User talk:JohnKim11

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. HrafnTalkStalk 03:20, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Michael Rydelnik
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Michael Rydelnik, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process
 * No source, other than his Faculty bio. No indication of notability (other than a bare assertion that he's a "renowned author", unsupported by even a bibliography). No substantive content.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. HrafnTalkStalk 16:32, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Notability of Glenn Kreider
A tag has been placed on Glenn Kreider requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, 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. Eeekster (talk) 11:12, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of "Tom Alberg"
A page you created, Tom Alberg, has been tagged for deletion, as it meets one or more of the criteria for speedy deletion; specifically, it is about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how they are important or significant, and thus why they should be included in an encyclopedia. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and the guidelines for biographies in particular.

You are welcome to contribute content which complies with our content policies and any applicable inclusion guidelines. However, please do not simply re-create the page with the same content. You may also wish to read our introduction to editing and guide to writing your first article.

Thank you. Bullzeye (Ring for Service) 02:38, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Michael Rydelnik
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Michael Rydelnik, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process
 * WP:BIO

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. THF (talk) 23:45, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Walter C. Fleming
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Walter C. Fleming, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process
 * Very minor academic. Article does not even assert that the topic meets any of WP:ACADEMIC#Criteria, thus not notable.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. HrafnTalkStalk 06:08, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Harold Hoehner
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Harold Hoehner, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process
 * Fails WP:ACADEMIC (DTS is not a "major institution of higher education and research"). No third party sources.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. HrafnTalkStalk(P) 11:02, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Harold Hoehner
An article that you have been involved in editing, Harold Hoehner, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/Harold Hoehner. Thank you. HrafnTalkStalk(P) 05:00, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

advice
Please see this afd discussion above, and WP:PROF, for an indication of what you should have done as a minimum when you wrote the article. if you are going to add other articles on academics, do it so they will be kept without it being a fight every time. I will help if I catch them in time, but you cannot count on that. It is primarily your responsibility. Add at least their publications, which are always very easy to find; if possible, Add some references to published book reviews of their books, if at all possible. Try Google Scholar for this, but any librarian can help further, as there are other sources. If they have any awards, add them. If they are editors of a journal, add that, but only editors-in-chief count for much here. If they have been involved in any religious or other controversy, there are likely to be news articles: use Google News Archive for these. Be aware that there is in practice a bit of a bias here against faculty in some subjects, such as education and religion, and try extra hard on these. No sense doing the work if it won't stay in Wikipedia.

And if they have only a single book, and it wasn't a great hit, or if they are still only an assistant professor, don;t bother--it almost certainly won't meet our standards. Start at the top. And never copy from a web site. Good luck with these. My advice is always available, but you have to do the writing. DGG (talk) 18:48, 29 January 2009 (UTC)