Clnbxly1867
A tag has been placed on Zojiroism requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Unforgiven24 (talk) 00:58, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
AfD nomination of Zojiroism
edit I have nominated Zojiroism, 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/Zojiroism. 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. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Editor437 (talk) 01:18, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for your note. I certainly read the page in question, and I'll tell you the reasons why I deleted it. First of all, two different editors tagged the page for deletion and two different administrators, one of whom was me, deleted it. The reasons for those actions varied, depending on the specific assessment of each individual, but collectively there were at least four different reasons for the article's deletion. The article's topic was assessed as being non-notable, and at least one editor thought it was either a hoax or untrue. In any case, regardless of those assertions, it certainly was unproven and [[WP:|univerifiable]] and that's why I deleted it -- you'll have to take up the other deletion with the other administrator who deleted its re-posting a little while later. You hadn't offered any proof that what you say is true, let alone that it is thought to be true by any reliable sources other than yourself. It is precisely because it is "not well known" and "extremely few besides its followers know of it" that it was deleted. Wikipedia is not a collection of indiscriminate information -- the topics of articles here are well-known to large segments of the public through coverage in the media, among other reasons. If you'd like to publicize your unknown religion, regardless of its merit, Wikipedia is not the place to do that. Wait until this concept gains more widespread acceptance that can be documented in independent third-party expert sources before trying to remake this article. If you have any further questions about Wikipedia policy, feel free to leave me a note. Accounting4Taste:talk 16:35, 25 August 2008 (UTC)