User talk:GenUser

AfD nomination of MyHeritage
An editor has nominated MyHeritage, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 15:15, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

MyHeritage
Nice work on creating and improving this article! Addhoc (talk) 18:02, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Help request
My contribution MyHeritage still says it's up for deletion even though notability has been established. What do I do? --GenUser (talk) 16:37, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
 * The article is being sent up at Articles for deletion/MyHeritage, and so far it looks like notability has been established. I'd add an argument there if you think necessary, but the best thing to do is wait it out.  If it's notable, it will stay.  x42bn6 Talk Mess  17:56, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree with x42bn6, the article will almost certainly be kept. Addhoc (talk) 18:04, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Who ends the AfD debate?
 * An administrator will review the debate, and reach a view as to the consensus. This usually happens after about 5 days. At present, a keep conclusion looks likely. However, repeatedly inserting misinformation into the article could result in delete votes. Mayalld (talk) 11:14, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

January 2008
Thanks for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your recent edit appears to have added incorrect information, and has been reverted or removed. All information in the encyclopedia must be verifiable in a reliable published source. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. The cited source says 2.38 million subscribers, yet you keep changing the article to say 20 million. Mayalld (talk) 11:11, 23 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia requires its articles to cite reliable sources. The only reliable source cited says 2.38 million. You can't cite a source that says 2.38 million, and put an entirely different figure in the article. Unless and until you can provide a reliable independent source for the 20 million, you can't add it.
 * Oh, and please don't add new comments to the top of talk pages. New comments go at the bottom. Mayalld (talk) 16:33, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Primary and Secondary sources
As a matter of policy, Wikipedia does not consider primary sources to be reliable. Whilst I do not suggest that it applies in this case, it is trivially easy for the subject of an article to make any claims that they might wish in self-published sources. For that reason, Wikipedia requires reputable secondary sources. Mayalld (talk) 16:31, 24 January 2008 (UTC)