User talk:WikipediaHelper97

Speedy deletion nomination of Transformational Leadership
Hello WikipediaHelper97,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Transformational Leadership for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Cotton2 (talk) 23:40, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Transformational Leadership


The article Transformational Leadership has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern:
 * No evidence of notability.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Adam9007 (talk) 01:49, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

August 2016
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize pages by deliberately introducing incorrect information, you may be blocked from editing. Melcous (talk) 09:09, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
 * In response to your message on my talk page, unfortunately you are mistaken about a few things. The article you wrote - Transformational Leadership - has not been "taken down", it has been nominated for deletion (and I was not the one who nominated it). If you truly believe it is a useful article, then you have the opportunity to improve it by adding references to reliable sources and demonstrating why the book is notable. In terms of the message I left you above about disruptive editing, that was in response to your edits on the articles Tranquillizer gun (into which you inserted a claim that Samuel Ogden - is that you? - which was not in any way verified by the reference you included) and Delegation (into which likewise you inserted a non-neutral and highly unlikely claim about Samuel Ogden with no evidence whatsoever). Finally, in your message on my talk page you called me both an idiot and someone who is destroying wikipedia. These are both personal attacks and the kind of behaviour that can get you blocked from editing wikipedia. My advice to you is to slow down, take some time to read the articles linked to, and begin to constructively edit wikipedia. Continuing the kind of editing you have done so far is only likely to lead to a block. Regards, Melcous (talk) 00:27, 19 August 2016 (UTC)