User talk:John williams 7

Welcome!

Hello, John williams 7, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, like Nigam arora, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for page creation, and may soon be deleted.

You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the Article Wizard.

Thank you.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other 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! Fiddle Faddle (talk) 00:57, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Nigam arora

A tag has been placed on Nigam arora 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 important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles 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. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

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 that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 00:57, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

December 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Nigam arora has been reverted.
Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline from Wikipedia. The external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. I removed the following link(s): http://heyroth.tripod.com/angela/examples/microsoftstrategy.pdf (matching the regex rule (?<!jeff560\.)tripod\.com).
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 02:43, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

February 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit that you made to the page Template:Advert/doc has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Please use the sandbox for testing any edits; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing for further information. Thank you. Ronhjones ^(Talk) 21:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, John williams 7. You have new messages at Ronhjones's talk page.
Message added 21:42, 19 February 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Ronhjones ^(Talk) 21:42, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, John williams 7. You have new messages at Ronhjones's talk page.
Message added 21:53, 19 February 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Ronhjones ^(Talk) 21:53, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback

The article still reads like an advert. It requires much more work to remove that tag. As such, I have reverted your removal until such time as the article improves sufficiently. I have let Ronhjones know. Ian Cairns (talk) 14:05, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have given the article a major overhaul to remove the advertising tone. I hope you agree that this is more neutral in tone. Ian Cairns (talk) 14:17, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of Nigam Arora

I have nominated Nigam Arora, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nigam Arora. 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.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 22:36, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a death sentence for the article, nor even close to one. It simply gives the community the spur to reach a consensus. Your course of action if you choose to try to save the article from deletion, is to find citations which meet WP:RS and to cite every sensible fact. Rhetoric will not save it, but evidence of notability and verifiability will. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 22:39, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WP:OUTING

Please stop posts like this[1] immediately. They are in violation of WP:OUTING, a key Wikipedia policy and if you make any further attempt to disclose real identity of any Wikipedia editor (other than your own), this will lead to your account being blocked from editing. Thanks, Nsk92 (talk) 13:17, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Nigam Arora

I've just read your comments on the deletion discussion, and I just want to say - I'm really sorry for the reception that you got. Much of what you say is in User:Jimbo Wales/Statement of principles and Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers. I just hope you stick around and are not scared away. StAnselm (talk) 05:22, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of Radiation monitoring in power plants

I have nominated Radiation monitoring in power plants, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Radiation monitoring in power plants. 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.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 18:31, 28 February 2010 (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 tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may 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) 23:53, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

re; your arbitration request

Hi John, I just saw your post, welcome to wikipedia and yes, this place gets stressful sometimes. Generally it's not worth sweating if an article gets deleted. Deletion is a much better outcome than having the article say something unfair about the subject, whether biased against them, which is unfair to them; or biased in their favor, which is unfair to readers expecting neutral information. We are actually trying to increase rather than decrease the amount of documentation (sourcing) required to keep articles about living people, for reasons like that.

The best way to deal with a deletion based on lack of notability is don't panic, and don't go too crazy trying to defend or improve the article during the deletion discussion. Most editors go through that experience once or twice of trying to save an article from deletion, before realizing it's not worth the stress. Just save a copy of the article on your hard drive or (if it's already deleted) ask an admin to retrieve a temporary personal copy that you can download, and let the deletion take place. Then if you want to restore the article, gather documentation as you come across it in external sources, taking as long as you want to improve the local version on your own computer, rather than frantically trying to beat the 1-week deadline of a deletion discussion and improve it on-wiki.

Once you have enough documentation to meet the requirements, you can recreate the article. If that amount of documentation isn't forthcoming, then just live with it. Wikipedia isn't a search engine and there are many subjects which it simply doesn't and won't cover. The simplest way to avoid saying something unfair about a person is to not say anything about them, which is what deletion accomplishes.

75.62.109.146 (talk) 09:11, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]