User talk:LakeBoater

Another editor has nominate an article you created for speedy deletion
A tag has been placed on requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia, because it appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion. If you can indicate how it is different from the previously posted material, place the template hangon underneath the other template on the article and put a note on the page's discussion page saying why this article should stay. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. If you believe the original discussion was unjustified, please use deletion review instead of continuing to recreate the page. Thank you. DuncanHill (talk) 16:37, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 17:59, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Gabriel Murphy deletion review
Regarding your comment at my talk page:
 * I would like to suggest that you remove the protection status from Gabriel Murphy and allow me the opportunity to expand on the article

I do not favor expanding the Gabriel Murphy article; I support keeping it as a redirect to Aplus.Net. Additionally, please see the request I made in the deletion review. Specifically, can I get you to clarify what outcome you want from the DRV? Do you want the article recreated, or just the redirect to Aplus.Net recreated? Thank you. —C.Fred (talk) 18:54, 22 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Since the article has been userfied at User:LakeBoater/Gabriel Murphy, I have archived the deletion review. Here's the path I'd recommend you take with the article:
 * 1) Review the general notability and notability of biographies guidelines. These are the hurdles that the article must meet. Also review the definition of a reliable source.
 * 2) Improve the article with a clear assertion of notability to meet the guidelines mentioned above.
 * 3) Make sure the assertions—and really, anything in the article—is backed up by a reference to a reliable source.
 * 4) Make sure the article is written in neutral point of view.
 * 5) Once you think the article is in good shape—or periodically along the way—ask another editor (including me) to review the article.
 * 6) If I think the article is in good shape—neutral POV, solid assertion of notability, and multiple independent sources—then I will open the deletion review discussion for you. (You could do it yourself, but having another editor do it may help your cause.)
 * 7) If the article is reinstated after the review, the closing admin will move it from user space back into the main encyclopedia.
 * I hope that helps. Like I said, if you have questions along the way, feel free to ask. —C.Fred (talk) 00:34, 23 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I received your message but will not be able to look at the article until this evening (around midnight UTC). (I check a few things during my lunch break, but I don't have time for in-depth reviews.) —C.Fred (talk) 16:24, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I honestly have to agree with C.Fred here. While I am sure Mr. Murphy is a nifty individual, the world is full of nifty folk who don't really have a lot in the way of notability. Murphy clearly has some, as he is mentioned in an article. But a while article? I am not so sure. - Arcayne   (cast a spell)  16:41, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Enrique Caballero Peraza
Enrique Caballero Peraza was a member of Mexico's congress. People who are or were members of a national or state legislature are automatically notable. I added some newspaper articles as references to Enrique Caballero Peraza. --Eastmain (talk) 00:54, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 13:34, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Orphan status and notability
Since the AfD closed before I could respond to your comment, I'm responding here on your talk page. First of all it is not at all uncommon for persons to improve an article that is up for AfD, even one that is up for the third time. I myself have done so, and it is not uncommon for an article that was eminently deletable at the start of an AfD discussion to be improved to the point where it is manifestly keepable. The orphan status reflected the lack of notability that the article asserted. Take for example the various companies Mr. Murphy led, and the awards he and his company won. All certainly verifiable facts, and well documented judging by the links. But the article never gave a reason why said companies and awards were noteworthy or important. There are millions of small businesses worldwide and millions of awards and few will ever be notable. If instead of providing a laundry list of non-notable facts, you were to focus upon something truly noteworthy he has done and have the article explain why someone should care about it, then it should be possible to get the article reestablished. Caerwine Caer’s whines 23:48, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Adoption
I'd be happy to adopt you. Million_Moments (talk) 09:32, 17 July 2008 (UTC)