Evanmayo

Your submission at Articles for creation

Your nomination at Articles for Creation was a success, and the article was created.

• The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see what needs to be done to bring it to the next level.
• Please continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request.
• If you would to help us improve this process, please consider

Thank you for helping Wikipedia!
I would reccommend expanding it, addind more refernces which show it's importance and why it should be kept. Thanks! ~ QwerpQwertus ·_Talk_·(Talkback Me)· 05:00, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Jumbleme (digital encryption service)

The article Jumbleme (digital encryption service) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No assertion of notability; press releases as sources; other than further press releases, I could only find a single blog mention of the site.

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 {{dated prod}} 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 {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Electrified Fooling Machine (talk) 06:13, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Hello, Evanmayo. You have new messages at WP:REFUND.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

JohnCD (talk) 21:13, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Please do add those sources you stated now exist to the article. As I can not find anything new, and as the article asserts no notability, my worry is not resolved. I will raise a community deletion discussion in a week or so if the article is not improved. Let me know if I can be of any help, however. Electrified Fooling Machine (talk) 17:58, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

December 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Jumbleme (digital encryption service) has been reverted.
Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline from Wikipedia. The external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. I removed the following link(s): http://healthcarewealthcare.wordpress.com/2010/04/26/invented-by-a-doctor-free-new-software-offers-protection-for-medical-professionals/.
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 21:25, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Observations on sources

Hi. I make the following observations:

• http://lawpracticestrategy.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/Revised-Web-Management-2.0.pdf is not a source for anything. It contains nothing more relevant than a hyperlink to the Jumbleme website.
• http://www.gettingemaildelivered.com/customer-showcase-jumblemecom is not unaffiliated with the subject: Jumbleme is a customer, and that is the only reason why the blog post exists (in the Customer Showcase section, no less).
• http://technews.tmcnet.com/data-voice-solutions/topics/security/articles/83369-free-new-software-secure-e-mails-protect-medical.htm is interesting. At first it looked like a reliable source to me, but on further examination, it is a not-so-subtle rehash of the PRNewswire release. For example,

PRNewswire : "JumbleMe provides a number of features to ensure the confidentiality of e-mails. It allows medical professionals to encrypt e-mail via a password. Only the intended recipient can read the message. JumbleMe offers numerous enhanced features, including one that limits the number of times an e-mail can be read and another that sets an expiration date - when the e-mail disappears, forever. JumbleMe meets all HIPAA and HITECH Act requirements so that e-mails - and the medical professionals who send them - are protected."

tmcnet.com: "A number of features are provided by JumbleMe to ensure the confidentiality of e-mails. Medical professionals are able to encrypt e-mail via a password, with only the intended recipient able to read the message. The enhanced features of JumbleMe include setting a limit on the number of times e-mail can be read and ability to set an expiration date. All HIPAA and HITECH Act requirements are met by JumbleMe so that e-mails and the medical professionals who send them are protected."

I'm not sure what to think of this. I will sleep on it.

• http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/217469 is fine, i think. On its own it is not enough, given the briefness. It may boil down to what the view of the community is on the tmcnet piece, if nothing more is forthcoming. Electrified Fooling Machine (talk) 01:46, 19 December 2010 (UTC)