User talk:SusanEason

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Kim Meredith.
To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the help desk, via real time chat with helpers, or on the reviewer's talk page

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Kilopi (talk) 00:45, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

January 2013

Hello, SusanEason. 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 The Devil in the Deal:50 Secrets to Successful Dealmaking, you may need to consider our guidance on conflicts of interest.

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. Theroadislong (talk) 13:54, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of The Devil in the Deal:50 Secrets to Successful Dealmaking

The article The Devil in the Deal:50 Secrets to Successful Dealmaking has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

A search for references failed to find significant coverage in reliable sources to comply with notability requirements. This included web searches for news coverage, books, and journals, which can be seen from the following links:
The Devil in the Deal:50 Secrets to Successful Dealmaking – news, books, scholar
Consequently, this article is about a book that appears to lack sufficient notability.

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 {{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. Drm310 (talk) 05:59, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

February 2013

Hi Susan. I saw your latest edits to The Devil in the Deal:50 Secrets to Successful Dealmaking and wanted to address several issues with you. I have included helpful links in my comments, which appear in red and blue.

The first and most serious issue is that you have a conflict of interest (COI), because you work for the author of the book. Editors who have a business or personal relationship with the article's subject are not prohibited from editing the article, but the affiliation with the subject can raise concerns of bias and promotional intentions. Therefore, COI editors are advised not to edit the article directly, but rather suggest changes on its talk page so that other editors can review them. It is considered proper for a COI editor to disclose their affiliation with the subject on the article talk page, and on their user page.
You last edit did not include an edit summary, which is a statement that describes the changes you made. This is helpful to editors who browse the article's history. It's also considered improper to delete maintenance templates without explaining why in the edit summary, which unfortunately you did.
I saw that you provided more references, which is good. However, it appears you might have misinterpreted a few of the parameters. The "title" parameter is the title of the supporting article, not the title of the person who wrote it. The "accessdate" parameter is only applicable to online sources where the "url" paramter has been filled in.
For a magazine, I would use the {{cite journal}} template, where you can specify useful information like the edition, volume, page number(s), etc. Also, some of your magazine references are missing important details, like the article title, author and page(s). Submitting these details will assist others in verifying what's been written.
Finally, I saw you used one reference in two places. Instead of writing it out twice in full and having it appear twice in the reference list, there is a shorthand method of making multiple references to the same footnote.

I have re-tagged the article with the {{COI}} template because some of the references to printed articles need to be filled in more. When those are completed and everyone is satisfied that they are reliable sources that are independent of the subject, then that template can come off. I would also recommend that you read Wikipedia's plain and simple conflict of interest guide to familiarize yourself with some relevant policies. Let me know if you need any more assistance. Thanks. --Drm310 (talk) 18:43, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, SusanEason. You have new messages at Drm310's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--Drm310 (talk) 17:15, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback (April 3)

Hello, SusanEason. You have new messages at Drm310's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--Drm310 (talk) 14:51, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

Work Diva, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Stuartyeates (talk) 02:30, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Kim Meredith concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Kim Meredith, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 180 days. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 13:44, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your article submission Kim Meredith

Hello SusanEason. It has been over six months since you last edited your article submission, entitled Kim Meredith.

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Kim Meredith}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 17:01, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]