User talk:Echo1111

Welcome!

Hello, Echo1111, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions.

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 {{help me}} 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!--Biografer (talk) 05:20, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Signumology[edit]

The article Signumology has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unsourced definition of a word, Googling shows this to be a pretty limited concept mainly written about by a single article. Same issue with related article Potestatemology with sources from that one author. This would need to be fundamentally re-written to be an article and not just a definition. This also applies to Scriptophile with even less sourcing there.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. JamesG5 (talk) 06:52, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Potestatemology[edit]

The article Potestatemology has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unsourced definition of a word, Googling shows this to be a pretty limited concept mainly written about by a single article. Same issue with related article Signumology with sources from that one author. This would need to be fundamentally re-written to be an article and not just a definition. This also applies to Scriptophile with even less sourcing there.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. JamesG5 (talk) 06:53, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Scriptophile[edit]

The article Scriptophile has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Simply a definition of a word. More suitable for Wikitionary than Wikipedia unless it can be dramatically expanded. While contributor's other 2 submissions are definitions they're topics, this doesn't appear to be something that could be easily expanded.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. JamesG5 (talk) 06:53, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Some advice :-)[edit]

Hi Echo. Welcome. Please do not take my deletion proposals as an attack. First of all, those are all delayed processes, and they're suggestions, not mandatory. You have a few days to improve the submissions and show that they can belong here on Wikipedia. As a general piece of advice tho, pages created with no sources (see WP:RS and WP:CITE for some help there) that are also very short and in the case of your one entry basically just a definition aren't likely to last. Other editors probably won't come forward to fix them and you won't get unlimited time to redo them. A MUCH better way to start would be to go thru the Articles for Creation process at WP:AfC or drafts (see WP:DRAFT) to take the time to build a full article before you share it. Please don't get discouraged about being here! Best of luck with your articles. JamesG5 (talk) 06:58, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Echo1111 (talk) 07:39, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Scriptophile for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Scriptophile 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/Scriptophile until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-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 notice from the top of the article. Pichpich (talk) 19:25, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]