User talk:Jachn

Speedy deletion nomination of Swissôtel Chicago


A tag has been placed on Swissôtel Chicago 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 is notable: 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 this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, 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, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. De728631 (talk) 18:18, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Swissôtel Chicago


The article Swissôtel Chicago has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Non-notable subsidiary of one notable company

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. De728631 (talk) 18:27, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Swissôtel Chicago
The article you created is no longer being considered for deletion. However, you need to keep working on the article, as it is not yet up to Wikipedia standards. Please provide some links to reliable third-party sources, such as newspaper articles, magazine articles or books, that back up the information you provided in the article. For more information about this process, please see Your first article. If you have any questions, please post them here or on Talk:Swissôtel Chicago. Thanks, and happy editing. Brad 18:41, 21 April 2010 (UTC)


 * I have to disappoint you since I have again nominated the article for deletion. I did that because I really don't see any notability for this particular subsidiary of Swissôtel. Please see this deletion discussion page for my reasoning and feel free to defend your article. You added a claim that the building was constrcuted by a notable architect, but can you provide references that show a significant coverage for architectural and design matters? Has the building received any national coverage apart from the usual attention that such houses use to get when hosting celebrities? De728631 (talk) 19:23, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Deletion nomination of Talk:Swissôtel Chicago
Hi Jachn, this is a message from an automated bot, regarding Talk:Swissôtel Chicago. You blanked the page and, since you are its sole author, FrescoBot has interpreted it as a request for deletion of the page and asked administrators to satisfy the requests per speedy deletion criterion G7. Next time you want a page that you've created deleted, you can explicitly request the deletion by inserting the text. If you didn't want the page deleted, please remove the tag from the page and undo your blanking or put some content in the page. Admins are able to recover deleted pages. Please do not contact the bot operator for issues not related with bot's behaviour. To opt out of these bot messages, add somewhere on your talk page. -- FrescoBot  (msg) 05:54, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

File source and copyright licensing problem with File:Swissotel Chicago logo.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Swissotel Chicago logo.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, we also need to know the terms of the license that the copyright holder has published the file under, usually done by adding a licensing tag. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged files may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the file will be deleted 48 hours after 22:49, 30 April 2010 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 22:49, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

File source and copyright licensing problem with File:Exterior long.JPG
Thanks for uploading File:Exterior long.JPG. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, we also need to know the terms of the license that the copyright holder has published the file under, usually done by adding a licensing tag. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged files may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the file will be deleted 48 hours after 00:43, 4 May 2010 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:43, 4 May 2010 (UTC)