User talk:Seattlecityunion
You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the Article Wizard.
Thank you.
The article United Protection Officers of America has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done because the article, which appeared to be about a real person, individual animal, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, did not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the notability of the subject may be deleted at any time. If you can indicate why the subject is really notable, you are free to re-create the article, making sure to cite any verifiable sources.
Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and for specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for musicians, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. NawlinWiki (talk) 03:57, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of United Protection Officers of America
[edit]A tag has been placed on United Protection Officers of America 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 an organization or company, 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 see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for organizations and companies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.
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 that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. —ShadowRanger (talk|stalk) 04:45, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
- There's nothing in the article you posted to indicate the importance of this organization. We can't just take your word for it -- especially because, as the founder of the organization, you're not neutral; see also Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. You need to cite reliable independent sources (see WP:V) that show that the organization is notable per our guidelines at WP:ORG. NawlinWiki (talk) 05:09, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
- The fact that you founded an organization, and that it filed an NLRB case, doesn't make it notable per WP:ORG (did you read that section?). Otherwise, every organization that ever filed a suit or labor proceeding in federal court would merit a Wikipedia article, and that's not what WP:ORG says. I'm not disputing that your organization exists -- but you haven't shown that it's notable per WP:ORG, and you haven't cited any reliable sources per WP:V (again, having a filing with the NLRB is not the same as the U.S. Government establishing that the organization is notable). Finally, the attacks on me (all the "non-union state" stuff) aren't helping you any. This has nothing to do with whether your organization is pro-union, anti-union, or whatever -- you simply haven't explained why it's notable. NawlinWiki (talk) 17:05, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
- In case you didn't notice, I have *not* removed your organization from the page List of trade unions. The fact that an organization has a redlink (no separate article) there might mean that it's not notable -- or that it is notable and that nobody has yet taken the time to compose an article on the subject. If and when an article is written on any union (or any other subject), it has to meet the Wikipedia guidelines that I've cited to you, above. I'm being entirely consistent in deleting your article (which had almost no content and cited no sources), but not deleting either the redlink for your organization or the ones for other organizations. Finally, we're all volunteers here, and making "demands" on me or any other volunteer isn't going to get you anywhere. NawlinWiki (talk) 19:38, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
- I haven't deleted any of your messages -- if you would take the time to read down a few lines, you'd see that it's all still there. The article that was posted July 7, 2009 by User:UPOA (I assume that's you as well) was blanked by its author a few minutes after it was posted, and then deleted under speedy deletion category G7, which provides that anytime an author blanks an article that he/she just wrote, we assume that they want it to be deleted. Frankly, I'm also tired of your angry and arrogant attitude ("wanna play?"), and your repeated accusations that I'm biased against you, against unions, or whatever. I'm not answering any more rude posts to my talk page from you. If you have a further issue with the deletion of your page, I suggest you visit Wikipedia:Deletion review. NawlinWiki (talk) 19:47, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
Your recent edits
[edit]
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button 
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 19:43, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
Blocked
[edit]
{{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first.