User talk:UnityResidential

Speedy deletion nomination of Chitoka Webb


A tag has been placed on Chitoka Webb, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be unambiguous advertising that only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add  on the top of Chitoka Webb and leave a note on |the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. HaeB (talk) 19:25, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

I have noted the "hangon" tag you applied to the above-captioned article and the assertions you made on its accompanying talk page. Unfortunately, there is a significant problem which you were apparently unable or unwilling to address. Last month, an article under this title was deleted as the result of an articles for deletion (AfD) process; you can find a complete record of that process at Articles for deletion/Chitoka Webb. Under our rules, an article that has failed at AfD must either be significantly improved upon remounting or be approved in advance via a process found at WP:Deletion review. The problem noted in the AfD was that there were no reliable sources to back up any of the assertions; this continues to be the case. It's important to realize that the links you provided do not qualify as reliable sources since they are essentially Ms. Webb's own statements about her history and situation; this counts as self-publishing or a primary source and they were of little or no value. Check out this link for a complete discussion of this idea. I believe you will now have to undertake an deletion review process if you wish this article to be remounted and remain. If you wish to have the deleted content returned to a "sandbox" page for that purpose, so that it can be significantly improved before submission, feel free to leave me a note. Best of luck with your future contributions. Accounting4Taste: talk 21:21, 18 May 2010 (UTC)