User talk:Daniel k forson

Welcome!

Hello, Daniel k forson, 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 The second man within, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's content policies and may not be retained. In short, the topic of an article must be notable and have already been the subject of publication by reliable and independent sources.

Please review Your first article for an overview of the article creation process. The Article Wizard is available to help you create an article, where it will be reviewed and considered for publication. For information on how to request a new article that can be created by someone else, see Requested articles. If you are stuck, come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can help you through the processes.

New to Wikipedia? Please consider taking a look at our introductory tutorial or reviewing the contributing to Wikipedia page to learn the basics about editing. Below are a few other good pages about article creation.

Article development
Standard layout
Lead section
The perfect article
Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

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, ask me on my talk page. You can also type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! ~ Eejit43 (talk) 01:25, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of The second man within

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.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on The second man within requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. 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 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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. ~ Eejit43 (talk) 01:25, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Daniel k forson and Eejit43: Daniel, this article appears to be about a book. The general criteria for inclusion of a book as a Wikipedia article is summarised here. As the article currently stood, there is no indication that it would pass this or any number of other tests for "notability". Instead, it appears to detail what might have informed its content. Technically, the WP:A11 speedy deletion criterion does not apply to books per se. Given that: there is no indication that this book, purported to be published in 2020, actually has ISBN nor has independent coverage of itself or its author, a notional Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The second man within would appear to be superfluous. --Shirt58 (talk) 🦘 09:34, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Shirt58 thank you. My reasoning for ending up with A11 was due to it not appearing to be specifically centered around the book. It also referred to a "project" and, to put it lightly, went on a confusing ramble about other things. Nonetheless, thanks! ~ Eejit43 (talk) 11:00, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]