User talk:Piaggiopete

Your submission at Articles for creation: User:136.8.33.68/Isabel Wright (March 11)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please read the comments left by the reviewer on your submission. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved. ''' Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! '''
 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia&.
 * To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new Articles for creation help desk], or on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Dodger67&action=edit&section=new reviewer's talk page].
 * Please remember to link to the submission!

Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:11, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
 * You can also get real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Speedy deletion nomination of User:136.8.33.68/Isabel Wright


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that User:136.8.33.68/Isabel Wright, a page that you created, has been tagged for deletion. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which articles can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:
 * It appears to be a test page. (See section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do, and take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.
 * It is unambiguous vandalism or an obvious hoax. (See section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please do not introduce inappropriate pages to Wikipedia; doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.

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. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:12, 11 March 2014 (UTC)


 * I do not agree with the reasons given above for deletion, but the page was totally unsuitable as a Wikipedia article for other reasons: because there was no indication that its subject satisfies Wikipedia's notability guidelines, and because it read as a promotional page ("An up and coming talented young artist"). I will also mention that in my experience at least 99% of all pages created that include the currently fashionable expression "up and coming" totally fail to satisfy Wikipedia's notability criteria: it amounts to saying "she isn't notable yet, but my guess is that she will be one day", whereas we need evidence that she is notable now. I also see that there was an anonymous talk page post, which may or may not have been from you, which said "My Daughter is about to become very talented an [sic] has a passion for art which will be shown soon locally in our hometown". That makes it even clearer that the claim is "she will be notable", rather than "she is notable". There are vast numbers of artists whose work has been shown locally in their home towns, but who come nowhere near to satisfying Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Finally, if that anonymous post was from you, then Wikipedia's conflict of interest guideline indicates that you should not be creating an article about your own daughter. If and when she does become notable by Wikipedia standards, probably an uninvolved third party will write an article about her from a neutral point of view. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 12:05, 11 March 2014 (UTC)