User talk:Dvelopmentguru
Asher Roth
[edit]
Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! I noticed that you recently added commentary to an article, Asher Roth. While Wikipedia welcomes editors' opinions on an article and how it could be changed, these comments are more appropriate for the article's accompanying talk page. If you post your comments there, other editors working on the same article will notice and respond to them and your comments will not disrupt the flow of the article. Thank you. —Politizer talk/contribs 05:04, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
- Once again, please do not add your signature to articles, as you did in this edit. —Politizer talk/contribs 00:44, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
Speedy deletion of Language Workshop for Children
[edit]
A tag has been placed on Language Workshop for Children requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company or corporation, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for companies and corporations.
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 article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Toddst1 (talk) 23:37, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of Francois Thibaut
[edit]
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Francois Thibaut, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:
- Article about a real person which does not establish notability; article is unreferenced (numerous ELs that link only to the index pages of nytimes, abcnews, etc.)
All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. —Politizer talk/contribs 23:52, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of Thibaut Technique
[edit]A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Thibaut Technique, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:
- No assertion of notability, no sources other than self-published ones
All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. —Politizer talk/contribs 00:26, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
December 2008
[edit]
Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Thibaut Technique has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Thingg⊕⊗ 00:54, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
Welcome
[edit]  A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10... 100... 200
And here are several pages on things to avoid:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please remember to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~) - if you click on the
|
ChildofMidnight (talk) 04:07, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
References
[edit]Dvelopmentguru, thanks for taking some time to add footnotes in the article. I am keeping the {{refimprove}} tag for now because, while there are some footnotes, there are still large chunks of the article that don't have a source given. Still, {{refimprove}} is better than {{unreferenced}}, which is the cleanup tag that was there before.
As for the other cleanup tag, it's because the footnotes are a bit messy right now. The easiest way to clean them up is to use the {{cite web}} template and other templates available at WP:CITET (the abbreviation for "citation templates"). To do that, you just paste in the following code inside the <ref></ref> tags, and then fill in as many fields as you can:
{{cite web | url= | title= | author= | work= | date= | accessdate= }}
If you use that template, it takes care of all the formatting and everything for you; all you have to do is track down the appropriate information (ie, the article's author for each author, the publication date, [[New York Times]] for |work=, etc.).
Thanks, —Politizer talk/contribs 04:15, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
- Hey Dvelopmentguru, that's a good idea, but the Asher Roth article probably isn't the best to use as a model, as it has lots of problems of its own. (A few months ago I went through and cleaned up all the refs, but since then people have messed them all up again.) If you want good examples of how to do footnotes, you can take a look at some of the articles I work on the most, such as Re-education through labor; I think that would be a good model for how to format the citations. —Politizer talk/contribs 15:27, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
Image source and copyright licensing problem with Image:Thibaut.jpg
[edit]
Thanks for uploading Image:Thibaut.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.
As well as adding the source, we also need to know the terms of the license that the copyright holder has published the image under, usually done by adding a licensing tag. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 20:29, 31 December 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. (ESkog)(Talk) 20:29, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
- If the image belongs to someone else, the best thing to do would be to have that person e-mail permissions-en@wikipedia.org with the relevant details. Full information about how to do that is available at Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. (ESkog)(Talk) 18:29, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what you mean. If you mean that the original creator of the image has released his/her rights to the image, then we would need to have that release e-mailed to the address I gave you above. (ESkog)(Talk) 03:04, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
Commons
[edit]If you upload an image to the Commons, you can show it by using its filename there, with no additional code. You might have trouble if there is an image on Wikipedia with the same filename; let me know if that is the case and I can help you out there. (ESkog)(Talk) 12:47, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
- Got it. You should be taken care of. (ESkog)(Talk) 22:22, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
Re: Speedy deletion inquiry
[edit]I think the article would be better if you found some independent sources (other media) who had written about the program in question. The Muzzy article also needs these, and if the article you created did end up being deleted I could see a case made for its deletion as well. I don't think your article is in any danger of speedy deletion, but in its current form without any third-party sources, it may be the subject of a discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion if someone felt it did not belong in the encyclopedia. (ESkog)(Talk) 03:22, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
Nomination of Professor Toto for deletion
[edit]
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Professor Toto is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Professor Toto until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Boleyn (talk) 08:02, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
Nomination of François Thibaut for deletion
[edit]The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/François Thibaut until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.