User talk:Badel06
Help Desk
[edit]You posted the following question to the Help desk and asked for a reply in your email. That is not the way questions are answered here. They are answered just below your questions. Since you are new, I'm also posting my response here to your talk page.
Goldierocks Article- how to refrence correctly when I believe it is already fully sourced?
[edit]The said article 'Goldierocks' has been proposed for deletion although it is fully refrenced, sourced and well written. How and where should I edit it so that this doesn't happen? What does Wikipedia feel is in-corret?
This is a rare but very useful article on one of the leading UK DJs of 2006 and essential for press/public reference.
Please email me soon as possible:
<email removed> —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Badel06 (talk • contribs) 03:14, 19 December 2006 (UTC).
- Though you have referenced some sources for the Goldierocks article, the editor that put the tag there does not feel that they are reliable. You should read the page that was linked to, which was WP:RS.
- I don't know about the references since I really didn't get very far into the article before I found other things wrong with it such as the use of the term "vixen". This doesn't present a neutral point of view. Please see WP:NPOV to address this concern.
- And finally, you mention that the article is essential for press reference. WP:NOT will explain that Wikipedia is not an advertising medium. This is an encyclopedia, not a free forum for advertising. For instance, the page on Coca-Cola does not say "It's the greatest drink ever!"
- I'll post these comments to the user's talk page as well... and I've removed his email address.
Dismas|(talk) 04:36, 19 December 2006 (UTC)- You've made some good changes though I believe that there is work to still be done. For instance, the line "Entwining taste with style, zest and motion,..." is not very neutral and sounds like a music review that someone may have written. Did someone say this about her? If so, it should be quoted.
Dismas|(talk) 13:48, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
- You've made some good changes though I believe that there is work to still be done. For instance, the line "Entwining taste with style, zest and motion,..." is not very neutral and sounds like a music review that someone may have written. Did someone say this about her? If so, it should be quoted.
License tagging for Image:Razzmatazz.jpg
[edit]Thanks for uploading Image:Razzmatazz.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 16:08, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
April 2009
[edit]
You should wait for others to write an article about subjects in which you are personally involved. This applies to articles about you, your achievements, your band, your business, your publications, your website, your relatives, and any other possible conflict of interest.
Creating an article about yourself is strongly discouraged. If you create such an article, it might be listed on articles for deletion. Deletion is not certain, but many feel strongly that you should not start articles about yourself. This is because independent creation encourages independent validation of both significance and verifiability. All edits to articles must conform to Wikipedia:No original research, Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, and Wikipedia:Verifiability.
If you are not "notable" under Wikipedia guidelines, creating an article about yourself may violate the policy that Wikipedia is not a personal webspace provider and would thus qualify for speedy deletion. If your achievements, etc., are verifiable and genuinely notable, and thus suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia, someone else will probably create an article about you sooner or later. (See Wikipedia:Wikipedians with articles.) Thank you. ˉˉanetode╦╩ 17:07, 13 April 2009 (UTC)