Talk:Tony Stockwell

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

New article

Hey, i have created the article. It still needs additional info about the psychic college etc, but this is a start. i hope people can improve this further!!! Macromonkey (talk) 19:34, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He is notable, check the references etc Macromonkey (talk) 19:38, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He can also be found on numerous sites, and there are certainly less famous psychics on wikipedia. He is reasonably famous, so i thought an article was needed Macromonkey (talk) 19:49, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I know that this doesn't contain all viewpoints, I only created the shell of the article, and could admittedly be considered POV Macromonkey (talk) 19:58, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm trying to find a ref for his DoB, any help? Verbal chat 19:59, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I honestly have no idea, i searched myself but with little success I'm afraid Macromonkey (talk) 20:01, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have any ideas on how to get the indentification numbers ( I forget what they're called) for the books, I don't know where to look, as this is my first article Macromonkey (talk) 20:06, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was about to try Amazon. Verbal chat 20:11, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah ok, I see that it has worked! I will keep that in mind when creating future articles, thanks Macromonkey (talk) 20:23, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

More refs added; subject is notable

Just an idea for those who tag articles like this as unreffed and non-notable with a threat of deletion. In the time it takes to do that, you can just as easily and quickly go to google news and look up the person's name in quotes in the news archives and find a ref or two and add them. Lazy deletionism removes information from Wikipedia. When information leaves, readers, writers, and editors leave with it. Creative reffing strategies increase information at Wikipedia. When information increases, readers, writers, and editors come to Wikipedia to learn and enjoy themselves. I did it! You can do it! Think about it. 64.142.90.33 (talk) 12:24, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from criticizing the editing style of other editors. When I tag an article, I put it on my watchlist and frequently make improvements later. Please assume good faith. I don't have to do things the way you prefer to do them yourself. Yworo (talk) 14:15, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bibliography

The bibliography should have full publication data. In particular, the names of the publishers are missing. Yworo (talk) 14:13, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]