User talk:Compy book

Welcome!
Hello, Compy book, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Senior accountant, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type help me on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  { MordeKyle }  &#9762; 02:17, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Your first article
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * Biographies of living persons
 * How to write a great article
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial

Your contributed article, Senior accountant


Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, Senior accountant. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – Accountant. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Accountant – you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions.  { MordeKyle }  &#9762; 02:17, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Deletion discussion about Accounting manager
Hello, Compy book,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether Accounting manager should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Articles for deletion/Accounting manager.

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks, Iazyges   Consermonor   Opus meum  02:43, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Deletion discussion about Junior accountant
Hello, Compy book,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether Junior accountant should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Articles for deletion/Junior accountant.

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks, Iazyges   Consermonor   Opus meum  02:43, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Deletion discussion about Accounting specialist
Hello, Compy book,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether Accounting specialist should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Articles for deletion/Accounting specialist.

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks, Iazyges   Consermonor   Opus meum  02:44, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Accounting supervisor
Hello Compy book,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Accounting supervisor for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.  Onel 5969  TT me 03:10, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

December 2016
Hello, I'm Calidum. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Five Guys have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks.  Calidum  01:43, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Please take note of the welcome at the top of your talk page. There you will find may links to excellent resources for new editors. Regarding your recent edits to Five Guys, it simply did not meet the standards of quality on Wikipedia. Much of it was unsourced (though not all), and large parts of your 14 edits in a row were obvious personal research and biased opinion.  Please take advantage of the tips for new editors before returning to the Five Guys article.  Thank you.  Magnolia677 (talk) 04:11, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Career studies certificate


The article Career studies certificate has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern:
 * Very short article with no sources present.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. --  Dane talk  23:23, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

nice work
Nice work on the maze of manosphere articles. Some of these seem to attract a lot of hate and vandalism, so I hope you've got them watchlisted. Kendall-K1 (talk) 23:34, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Involuntary Celibacy
That may be the case - I haven't revisited the issue since the AFD close last year. If you believe that new (or newly discovered) sources could be used to put together a neutral and well-referenced treatment of the subject, then your first step is going to be compiling a list of those sources. One of the problems with the article before it was deleted was that different sources talked about involuntary celibacy in different ways - some as a disorder and others as merely an aspect of social interaction, for example. So it was as if we had multiple articles about different sorts of involuntary celibacy just kind of mashed together, then duct taped into one article with a healthy dose of original research. In any event, once you have a rundown of the sources and what they say, and if you think those sources can support a good article, then you'd want to make your case at WP:DRV. Best, UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 15:02, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
 * In any case, this and/or this could be a useful kickstarter. 92.6.179.137 (talk) 22:44, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Take a breath
It sounds counterintuitive, but if the Momsen Lung is considered essential for escapes, & crewmen don't realize they can escape without, they won't try, in conditions when they would otherwise have been able to succeed. So opines Blair (or was it Ned Beach?), & I agree. TREKphiler any time you're ready, Uhura 23:27, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Wow, that sounds like a major problem with their training. When I get on an airplane, they make a big deal about the emergency procedures, despite the small chance of actually needing to follow those instructions. But these guys are in a ship that's going to be under attack by people who are trying to sink it. I would think that the realities of how and when escape is possible should have been important to teach them. Compy book (talk) 02:10, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
 * (Somehow I missed the ping...) It wasn't the crew training at fault as much as the Navy not realizing; AIUI, free ascents hadn't been done, & wouldn't be until postwar, when the Brits found it was possible to free-ascend from as deep as 300' (IIRC). TREKphiler  any time you're ready, Uhura 18:51, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

"Requested articles"
Hi Compy book, may I ask about the article lists linked from User:Compy book/Requested articles? Where do these lists come from, and what is their purpose? All the redlinks appear to be articles deleted as sockpuppet creations, and some of them are in fact deleted attack pages, so there's no actual request for them to be created... --bonadea contributions talk 14:49, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
 * There was a request for some analytics on deletion data. Compy book (talk) 12:32, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Covfefe incident


The article Covfefe incident has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern:
 * per WP:NOTNEWS

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 08:36, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Covfefe incident for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Covfefe incident is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Covfefe incident until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. f e  minist  09:40, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Re: Archive table
Seems quite unlikely, but if you write a research project you may get data access with some bureaucracy. --Nemo 16:43, 24 June 2017 (UTC)