User talk:Alanhopking

Welcome!

Hello, Alanhopking, 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 Esoteric Healing, 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! Eeekster (talk) 02:32, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Esoteric Healing

A tag has been placed on Esoteric Healing, 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 an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information. 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. Eeekster (talk) 02:32, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion

Try looking in Wikipedia:Deletion policy. An administrator can possibly supply you a copy of the page. Clovis Sangrail (talk) 13:31, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Esoteric healing

A tag has been placed on Esoteric healing, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent. If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this.

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. Bihco (talk) 19:16, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Copy of the deleted material

I have examined the current version of the above-captioned page and I think what you are asking for is an older version to be returned to you. I have retrieved the most recent iteration of the deleted material and will place it into what's called a "sandbox" page, where you can work on it with slightly less urgency, found at User:Alanhopking/Sandbox. (Just click on the link to get to the page.) I should say that I think the contents of the article are likely to meet with a great deal of resistance and I strongly urge you to find out what the relevant policies are and meet their requirements. You can find a number of pointers to basic instructional articles in the material above; you might start with this page. Based on what I see, I think you might also benefit from an examination and understanding of this policy; that is, if you intend to suggest that "Esoteric healing" provides any tangible health benefits. Best of luck with your future contributions. Accounting4Taste:talk 21:23, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Since 22 of the 23 citations in the deleted material are to your own work, I suggest also that you have a look at our conflict of interest policy and the material on advertising; you seem to be in danger of infringing both of them. Accounting4Taste:talk 21:25, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have reworked the material and submit it to you for approval before launching. I can's see why there should be resistance to this information. All it's doing is stating what esoteric healing is and what esoteric healers do. This is of interest to readers who know nothing about esoteric healing. After all you have a page on spiritual healing (to which I refer), to the soul (to which I refer), and many other scientifically unproven pages and religious dogmas that are plainly absurd, but are believed in by many, so why not esoteric healing that is a little less absurd and little closer to being scientific? I look forward to your feedback. AlanAlanhopking (talk) 23:54, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have again worked through this article so that it conforms with wiki's neutrality requirement. Please reassess and consider removing the tag referring to dispute etc, thanks. Alanhopking (talk) 23:54, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]