User talk:Speaker107

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Your submission at Articles for creation

You recently made a submission to Articles for Creation. Your article has been reviewed and some issues were found because of which it could not be accepted in its current form; it is now located at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Valor. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. Feel free to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved. (You can do this by adding the text {{subst:AFC submission/submit}} to the top of the article.) Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Armbrust WrestleMania XXVII Undertaker 19–0 22:18, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

You recently made a submission to Articles for Creation. Your article has been reviewed and some issues were found because of which it could not be accepted in its current form; it is now located at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Valor. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. Feel free to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved. (You can do this by adding the text {{subst:AFC submission/submit}} to the top of the article.) Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! TucsonDavidU.S.A. 02:30, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

You recently made a submission to Articles for Creation. Your article has been reviewed and some issues were found because of which it could not be accepted in its current form; it is now located at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Valor. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. Feel free to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved. (You can do this by adding the text {{subst:AFC submission/submit}} to the top of the article.) Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! -- Bk314159 (Talk to me and find out what I've done) 16:49, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article Valor (Book) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:N. Not notable e-book without significant attention from reliable, independent 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 {{proposed deletion/dated}} 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 {{proposed deletion/dated}} 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. Fram (talk) 14:29, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback posted

Posted here: Wikipedia:Requests_for_feedback/2011_April_11#Valor_.28book.29. MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:47, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to your question about cover image: Wikipedia:Requests_for_feedback/2011_April_11#Valor_.28book.29; (I grouped your two sections together; add to your existing request rather than starting a new one). MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:34, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Category "Category:Books" is way too broad for "Valor"

Categories should be as specific as possible. Please dig down into the book sub-categories and pick the most specific cats that fit. MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:45, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Valor (book) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Valor (book) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Valor (book) 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.

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. Fram (talk) 07:14, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

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 halfwidth tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could 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) 15:28, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Valor

Hey Speaker107 --

I was over at Articles for Deletion and noticed that you've really been pushing for Valor to be kept. While I understand your point about Wikipedia being an encyclopedia, there is a cleverly hidden policy that Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Really the main concern that editors have with the article is that it makes few notability claims. Yes, it does mention that it is one of the highest rated eBooks on SmashWords -- but that's due to only 8 reviews. SmashWords is only one (small) self-publisher; it doesn't even have its own article. You need to show that the novel is notable in a larger scope.

For now, I suggest you userfy the article, either via cut-and-paste, or, after the conclusion of the AFD process, via request to the closing admin. This way you'll be able to work on fleshing out the article without having to worry about pesky editors doing deletion nominations before you've finished.

(Also, I noticed that your contributions are mostly related to Valor. Just to put it out there, and not to make any claims or accusations, I would like to point out the Wikipedia policy on conflict of interest.)

Cheers. --Mûĸĸâĸûĸâĸû (blah?) 19:11, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]