Cgmittermeier

Welcome!

Hello, Cgmittermeier, 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
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

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 need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!  Mermaid from the Baltic Sea 16:40, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

ILCP article

Please do not remove speedy deletion tags from articles. If you do not believe the article deserves to be deleted, then please do the following:

1. Place {{hangon}} on the page. Please do not remove any existing speedy deletion tag(s).
2. Make your case on the article's talk page.

Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Thank you. --AbsolutDan ^(talk) 16:48, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Please stop removing speedy deletion notices from articles that you have created yourself. If you do not believe the article deserves to be deleted, then please do the following:

1. Place {{hangon}} on the page. Please do not remove any existing speedy deletion notice(s)
2. Make your case on the article's talk page.

Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Thank you. --AbsolutDan ^(talk) 17:00, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

ILCP

Christina,

I originally tagged the ILCP article for deletion when it looked like this: [1]. At the time, the article met Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion because it was a page that was promotional of the subject and would need significant re-writing in order to meet Wikipedia's inclusion criteria. It seems there was some confusion during further edits [2] as well.

I am confused about your suggestion that the current state of ILCP redirecting to Conservation International is some sort of legal matter. It appears that in one of your edits, you attempted to redirect ILCP to Conservation International yourself: [3]. Later on, another editor cleared the article and set a proper redirect: [4].

I fail to see how this redirect is a legal problem. However, I am not a lawyer, so I'm probably not the best person to speak to about it. I'll try to cover the matter below from Wikipedia policies and guidelines as best i know them. Please see Wikipedia:Contact us/Article problem if the below does not address your concern.

As far as Wikipedia procedure is concerned, one of 3 things should happen to the ICLP page:

1. If the International League of Conservation Photographers is a notable organization and can be properly sourced using reliable sources (per Wikipedia's verifiability policy), and follow Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, then it should be un-redirected and written as such. To do this, you can click on this link [5], edit the page, remove the redirect line, and make the appropriate changes.
2. If there are several notable organizations that use the acronym ICLP, the page should be un-redirected per the above procedure and made into a disambiguation page.
3. If neither of the above can/should be done, it should be deleted as an implausible typo (ie no one looking for Conservation International would look for it under the acronym ICLP).

Note that I have linked to several guidelines/policies in the above - just click on the blue links to take you to the appropriate page. You can always return to your talk page by clicking "my talk" at the top of any page. Please let me know if you have any further concerns or questions I may be able to assist with. --AbsolutDan ^(talk) 04:37, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

P.S. - before you go much further, it would probably be a good idea to take a look through Wikipedia's Conflict of interest guideline, as we're discussing articles that you are affiliated with. --AbsolutDan ^(talk) 04:45, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

OK, I see we're back to the original state of the article. As it stands, the article fails WP:NPOV and doesn't cite 3rd-party reliable sources. However, instead of marking the page for deletion as I did last time, I'm just going to add a few tags to it to describe the work that needs to be done. This should give you time to improve the article. Cheers --AbsolutDan ^(talk) 22:56, 23 January 2007 (UTC)