Knowledge (XXG)

User talk:Tonyshep

Source 📝

190: 175:
have had on education in the UK and the US and concerns that affect them, I am wondering what else to include. Is it better that I change the entry to that of the community I am involved with and base it around that? I was under the impression that this was not considered good form as it would count
157:
Ok, admittedly for my first entry I was not fully aware that I would have to have a large entry to put in immediately. I was under the impression that I could put in an initial marker (in this case a definition) and then expand it with the usage of it within specific communities. I had considered
162:
but felt it better to put in a small entry that could be linked to other entries later. The delete marker was placed on very quickly and I am not sure that I will have time to put anything more than a short expansion on tonight. Other than expanding with examples of the history of the usage,
216:
until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.
220:
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.
58:
explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.
110:
process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Knowledge (XXG)'s criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "
202: 213: 126:. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the 131: 111: 176:
as self-advertising (if you can consider an entry for a community self-advertising). Advice or guidance on this would be appreciated.
135: 62: 39: 107: 206: 115: 42:, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add 20:, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Knowledge (XXG). This has been done for the following reason: 78: 228: 122:
notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on
142: 201:
is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to
127: 74: 70: 66: 31: 47: 223: 139: 99: 61:
For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria
123: 77:. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. 55: 40:
see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article
197: 181: 103: 17: 234: 144: 85: 38:
basic Knowledge (XXG) criteria may be deleted at any time. Please
138:, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. 130:, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the 118:). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the 106:, suggesting that it be deleted according to the 163:communities that use it, the fact that the word 214:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Edugeek 171:is used to change that round, the impact the 8: 158:adding it as an extension of the entry for 54:on the top of the page and leave a note on 203:Knowledge (XXG)'s policies and guidelines 7: 167:has been derogatory for a while but 25:Knowledge (XXG) is not a dictionary. 14: 212:The article will be discussed at 116:Knowledge (XXG)'s deletion policy 188: 153:Existance of Edugeek as an entry 1: 235:16:05, 20 February 2011 (UTC) 102:}}" template to the article 34:, articles that do not meet 32:criteria for speedy deletion 112:What Knowledge (XXG) is not 250: 128:proposed deletion process 16:A tag has been placed on 205:or whether it should be 145:20:50, 17 May 2007 (UTC) 132:speedy deletion criteria 86:18:46, 17 May 2007 (UTC) 56:the article's talk page 136:Articles for Deletion 134:or it can be sent to 98:I have added a "{{ 108:proposed deletion 241: 231: 226: 192: 191: 121: 83: 53: 52: 46: 249: 248: 244: 243: 242: 240: 239: 238: 229: 224: 193: 189: 186: 155: 119: 96: 79: 63:for biographies 50: 44: 43: 28: 12: 11: 5: 247: 245: 187: 185: 180:Nomination of 178: 154: 151: 149: 120:{{dated prod}} 95: 92: 90: 22: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 246: 237: 236: 233: 232: 227: 218: 215: 210: 208: 204: 200: 199: 183: 179: 177: 174: 170: 166: 161: 152: 150: 147: 146: 143: 141: 137: 133: 129: 125: 124:its talk page 117: 113: 109: 105: 101: 93: 91: 88: 87: 84: 82: 76: 75:for companies 72: 68: 67:for web sites 64: 59: 57: 49: 41: 37: 33: 27: 26: 21: 19: 222: 219: 211: 196: 195:The article 194: 184:for deletion 172: 168: 164: 159: 156: 148: 97: 89: 81:Boricuaeddie 80: 60: 35: 29: 24: 23: 15: 173:edugeekers 30:Under the 71:for bands 207:deleted 198:Edugeek 182:Edugeek 169:edugeek 104:Edugeek 94:Edugeek 18:Edugeek 114:" and 48:hangon 230:amuse 225:Cind. 73:, or 165:geek 160:geek 100:prod 36:very 140:DES 209:. 69:, 65:, 51:}} 45:{{

Index

Edugeek
criteria for speedy deletion
see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article
hangon
the article's talk page
for biographies
for web sites
for bands
for companies
Boricuaeddie
18:46, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
prod
Edugeek
proposed deletion
What Knowledge (XXG) is not
Knowledge (XXG)'s deletion policy
its talk page
proposed deletion process
speedy deletion criteria
Articles for Deletion
DES

20:50, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Edugeek
Edugeek
Knowledge (XXG)'s policies and guidelines
deleted
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Edugeek
Cind.
amuse

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.