User talk:Johnllyman

Welcome!

 * }

December 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Foreign Policy Digest has been reverted. Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline from Wikipedia. The external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. I removed the following link(s): http://www.facebook.com/foreignpolicydigest. If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 23:09, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added to the page Foreign Policy Digest do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used as a platform for advertising or promotion, and doing so is contrary to the goals of this project. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline from Wikipedia. The external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. I removed the following link(s): http://www.facebook.com/foreignpolicydigest. If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 23:34, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Journal of Foreign Relations


A tag has been placed on Journal of Foreign Relations requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

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. Fæ (talk) 18:19, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Hello Johnllyman. If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Journal of Foreign Relations, 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 you, 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. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  21:42, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Article nominated for [| Rescue]
Dear John, your article is very salvageable. Please add references to third party sources such as the ones I have cared to add to the deletion discussion and connect it to your already notale contributors and their pages in wikipedia. Cheers GrandPhilliesFan (talk) 11:54, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

October 2011
When adding links to material on external sites, as you did to Journal of Foreign Relations, please ensure that the external site is not violating the creator's copyright. Linking to websites that display copyrighted works is acceptable as long as the website's operator has created or licensed the work. Knowingly directing others to a site that violates copyright may be considered contributory infringement. This is particularly relevant when linking to sites such as YouTube, where due care should be taken to avoid linking to material that violates its creator's copyright. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. If you believe the linked site is not violating copyright with respect to the material, then you should do one of the following:
 * If the linked site is the copyright holder, leave a message explaining the details on the article Talk page;
 * If a note on the linked site credibly claims permission to host the material, or a note on the copyright holder's site grants such permission, leave a note on the article Talk page with a link to where we can find that note;
 * If you are the copyright holder or the external site administrator, adjust the linked site to indicate permission as above and leave a note on the article Talk page;

If the material is available on a different site that satisfies one of the above conditions, link to that site instead. Cameron Scott (talk) 18:57, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Journal of Foreign Relations


A tag has been placed on Journal of Foreign Relations requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a clear copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

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. Cameron Scott (talk) 14:49, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of John Lockhart Lyman


The article John Lockhart Lyman has been proposed for deletion because, under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one. Sparthorse (talk) 01:10, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Please do not write an article about yourself, as you did at John Lockhart Lyman. Creating an autobiography is strongly discouraged – see our guideline on writing autobiographies. If you create such an article, it may be deleted. If what you have done in life is genuinely notable and can be verified according to our policy for articles about living people, someone else will probably create an article about you sooner or later (see Wikipedians with articles). Please understand that this is an encyclopedia and not a personal web space or social networking site. If your article has already been deleted, please see: Why was my page deleted?, and if you feel the deletion was an error, please discuss it with the deleting administrator. Thank you. Crusio (talk) 07:13, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank for the message regarding the entry John Lockhart Lyman. While I did create it I did so for two reasons. To give the entry for the Journal of Foreign Relations more links so that it would meet with the perimeters to be kept on Wikipedia and the second reason is that contributors to that site, JOFR, are more inclined to contribute if they sense that it is a legitimate online journal. My point with creating the entry for John Lockhart Lyman is essentially to have the Journal of Foreign Relations kept and not deleted. There is some confusion on my part though. I created the entry with every attempt to align it with other entries about journalists and writers. Johnllyman (talk) 07:19, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
 * John, what you write above is exactly why people with a COI should refrain from editing here, unless they really understand WP and its guidelines/policies. Articles should not be created here to encourage people to contribute to your journal, WP is not for advertising. And whether or not other articles link to the journal article is absolutely immaterial as to whether it will be deleted or not. As for your remark that you modeled your autobio on that of other journalists, WP has over 3 million articles and not all of them will comply with our guidelines. The fact that nobody got around to cleaning those articles up does not mean that they adhere to the necessary standards. See WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Also, your autobio does not indicate how you would meet the necessary notability guidelines (general: WP:GNG, or more specific ones, such as WP:AUTHOR or WP:PROF). I did not put a tag on it for missing notability, but at this point, I would advise you to blank the page and request speedy deletion. Otherwise you risk that someone will take it to AfD. --Crusio (talk) 07:32, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the feedback. I deleted any mention of my educational background. I just left my current role at the Journal and my work on the Morningside Post which constitutes external sources. Johnllyman (talk) 07:38, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

At the moment, you are a textbook example of a (very polite) spammer - all of your edits are either to promote yourself or enterprises that you are involved in. Over the long-term the community tends to kick back against spammers and even if an article should exist for you or the websites you are connected to, then your current actions make it that much harder for truly independent editors to write about those subjects. --Cameron Scott (talk) 09:18, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of The Morningside Post


The article The Morningside Post has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * No evidence of notability presented.

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. Cameron Scott (talk) 14:40, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of John Lockhart Lyman for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article John Lockhart Lyman 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/John Lockhart Lyman 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. Crusio (talk) 11:23, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Journal of Foreign Relations


A tag has been placed on Journal of Foreign Relations, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate,. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

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. Crusio (talk) 09:52, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

November 2011
Thank you for your recent contributions, such as Journal of Foreign Relations. Getting started creating new articles on Wikipedia can be tricky, and you might like to try creating a draft version first, which you can then ask for feedback on if necessary, without the risk of speedy deletion. Do make sure you also read help available to you, including Your First Article and the Tutorial. You might also like to try the Article Wizard, which has an option to create a draft version. Thank you. ''The article has previously been deleted and by consensus found to lack sufficient evidence of notability. Please consider creating a draft for review and discussion rather than recreating as a 'live' article against consensus. You may find WP:RFF useful.'' Fæ (talk) 10:15, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Guidance on notability
Hi Johnllyman,

Wikipedia has its own guidance for notability that may not be the same as your intuitive sense of what is notable. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia of general knowledge rather than an index of profiles of companies and people. Each article needs several independent reliable sources to show significant impact on the historical record. The guidance for organizations is given at WP:ORG with a useful list of questions answered at FAQ/Organizations and for biographies WP:BIO applies.

If the articles you are creating have reliable sources to support the criteria defined in that guidance then you may have a reason to keep the articles from being deleted which you are welcome to raise on the article talk page or on any linked deletion discussion. If you are associated with the organization, person or product the article is about then you must follow the conflict of interest guidelines and avoid editing the article yourself but you are free to suggest and discuss changes.

Rather than starting "live" articles, you can create a draft first which allows you to get your article properly sourced before risking speedy deletion - see Userspace draft and Userfication.

If you would like some independent help you can ask one of the noticeboards at WP:Requests or try chatting with other Wikipedians on.

Thanks, Fæ (talk) 10:15, 5 November 2011 (UTC) == Proposed deletion of notable. This article was previously deleted after an AfD which resulted in a speedy delete decision due to copyright violation. This version does not seem to be a copyright violation, but its other issues are significant.]] ==

The article notable. This article was previously deleted after an AfD which resulted in a speedy delete decision due to copyright violation. This version does not seem to be a copyright violation, but its other issues are significant.]] has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Article that has no reliable sources and therefore is both unverifiable and does not show why this journal is [{WP:N

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 Talk:notable. This article was previously deleted after an AfD which resulted in a speedy delete decision due to copyright violation. This version does not seem to be a copyright violation, but its other issues are significant.|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. Sparthorse (talk) 06:04, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Journal of Foreign Relations


A tag has been placed on Journal of Foreign Relations, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate,. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

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. Crusio (talk) 08:06, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Journal of Foreign Relations for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Journal of Foreign Relations 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/Journal of Foreign Relations (3rd nomination) 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. Fæ (talk) 08:09, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Conflict of interest
Hello Johnllyman. If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, 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 you, 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.

''As your account name matches the name of the editor of the Journal of Foreign Relations website (http://www.jofr.org/author/john-lyman) it is reasonable to conclude that your repeated recreation of an article about the same website is in contravention of the Wikipedia policies on conflict of interest. You have failed to follow the repeated advice given on this page for how to draft an article and what would be required in terms of notability for such an article. Please take time to review the policies linked here, further use of Wikipedia to promote your website will be treated as vandalism and lead to a block for this account.'' You may find the noticeboard at WP:COI/N useful if you wish to discuss further how it might be possible for you to contribute to Wikipedia whilst having a known conflict of interest. Thanks Fæ (talk) 12:14, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

I could have simply left any mention of my role with the Journal of Foreign Relations out rather than have the entry deleted. When one or two people policy the whole of WP it sort of looses its unique flavor. Johnllyman (talk) 18:54, 7 November 2011 (UTC)


 * It would have still been deleted - you never provided any evidence (reliable sources) that it was notable. --Cameron Scott (talk) 19:03, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

I provided links to the Huffington Post and several other external sources. Shall I provide data regarding site visits and information regarding when the site was published? A number of entries The Morningside Post and Foreign Policy Digest have similar entries than mine did before it was deleted. If you provide a sample of what would make the entry notable I can provide it. I did include links to external sites that have cited the Journal of Foreign Relations on the web. Johnllyman (talk) 00:24, 8 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Both of those articles look like they should be deleted as well for the same reasons your article was. --Cameron Scott (talk) 08:15, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Here's my issue. Wikipedia is a resource to provide general information for website, current and historical events. An entry on Wikipedia serves a great purpose. While I'm not sure how many Admins of WP decide the fate of entries, but if its only a few trusted individuals you're depriving the general public of useful information. Both of those entries are helpful and have been helpful to me during my undergraduate years. I completely respect the editing process and the reviews of entries but at some point it would be useful to provide insight about how to improve any entries versus just deleting them. I have gone to great lengths to improve my entry for the Journal of Foreign Relations and I would be grateful if you could help me improve my next attempt. What link can I provide which will help the entry meet any test or deal with any issues that you might have with it? Thank you Johnllyman (talk) 08:24, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Bluntly - if your website turns out to be notable, someone else will write about it. - that applies both here and the real world. What your article lacked in every version were references (from reliable sources) that were *about* the journal. That Joe Blow has written for you is irrelevant, that the NYT writes an article *about* the journal is - see the difference? I certainly couldn't find any sources like that when I looked for them. --Cameron Scott (talk) 08:43, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Journal of Foreign Relations concern
Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Journal of Foreign Relations, a page you created has not been edited in at least 180 days. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace. If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements. If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13. Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 19:52, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Your article submission Journal of Foreign Relations


Hello Johnllyman. It has been over six months since you last edited your article submission, entitled Journal of Foreign Relations.

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply and remove the  or  code. Please note, however, that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code:, paste it in the edit box at this link , click "Save", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 10:17, 27 September 2013 (UTC)