Fm122
Re: your subpage on Gwynn Dyer, you asked:
"How can I change the page to make it "appropriate"?"
To put it bluntly, you can't. Wikipedia is not a free webhost for material like that, nor is it a soapbox. What you were writing was a great big essay addressing and rebutting Dyer's points one by one -- which is basically a huge great mass of original research and opinion-pushing.
You can have the material back (it can be e-mailed to you, for instance). But you can't keep it on Wikipedia. DS (talk) 13:55, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
DragonflySixtyseven,
Thank you for the explanations. Is there some page(s) I should read to know what is appropriate and inappropriate usage for User pages?
How can I have the file that you deleted e-mailed back to me? Do you have an email address I can contact you from, instead of posting it publicly to your Talk page?
Answer edit
The file has been e-mailed to you.
I strongly suggest you read Wikipedia:User pages for further details about what is and isn't allowed. DS (talk) 04:54, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
--
I appreciate your guidance. I have removed the link to the page that you deleted, and have created a revised in-progress page, /Ethiopia, Demographic Pressure & the Risk of Famine
This page eliminates the direct criticism on Dyer so it can no longer be classified as soapbox. I hope to eventually put this, or components thereof, on the main Wiki site either by adding to the small, existing "Famines in Ethiopia" page, or creating a sub-page such as "Causes of Famines in Ethiopia". I hope this now conforms to the acceptable criteria on the Wikipedia:User pages, i.e. (Notes related to your Wikipedia work and activities; Matters that are long enough in length, or active enough, to allocate them a page of their own ; Work in progress or material that you may come back to in future (usually on subpages); Drafts, especially where you want discussion or other users' opinions first, for example due to conflict of interest or major proposed changes).
All my statements are supported by standard literature citations, so it's unclear why you identify it as original research; the tabulated data represent http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research#Routine_calculations in my interpretation of that policy page.