User talk:Dschuster

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Dschuster! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot notifying you on behalf of the the unreferenced biographies team that 1 of the articles that you created is currently tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 3 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

Dan Ashbel - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 19:42, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Evangelical intelligentsia

The article Evangelical intelligentsia has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Completely unsourced, based purely on a term coined by a single researcher, and serving only to inflate the importance of the people mentioned.

While all constructive 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. Revent^talk 08:19, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Evangelical intelligentsia for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Evangelical intelligentsia 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/Evangelical intelligentsia 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. Sizeofint (talk) 07:39, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Back to the Roots (organisation)

The article Back to the Roots (organisation) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

I have tried every which way to find secondary sources for this organisation but have not been successful. Unfortunately, this is a promotional piece with no current chance to be notable.

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. TheGracefulSlick (talk) 04:41, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]