User talk:Djbwiki/Old

Welcome!

Hello, Djbwiki, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

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 need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! --Ronz 20:39, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lisa Feldman Barrett

I have added a "{{prod}}" template to the article Lisa Feldman Barrett, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. -- Levine2112 ^discuss 06:35, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning this article: A full professor of psych at Boston College? Almost certainly notable, so it's just a matter of documenting why she's notable. See WP:PROF for specific guidelines. Because of the WP:COI issues, it would be best to contribute to the talk page and let other editors review the material for inclusion. --Ronz 02:55, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've added the proposal for deletion back. I've been unable to find suitable sources to demonstrate notability. Note we need reliable, verifiable sources that demonstrate the notability of the subject of the article. None has been provided yet. If you find some, I'll happily review them for you if you place links to them on the talk page. --Ronz 17:21, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel J. Barrett

I have added a "{{prod}}" template to the article Daniel J. Barrett, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. -- Levine2112 ^discuss 06:35, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning this article: If he's notable, it would probably be for his books: "Published authors, editors and photographers who received multiple independent reviews of or awards for their work." (WP:BIO). Since you have a conflict of interest, it would best to point out reasons for notability on the talk page for consideration and possible inclusion by other editors. --Ronz 02:43, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the PROD tag. The article may have problems and/or WP:COI issues, but it does satisfy notability and verifiability requirements. Removal is only possible per WP:AfD. However, Levine2112 and anyone else considering to put the article up for AfD, please take a look at Mark K. Bilbo and especially this AfD debate before proceeding. You may want to ask yourself whether or not an AfD could be a waste of other editors' time and/or raise WP:POINT suspicions (the latter in connection with the BvR arbitration case). AvB ÷ talk 08:38, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:COI, it seems the appropriate thing to do in a Vanity case such as this is to delete the content from article space and move it onto Daniel Barrett's user page. See here for more info. Any thoughts? -- Levine2112 ^discuss 17:47, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply is here. AvB ÷ talk 00:31, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the COI statement but the caveat is that the "who" who creates the article should not be the subject of the article per WP:COI#Autobiography. -- Levine2112 ^discuss 06:40, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply is here. AvB ÷ talk 08:25, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Conflicts of interest

Wikipedia has guidelines specific to conflicts of interest which apply to the situations mentioned above. It would be very helpful for you to familiarize yourself with these guidelines as you learn your way around Wikipedia and address the above concerns.

With regard to biographical articles: To merit inclusion in the encyclopedia proper, a subject must be notable, with reference to reliable published sources. --Ronz 20:39, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

tags removed

I think it is now clearly objective, and I have removed the COI tag. I think the article shows Notability clearly by WP standards, but if it is necessary to defend N, I will go back and add a list of selected academic papers and citations counts and so on. Ask my help if I don't notice., since I have a good deal of practice with academic biographies. DGG 05:44, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Conceptual Act Model of Emotion

Although you did not apparently create this article, I see from the discussion at Lisa Feldman Barrett that you are her husband, so I'm copying you on this notice.

A tag has been placed on The Conceptual Act Model of Emotion, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

new model, not notable

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet very basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. SueHay 01:50, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]