User talk:Historian2010

Welcome!

Hello, Historian2010, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Rd232 ^talk 17:46, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Voters' Rights Amendment

Hi Billy,

I reviewed Voters' Rights Amendment and I am sorry to say that I come to the conclusion that this article should be deleted, as the notability of its subject has not been shown to meet Wikipedia's notability requirements for inclusion. Going over the sources the article provides:

movetoamend.org and www.thenation.com/node/166616 both do not mention USVRA and so do not contribute toward establishing notability of the USVRA.

http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=29246 is written by yourself and so does not meet the Wikipedia criteria that sources supporting notability be independent of the subject.

world.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/96589 -- The web site mediamonitors.net publishes user-supplied content and so fails WP:USERGENERATED. Also the author of the article is Richard John Stapleton, who is clearly affiliated with the USVRA, and so fails the Wikipedia requirement that sources used to establish notability be independent of the subject.

www.nationofchange.org/voters-rights-amendment-and-war-1336313338 is written by Charles Foerster, also clearly affiliated with the USVRA, and also fails to be independent of the subject.

www.usvra.us cannot be used to establish notability.

So as you can see, the article provides absolutely no sources that meet Wikipedia criteria for establishing notability.

The article as it is written does not meet Wikipedia criteria regarding WP:NPOV as it appears to promote the USVRA organization and its goals. This is a separate problem which could only be resolved by finding the independent sources required to establish notability.

I don't mean to stick a thumb in your eye, and want to give you time (let's say, a week or so) to find reliable, independent sources to establish notability. I did some searching this morning and could not find any. But if the sources are not brought, I'll have to submit the article for deletion at WP:AFD. (Actually what should happen is that a sentence or two from the Voters' Rights Amendment should be merged into William John Cox, and Voters' Rights Amendment should be redirected to that article.) I know this is a cause you personally believe in, but given the sources, at this time Wikipedia is not the right place to host this as a separate article. Zad68 15:55, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Zad, I'll defer to your judgment "at this time." Will you do the honors of redirecting the subject to WJC? Historian2010 (talk) 14:44, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Will do, thanks for (hopefully!) not taking this personally. Cheers... Zad68 15:06, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done If at some point in the future, the USVRA picks up enough attention in the press to meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines, we can of course undo the redirect and put the sourced content there. Zad68 15:21, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Historian2010 (talk) 13:18, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited William John Cox, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page National Popular Vote (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:58, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Will modify.Historian2010 (talk) 22:11, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet of WilliamJohnCox (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · logs · block log · arb · rfc · lta · SPI · cuwiki) that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. Vanjagenije (talk) 18:22, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]