User talk:Demossoft

Welcome!

Hello, Demossoft, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Baalbek, Monument Phenicien, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may soon be deleted.

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 New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, 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! — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 08:38, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Baalbek, Monument Phenicien

The article Baalbek, Monument Phenicien has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

no evidence of notability

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) 08:38, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of "Le Liban assassiné, lettre ouverte à Monsieur Sarkozy"

A page you created, Le Liban assassiné, lettre ouverte à Monsieur Sarkozy, has been tagged for deletion, as it meets one or more of the criteria for speedy deletion; specifically, it has no content, other than external links, categories, "see also" sections, rephrasing of the title, and/or chat-like comments.

You are welcome to contribute content which complies with our content policies and any applicable inclusion guidelines. However, please do not simply re-create the page with the same content. You may also wish to read our introduction to editing and guide to writing your first article.

Thank you. Anirudh Emani (talk) 07:53, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Removing Speedy at Le Liban assassiné, lettre ouverte à Monsieur Sarkozy

Welcome to Wikipedia, thank you for taking the time to create a page here. It might not have been your intention, but you recently removed a speedy deletion tag from a page you created yourself. Because Wikipedia policy does not allow the creator of the page to remove deletion tags, an automated program has replaced the deletion tag you removed from Le Liban assassiné, lettre ouverte à Monsieur Sarkozy. Please do not continue to remove the deletion tag, instead, if you disagree with the deletion, you can follow these steps:

Go to the page by clicking this link. Once there, select the button that says Click here to contest this speedy deletion.
This will take you to the talk page, where you can make your case by explaining why the page does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion.

Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do. For further help about the deletion, you could contact the user who first placed the tag or a highly active user who is willingly to help with deletion. This message was left by a bot, so please do not contact the bot about the deletion. Thank you, - SDPatrolBot (talk) 08:05, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Le Liban assassiné, lettre ouverte à Monsieur Sarkozy

I have declined the speedy deletion nomination for this article, but I am not sure whether this, and your other book articles, qualify for Wikipedia. As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia is selective about article subjects: it does not expect to have an article about every book published, any more than every company, band or person. The general inclusion criterion is called notability and is not a matter of opinion but of showing references to significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources - the test is, have people independent of the subject thought it important enough to write substantial comment about? For books, the notability standard is explained at WP:Notability (books). Unless you can add references to show how these books satisfy WP:BK#Criteria, it is likely that these articles will be proposed for deletion. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 09:20, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest guideline

You are posting many articles about books by Lina Murr Nehmé. If you are Lina Murr Nehmé, or are her agent or publisher or are connected with them, you have a conflict of interest.

Wikipedia is not for advertising or promotion of any kind.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about following the reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. JohnCD (talk) 09:27, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Les otages libanais dans les prisons syriennes, jusqu'à quand?

The article Les otages libanais dans les prisons syriennes, jusqu'à quand? has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No reliable sources to show that this book is notable.

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. Fiftytwo thirty (talk) 15:24, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Baalbek, Monument Phenicien for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Baalbek, Monument Phenicien 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/Baalbek, Monument Phenicien 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 good 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 template from the top of the article. Deadly∀ssassin 21:37, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Si Beyrouth Parlait

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 Si Beyrouth Parlait, 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. Bazj (talk) 23:04, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Status and Advice

I think t might help if I give you some advice: I've been here for 4 years now, trying as hard as I can to get Wikipedia to accept as many articles on academics as the community will possibly be willing to accept. that was one of the main purposes I came here, in fact. It's been quite successful--when I came, articles about even members of the US National Academy of Sciences were being listed for deletion, and articles on people of similar quality in the humanities were being actually deleted. The key to getting a non-academically oriented assemblage of people like the ones on Wikipedia to accept this, is to be selective, One of the key aspects of selectivity is not trying to write many articles about different publications or theories of the same person, unless that person is really famous. It's much more effective to have one good strong article, and that article is normally the one about the author. If you look at my talk page entries for today, you'll see some discussion of this at the bottom.

I urge you to withdraw the articles about the individual books, and instead write one about the author, in which all the books can be appropriately mentioned, and redirects made from the titles.. I think it would probably hold, whereas going about it book by book, they are probably all going to get deleted. I'll be glad to take a look at the author article when it's ready--just ask me. There's a feeling here about real or apparent Conflict of Interest--nobody much minds it if the articles are unimpeachable, but otherwise, it tends to produce a negative reaction. DGG ( talk ) 04:53, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Le Liban assassiné, lettre ouverte à Monsieur Sarkozy

The article Le Liban assassiné, lettre ouverte à Monsieur Sarkozy has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Insufficient reliable source coverage to demonstrate notability for inclusion.

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. Fiftytwo thirty (talk) 16:37, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Barbara de Baalbek

The article Barbara de Baalbek has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Appears to fail WP:NBOOK. There are no notability claims.

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. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 15:35, 19 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Lina Murr Nehme

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 Lina Murr Nehme requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

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. Unionhawk ^Talk ^E-mail 12:08, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of La Renaissance en Question 1-2

The article La Renaissance en Question 1-2 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unreferenced book, notability not established

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. WWGB (talk) 11:09, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of La Renaissance en Question for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article La Renaissance en Question is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted. I have included in this nomination Du Règne de la Pègre au reveil du Lion.

The articles will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/La Renaissance en Question 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 good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the articles during the discussion, including to improve the articles to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. JohnCD (talk) 14:11, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's sourcing policy

Please do not add or change content without verifying it by citing reliable sources, as you did to Lina Murr Nehme. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. --Jezebel'sPonyo ^{bons mots} 14:25, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add unsourced content, as you did to Lina Murr Nehme. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Jezebel'sPonyo ^{bons mots} 16:52, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Spamming

Every time that you place a link to an author's work in the wrong section, i.e. See also, or create a See also section especially to insert a reference to the author, it is spamming. This is particularly the case when the link that you have created is only slightly referenced to the subject matter.

You have done all this so persistently, even though you eyes and intelligence must inform you that the right place to put the reference to a book is in the section which may variously be called '"References'" or '"Additional reading'".

You DO know that these sections exist, because you added a list of five books to an appropriately headed section as one of your earliest edits. Yet you have continually stuck the reference to this author's works into the wrong section, presumably to separate the the books from all the other books on the lists, and gain more attention for them.

Knowingly inserting material into the wrong section, and creating inappropriate sections in an article constitutes a very cunning form of vandalism.

In the future:

Do not under any circumstances create See also sections in order to insert advertising for an individual and their works
Do not add the name of the author or a book to any See also section. (unless the book is the Bible, the Quran or text of similar stand-alone importance)
Do not add book titles without the name of the author. You added five to one article, that all linked to the author's page, and you ommitted to give the author's name for four of them.
Do not link every book in a list back to the same article, as if there were five separate articles. Linking the author is sufficient.
Do not add your author's book to the References section, unless your author's work has actually been referenced within the article.

Do put books that have real relevance into the Additional reading section.
Do state author's name, publisher, date and ISBN.
Do link the author's name to the article about the author.
Do create an Additional reading section where appropriate and none exists.

Amandajm (talk) 03:45, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]