717:
but you seem to think that only your interpretation could be correct. The contributor who does not make
Knowledge the focus of their life has to try to figure out what "notable" really means by looking at what articles are included. So if obscure indie bands, like say, Ataloss, are accorded "notable" status, then why isn't an artist who has two paintings hanging in the Smithsonian and one that was commissioned by the White House? Since you deleted that article, then you tell me. You may say that Ataloss will at some point be deemed unworthy, but the fact that an article, no matter how long it has been included, can be deleted at any time on the whim of someone like you, does not help new contributors figure out what is acceptable. And yes, I consider myself new in that I submitted a few articles five years ago and a few more this month, all of which you have now deleted. It may be that all of those articles would be considered to be about non-notable people by Knowledge editors with less of chip on their shoulder than you, but show me the clear guidelines that indicate what is notable and what is not. Without such guidelines, this whole process would appear to be quite subjective. And nowhere do I see any prohibition against a contributor writing an article about someone whom the contributor is connected to or has material interest in. My guess is that it happens often. It seems, however, to have made you quite angry that I have done so. Perhaps there needs to be such a prohibition clearly spelled out if that is indeed what the rules are.
618:
accepted at this point, so someone at
Knowledge must think they meet the standards. Also, a number of Sentient authors have been written up by people not connected to Sentient Publications and those articles have been accepted. The people I am submitting are leaders in their fields who have done far more of note than to write a book. Of course, you are free to disagree, but I would appreciate it if you could do so in a civil manner. I'm not trying to do anything prohibited by Knowledge as I understand it and I have read the rules. I've attempted to write about these people in a neutral manner and have provided outside sources.
662:, another potential pitfall that could lead to your blocking and public embarrassment. Please be advised that unsourced, poorly sourced, and spammed materials can be deleted by any editor at any time. If I were you, I would recuse myself from now on from promoting any of my products on Knowledge. Believe me: The Knowledge community will absolutely not stand for it, and they will come down on you very, very, very hard if
739:. On Knowledge, you can't argue for an article's inclusion by pointing out that some other article exists. Also, I did not delete any of the articles about your company's products. I am not an admin and have no power to delete articles. Some of your articles were speedily deleted by admins, while others were redirected. I know that Knowledge policies can seem confusing, but here's a good rule of thumb:
681:
policy and conventions. Please do not bite the newcomers. If someone does something against custom, assume it was an unwitting mistake. You should politely and gently point out their mistake, reference the relevant policy/guideline/help pages, and suggest a better approach." You'd do well to learn a little politeness. You make me want to have nothing further to do with
Knowledge, which I assume is your goal.
486:
786:
390:
647:
books. This goes completely against the guidelines I've directed you to, and I cannot emphasize strongly enough that if you keep it up, you are headed not only for a block, but perhaps even public embarrassment. Believe me, I have seen it happen here hundreds of times. The fact that you have gotten away with contributing
135:
material for a "stub" bio on her, but would need drastic rewording, by someone who understands its jargon but is willing and able to state her ideas in a way that recognizes the value of considering the fact that she holds them as something separable from whether they involve any value or truth; for
680:
No, I am not Anyuan. I do not have any alias account, just my own. And could you possibly be any more rude? I suppose you could, having read a few of your comments on other articles. As long as we're citing
Knowledge chapter and verse here, what about "People new to Knowledge may be unfamiliar with
716:
Your sarcasm and rudeness is obviously fun for you but harmful to
Knowledge and completely unneccesary. By assuming evil intent by contributors all you are doing is maintaining your role as petty tyrant and enforcer of guidelines that are by no means so clear cut as to be free from interpretation,
646:
that
Knowledge has "accepted" your topic as "notable." All it means is that nobody has evaluated your promotional article yet, and so you've temporarily gotten away with trying to promote your commercial enterprise. You are here for no other purpose than to make money by using Knowledge to sell
617:
I'm an infrequent
Knowledge contributor so it can take me a while to see that I have a message. I'm the owner of Sentient Publications. We have over 80 authors represented in our catalog; I've submitted 11 that I think are worthy of an entry in Knowledge. Of those it looks like 5 or 6 have been
602:, among many, many others. Well, this is not going to stand. Knowledge is not a free web hosting service for you to promote your non-notable writers. If Sentient Publications wants to do that, let it pay for publicity through the usual routes.
751:
folks who are self-righteously trying to use
Knowledge as a free web-hosting service in order to feature their commercial products so they can turn a buck. You are headed for a block if you keep it up. Thank you, and have a nice day.
136:
that purpose, we have no need of a copy of such a text as part of WP: any of the many URLs for pages that already contain it would suffice as information for an editor who would take the article in an acceptable direction. Thanks.
126:
In fact, the language that you placed in her bio article is worthless here, since its point of view is the assumption that her philosophical beliefs are accurate and useful, while WP articles must take a
52:
has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. For text material, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source, provided that it is credible.
505:
Refs in the article come from Wilson and thus are not reliable nor independent. I'm unable to find any refs that are about her, only just quotes in articles. There needs to be refs about her per
411:
747:
for articles that are not related in any way to your company. If, instead, you continue on your present course, you will quickly find that the most unpopular people on
Knowledge are the
801:
836:, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.
582:
Why didn't you reply to my question above? You're an employee of
Sentient Publications, here to promote the non-notable books of its non-notable authors. You are in violation of
434:
123:
However, for text content, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Knowledge.
254:. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.
240:
313:
98:
If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org
55:
If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely
76:
327:, a forum on Knowledge for new editors to ask questions about editing Knowledge, and get support from peers and experienced editors. Please join us!
839:
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.
350:
Do you work for Sentient Publications? Your purpose here appears to be to promote Sentient authors, regardless of their notability. Please read
552:
45:
702:. Approximately how many years were you planning to wait before you started following Knowledge policies against promoting your own company?
640:
in violation of our policies. Please note that just because you write a promotional article and it's been standing for a couple of weeks
779:
272:
Hi Connieshaw, as you can see in the area you commented on my talk page, the speedy deletion was denied. Later it was found that
239:
I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether Adrianne Ahern should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at
556:
425:
284:, it will take more time but once it passes there is little danger of it being deleted. You can also come ask questions at the
281:
58:
655:
works--you should read that policy thoroughly as well. Also, are you this other promotional account for Sentient products
421:
32:
text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from
699:
in order to claim newcomer status, when you've been pushing your promotional edits here for over five and a half years
544:
497:
475:
548:
193:
41:
332:
293:
262:
219:
211:
531:
849:
If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at
833:
821:
407:
114:
92:
70:
250:
is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on
424:, and don't have to post a request. However, you are more than welcome to continue submitting work to
861:
850:
793:
595:
493:
479:
461:
251:
157:
29:
273:
230:
189:
736:
663:
599:
560:
396:
153:
564:
591:
328:
324:
289:
285:
258:
215:
590:. If you keep it up, you are headed for a block for disruptive editing. You recently created
568:
527:
735:
does not give you the right to promote your company on Knowledge. Attaloss is an example of
843:
757:
707:
671:
637:
607:
587:
371:
363:
355:
199:
If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can
49:
37:
33:
25:
18:
366:. I think that most of your edits, per Knowledge policies, should be deleted. Thank you.
857:
829:
718:
682:
619:
453:
171:
143:
696:
659:
648:
128:
811:
748:
633:
583:
514:
506:
382:
351:
277:
247:
161:
744:
740:
656:
652:
359:
312:
513:
While all contributions to Knowledge are appreciated, content or articles may be
442:
192:
for deletion, because it seems to be an article that was previously deleted by a
73:
and send an email with the message to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org".
69:
If you have permission from the author leave a message explaining the details at
753:
703:
667:
603:
367:
280:. I looked for some and couldn't find any. You can start the article again at
167:
139:
537:
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing
103:
417:
743:. Like all Knowledge editors, you would be better served trying to locate
806:
732:
865:
815:
785:
761:
726:
711:
690:
675:
627:
611:
572:
469:
375:
336:
297:
266:
223:
174:
152:
The same copyright-violation issues are the reason for the deletions of
146:
731:
Thanks again for writing. The existence of an article about the band
416:
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to
389:
441:
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider
83:
If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted
695:
Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't realize you were going to retreat behind
399:, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
164:, and the rest of your initiations of bios remain to be reviewed.
207:, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.
109:
86:
651:
for a number of years indicates that you do not understand how
792:
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect
784:
484:
388:
432:
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the
34:
http://www.sentientpublications.com/authors/b_bruteau.php
276:
did not have any reliable secondary sources to meet the
700:
666:
is required regarding your multiple policy violations.
555:
process can result in deletion without discussion, and
443:
202:
520:
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the
420:. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can
241:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Adrianne Ahern
8:
188:I wanted to let you know that I just tagged
181:Speedy deletion nomination of Adrianne Ahern
800:redirect, you might want to participate in
95:with a link to where we can find that note.
796:. Since you had some involvement with the
846:of the content if it meets requirements.
632:I strongly advise you to thoroughly read
451:Thank you for helping improve Knowledge!
77:Knowledge:Requesting copyright permission
63:then you should do one of the following:
414:to see how you can improve the article.
526:notice, but please explain why in your
278:Knowledge:General Notability Guidelines
832:. I just wanted to let you know that
410:. You may like to take a look at the
406:, which is recorded on the article's
24:Hello. Concerning your contribution,
7:
804:(if you have not already done so).
113:, and note that you have done so on
515:deleted for any of several reasons
500:because of the following concern:
89:or released into the public domain
14:
402:The article has been assessed as
311:
282:Knowledge:Articles for creation
214:if you have questions. Thanks,
856:Thank you for your attention.
246:If you're new to the process,
59:GNU Free Documentation License
1:
866:01:32, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
816:04:19, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
762:18:50, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
727:17:21, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
712:19:42, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
691:15:55, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
676:20:27, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
628:20:06, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
612:19:18, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
573:20:16, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
470:23:40, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
376:02:14, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
337:16:33, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
298:16:32, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
267:19:51, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
224:04:38, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
131:. That text would make good
36:. As a copyright violation,
559:allows discussion to reach
540:{{proposed deletion/dated}}
523:{{proposed deletion/dated}}
175:14:43, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
147:07:36, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
881:
778:Diane G. Wilson listed at
551:exist. In particular, the
229:Deletion discussion about
545:proposed deletion process
323:, you are invited to the
780:Redirects for discussion
722:
686:
623:
444:leaving us some feedback
422:create articles yourself
210:You can leave a note on
102:a postal message to the
46:speedy deletion criteria
802:the redirect discussion
532:the article's talk page
304:Check out the Teahouse!
40:appears to qualify for
789:
658:? If so, please read
489:
393:
788:
578:At it again, are you?
557:articles for deletion
498:proposed for deletion
488:
426:Articles for Creation
392:
383:Articles for creation
346:Sentient Publications
248:articles for deletion
203:contest this deletion
129:neutral point of view
115:Talk:Beatrice Bruteau
93:Talk:Beatrice Bruteau
71:Talk:Beatrice Bruteau
17:Copyright issue with
236:Hello, Connieshaw,
104:Wikimedia Foundation
834:Draft:Alice Matzkin
822:Draft:Alice Matzkin
381:Your submission at
28:, we cannot accept
790:
636:and stop creating
549:deletion processes
490:
394:
194:consensus decision
185:Hello Connieshaw,
106:permitting re-use
476:Proposed deletion
343:
342:
252:how to contribute
79:for instructions.
872:
842:You may request
542:
541:
525:
524:
487:
465:
457:
446:
315:
308:
307:
206:
91:leave a note at
50:Beatrice Bruteau
38:Beatrice Bruteau
26:Beatrice Bruteau
19:Beatrice Bruteau
880:
879:
875:
874:
873:
871:
870:
869:
826:
798:Diane G. Wilson
794:Diane G. Wilson
783:
596:Diane G. Wilson
580:
553:speedy deletion
539:
538:
522:
521:
494:Diane G. Wilson
485:
483:
480:Diane G. Wilson
472:
463:
455:
386:
348:
339:
306:
234:
200:
183:
158:Steven Harrison
42:speedy deletion
22:
12:
11:
5:
878:
876:
828:Hi there, I'm
825:
819:
782:
776:
775:
774:
773:
772:
771:
770:
769:
768:
767:
766:
765:
764:
579:
576:
563:for deletion.
543:will stop the
511:
510:
482:
473:
449:
448:
439:
412:grading scheme
401:
387:
385:
379:
347:
344:
341:
340:
318:
316:
305:
302:
301:
300:
274:Adrianne Ahern
233:
231:Adrianne Ahern
227:
190:Adrianne Ahern
182:
179:
177:
165:
149:
137:
121:
120:
119:
118:
96:
81:
21:
15:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
877:
868:
867:
863:
859:
854:
852:
851:WP:REFUND/G13
847:
845:
840:
837:
835:
831:
823:
820:
818:
817:
813:
809:
808:
803:
799:
795:
787:
781:
777:
763:
759:
755:
750:
746:
742:
738:
734:
730:
729:
728:
724:
720:
715:
714:
713:
709:
705:
701:
698:
694:
693:
692:
688:
684:
679:
678:
677:
673:
669:
665:
661:
657:
654:
650:
645:
644:
643:does not mean
639:
635:
631:
630:
629:
625:
621:
616:
615:
614:
613:
609:
605:
601:
600:Alice Matzkin
597:
593:
589:
585:
577:
575:
574:
570:
566:
562:
558:
554:
550:
546:
535:
533:
529:
518:
516:
509:
508:
503:
502:
501:
499:
495:
481:
477:
474:
471:
467:
466:
459:
458:
452:
445:
440:
437:
436:
431:
430:
429:
427:
423:
419:
413:
409:
405:
400:
398:
397:Alice Matzkin
391:
384:
380:
378:
377:
373:
369:
365:
361:
357:
353:
345:
338:
334:
330:
329:heather walls
326:
322:
317:
314:
310:
309:
303:
299:
295:
291:
290:heather walls
287:
283:
279:
275:
271:
270:
269:
268:
264:
260:
259:heather walls
255:
253:
249:
244:
242:
237:
232:
228:
226:
225:
221:
217:
216:heather walls
213:
208:
205:
204:
197:
195:
191:
186:
180:
178:
176:
173:
169:
163:
162:Barbara Meyer
159:
155:
154:Brent Cameron
150:
148:
145:
141:
134:
130:
124:
116:
112:
111:
105:
101:
97:
94:
90:
88:
82:
80:
78:
72:
68:
67:
66:
65:
64:
62:
60:
53:
51:
47:
43:
39:
35:
31:
27:
20:
16:
855:
848:
844:Userfication
841:
838:
827:
805:
797:
791:
737:WP:OTHERCRAP
664:WP:CONSENSUS
642:
641:
581:
547:, but other
536:
528:edit summary
519:
512:
504:
492:The article
491:
462:
454:
450:
433:
415:
403:
395:
349:
320:
256:
245:
238:
235:
212:my talk page
209:
201:
198:
187:
184:
151:
132:
125:
122:
107:
99:
84:
74:
56:
54:
23:
592:Linda Weber
404:Start-Class
288:. Regards,
30:copyrighted
858:HasteurBot
830:HasteurBot
719:Connieshaw
683:Connieshaw
620:Connieshaw
456:Miniapolis
321:Connieshaw
108:under the
85:under the
57:under the
44:under the
638:WP:ADVERT
588:WP:ADVERT
561:consensus
496:has been
435:help desk
418:Knowledge
408:talk page
364:WP:ADVERT
356:WP:AUTHOR
733:Attaloss
325:Teahouse
286:Teahouse
257:Thanks,
824:concern
697:WP:BITE
660:WP:SOCK
649:WP:SPAM
565:Bgwhite
319:Hello!
754:Qworty
749:WP:SPA
704:Qworty
668:Qworty
634:WP:COI
604:Qworty
598:, and
584:WP:COI
530:or on
507:WP:GNG
368:Qworty
352:WP:COI
160:, and
133:source
61:(GFDL)
812:talk
745:WP:RS
741:WP:42
653:WP:RS
360:WP:BK
168:Jerzy
140:Jerzy
862:talk
758:talk
723:talk
708:talk
687:talk
672:talk
624:talk
608:talk
586:and
569:talk
464:talk
372:talk
362:and
333:talk
294:talk
263:talk
220:talk
196:.
110:GFDL
87:GFDL
75:See
807:DGG
478:of
243:.
864:)
853:.
814:)
760:)
725:)
710:)
689:)
674:)
626:)
610:)
594:,
571:)
534:.
517:.
468:)
428:.
374:)
358:,
354:,
335:)
296:)
265:)
222:)
166:--
156:,
138:--
100:or
48:.
860:(
810:(
756:(
721:(
706:(
685:(
670:(
622:(
606:(
567:(
460:(
447:.
438:.
370:(
331:(
292:(
261:(
218:(
172:t
170:•
144:t
142:•
117:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.