User talk:Wikicreator24

Proposed deletion of Elise johnson
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Elise johnson, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Gunnar Hendrich (talk) 22:30, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Don Lattin
A tag has been placed on Don Lattin requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must include on the external site the statement "I, (name), am the author of this article, (article name), and I release its content under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 and later." You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

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. andy (talk) 22:47, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Please do not remove speedy deletion notices from pages you have created yourself. Please use the template on the page instead if you disagree with the deletion.

Speedy deletion of Brent Kessel
A tag has been placed on Brent Kessel 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. --Alinnisawest(talk) 02:28, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Talk:Roy Doliner
A tag has been placed on Talk:Roy Doliner requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, "See also" section, book reference, category tag, template tag, interwiki link, rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

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. --Alinnisawest(talk) 02:30, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Spammer
It took me a moment to work out what the people you are writing about have in common. You work for HarperCollins and are promoting the authors you publish. Please stop. Advertising is not allowed here. Writing articles with the intention of spamming is worse. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 04:44, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

A few tips on style: &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 05:06, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
 * "award-winning" is a nauseating and hopelessly over-used phrase - usually indicating non-notablity. If you must quote awards, write something like "is the winner of the &hellip; Award" - giving the name of the award and a link to the website that proves it.
 * "official website" and "author biography" do not take capitals.


 * OK, I'm just incredibly confused and would like some explanations. First of all, how am I spamming? That doesn't make sense to me. Second of all, how can you decide what authors deserve Wikipedia pages and which do not? How can you slap a an advertising label on some author pages and not on others? People who have done famous things or written groundbreaking, well-known, or famous works deserve to be acknowledged on the internet, and Wikipedia is one service. How can you justify taking off HarperCollins authors as opposed to any other authors. You are turning Wikipedia into a biased and entirely arbitrary institution and this is completely unacceptable. Who are appropriate people to create pages about authors and who are not? How can you just decide that someone is more fit to write pages about people? I am providing accurate information about influential people of our decade. You are doing a disservice to these authors and to Wikipedia to take down these pages. It is utterly confusing to me who you expect to put up these pages if I don't. Is not any page about an author, movie star, director, screen writer, any individual actually just advertising if they are not dead? I think so, under your guidelines. I expect you to take down all author pages if you deem mine somehow unacceptable or different.


 * Also, I appreciate your tips on style, those were very helpful. However, they'll only be useful if you ever allow me to actually put up Wikipedia pages. Wikicreator24 (talk) 17:08, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

One person is advertising when they come to Wikipedia with the intention of writing about things in which they have a commercial interest. Another person is providing useful information when they come to Wikipedia with the intention of building an encyclopedia. A glance at the contributions of someone like Alinnisawest compared with your contributions makes the difference very clear.

This edit also makes the point. You came along with a pre-drafted piece of text peppered with weasel words: "forces his readers to consider", "bestseller" (twice). You completely ignored the fact that there is already a section called "Bibliography" and created a new section called "Books" duplicating existing content. Someone whose motivation was to build an encyclopedia would have integrated the new text into that which was already there.

Who do I expect to put up these pages if you don't. The people who read these authors of course! They are the ones who can judge whether an author is notable.

Of course "Wikipedia is biased and subject to (perhaps a better phrase than privy to) inconsistent whims". But with the inconsistent whims of thousands of editors all pulling in different directions, the nett result is usually pretty fair. AfD discussions and the like strive to judge people against some absolute standard of "notability". Your standard is whether they are published by HarperCollins!

But you may take heart from the fact that for the four articles I sent to AfD no-one is rushing to say delete. I have registered your COI, that is the main thing. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 08:03, 21 August 2008 (UTC)