User talk:Proritorie
Welcome!
Hello, Proritorie, 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, such as Dada Gallotti, 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:
- Your first article
- Biographies of living persons
- How to write a great article
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- Help pages
- Tutorial
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! Clubmarx (talk) 03:41, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
The article Dada Gallotti 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. Clubmarx (talk) 03:41, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
References
[edit]I've put the tag back on because we need something better than imdb. This is not considered a reliable source here on Wikipedia. You must reference an article about a living person - and in fact all articles should be referenced - or it will be deleted. References must be from reliable sources - not blogs, forums or from material that is or can be supplied by the subject of the article - which is where the objection to imbd comes in. Peridon (talk) 19:08, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
- Why is IMDB not good enough? /Pro
- Because the info can come from the subject - press releases or whatever. Sources like that can be used to back up points in an article, but not to be the only source of notability. People can have long careers in films, but these may be as bit part actors in B movies (with an average screen time 20 seconds per film). There needs to be indication of the subject's films, and the importance of their parts and of the films. As I say, no source can be used for establishing notability if it is editable by the public or by the subject (or their PR dept or fanclub...), or if it comes from 'official' or otherwise connected sites. This rules out aboutus, LinkedIn, IMDb, Wikipedia itself, any blog or forum or similar. Good newspaper reviews and reports (preferably not The Sun or the National Enquirer) or magazines (but not fanzines) are OK. There has to be editorial supervision in the case of newspapers online - the paid reporter is OK but the commenter on his/her article in the blog section isn't. IMDb can be used - but not as the main establisher of the suitability of the subject of the article. Peridon (talk) 12:34, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
- The mymovies.it link looks better - if only because I haven't yet found out who writes the articles there. The tone of the article is rather as if it comes from her publicity machine than being independent - but I suppose some people may write that way. Try and find something in English - this IS the English language Wikipedia and not everyone here can understand Italian. Peridon (talk) 12:44, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
- Because the info can come from the subject - press releases or whatever. Sources like that can be used to back up points in an article, but not to be the only source of notability. People can have long careers in films, but these may be as bit part actors in B movies (with an average screen time 20 seconds per film). There needs to be indication of the subject's films, and the importance of their parts and of the films. As I say, no source can be used for establishing notability if it is editable by the public or by the subject (or their PR dept or fanclub...), or if it comes from 'official' or otherwise connected sites. This rules out aboutus, LinkedIn, IMDb, Wikipedia itself, any blog or forum or similar. Good newspaper reviews and reports (preferably not The Sun or the National Enquirer) or magazines (but not fanzines) are OK. There has to be editorial supervision in the case of newspapers online - the paid reporter is OK but the commenter on his/her article in the blog section isn't. IMDb can be used - but not as the main establisher of the suitability of the subject of the article. Peridon (talk) 12:34, 4 May 2010 (UTC)