A tag has been placed on Pooya Rad, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article is a repost of either already posted material, or of material that was previously deleted in a deletion debate, such as articles for deletion. If you can indicate how Pooya Rad is different from all other articles, or if you can indicate why this article should not be deleted, I advise you to place the template {{hangon}}underneath the other template on the article, and also put a note on Talk:Pooya Rad saying why this article should stay. An admin should check for such edits before deleting the article. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Please read our criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 4 under General criteria. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. We welcome your help in trying to improve Wikipedia, and we ask you to follow these instructions. --Onorem13:36, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You should wait for others to write an article about subjects in which you are personally involved. This applies to articles about you, your achievements, your business, your publications, your website, your relatives, and any other possible conflict of interest.
If you are not "notable" under Wikipedia guidelines, creating an article about yourself may violate the policy that Wikipedia is not a personal webspace provider and would thus qualify for speedy deletion. If your achievements, etc., are verifiable and genuinely notable, and thus suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia, someone else will probably create an article about you sooner or later. (See Wikipedia:Wikipedians with articles.) Thank you.
Seeing now that this article has been previously deleted, it will probably be speedy deleted soon. Please refrain from re-creating it.
The Reason We (Kharizmi Festival winners) are placing our pages on wikipedia is because this festival is a scientific and innovation challange and can invite all other younger friends to start researching.
and about the information I'm submitting on wikipedia .. all these informations are NATIONAL HONORS of IRAN's Science family not myself.
Moreover these awards are just scientific NOT any business advertisement.
so I don't belive this article should be deleted.
Pooyarad05:23, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A List of Winners
I belive any Scientist has the right to Introduce a backround about itself. Not talking about a researcher who has good ideas, somebody who achieved many awards in level of president and First person of the country.
I like my other friends (next and former kharizmi and world olympics) introduce themselves. then wikipedia has a LISTING (as all encyclopedia goals) of A country's scientists .
Only Dead Scientists like Prof. Mahmoud Hesabi is not necessary for Wiki.
Archstanton , It's an answer to you ...
You Said : ( If your achievements, etc., are verifiable and genuinely notable, and thus suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia, someone else will probably create an article about you sooner )
It's Not time to wait for someone PROBABLY grow wikipedia! I prefer to do it myself and I try do it truthworthy and correct.
Pooyarad05:23, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! HagermanBot05:09, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
How should I explain that the content Pooya mirzaee rad however was equal to pooya rad and pooya rad's content was not good enough. I just Tried to update and make corrections on Pooya Mirzaee Rad , and then redirect pooya rad to it...
but what administrators have done. they said pooya rad was not eligible to be on wiki and speedy deletion happened to it, then they resulted pooya mirzaee rad is same content recreated then it should be deleted too...
but why they don't give chance to improve it?
>> PUTED THE FIRST COMMENT : ArchStanton 11:25, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
>> DELETED : Kafziel Talk 13:09, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
Do you think this time is enough to make corrections on the page?! it's NOT fair
According to our policy, biographies of living people must be verifiable through reliable sources or the information may be deleted without any discussion at all. Other editors have tried to explain this to you, as well as the fact that it is not a good idea to write articles about yourself. By choosing to disregard their warnings, you are disrupting Wikipedia.
Two hours is more than enough time to post a proper article. A Wikipedia article is not a place for you to experiment and learn for hours or days at a time; that is what the sandbox is for. As a scientist, surely you understand that you need to have your footnotes and citations prepared before you submit the final draft of a research paper. The same is true here. If you can't make any verifiable claim of notability, the article must be deleted immediately.
A Google search returns 7 hits, some of which are just mirror sites of this deleted article. I'm unable to find anything to verify the claims you make here. I'm not certain what your native language is but it may be a good idea to raise the issue at that language's Wikipedia, where it is more likely to find reliable sources for the subject (perhaps the Farsi Wikipedia). If you can create a good article on that site, with appropriate sources, it might be possible to prove its notability on the English Wikipedia. Until there are reliable, English language sources to prove that this information is true, it will not be allowed here. KafzielTalk12:10, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A tag has been placed on Pooya Mirzaee Rad, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as articles for deletion. If you can indicate how Pooya Mirzaee Rad is different from the previously posted material, or if you can indicate why this article should not be deleted, I advise you to place the template {{hangon}}underneath the other template on the article, and also put a note on Talk:Pooya Mirzaee Rad saying why this article should stay. An admin should check for such edits before deleting the article. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Please read our criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 4 under General criteria. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. We welcome your help in trying to improve Wikipedia, and we request you to follow these instructions.
-Cquan08:12, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Correct references added
Hi,
I added Correct and Referable links to each part.
For Example about all Events (kharizmi festival , competitions, olympias) I added purpose and history and direct link for prove.
Mr Kafziel , You were right.. there was huge weaknesses . It needed a lot of references and proves and referable links.
I added some and I'm adding more.
Hope it to be eligible to be up on wiki
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions; however, it appears you may have written a Wikipedia article, or a draft for a Wikipedia article, about yourself. Creating an autobiography is strongly discouraged – please see our guideline on writing autobiographies. If you create such an article, it may be deleted. If what you have done in life is genuinely notable and can be verified according to our policy for articles about living people, someone else will probably create an article about you sooner or later (see Notable people who have edited Wikipedia). If you wish to add to or change an existing article about yourself, you are welcome to propose the changes by visiting the article's talk page. Please understand that this is an encyclopedia and not a personal web space or social networking site. If your article has already been deleted, please see: Why was the page I created deleted?, and if you feel the deletion was an error, please discuss this with the deleting administrator. Thank you.
It would be best if you refrain from recreating this article, as it will likely encounter the same speedy deletion procedure each time. This is now far from the first occurance of this, so it may be advised that you take a step back from pursuing this issue and carefully consider the Wikipedia community's policies and guidelines. Thank you. -Cquan08:21, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
From what I can see from your posts, it is quite clear that the article is about you, which is one of the primary reasons you should not be creating this article. Branding it as a biography does not exclude it from the policies and guidelines. Also, a biography article is not the proper way to introduce content about the particular honors, competitions or festivals the subject of the biography is involved. If articles already exist on any of them, you should consider adding content on those articles since it's discouraged for you to CREATE articles related to you, but not to contribute constructively after they are created. In general, you should have faith that if the subject meets notability requirements, an article will be created INDEPENDENTLY of the subject of the article.
Also, this is not my call by any means. Any action will ultimately be performed by an admin per their own good judgment or by community consensus on the subject. You should place your arguments on the talk page of the article so that they are generally accessible.
By the way, you should NOT blank your talk page as there are ongoing disputes and the messages and notices here should be readily available as reference. Thanks. -Cquan08:43, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This page is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
IMHO, yes you are wrong. You are referring to a Wikiproject page, which is an effort by editors to standardize and improve articles with a similar subject/basis/etc. Wikiprojects ARE NOT official policy or guidelines, which can be found here: [1]. -Cquan09:00, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's deletion will be decided by an admin. IMHO, improvement to the article isn't the issue. It's the fact that the subject of the article is creating and extensively contributing to it. The relevant text in the policy is here: [2]. Wikipedia:Autobiography also applies. -Cquan09:40, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Why Wrong? It IS official
Check:
This page documents an official policy on the English Wikipedia
Another article violating policies/guidelines IS NOT a rationalle. In fact, thanks for pointing them out as I will take a look and propose anything I feel is necessary on the topic. And to quote the policy on BLP:
"...Wikipedia discourages people from writing new articles about themselves or expanding existing ones significantly..."
This follows to Wikipedia guideline Wikipedia:Autobiography. In short, the article may meet standards on its own, but the fact that the subject of the article is creating/expanding it significantly is a violation of guidelines.
P.S., my term "branding" is referring to the first line of the article which explicity states it as a biography and the addition of the Wikiproject tag for biographies. -Cquan09:09, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Examples?
I don't Understand.
there are thousands of biographies here in wikipedia. (<< if this sentense is wrong please tell me I'll bring examples)
they might be written by other people or by themselves (<< is there any difference? how do you know? I can make another ID , other than my name, named XYZ and make the biography , then is it ok?)
biographies all are not exactly fit and perfect as Policy is asking.
Wikipedia is not perfect by any means. We as editors do our best to make it the best it can be. As I said, the existence of other violations is not a rationalle for being a violator. Using another user name to do the same thing is called using a sockpuppet, which is against policy. The points you are making about the imperfections in Wikipedia are valid and editors should try to fix the problems instead of contributing to them. -Cquan09:16, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Finally
Can I have the page on USERPAGE part? if yes... so why I have notice on top?
If any person or organization wants to write about me or whatever I tried to announce here on wiki.. It will be subject to delete. is it right or wrong?
I mean I might want to ask WIPO to write about me? they might user the same name pooya rad or pooya mirzaee rad
and it might be deleted again .
but according the rules they should be able to write about me or any other person. is it correct?
then if there was anything missing or I had any objection I can email admins or the author to correct it.
I'm not as sure about that particular point, but I think in general it's ill-advised to ask others to write about you. The issue may rise again if this article is recreated independently and at that time the community will have to arrive at some kind of consensus about whether it is proper or not. If the article is recreated and sticks, then you should exercise care in editing it since you are the subject.
I think I will recuse myself and step away from the issue at this point. I believe I have worked within the scope of good faith, but since at this moment I'm the only editor in this discussion with you, I will defer to the community for anything further. I hope it is clear that I am only trying to give you guidance on good Wikipedia conduct. If at any point I have come across like an angry mastodon, please forgive me for that was not my intent. Thanks and good luck. -Cquan09:53, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's DARK
I've ben asked to write here from WIPO by email
according policies I shouldn't. so I'll ask them to do it themselves.
but here WIKI is dark and I'm sure anyhow it will be deleted...
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! HagermanBot 05:09, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
