User talk:LheaJLove

Welcome!

Hello, LheaJLove, 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 on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 22:10, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Black existentialism[edit]

A tag has been placed on Black existentialism, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the article and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 22:10, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Cave Canem Workshop[edit]

I have nominated Cave Canem Workshop, an article you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cave Canem Workshop. 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. Brougham96 (talk) 03:05, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete tags[edit]

Please do not remove speedy delete tags from articles that you authored. It is against Wikipedia policy. If you disagree with the deletion, please add {{hangon}} to the page, underneath the deletion tag, and explain your reasoning for keeping the artcle on the article's discuusion page. Thank you. -Brougham96 (talk) 03:16, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Black Nobel Prize laureates[edit]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Black Nobel Prize laureates, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Truthanado (talk) 02:14, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Black Nobel Prize laureates[edit]

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Black Nobel Prize laureates. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Black Nobel Prize laureates. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:15, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs[edit]

Hello LheaJLove! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 943 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

Charles Gilchrist Adam - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 18:27, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

September 2011[edit]

Hello LheaJLove. If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Literarily, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

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 following the 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. Crusio (talk) 10:16, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Literarily[edit]

The article Literarily has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

New magazine, not a single item published yet, no independent sources. Article creation vastly premature. Does not meet WP:GNG.

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. Crusio (talk) 10:19, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Literarily for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Literarily 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:Articles for deletion/Literarily 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 good 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 template from the top of the article. Crusio (talk) 13:53, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you. Crusio (talk) 13:59, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Drmies (talk) 14:36, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your account has been unblocked--it had been blocked because of a suspicion that recent editing activity suggested someone might have gotten access to your log-in information. Please see the discussion here, Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Suspicious_edits. It was decided, after a perusal of various links, that this was probably not the case; my apologies if my block interrupted your activities, but I did not want to take any chances. However, let me urge you, please, to not add inappropriate external links to articles--it appeared to be spamming. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 01:40, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deletions[edit]

Hi, you can sign your comments automatically using four tildes ~~~~. Please add your messages to the bottom of the talk page, or they may be overlooked. While I understand that you may have a particular interest in African-American issues, Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, and as such has certain criteria which articles must meet, whether they involve African-Americans, Muslims, Christians, Republicans or whatever. You should not expect the criteria to be lower (or for that matter higher) for any racial, religious or political group. You can write about anything that satisfies the following criteria.

You must provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that your subject meets the notability guidelines.
Articles must be neutral, encyclopaedic and not promotional in tone.
The article must be in your own words. Copyrighted text is not allowed in Wikipedia, as outlined in this policy. That applies even to pages created by you or your organisation, unless they state clearly that the text is public domain. There are ways to donate copyrighted text to Wikipedia, as described here; please note that simply asserting on the talk page that you are the owner of the copyright isn't sufficient.
You have an obvious conflict of interest when it comes to editing articles about this subject. Thank you for declaring your interest. If, after reading the information about notability linked above, you still believe that your articles are notable enough for a Wikipedia article (and that there is significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources), you could, if you wish, post a request at Wikipedia:Requested articles for the article to be created. See also Wikipedia:Best practices for editors with conflicts of interest.
You may be right that black people may be interested in your articles, but this is not the appropriate forum to promulgate material that can not be backed up by proper sources.
If you think that I am not acting impartially, you are welcome to browse my deletions.

I hope this helps, and that you can see your way to writing a properly referenced article meeting the notability criteria. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:39, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your page, Literarily:Erotic[edit]

Hey, LheaJLove, I wanted to talk to you about the page you created. First of all, I'm sorry that you're getting frustrated, but the article still isn't appropriate for Wikipedia. The thing is that, as Jimfbleak explains above, Wikipedia has several criteria for inclusion that it calls notability. In a nutshell, notability at its most basic means that a subject must have been significantly covered in multiple, independent, reliable sources to have an article in Wikipedia.

I'm afraid that the article that you wrote makes no assertions of notability, or even of any specific significance of the website, which is why my first instinct was to nmark it for deletion. When I thought about it, I figured that it might be better to save the content of the article so that you can keep working on it. Therefore, instead of deleting it, I've moved it to this location: User:LheaJLove/Literarily:Erotic. It's now in your userspace; it's not really considered a "real" article, and it won't show up on any searches or links in Wikipedia. This way, it won't be deleted while you work on it. Once you feel that you're done, you can try submitting it to Articles for creation, where it will be reviewed for possible inclusion as a real article. I should tell you, though, that I don't think you'll be able to get it up to that standard, as I did a quick search for reliable sources and came up with nothing. I just don't think that this website is notable enough for an article. But you're welcome to try, if you think you can demonstrate notability. Just make sure that, if you do, you try very hard to find third-party reliable sources that specifically talk about the website; you'll need several of those to be able to demonstrate notability.

Finally, let me just say this: don't be discouraged! Wikipedia is tough to master, but there is a reason. If you need help, you can ask me at my talk page, or you can try asking at the Teahouse, which is a place for anyone to get answers to any questions they have about Wikipedia. Thanks, and good luck! Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 15:59, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you recreated it. I'm sorry, but it's not acceptable as is, so I'm going to have to mark it for deletion. If you want to keep working on it, you can, at User:LheaJLove/Literarily:Erotic, but it is not even close to acceptable at the moment. Thanks, Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 16:07, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits[edit]

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 16:08, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:41, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (WFF 'N PROOF) has been reviewed![edit]

Thanks for creating WFF 'N PROOF, LheaJLove!

Wikipedia editor Atsme just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Please improve WFF'N PROOF by citing the information you provided in the article.

To reply, leave a comment on Atsme's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

^{Atsme📞📧} 15:08, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Hello, LheaJLove. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message[edit]

Hello, LheaJLove. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of List of black Nobel laureates for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of black Nobel laureates 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:Articles for deletion/List of black Nobel laureates until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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.

RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 00:33, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]