User talk:Foltigo

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Guillaume2303 (talk) 12:07, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Prosfiction


A tag has been placed on Prosfiction requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

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. Guillaume2303 (talk) 12:07, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Prosfiction


The article Prosfiction has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * No indication it meets inclusion criteria; no references. Not a notable concept.

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. henrik • talk  21:39, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or  located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 22:04, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Message
22:25, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Prosfiction for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Prosfiction 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/Prosfiction 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 good 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. henrik • talk  05:08, 14 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi again Daniel. As you see above, I've nominated this article for a formal deletion discussion, but don't panic yet. This means the article will be discussed for a week, you'll still have a chance to improve the referencing and convince the community that it meets our inclusion criteria.
 * I'm sorry to not give you a more friendly welcome, but Wikipedia has a degree of editorial control and standards that should be upheld. If you'd like to know which sourcing is suitable or any other questions about editing, I'd be happy to help. Danie l henrik  • talk  05:14, 14 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Henrik, I insert now three reference, two jornals where one is from an agêncy of national security from Brasil, points and will ask Dr. Raza to review it. In this case I think we attack the main problem, right. If there are any more concerns I am open to hear them.

--Foltigo (talk) 10:30, 14 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi Daniel. I'm afraid that our criteria requires concepts to have been covered by independent sources. It seems Dr. Raza himself is the author of two of the papers. The Revista Brasileira de Inteligência source is good, but it only has a passing mention of Prosfiction, as a title in one of the references. I think the article will have to wait until the concept gathers more acceptance in the scientific community. Even if the article is not kept now, it doesn't mean there can never be an article on it - just that it's premature right now. henrik  • talk  13:11, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * If you'd like to read a bit more, this page explains our criteria in full. henrik  • talk  13:15, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. There are some more sources out there as Theses from Students that integrated prosfiction etc. I will need just some days to sort it out and include it. Daniel --Foltigo (talk) 13:28, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Hello again
I think you will be a great editor. Your first article, due to lack of sources, will likely not remain. But, that's no reason for you not to become one of the greatest, most productive, well-loved editors in the community! I welcome you to collaborate, to make and expand articles, to contribute! (Nice pitch, eh?) Let me know. By the way, the challenge to your article isn't personal, but instead, simply about verifiablility. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 10:27, 14 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks Anna, I included now three references, where one is the like the American CIA from Brasil that mention and reference to prosfiction in there monthly jornal. - Daniel --Foltigo (talk) 10:46, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Pictish Mithraism
Consider weighing-in with your opinion. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 10:31, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Foltigo prosfiction large.png
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Foltigo prosfiction large.png, has been listed at Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 13:19, 14 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I am the copyright owner. The original file ist at http://www.foltigo.com/docs/foltigo_prosfiction.pdf --Foltigo (talk) 15:17, 14 February 2012 (UTC)