| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
Contested deletion edit
This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because I feel it has a significant importance in the creation of the critically acclaimed and commercially successful video game Jak and Daxter: The Precursor Legacy. I have added three references to both Charles' official blog on Blogspot, and to his official gallery hub on The Animation Academy. If the reference formatting is incorrect for Wikipedia I would surely appreciate it if someone were to correct those, but I feel the URLs I provided are in fact reliable sources. I will continue editing the page and adding new sources as I find them; I hope I can keep the page alive. Thanks! --Jacedc (talk) 01:55, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
- Please add reliable, independent, 3rd party sources. Primary sources such as blogs and subject's web site are not sufficient to assert notability. See: WP:RS, WP:V, and WP:BIO for more information. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:32, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
- Fixed. Citation 1 references a Blogger profile (not an actual blog, therefore not subject to change.) If it does, I have the Google page cache index for backup, but there are parameters in the url which break the reference template, so I used the actual URL (I'll provide it if need be.) Citation 2 and citation 3 reference actual books (from Google Books.) Should be acceptable? If not, please tell me and I'll fix them. I also used the
cite webandcite booktemplates instead of raw ref tags, so the formatting should be good as well. --Jacedc (talk) 15:02, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
- Fixed. Citation 1 references a Blogger profile (not an actual blog, therefore not subject to change.) If it does, I have the Google page cache index for backup, but there are parameters in the url which break the reference template, so I used the actual URL (I'll provide it if need be.) Citation 2 and citation 3 reference actual books (from Google Books.) Should be acceptable? If not, please tell me and I'll fix them. I also used the
4 November 2013 edit
Inquiring about the "lead missing" template when it clearly has an introduction. I will remove the tag if I do not get a response within the next three days. --Jacedc (talk) 16:50, 4 November 2013 (UTC)