User talk:NiJuShiHo

Welcome!

Hello, NiJuShiHo, 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, like Cecil T. Patterson, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for page creation, and may soon be deleted.

You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the Article Wizard.

Thank you.

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:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 01:17, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Cecil T. Patterson

The article Cecil T. Patterson has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Notability is asserted but not established through third-party reliable sources.

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 {{dated prod}} 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 {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 01:17, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Cecil T. Patterson

An article that you have been involved in editing, Cecil T. Patterson, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cecil T. Patterson. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 02:01, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Citing sources

Hello, NiJuShiHo. Your latest reference now displays correctly. You're clearly adept at writing conventional footnotes, so in the future all you need do is enclose your footnote in <ref> </ref> tags at the statement you wish to footnote, and the Wiki-machinery will number it and display it correctly in the References section. I'll continue to watch the article for changes, and do what I can to improve your article.

So you know, ; it is visible when you edit, but is hidden when the page is displayed. I commented out your original references when I replaced them with citation templates, and named the new <ref> tags so that you could follow my changes. You added your new reference inside the comment tags , which is why they weren't displayed.

It would be a good idea to let the folks at the Articles for Deletion discussion know that you're supporting your article with third-party sources. You may be able to persuade those who have already voted to reconsider your article and change their vote, and if not you may still persuade the administrator who is responsible for closing the debate. Although editors are voting to keep the article or not, AfD isn't a democracy. An administrator who is not participating in the discussion is responsible for deciding the outcome based upon the arguments presented. It is this unseen administrator who must be persuaded that your subject is notable, not the editors commenting on the article. Yappy2bhere (talk) 20:11, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, you too can vote at AfD to Keep or Delete this article. It means more of course if you give your reasons when you vote, but there's no point in abstaining. Yappy2bhere (talk) 20:17, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]