User talk:Celine1018

Welcome

Hello, Dka-national, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions.

I notice that one of the first articles you edited appears to be dealing with a topic with which you may have a conflict of interest. In other words, you may find it difficult to write about that topic in a neutral and objective way, because you are, work for, or represent, the subject of that article. Your recent contributions may have already been reverted for this very reason.

To reduce the chances of deletion, you might like to draft your article before submission, then ask me or any other editor to proofread it. To start creating a draft article, just click your user name at the top of the screen when you are logged in, and edit that page as you would any other. If the page you created has already been deleted from Wikipedia, but you want to save the content from it to use for that draft, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page.

The one firm rule we do have in connection with conflicts of interest is that accounts used by more than one person will unfortunately be blocked from editing. It is also worth noting that Wikipedia generally does not allow editors to have usernames which specifically link them to one company or corporation. If your username does have such a name, it would be advisable for you to request a change of username.

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! You can also just type {{helpme}} on your user 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! Naraht (talk) 00:10, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delta Kappa Alpha page.

I think what you have made is usable. While there are issues with Conflict of Interest as in the welcome template I just added, it doesn't appear to be too slanted. There are still some minor things that need to be fixed (the references should have the description inside the text not <ref>[website] descripition</ref> but rather <ref>[website description]</ref>. My primary question is whether the members of the previous incarnation of Delta Kappa Alpha consider those who have restarted it as members of the same organization. I'll take another look either tonight(Thursday) or tomorrow. Also, in general category pages shouldn't be in things in the userspace, but since we can move it soon, it should be OK. I'll go ahead and move it after I review it, OK?Naraht (talk) 00:15, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Naraht! I'll fix the ref descriptions as soon as I can. I've also asked for a change of username, so hopefully that will go through quickly. As for whether members of the previous incarnation consider the new Alpha chapter to be of the same fraternity, I cannot speak for members such as George Lucas, who of course I am not in personal contact with, but USC professor and DKA alum Drew Casper certainly considers the new chapter to be the same Delta Kappa Alpha that he belonged to. The faculty and administration at USC's School of Cinematic Arts likewise has always said that the Alpha chapter was "reestablished" on campus. Hopefully I made sense... Dka-national (talk) 00:30, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you requested a namechange, the name you picked appears to fit all of the criteria, so I expect it should go through in the next 12 hours (or less). The ultimate reference for re-established would be a mention of how long it has been there or the fact that it had been re-established on [[1]], but I certainly don't see anything that contradicts it. (I'm not trying to be a pain about it, but Wikipedia lives on references, and frankly with the tie to the old Delta Kappa Alpha, your group is notable, but a brand new group called Phi Upsilon Gamma (or something) that has done what your group has since re-establishment with no tie probably wouldn't be. But until someone challenges it... As for Drew Casper, you may want to see what can be done to upgrade that page as well. At one point on his page there was a mention of that he did reviews for the Catholic Legion of Decency, and if that could be referenced for him, it would be an interesting point, IMO. Another thing that should be fixed, is that the three groups on the template are in alphabetical order within the group. Naraht (talk) 01:03, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I changed reference #9 on the page to a pdf from when in 2009 the reest. chapter was trying to attract interest/awareness from new members. The mission statement in the pdf says DKA is the "resurrected cinema fraternity" and I assume that even more recent, revised mission statements have omitted that part. I will look into updating Casper's page, and to be honest I wasn't sure what 3 groups needed to be alphabetical, so I went ahead and tried to alphabetize a couple different sections (references, links, Professional Fraternity template) Dka-national (talk) 04:18, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what you mean by alphabetizing the references or links... The re-established is still a primary source rather than a preferred secondary source, but we use what we have. Two more sources for links are google newspaper archives for dka and books.google.com entry for dka(click both) And I *still* want to read completely through what happened with Mae West.

Please use the Celine1018 account

PLease use the Celine1018 account which was created...Naraht (talk) 02:31, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]