User talk:Juliancolton/Recall

Speedy deletion of Bujutsu kodosokukai
We were totally stunned today experiencing that our article "Bujutsu kodosokukai" has been deleted, and that very fast after the notification. During the last month we have worked intensely to correct it according to the wiki credentials and common guidelines stated amongst others by you. It felt as if the message we wrote under the discussion have not even been read, and we sincerely hope that this is not the case. But we have started a discussion page User:Freezydk/Bujutsu_kodosokukai where we have repeated the message.

The Bujutsu kodosokukai page has been published on Wikipedia for almost 1½ years ago and at that time not much was done to correct the errors and mistakes other than another upload. The author of the article would like to apologize for this but he has been through an unpleasant personal tragedy of a longer duration and could not cope with the situation at that time.

We appreciate that you and other people spend so much time and effort and doing a marvelous job in controlling and investigating, that the knowledge published on Wikipedia is correct and objective. And we believe ourselves that the latest upload was in that category. We have tried to make corrective actions towards all the issues that were raised. It was not meant as an unfriendly gesture that we deleted the message boxes after the upload, because that was what the content said, that you can delete it when you have made the corrections.

But we also know that we lack in experience and this is our first article, and English is not or native tongue, so there will be mistakes and errors, for that we apologize. That is why we need help and support from guys like you and tell us what exactly is wrong in our article so we can correct it. To us Wikipedia is a good and comprehensive media which we use a lot and we want our knowledge and experience to be represented here as well.

We hope that we can have a serious and respectful dialogue and come to a mutual understanding and we can finally upload our article without it being deleted again.

Best regards,

{Freezydk (talk) 21:25, 5 May 2010 (UTC)}

This message has been sent to UtherSRG as well
 * Hello. The reason I deleted the article was because this discussion resulted in a consensus to do so. Three editors unanimously agreed that the article's subject lacked adequate notability. It was about a year and a half ago, but as far as I'm aware, I did not have a personal opinion on the article so my decision was procedural only. If you feel you can improve the article enough to justify reinstating it, please feel free, but be sure to include references to reliable sources that establish its significance. I'd be happy to answer any specific questions you have. Regards, – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 04:04, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

(Freezydk (talk) 14:08, 27 June 2010 (UTC)) Hi Julian,

I have done some more work on our wikipedia article "Bujutsu Kodosokukai" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Freezydk/Bujutsu_kodosokukai

I would very much like your input about how we can improve the content so it meets the demands of the wikipedia rules. It is my intension to make this article as perfect and objective as possible and not as an advertisement. Still english is not my native tounge and I will do anything to avoid any misunderstandings and errors but probably need a little help here as well. Regards, Martin

(Freezydk (talk) 21:30, 30 June 2010 (UTC)) Hi Julian, How are you doing? I was wondering if you have had time to through our article and give some comments and hints for some improvement. I am very eager to get this article up and running and so is the organisation behind me. Hope to recieve your comments and approval soon. Best regards, Martin

Marion Harding
Hi Julian - I do not have 1,000 edits but around 500 nor am I complaining about anything but was wondering whether I could apply to re-instate the Marion Harding (artist) article that was deleted some time ago. The artist now lives in Ottawa and is 73 years old. The reason other than I am not convinced there was somewhat of a male biased issue against her notabilty in the first instance is simply that more noteworthy circumstances have taken place in her life. Obviously, I am aware that your duties are often times procedural but you come across as very reasonable and I simply do not know what to do if one suspects a 'cabal' among voting experts for reasons that may or may not pertain to Wikipedia guidelines. For instance, what if one knew that an expert were connected outside of a Wikipedia context to someone with an interest (for whatever reason) to blocking the article?Ernstblumberg (talk) 21:01, 29 October 2010 (UTC)