User talk:Scarey-soccer

Speedy deletion of James Chip Sorrell
A tag has been placed on James Chip Sorrell requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

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 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. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. – Dream out loud (talk) 04:25, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

James Sorrell
Hey, I'm sorry to have to say this, but your article on him has several major issues. The first and most problematic is the fact that there is pretty much no reliable information available about him, which by itself is grounds for deletion because it violates Wikipedia's policy on verifibility. The second problem is it is not written from a nuetral point of view, which is one of, if not the most important rule on Wikipedia. While this could potentially be fixed, the above-mentioned fact that he is not notable enough to have sufficient coverage by reliable news or other sources means we could not verify that what is being said is true or not, even if it was neutral. The third problem is the fact that you know him personally. This creates a conflict of interest for you if you write about him because your personal experiences and interactions with him will inevitably bias your opinion toward him for the better or the worse. While this doesn't mean you can't edit articles about topics you are familiar with, (I edit articles about electronic equipment I own all the time), it does mean that you being the primary contributor, especially with the near-total absence of third-party info about this man, is not a good thing if the article is to be truely neutral. I'm sorry, but given all the above problems, I've deleted the article. If you have any questions or you still don't understand why I decided to do this, please feel free to leave a note on my talk page. Thanks. Thingg &#8853; &#8855; 04:56, 16 October 2008 (UTC)