Rleyton

Welcome!

Hello, Rleyton, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Glasgow Life, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

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 Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

• Your first article
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• 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!  CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 03:32, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Glasgow Life

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 Glasgow Life, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 03:32, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

Response to deletion

Have posted a response to nominator and actioner of the speedy deletion. Requesting at least the markup restored somewhere, but strongly object to basis of deletion. Alas because it was deleted, well, speedily, there's no buttons to press any more. Rleyton (talk) 10:18, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

Justifiction for article

So Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) sets out the determinations for a separate article for an organisation.

Primary criteria

" notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject.":

A quick(ish) research run into significant mentions of Glasgow Life:

• 12th August, 2019 BBC News [[1]] "Glasgow venues enjoy record visitor numbers", Nearly 19 million visits were made to venues run by Glasgow Life in 2018, new figures have revealed
• 13th July 2016, Glasgow Herald [[2]] quotes MCR Pathways: Glasgow Life is the latest of the city’s biggest and influential organisations to make a long term commitment to a partnership
• 16 December 2016, BBC News [funded body Glasgow Life to cut 300 jobs]
• 24 April, 2019 Evening Times, ["Glasgow Life policy decisions"]
• 6 July, 2016 Glasgow Herald "Glasgow Life slated over the sacking of five managers amid allegations of a Commonwealth Games overtime scam".
• 3 April, 2018 Scottish Government, ["Glasgow 2014 Commonwealth Games legacy: summary findings April 2018"]
• 2018, Academic paper all very well in practice, but what about the theory? The case of Glasgow Life, Scotland (Strathclyde University Strathprints), by Mark O'Neill and Robert Rogerson (2018)
  • Above features in "Managing Organisational Success in the Arts", Stevenson, David (ed) [3], quote "...the formation of Glasgow Life represented one of the most high profile transfers of functions from a council to a charitable trust in the UK. The inclusion of libraries was unprecedented...". In the conclusion "...we believe that there are elements of its approach and practices that may be relevant for a wide range of cultural organisations and insights into how such organisations' adoption and evolution can be understood."

Additionally there are statutory bodies (Glasgow City Council, OSCR, Scottish Parliament not least) which make numerous references to the organisation.

• They amount to significant coverage.
• In multiple (7) sources
• Of which are 5 are entirely independent (Glasgow Herald and Evening Times are sister publications).
  • Whilst Glasgow City Council owns Glasgow Life, it is a statutory body which makes the relationship relevant and important.
• They may all be considered reliable
• Some (BBC News, Glasgow Herald, Evening Times) are secondary, but Scottish Government and Glasgow City Council are primary, as are filings for the organisation at Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator.

Non-commerical organisations

• National or International in Scale: Glasgow Life is the largest organisation of its type in Scotland, and one of the largest of its kind in the UK. It (or at least, its venues/facilities/staff) regularly organises international scale events, including Commonwealth Games, UCI Track Cycling World Championships, and other large sports events. Also 'unprecedented' inclusion of libraries in its remit (O'Neill, Rogerson quotes).
• significant coverage in multiple...sources - See above, ie. statutory bodies, press, academic sources, court cases regularly make reference to Glasgow Life.

Rleyton (talk) 11:21, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

Disagreement with deletion criteria/process

Per Wikipedia:Deletion review and Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion, was cited as G11: This applies to pages that are exclusively promotional and would need to be fundamentally rewritten to conform with Wikipedia:NOTFORPROMOTION. If a subject is notable and the content could plausibly be replaced with text written from a neutral point of view, this is preferable to deletion. Note: Any article that describes its subject from a neutral point of view does not qualify for this criterion. However, "promotion" does not necessarily mean commercial promotion: anything can be promoted, including a person, a non-commercial organization, a point of view, etc.

It's hard to give precise examples without access to my original draft. I refute entirely that it was in any way Unambiguous advertising or exclusively promotional. If anything, it was perhaps a bit critical. I have no relationship to the organisation (other than being a resident in the city, and - necessarily - a user of their services; I don't expect this to exclude, but would have been happy to note it). I have no desire to see it advertised. Rather, was seeking to open up information and I feel is a bit too opaque, and in need of wider access.

Ultimately I feel Wikipedia is overdue an article for this organisation so readers/residents can understood it, its operation and relationships, as well as its achievements and challenges. All content I'd argue is well suited for an encyclopaedia, particularly one that has national and international reach and impact. I've identified above a number of supportive, independent, sources that give separate but mutually supportive reasons to justify the article.

There may well have been content/phrasing in the article that were in need of attention. I had endeavoured to write it neutrally, and properly cite everything, and planned to expand it over time: it's a big subject/organisation with a lot of information opaquely available/distributed. I had expected some constructive feedback, and hoped too wider availability in main site would hopefully have encouraged others to contribute.

That this was through a very quick deletion process, with no ready opportunity to contest the decision, has undoubtedly left me feeling a little raw. I entirely recognise there's a need for this sort of process in the face of spam, abuse, defacement on the site. However, I'd expect too there to be a consideration or weighting of good intent, not least that Wikipedia users who (I'd thought) clearly not (14+ year account; various minor edits) a short-term user, but was making an honest attempt to add an overlooked but important organisation, should be given a little better scope/ability to respond.

Rleyton (talk) 13:16, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

Scottish Athletics and me

Just for disclosure, I've popped some notes on my user page about my relationship, such that it is, with Scottish Athletics. I'm Chair, on the board, of a running club. That running club is affiliated to Scottish Athletics, which means it has (via a delegate) AGM voting privileges on behalf of the clubs members. I'm also a personal member of Scottish Athletics too (this carries no voting privileges): It's pretty much required in order that I may take part in local cross country and road running events.

I don't think this amounts to any conflict of interest, but wanted to set it out just in case. I have tagged this on the talk page.

The page was very out of date, and nobody seemingly taking on ownership, but would welcome anybody else having a spin at this, or keeping an eye on the edits.

Orphaned non-free image File:Glasgow Life Logo 2010.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Glasgow Life Logo 2010.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:33, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Glasgow Life (November 11)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by CASSIOPEIA was:  The comment the reviewer left was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Glasgow Life and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Glasgow Life, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:50, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Rleyton! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! CASSIOPEIA(talk) 04:50, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Glasgow Life concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Glasgow Life, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:36, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Glasgow Life

Hello, Rleyton. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Glasgow Life".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! JMHamo (talk) 08:32, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Restoration of Draft:Glasgow Life

Resumed process to bring a page together on Glasgow Life as it is a current topic and a reference article would help support local discourse. It needs updating and revisions to address some of the previous comments made. Rleyton (talk) 13:07, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

And lack of time, other things going on meant my previous effort stumbled. Have lodged a request to restore the previous draft, and will bring up to date with all the various goings on before posting. Rleyton (talk) 14:32, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Glasgow Life restored quite quickly, so basic set of updates applied. Comments welcome Rleyton (talk) 16:36, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Glasgow Life logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Glasgow Life logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:19, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Glasgow Life logo.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Glasgow Life logo.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:20, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Glasgow Life has been accepted

Glasgow Life, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Newystats (talk) 11:13, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

Scottish athletics

hello, I notice that you have previously edited some Wikipedia pages on athletics in Scotland and from your talk page I see that you are a member of a Glasgow athletics club, which would suggest an interest in this area. I wonder if you would consider contributing informally to improving the coverage of Scottish athletics on Wikipedia. I have so far added a history section to the page on Scottish Athletics, I have created a page for Scottish Athletics Championships, I have started adding the annual championships. I also did some work on venues for those championships, particularly the football grounds and greyhound stadiums that failed to mention any athletics at all, so I have done some work on the Powderhall Grounds in Edinburgh, Hampden Park Glasgow, and Carolina Port Dundee. if there is something here that takes your fancy, either working on venues, or updating the championship results, or doing biographies of athletes or something, please feel free to jump in and have a go. just adding categories to venue articles to show that they were track and field venues can be useful. If you need any help finding sources or with anything else please feel free to ask. Cottonshirtτ 14:00, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:21, 28 November 2023 (UTC)