User talk:Lewis Cropley

Hello, Lewis Cropley. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, Arkhitekton, for deletion because I don't think it meets our criteria for inclusion. If you don't want the article deleted:

1. edit the page
2. remove the text that looks like this: {{proposed deletion/dated...}}
3. save the page

Also, be sure to explain why you think the article should be kept in your edit summary or on the article's talk page. If you don't do so, it may be deleted later anyway.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. {_C  A S U K I T E  ^T} 01:24, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

hi thanks for your message, are you sure? why? ive seen much worse, I am not an editing expert I am waiting for someone experienced to add and reconfigure, give it some time and we'll chat in a few months, an encyclopedia does not have to be an award winning essay every time, I think you are ommitting valuable data and need to keep up to date, I wouldn't donate to Wikipedia if obvious articles were constantly deleted, I'd buy a book encyclopedia instead.

Reliable etymological and legal references supplied, no "trolling please", theres no need to delete just because you don't like accuracy or builders, fell free to add what you think is accurate and please cite your references and evidence. Please be objective, there's nothing personally intended about historiography.

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Arkhitekton 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/Arkhitekton until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. ELEKHH^T 02:26, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Lewis Cropley! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Ryan Vesey (I'm a Teahouse host) Visit the Teahouse This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 20:40, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add multiple comments in Articles for Deletion discussions to overbalance the sides into your favour. George8211^{what did I do wrong now?} 19:55, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just curious - why did you remove the notability tag on Arkhitekton magazine? George8211^{what did I do wrong now?} 19:58, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

hi yes, is that ok? im new to this, did you put it there, why? just wondering.

Yes, I put it there. Don't worry about being new - we've all been new at some stage. (I've been here for less than a year.) What notability means is if a subject has enough coverage to have an article on Wikipedia. If you want to ask any more questions, then you can visit the Teahouse. George8211^{what did I do wrong now?} 20:05, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ok thanks

No worries. The Cheatsheat. George8211^{what did I do wrong now?} 20:52, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Lewis Cropley. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Arkhitekton Magazine, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

• Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
• Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
• Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
• Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. This is noting that this magazine's web presence is at http://lewiscropley.wix.com/arkhitektonmagazine AllyD (talk) 21:07, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

No evidence that this new magazine meets the notability criteria.

While all constructive 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 {{proposed deletion/dated}} 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 {{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. AllyD (talk) 21:09, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, Arkhitekton magazine. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – Arkhitekton Magazine. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Arkhitekton Magazine – you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. AllyD (talk) 21:37, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add soapboxing, promotional or advertising material to Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. SmartSE (talk) 13:16, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Arkhitekton magazine, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 14:56, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Arkhitekton Magazine 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 web content, 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 read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 15:07, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for advertising or self-promoting in violation of the conflict of interest and notability guidelines. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.  SmartSE (talk) 15:11, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Lewis Cropley (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

content discrimination Lewis Cropley (talk) 21:37, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Yes, Wikipedia does not publish content indiscriminately, but has clearly defined rules about what content is needed. Please re-read the warnings that were placed on this page before your block, and the rules they link to. Please, if you decide to request unblock again, make sure your request clearly describes the rule or rules that you broke, and your plan for editing differently in the future. FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:43, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.