User talk:Stevehawker

Welcome
Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on, or ask your question and then place  before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! ~Kylu ( u | t )  13:44, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Deletion of Exegesis (group)

 * Copied from AnthonyConway usertalk

Hi,

I have to agree with Kylu. I don't think the article is enhanced with lists of graduates. It's great to see people I knew on the list, but that's not the purpose of Wikipedia.

If we rewrite it to show the significance of exegesis and how it became programmes, etc then I think it will be a worthwhile entry.

Stevehawker 00:28, 24 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Steve, I can't see how a stub does not justify deletion but an expanded article does, however badly expanded. It would have been helpful if Kylu had made some positive changes to the article.  To delete the whole thing was just destructive.  I look forward to seeing your suggestions for a better article.


 * Regards


 * Anthony


 * PS As you say, it was fascinating to see what had become of all those people I once knew.


 * Section copied from User talk:Kylu

Rather than delete the page, why cant you just delete the section that you consider spam?

Or

Reinstate it and use the talk page to let us know what you think is spam. Last time I viewed the page (couple of weeks ago at most), I couldnt see anything remotely objectionable.

Stevehawker 10:58, 21 August 2007 (UTC)


 * While, perhaps, the top of the page could be salvageable, the sections "Graduates of the Exegesis seminar and ex-members of Programmes Limited and Merchants" and "Companies formed or largely staffed by Exegesis graduates and using the material" were indiscriminate lists comprised of only external links.


 * In addition, the text itself did not did not cite a single reliable source, made no assertation of notability at all.


 * The deletion of the lists was my main concern, however without the lists you're simply left with a stub with no citations nor assertation of notability, which still would've left the article subject to speedy deletion.


 * Now, just to clarify, while the speedy deletion criteria do state that recreation of deleted material (G4) is a deletion reason, that doesn't apply to deletions per the CSD's themselves. If you'd like to recreate the page, including asstertation of notability and citations, it may well satisfy the various policies for inclusion. In fact, if you'd like the source for the deleted page, please let me know and I'd be happy to recreate the page in your userspace for your reference.


 * I hope this was of some help. I'm copying this section to your talkpage (with a handy welcome message full of useful information!) for your convenience. ~Kylu ( u | t )  13:44, 21 August 2007 (UTC)