User talk:DrSchlagger

Hello, DrSchlagger, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as North Texas Crime Commission, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

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 Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

• Your first article
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• Biographies of living persons
• How to write a great article
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Help pages
• Tutorial

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:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Bazj (talk) 10:39, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Cyber Defense Labs Logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Steel1943 (talk) 01:53, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

When leaving comments on talk pages, could you please create a "New section" using the button on the top left instead of adding them to current sections regarding other issues as otherwise editors may be unable to see them; such as in my case. What exactly do you need help with in regard to this article? Uamaol (talk) 14:27, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Draft:Cyber Defense Labs, 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. DGG ( talk ) 03:21, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on North Texas Crime Commission, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under one of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which articles can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

• It 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. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Business 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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. DGG ( talk ) 01:07, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Wiae was:

I've removed some substantial copying from the company's website.

The draft still retains a somewhat promotional flavour, including (but not limited to) phrases like "industrial power generation and compression solutions" (see WP:SOLUTION), "pipeline integrity solutions", "leverages technological innovation from other GE businesses", "has gone on to further expand its global presence by building a strong foundation in the oil and gas industry with over a dozen acquisitions" (just say that GE Oil & Gas has acquired over a dozen oil and gas companies), "true workhorses of the industry", "help you compete in the clean fuel space", and "people believed that electricity was the way to go" (too conversational).

There is also some information that is repeated several times, like the particular markets that GE Oil & Gas works in. That can be trimmed.

As for the sources, this one is sort of lacking in content about GE Oil & Gas, and this one is an interview with someone affiliated with the subject. The company may be notable but these two sources aren't fantastic when measured against the corporate inclusion criteria. Are there any more sources out there? The WSJ and other Rigzone sources look fine to me.

Finally, almost none of the information here is sourced to a particular reference using an inline citation. While inline citations are not required after every sentence (see the rules on when they're required), it does make it difficult to verify the facts in a paragraph without any references. Thanks,

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:GE Oil & Gas and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

/wiae /tlk 14:02, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Just to clarify, you didn't add any copyrighted material to the draft; it was there since the draft's inception. Thanks, /wiae /tlk 14:03, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I'm sorry to have to bother you, but you kindly wrote some positive comments on my article Lattice delay network which was being submitted a few months ago. The article had been up for a while, but now Wikipedia editor(s) have decided it would be better merged with Lattice phase equaliser and so have redirected viewers to this site where my article is currently hidden from view. For a variety of reasons I do not wish to combine the articles in the way proposed and would like my article reinstated to what it was before. Whatever your views, could you add to the discussion at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions under the heading "Newly linked article has gone missing". If you can find the time I would be grateful Thanks D1ofBerks (talk) 14:04, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Your addition to Hillary Rodham senior thesis has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. CAPTAIN RAJU ^(✉) 20:34, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Hello, DrSchlagger. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "General Dynamics Mission Systems".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. —MRD2014 (talk) (contribs) 15:30, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello, DrSchlagger. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "North Texas Crime Commission".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. CatcherStorm ^talk 12:50, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Draft:Cyber Defense Labs is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Cyber Defense Labs until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Hello, DrSchlagger. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "Maverick Investigations".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. — O Fortuna ^{semper crescis, aut decrescis} 08:13, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello DrSchlagger,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Object pose estimation for deletion, because it appears to duplicate an existing Wikipedia article, 3D pose estimation.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.

TheDragonFire (talk) 09:58, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi, can you please slow down the Prod nominations as you have nominated about a hundred today and they all have to be checked by prod patrol and admin, thanks Atlantic306 (talk) 20:41, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

I echo Atlantic306's thoughts here. It's great to help cut down some of the cruft, but I've had to contest a few of the prods from this morning (Auguste Keufer, Bash-Aparan, Bansaha, Avenida Comandante Valòdia, Aina (novel), Noah Mann junior and Noah Mann). Also I recommend checking the revision history on some of these articles; with the two Noah Mann articles, a new editor overwrote an older, legitimate article, and we wouldn't want to delete those actual articles. It might also be courteous to leave a notification on the creator's talk page when you PROD an article. (Twinkle will do this automatically for you, which is very helpful.) Thanks, and let me know if you have any questions. /wiae /tlk 20:47, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

I'm fixing the legitimate orphans but there is so much that is un-sourced, self promotional or just irrelevant. Just because a place exists on a map, does not mean it needs a article. I'm just trying to apply the same vigor as other people. Doc Schlagger

@DrSchlagger: I appreciate that; thank you for doing your part! However, I would suggest that you try at least a web search (and preferably a search of Google News/Google Books too) before PRODding an article. For instance, an hour ago you PRODded Centurion syndrome. However, if you Google that term, you will find several academic journal articles written on the subject. To me that is a fairly clear indication that the topic is notable, and certainly that it is not an uncontroversial candidate for deletion. Thanks, /wiae /tlk 21:05, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

I was going to just add a line in the article about eye conditions, its is not significant enough for its own article, but whatever. I was just applying the same standards that get applied to anything i write. DrSchlagger (talk) 21:11, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

@DrSchlagger: I appreciate your enthusiasm but I would suggest you slow down. You just added a lead section to Bank Lofts that had nothing to do with the article. Wikipedia isn't a race; there's no prize for being first. I'm happy to help if you need any guidance. Just ask. /wiae /tlk 21:52, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi, on a related note, I suggest that you have a look at Wikipedia:Notability (geographic features), which explains the standards applied on Wikipedia for geographic features. In short, because of Wikipedia's function as a gazeteer, articles on those topics are generally kept even when sourcing is very scant. Thanks, --Arxiloxos (talk) 02:01, 19 July 2017 (UTC)