User talk:Lisamoore1313

Nomination of David Nemer for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article David Nemer 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/David Nemer 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 00:30, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

@WikiDan61: Hi, I just came across Nemer's book and I thought he deserved a space on Wikipedia, we have way less notable academics and people on this platform. Which links were broken? So I was able to find the pdfs about his news: http://homes.soic.indiana.edu/dnemer/news/DavidNemerColumn.pdf http://homes.soic.indiana.edu/dnemer/news/DavidNemerATribuna2013.pdf http://homes.soic.indiana.edu/dnemer/news/DavidNemerATribuna2010.pdf http://homes.soic.indiana.edu/dnemer/news/DavidNemerAGazeta2013.pdf http://homes.soic.indiana.edu/dnemer/news/DavidNemerAGazeta2006.pdf

@WikiDan61: I just added more evidence (pdf of news articles) on the wiki page: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:DavidNemerATribuna2015.pdf

@WikiDan61: I added another source: David Nemer's research was the cover of the magazine SIM. http://issuu.com/revistaredesim/docs/ed70issuu

Welcome!

Hello, Lisamoore1313, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

• Introduction and Getting started
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article
• Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! —David Eppstein (talk) 03:53, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
@David Eppstein: Thanks David. Your messages seem more encouraging than some of the comments I've been getting here. Lisamoore1313 (talk) 04:12, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Yes, people here can be a little brusque sometimes. Try to remember that even so, most of them are working with good intentions to improve the encyclopedia. —David Eppstein (talk) 04:14, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Some articles for you!

I hope you keep editing... you have fight in you. Here are some interesting articles that explain the weird world of Wikipedia:

• A New York Times Article on the Wikipedia gender gap
• Su Gardner's reply
• MIT Technology Review article about numerous problems

I particularly like the quote in the MIT article above that says: "...the researchers suggest updating Wikipedia’s motto, “The encyclopedia that anyone can edit.” Their version reads: “The encyclopedia that anyone who understands the norms, socializes him or herself, dodges the impersonal wall of semi-automated rejection and still wants to voluntarily contribute his or her time and energy can edit.” It's entirely accurate.New Media Theorist (talk) 01:59, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

@New Media Theorist: Thanks, I will take a look at them, the NYT article seems interesting. I'm sorry if I sounded a bit defensive in my first reply to you - you would understand if you were a fresh blood reading your first comment. Anyways, do you know Portuguese? If not I could try to translate some of those newspaper articles for you, you will see the impact that Nemer and his research have done. Overall, it is interesting that I decided to join Wikipedia and really thought that adding Nemer to the wiki world would be a really easy sell - making a great debut for me, and apparently I did a bad job "selling" his article. He is not just an academic but also an influential activist in Vitoria. Now I got to the point that I don't even know why I want to "defend" his article so much... I mean, I wrote it, but it is hard to see a gain in this battle. Lisamoore1313 (talk) 02:12, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Once an article gets onto that AfD page, it has to have a pretty notable subject in order to survive the process. Which is to say that there are thousands of less notable people than him with Wikipedia pages: they just haven't hit the AfD category yet. He will probably be notable in five or ten years if he keeps at it. Right now it is probably WP:TOOSOON. You did a good job selling him, but the article is too overtstated for Wikipedia. If it had been five or ten lines it probably would not have been nominated for deletion. Editors are very sensitive to fluff! New Media Theorist (talk) 02:52, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Making the case

Hi EricEnfermero, and thanks for your edits on Nemer's article. I'm still very new to Wikipedia and his article was my first contribution to Wikipedia. I thought that adding his story to Wikipedia would have been an "easy sell", but apparently I did not do a very good job. At the Nemer's AfD page, most comments are about whether or not Nemer is a notable person. I have provided with several newspaper articles and TV show links that support his notability, unfortunately most them are in Portuguese, and since you are familiar with spanish, I was wondering if you would be willing to take a look at them and weigh in (vote). Along with those news sources, I've referenced academic sources and his Book.