User talk:Dr. Chuck

Welcome!

Hello, Dr. Chuck, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Charles A. Findley, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may soon be deleted.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! jheiv ^{talk contribs} 17:17, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Charles A. Findley[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Charles A. Findley 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 important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. jheiv ^{talk contribs} 17:17, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I did notice that after five years this artilce was nominated for delectio by Jheiv. I note that this article was created prior to 2010 so does not have the same requirements. However, if you can restore it, appropriate references and links which are readily available can be included to our satisfacation.

Proposed deletion of Collaborative learning-work[edit]

The article Collaborative learning-work has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

no evidence of notability

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 {{proposed deletion/dated}} 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 {{proposed deletion/dated}} 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. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:16, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Collaborative Networked Learning for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Collaborative Networked Learning 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/Collaborative Networked Learning 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 good 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. DanielRigal (talk) 00:00, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Really sorry to have missed this debate Dr Chuck. I would have supported the preservation of the page, and failing that, the integration of content to networked learning. I have a small issue over there, regarding the definition of networked learning, where one editor is asserting authority that NL is mediated by ICTs, where I see it as much broader, along the lines of Illich (1971) for example. If this disagreement continues, it might be necessary to fork a new page that focuses on the broader concept.. something like learning webs (Illich) or reviving collaborative networked learning (but I think it too centered on ICTs, or starting open and networked learning. Either way, the networked learning page needs history from the 1980s.. I recall Collaborative Networked Learning having content along those lines. Do we have it preserved somewhere so it can be added? Leighblackall (talk) 23:52, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

March 2011[edit]

Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion pages, as you did with Collaborative learning-work. Doing so won't stop the discussion from taking place. You are, however, welcome to comment about the proposed deletion on the appropriate page. Thank you. DanielRigal (talk) 00:16, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Dr. Chuck. If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Collaborative Networked Learning, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:

editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. DanielRigal (talk) 00:17, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your article[edit]

Hi Dr.Chuck. I notice you posted a note on the talk page of an article you created that was recently deleted. I just tagged the talk page with a speedy delete, only because we don't have mainspace talk pages without subject pages. If you are interested in creating the page again, I suggest you develop a version in userspace. Some policies/information to pay extra attention to are WP:WWMPD, WP:COI and WP:NOTABILITY. Once you think your article is well constructed, well sourced, and belongs in mainspace, feel free to ask the opinion of myself or any of the editors, perhaps at the Notability Noticeboard.

If you have any questions, feel free to leave a note on my talk page. Regards. jheiv ^{talk contribs} 05:13, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits[edit]

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 02:12, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Charles A. Findley[edit]

The article Charles A. Findley has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

All self sources - recreation of a previously deleted article - notability not established - etc.

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 {{proposed deletion/dated}} 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 {{proposed deletion/dated}} 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. jheiv ^{talk contribs} 16:45, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add soapboxing, promotional or advertising material to Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. DanielRigal (talk) 17:00, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Charles A. Findley for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Charles A. Findley 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/Charles A. Findley 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 good 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. — Coffee // have a cup // essay // 17:52, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning; the next time you use Wikipedia for soapboxing, promotion or advertising, as you did at Computer-supported collaborative learning, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Please stop introducing the same material into different articles simply because the articles you are trying create have no place on Wikipedia. jheiv ^{talk contribs} 11:06, 15 March 2011 (UTC) You all suggested editing content and combining content where to improve the coverage. I simply included relevant history of the other entry into the relevant category. I do hope that you will remove your attacks and consider the importance of including these important parts of the history of a field, even if you are not well informed on the developments in the area. Thank you for your kind considerations.[reply]

MfD nomination of User:Dr. Chuck[edit]

User:Dr. Chuck, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Dr. Chuck and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Dr. Chuck during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 11:48, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your user page[edit]

Dr Findley, I am afraid you misunderstood the advice you were given in 2011, quite understandably because it turns on details of Wikipedia jargon. What was suggested was that if you wanted to develop your article you should do it in a sub-page as part of your "user space", which includes subpages for article drafts as well as the primary user page User:Dr. Chuck.

The policy on main Wikipedia user pages is explained at WP:NOTWEBHOST:

"Wikipedians have their own user pages, but they should be used primarily to present information relevant to working on the encyclopedia. Limited biographical information is allowed, but user pages should not function as personal webpages or be repositories for large amounts of material that is irrelevant to collaborating on Wikipedia. If you are looking to make a personal webpage or blog or to post your résumé, please make use of one of the many free providers on the Internet or any hosting included with your Internet account."

So I have moved it to User:Dr. Chuck/Charles A. Findley and you can develop it there. You are free to write something at User:Dr. Chuck, within the scope suggested by WP:UPYES and WP:NOTWEBHOST.

Since the article was deleted after Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charles A. Findley, you should not re-post it without the agreement of user Ron Ritzman (talk), the closing administrator, or failing that by application at WP:Deletion review. If you have not already done so, you should also read WP:Notability (people) and Wikipedia:Autobiography. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 13:04, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]