User talk:Rleyton

Welcome!

Hello, Rleyton, 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 Glasgow Life, 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 Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 03:32, 9 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Glasgow Life

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Glasgow Life, 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 Wikipedia: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 deleting administrator. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 03:32, 9 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Response to deletion

Have posted a response to nominator and actioner of the speedy deletion. Requesting at least the markup restored somewhere, but strongly object to basis of deletion. Alas because it was deleted, well, speedily, there's no buttons to press any more. Rleyton (talk) 10:18, 9 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Justifiction for article

So Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) sets out the determinations for a separate article for an organisation.

Primary criteria

" notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject.":

A quick(ish) research run into significant mentions of Glasgow Life:

12th August, 2019 BBC News [[1]] "Glasgow venues enjoy record visitor numbers", Nearly 19 million visits were made to venues run by Glasgow Life in 2018, new figures have revealed
13th July 2016, Glasgow Herald [[2]] quotes MCR Pathways: Glasgow Life is the latest of the city’s biggest and influential organisations to make a long term commitment to a partnership
16 December 2016, BBC News [funded body Glasgow Life to cut 300 jobs]
24 April, 2019 Evening Times, ["Glasgow Life policy decisions"]
6 July, 2016 Glasgow Herald "Glasgow Life slated over the sacking of five managers amid allegations of a Commonwealth Games overtime scam".
3 April, 2018 Scottish Government, ["Glasgow 2014 Commonwealth Games legacy: summary findings April 2018"]
2018, Academic paper all very well in practice, but what about the theory? The case of Glasgow Life, Scotland (Strathclyde University Strathprints), by Mark O'Neill and Robert Rogerson (2018)
- Above features in "Managing Organisational Success in the Arts", Stevenson, David (ed) [3], quote "...the formation of Glasgow Life represented one of the most high profile transfers of functions from a council to a charitable trust in the UK. The inclusion of libraries was unprecedented...". In the conclusion "...we believe that there are elements of its approach and practices that may be relevant for a wide range of cultural organisations and insights into how such organisations' adoption and evolution can be understood."

Additionally there are statutory bodies (Glasgow City Council, OSCR, Scottish Parliament not least) which make numerous references to the organisation.

They amount to significant coverage.
In multiple (7) sources
Of which are 5 are entirely independent (Glasgow Herald and Evening Times are sister publications).
- Whilst Glasgow City Council owns Glasgow Life, it is a statutory body which makes the relationship relevant and important.
They may all be considered reliable
Some (BBC News, Glasgow Herald, Evening Times) are secondary, but Scottish Government and Glasgow City Council are primary, as are filings for the organisation at Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator.

Non-commerical organisations

National or International in Scale: Glasgow Life is the largest organisation of its type in Scotland, and one of the largest of its kind in the UK. It (or at least, its venues/facilities/staff) regularly organises international scale events, including Commonwealth Games, UCI Track Cycling World Championships, and other large sports events. Also 'unprecedented' inclusion of libraries in its remit (O'Neill, Rogerson quotes).
significant coverage in multiple...sources - See above, ie. statutory bodies, press, academic sources, court cases regularly make reference to Glasgow Life.

Rleyton (talk) 11:21, 9 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disagreement with deletion criteria/process

Per Wikipedia:Deletion review and Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion, was cited as G11: This applies to pages that are exclusively promotional and would need to be fundamentally rewritten to conform with Wikipedia:NOTFORPROMOTION. If a subject is notable and the content could plausibly be replaced with text written from a neutral point of view, this is preferable to deletion. Note: Any article that describes its subject from a neutral point of view does not qualify for this criterion. However, "promotion" does not necessarily mean commercial promotion: anything can be promoted, including a person, a non-commercial organization, a point of view, etc.

It's hard to give precise examples without access to my original draft. I refute entirely that it was in any way Unambiguous advertising or exclusively promotional. If anything, it was perhaps a bit critical. I have no relationship to the organisation (other than being a resident in the city, and - necessarily - a user of their services; I don't expect this to exclude, but would have been happy to note it). I have no desire to see it advertised. Rather, was seeking to open up information and I feel is a bit too opaque, and in need of wider access.

Ultimately I feel Wikipedia is overdue an article for this organisation so readers/residents can understood it, its operation and relationships, as well as its achievements and challenges. All content I'd argue is well suited for an encyclopaedia, particularly one that has national and international reach and impact. I've identified above a number of supportive, independent, sources that give separate but mutually supportive reasons to justify the article.

There may well have been content/phrasing in the article that were in need of attention. I had endeavoured to write it neutrally, and properly cite everything, and planned to expand it over time: it's a big subject/organisation with a lot of information opaquely available/distributed. I had expected some constructive feedback, and hoped too wider availability in main site would hopefully have encouraged others to contribute.

That this was through a very quick deletion process, with no ready opportunity to contest the decision, has undoubtedly left me feeling a little raw. I entirely recognise there's a need for this sort of process in the face of spam, abuse, defacement on the site. However, I'd expect too there to be a consideration or weighting of good intent, not least that Wikipedia users who (I'd thought) clearly not (14+ year account; various minor edits) a short-term user, but was making an honest attempt to add an overlooked but important organisation, should be given a little better scope/ability to respond.

Rleyton (talk) 13:16, 9 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Scottish Athletics and me

Just for disclosure, I've popped some notes on my user page about my relationship, such that it is, with Scottish Athletics. I'm Chair, on the board, of a running club. That running club is affiliated to Scottish Athletics, which means it has (via a delegate) AGM voting privileges on behalf of the clubs members. I'm also a personal member of Scottish Athletics too (this carries no voting privileges): It's pretty much required in order that I may take part in local cross country and road running events.

I don't think this amounts to any conflict of interest, but wanted to set it out just in case. I have tagged this on the talk page.

The page was very out of date, and nobody seemingly taking on ownership, but would welcome anybody else having a spin at this, or keeping an eye on the edits.

Orphaned non-free image File:Glasgow Life Logo 2010.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Glasgow Life Logo 2010.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:33, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Glasgow Life (November 11)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by CASSIOPEIA was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

We need significant coverage (3-5 sources) of independent, reliable published sources (such as from major newspapers) where by the sources talk indirect about the subject in depth and in length and not passing mentioned. Here we have only one independent, reliable from BBC. We need at least two more.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Glasgow Life and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Glasgow Life, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:50, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rleyton! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:50, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Glasgow Life concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Glasgow Life, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:36, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Glasgow Life

Hello, Rleyton. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Glasgow Life".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! JMHamo (talk) 08:32, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Restoration of Draft:Glasgow Life

Resumed process to bring a page together on Glasgow Life as it is a current topic and a reference article would help support local discourse. It needs updating and revisions to address some of the previous comments made. Rleyton (talk) 13:07, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And lack of time, other things going on meant my previous effort stumbled. Have lodged a request to restore the previous draft, and will bring up to date with all the various goings on before posting. Rleyton (talk) 14:32, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]