Tinacornely

Hi Tina, thank you for your submission. The primary reason that I declined the draft was that it lacked reliable sources. All articles require reliable third party references to verify the content. Particularly with biographies of living persons there is a more stringent policy regarding the inclusion of details that may be libellous or contentious. While I understand that your article is relatively uncontroversial in nature, you are still required to fulfil WP:VERIFY before it can be accepted. If you are unsure about how to find or add the references I would encourage you to read the referencing for beginners page. The second problem is in relation to the question of notability. At the moment I would say that Sabrina Louise does not pass the general notability guidelines to be included on Wikipedia. I did a quick Google search and failed to find any substantive coverage of the subject in other forms of media. Of course I understand that this may change and new sources may emerge as the project continues, so keep working on the article. Finally, another concern that I have is with the apparent conflict of interest with the subject of the article. It's not unusual for someone to create articles that they are interested in or have some relation to - but there are a number of issues with regards to neutrality and the overall purpose of the article. I hope that this is helpful, if you have any additional questions of concerns, feel free to ask. -CTS talk 23:58, 24 July 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hi Tina. So to give you a better idea about the direction of the article, I went through and made a number of changes to the style and layout of the page. It still requires a bit of work in terms of establishing notability and referencing, so don't re-submit the page just yet. As for your photo, you can upload it here at Wikicommons. Just follow the prompts and make sure that you are aware of the copyright status of the particular photo. Don't give up just yet, AFC is a gradual process. Please reply here, thanks-CTS talk 10:03, 25 July 2012 (UTC)Reply

Dear snowysusan:

Thank you for your comments and suggestions. I read through the material and still am at a loss. I will do my best to get more verifiable data and add more citations. If possible, I would like to ask a favor. Could you please revise my text and take out what you feel may be POV or self serving? The purpose of doing this article is to raise awareness about the poor so that others can learn and follow suit. There are simple solutions and in some cases free. There are so many people without insurance and altnernative medicines are available to them. The same goes for the poor. There is so much trash in the world and trash can be converted into useful things. It would be my desire for this article to raise awareness about the untapped resources that are out there. And to use cell phones to push this media across the globe. I have actually started doing this. Now that you understand my purpose, could you please help me refine my text? You can take out anything you feel is innappropriate. I feel that art can heal and for that reason included the section about "death by a thousand cuts". I welcome your continued help in refining this article. The message is what is important here. Not the messanger. Thank you! --Tinacornely (talk) 23:22, 20 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

The {{help me}} tag tells every editor on Wikipedia that you need a hand, but it sounds like you're requesting help from a particular editor. In that case, your best bet is to leave a message on her talk page, and give specifics about what you need (including the name of the article). Happy editing! Dori ☾Talk ☯ Contribs☽ 23:29, 20 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sabina Louise, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 180 days. 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) 14:27, 20 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

Dear HasteurBot,

I recently updated the article. I also tried to add an article about my humanitarian work that came out in the Miami Herald recently. I am not sure if I added it correctly. Could you please take a look & let me know your thoughts & recommendations? Thank you! Tinacornely (talk) 04:35, 19 November 2013 (UTC)Reply

Tinacornely, you are asking a "bot" to do these things. Bots are not people, they are robotic scripts that have been created to handle repetitive tasks so contributors (real people like you and me) don't have to. I hope this helps. – Paine Ellsworth ^CLIMAX! 16:57, 19 November 2013 (UTC)Reply

In respect of the concern the bot raised, the fact you have edited the article now means it won't be considered for deletion for another 6 months now. Rankersbo (talk) 15:04, 12 December 2013 (UTC)Reply

Joel I recently updated my page. I also tried to add a reference as an article about my humanitarian work recently appeared in the Miami Herald. I am not sure if it worked. Please take a look & let me know your thoughts. Also, I would like to add some life saving articles I have written. I could not figure out how to do this. Thank you. Tinacornely (talk) 04:44, 19 November 2013 (UTC)Reply

I see that your purpose in editing Wikipedia is to publicise work that you have been involved in. There are two problems with that. Firstly, Wikipedia's conflict of interest guidelines discourage editing on any subject in which you have such a personal involvement. In writing about a subject in which you have a close personal involvement it is always difficult to stand back and see how the subject will look from the detqached perspective of an outsider, which makes it difficult or even impossible to write in the neutral way that is required for Wikipedia articles. Secondly, it is a firm policy that Wikipedia must not be used for promotion of any kind. There is no doubt whatever that you have been trying to use Wikipedia for promotion: you have explicitly stated that your purpose is "to help spread the word and show the world that art can heal", and to show "the masses them cost effective ways to survive and save our environment at the same time". No matter how firmly you are convinced that what you are trying to publicise and promote is a noble and worthwhile cause, using Wikipedia to do so is unacceptable. Wikipedia does not exist to "spread the word" about anything, nor to "show the world" anything. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:03, 19 November 2013 (UTC)Reply

James, could you please just remove/delete my wikipedia entry? Or please tell me how to do this. Thank you. 98.219.80.193 (talk) 13:57, 19 November 2013 (UTC) 98.219.80.193 (talk) 14:01, 19 November 2013 (UTC)Reply

You actually need an administrator to delete things on Wikipedia. What I don't understand is why don't you stick with it and build the article. You have done all the right things so far. Just continue to follow instructions and seek help wherever you can find it. Right now, according to what I've read, you need to familiarize yourself with two of Wikipedia's most important articles. The article on reliable sources will provide you with what you need to give your article the proper reference citations. WP:COI and especially the Plain and simple conflict of interest guide will give you the tools you need to deal with the COI issues that have been raised. Please don't give up nor should you become in any way less determined to continue with the article. I wish you all the best and lots of... Joys! – Paine Ellsworth ^CLIMAX! 17:16, 19 November 2013 (UTC)Reply

I totally disagree with "You have done all the right things so far". Writing an article to publicise one's own work, and to tell the world about one's noble cause, is not doing "all the right things", and runs completely against Wikipedia's principles. 79.123.73.56 (talk) 18:09, 19 November 2013 (UTC)Reply

It is your right to disagree; however, if you read the COI documents you will see that as long as a contributor has been honest and forthright with their potential COI issues, then that is the right thing to do. And there are instructions in those articles about COI that give people who are notable the policies and guidelines to help them with their articles, whether the articles be about their company, someone they know, or even about themselves. When you look at what Tinacornely has done thus far, there is nothing that has been done incorrectly; there are only things that that this contributor still needs to do. Don't be so negative, Mr. IP! How would you feel if it were you who felt you were notable enough to have an article here, and someone wants to penalize you for being notable? If this person is not notable, then it is as you say mere publicizing. However, if this person is, in addition to her experiences, awards and accolades, a notable person who has done one or more notable things, then it is so much more than mere publicizing. It is documenting a notable person in the annals of history! Joys! – Paine Ellsworth ^CLIMAX! 20:34, 19 November 2013 (UTC)Reply

Bellerophon _{talk to me} 13:23, 15 December 2013 (UTC)Reply

At the very beginning of this process I became so disillusioned that I gave up and asked to be deleted. Some editors were helpful and some were downright mean. Please take a look at the conversation between James and Snowy. I believe that this exchange should be reviewed by your team as I felt discriminated. Because I have learned that I am not the only woman being discriminated on wikipedia, I would like for a "what can we do better next time" and how we can prevent racism and sexism from happening on wikipedia. Thank you.Tinacornely (talk) 14:22, 6 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Tina Cornely is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tina Cornely until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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.

Dear Davey2010: If you did a research on the originating authors of the wikipedia entries you would find that 99% of them are affiliated with the subject. So how can we address this? Well, by creating additional specific guidelines and/or assigning a mentor to help streamline the process. What I do realize is that most of you are donating your time. By streaming the process you will streamline your efforts. Furthermore someone made substantial changes to my original entry. I will try to refine further based on what you have told me. Thank you for your tips. 2601:3:2B01:D305:81D:13B6:D68:81ED (talk) 19:24, 6 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

  Hello, Tinacornely. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

• Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
• Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
• Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies. Note that Wikipedia's terms of use require disclosure of your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Tina Cornley