User talk:Onganymede

Nomination of J. Jaye Gold for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article J. Jaye Gold 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/J. Jaye Gold until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. Mccapra (talk) 13:08, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
 * In time, an Administrator will decide to draftify or delete the article. If there truly are not more refs about Gold and the existing refs are weak, the decision may be to put the article out of its misery versus converting it to a draft that likely will never succeed. Four of the refs are to blog postings at medium.com. Blogs are not considered reliable sources, and thus do not contribute to notability. David notMD (talk) 11:07, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
 * You are to be commended on your tremendous efforts to bring the draft in compliance with Wikipedia guidelines. In the end, the article was deleted on failing notability rather then flaws in content or referencing. It is possible that this was in part WP:TOOSOON, but rather than dwell on the decision, I suggest you turn - at least for a while - to improving existing articles. David notMD (talk) 23:34, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

My Interest
Having long been an appreciative user of Wikipedia, compulsively editing most anything I read, and finding myself house-bound by Covid and a preexisting condition, I wondered if I could participate here and help out with some basic editing. I read exhaustively from the intro. articles and procrastinated. The repeated message I got was: BE BOLD!

I decided to try my first article. I was not solicited. I am not being paid. I am not intending to promote. I chose a person whose books I have read, whose perspectives I am struck by, whose service organization appears to me quite remarkable, and who is still relatively unknown but, I believe, noteworthy. I apologize for not clarifying all this and asking for help earlier.

Were I writing an article on Herman Hesse, Leonard Cohen, Georgian [the republic] wine, or Queen [the band] (thank goodness others already have), my enthusiasm would, similarly, likely show through. But, message received. "Just the facts, ma'am." So, I'd like to see this through. I deleted much, restructured the rest, and found new references (at least as reputable as the Dungeons and Dragons website I've seen used). Please tell me what is still in the way. I have tried to eliminate any partiality. Please tell me where it is still evident. Too much "spirituality"? I'll delete that section. Too wordy? I'll chop it again. I think it could be made "good enough" - the writing, the notability, my sources. Many "help" pages I read indicated a minimum of hard and fast rules, with room for exceptions where the occasion merits. Please inform... Many thanks for your time.
 * Hi! Sadly, writing a biography on wikipedia is, admittedly, a bit hard (I personally refuse to touch them). In the case of your page, you need to use more independent, third party sources. —moonythedwarf (Braden N.) 03:30, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi Moony, thanks for your reply [and sympathy!]. Would you mind looking again and reporting back? I took out more text, found more/new third party refs. I'm exhausted but hopeful... Onganymede (talk) 04:47, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

moonythedwarf Hi, I wrote back but didn't know how to reply properly... but maybe you will get flagged and see this now? Would you take a look again? I have tried to do everything editors have suggested / required.Onganymede (talk) 19:26, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
 * , Several of the sources you have aren't acceptable. You need to read the rules around reliable sources. Medium, for example, is never a good source. —moonythedwarf (Braden N.) 20:42, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

moonythedwarf Hi, I've redone the references, as per editors' recommendation. I've kept 1 medium ref. Would you (look and?) confirm it is unacceptable? I see/read that exceptions can be made. It's a woman's story. Is it suspect? Possible to use? Or just must be deleted? Onganymede (talk) 21:34, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
 * , it still has some issues, but we're to the point I have a little trouble pointing out the exact issues in a helpful manner, so I encourage you to ask for assistance as the help desk. —moonythedwarf (Braden N.) 23:42, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

moonythedwarf So, just now posted, hopefully, my last wrap up on the Nomination for deletion page. I will see what comes back and move on. Thanks for being available. All the best. Onganymede (talk) 00:36, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi I was a bit surprised that the article was deleted rather than being relisted for another week, but please don’t be discouraged. I think your work was exemplary and you did everything you could to rescue the article. In the end I’m afraid you just chose a subject that the community doesn’t agree is notable. If you can do similar work on a different subject you’ll fare better. If I can be of any help to you please drop me a message on my talk page. All the best Mccapra (talk) 23:07, 8 November 2020 (UTC)