User talk:Dbswlz

Article
The article The Law Offices of Bovino & Associates has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done because the article, which appeared to be about a real person, individual animal, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, did not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the notability of the subject may be deleted at any time. If you can indicate why the subject is really notable, you are free to re-create the article, making sure to cite any verifiable sources.

Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and for specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for musicians, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. NawlinWiki (talk) 22:54, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Law-related-stub
Template:Law-related-stub has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.  Super Mario  Man  01:14, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Template:Law-related-stub


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page that you created was tagged as a test page and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can 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 a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent 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. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 11:15, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Bovino & Associates


A tag has been placed on Bovino & Associates 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 person, organization (band, club, company, etc.) or web content, 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 see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can 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 a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent 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. 76.65.131.160 (talk) 23:05, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Your article has been moved to AfC space
Hi! I would like to inform you that the Articles for Creation submission which was previously located here: User:Dbswlz/David Andrew Bovino has been moved to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/David Andrew Bovino, this move was made automatically and doesn't affect your article. Your draft is waiting for a review by an experienced editor, if you have any questions please ask on our Help Desk! Have a nice day. ArticlesForCreationBot (talk) 22:37, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation
 Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.
 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia&.
 * To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the help desk, via real time chat with helpers, or on the [ reviewer's talk page]
 * Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! LegoKontribsTalkM 04:05, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of David Andrew Bovino


The article David Andrew Bovino has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Except for refs about his attack, there are no refs that are about him. The refs are about the trials.  There needs to be independent, reliable references about Mr. Bovinio per WP:SOURCE.

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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Bgwhite (talk) 20:07, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of David Andrew Bovino for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article David Andrew Bovino 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/David Andrew Bovino 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 template from the top of the article. Bgwhite (talk) 18:52, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of David Andrew Bovino for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article David Andrew Bovino 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/David Andrew Bovino & 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 template from the top of the article. § FreeRangeFrog 03:04, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of David Andrew Bovino


A tag has been placed on David Andrew Bovino, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate,. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can 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 a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent 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. Bgwhite (talk) 00:16, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

November 2012
This is your only warning; if you use Wikipedia for soapboxing, promotion or advertising again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice.  DGG ( talk ) 04:29, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

the lawsuit
I have deleted the page Robyn Frankel v. Palo Alto Medical Foundation Group as pure advertising, under provision G11 of WP:CSD, because that was clearly the intention and the effect.

There have been a number of attempts to write articles on the attorney, and the firm, all of which have been deleted, and protected against re-creation this has been been protected as well,   to prevent further use of Wikipedia for advertising. I would be willing to unprotect if an uninvolved editor proposed to write an article.

In case you or anyone should want some further explanation, I note with respect to this particular article:
 * 1) the unsourced wording  "especially significant", "landmark verdict"
 * 2) The promotional sentence "the patient turned to [the particular attorney] and  his professional counsel at [his particular firm]."
 * 3) the list breaking down the damages into the multiple various components, with subtotals and totals, to magnify the extent of the article..
 * 4) the emphasis, repeated three times, on how it was won even though it had been first dismissed with prejudice.
 * 5) the emphasis throughout of the special role of the individual attorney for the case.
 * 6) The failure to mention what was clearly stated in the sources, that the firm was not the only attorney for the claimant in the case.  In fact,  he was not even the lead counsel; The most detailed of the sources says specifically that "Jeffrey S. Mitchell of the San Francisco firm Emison Hullverson Mitchell LLP came on as co-counsel in 2011 and, as lead counsel, tried the case with [the attorney you have been writing articles about]"
 * 7) The failure to mention what one of the sources specifically quotes one of her attorneys from this firm as saying "an appeal by the Medical Foundation is expected and is standard in such cases"
 * 8) the claim on the firm's website http://bovinolaw.com/ that "Wikipedia features [the firm's] case here [link to the now deleted article on  Wikipedia]"
 * 9) the extremely weak claim to notability, that it was "one of the highest awarded in a medical malpractice lawsuit in the history of Santa Clara County, California."  -- not claiming to be the highest in California, or even in that one county.
 * 10) The use of a reference from the promotional site of a malpractice law firm.
 * 11) The BLP-violating characterization of the defendants. Such statements as were made here would have to be quoted from a definite source, and I notice none of the news sources listed used these terms.

I view of what I have found by a detailed examination of the article and the sources, I revise my previous warning, and am blocking you indefinitely as an entirely promotional editor. The formal notice will follow  DGG ( talk ) 07:41, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for advertising or promotion. From your contributions, this seems to be your only purpose. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.  DGG ( talk ) 07:42, 18 November 2012 (UTC)