This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Sir John A Macdonald Junior High School article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article was nominated for deletion on 23 December 2007. The result of the discussion was No consensus. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I recently encountered this article while performing either New Page Patrol, Recent changes patrol, or Counter-Vandalism Unit activities, and in my opinion as a Wikipedia editor, it either lacks sufficient Attribution that it satisfies the notability criteria for Organizations and companies, or it may violate the Conflict of interest guideline, or perhaps it reads like blatant Vanispmcruftisment.
Wikipedia articles must be based on reliable sources to verify any claims of Notability … without them, an article is just original research, which is prohibited by official policy. Even though the lack of reliable source attribution in an article is not grounds for deletion in itself, an article with absolutely no sources (or only links to unreliable ones like MySpace, Google, and Amazon.com) raises a flag for some editors that such attributable sources may not, in fact, exist.
The point is that I plan to tag this article with either a {{
prod}}
that explains my reasons why I believe that it should be deleted, or else a {{
db-inc}}
tag for
speedy deletion (
CSD A7).
I have created this initial entry on the article's Discussion page in the hope that Administrators and other editors, including the author, 198.53.155.80 ( talk · contribs), will also comment on their opinions and actions here ... please respond on this Discussion page, instead of on my Talk page, in order to avoid fragmenting the conversation.
Flag it, then tag it, THEN frag it!
{{
prod}}
, or (b) listing it on
Articles for Deletion; either alternative gives the author an opportunity to add
reliable sources for
verifying their assertion(s) of
notability, and if no improvements have been made in the five days provided by the
proposed deletion tag, then no further
consensus is needed for deletion.I think we can all agree that Haste is the Dark Side of the proposed and speedy deletion processes, and these draft protocols are designed to "soften the blows" of the "iron fist in the velvet glove" ... for all of the parties involved. — 72.75.79.128 05:21, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Sir John A Macdonald Junior High School article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article was nominated for deletion on 23 December 2007. The result of the discussion was No consensus. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I recently encountered this article while performing either New Page Patrol, Recent changes patrol, or Counter-Vandalism Unit activities, and in my opinion as a Wikipedia editor, it either lacks sufficient Attribution that it satisfies the notability criteria for Organizations and companies, or it may violate the Conflict of interest guideline, or perhaps it reads like blatant Vanispmcruftisment.
Wikipedia articles must be based on reliable sources to verify any claims of Notability … without them, an article is just original research, which is prohibited by official policy. Even though the lack of reliable source attribution in an article is not grounds for deletion in itself, an article with absolutely no sources (or only links to unreliable ones like MySpace, Google, and Amazon.com) raises a flag for some editors that such attributable sources may not, in fact, exist.
The point is that I plan to tag this article with either a {{
prod}}
that explains my reasons why I believe that it should be deleted, or else a {{
db-inc}}
tag for
speedy deletion (
CSD A7).
I have created this initial entry on the article's Discussion page in the hope that Administrators and other editors, including the author, 198.53.155.80 ( talk · contribs), will also comment on their opinions and actions here ... please respond on this Discussion page, instead of on my Talk page, in order to avoid fragmenting the conversation.
Flag it, then tag it, THEN frag it!
{{
prod}}
, or (b) listing it on
Articles for Deletion; either alternative gives the author an opportunity to add
reliable sources for
verifying their assertion(s) of
notability, and if no improvements have been made in the five days provided by the
proposed deletion tag, then no further
consensus is needed for deletion.I think we can all agree that Haste is the Dark Side of the proposed and speedy deletion processes, and these draft protocols are designed to "soften the blows" of the "iron fist in the velvet glove" ... for all of the parties involved. — 72.75.79.128 05:21, 3 November 2007 (UTC)