User talk:Russellfsm

Welcome!

Hello, Russellfsm, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

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 need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a mere directory of links nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that exist to attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam policies for further explanations of links that are considered appropriate. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. See the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. —— Eagle (ask me for help) 03:45, 9 November 2006 (UTC) bibliomaniac15 Review? 00:03, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

re: Web documentary

Hi there, I am totally at a loss as to why this article was nominated for deletion as I commented on the AfD. The article may have had problems of style or tone as first written,(I haven't looked at the history yet) but I have no doubt that it will survive AfD and would be glad to assist you with writing and/or expansion according to WP guidelines. --killing sparrows ^(chirp!) 03:53, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re: Web documentary

As a newbie, I made some near fatal transgressions! The criticisms of the first posters were not entirely out of line -- the speed of the response caught me by surprise, though. I'd planned on editing the content, but the cries for deletion were immediate. So, I quickly pulled the offensive material (an article I'd written; mentions of my own name and so on). However, I am greatly relieved at your tone and approach and gladly accept your invitation to provide guidance. It is a valuable topic, one that merits its own heading. Thanks again for your support. Russellfsm 06:53, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A couple of suggestions for you.

Try to put something in which will show why a Web documentary is inherently different than a documentary film or a non-fiction book.
References to third party, independent sources about why this medium is important would be good too. Is there a magazine or trade journal centered around documentaries or film in general which would have something about it?
If you do want to write a creative piece about it, maybe about how to make one or what tools are needed, you could always put it in Wikibooks, as long as it has not be published under a non-free license previously.

If you would like any more suggestions, just let me know on my talk page. Slavlin 04:46, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re: Web documentary

Hi there, I don't think that you need to worry about the article being deleted. There must be a consensus to delete and that is surely not happening here. There are no arguments presented that make a good argument for deletion. At this point one of two things might happen. 1. An admin may close the debate and rule either a firm keep, or, no consensus to delete therefore keep. Or, 2. Relist the debate to elicit more comment. Either way I think the article will be kept.

I believe you are correct in most of the comments you have made on the deletion debate. The guidelines (not policies!) against writing about yourself or a topic you are close to are not prohibitions. After the AfD closes you can add in as much information as you want but I would suggest that you work with a disinterested editor to be sure the article's tone remains neutral. I would be willing to help with this, as, I think, would be Closenplay. Note that most editors on Wikipedia are not experts on the topics they write on, nor need they be. We are not in the original thought business, it is much closer to reportage. I think the best qualifications to edit on WP are critical thinking, neutrality and the ability to write a clear sentence. --killing sparrows ^(chirp!) 00:31, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I chimed in over at AFD too when I saw this nomination was still open and looking for additional opinions. I'd also be happy to help out with developing the article some more or vetting new additions if that would help. I think it's a fascinating new vehicle for documentary/advocacy - great article idea Russel! Paxse 07:37, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the support. I see the AfD has been removed. That's great! I'm actually speaking this afternoon with a leading wildlife film producer who teaches at American University about web documentaries. I'm extremely busy right now, so I'll only be able to get into this occasionally over the next several weeks. But I'll try to begin some initial edits to help flesh it out more deeply. Russellfsm 21:43, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

QUESTION: Sorry to take the lazy way out, but could someone point me to where I can see how to cite a print article that doesn't exist online? Thank you. Russellfsm 22:00, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. Check the Further reading subheading in this article: Khmer Rouge for some examples. For the final word on citations see WP:CITE. By the way asking a question on your own talk page is a little similar to talking to your self :) Unless someone has your page on their watchlist (like me) or stumbles across it, you could be waiting a while for an answer. Next time you have a question, click on the highlighted name of someone (you're welcome to use me), go to their talk (discussion) page, click the + sign to start a new topic/subheading and then type your question. Good luck with the new project and keep making documentaries! Paxse 15:14, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]