User talk:Andreaimparato

Welcome!

Hello, Andreaimparato, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, like Bonnie Bowden, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for page creation, and may soon be deleted.

You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the Article Wizard.

Thank you.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! —Ecw.Technoid.Dweeb | contributions | talk | ☮✌☮ 02:15, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Bonnie Bowden

A tag has been placed on Bonnie Bowden requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a clear copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. —Ecw.Technoid.Dweeb | contributions | talk | ☮✌☮ 02:15, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Bonnie bowden

A tag has been placed on Bonnie bowden, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Sheeana ^Talk 04:14, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Bonnie Bowden

The article Bonnie Bowden has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia:Help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. The-Pope (talk) 12:47, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest?

Hi there, you seem to be misunderstanding the verifiability requirements of this site. You wrote that "the following notelines, bios and artist's explanations are written under agreement of the Artist herself, and verifiable by external sources" and then later (I assume it was you, but you didn't login, so it showed up as an IP address) "as indicated by the following "parentheses reference verifiable source": (see the Artist's Official Site at www.bonniebowden.com That Site is copyrighted by Mrs. Bonnie Bowden herself)"

This is not acceptable to prove anything. Firstly, self published sources are rarely, if ever, acceptable as a reliable source. Secondly, wikipedia has a strong policy about avoiding conflicts of interest. Unfortunately, this means that the subject of an article is actually the worst person to be involved in writing the article. If you or the subject has problems with it, then there is a mechanism to contact the wikimedia foundation to correct or remove, but self-editing is not encouraged, as it is nearly impossible to do without any bias.

This is an encyclopedia. It relies on having information that is verifiable from reliable, independent sources. You must click on each of the blue links in the paragraphs above and understand the requirements, and determine if you can abide by them, or else the article will not be able to remain. As it is, the article is written like a magazine review or other fansite. It is not encyclopedic. I am about to edit it back to be a "stub" that will have a greater chance of remaining as an article, but without any independent references, it will be deleted in a few days time. Regards, The-Pope (talk) 15:02, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't revert again

The version that you reverted to has many problems. There are wikipedia style problems, referencing problems, verifiability problems, general tone problems. If you revert again it will be considered vandalism and you may be blocked from editing. If you need help, either reply here below these comments or on my talk page. Regards, The-Pope (talk) 13:01, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Two important things about the Bonnie Bowden article

First it is absolutely forbidden to remove a BLP-PROD (that deletion notice at the top of an article) until you fix the problem. It is a fixed, unbreakable requirement that all new articles abotu living persons must have at least 1 citation, otherwise they must be deleted. Thus, the prod has to stay until a reliable source is added to the article. Continuing to remove that prod will be considered disruptive editing, and can result in you being blocked.

Second, I strongly recommend that you take a look at the articles of other musicians so that you can see how they are supposed to be laid out and written. The version your wrote has some signficant problems; the biggest of which was that it was written in one single, complex, difficult to follow paragraph that I couldn't even understand. The second biggest problem is that it read more like a fan article, full of flowery phrases that complimented Bowden--on Wikipedia, our coverage must be entirely neutral (see WP:NPOV for more information). Again, take a look at other articles on musicians to get an idea of what to look for.

I recommend that, if you want to improve the article, do two things:

Find and add reliable sources that verify the information in the article. If a source is not found by the deadline, the article will be deleted, unfortunately.
Try adding a little bit to the article at a time; then we can help mold and craft the information so that it meets Wikipedia's policies.

If you have any questions, please ask me on the article's talk page. Qwyrxian (talk) 14:11, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

August 2010

Please do not add or change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did to Bonnie Bowden. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. The-Pope (talk) 16:07, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]