User talk:ConcentratedAllPurposeCleaner

Welcome!

Hello, ConcentratedAllPurposeCleaner, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Jeremy Karpen, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may soon be deleted.

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 New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type helpme on this page, 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! Kudpung (talk) 12:29, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Starting an article
 * Your first article
 * Biographies of living persons
 * How to write a great article
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial

Proposed deletion of Jeremy Karpen


The article Jeremy Karpen has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Pre election political  propoganda

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article to address the issues raised. Removing  will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Kudpung (talk) 12:29, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Proposal for deletion
I'm afraid you  may  have misunderstood the instructions on the deletion  proposal  template. You may  only  remove the template if you  improve the article to  comply  with  Wikipedia policy  and guidelines. What you  effectively  did was to  replace the promotional  material  I  had removed, and add more (Huffington Post). I am escalating  this for immediate deletion.--Kudpung (talk) 13:46, 30 October 2010 (UTC)


 * As noted on the page, I outlined my reasoning on why I felt the added material addressed your concern.Rather than address the open disscussion you escalated. Your edits were not noticed because you failed to annotate or discuss them and my edit overwrote yours as a result. Please address my specific unanswered questions to improve the article. Otherwise your determination has only been addressed by the evidence of your shorthand opinion? Why edit a document you then nominate for swift deletion? If the topic has the merit to warrant your editing, why does my documented actions of editing change that? Because it overwrote your undocumented edit? My arguement against this poorly reviewed request for swift deletion goes without a thoughtful reply and is met with unneeded speculation as to my polictical agenda.ConcentratedAllPurposeCleaner (talk) 17:23, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

What recourse do I have when I feel an editor is acting vindictive or illogical? What is the appeal or review process should my article be removed?


 * Several options are available for inviting outside review of editor behavior. Before directing you to those venues, I would like to ensure that you are familiar with the principle of the assumption of good faith.  If an editor disagrees with one's position or view, as long as their actions are executed in good faith, then there is little to be done other than address the issues raised.  You may find the answer to your inquiry regarding article deletion at Deletion review.  I'll  watchlist this page in the event you have further questions or concerns.  Regards   Tide rolls 22:33, 30 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I have at no time made any speculations about  your personal political agenda -  all  my comments were specifically,  and only, about  the content  of the article. My  edits were correctly  annotated in  the edit  summary, and in the page history,  and the reasons for the proposed deletion have been extensively  documented on  the article talk  page in  a formal but  friendly  manner. I therefore strongly advise all  editors in  all  manner of dispute, to  read and understand our policies at  assume good faith, and WP:GAME - statements such  as  'editor is acting vindictive or illogical' might  be extremely presumptuous and unfounded. I have assumed good faith  in  that  I  have accepted that  you  may  not  have been aware of the rules here, and have pointed out, with  demonstration  edits, how the article may  approach an acceptable content. Nevertheless, the onus is on all  editors to  be aware of these rues before they post  new articles to  publicly  viewable pages. If the article is deleted, you  are welcome to  follow standard procedure for appeal.  There are no  time pressures on either side. Thank  you.--Kudpung (talk) 00:53, 31 October 2010 (UTC)


 * you stated ...I'm sorry about all this, but Wikpedia is not the place to conduct an election campaign.--Kudpung (talk) 15:26, 30 October 2010 (UTC), since I am not conducting an election campaign, this must be speculation? Your Edit summary entries seem ok now that I have become more familiar with the system, but the discussion placed on my User Page was undiscovered and effectively hid your reasoning on a place other than the page at hand, also probably my ignorance. You amplified my statement in your above reply by ommitting the conditional nature of my question. (i.e. What recourse do I have when I feel an editor is acting vindictive or illogical?) and this question never singled you out by name. Regardless, cooler heads have prevailed and we have several interested people working on this article. In fact I've incorporated your sandbox draft into the "current" version. Overall I've become a believer in the process and am looking forward to seeing how this unfolds. ConcentratedAllPurposeCleaner (talk) 05:22, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Jeremy Karpen


A tag has been placed on Jeremy Karpen, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Business for more information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Kudpung (talk) 13:48, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Jeremy Karpen - EDITING ASSISTANCE
An editor has placed a suggested draft article in your user space at: *User:ConcentratedAllPurposeCleaner/sandbox and the Speedy deletion  notice has been removed with  the comment:  not unsalvageably promotional, notability issues may remain. If you wish, in  order to  address issues of promotional  and notability, salvage the artice, and avoid further deletion  processes, you  may  use this article to  substitute the existing content  at Jeremy Karpen, and if you  no longer require the page you  are free to  blank the content from  your sandbox. --Kudpung (talk) 01:06, 31 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Thank you for providing a thoughtful addition and investing time on this, I've incorporated it after another editor combed through the article with many edits. ConcentratedAllPurposeCleaner (talk) 05:25, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Conflict of Interest
I would just  like to  point  out  that  as  Mr Karpen has today been officially warned for interfering with  Wikipedia templates, and editing  articles about  himself, that  we have a very  strict  policy  at  WP:COI about any editors creating or editing  articles about theselves, and people with whom they  may  be closely  connected.--Kudpung (talk) 02:00, 31 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Noted, but I am not Jeremy and I don't know how this Conflict of Interest belongs on my page. His ignorance seems relatively benign in its attempt to update his age? Whereas your posting this on my user page intends to accomplish what exactly? Is there prohibition from deleting it as irrelevant to our discussions? ConcentratedAllPurposeCleaner (talk) 05:29, 31 October 2010 (UTC)


 * It's a courtesy note. A standard procedure at  Wikipedia. It  helps to  ensure that  everyone knows what's going  on, and to avoid new and inexperienced editors from the unpleasant  surprise of finding  themselves implicated in  something  that  could have been avoided.  Formal  warnings  look very  different. See Mr Karpen's page for examples.--Kudpung (talk) 07:46, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Jeremy Karpen


The article Jeremy Karpen has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * This person is clearly not notable per WP:POLITICIAN.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Lincolnite (talk) 03:53, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Jeremy Karpen for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jeremy Karpen 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/Jeremy Karpen 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 good 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 template from the top of the article. Lincolnite (talk) 04:58, 1 April 2011 (UTC)