User talk:Esuc

Orphaned non-free image File:MonjuBegumEvidence.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:MonjuBegumEvidence.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:


 * I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a template, along with your question, beneath this message.
 * I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
 * If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
 * To opt out of these bot messages, add  to your talk page.
 * If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:40, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Selection criterea
Sorry, but you just gave me a policy which defeated your own rationale for keeping the article.

take a close look at LSC

It says

Selection criteria should be unambiguous, objective, and supported by reliable sources. In cases where the membership criteria are subjective or likely to be disputed (for example, lists of unusual things or terrorist incidents), membership criteria should be based on reliable sources.

When establishing membership criteria for a list, ask yourself:
 * If this person/thing/etc., wasn't an X, would it reduce their fame or significance? 
 * Would I expect to see this person or thing on a list of X?
 * Is this person or thing a canonical example of some facet of X?

Common selection criteria

 * Every entry meets the notability criteria for its own non-redirect article in the English Wikipedia. Red-linked entries are acceptable if the entry is verifiably a member of the listed group, and it is reasonable to expect an article could be forthcoming in the future.  This standard prevents Wikipedia from becoming an indiscriminate list, and prevents individual lists from being too large to be useful to readers.  Most of the best lists on Wikipedia reflect this type of editorial judgment.
 * Every entry in the list fails the notability criteria. These lists are created explicitly because most or all of the listed items do not warrant independent articles: for example, List of minor characters in Dilbert or List of paracetamol brand names.
 * Short, complete lists of every item that is verifiably a member of the group. These should only be created if a complete list is reasonably short (less than 32K) and could be useful (e.g., for navigation) or interesting to readers.  The inclusion of items must be supported by reliable sources.  For example, if reliable sources indicate that a complete list would include the names of ten businesses and two non-notable businesses, then you are not required to omit the two non-notable businesses.  However, if a complete list would include hundreds of entries, then you should use the notability standard to provide focus to the list.

"Creation guide" lists—lists devoted to a large number of redlinked (unwritten) articles—don't belong in the main namespace. Write these in your userspace, or in a Wikiproject's space, or list the missing articles at Requested articles. Bunser (talk) 19:08, 12 November 2011 (UTC)