User talk:Expiditer

Help request
Expiditer (talk) 03:45, 14 September 2009 (UTC) Thanks for your help, I did get to the IRC page. Expiditer (talk) 00:54, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Welcome and introduction
Hello, I am trying to get peer review on a article I have written but don't seem to be getting anywhere. Expiditer (talk) 00:53, 16 September 2009 (UTC) Hi, Expiditer. This is NOT some automated message...it's from a real person. You can talk to me right now. Welcome to Wikipedia! I noticed you've just joined, and wanted to give you a few tips to get you started. If you have any questions, please talk to us. The tips below should help you to get started. Best of luck!  Chzz  ►  03:52, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Your Question re Grabill/Ponzi scheme
Thanks for your question. This place can be a tough place to figure out, with all the rules and guidelines. I’ve been around for some time, and I still run into something new just about every day. The general guideline for notability is Here, but I’d like to point out one section of it here. As it notes, when someone is notable for one event, there’s no question an article makes sense, but it isn’t always clear how to focus the article. As the good example indicates, the Rodney King beating incident is clearly notable, and the article should mention the person who shot the videotape, but it doesn’t make sense to have an entire article about that person’s life story. At the other extreme, when someone has a lifetime of fame, like Albert Einstein, we want to know everything about him.

Your case is somewhere in between, with an additional complication that I don’t know how notable the specific incident was. Bernie Madoff’s fraud was front page news. The Graybill Ponzi scheme was much less notable. It still may be notable, but you need more examples of coverage in the newspapers to TV to establish it. Then we get to the nub of the question. Should there be a bio of Graybill because he is notable? or an article about the Graybill Ponzi scheme because that one event is notable? I think the latter is easier to justify, but I haven’t done enough research to tell. If the article is about the Graybill Ponzi scheme, then all the refernces about the incident still makes sense, but there’s less interest in filling out the biographical details of the rest of his life.

Again, I want to emphasize I’m not saying the article should or should not be about Graybill the person, or the Graybill Ponzi scheme. I’m just trying to point out the guidelines and thinking that may go through the heads of other editors as they see what you wrote and either propose changes or just make them.

Good Luck. SPhilbrick T  11:53, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Dale L. Graybill


The article Dale L. Graybill has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Virtually no sources outside of US Gov't press releases. And even using the primary sources and the (very) few secondary sources, their story is has large holes, so it's not possible to explain what happened and when.

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. Dori ❦ (Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 04:46, 15 October 2009 (UTC)