User talk:Zimiti

AfD nomination of Zimiti

I have nominated Zimiti, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zimiti. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 15:40, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reply on deletion

Welcome!

Hello, Zimiti, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!

Hello Zimiti!

Generally AFD's are closed within 5 or 6 days (at limit 7 if no consensus) of discussion if there is enough discussion or that there is a consensus or that the article is just plain terrible that is deleted very quickly. If not generally they are re-listed for more discussion if there is little or no discussion. In this case, there is sufficient discussion and consensus after the normal 5 or 6 days for a deletion - this is to prevent any backlogs, where several AFDs are waiting to be closed- generally there is a backlog when there are still AFD's open and/or not-relisted after 6 or 7 days. And after you've posted your message and the reply by User:Whpq, 30 hours passed and nothing happened suggesting that an outcome was made and that deletion was the clear option there.

Even though you would have informed others, if they have made little or no edits outside a topic/page, little consideration/weight will be given to those votes (especially if they are weak arguments only serving to influence the outcome) and also this may be considered as meatpuppets especially if it is recruiting non-Wikipedia users without even contributed before (from a school, organization, friends, etc)and IPs (IP adresses also are often given less weight to the outcome). WP:MEATPUPPET explains that: "While Wikipedia assumes good faith especially for new users, the recruitment of new editors to Wikipedia for the purpose of influencing a survey, performing reverts, or otherwise attempting to give the appearance of consensus is strongly discouraged". This is not a majority vote and if those editors have not contributed outside of the AFD, it will not influence the outcome or should I say the final decision by the closing administrator. You can inform in a neutral way some members (more recommended members that have contributed elsewhere in multiple pages outside one topic/page - thus more legitimate users) to participate in a deletion discussion. Sending messages to users or influencing them to vote a particular way is violating WP:CANVASS.

You can ask for a deletion review (although there was a clear consensus here). If you want this article on this site. Please visit the guide/tutorial links I've left above for more details on various aspects of the encyclopedia and ways/tips to build up a good article especially the first one considering that building its first article is often a challenge considering one is less familiar with the various policies, etc. I've been through this before.

I could also direct to Wikipedia:Notability on notability guidelines as well as it seems that it did not meet the guidelines there, not meeting WP:CORP. Also, since I've seen that If a good article is built, while meeting notability guidelines, that does contain as less as possible of promotion/spam, it can go to Wikipedia:Deletion review to see if it can pass/return as an individual article. Please also read WP:COI as that issue was also raised since your username matched the name of the article. The policy states: Adding material that appears to promote the interests or visibility of an article's author, its author's family members, employer, associates, or their business or personal interests, places the author in a conflict of interest. When editors write to promote their own interests, their contributions often show a characteristic lack of connection to anything the general reader might want to consult as a reference. If you do write an article on area in which you are personally involved, be sure to write in a neutral tone and cite reliable, third-party published sources, and beware of unintentional bias. Neutral point of view is one of Wikipedia's five pillars. If you need a change to your username to avoid the issue you can visit Wikipedia:Changing username and follow the steps. Someone from the Wikimedia (I believe it is from there) would do the operation.

If needed, you can request that I can send a copy of the deleted article to a userpage of yours in order to do the improvements necessary so that it can possibly return as an article via Deletion review. Thanks! I know it is long but since you are a new user, I've thought to introduced to you several aspects of the encyclopedia--JForget 19:07, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]