User talk:Libs

Welcome!

Hello, Libs, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Doc ^ask? 17:01, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the link on the Ming page. We only insert external links that provide the reader with additional information on the subject. No promotional linkes. The link you inserted was in fact to a site that is not yet up. If you are connected with the webite, do not insert the link as that might be considered promotional spamming. Suggest it on the talk page, and, if it is felt appropriate, someone else can insert it. --Doc ^ask? 17:03, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sandy Walkington

A tag has been placed on Sandy Walkington, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

This person is not notable as he is merely a proposed candidate in a proposed election. Incidentally, there can be no candidates for any UK constituencies at present as no election has been called. The correct term which should have been used, if this person was notable, is "Prospective Parliamentary Candidate"

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet very basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page 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.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. B1atv 11:35, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

April Pond

A tag has been placed on April Pond, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

This person is not notable as he is merely a proposed candidate in a proposed election. Incidentally, there can be no candidates for any UK constituencies at present as no election has been called. The correct term which should have been used, if this person was notable, is "Prospective Parliamentary Candidate"

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet very basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page 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.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. B1atv 11:43, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral Point of View

All articles on Wikipedia must comply with the neutral point of view. You are adding pages for prospective parliamentary candidates for the Liberal Democrats. Your user name suggests that you may be connected in some way with these people or at least not be approaching this from a neutral point of view. This is to be avoided generally. In addition, you need to be aware that to describe "prospective candidates" as "candidates" has legal consequences for the candidates under the Representation of the People Act - the moment somebody becomes a "candidate" the calculator starts on their permitted election expenses. The fact that such a "candidacy" was announced on Wikipedia could lead a loosing candidate to claim that a proportion of Wikipedia's costs be attributed to their election expenses. Wikipedia is not a tool to promote election candidates so I suggest that you stop listing all prospective candidates as you are doing. B1atv 11:43, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Sandy Walkington

In the Sandy Walkington talk page you question my motives. Please do not do that. I have not questioned yours. I feel that articles about would-be candidates in would-be elections are not suitable for WP and in contrary to WPs policies. You may disagree with this and that's fine. The administrators who review my request may also disagree with me and that's fine too. But please don't take it personally and please don't resort to questioning my motives or anything other than whether or not the article is compliant with WP policies. B1atv 12:17, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but though you ask not to question your motives, I think that questioning them is justified. You admit yourself, that you are a yourslef a PPC. That means also, that you are probably of a member of some party. Would you suggest an article about a PPC of your own party for deletion? I think not. I wouldn't suggest any article about a PPC of any party in the future election for deletion, though it is true that I wouldn't create one about a PPC of competing party. Still there are such articles, for instance about Wilfred Emmanuel-Jones, but that one you haven't nominated. I wonder why? Do you really think that all the PPCs of your own party meet the WP notability test, but the PPCs of other parties don't? --Libs 12:29, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You have asked the same question on my talk page and I have answered there. B1atv 12:43, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Warning: Assume good faith

Libs, do not question the motives or the integrity of fellow Wikipedians. Argue your case, without discussing the personal backgrounds of other Wikipedians. Assume good faith. A ecis^Brievenbus 13:03, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unless there is strong evidence to the contrary... The fellow editor in question admited to have been a PPC himself. I think that it would be more clear for all, if a PPC wouldn't suggest articles about PPCs of competing parties for deletion, but would leave it for others, who are less involved. Don't you? --Libs 13:10, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Libs, don't try to argue this. This is not negotiable. If you believe that Sandy Walkington‎ and April Pond‎ are notable enough for Wikipedia, please do make your case. But don't try to smear B1atv‎ (talk · contribs). A ecis^Brievenbus 13:14, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Charles Anglin

An editor has nominated Charles Anglin, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charles Anglin and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 09:59, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]