Helen194848
Welcome!
Hello, Helen194848, 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 Open Episcopal Church, 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:
- Starting an article
- Your first article
- Biographies of living persons
- How to write a great article
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- Help pages
- Tutorial
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! noq (talk) 12:50, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Open Episcopal Church 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 Open Episcopal Church requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
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. noq (talk) 12:50, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi edit
I've taken the CSD tag off, but there are great problems with the article. You have given a great stack of 'references', but not one of the accessible ones is in fact a reference as we use the term. (I can't speak for the books.) I don't think you understand the way it works here, yet. In the article, you put a reference against Michael Parkinson - which takes us to the Wikipedia article. The way that should be done is by wikilinking like this Sir Michael Parkinson which is [[Sir Michael Parkinson]] when you type it in. (If you want to link to a Wikipedia article this way but use a different form of the name, that can be done too. Ask if you need it.) These are links not references, as the article makes no mention of the subject. None of your references, so far as I can see, show notability for your subject. The Jade Goody one is a brief mention only. The Guardian one about Post the Host is somewhat more, but not really showing enough for an article. The Scottish Parliament one shows that one of the Church members led Time for Reflection. What this is and who gets called to lead it I do not know. It could mean something, or they might just pick a denomination/religion at random. Please look at WP:RS to get an idea of what is needed (reliable sources, and WP:GNG for general notability. Sources linked to the subject cannot show notability, but may be used for extra info once notability is shown. For a start, sort out the wikilinks that are currently references (and a few of the other references just go to the home page of some outside organisation that probably has an article on Wikipedia and could be wikilinked. I'm holding off calling for deletion on the grounds of non-notability for now, as I think the problem is that you didn't understand our requirements and procedure. If you have any queries, please don't be afraid to ask me or one of the other regular editors. (You can recognise us by the userpages, well used talkpages and varied subjects in our contribs...) Good luck. Oh, if anyone puts a deletion tag on, tell them that it's being reworked and ask them to please take it off again. They should see this, anyway, when notifying you. Peridon (talk) 14:39, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
The article Open Episcopal Church has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
The Open Episcopal Church is a small denomination, with no recognition whatsoever from any major religious groups. Their leaders are widely seen as episcopi vagantes and nothing of notice can be said about them. As if this were not enogh, the creator of this page is one of the leaders of the Open Episcopal Church, which makes me think this page was created more for PR reasons than actual information. I move for deletion.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Karma1998 (talk) 22:33, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
Nomination of Open Episcopal Church for deletion edit
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Open Episcopal Church until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.