User talk:Musician1955

I would like to add this new title "New Energy Movement" that might start kinda like this. The subject is vast, real and begging for attention on Wikipedia and any other good reference guide on New Energy technologies in the new millennium;

Speedy deletion of New Energy Movement
A tag has been placed on New Energy Movement, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as FAQ/Business for more information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. andy (talk) 22:36, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

February 2009
Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. For more information about creating articles, you may want to read Your first article. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. andy (talk) 22:36, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Whoah-whoah...hold your horses please :-) Whoever deleted this topic caught me off guard. I'm sure that you have a valid reason for rejecting the article. By the way, this page is 100% original and certainly NOT merely to "promote an entity!" I composed the article myself without any assistance or cut-and-paste nonsense. New Energy Movement is a concept and a very worthy topic in this day and age. Just because there is an entity that calls itself New Energy Movement (which I referenced) does not negate the reality of a "new energy movement" from being a valid, very real and pressing concept. In my zeal, I had used capitals "N", "E", and "M" merely for emphasis, obviously a short-sighted decision. A compromise, I hope, would be to remove the link association from the article's title and change the New Energy Movement reference throughout to "new energy movement." I feel very strongly that this title and subject matter is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia and hope it will get the validation and attention and distribution it deserves. Obviously I did not explain it clearly in the original article and obviously need to go through Wiki boot camp soon because I see now that the article "was" ill-constructed making it appear to promote or propagate an entity, rather than propagate an idea worthy of included in Wikipedia as a valid topic. The article will definitely evolve as I learn how to format and add vital links and topic matter. I suspect that whomever recommended this for fast deletion may have neglected to read the entire subject to see that this in fact does "NOT" promote an entity, but rather, a valid concept for our times. I completely understand how one may have seen this article as blatant promotion of an entity. Please consider the underlying facts and "thanks" for keeping me on my toes. I'm fairly new at Wiki and need to do my homework. I attended the Saturday session of Rcc2009 in Portland on Saturday briefly. Physical problems prevented me from staying longer and getting to know the community better. PEACE!


 * So the article is intended to promote an idea that you made up. andy (talk) 22:47, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

I did not "make up" this concept or idea. It is very real and in effect as we speak. Just because you call it "made up" does not make it so. If I need to remove the article and refine it to make it more appropriate for inclusion in Wikipedia prime-time, then I will do what I must. But please do not misconstrue the good intent and validity of the title New Energy Movement. Please. John W. Cornett (talk) 23:03, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of New Energy Movement
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article New Energy Movement, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process
 * self-admittedly soapbox essay. Fails WP:OR ("unpublished analysis or synthesis of published material that serves to advance a position"), WP:SOAP ("Wikipedia is not a soapbox, a battleground, or a vehicle for propaganda and advertising")

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. andy (talk) 10:54, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of New Energy Movement
An article that you have been involved in editing, New Energy Movement, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/New Energy Movement. Thank you.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. andy (talk) 13:52, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Use of Talk pages
FYI Talk pages such as Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Environment are not the correct places for deletion debates. Please use the main page. andy (talk) 16:07, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Whoops! Still learning my way around. Thanks!John W. Cornett (talk) 16:11, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

By the way Andy, please give me a hint...where exactly did the article attain self-admittedly soapbox essay status... That's a really good one....but not the case here. PEACE! John W. Cornett (talk) 16:14, 24 February 2009 (UTC)


 * This came from your own comments: "The article is intended to enlighten people" andy (talk) 16:18, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Well, I'm not sure why I said it that way at the time, (I can remove the statement if it is still there) but I fail to see how that rises to the level of "Soapboxing" ...rather it seems to me that the statement you refer to, "intended to enlighten people" is actually a fairly benign statement used only to emphasize the efficacy of the subject of the article. PEACE! John W. Cornett (talk) 16:25, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion pages. Doing so won't stop the discussion from taking place. You are, however, welcome to comment about the proposed deletion on the appropriate page. Jac 16888 Talk 08:43, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I apologise, I didn't realise the AFD tag was at the bottom and jumped to the wrong conclusions. Very sorry-- Jac 16888 Talk 12:26, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Moving the AfD notice
Please do not move the deletion notice from its correct place at the top of the page. You can clearly see that I and other editors move it back so you must be aware that the notice should remain in place. Continuing to move it will count as vandalism and may result in your being blocked from editing wikipedia. andy (talk) 19:15, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, you will be blocked from editing. andy (talk) 22:51, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Whoops! I am not a vandal, simply misinformed and taking advantage of the lack of information available within the notice. There is nothing in the notice that states the notice has to remain on top. I have now been informed. Thank you. PEACE! JohnJohn W. Cornett (talk) 22:54, 25 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, you were informed earlier. Do it again and you will be blocked. Wikipedia has rules - follow them! andy (talk) 22:56, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

In fact,I was not informed since I did not see it. The words "remove" is not the same as "move" in my vocabulary, but I am now "informed" as you suggest. Did you get my comments to you on the delection discussion page? PEACE!John W. Cornett (talk) 22:58, 25 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Do not alter users' Talk pages, as you did by deleting material from my talk page. You either haven't a clue about wikipedia's rules, or you don't care, or you are deliberately vandalising, so take this as a  final  warning - any further acts of vandalism will result in my asking for you to be blocked from editing wikipedia because all of your edits are disruptive. If you don't understand the rules, don't edit wikipedia. If you do understand the rules, stop your disruption immediately. andy (talk) 23:14, 25 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Andy, please note that the information I deleted from your talk page was the "dross" statement that you verbally reprimanded me over. Please accept my apologies. Also, please note, I am not a vandal. I am on a very steep learning curve for Wiki ettiquette and really appreciate your patience and forgveness, and the same goes to the Wiki community at large. John W. Cornett (talk) 23:57, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

*""I do care, and I will comply."" I'm just a newbie where Wiki is concerned and really appreciate your patience with me.John W. Cornett (talk) 23:19, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * ""Yes sir.""John W. Cornett (talk) 23:17, 25 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Am in the process of organizing my facts better so that the article will have "substantive links" and am also in the process of ensuring that questions posed in first paragraph of the article are actually answered in the actual article. Any help will be appreciated.John W. Cornett (talk) 23:52, 25 February 2009 (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) 00:00, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

March 2009
Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. For more information about creating articles, you may want to read Your first article. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. ''This article has already been deleted through a consensus of wikipedia editors. It should not be re-created unless it is substantially different. In fact in your case, since you obviously haven't a clue how wikipedia works, I'd steer well clear of any attempt to resurrect it whatsoever. The same goes for the article's talk page - the article is dead, so the talk page cannot exist on its own'' andy (talk) 23:20, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for all your help Andy.John W. Cornett (talk) 07:01, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Musician1955


A tag has been placed on User:Musician1955 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free Web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

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, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Guy Macon (talk) 12:10, 20 March 2015 (UTC)