User talk:Mobileme

Hi Guys!

Well I am not completely done, but 80% there, so I thought I'd share with you why this article is important. First, this article already exists in the French wiki section, I am more or less just translating. So obviously this was deemed significant enough before.

I recently met Philippe at the Namm show and was so impressed at to how he started this from scratch and really make it into a company. In France his site has a PR5 and big alexa rankings, it is the number one resource for musicians in France, it's like the Harmony Central (USA) of France. He has recently launched his English version of the site which is slowly growing, and is in the same spirit of the French site as musicians are musicians everywhere.

Philippe is down to earth, and still keeps the same philosophy which is to provide objective advice and help to musicians. Yes, he runs a business only in so much as it takes money to run a website like this and the man needs to live on something.

Audiofanzine is really committed to providing good content. For Namm 2009, they published hundreds of news items and exclusive video footage from the show room floor of Namm. Thanks to this website, sneak previews of much awaited gear was published on the net and spread in leading forums...

let me know what you think...I'm new to this whole wiki stuff and don't know all the rules...

Thanks for your e-mail. I prefer to do Wikipedia business in full view of the Wikipedia community, so I'll respond here. Your article was deleted because it didn't meet the Wikipedia guidelines for the notability of web content and I agreed with the editor who tagged it for speedy deletion. Specifically, there were no reliable sources -- impartial third-party arm's-length experts -- who attested to the relative importance or "specialness" of the webzine relative to others, and in a way that the reader can confirm those sources. Unfortunately, your opinion as to the importance or excellence of its content can't be used to support your assertion that this site is notable (unless you have expert credentials of which I'm not aware). I would recommend, if you intend to remake this article for the third time, that you do so in what we call a "sandbox" page, where you can add references, etc., without worrying if the article is going to be immediately deleted. If you would like me to retrieve the deleted content and put it into a sandbox page for you, I'd be happy to do that; just leave me a note. You might also read through WP:Your first article and WP:Why was my article deleted? for some hints as to how to move forward, if you choose to do so. I'd also suggest that "When I am completely finished I will discuss why it should not be deleted." is not going to be a useful approach; as you've learned, new page patrol takes place quickly and definitively and we don't wait for explanations that may never be provided. I suggest it would be better to build the article in a sandbox page and mount it when you're sure it meets the relative guidelines. I trust this is the "human message" you require. If there's anything further, please leave me a message at the bottom of my talk page. Accounting4Taste:talk 01:43, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note. I've created the sandbox page with the deleted material for you at User:Mobileme/Sandbox, as you requested. As you mentioned in your note, yes, the most useful citations will be articles from the press; comparisons of one with another would not usually be appropriate unless those comparisons were made by third-party experts, because they would be considered original research. Check out this article for some hints as to the type of references that are most useful. If you have any further questions, feel free to leave me another note. Accounting4Taste:talk 16:44, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I believe French-language citations would be quite appropriate; we have translators available should that be required. It might be helpful to provide a brief precis in English of the contents of a French-language source. Accounting4Taste:talk 16:46, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To the best of my knowledge, when you have citations from a magazine, although JPGs would be useful (I'm not sure where exactly you would put them, but I think they would be useful -- but they would violate copyright if you put them here), I think it's sufficient merely to cite the exact place where the article could be found. For instance (and I'm making this up entirely), "My 50 Favourite Restaurants", by John Smith, in Time magazine, October 3, 1987 issue, pages 16-20. That way, anyone who cares to do so can locate the original material. I believe there are very specific rules as to how Wikipedia likes to see these citations written out, but they vary according to the source, and I'm not very familiar with them (for instance, magazines are cited differently than books), so I'd advise a little research on the best format. Hope this helps. Accounting4Taste:talk 17:18, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note. The blog that's referenced isn't really a reliable source as near as I can tell -- see WP:LINKSTOAVOID (#11) for some guidelines on this topic. However, the accumulation of links to the French-language press seems to me (with my limited understanding of French) as though it would be worthwhile... it's just not quite thorough enough. Instead of providing a link to a page within the website itself that lists these citations, I suggest it would be better to list each separate citation within the article in the same area where you have the single link, ideally with a link to how to find it. I can't say that each of these references is valid but, if you want a hint, the more references you provide that look like they would be reasonably authoritative, the more likely it is that editors will perceive them as being authoritative. I'm not proud of the idea that the number of citations is sometimes better than the authoritativeness of any individual citation, but sometimes it works that way. Take another look at the way I wrote down the imaginary citation from Time magazine above to get an idea what people will be looking for when they see citations. (And, as I said, I also advise that you look up the right way to cite different sources like newspapers and magazines.) I hope this helps. Let me know if you want further advice. Accounting4Taste:talk 17:18, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]