User talk:Writerms

Notability of Rebecca W. Keller

A tag has been placed on Rebecca W. Keller requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia 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. Rwiggum (talk) 22:43, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've discussed this with the deleting administrator and I'm going to respect her decision; what seems to have tipped the balance for her is that there is no evidence that any expert source feels that these textbooks have any validity, and I agree, nothing like that was in evidence, which makes them self-publishing, which makes them non-notable. If you think you can provide such evidence in a verifiable way, and you want the deleted text to be placed in a "sandbox" page so that you can work on it there, I'm prepared to do that upon your request. I also suggest that the article would need work in the area of neutrality and the need to avoid advertising. If I can be of any assistance, or if you have any questions, please feel free to leave me a note at your convenience. Accounting4Taste:talk 23:29, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Deletion of Meryl Runion page

Hello. Meryl Runion was "speedily" deleted under the notability guidelines section (CSD A7). The article didn't assert what makes the subject notable. I've moved the page to User:Writerms/Meryl Runion. It may be a good idea to look at similar figure's biographies to get an idea of what should / shouldn't be included. Let me know if you have any other questions. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 01:12, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Writerms, 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 messages on discussion pages using 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 ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 01:37, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note. I've placed the deleted material into a sandbox page for you at User:Writerms/Sandbox. If you have any trouble finding it, let me know; and if you need assistance, I'll do what I can to help. You don't need anyone's permission or approval to re-mount the page in question, but I do encourage you to read through the guidelines that were mentioned -- the ones above are a great place to start -- because that has the potential to save you a LOT of work and trouble, if you re-mount the page only to see it deleted again. Let me know if I can help further. Accounting4Taste:talk 02:20, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note. I had a quick look, and it seems to be ready to be mounted. The references seem to have been thoroughly researched. I can't say what exactly will happen, and you can expect there to be a flurry of attention to the article when you remount it, but you should probably go ahead. One thing that caught my attention -- I think the part about "Professional experience" could probably come out, it's not really "encyclopedic" and sounds more like it's lifted straight from a resume. Good luck with it and, if you have further questions, you know where to find me. Accounting4Taste:talk 22:26, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]