Talk:Underearners Anonymous

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Addictions and recovery Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Addictions and recovery, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of addiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Addictions and recoveryWikipedia:WikiProject Addictions and recoveryTemplate:WikiProject Addictions and recoveryaddiction and recovery articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

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

Thank you.

The article Underearners Anonymous has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done because the article, which appeared to be about a real person, individual animal, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, did not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the notability of the subject may be deleted at any time. If you can indicate why the subject is really notable, you are free to re-create the article, making sure to cite any verifiable sources.

Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and for specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for musicians, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. NawlinWiki (talk) 21:31, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Now in your userspace at User:Eweinber/Underearners Anonymous - please add the sources there before moving back to article space. Thanks, NawlinWiki (talk) 03:31, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, your revisions to the UA article seem ready to go back to mainspace. There are more recent references from Harper, USA Today, and another WSJ article... thanks, Petersam (talk) 05:55, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Underearners Anonymous article deletion

from User_talk:Smartse#Underearners_Anonymous_article_deletion

Please userfied the deleted article as above as i am unsure per deletion notice.

If you are creating a new page with different content, please continue. If you are recreating a page similar to the previously deleted page, or are unsure, please first contact the deleting administrator using the information provided below.

21:21, 10 August 2012 Smartse (talk | contribs) deleted page Underearners Anonymous (A7: Article about a company, corporation, organization, or group which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject (CSDH))

thanks Petersam (talk) 19:36, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have userfied it per your request to User:Petersam/Underearners_Anonymous. It looks very unlikely though that the organisation will pass the general notability guideline so please make sure you find some good quality sources before moving it back into mainspace. Thanks SmartSE (talk) 20:24, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for reply and guidelines Petersam (talk) 20:53, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, seems the article was speedily deleted Oct 2011 and moved to User:Eweinber/Underearners_Anonymous. the editor added references from WSJ and AOL; but did not have the article moved into mainspace. I have also found new references from Harper and USA Today and another WSJ article this year plus Steppin Out Radio interview with the founder.. Before i do more work, does it meet the guidelines now? thanks, Petersam (talk) 21:40, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for not replying sooner - I've been busy and somehow missed/forgot about your second message. I've had a quick look at the draft and it looks reasonable enough, but it could do with more secondary sources - have you checked google books and google news? I'm not sure that the header "success" is neutral, but that's not a major concern. Feel free to use the move function to move it back into mainspace. SmartSE (talk) 19:37, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]