User talk:Vancitystars

Hello, Vancitystars, 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:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk 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 {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! BO; talk 08:27, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Michael cheng photo 2013.jpg, which you've attributed to Stephanie Lake Photography. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:10, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Vancitystars, thanks for the note. I suppose my hesitation in this case is that I personally have some concerns about the notability of the subject. I helped fix a few things with the AFD so I won't contribute there, but if I did I'd possibly support deletion at the moment. For now, it looks like it's probably WP:TOOSOON for an article about this particular person. I can see you've put a lot of energy into adding sources, but a large number of sources is only valuable (in terms of notability) if those sources provide significant coverage of the subject. Some of the sources you have included don't mention him at all, some are obviously promotional - pushed by his university, some are passing mentions about him winning a non-notable local award. My advice? Remove most of those and then consider what you're left with. There are a couple there that I think might work well and you can probably use them to make a case. But right now, it's so unclear which are useful and which are not that most people will struggle to work out if he is notable or not. As for new editors showing up to target the article, that's not new - the key is just to play by the rules and don't get angry about it. You should also have a read of some of the policies linked in the welcome message above. Those might have been helpful before the article was created but many are still useful after the fact. Stalwart111 09:26, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Cheng (entrepreneur), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to 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. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

APerson241 (talk) 12:17, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Michael Cheng (entrepreneur), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

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 "Click here to 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, you can place a request here. Stalwart111 18:30, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your article was deleted at AFD by consensus - you can't simply recreate it because you disagree with the result. The proper path is via Deletion Review. As above, I have tagged it for speedy deletion. Stalwart111 18:39, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On the article itself, you need to understand that it wasn't deleted because it was "poorly written" because that's a WP:FIXTHEPROBLEM problem. If an article goes to AFD and it is determined that the subject is notable but the article is badly written, it will more than likely be kept and editors will be encouraged the edit the article and make improvements. Very rarely, when an article is "beyond saving" it is deleted in order to allow for complete re-writing. Where that is the case you'll see people suggesting WP:TNT throughout the discussion. In this case, consensus determined that the subject (Michael Cheng) was not notable.

You need to have a look at the arguments made during that discussion and work out what can be done to address them. But you also need to be aware that DRV is not AFD, Round 2. DRV is about asking for permission to recreate a deleted page or to challenge the technical validity of a closure and deletion. Trust me when I tell you there was nothing wrong the latter in that discussion - consensus seemed very clear. To be allowed to recreate the article, you will need to demonstrate that new and better sources have become available since the deletion discussion or that there were sources not considered during that discussion that have since come to light. It's up to you but I would suggest that going to DRV immediately after an AFD probably won't end well for you. Best to leave it for a couple of months (at least) and use that time to collect as many good sources as you can. Then approach DRV for permission to recreate. Stalwart111 04:25, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, editors certainly had an issue with promotion and bias. The First AFD was started because another editor thought there was "very little content that demonstrates notability". That discussion has only two participants and was withdrawn at the discretion of the nominator. The Second AFD was started on basically the same grounds, though other editors had an opportunity to comment. Those editors did point to concerns about bias but they also had concerns about notability (the more serious of the two around here). I think people would be willing to give you another go at it (via DRV) but I think you would also need to do some work to convince people you are here to build an encyclopaedia rather than just to promote this individual (see WP:NOTHERE). You seem to have joined in December but all of your edits so far relate to your attempt to publish an article about this one person. As a result, you seem to be struggling with what is required when writing a biography of a living person. Is there a particular reason you are interested in this guy only? Having broader editing history will convince people you aren't this guy's PR agent or even this guy himself. There are plenty of very notable people who don't have articles yet. Perhaps try writing one of those before trying on one of the tougher, more marginal, ones. Stalwart111 07:30, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Cheng (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Magedq (talk) 07:58, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Michael-Cheng.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{permission pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. Here is a list of your uploads. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 14:43, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]