User talk:Wordcommando1

Welcome!
Hello, Wordcommando1, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Wordcommandos: Encouraging Veterans to write and submit their works, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type help me on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers: 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 have any questions, check out Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Robert McClenon (talk) 02:24, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Your first article
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * Biographies of living persons
 * How to write a great article
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial

Speedy deletion nomination of Wordcommandos: Encouraging Veterans to write and submit their works


A tag has been placed on Wordcommandos: Encouraging Veterans to write and submit their works, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:
 * It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Business for more information.
 * It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:24, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Wordcommandos
Hi. I've recently deleted the article you wrote, but I noticed that you had asked for "more time" on the article's Talk page. If you're in need of more time to bring an article up to Wikipedia's standards, you're most welcome to write it as a Draft, which will give you ample time to find good-quality sources, improve the wording etc. Then, once you're happy with it, it's a case of getting another user to look at it and (hopefully) moving it into the main article-space. The usual rule is that if you have an article not "actively being improved" as a Draft for more than six months it risks getting deleted, but that's obviously a lot more time than the Speedy Deletion process. Hope this helps, and if not, please feel free to reply either here or on my Talk page. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 04:16, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Greetings. I've read the initial "possible" deletion reasoning, but I explained my stance against it... and have not read your BigHaz "reason" for deleting the page. Did you review the article and its merits? Usually, in an insightful environment such as this encyclopedia, an editor would/should take a moment to explain what content in the article is/are not deemed good-quality. I'd like to know what it is that you find insufficient about this article. I took the time... maybe you can take the time? Thanks. User:Wordcommando1


 * Happy to do so. Ultimately, the article was written either as a news article or an advertisement for the program (depending on how you read it), and neither of these things is what Wikipedia, or any encyclopedia, intends to have in it. Further, the article as written didn't make a claim of significance or notability for the program. It exists, and seems to be a good form of therapy for veterans, but that doesn't mean that it automatically merits a Wikipedia article. There would need to be non-trivial, third-party coverage explaining the significance of this particular program (is it the first? the largest? the "most successful" by some metric or another?) in order for that to be met. I don't mean to say that it will never meet that criterion, which is why I've suggested re-creating it as a Draft in order to have the extra time to find those sources, but the article as written didn't do that, and that has a lot to do with the deletion as well.
 * The final point, although it wasn't one raised in the initial tagging of the article, is that it was a direct copy and paste from the source linked at the bottom of the page. Even if that page was one you wrote for the blog, there can still be copyright issues in simply copying the text word-for-word. That blog post can most definitely be used as a reference - one of a few, per the above - but it can't be the text of the article itself.
 * It also may be important to explain what the process is in terms of deletion of an article. As the rationales for deletion related to specific policies (the ones requiring claims of notability and that articles not be advertisements for their subjects), any response would need to address those, and ideally explain that there is in fact a claim of notability and/or that the article wasn't an advertisement. The response you made asked for "leeway" to bring the article up to the standards required, which is where my suggestion of a Draft comes in once again. In terms of an editor "tak[ing] a moment to explain what content in the article is...not deemed good-quality", that was provided in the rationale when the article was tagged for speedy deletion. This rationale and your response was considered in light of the merits of the article, and the decision was made accordingly. While this may seem like a "rubber stamping", it wasn't such at all. Time was certainly taken to review the matter before the deletion was completed.
 * Again, happy to discuss further if you wish to do so. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 12:45, 24 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi there! As you suggested, I've created a new page for Wordcommando, and placed it in Draft:Wordcommando for you review, and others. I'd appreciate your comments. Thanks. User:Wordcommando1

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Wordcommando


A tag has been placed on Draft:Wordcommando, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the.  DGG ( talk ) 04:44, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Wordcommando


A tag has been placed on Draft:Wordcommando requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from http://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/Putting-Feelings-Into-Words-Produces-8047. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.  DGG ( talk ) 05:04, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Wordcommando
Why did you delete the page for Draft:Wordcommando? I followed the submission protocol and did not "publish" the article, but instead submitted it as, the protocol illustrates, a "DRAFT."

I don't get your logic for a quick read and delete. A draft is a draft, or maybe I don't understand your Wiki-meaning of this encyclopedic entry. But please, do explain your basis.

A viable draft submission is something for editors to consider and provide valuable input, not outright dismissal. If there is an error, say signifying 10% of the content, then majority of it, or 90%, is viable. I don't understand your logic in the quick deletion of a "draft" submission. Wordcommando1 (talk) 21:03, 7 November 2017 (UTC)