User talk:YearginD

Welcome!
Welcome to Wikipedia, YearginD! Thank you for your contributions. I am Rosiestep and I have been editing Wikipedia for some time, so if you have any questions feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You can also check out Questions or type at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes ( ~ ); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Rosiestep (talk) 04:55, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Introduction
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * How to write a great article
 * Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community

Thank you Rosiestep! When you have time, can you please review my article on Deb Sofield. I appreciate your warm welcome. My primary question is about notability. I question that a person who is notable within their state and nationally cannot be deemed so without national references. My article is tagged re. notability, potential advertising and "weasel words". I have had responses from editors who tagged the article, but I feel somewhat at a loss. I am also confused about the "orphan article" tag. When I linked to another article Order of the Palmetto, editing it to [rightly] include Deb Sofield, it was removed as advertising. I am missing what the other editors see.

Grateful for guidanceYearginD (talk) 15:05, 27 August 2015 (UTC) Rosiestep

August 2015
Hello, I'm Yopie. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. Yopie (talk) 00:53, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, Yopie. I left questions for you on your talk page. Very confused by your tags and edit comments. Glad to make adjustment, but need specific examples. I have read the Wikipedia rules and reread my article on Deb Sofield; I have even read again my edit to the Order of the Palmetto article and cannot see what you refer to. I really do want to do this properly.

Thank you for all help and guidance. YearginD (talk) 15:11, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Talkback
Whpq (talk) 15:47, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Talkback
Whpq (talk) 15:56, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Deb Sofield for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Deb Sofield is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Deb Sofield until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Whpq (talk) 18:44, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi there! I just wanted to let you know I moved your comment from the talk page of the discussion for deletion to the main page. This way your comments are more visible and can be seen as your comment to keep the article. RickinBaltimore (talk) 15:04, 2 June 2016 (UTC) Thank you!!! I appreciate the help. YearginD (talk) 15:43, 2 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Regarding your post on the talk page for the deleted article- the page was deleted because a deletion discussion determined that it should be. In order to recreate the page, you must address the reasons that the page was deleted.  You were notified of this discussion above.  If you believe the deletion was in error you can ask for Deletion Review. 331dot (talk) 11:40, 4 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Thank you. I was never notified that the discussion had reached consensus. Surprised, especially after I'd added new references. I have asked for a review.YearginD (talk) 12:19, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
 * There isn't any notice given beyond closing the discussion. This normally takes place after 7 days. It's good practice to place an AfD discussion page on your watch list as the close of the discussion will cause it to appear on your watch list. As for deletion review, it is not afd round 2.  A deletion review considers if the deletion process was not properly followed.  If all you are going to say at the deletion review is that you believe Sofield is notable and the other editors participating in the discussion are simply wrong, it won't really go anywhere.--Whpq (talk) 02:14, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

So now...what to do? Again, I am not certain that everyone had the opportunity to view the new references that I had added (work with youth in Russia, cited in a couple of books, one of which was by the Governor of South Carolina. What are the next steps for me to either reinstate the article or begin from scratch. Thank you, all, for your feedback and guidance. YearginD (talk) 18:34, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
 * At this point, it is unlikely that you would be able to re-instate the article right away. AT least one editor provided an opinion of delete after your addition of more references, and I as nominator, also saw them and was not swayed by their addition.  You can ask the deleting admin, User:Nakon to userfy the deleted article in your sandbox so that you can continue to work on the article as a draft.  Regards. -- Whpq (talk) 23:23, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Many thanks. Can you (or any of the other reviewing editors) offer guidance or suggestions for what, in your opinion, is missing as proof of notability? With appreciation, YearginD (talk) 15:25, 16 June 2016 (UTC)