User talk:Dgandco

For the article on Dr. Barnes, I have removed a good deal of public relations-style talk. This is an encyclopedia, and a neutral tone is essential. Please check that none of the remaining material is copied from another web site--we cannot accept such material,--see WP:Copyright. DGG (talk) 02:48, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Family Promise
almost all of this article seems to be copied from their web site. Please see WP:Copyright -- it MUST be rewritten in your own words. & see WP:BFAQ--much of what is said there is highly relevant. Many administrators would have simply deleted this article. I have instead reduced it to a stub, since it appears notable. Do it right. DGG (talk) 03:19, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

I am not sure how to fix the problems that you have discussed in your alerts What does it mean to have a conflict of interest, also how do i recieve notabiliy for these scholars? Finally I am also having citing issues. I would love to get all of these issues resolved in order to prevent deletion. Thank you for pointing out my errors. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.57.8.50 (talk) 19:12, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

alert
I notice you have entered a number of biographies of other religious-related scholars and related organizations. Please do just the same with respect to them. I am very sympathetic to such articles, but you are leaving them very vulnerable to deletion. There is no point doing the work if it is not going to stay in Wikipedia. I caught some & improved them enough to stay in, but I can not fix them all for you--you go do it. DGG (talk) 03:28, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

September 2007
I have been reviewing the series of article you have been writing, and they appear to be inserted in violation of our guidelines for conflict of interest, as detailed above. If you add any more such articles, you will surely be blocked. If you add any more material coped from websites, they will be immediately removed, and you will most certainly be blocked. The only two reasons I am not blocking you immediately are that you seem never to have received an adequate warning, and that it will be to the benefit of the encyclopedia that you fix your own work. '''This is a final warning. I can and will block you without further notice if this patten continues.''' We have an obligation to protect against copyright violation and conflict of interest--we cannot permit articles in violation of copyright to remain in Wikipedia. . If you have any questions, please feel free to ask here or on my user talk page. DGG (talk) 03:46, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Signing comments
Please ensure that you sign any comments that you leave on talk pages and project pages. Thank you.  Adrian M. H.  16:20, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

The basics

 * 1) . Do not ever copy anything from a website, unless you fulfill the requirements of WP:COPYRIGHT. even then, it must be suitable.
 * 2) . Read WP:BFAQ for information about conflict of interest and the necessary precautions.
 * 3) . Read WP:PROFTEST from information about what counts as notability for faculty and researchers
 * 4) . Remember the difference from an academic CV, which lists everything pertinent, and an encyclopedia article, which contains only information about the most important accomplishments.
 * 5) . List only major works: Books, the most important peer-reviewed journal articles, major awards, chairmanships, and so on.
 * 6) .Books are shown to be important by first, the nature of the publisher, and second, reviews in peer-reviewed journals. Include exact citations to such reviews, and third, being cited elsewhere.
 * 7) It is appropriate to list all the published books. Works in progress don't count for much.
 * 8) .Journal articles are shown important by fisrst, being published in excellent journals, and second, being widely cited. In the humanities, Scopus and Web of Science unfortunately dont work for citation counts--do the best you can with google Scholar.
 * 9) Overall number of peer reviewed articles is important, but do not actually list them all. Only the most highly cited or most recent or most significant. Usually, 5 is sufficient.
 * 10) Internal university committees are not usually of encyclopedic importance, nor is service as a reviewer. Editorships are. Positions as the head of major projects are.
 * 11) Teaching is only of encyclopedic importance if documented by major awards, notable students, or widely used textbooks.
 * 12) University administration below the Chair level is not usually important.
 * 13) Details of undergraduate work is not usually important, nor is any graduate work except the doctoral thesis research.
 * 14) work done independently after establishment as a full member of the profession in one's own right is what is important.
 * 15) Remember the difference between public relations and an encyclopedia article
 * 16) Avoid adjectives of praise or importance
 * 17) Mention things once only.
 * 18) Mention the full name, & name of the u niversity and department, only once or twice.
 * 19) Avoid needless words. Write concisely.
 * 20) Avoid non-descriptive jargon, and discussions of how important the overall subject is to society.
 * 21) Important public activities need to be documented by exact references to reliable 3rd party public sources/. don't use vague phrases about importance to the community and the like--list specific activities.
 * 22) .Do describe the research in specific terms, but briefly. Link to a few very specifically appropriate WP articles.
 * 23) . follow WP style
 * 24) . Differentiate between External links, and references.
 * 25) . Link only the first appearance of a name of an institution or subject, but link all institutions and places
 * 26) . Give birthdate and place if possible
 * 27) . Use italics for book titles and journal titles, never bold face. DGG (talk) 04:14, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Deborah Little
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Deborah Little, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Magioladitis (talk) 01:16, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Linda L. Barnes
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Linda L. Barnes, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process
 * Unreferenced WP:ACADEMIC orphan, tagged since 9/07 w/o improvement.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. THF (talk) 13:47, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Lou Cristillo
I have nominated Lou Cristillo, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Lou Cristillo. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. THF (talk) 15:05, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Heidi Ravven
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Heidi Ravven, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process
 * non-notable academic, hardly any hits in GScholar, extremely few citations. Does not meet WP:PROF

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Crusio (talk) 16:15, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Spam in Clare Butterfield
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Clare Butterfield, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Clare Butterfield is blatant advertising for a company, product, group, service or person that would require a substantial rewrite in order to become an encyclopedia article. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Clare Butterfield, please affix the template to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that '''this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here''' CSDWarnBot (talk) 02:20, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

FYI conflict of interest guideline
If you have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:
 * 1) editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
 * 2) participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors;
 * 3) linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam); and,
 * 4) avoid breaching relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for businesses. For more details about what, exactly, constitutes a conflict of interest, please see our conflict of interest guidelines. — Athaenara ✉  03:35, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Clare Butterfield
I have nominated Clare Butterfield, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Clare Butterfield. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. SchuminWeb (Talk) 03:57, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Faith in Place
I have nominated Faith in Place, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Faith in Place. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. SchuminWeb (Talk) 04:00, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Institute for Women's Policy Research


The article Institute for Women's Policy Research has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * noability tag left unaddressed for 2 years. No showing of coverage independent of its founder, who has a separate Wikipedia article.

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. Racepacket (talk) 14:02, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Family Promise


A tag has been placed on Family Promise, 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, 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. Epeefleche (talk) 07:30, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Muslims in New York City Project


The article Muslims in New York City Project has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Lack of references to establish notability. While the project published many papers (which can be found on Google Scholar), those papers are about their own subjects, not this research funding vehicle itself, and generally only mention this project as an acknowledgement, rather than discussing it substantially in its own right. I can't find any reliable source which actually discusses this project in detail, as opposed to just acknowledging it as a funding source or academic affiliation."

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. SJK (talk) 13:05, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Muslims in New York City Project for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Muslims in New York City Project 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/Muslims in New York City Project until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. SJK (talk) 05:20, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Anne C. Klein


The article Anne C. Klein has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Don't think article meets any WP:NACADEMIC criteria, near complete lack of reliable sources too."

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. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:06, 1 May 2022 (UTC)