User talk:Meadejh

Speedy deletion of Church of the Saviour, Washington, DC

A tag has been placed on Church of the Saviour, Washington, DC requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must include on the external site the statement "I, (name), am the author of this article, (article name), and I release its content under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 and later." You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

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 (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's 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. Yng varr 21:09, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Recreate

Please stop recreating Church of the Saviour, Washington, DC. Please review Wikipedia:Copyright violations for quidelines, If you have questions ask at my talk page. Thank you Jeepday (talk) 21:19, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials#Granting us permission to copy material already online. But if you have a conflict of interest then it's strongly discouraged to create an article. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:46, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are a number of considerations, If you are the original Author of the work that you can release the copyright. But as a rule the content that may be appropriate for a church web site may not be appropriate for Wikipedia. Please review Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability for some content guidelines then you may want to review Wikipedia:Verifiability to ensure you can provide reference to support what ever content you finally decide is appropriate. You may also want to keep in mind the guidelines at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest before considering if you are the correct person to write the article. If after reading these quidelines you still feel it is appropriate to create a Wikipedia article for this church, you can begin drafting your work here User:Meadejh/Sandbox/Church of the Saviour, Washington, DC as this is user sandbox you can work on the article without being in the main WIkipedia space. I hope this is helpful and that I have not frighted you from continuing to contribute. Jeepday (talk) 21:52, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Meadejh, 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:

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 and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Jeepday (talk) 21:52, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notability of Church of the Saviour, Washington, DC

A tag has been placed on Church of the Saviour, Washington, DC requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's 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 confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 23:45, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Church of the Saviour

I deleted the article Church of the Saviour, Washington, DC because it contained advertising (speedy deletion criterion G11), and because it didn't make clear how and why the subject was notable enough to be included in Wikipedia (speedy deletion criterion A7). Your edits show that you have a clear conflict of interest with regards to the subject. If you disagree with the deletion of the article, you are free to request a deletion review. If you need help with this, you can leave a message on my user talk page and I'll help you out. A ecis^Brievenbus 22:40, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]