User talk:Julienmodica

October 2009[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed a speedy deletion tag from Julien Modica, a page you have created yourself. If you do not believe the page should be deleted, you can place a {{hangon}} tag on the page, under the existing speedy deletion tag (please do not remove the speedy deletion tag), and make your case on the page's talk page. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you. Chase wc ⁹¹ 17:07, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks you!!! It was not my intention. The page was not about Julien Modica. It was about issues relevant to Julien. Since the title of the page was Julien Modica, I thought it better to start anew. Julienmodica (talk) 17:12, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove speedy deletion notices from pages you have created yourself, as you did with Julien Modica. Please use the {{hangon}} template on the page instead if you disagree with the deletion, and make your case on the page's talk page. Thank you. Chase wc ⁹¹ 17:21, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You may want to start an article as a user page, edit it, check the page for suitability, and if it can pass WP:N and WP:MOS move it into the main article space. -- allen四names 17:31, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Veterans with TBI/PTSD/Depression[edit]

The article Veterans with TBI/PTSD/Depression has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This article appears to be about the legal proceedings of a single person, proceedings which do not appear to meet Wikipedia's notability criteria, created by the subject of those proceedings. Under the conflict of interest guidelines, we all agree to refrain from writing about ourselves; if this is truly important, someone other than Julien Modica will inevitably create a more focused article about it. Wikipedia already has articles about Veterans, [Combat stress reaction]], PTSD, Traumatic brain injury, and many Types of psychological depression, but in my opinion, Wikipedia does not need an article about Julien Modica's legal matters.

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 {{dated prod}} 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 {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 20:57, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As long as you put it that way, then, I agreee with the previous editors comments, but, in fact, I hope that particular editor disagreed with the publication of I. Lewis Libby's page as well; otherwise, he/she would be demonstrating bias and that is not in Wikipedia's mission. Is it? I assume I will be given the same courtesy given to the author of all wikipedia's pages. Thank you. Julienmodica (talk) 21:15, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I do not understand the relationship between this comment and your edits. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia; it isn't the appropriate place to make arguments in your court case. The court is the right place for that. There is an article about Lewis Libby. Lewis Libby is a notable person, so the encyclopedia needs an article about him. However, that article was not written by Libby himself, but by people who don't know him, based on what they read in reliable sources. If you are a notable person, then people who do not know you will write an article based on reliable sources. There is no bias in deleting an article that is an apparently non-notable person's opinions about his own legal matters, while having an article about a very notable person. Wikipedia has an article about Eleanor Roosevelt, but that doesn't mean that it's biased in not letting me write an article about how I'm voting in the next election, because those things are not related to each other in any way. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:21, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We agree completely with you and your great analogy. We made this point to chase before, and we'll make it to you. You win... Its over... But, why, when we Google Julien Modica, do we get a "Julien Modica deletion page." You need to take a position here. Julien Modica is in or Julien Modica is out. Leaving Julien Modica on the edge does no one any good and, in fact, is harming Julien. Take Julien Modica out of the wiki system or just pretend Julien Modica is notable. It is the wishy washy position you guys are taking that is frustrating us here, sorry for being so blunt. Further, if you choose to do nothing, let me know who we can talk with to make you decide... Or we'll decide who to talk with. Again, sorry for being so blunt, but this is not a game. Julienmodica (talk) 21:42, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]