User talk:GoGerardo

Welcome!

Hello, GoGerardo, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Main Center For Atheism, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may soon be deleted.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type helpme on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers: 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! JDDJS (talk) 05:04, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Starting an article
 * Your first article
 * Biographies of living persons
 * How to write a great article
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial

Speedy deletion nomination of Main Center For Atheism


A tag has been placed on Main Center For Atheism, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Business for more information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, 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. JDDJS (talk) 05:04, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

January 2011
Welcome to Wikipedia. If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Main Center For Atheism, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:
 * 1) editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
 * 2) participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
 * 3) linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. I'm sorry but it's not a good idea to edit articles related to your religion (yes i'm considering atheism to be a religion) when you feel very strong about as you obviously do JDDJS (talk) 05:18, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Please do not remove speedy deletion notices from pages you have created yourself. Please use the template on the page instead if you disagree with the deletion, and make your case on the page's talk page. Thank you. JDDJS (talk) 18:23, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you. JDDJS (talk) 18:23, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Main Center For Atheism


The article Main Center For Atheism has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Creator has Conflict of interest. Does not seem notable

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. JDDJS (talk) 18:25, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Main Center For Atheism
I see that Main Center For Atheism has been deleted as a copyright infringement. I thought it only fair to mention the following. When an article written by an inexperienced editor is deleted as a copyright infringement, very often the editor will then go to some effort to reinstate the article, trying to avoid the copyright problem. They may do this by rewriting the article from scratch rather than copying, or they may do so by submitting copyright permission to the Wikimedia foundation. Unfortunately in my experience both of these are frequently a waste of time, as the article then gets deleted again. As far as this particular article was concerned, even without the copyright problem it would certainly have been deleted, for one or both of two reasons. Firstly, the article was quite unambiguously written to promote the organisation. Secondly, the organisation comes nowhere even remotely near to satisfying Wikipedia's notability criteria. Rewriting an article can get rid of copyright problems and the promotional character of an article, but no amount of rewriting an article will turn a non-notable subject into a notable one. If you are interested, you can see what would be required by reading one or more of: the general notability guideline, the guideline on notability of organisations, and the guideline on reliable sources. FAQ/Organizations is also relevant. I wish you luck with publicising your organisation, but Wikipedia is not the place to do it. JamesBWatson (talk) 21:04, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Main Center For Atheism


A tag has been placed on Main Center For Atheism, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Business for more information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, 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. JDDJS (talk) 21:06, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

JDDJS I don't understand why you keep placing a deletion tag on the page. I made the changes you asked me to make in order to make it neutral, but still you keep placing a deletion tag. Please just tell me what I need to do specifically in order to keep the page. Thank You GoGerardo (talk) 21:09, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Read what JamesBWatson wrote above. JDDJS (talk) 21:12, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

January 2011
Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as Main Center For Atheism, to Wikipedia, as doing so is not in accordance with our policies. For more information about creating articles, you may want to read Your first article; you might also consider using the Article Wizard. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. I took the trouble to write the above message to save you from wasting your time rewriting it and dealing with the copyright issue, only to see the article deleted again. However, I see that, by the time I had finished doing so, you had already recreated it, without even attempting to deal with the copyright issue. JamesBWatson (talk) 21:12, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Main Center For Atheism


Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as Main Center For Atheism, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, 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. JDDJS (talk) 21:13, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

This is your last warning; the next time you create an inappropriate page, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. JDDJS (talk) 21:14, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

I don't want to be blocked, but I would like to keep the page. Please tell me what I need to do in order to keep the page. GoGerardo (talk) 21:18, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
 * The page can't be kept. Simple as that. JDDJS (talk) 21:20, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

With all due respect, you wrote the first time on the articles discussion page that if I made the content neutral I could keep the page. I don't understand what's wrong, it doesn't meet the criteria for speedy deletion since other companies, websites (.com's and .org's) get to keep their neutral articles. This is for a good cause and it feels as if you are making a mistake. GoGerardo (talk) 21:24, 8 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I can't find anywhere where anyone explicitly said that the article could be kept. However, JDDJS did say "You're going have to take away everything that is not neutral", which was an unfortunate choice of words, as it would naturally suggest that that was all that had to be done. It is because of past experience of situations like this that I took the trouble to write my first message above. Time and again I see the following sequence of events:


 * 1) New editor, in perfectly good faith, writes an article.
 * 2) Another editor tells them, in perfectly good faith, that the article is unacceptable for some reason (copyright, promotion, or whatever), and the article is deleted.
 * 3) The new editor rewrites the article, carefully avoiding the problem specified.
 * 4) Another editor tells them, in perfectly good faith, that the article is unacceptable for another reason, and the article is deleted.
 * 5) The new editor rewrites the article, carefully avoiding the problem specified.
 * 6) The article is deleted again because the subject of the article is not notable. Unlike the other deletion reasons, this cannot be put right by any amount of rewriting.
 * I can well imagine how frustrating all that is to a new editor who honestly tried to follow instructions. It was to avoid this problem that I took the trouble to write to you, explaining why the article would not be acceptable even if it was rewritten. However, you simply recreated it without even rewriting it (or with minor rewriting that I didn't notice at a quick look, but either way with no serious attempt to address the issues which had led to deletion).
 * Contrary to what you suggest, the article certainly did meet several of Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, namely A7, G11, and G12. As for other articles, see WP:OTHERSTUFF, and as for being a good cause, see Wikipedia is not here to tell the world about your noble cause. JamesBWatson (talk) 21:50, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of TMCFA


A tag has been placed on TMCFA, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Business for more information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, 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. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:38, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of TMCFA


A tag has been placed on TMCFA requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, individual animal(s), an organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or why the subject of the article is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding  at the top of the article, immediately below the speedy deletion  tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate), and providing your reasons for contesting on the article's talk page, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. You may freely add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

You may want to read the guidelines for specific types of articles: biographies, websites, bands, or companies. Peridon (talk) 21:41, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

For a start
You don't give any reliable references - see WP:RS. The ones you give don't show independent coverage - and I can find very little on Google. Peridon (talk) 21:47, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of ProfessorGA.com


A tag has been placed on ProfessorGA.com, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Business for more information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, 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. This lousy t-shirt (talk) 21:57, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Your choice
Well, I am disappointed. I have given up quite a lot of my time explaining to you what the situation was in order to help you avoid the situation which you have now chosen to put yourself in, and others have also tried to help you. It was made quite clear to you that repeatedly creating the same spam/copyright infringing/ non-notable article was unacceptable, and would lead to your being blocked, but you have chosen to take that option. JamesBWatson (talk) 21:59, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistent copyright violations, and using Wikipedia only for advertising or promotion. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text below this notice, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. JamesBWatson (talk) 22:01, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Please unblock me, I simply created the article ProfessorGA.com because on Google it had more reviews and links and the domain name was much more notable than the other names I gave to the articles. If I receive more coverage such as on television, magazines, newspapers, reviews, etc will you allow me to keep the article? GoGerardo (talk) 22:03, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Hello can anyone answer my question?! If I receive more coverage such as on television, magazines, newspapers, reviews, etc will you allow me to keep the article? GoGerardo (talk) 22:11, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid you have just tipped your hand by saying "if I receive more coverage." We are all expected not to write about ourselves. See our policies on autobiographies and conflicts of interest. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:55, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

If the website ProfessorGA.com receives more coverage and expands through product sales throughout the years lets say through TIME Magazine, the New York Times, News reports on television etc. I see other websites with their own article, and if the site becomes notable it should deserve an article on wikipedia. Will I be able to make an article for the site on wikipedia in the future?

I don't want it to be about me, I want it to be about the website ProfessorGA.com (The Main Educational/Informational Center About Atheism For Everyone). Can I have the article about The Main Center For Atheism if it receives more exposure?
 * If another editor at some time in the future decides that your website is notable enough to warrant a Wikipedia article, it will be written. But you don't get to write about your own organization; please don't attempt to do so. You'll be unblocked only if you agree not to write about ProfessorGA.com (or any of your personal endeavors) at all. --jpgordon:==( o ) 00:08, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Later on down the road of life if the website/organization is notable enough according to a future editor or yourself it will get an article on wikipedia if someone writes about it? GoGerardo (talk) 04:12, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Not according to some future editor. According to multiple reliable sources not affiliated with the subject. This is why we don't want users writing about themselves or organizations they have a close involvement with. It is very difficult to objectively evaluate your own endeavors, and is best left up to someone without a personal interest in the matter. There are literally millions of websites. I would estimate that less than 1% of them have a Wikipedia article. Most small businesses, be they online, physical locations, or both, are not sufficiently notable to be recorded in an encyclopedia. Beeblebrox (talk) 07:00, 9 January 2011 (UTC)