You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Okayafrica, 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 "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, then please contact the deleting administrator. Exemplo347 (talk) 04:08, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I'm Exemplo347. I noticed that you made a comment on the page User talk:Jimfbleak that didn't seem very civil. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page.
Please don't accuse other editors of Racism.Exemplo347 (talk) 00:53, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Please make sure you assume good faith with other editors. Many articles are deleted every day for promotional tone or lack of assertion of significance. Personally, I don't think the speedy deletion criteria were correctly applied; however, I think it was an innocent error and not the result of any bias on the basis of race or geography. —C.Fred (talk) 01:02, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@C.Fred: I understand that my tone could have been better and appreciate your advice. As you personally don't believe the speedy deletion criteria was correctly applied, can you reinstate the page so that I can add further sources that will cement the page as notable? The page was almost automatically marked for speedy deletion before further sources could be made. Thank you! JuliaCameron (talk) 01:08, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
First, the page was not automatically tagged; it was tagged by two human editors and deleted by a third. Second, the usual procedure is to allow the deleting admin first chance to explain the edit and undo it themselves. (Edit warring by regular editors is frowned upon, but "wheel warring" by two admins undoing each other's actions is a far more serious matter.) If it's this time tomorrow and neither the page has been reinstated nor Jimfbleak has responded, then leave me a message, and I'll go ahead and reinstate. —C.Fred (talk) 01:13, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You may not have Intended it to be a personal attack, but it could be Perceived as a personal attack. The suggestion or implication that another editor's actions is the result of bias is neither courteous or respectful. Please do your best to remain civil in future. Exemplo347 (talk) 01:19, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. Don't be so quick to assume - and accuse others of - bias in the routine actions that Wikipedia editors and Administrators perform every day. Your comments on my talk page mention the word "Racism" far too many times. Hopefully you'll modify your future actions and be as civil to others as I have been to you. Exemplo347 (talk) 01:24, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
