User talk:Edit16180339

Proposed deletion of Michael John Miller (Pilates Instructor)


The article Michael John Miller (Pilates Instructor) has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this newly created biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one. NtheP (talk) 16:51, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

deletion
I deleted the page on Michael John Miller because it was advertising, being devoted only to a presentation of how good his method of instruction was. Content like "The MICHAEL MILLER trademark is a symbol of ideal posture and perfect body dynamics rooted in the physics of spiral movement found in galaxies, whirlpools, shells, wind and light. By choosing the attitude of natural and counter-balancing forces in our own body we can we reduce the stress of gravity and move pain free with ease and grace. " does not belong on Wikipedia

Please do not try again unless you have several references providing substantial coverage from 3rd party independent published reliable sources, print or online, but not blogs or press releases, or material derived from press releases. Print is OK, but when it is in a relatively obscure source you need to give some idea of extent and what it says. A article in a pilates magazine contained on a single page is not a substantial source, but rather an announcement. A Wikipedia article needs to be written like an encyclopedia article, not a press release--don't praise the organization or person, say what they do. Remember not to copy from a web site, even your own -- first it's a copyright violation, but, even if you own the copyright and are willing to give us permission according to WP:DCM, the tone will not be encyclopedic and the material will not be suitable. (Thus, there is generally no purpose in giving permission; it is better to rewrite.)

Do not include material that would be of interest only to those associated with the subject, or to prospective clients --that sort of content is considered promotional.  DGG ( talk ) 18:17, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time to explain. This whole experience of trying to preserve information in an encyclopedic format acceptable to the Wikiworld has left me frequently at wits end. But, I have been terribly grateful for the experience. What brought me to Wikipedia were others misrepresenting Michael Miller and his view of Pilates at the article on Pilates. The most important contribution of Michael Miller is his trademark. Do you need more notability or neutral point of view than the federal government when granting a trademark? Is just getting it granted enough to appear in Wikipedia? I hoped to clarify something and have missed my target. Edit16180339 (talk) 18:56, 23 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi Edit16180339, as far as I know the government has no requirement for a trademark other than the facts that you ask for it, and nobody else is using it; so it's not at all unsusual. What Wikipedia means by notability is that independent reliable sources (like newspapers, magazines, and books) have written extensively about the subject. So Miller’s trademark would make him notable only if say a newspaper thought it was so unusual that they wrote an article about his having a trademark; I can’t imagine that happening. —teb728 t c 04:57, 24 November 2012 (UTC)