User talk:Manchesterfire
James Pearson (Politician) This page was deleted in January due to lack of notoriety. It has been updated after recent events. If you feel there is some other problem please let me know. Tony (Manchesterfire (talk) 15:35, 18 April 2010 (UTC))
The article James Pearson (Politician) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- Non-notable per WP:POLITICIAN, little significant coverage online from WP:Reliable sources, apparent WP:Conflict of interest by article's creator.
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. MuffledThud (talk) 09:00, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
Articles for deletion nomination of James Pearson (Politician)[edit]
I have nominated James Pearson (Politician), 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/James Pearson (Politician). 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. MuffledThud (talk) 14:10, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Speedy deletion nomination of James Pearson (Politician)[edit]
A tag has been placed on James Pearson (Politician), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.
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. BelovedFreak 16:00, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
James Pearson (Politician)[edit]
Hi Manchesterfire. What do you need help with? In general, an AFD decision is considered binding for future re-creations of an article unless new material or evidence is provided that overrides the original decision - fresh evidence of notability, major expansion of content etc.. Deletion discussions have generally found local councillors to fail the notability criteria at WP:POLITICIAN, so you need to show that James Pearson meets the General Notability Guidelines - in particular, you would need to show that he has received significant coverage in reliable, independent sources.
I apologise for the over-bureaucratic nature of Wikipedia's deletion process. Let me know if you have any other questions. Best wishes, Rje (talk) 13:58, 23 April 2010 (UTC)