User talk:Seminaristka
Speedy deletion nomination of Mark Vishik's seminar at Moscow State University
[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 Mark Vishik's seminar at Moscow State University, 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, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 20:47, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
The article Mark Vishik's seminar at Moscow State University has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- no evidence of notability. Wikipedia is not a course directory
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:31, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
Copying and translating the article Mark Vishik (mathematician) from German Wikipedia
[edit]If you take an article from another Wikipedia you are obliged to transfer the article's history in order to show that the contents were written by someone else (in this case by me). Please inform yourself how to do this and rectify this matter. This could be complicated because maybe you have to have the article deleted and create it again by having the German article imported. After that you can overwrite it with your translation. (Sorry! It happened to me, too, when I was new to Wikipedia.) -- KurtSchwitters (talk) 09:47, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
- Kurt, please give a link to where the requirement to transfer the article's history is stated. My understanding is that it would be necessary and sufficient to provide an edit summary of "translated from de:Mark Vishik" on the first posting here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:58, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
- Hi, see page Wikipedia:Copying_within_Wikipedia, paragraph on translating. Maybe a reference in the summary is enough. The import of the article's history is the better option, though. -- KurtSchwitters (talk) 11:38, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
- Hi, I inserted the "translated page" template because the source German Wikipedia is not mentioned elsewhere. This banner can be removed if correct source licensing has been done. -- KurtSchwitters (talk) 19:25, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
- Hi, see page Wikipedia:Copying_within_Wikipedia, paragraph on translating. Maybe a reference in the summary is enough. The import of the article's history is the better option, though. -- KurtSchwitters (talk) 11:38, 7 October 2011 (UTC)