 | This article was nominated for deletion on 4 March 2017. The result of the discussion was keep. |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
Untitled
editI've created a stub page for Viola Wyse, the first woman to be a chief of her tribe on Vancouver Island, B.C. There's room to expand here. This page was created for the Art + Feminism event on March 4 using a link for the Women in Red. More links and citations to be added! Please contribute. Shameran81 (talk) 18:52, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
Contested deletion
editMy page was requested to be speedily deleted, however this is not, contrary to the tag, an unambiguously promotional page. I have no relation to this person. Viola Wyse was a notable figure in Canada. First woman tribal chief who negotiated political agreements on behalf of her tribe. This page is a stub and needs expansion. --Shameran81 (talk) 18:52, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Shameran81: Thanks for sharing the insight here. Please note that Wikipedia is not a soapbox to advertise events.
The reason for the article being tagged for speedy deletion is because carriers a promotional tone and content. Ex: "...Wyse was celebrated as a "visionary" leader and she was recognized for securing protocol agreements...". Note that per the guidelines provided for creation of new content, all articles must be written from a Neutral point of view.
Kindly refer through the fundamental principles for editing before adding further content on the same note.
Feel free to reach out to any in case any assistance is required. Thanks.
TopCipher (talk) 18:57, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Topcipher: Noted. Shameran81 (talk) 19:02, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Shameran81: I already declined the speedy nomination, since it wasn't the type of blatant spam that would qualify for G11 deletion. It did have a little problem with "talking up" the subject, as mentioned above, it looks like that's been fixed. The current deletion nomination will run for a week, and is on the grounds of poor sourcing. A couple of obituaries is pretty thin referencing. If you know where better source material can be found, you're welcome to point that out at the deletion discussion, and it'd probably be good for you to do so. Seraphimblade Talk to me 19:15, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Seraphimblade: Sounds good - appreciate the advice. Need to add the under construction template, it sounds like! :) Shameran81 (talk) 19:23, 4 March 2017 (UTC)