User talk:Democracyplease

{{Helpme}}

Speedy deletion of Page name (disambiguation)

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and the page that you created has been or soon will be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the 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 would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. —BradV 17:42, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help

What would you like help with? —BradV 17:44, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome

Welcome to Wikipedia. To find out how to make useful contributions, take a look at the welcome page. To stay in Wikipedia, an article has to be about something notable, that is, of general interest. Click on Notability for an explanation of what that means. Also, it must give independently verifiable sources; Wikipedia does not publish original research. Articles that don't meet these requirements are likely to be deleted. Follow the links below to learn more:

To find out more about creating articles, read the Introduction and the Guide to creating your first article.
You should not write articles about yourself, your band, your client or your best friend - that's a conflict of interest.
Wikipedia is not an advertising service. Before writing about your own business, read Business' FAQ.
For experiments, please use the sandbox.

JohnCD (talk) 19:33, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Real democracy in america

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Real democracy in america, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? JohnCD (talk) 19:33, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Answer to your questions

I saw the question you posted on JamieS93's talk page: I am sure he will reply in due course, but perhaps as the editor who put a PROD notice on your article I can save him the trouble.

You asked if this is just an automatic type of thing or does someone really intend to delete the article I just spent several hours creating? No, it is not automatic; volunteer editors scan incoming articles and flag for attention those which do not seem suitable for Wikipedia. I am sorry that you have spent several hours on this article, because in my opinion (though I am not Authority) it is not the sort of thing that Wikipedia is for.

It seems that you have original political ideas and are looking to publish them. I am sure there are many websites which would be happy to do that, but Wikipedia is not one of them: its three key content policies are (1) verifiability - everything must be verifiable from an independent, reliable source - (2) no original research, and (3) neutral point of view. From those there follow a long list of things that Wikipedia is not, including Wikipedia is not a soapbox for promulgating a particular point of view.

You ask, Is there anything else I can do to prevent the deletion? If you read the Proposed Deletion notice on your article, you will see that anyone, including you, can remove the PROD template if you object to deletion for any reason - because PROD is intended for uncontroversial deletions. That will stop the PROD process, but it is then likely that I, or some other editor, would nominate the article for deletion under the Articles for Deletion process, when a debate would take place to which any editor, including you, can contribute. At the end of five days an administrator would review the arguments put forward, and delete the article if he considered that there was a consensus to do so.

I am sorry to seem unwelcoming: Wikipedia is good at encouraging everyone to contribute, but not so good at making clear that it has principles and standards governing what contributions are acceptable. There is guidance available, in fact a confusing mass of it: I hope you will find the links in this answer and in the Welcome paragraph above helpful. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 21:01, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your articles

Hi Democracyplease. For more clarification, I can explain what happened with your articles in addition to what JohnCD mentioned above.

Well, there's two articles that you recently created. As for your first article, Page name (disambiguation), yes it's true that someone tagged the page for speedy-deletion because it appeared to be a test page. It wasn't automated, but instead a real user, JohnCD, requested that it be deleted. The article has been deleted since then, but you can contact one of these administrators for a copy of your deleted page.

There's also the second article you created, Real democracy in america. With this one, User:JohnCD tagged the article for proposed deletion, which means that if no one opposes the proposition within five days, it will be deleted. The reason was because the article is an essay with original research. It might be really nicely written, but that doesn't really matter, because Wikipedia simply is not the place to publish essays. I'm sorry about this, but your article will probably get deleted in five days for that reason.

If you need any further explanation, don't hesitate to ask me again on my talk page. I hope this helps you, JamieS93 21:18, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

National Initiatives and Referenda

This article, though more factual, cited no sources; but looking round the encyclopedia I find that there is an existing article National initiative covering similar ground in more detail, so rather than propose your article for deletion I have converted it to a redirect to that. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 21:41, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments on proposed deletion

Please give me some ideas on how to improve. I am disputing that the research is not verifiable. How could the amendments to the US CONSTITUTION and what they stand for NOT BE VERIFIABLE? This is not logical. Over 200 years they've been verified by the sacrifice of millions of American Veterans. So, I really don't get that argument for deletion.

The fact that I am on a soapbox is also not right to me. I find many articles in Wikipedia that are sponsoring one idea or another. Why should a new idea have to go through all this censorship?

I'm also concerned that ONE PERSON has the right to delete an article that has merit. Why isn't the article put forth to a committee or a group? Who are you to have so much power? I don't have equal power to suggest an article and have the expectation that it will stay?

Please respond. If there is a way to improve and keep it in, I would appreciate it. If it doesn't fit with WIkiPedia, what's the point of having a wikipedia? No one cares about 99% of what's in here if you have such a restrictive policy, in my humble opinion.

Let's get some brainstorming on this. How about it?

The United States Constitution is certainly verifiable, and has a long article. What is new, and not verifiable, is your ideas about national initiatives and referenda. Wikipedia is not a place for first publication of ideas like this: if they have been published elsewhere, and been the subject of published comment and discussion, that would give rise to independent references to support an article. In fact there is an article, National initiative, which covers some of this ground, based on ex-senator Mike Gravel's National Initiative for Democracy. The difference is that your article says "There ought to be National Initiatives... " (opinion); the existing article says "ex-senator Gravel has proposed... " and "the NID is... " (facts, verified from the NID web-site and comments).

Refusing to allow Wikipedia to be used as a soapbox is not censorship, it is a reflection of what Wikipedia is: an encyclopedia, not a discussion forum. It can only maintain itself as an encyclopedia, rather than a general forum where anyone can post anything they like, by having clear standards about what articles are acceptable.

You need have no concern that ONE PERSON has the right to delete an article that has merit - he hasn't. An administrator (a limited class of experienced and trusted editors, of which I am not one) can on his own speedily delete an article which is grossly unsuitable - nonsense, copyright, libellous, advertisement, or trivial of the "Tracey is awesome LOL!!!!!!" variety; but yours is not one of those. All that I have done is to propose it for deletion; it would only be deleted if after five days nobody had objected. I will take your comments as an objection, so instead I have nominated it for deletion under the Articles for deletion process - see the formal notice below. That opens a debate where any editor, including you, can comment and make recommendations to Delete or Keep. After five days an administrator will consider the arguments put forward (not the number of votes) and will delete the article if he considers that the consensus is to delete. The default in case of no consensus is to keep. Even after deletion there is an appeal process at Deletion review.

I don't, myself, see any way to make your article acceptable, because it is an opinion piece and that's not what Wikipedia is for, but there may be suggestions in the AfD debate - people are motivated to save an article if possible rather than delete.

One last point - when posting a comment on talk pages, like this or the AfD debate, it's convenient to end with four "tilde" characters ~~~~ which the system automatically turns into a "signature" with your username and the time and date so that readers know who wrote it - like this: JohnCD (talk) 11:10, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Real democracy in america

An article that you have been involved in editing, Real democracy in america, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Real democracy in america. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? JohnCD (talk) 11:17, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]