User talk:Rleyton

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Rleyton, 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 Glasgow Life, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

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, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  CASSIOPEIA(talk) 03:32, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Glasgow Life[edit]

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.

A tag has been placed on Glasgow Life, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 03:32, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

Response to deletion[edit]

Have posted a response to nominator and actioner of the speedy deletion. Requesting at least the markup restored somewhere, but strongly object to basis of deletion. Alas because it was deleted, well, speedily, there's no buttons to press any more. Rleyton (talk) 10:18, 9 November 2019 (UTC)


Justifiction for article[edit]

So Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) sets out the determinations for a separate article for an organisation.

Primary criteria[edit]

" notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject.":

A quick(ish) research run into significant mentions of Glasgow Life:

Additionally there are statutory bodies (Glasgow City Council, OSCR, Scottish Parliament not least) which make numerous references to the organisation.

Non-commerical organisations[edit]

  • National or International in Scale: Glasgow Life is the largest organisation of its type in Scotland, and one of the largest of its kind in the UK. It (or at least, its venues/facilities/staff) regularly organises international scale events, including Commonwealth Games, UCI Track Cycling World Championships, and other large sports events. Also 'unprecedented' inclusion of libraries in its remit (O'Neill, Rogerson quotes).
  • significant coverage in multiple...sources - See above, ie. statutory bodies, press, academic sources, court cases regularly make reference to Glasgow Life.

Rleyton (talk) 11:21, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

Disagreement with deletion criteria/process[edit]

Per Wikipedia:Deletion review and Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion, was cited as G11: This applies to pages that are exclusively promotional and would need to be fundamentally rewritten to conform with Wikipedia:NOTFORPROMOTION. If a subject is notable and the content could plausibly be replaced with text written from a neutral point of view, this is preferable to deletion. Note: Any article that describes its subject from a neutral point of view does not qualify for this criterion. However, "promotion" does not necessarily mean commercial promotion: anything can be promoted, including a person, a non-commercial organization, a point of view, etc.

It's hard to give precise examples without access to my original draft. I refute entirely that it was in any way Unambiguous advertising or exclusively promotional. If anything, it was perhaps a bit critical. I have no relationship to the organisation (other than being a resident in the city, and - necessarily - a user of their services; I don't expect this to exclude, but would have been happy to note it). I have no desire to see it advertised. Rather, was seeking to open up information and I feel is a bit too opaque, and in need of wider access.

Ultimately I feel Wikipedia is overdue an article for this organisation so readers/residents can understood it, its operation and relationships, as well as its achievements and challenges. All content I'd argue is well suited for an encyclopaedia, particularly one that has national and international reach and impact. I've identified above a number of supportive, independent, sources that give separate but mutually supportive reasons to justify the article.

There may well have been content/phrasing in the article that were in need of attention. I had endeavoured to write it neutrally, and properly cite everything, and planned to expand it over time: it's a big subject/organisation with a lot of information opaquely available/distributed. I had expected some constructive feedback, and hoped too wider availability in main site would hopefully have encouraged others to contribute.

That this was through a very quick deletion process, with no ready opportunity to contest the decision, has undoubtedly left me feeling a little raw. I entirely recognise there's a need for this sort of process in the face of spam, abuse, defacement on the site. However, I'd expect too there to be a consideration or weighting of good intent, not least that Wikipedia users who (I'd thought) clearly not (14+ year account; various minor edits) a short-term user, but was making an honest attempt to add an overlooked but important organisation, should be given a little better scope/ability to respond.

Rleyton (talk) 13:16, 9 November 2019 (UTC)


Scottish Athletics and me[edit]

Just for disclosure, I've popped some notes on my user page about my relationship, such that it is, with Scottish Athletics. I'm Chair, on the board, of a running club. That running club is affiliated to Scottish Athletics, which means it has (via a delegate) AGM voting privileges on behalf of the clubs members. I'm also a personal member of Scottish Athletics too (this carries no voting privileges): It's pretty much required in order that I may take part in local cross country and road running events.

I don't think this amounts to any conflict of interest, but wanted to set it out just in case. I have tagged this on the talk page.

The page was very out of date, and nobody seemingly taking on ownership, but would welcome anybody else having a spin at this, or keeping an eye on the edits.

Orphaned non-free image File:Glasgow Life Logo 2010.svg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Glasgow Life Logo 2010.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:33, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Glasgow Life (November 11)[edit]

AFC-Logo Decline.svg
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by CASSIOPEIA was:  The comment the reviewer left was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
CASSIOPEIA(talk) 04:50, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
Teahouse logo
Hello, Rleyton! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! CASSIOPEIA(talk) 04:50, 11 November 2019 (UTC)