User talk:Scaglionet1

Welcome!

Hello, Scaglionet1, 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 Jeannie Seeliger, 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! — Timneu22 · talk 14:51, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Jeannie Seeliger[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 Jeannie Seeliger 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. — Timneu22 · talk 14:51, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

January 2011[edit]

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia. While objective prose about beliefs, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. Your edits seem to indicate you have a single-purpose account for the intention of Jeannie Seeliger. Please note that this is not a place to post someone's resume or to otherwise promote individuals. Topics on Wikipedia are included only when they are already notable (been covered by multiple, independent, reliable sources). — Timneu22 · talk 15:29, 18 January 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) 17:38, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You don't seem to get it[edit]

Regarding this edit to User talk:Timneu22: you don't seem to be getting the point. Mere numbers do not establish that someone is notable. According to Wikipedia guidelines, notability is established by significant coverage in reliable sources. That means that someone, somewhere has taken the time to write an article about Seeliger that has actually been published in a publication that performs some sort of fact checking. The NYTimes quote is not significant coverage; it is merely using Ms Seeliger as a source for an interesting quote. Your own interview is not significant coverage because there is no evidence it has actually been published anywhere. Find reliable sources, and you can establish notability, but merely screaming numbers at us won't do it. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 19:59, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Furthermore, for goodness sakes figure out how to properly place messages on other users' talk pages. — Timneu22 · talk 20:01, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Numbers do mean a great deal. It's how things are judged. In sports there is the record for most games played. Why do you think that is? You obviously know little about the legal profession. If you did you would think it remarkable that an attorney would file so many successful cases. It is more bankruptcies filed then any of the 86000 current lawyers licensed in NJ. So it not my opinion...more common sense. And who are you to determine who is important in the history of a law firm? I got my information from the "important" person involved in the development of Jacoby & Meyers. You decided she wasn't important? I am curious to know how you make the determination about the history? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.79.42.226 (talk) 20:57, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

First, learn how to write comments on talk pages. Second, there are standards and guidelines on Wikipedia. You're not following these. It is obvious by your responses that you really just do not get it! — Timneu22 · talk 21:04, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)

OK, let me clarify. Numbers don't count on Wikipedia. A baseball player with a .700 average but with no coverage in independent media would not rate an article, and neither does a lawyer with 17000 bankruptcies but no independent coverage. For all we know, you made up that number. With no citations to prove the fact, we have no fact. Even if the number is verified, that number by itself establishes Seeliger as a prolific lawyer, but not a notable one. Only independent coverage can establish her as notable. These are the Wikipedia policies. If you don't like them, you are free to

take up a discussion at the Village Pump to try to change the policy;
take your article elsewhere; or
try to write an article that actually complies with the relevant policies and guidelines.

The choice is yours. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 21:10, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]