The data came right off his web site. I've known Brian for years and the information is accurate. His long and interesting military career justify him having a page here.
Speedy deletion of Brian Klock
A tag has been placed on Brian Klock 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 a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance 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 biographies.
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 (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on
the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.
Dougie WII (
talk)
17:59, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Another editor has added the "{{ prod}}" template to the article Brian Klock, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{ prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot ( talk) 18:14, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
AfD nomination of Brian Klock
I have nominated Brian Klock, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brian Klock. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Dougie WII ( talk) 00:38, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Speedy deletion of Brian Klock
A tag has been placed on Brian Klock requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.
If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must include on the external site the statement "I, (name), am the author of this article, (article name), and I release its content under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 and later." You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.
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 (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on
the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.
Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (
Broken clamshells•
Otter chirps)
01:14, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the note! I apologize if anyone (including me) made you feel unwelcome. Please understand that (on some days at least) over a thousand articles are contributed which must be deleted, so the process is fairly streamlined--which can seem impersonal and cold. How to improve this process without impeding it is a perennial topic for discussion. In this case, I deleted the article as a copyright violation, which qualifies under the criteria for speedy deletion (General criteria 12). Since Wikipedia is widely mirrored across the web (meaning we loose control of the content, but is still cited back to Wikipedia), and copyrighted material can cause legal headaches, this sort of issue is deleted especially swiftly. The other issues under discussion are notability, the specific guideline of which here is WP:BIO and WP:BLP, and conflicts of interest. Notability guidelines exist since a fair amount of volunteer effort (all Wikipedia is volunteer) must be expended to check facts, monitor for vandalism, etc. the pages which are created. Additionally, a subject must have been covered in reliable, independent sources to a sufficient degree that the content can be verified. Notability is not a reflection of the individuals worth or contribution to society.
The last concern that you should be aware of is the conflict of interest guideline. Since Wikipedia strives to not only be a good source of information but a neutral source as well, content which was written as part of a press release, advertisement, promotional website, etc. are (even when copyright permissions can be obtained) not usually usable for the project. We even recommend people closely related to a topic refrain from editing about that, since they have the appearance of a bias. Of course, how close is too close is usually left to the conscience of the individual (although there have been some cases where companies or people have been reported the media attempting to slant their Wikipedia pages, see this for instance.)
There's a lot of policies and procedures to take in here, I know. But do feel free to let me know if you have any other questions. -- TeaDrinker ( talk) 07:02, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi there. 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. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the
Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. You may also click on the signature button
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name 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!
Giles Bennett (
Talk,
Contribs)
19:21, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
The data came right off his web site. I've known Brian for years and the information is accurate. His long and interesting military career justify him having a page here.
Speedy deletion of Brian Klock
A tag has been placed on Brian Klock 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 a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance 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 biographies.
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 (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on
the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.
Dougie WII (
talk)
17:59, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Another editor has added the "{{ prod}}" template to the article Brian Klock, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{ prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot ( talk) 18:14, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
AfD nomination of Brian Klock
I have nominated Brian Klock, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brian Klock. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Dougie WII ( talk) 00:38, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Speedy deletion of Brian Klock
A tag has been placed on Brian Klock requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.
If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must include on the external site the statement "I, (name), am the author of this article, (article name), and I release its content under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 and later." You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.
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 (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on
the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.
Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (
Broken clamshells•
Otter chirps)
01:14, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the note! I apologize if anyone (including me) made you feel unwelcome. Please understand that (on some days at least) over a thousand articles are contributed which must be deleted, so the process is fairly streamlined--which can seem impersonal and cold. How to improve this process without impeding it is a perennial topic for discussion. In this case, I deleted the article as a copyright violation, which qualifies under the criteria for speedy deletion (General criteria 12). Since Wikipedia is widely mirrored across the web (meaning we loose control of the content, but is still cited back to Wikipedia), and copyrighted material can cause legal headaches, this sort of issue is deleted especially swiftly. The other issues under discussion are notability, the specific guideline of which here is WP:BIO and WP:BLP, and conflicts of interest. Notability guidelines exist since a fair amount of volunteer effort (all Wikipedia is volunteer) must be expended to check facts, monitor for vandalism, etc. the pages which are created. Additionally, a subject must have been covered in reliable, independent sources to a sufficient degree that the content can be verified. Notability is not a reflection of the individuals worth or contribution to society.
The last concern that you should be aware of is the conflict of interest guideline. Since Wikipedia strives to not only be a good source of information but a neutral source as well, content which was written as part of a press release, advertisement, promotional website, etc. are (even when copyright permissions can be obtained) not usually usable for the project. We even recommend people closely related to a topic refrain from editing about that, since they have the appearance of a bias. Of course, how close is too close is usually left to the conscience of the individual (although there have been some cases where companies or people have been reported the media attempting to slant their Wikipedia pages, see this for instance.)
There's a lot of policies and procedures to take in here, I know. But do feel free to let me know if you have any other questions. -- TeaDrinker ( talk) 07:02, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi there. 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. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the
Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. You may also click on the signature button
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name 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!
Giles Bennett (
Talk,
Contribs)
19:21, 2 January 2008 (UTC)