User talk:CRydberg3

Welcome!

Hello, CRydberg3, 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 Father Larry R Richards, 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! McGeddon (talk) 16:03, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Father Larry R Richards

The article Father Larry R Richards has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. McGeddon (talk) 16:03, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The article has been deleted, as it was created by assembling pieces copied from other sources, infringing copyright. Also. a Wikipedia article needs to be written from a neutral point of view, so there is no place for an article which tells us that someone "is a gifted and captivating speaker", that his works "are always authentic and enthusiastic". Please make sure not to post promotional material.

My advice to new editors is that it is best to start by making small improvements to existing articles, rather than creating new articles. That way any mistakes you make will be small ones, and you won't have the discouraging experience of repeatedly seeing hours of work deleted. Gradually, you will get to learn how Wikipedia works, and after a while you will know enough about what is acceptable to be able to write whole new articles without fear that they will be deleted. Over the years I have found that editors who start by making small changes to existing articles and work up from there have a far better chance of having a successful time here than those who jump right into creating new articles from the start. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 16:18, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest

Hello, CRydberg3. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places, or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic, and it is important when editing Wikipedia articles that such connections be completely transparent. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, we ask that you please:

avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your family, friends, school, company, club, or organization, as well as any competing companies' projects or products;
instead, you are encouraged to propose changes on the Talk pages of affected article(s) (see the {{request edit}} template);
when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or to the website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Please take a few moments to read and review Wikipedia's policies regarding conflicts of interest, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 16:21, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Fr. Larry R. Richards

The article Fr. Larry R. Richards has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Will require a major rewrite in order to be encyclopediatic. References are essentially just external links. Appears to be written by someone with close connections to the subject.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. Osarius - Want a chat? 13:59, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Fr. Larry R. Richards for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Fr. Larry R. Richards 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/Fr. Larry R. Richards 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. Osarius - Want a chat? 14:14, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. The thing about Wikipedia, is that every fact and every assertion in every article needs to be sourced to WP:RS secondary sources, or it cannot stay in the Wikipedia. The article may well be deleted, because it as written, it appears to violate WP:PROMO.E.M.Gregory (talk) 21:43, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, CRydberg3. You have new messages at Osarius's talk page.
Message added 07:47, 7 May 2017 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Osarius - Want a chat? 07:47, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

May 2017

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. Osarius - Want a chat? 09:12, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Answer to your email

I have received your email. I am answering it here, because normally communications about editing Wikipedia should be openly visible to other editors, unless there are reasons why confidentiality is needed.

The reason for the deletion of the second version of the article you created was that its subject does not satisfy Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Although I took no part in the discussion that led to that deletion, I have checked for myself, and it is clear to me that he does not come anywhere near to satisfying those guidelines. No amount of rewriting an article can change the notability of the subject of that article.
You say that Larry Richards "would like to have a Wikipedia page ASAP". There are various web sites that provide the service of hosting pages for people who want them, but Wikipedia is not one of them. Wikpedia strives to have neutral, independent, third party, coverage of topics notable enough that uninvolved outsiders are likely to write about them.
My experience over the years is that when a person wants to have an article about himself or herself, and goes so far as to get someone to create one on their behalf, that is usually evidence that he or she is not notable by Wikipedia standards: people who are really notable already have substantial coverage, without needing to have Wikipedia articles to publicise them.
I see that after I had deleted the first version of the article and mentioned its promotional tone to you, you rewrote it, omitting some of the kinds of things I had mentioned. However, it still read as promotional. That is a good example of the main reason that the conflict of interest guideline discourages writing on a subject to which you have a close personal interest: even if one is sincerely trying to write in a neutral way, it can be difficult or even impossible to view one's own writing from the detached perspective of an independent observer, so that very often in such a situation the person writing produces text which to an outsider as promotional.
It is up to you, but my sincere advice to you is that any Wikipedia article about Larry Richards, no matter how it may be written, is unlikely to survive for long, because of the lack of notability, and therefore any time and effort you put into trying to publicise him would be more effective elsewhere than on Wikipedia. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 19:52, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]