I noticed that the notability guidelines on Simple English Wikipedia are the same as the English Wikipedia so I thought that I could create a notable stub as a test, but that test revealed much. It was quickly tagged for quick deletion as not notable despite three reviews in major media sources such as the Los Angeles Times.

I figured that speedy deletion would work the same way on the English Wikipedia because the guidelines were the same, but I guess I was way wrong. The criteria are similar, but how they go about it is odd.

I talked to an admin there about speedy deletions. Apparently my description of how speedy deletion works on the English Wikipedia is wrong even though the editor is on the other Wikipedia as well. The editor said that if something doesn't claim notability, but is notable based on significant coverage, it can be deleted with quick deletion and that it works the same way on the English Wikipedia. Huh?

"Claiming notability stops an article from being speedy deleted, but notability does as well. If an article claims notability, it can still be considered non-notable if there is no coverage. If it shows notability, it should not be deleted under any circumstance. I have been participating in speedy deletion for a long time and that is how speedy deletion works there." was what I said, but apparently I don't know what I'm talking about. I didn't add that notable articles could still be merged, but that wouldn't change anything.

Then it went to requests for deletion because an admin from the English Wikipedia said it was notable and removed the speedy deletion tag. Of course the only two people that said keep in the RfD were experienced English Wikipedia editors. Apparently, the other editors in the discussion said that I need to edit the article to their subjective opinions of notability. I did find a review in a scholarly journal, but apparently a review no matter where doesn't show notability.

This may seem like a rant, but I want some clarification. Is this the norm in regards to notability on the Simple English Wikipedia? I admit that the stub is poorly written, but I'm not used to writing articles simply. Being poorly written (like most articles there) is no reason to delete it if it is notable.