User talk:LilithMiami

Speedy deletion nomination of American Investigative Society of Cold Cases


A tag has been placed on American Investigative Society of Cold Cases 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 an organization or company, 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 read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Zeusu 10:33, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

Conflict of interest
Hello, LilithMiami. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but 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.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:


 * Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
 * Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam).
 * Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content 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.
 * I've declined the request to restore the page. The problem is that the page didn't really show how the organization passes WP:ORG as a whole, which was made more problematic by the fact that the page was fairly promotional in tone. It came across more like something written for a press release or a private website for the organization. Other than a handful of stories about the organization launching, there's nothing out there to show a depth of coverage and it's just far WP:TOOSOON for this group to have an entry. The thing to remember is that no matter how noble their cause is or who is a member, that notability is not automatically inherited (WP:NOTINHERITED) by any of this. It may make it more likely that they'll gain coverage, but it's not a guarantee. We have to have coverage of the organization and I think that since this groups is only about a year old, it's just too soon. There's no depth of coverage here and I don't think it'd pass notability guidelines if it was restored and went through AfD. Now given the tone of the article and that it's relatively unheard of all things considered, I'm inclined to think that you are involved with the organization to some degree. There's nothing that says that you can't write about something you're personally involved with, but it is discouraged because it's so incredibly easy to write a promotional article without meaning to. I would highly, highly recommend that you read over our COI guidelines thoroughly and get someone from WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography to help you with writing this.


 * On a side note, you may want to be very, VERY careful about listing each case that the group handles. Not only could this very, very easily grow unwieldy as the group handles more cases, but you also have to be careful about divulging personal details on Wikipedia. It could come across like it's a brag book for the organization or like it's something people could add to themselves, like a tip board. I'm also slightly worried that it could come across as original research due to the tone of the article and that it could leave us open if by some chance the family of the people investigated in the course of the case wanted to complain that we were posting a ton of personal information. Even if you refer to the people as "Suspect #1" and don't name names, the suspect's family could very well come on here and threaten some legal action because essentially none of it is sourced in places that we could use to back anything up. WP:PRIMARY sources such as the organization itself would not be usable towards this end. It has the potential to be a very, very large nightmare if one of the suspect's families were to want this information removed. There's also the concern that to many editors this will come across as indiscriminate information when it comes down to it, especially since there is no coverage in RS to show that the AISOCC's coverage of the cases really warrants inclusion in the overall article. I can't warn you hard enough about all of this because stuff like this can and has happened in the history of Wikipedia. Normally we'll just block anyone that comes on to Wikipedia and says "remove this or I'll sue" but at the same time we also tend to take a look at the information in question and try to avoid further legal actions. I really, really would prefer it if you woudl remove the detailed case information in the sandbox version you have. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   13:50, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User:LilithMiami/sandbox


A tag has been placed on User:LilithMiami/sandbox requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article or image appears to be a clear copyright infringement. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from https://nebula.wsimg.com/e3bf01f4208ffb3dd59715a2f88dffd7?AccessKeyId=920A0B0BA34D26357EAD&disposition=0&alloworigin=1. 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 or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — 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 or image 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 this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   14:01, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Please understand, we cannot accept copyvio from any source. Even if the rights to the original material are given up as fair use, you would still have to re-write this for issues of tone and for the issues of privacy that I broached above. We really, REALLY have to be very cautious about what we put on Wikipedia, especially if it's only sourced by primary sources and could lead to further issues on here. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   14:01, 26 May 2014 (UTC)