User talk:Mirjam Behne

Nomination of John Harrigan for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article John Harrigan 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 Harrigan 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. Singularity42 (talk) 00:04, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Note:

 * If with your reasoning, you wish the article "kept", the thing to do is precede your comments with an asterisk to "Bullet" the text, and then followed by an emboldened "Keep" . To embolden, you precede and follow the word "keep" with three apostrophes. (IE: 3 apostrophes, Keep, 3 more apostrophes). When you hit "save page" it will appear as the bullet you can see below, right before my signature.
 * Keep - Best,  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 21:20, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I'll be glad to check in on your ongoing work on the article and offer an opinion at the AFD... but before I do, I wish to advise you carefully review WP:Identifying reliable sources so as to ensure the article is not sourced inappropriately. Notable (even if only) to the United Kingdom is fine with Wikipedia, as long as the subject is has significant coverage in multiple reliable independent sources. Luck to you.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 01:20, 16 March 2013 (UTC)  WP:RS


 * I'd be very grateful for your help by reviewing the article. I carefully reviewed the secondary sources I used for the article and I think they all match the creteria of significant coverage in multiple reliable independent sources for the subject. I only used primary sources like personal websites ect. for the external links now. Thank you very much. Mirjam Behne (talk) 03:22, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Managing a conflict of interest
Hello, Mirjam Behne. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the page FoolishPeople, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the COI guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:


 * avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, company, organization or competitors;
 * propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the request edit template);
 * disclose your COI when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
 * avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
 * do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. --Animalparty! (talk) 18:31, 16 June 2019 (UTC)