User talk:Mreinsmith

Speedy deletion of Parasequential
A tag has been placed on Parasequential, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent. If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Knock-Off Nigel (talk) 20:28, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Parasequential is restored temporarily
Hey there, Mreinsmith. I've restored the article after your post on my talkpage. I can see that the article was not in fact "patent nonsense" by the strictest definition so I agree it deserves a little daylight to try to make an article out of it. However, please note when you visit the article that it has a proposed deletion tag added. That tag allows any editor 5 days before deletion to add to, reference and otherwise improve the article. If the article is improved, the tag can be removed, however it may still end up being moved to the third deletion process called Articles for deletion where the community will discuss this article specifically to decide by consensus if it should stay. Please ask if you need any further assistance! Happy editing,  Keeper   |   76   |   Disclaimer  17:12, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Parasequential
Another editor has added the  template to the article Parasequential, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also What Wikipedia is not and Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the  template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 18:00, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Got your message
Hey there again Mreinsmith. Got your message. I noticed you've continued adding to the article. One guideline that I believe you may find helpful when trying to add a "word" to the encyclopedia is this one. Perhaps the Parasequential article would be better placed at Wiktionary? It's up to you. Once you feel that you've made enough improvements to the article that you are satisfied with it, I will go through it and format it to be more "Wikipedia-like" and do some copyeditng and the like. If you feel that the article should remain here, edit the page to removed the proposed deletion notice that's on the page. If the notice is still there after 5 days of being placed there, it can be deleted by any admin at any time. After reading that guideline, and looking into Wiktionary, if you decide that Wikipedia isn't the most appropriate place for this, let me know, I'll delete the article. Cheers,  Keeper   |   76   |   Disclaimer  16:16, 23 February 2008 (UTC)