User talk:Julesc42
Hi. You made a variety of changes to the Almeda University article. As I'm sure you know, many of your changes were contentious ones, and against the previously established consensus. I have reverted them. Please discuss your changes on the talk page first and gather support before making further changes. Thanks, William Pietri 18:53, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
What was wrong with what I'd written. I did not claim anything that was not well referenced. Do you have some reason that you wish for a biased, libelous article to be posted on Wikipedia? I didn't say that Almeda good. I just said that they are legal in some places, not legal in others, and it is up to the student to make the choice. They are very transparent on their site about their accreditation...which I stated in my article. Are you associated with some competing institution? I can't see why you'd want to leave an attack in what is supposed to be a neutral website. By the way, if you have a look at the discussions about this article, you will actually discover that the "previously established consensus" dictates that they agree with the fact that the article to which you reverted was indeed biased and libelous...I believe that would make it in my favor, not yours.
I'm sorry, but Wikipedia doesn't allow articles about topics like this. You can read WP:N for more explanation.Prezbo (talk) 00:25, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
Nomination of For the Love of Meghan for deletion[edit]
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article For the Love of Meghan 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 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/For the Love of Meghan 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 good 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 template from the top of the article. Herostratus (talk) 17:22, 5 December 2011 (UTC)