GatorHalcon

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Biologix Hair Sciences Ltd..
• To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the help desk, via real time chat with helpers, or on the

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Excirial ^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 22:02, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia! Need a hand?

Hello! GatorHalcon, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about why your article submission was declined please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Sarah (talk) 18:48, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

Follicle Nutrient Deficiency Syndrome (FNDS), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as C-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 are more than welcome to continue submitting work to Articles for Creation.

• 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 .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Mdann52 (talk) 16:47, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Anthony Wile.
• To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the help desk, via real time chat with helpers, or on the

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! avs5221^{(talk|contrib)} 15:06, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Anthony Wile.
• To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the help desk, via real time chat with helpers, or on the

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Excirial ^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 20:04, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

re-review please

Good morning, Excirial. I have addressed your comments in an article I'm trying hard to get right and have removed peacock terms and added more references in support of the person's work. Would you mind having another look, please? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Anthony_Wile Related question... There appears to be an old page that was begun for this individual sometime in the past but never really finished. You recently reviewed it, too, and it's now showing up on my watchlist. I assume that one should be deleted? It's here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/Anthony_Wile [old] Finally--if this is NOT the best way to request a re-review or re-submit, please advise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GatorHalcon (talk • contribs) 11:46, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Hello there GatorHalcon,

The second Anthony Wile article shows up on your watchlist because Wikipedia simultaniously watchlists a article and article talk pages. It seems someone else started an article on the article page, while yours resides on the article talk page (Causing you to see two of them on your watchlist). For now i would see it as a minor inconvenience, since keeping AFC article's is preferable over removing them altogether, just in case a contributer returns or someone decides to adopt the article.

As for the article itself, i fear it still suffers from the old non neutrality and peacock issues. For example:

• Incorporating a perspective based on more than 20 years of financial and business experience working with growth-oriented companies in a variety of sectors (Puffery)
• The Daily Bell remains on the cutting edge of alternative news publishing (Non neutral, peacock)
• Harry Browne, were an enormous success, with more than 500,000 people logging on. (Subjective - success is a conclusion, enormous is not neutral).
• Editor to several leading free-market thinkers. (More peacock words)

I only checked a few random sentences and sections, so there are bound to be more.

As for the review requests - it is best to place the article back in the queue for another check when desired (Reduces dependence on a single editor - i tend to have vacation every now and then). To do this, just click the "When you are ready to resubmit, click here." link in the bottom template.

Kind regards, Excirial ^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 17:59, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Anthony Wile.
• To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the help desk, via real time chat with helpers, or on the

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! SarahStierch (talk) 18:35, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

Anthony Wile, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been 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 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 are more than welcome to continue submitting work to Articles for Creation.

• 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 .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 11:25, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi GatorHalcon, the article you created and I moved, needs further work. It's been created but that does not mean it's finished. If you don't work on it right now it may be deleted. An well-intentioned editor just told me

″The sources in the article are awful, either primary sources, blogs, a Wikipedia article, or otherwise not about the subject. None of the sources show any notability for the subject, and unless there's something about to be added to the article or some sources I'm somehow missing, the article is looking at a WP:PROD or WP:AFD.″

If you don't do something to remedy the issue it will be nominated for deletion (probably by me to save my ass). Do something about the references. Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 08:37, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

OK... I am brand new at this, now RE-reading help/guideline pages like mad ... (advice requested) ... while some editors seem determined to delete immediately! I am trying to address concerns before that happens... Since the well-intentioned editor thinks all the references are awful and that Wile is a fringe nutjob, I'm not really sure what to do with that. Wile was interviewed again this past week on RT News; I'm not clear how that is not a mainstream reference. It's even included in my cable TV lineup... Nonetheless, all references to his appearances there (and all other references, frankly) have been deleted. Where do I go from here?! GatorHalcon (talk) 14:01, 30 September 2012 (UTC)GatorHalcon

Hey, Mr. T... on second thought, I'm done. Please just delete this page entirely. If I knew how to do it I would but, frankly, I'm all done trying to follow wiki help pages only to then find out this is all just entirely subjective ... Thanks for your efforts.

Your recent contributions

Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Anthony Wile exists and so does Anthony Wile. Both have a photo captioned "Anthony Wile". This image looks like a copyright violation. In fact, one version was deleted, and you simply uploaded two more version with no license.

You created Anthony Wile, publisher of TheDailyBell. You also created Follicle Nutrient Deficiency Syndrome (FNDS). It seems very likely to me that you created it to promote biologixhair.com. This promotional article in http://www.thedailybell.com discusses the syndrome, and mentions Dr. Duran who is associated with biologixhar. The article Follicle Nutrient Deficiency Syndrome (FNDS) uses the biologixhair.com website as references.

This seems like conflict of interest or even paid editing. Please comment. Thank you. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 09:11, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Further, both Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Anthony Wile and Anthony Wilecontain copy pasted content from here. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 09:17, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

One more dandy: User:Anthonywile Anna Frodesiak (talk) 09:20, 30 September 2012 (UTC) (Now moved to his sandbox in this edit.) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 09:48, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Another matter: Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Biologix Hair Sciences Ltd. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 09:51, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Ouch! Where to begin to defend myself?! Anthony Wile contributes to our understanding of economics, from a free-market perspective, similar to Lew Rockwell, Ron Paul, the von Mises Institute and others with Wiki living person bio pages. I created a page about him for that reason.

After reading the Wikimedia photo upload guidelines, I thought I did that correctly. The photo is owned by him and I got permission to upload it. Apparently, I need to determine how to make that known...

Yes. I created the FNDS page after I read about it at Wile's site. I think it is quite notable that an alternative is being/has been developed to people taking a drug that makes them permanently impotent because they want to grow hair (which outrages me). It made sense to me, further, that I should create a page about the company that has the treatment available so people can then research and determine whether there's any validity to it, which is what I did when I first read about it. Similar pages on treatments and the companies that invented them are on Wikipedia so this made sense to me. That page was declined and since I'm not sure how to write it in a manner to direct people to where they can get more information about FNDS without it seeming like a promotion of the company I haven't done anything more to that page.

I don't understand how it's "one more dandy" that Anthony Wile apparently created a user page for himself at some point, or how that has anything to do with my attempts to add to Wiki. Feels rather like an accusation of ... well, something. I've spent many, many hours reading help pages to contribute to Wiki properly, and have asked for help several times. I'll continue to do that... GatorHalcon (talk) 14:39, 30 September 2012 (UTC)GatorHalcon

Perhaps I shouldn't have said "dandy". I meant that it was yet another Wile article, only this time at a userpage. May I ask, please, whether or not you are associated with either of the subjects? Are you being paid to create these articles? Do you have a conflict of interest? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 15:26, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

I answered your questions above, thoroughly, in politely explaining why I contributed many, many hours of my time trying to learn to add things I think are important to Wikipedia. It is disappointingly clear to me now that the real conflict of interest here is an ideological one between me and certain (not all) editors of Wiki. My understanding of the purpose of Wikipedia is to allow people to create factual contributions, uncensored by the powers-that-be, to humankind's general knowledge; as it turns out, (regardless of Wikipedia's own written guidelines), some editors are personally, subjectively assessing and making a determination as to whether any individuals, schools of thought, information sources, medical discoveries (and doubtless many other areas of which I'm not aware) are or are not "acceptable." I was obviously mistaken in my understanding of Wikipedia.

First, you are very, very welcome here. But, you weren't entirely thorough in your response. You again haven't answered the most important question. Do you have a conflict of interest here? Are you associated with the subjects?

We are very sorry that you spent a lot of time putting these articles together, and now they are up for deletion. We don't want you to be put off.

Regarding your rationale in creating these articles, please read WP:GNG and WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. This is all about inclusion criteria, and nothing more. We don't care who or what gets an article if they're notable. We don't judge. It's simply about independent media coverage. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:38, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

"uncensored by the powers-that-be" - yes, as far as we can be. But that does not mean that anything goes. We are 'free to edit', but we do have rules. 'Notability' applies over and above good intention. There are charity workers who will never have an article, and villains with long pages. There are million dollar companies whose products are used by millions of people every day - but no article. (One case was a company making own brand goods for big chains. Not one tin had their own name on it. Totally unknown outside purchasing departments, employees and the Infernal Revenue...) I too am interested in the matters raised by Anna. Conflict of Interest WP:COI is not forbidden. Paid editing is not forbidden. Neither are recommended. Peridon (talk) 12:01, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Follicle Nutrient Deficiency Syndrome (FNDS) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Follicle Nutrient Deficiency Syndrome (FNDS) 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/Follicle Nutrient Deficiency Syndrome (FNDS) 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 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 template from the top of the article. Sitush (talk) 09:53, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Anthony Wile - Controversies section

As the principal author of the article, I thought you might like to offer some input on how to handle it. Please see: Talk:Anthony Wile#Controversies section

Thanks, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 11:42, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Please fill out our brief Teahouse guest survey

Hello fellow Wikipedian, the hardworking hosts at WP:Teahouse would like your feedback! We have created a brief survey meant to help us better understand the experience of new editors on Wikipedia. You are being selected to participate in our survey because you edited the Teahouse Questions or Guests pages sometime in the last few months.

Click here to be taken to the survey site.

The survey should take less than 10 minutes to complete. We really appreciate your feedback, and we look forward to your next vist to the Teahouse!

Happy editing,

Jonathan and Sarah, Teahouse hosts 02:14, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Biologix Hair Sciences Ltd. concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Biologix Hair Sciences Ltd., a page you created, has not been edited in at least 180 days. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 13:33, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Your article submission Biologix Hair Sciences Ltd.

Hello GatorHalcon. It has been over six months since you last edited your article submission, entitled Biologix Hair Sciences Ltd..

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Biologix Hair Sciences Ltd.}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 18:01, 26 November 2013 (UTC)