User talk:Erinkstapleton

Your submission at Articles for creation: The London Graduate School (October 10)

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit if you feel they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The London Graduate School.
To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the reviewer's talk page. Please remember to link to the submission!
You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Arthur goes shopping (talk) 13:51, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Erinkstapleton, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about why your article submission was declined please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there!

Welcome!

Hello, Erinkstapleton, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your edits have not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may be removed if they have not yet been. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles. As well, all new biographies of living people must contain at least one reliable source.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! 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:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or you can type {{helpme}} on your user page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! BusterD (talk) 20:01, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not trying to be argumentative here, but I urge you NOT to remove review tags before making corrections indicated by the tags. My addition of the tags is in no way intended to discourage you from editing or influence your edits (other than providing guidance toward page improvement). Review of new pages is a normal part of Wikipedia process. I'm concerned that the three academics for which you've started pages today not might meet guidelines for notability, but the best way to defend against such assertion is to support the works with mulitple independent reliable sources (see WP:IRS for information). Please continue to edit boldly, and feel free to ask me or others for assistance if you need to understand Wikipedia better. BusterD (talk) 21:54, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Hager Weslati

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 Hager Weslati 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 read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. GILO A&E⇑ 22:15, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Eleni Ikoniadou

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 Eleni Ikoniadou 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 read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. GILO A&E⇑ 22:16, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: The London Graduate School (October 11)

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit if you feel they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The London Graduate School.
To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the reviewer's talk page. Please remember to link to the submission!
You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! TKK! bark with me if you're my dog! 06:42, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I took it upon myself to do a cursory web and book search for sources meeting WP:IRS about the TLGS institution, but didn't immediately find good sources independent of the subject. If you are associated with the institution, you are in an advantageous position to help find and insert such sources. I should say that the graduate school might meet Wikipedia standards for inclusion, but we need reliable independent sources upon which to anchor any assertions made about the school. Please look over WP:IRS, then look for sources. Offline sources are just fine, so long as they meet the standard. Good luck and keep on plugging. BusterD (talk) 21:15, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your request for undeletion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that a response has been made at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion regarding a submission you made. The thread is Eleni Ikoniadou. JohnCD (talk) 13:45, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Academic notability

Welcome to Wikipedia. I am afraid it takes some time to find ones way through all the rules and standards which are necessary to keep this a useful encyclopedia; but there are always human guides to help you through the maze.

On Talk:Eleni Ikoniadou you wrote: "This academic holds the equivalent position of "professor" in the US. Tenured academics in the UK are not referred to as professor, but are given the title lecturer. On this basis, this particular person passes the test set out by wikipedia's standards."

No, that is not the case; a tenured academic is not automatically notable in Wikipedia's special sense, and even the title "Professor" in the British system does not confer automatic notability, though it is probably enough to avoid speedy deletion. The level conferring automatic notability is explained in WP:Notability (academics)#Criteria #5: "The person holds or has held a named chair appointment or "Distinguished Professor" appointment at a major institution of higher education and research (or an equivalent position in countries where named chairs are uncommon)."

Other criteria based on academic achievement are explained in WP:Notability (academics), and I advise you to read it carefully before writing any more academic biographies, because it can be embarrassing when an article has to be deleted.

If you are connected with the London Graduate School, please read the Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. Wikipedia is very resistant to anything that looks like promotion. You will also find the Wikipedia:College and university article guidelines of interest: note under "Faculties and academic colleges" that individual schools or programs within a university are not often able to demonstrate independent notability, and may be better covered by a reference within the main university article.

Regards, JohnCD (talk) 19:32, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Follow-up

My fellow admin JohnCD asked me to follow up on some of these articles, because I'm one of the people here who work most in this subject area. Most academics will need to meet the qualifications under WP:PROF, but for those publishing in fields where books rather than journal articles contribute most to academic importance, there an alternative route, WP:NAUTHOR which rei=quires the publication of several well-received books from major academic publishers, , as shown by substantial book reviews, and supported additiomlly by extensive library holdings--best shown on Worldcat.

The article should give a basic biography --place of birth, place of preparatory and higher education and degrees received, and then list the academic positions and the publications that establish notability, with references to the reviews--any librarian can help you find them. Include any national-level awards received, but not internal awards from the university. Show the field of specialization by the books published, not by the coursers taught.

If an article on a notable academic is challenged, i will always defend it--as I do too much work here to keep track of every article upon which i have given advice, notify my on my user talk page if my assistance is needed. I shall check any already-deleted articles, and restore them if I think they have But before you continue, please learn the conventional practices here,and write the kind of article that will not even be challenged. DGG ( talk ) 08:23, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your (somewhat more reassuring) reply - for an open-access information source, I find it disturbing that unknown users with potentially no knowledge in a particular field can arbitrarily have a page "speedily deleted". I would have thought the more accessible information the better, but anyway...

So I'm not really sure if this is the correct way to reply to this thread, but perhaps you can help me with another issue I've had with posting a page about an academic? I've posted a page about prominent Derrida/Lyotard scholar, Simon Morgan Wortham, and the page name has been changed to Simon Wortham, with someone obviously assuming that "Morgan" is a middle name, despite the fact that in the listed bibliography, it's clearly shown as a surname. I can't work out how to change it back, and it's embarrassing, because, as evidenced by the many published books under the name "Morgan Wortham, Simon" "Simon Wortham" is just not his name. (I'm sure I could, but actually I don't have a lot of time to dedicate to using and learning how to use wikipedia, and have just been trying to post some contributions in what very little spare time I do have.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Erinkstapleton (talk • contribs) 16:59, 15 October 2013

I have moved the article back to Simon Morgan Wortham, leaving a redirect at the other title.

Yes, this is the right way to reply: anyone who has posted on your talk page is likely to have "watchlisted" it, and so will see if you post a reply. The custom is to make the course of the conversation a little clearer by indenting successive items. This is done by adding one or more colon characters : to the beginning of each paragraph. If you want to contact a specific user, click on "talk" after their username and then on "New section" at the top of their talk page. To ask generally for help, you can put {{helpme}} (two curly brackets each side) at the bottom of your talk page with a question below it.

Speedy deletion is not arbitrary: it requires two pairs of eyes. Anyone can tag an article, but an administrator has to review it before actually deleting. The criteria for speedy deletion are quite narrowly defined (see WP:CSD#List of criteria); anything that does not meet them can only be deleted by more deliberate processes taking at least a week, with more opportunity for comment and disagreement.

Regarding "the more accessible information the better", in the very early days it was thought that, freed from the limitations of paper, Wikipedia could be a "list of everything" with articles about every person, company, book, video game, pop band, song, Pokemon character... but it was soon realised that to be a useful encyclopedia some inclusion criteria were necessary. You can read some of the arguments, if you are interested, at m:Deletionism. The basic criterion, hammered out after much argument, was the WP:General notability guideline which looks for "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". That has the advantage of asking, not "Is this important?" but the more objective question "Is there evidence that people not connected with this subject think it important?" More specialised guidelines for particular subjects have been worked out, such as WP:PROF and WP:AUTHOR.

It is convenient on talk pages (but not in articles) to know who said what when. It helps this if you end your contributions with a group of four "tilde" characters ~~~~, which the system will turn into a "signature" with your username and the time and date, like this: JohnCD (talk) 18:47, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As for the name, you can see who did what by clicking the heading "Page History", at the top or right of the WP page. In this case it was myself. I did it on the basis of the standard source for author's names: the LC name authorities file. Another ed. changed it back; LC might conceivably be wrong, but it's not worth arguing over. The fascinating thing about WP is that no action is permanent. DGG ( talk ) 01:05, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Fred Botting

Hello Erinkstapleton,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Fred Botting for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Makro (talk) 21:48, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The London Graduate School concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The London Graduate School, a page you created, has not been edited in 6 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 02:03, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]