User talk:Pnajadi

Again, I fundamentally disagree with your rejection and now the deletion by Anthony who has for sure did not think much to hit that delete button playing a bit god here on Wiki. What does he now want? That we contribute more to humanity to a level he then finally might like? Again, I can contest thousands of pages here that then also and under the same "shoot down critera" should have been nixed a long time ago, cross border that is. Kindly verify facts, updated myself today on my person. Appreciate your kind reconsideration & or comments. Best rgds Pascal Najadi
 * Please review the notability standards of Wikipedia. Notability must be supported by reliable and verifiable sources that are independent of the subject of the article (i.e., not self-published or with a connection to the subject.  Wikipedia also strong discourages autobiographies as the author always has a conflict of interest in those cases and it is difficult to maintain a neutral point of view.  Finally, other stuff exists is not a good argument for retaining an article.  Regards,  GregJackP   Boomer!   11:16, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
 * See my comment below. While I decline to take offence at the implied attack on me here, I will point out that my activity as an admin is always based on wikipedia principles, policies and guidelines. If all editors followed the same philosophy admins would have nothing to do.--Anthony Bradbury"talk" 16:18, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Pascal Najadi


A tag has been placed on Pascal Najadi, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. 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 seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Business for more information.
 * It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but 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 yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. GregJackP  Boomer!   16:50, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

In your comment on my talk page you failed to add your signature, which accounts for the slight delay in my reply. I note that you do not agree with my deletion of this page; which, I should point out in relation to your comment, is not YOUR page, although it may be about you; all pages in wikipedia are available to all editors. The page was deleted on the basis both of failing to assert adequate notability, while at the same time being promotional, and I would maintain that this is an accurate summation. To avoid needless correspondence I will concede without argument that the Swissair collapse is obviously notable; highly so. But that does not confer notability on people associated with it, whether as film-makers or in other capacities. I am not prepared to reverse my decision, but you have the option of seeking a community review at the deletion review page. I suspect from your username that the article is an autibiography; while it was not deleted on this basis you might care to look at autobiography guidelines.--Anthony Bradbury"talk" 16:14, 20 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I note your further comment on my talk page, though it is not clear to me why you should believe that I am, or have been, a serving officer, nor why I should have a relationship with the F/A 18, nor indeed why you should think I am American, which I am not.

My comments made earlier regarding ths article stand.--Anthony Bradbury"talk" 18:52, 20 August 2012 (UTC)