User talk:Mreadingsmith

Speedy deletion nomination of INSIGHT E
Hello Mreadingsmith,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged INSIGHT E for deletion, because it seems to be promotional, rather than an encyclopedia article.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. JacobiJonesJr (talk) 07:05, 1 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Hi Mreadingsmith: I am an administrator here on en.wikipedia. Someone brought to my attention the discussion at User talk:RHaworth; I take it from the signature there that the IP editor there (and on INSIGHT_E) was you editing logged out. Have you lost your password? I see that you have e-mail enabled; this should enable you to regain control of the account by having the password reset and e-mailed to you. Unfortunately RHaworth declines to respond to IP inquiries, and in any case once you register an account you should endeavour to only edit logged-in. As to the article, I've looked at it and it was correctly tagged with a number of issues, the most major of which is that it lacked citations to reliable third-party sources, which is the primary way we determine notability. (This can include newspaper articles as well as scientific journals and government documents; a brief summary of the requirements is here.) I see no one gave you a welcome template with links to our policies, including notability, so I've placed one at the top of this page. Please have a look at that and at the policy relevant to promotional pages, and then if you still think you can meet our notability standard, I suggest you post again at User talk:RHaworth with links to independent reliable sources that you can add to the article now that you are aware of the need for them, and ask him to undelete the page so that you can add the sources and rewrite it to be less promotional in tone. Just removing the section on objectives was a good-faith effort, but the page would require recasting in more neutral language plus adding sources; strictly speaking, pages should be based as far as possible on what third-party sources have said about the topic, with internal sources used only to establish informational details such as number of staff. I hope this helps, and feel free to ask me for clarifications on my talk page. Yngvadottir (talk) 17:26, 3 June 2014 (UTC)