Hello, Alexlaw65, 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:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Royalbroil01:43, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You can read about the conflict on interest guideline at WP:COI. You did keep the Lyle Shelton article neutral, so no worries. One thing that you should work on is to compose the article with complete sentences instead of phrases. Thanks for fixing the link on the Motorsports Hall of Fame of America so that it doesn't point incorrectly to the politician's article! Royalbroil01:43, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
For an article to be kept it needs to have multiple reliable sources that are independent of the source. A reliable source includes newspapers, magazine, books, and research papers among other things. The bigger the source, the better the demonstration of notability. Newspapers from major cities are a great demonstration, although an article about a New York City alderman in the New York Times doesn't prove too much, or at least not as much as that same article published in the Chicago Tribune (half the country away). So you would need to provide more sources and better ones too if you want the article to be kept. Royalbroil05:23, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Would being quoted in The Australian (the only national daily, with the exception of the business-oriented Australian Financial Review) twice in the last month count? Once in relation to Gay Marriage (17/12/2007), the other in relation to Lobbyists access to Ministers (11/01/2008)?
Most likely, depending on the nature of the quote.
Maybe the direction that you should head is to create the article in your personal userspace. You would then complete the article, taking care to write an article that clearly meet the notability standards using reliable sources. You should run it by me, but more importantly by User:Deb, until it meets the standards. There is no time limit that way. I have taken the liberty to restore the article at deletion at User:Alexlaw65/Sandbox. Remember, you cannot start the Lyle Shelton article in mainspace (the regular article area) or it will be speedy deleted as recreating deleted material. Royalbroil04:32, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but I have only just noticed your message on my talk page - I wasn't ignoring you! I saw the article as a fairly straightforward case of a non-notable biography because:
Although there was evidence of his being a local politician, this is in no way remarkable;
The only time he appeared to have run for a major political position, he had been unsuccessful. We wouldn't normally, for example, consider unsuccessful candidates in a UK general election to be worthy of note - but it might depend on various things, eg. whether the person was a leader of a minority party, an ex-MP, etc.
Although it was stated that he was a well-known campaigner on various issues, there was no evidence given for this.
I assume you made your comment about me being "trigger happy" because you saw my own comment on my talk page about not being trigger happy. You probably also saw all the hate mail I get from hardened vandals. Unfortunately there are too many articles on wikipedia that just shouldn't be here, and if we are going to deter people from creating them, we have to be quick off the mark. Sometimes I make mistakes, but I'm always prepared to discuss them and, if appropriate, restore the articles. However, I think User:Royalbroil has explained things very well above. Deb (talk) 11:15, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
