Revision as of 00:03, 1 July 2010

About Me

• As a Wikipedian I try to be fair and unbiased in my work on articles. I have improved articles on subjects that I dislike, and I have argued to delete articles about subjects that I admire.

• I always try to consider the policies and guidelines of Misplaced Pages, most especially the need for articles to be notable, which is verified by reliable sources. I firmly believe that the burden for proving such notability lies with those who wish for the article to be included, not for those who wish the article to be removed. I try to judge an article based on the subject of the article, not on how it is currently written nor on who has created or edited the article or who is advocating the article.

• I don't believe there is a limit to the size of the encyclopedia, but I do believe that for the encyclopedia to function it must have articles that are encyclopedic, even as Misplaced Pages redefines what an encyclopedia is. I am neither an inclusionist, nor a deletionist, and find myself defending as many articles as I try to remove. I try to judge each article on its own merits rather than on any greater agenda or philosophy.

• I do not have a problem with single-purpose accounts, depending on what that purpose is.

• I try to be courteous to other editors and assume that they mean well even when I disagree with them, until they give a clear indication that they don't. I especially try to be kind to a newcomer, as they are the most likely to make honest mistakes. When a person's initial impression is negative they are unlikely to return, and Misplaced Pages can't survive without drawing new editors. However, a person must show a sincere desire to contribute positively to the encyclopedia, and not simply be a vandal or advertiser.

• I can, and do, change my mind if someone gives me a good enough reason. I can, and do, make mistakes and I acknowlege acknowledge that. _{That wasn't intentional irony, I actually made a typo in that sentence. My point is made.}

Proposed Deletions

I keep an eye on proposed deletions that have expired, or are close to expiring. I will decline the proposed deletion of any article that has had a proposed deletion objected to in the past, or has survived a deletion discussion, or where an editor has clearly expressed an opposition to the deletion (yet hasn't removed the tag). All of those situations make a proposed deletion invalid, as proposed deletions must be uncontroversial. Also, if I determine that the article is worth keeping, I will decline it personally and usually explain why on the talk page of the article.

Did I delete "your" article?

If I have deleted an article you want restored through proposed deletion (prod), then just ask me to restore it, and I will. Proposed deletions are uncontroversial and can be restored by anyone's request. I'll also restore proposed deletions that someone else has deleted. I will not restore articles deleted through other means, Deletion Review is where you should go if you feel a deletion was wrong. If I have deleted an article through speedy deletion (CSD) and I made a mistake (it has happened before), if you can point out where I made a mistake, I'll restore the article. I won't do so if another administrator was the person who deleted the article, again in that case you should try Deletion Review (or talk to that other administrator).

If I have restored an article that was deleted through proposed deletion, keep in mind that it's not necessarily "safe". I evaluate every article before deleting it, and if I deleted something then there was a reason for it. If I restore a proposed deletion, but it meets one of our speedy deletion criteria then I may delete it per that rationale (in which case it can't be easily restored). The article may also be taken to Articles for Deletion to be deleted (either by myself or someone else). In most cases, an article is deleted because it doesn't meet Misplaced Pages's notability requirements, and the best way to show that an article is notable is showing significant coverage in reliable sources.

== Mediation for Bioidentical Hormone Page ==

If you are still interested in mediation, the Bioidentical Hormone page is badly in need of it. Please contact me if you are interested. The page is locked down by user:WLU and reflects a very biased anti-bioidentical view. It is actually an embarassment to wikipedia.

UGAcodon (talk) 00:03, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

• Misplaced Pages administrators