User talk:Dannydohrmann

To whom it may concern...

In my haste I erronously placed what I thought was an "About the Editor" commentary in a manner that appeared to be an advertisement.

I thought I used the Wizard properly.

Please reconsider

\==Speedy deletion nomination of User:Dannydohrmann==

A tag has been placed on User:Dannydohrmann, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be unambiguous advertising that 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 general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item G11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add  on the top of User:Dannydohrmann and leave a note on |the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Jafeluv (talk) 21:00, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Please do not add nonsense to Wikipedia, as you did to the Scrum (development) page. Such edits are considered vandalism and quickly undone. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox instead. Thank you. Andy Dingley (talk) 00:47, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Open Discussion to Article I've Added
Good day to all...

I am trying to be proactive. Therefore, please do not take anything as derogatory.

A few moments ago an article that I had added to Wiki's URL on Scrum was removed. I have pasted the article below:

Scrum Mentality Syncs with the "For Now" Mindset
With (x)aaS, "(variable) as a Service," becoming more prevalent, the mindset of "For Now" (short term and/or emergency contingencies), is best executed utilizing Scrum. "For Now" is the antithesis of SDLC. Scrum methodology does not condone / condemn the high risk factors involved with “For Now.”

It is my contention that the article meets the “Taste Test” of the 5 Pillars:

Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia. The article is not a soapbox, an advertising platform, a vanity press, an experiment in anarchy or democracy, an indiscriminate collection of information, or a web directory. It is not a dictionary, newspaper, or a collection of source documents.

Wikipedia has a neutral point of view. The article should be taken in the same manner as was intended: In context, and not presenting any point of view as "the truth" or "the best view". Additionally, the article does strive for verifiable accuracy.

Wikipedia is free content that anyone can edit and distribute. Self explanatory.

Wikipedians should interact in a respectful and civil manner. Be open and welcoming. Self explanatory

Wikipedia does not have firm rules. Rules on Wikipedia are not carved in stone, and the spirit of the rule trumps the letter of the rule.

One should see that the spirit of the article is appropriate and meets the threshold of all 5 pillars.

Danny Dohrmann
 * Hi, the 5 pillars are necessary, but not sufficient conditions for contributing to Wikipedia. One editor thought your addition was original research (please have a look at what that means, and how to avoid it), and the other thought it was unintelligible. That makes at least two experienced editors who think that your addition was not appropriate. In general, when material is reverted, do not simply add it without comment. If you want to discuss the material, the article's discussion page is the right place for it. However, at least a third editor (myself) did not feel the material was appropriately encyclopedic for it to be added. So ultimately you will most likely not achieve the goal of adding the material. You may learn a little bit more about Wikipedia editing, though. So relax, the world doesn't end just because you were unable to add this particular material. There are over 3 million articles on Wikipedia; try to learn what constitutes acceptable material, and how perhaps you can change what you want to add to make it acceptable (assuming that's possible, which I cannot judge either way). -- Nczempin (talk) 16:17, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

TUSC token e0e01892aa285f0067339aebde96a83b
I am now proud owner of a TUSC account! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.207.146.234 (talk) 03:17, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

TUSC token e0e01892aa285f0067339aebde96a83b
I am now proud owner of a TUSC account! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.207.146.234 (talk) 03:20, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Your contributed article, Shell oil logo


Hello, I notice that you recently created a new page, Shell oil logo. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as yourself. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page - Royal Dutch Shell. 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 Royal Dutch Shell - you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think that the article you created should remain separate, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, 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. 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. Vanadus (talk | contribs) 15:58, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Kristopher Dohrmann


A tag has been placed on Kristopher Dohrmann requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band or musician, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to 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, you can place a request here. red dog six (talk) 02:38, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Kristopher Dohrmann


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Kristopher Dohrmann requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to 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, you can place a request here. red dog six (talk) 05:14, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Kristopher Dohrmann
Hi,

Wikipedia is a well-known online encyclopedia. Tens of thousands of new articles are written everyday by well-meaning volunteers such as yourself. As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia operates according to policies determined by consensus. One of these policies is the criteria for speedy deletion. Many people would like to have a Wikipedia article about themselves. Sadly -- because Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and not a chronicle of everyone who has ever lived -- only people judged to be encyclopedically notable are allowed to have articles written about them.

Wikipedia has a process to judge the notability of a person based on their article. The article Kristopher Dohrmann failed the first stage of that process -- specifically, it failed to state a claim of encyclopedic notability. Claims of notability might include: major awards won, significant coverage in reliable & independent sources, substantial sales figures supported by major industry publications, and the like. For a full explanation of the criteria used in judging musicians, see Notability (music).

I know nothing about Mr. Dohrmann, except what I read in the article. I don't have any opinion regarding him. Like all Wikipedia admins, I am also a volunteer, doing my best to build and maintain a useful and friendly encyclopedia. If you can produce sources that demonstrate Mr. Dohrmann meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability, I'll be happy to help you rewrite his article.

There is one other issue -- your username suggests you might have a close, perhaps familial, relationship with Kristopher Dohrmann. While this does not prevent you from writing about him, it could present a conflict of interest. Wikipedia's articles must be neutral in tone, which is often difficult for close friends and family to achieve. If Kristopher Dohrmann is well-known, and you are a relative of his, you might consider just waiting... eventually, an uninvolved person will find his or her way to Wikipedia and write an article about Kristopher Dohrmann.

If I can be of further assistance, please don't hesitate to ask. You may reply on your talk page here, to keep the conversation centralized. Best wishes, Xoloz (talk) 05:16, 25 February 2014 (UTC)