User:DGG/userhelp

links: deltalk, WP:AFD, WP:PRODSUM, WP:CSD, WP:DELREV

This is not fixed boilerplate, but it consists of some frequent advice which I customize to fit the circumstances.

basic adviceEdit

The peculiar way it works here, is that it is not a good idea to make stub articles and then fill them in--it is much safer to set them up off-wiki, add a newspaper reference or two, and then put them in, one at a time. We are trying to figure out some way to keep people from deleting incomplete articles as soon as they are made, but haven't found one that can also cope with the immense amount of real junk that people put in--we actually need to delete 1000 articles a day. There is one semi-secret trick: type in

-- It should give you a day or two grace.

And there is another trick, not secret at all. Register. It is just as anonymous--actually, much more anonymous. And then you get known for doing good stuff. DGG (talk) 23:50, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

process notesEdit

  • stub problems: The way it is around here now, the only safe way to create a new page or edit a stub is to do it either offline or in the sandbox in user space. This should not be necessary, and in fact was less necessary 6 months ago. But the increased number of WP editors finding new page patrol more suitable to their skills than working on articles, seems to make it the only reliable way. (I am one of those who usually !votes to delete articles on elementary and middle schools, but I like to see fair play.)
  • Another editor has added a "prod" template to the article Meeting Nightly in the Open , suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process.All contributions are appreciated, but that editor believes it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, (see "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree with the notice, discuss the issues at its talk page. You may remove the deletion notice, and the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Articles for Deletion
  • Another editor has added a "speedy delete" template to the article Open Nightly in the Meeting , suggesting that it be deleted according to the speedy deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but that editor believes it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, (see "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). If this page does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, or you intend to fix it, please remove this notice, but do not remove this notice from pages that you have created yourself. If you created this page and you disagree with this page’s proposed speedy deletion, please add:

{{hangon}} to the top of this page, and then explain why you believe the article should not be deleted on its talk page. This will alert administrators to your intention, and should permit you the time to write your explanation.

    • In my opinion, the article has at least potential merit. As I am not the author, I can remove the notice, and I have done so, This will halt the process temporarily. However, the article is very likely to be renominated for deletion very quickly unless it is much improved. Please see my suggestions below.

I apologize for not having the time to help more personally. --

  • I am informing you -- merely as a friend -- that that this possibly useful page, has been or probably soon will be put on the AfD list to discuss its possible deletion, or is already being considered for deletion

burden of proofEdit

  • The sources found are more than sufficient. Perhaps they should have been looked for in the first place.DGG
The burden of attributing statements is on he who adds the info, not he who deletes. If an article doesn't cite its sources, I can look for them, or I can remove the unsourced info, or, if totally unsourced (or unreliably sourced), I can propose its deletion. All are perfectly acceptable methods. Picaroon 03:48, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
You should really read the sentence following the one in Wikipedia:Attribution that you have just paraphrased, which talks about your making reasonable efforts to find sources, yourself. You should also read Wikipedia:Deletion policy and Wikipedia:Guide to deletion#Nomination. The burden is on you, as a nominator who is nominating an article for deletion for being unverifiable, to look for sources. It is not enough to simply note that there are none cited in the article. That does not constitute unverifiability, and is not a rationale for deletion, per policy. DGG is quite right. Uncle G 04:00, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

general notesEdit

  • To avoid deletion of the page on Operational Paranoia I advise you very strongly to immediately revise it. In particular, I suggest that you
  1. change all the headings to avoid full caps, which is not the style here,
  2. decrease the number of past & present officers
  3. leave in only a few words like importance and notable.
  4. link to WP descriptions of projects or people
  5. insert external links to other major groups
  6. add references to any newspaper or magazine articles that describe the organization & its work (even if not in English).

I'd advise you to act fast--these processes proceed very rapidly, and many of those who join the discussion will probably want to delete the article if it remains unimproved--and they are generally correct. Good luck--I wish you the best. I apologize for not having the time to help personally. --

copyrightEdit

  • The only way to actually show what your product is that is sometimes accepted is a single screenshot, but we can only use it if your formally donate it to us under the provisions of WP:DCP, which means releasing 'all rights, even the right to commercial use. There is no guarantee that the gift will remain of WP if it is thought inappropriate, and the gift is nevertheless irrevocable. for more information, see WP:COPYRIGHT.

typesEdit

---multi-bio---

  • I notice you have been making numerous biography stubs. This is a meritorious and highly worthwhile activity, but sometimes it is not easy to understand from such a stub that the person is notable. There are a number of editors engaged in the essential activity of checking newly created articles and deleting those about truly unnotable people, of which there are several hundred each day. To keep your articles from being deleted by mistake, always include at least the following information:
saying in the first sentence something to demonstrate notability in unmistakable words, like "A.B. is a notable poet, professor of X at [ ], winner of the XYZ prize, author of ten widely-read books" (or whatever applies). Use the exact wording, include either the word "notable" or "internationally-known" or "nationally-known"; do not use "famous" -- May sound silly, but that is what many people look for here.
giving some 3rd party sources. A website at a university etc. can be one, but it cannot be the only one. Book reviews are fine, or a newspaper stories. Print or web is OK, but not from a list or a blog.

I apologize for not having the time to help more personally.

deprod political / religious articlesEdit

  • The page you have edited Action Beyond Cambodia and some related pages, has been listed for proposed deletion. I have removed the deletion tag in order that there can be a full discussion. It will undoubtedly be listed on AfD within the next day or two. I am taking no position on the issue at this time; I de-prod any page where I think may involve religious or political controversy to avoid possible bias by making sure they have a full discussion.

I apologize for not having the time to help more personally.

political candidatesEdit

  • not being the author,

I have removed the speedy tag, because I think national candidate of major parties are always N, and I include the Greens as a major party at least in canada. My opinion is not universally shared, so i urge you to write a very strong article backed by unimpeachable third party published sources I apologize for not having the time to help more personally.


to bio/autobio authorsEdit

  • There are some problems with the article on Xavier Yseult Zebec, which has now being put up for deletion. What is particularly needed are 3rd party sources for his activities, to shown that they are recognized as notable. Anything, print or web will help, but at least some of them must be from sources other than his own group's newsletter or magazine.

This has to be done within the next day or two to do any good. I apologize for not having the time to help personally.

I have also looked at some of your contributions on other Delightful Emperors of France, and the same applies to them. They must have sources---there are many people engaged in the useful task of checking biographical articles and proposing deletion of those without sources. Since all WP articles must have such 3rd part sources, they are perfectly right to do so. I suggest you first take care of these before adding more--there is no point in doing the work if it is going to be deleted.
  • I am trying to defend it, but will not be able to without more material.
  • If you do not do this immediately, the article will probably be deleted in a day or two--though not by me.
  • A final point It is necessary to say something in the first sentence something to demonstrate notability, like
"A.B. is a notable (whatever), , winner of the Nobel prize (or whatever applies).. Use the exact wording, including either the word "notable" or "internationally-known" or "nationally-known"; do not use "famous" May sound silly, but that is what people look for here.

to academic autobio authorsEdit

    • Prof. Q. Random seems a worthy subject for an article, but there is, very unfortunately, some prejudice here against even important people from the academic world. It would help the article to remain if you adjust it a little to the usual WP style, which includes:

what to do about it

    • The page you have edited on Prof. Q. Random , has been listed for proposed deletion. I have removed the deletion tag, which stops the process for the moment.

She seems a worthy subject for an article, but there is, very unfortunately, some prejudice here against even important people from the academic world. if you would like the article to remain you must write it in the WP style, which includes:

  • looking like an encyclopedia article not a CV
  • saying in the first sentence something to dramatically demonstrate notability, like "A.b. is an internationally-known professor of X at, winner of the XYZ prize and 10 honorary doctorates" , or A.B. is a notable authority on Whatever. She is ... (etc) (whatever applies best). Use the exact wording I recommend, including either the word "notable" or "internationally-known" or "nationally-known"; do not use "famous" -- May sound silly, but that is what many people look for here.
  • No later than the second sentence, include a line listing the current position, as "A.S. is Professor of [[Qyz]] in the Department of [[Ufology, or whatever]] at at the [[University of Wherever]]. Include the brackets. If it is a named professorship, say so; if he is or was chairman or head of department, say so. If he is less than a full professor, indicate that. If the subject or the university does not make a link, check Wikipedia for the form used for that subject or school.
  • not going into disproportionate personal details
  • listing college degrees with university and year -- and putting the university names in double brackets
  • listing important awards, important memberships and offices held --a list is more readable than paragraphs
  • If editor of any journal, say so.
  • listing books published as formal references style: Author, title, Publisher, year ISBN if possible.
  • listing some major published papers, say how many total. Do not just link to Google, list the most prestigious papers. State the importance the journals are. Say how many other papers cited them. Use PubMed, not Google or Google Scholar. --Pub Med covers this field better.

and, most important, giving some 3rd party sources. A website at a university etc. can be one, but it cannot be the only one. Book reviews are fine, or newspaper stories about an award. Campus student newspapers are generally not OK. Print or web is OK, but not from a list or a blog. There is, very unfortunately, some prejudice against people from the academic world.

There is understandable feeling here against articles written by the subject or a member of his family, so it has to be a really solid article. See WP:AUTO and WP:COI

If you do not do this right away, the article will probably be deleted in a day or two--though not by me. If this happens, just recreate it, but take you time--maybe in a week after careful preparation I apologize for not having the time to help personally.

    • details
  1. . Birthdate and place
  2. . Degrees and where they're from
  3. . Honours
  4. . Previous major positions
  5. . Publications
  6. . There must be third party mentions. -- We need book reviews or news items -- there obviously will be some reviews, and there should be news items about his programs or talks. If you cant find the reviews get some help from a librarian and put them in , tomorrow, as References
  7. . external References: at the bottom, including the web page at the University, and any other official university page

if it looks like a cvEdit

As the reviewing administrator, in order to prevent deletion of the CV of Peter james masquerading as a WP article, I removed the un-encyclopedic material, and removed the speedy delete tag that an editor had placed on the material. It needs some further attention:

  1. Please change the use of the letter "l" in dates to the number "1".
  2. Please add one or two references from third party published sources to his work. They should be available, considering the distinguished nature of his career.
  3. Please add as "External Links" a link to his official website at his university, and one or two links to similiar information that might serve to document the routine information.
  4. Please add a paragraph describing in a narrative manner the work he is best known for, with a reference to one or two of his books, and, preferable, to someone else writing about its importance.
  5. Please add at least one or two book reviews of his most important books, so people know they have been recognized in the profession.
  6. Please separate the books he has written or co-written fro the ones he has edited or co-edited.

general unsourcedEdit

Sources for The Dual Inheritance Theory of Cultural Evolution

Hello. Good work on [[ , and thanks for the contribution. However, you did not provide any references or sources in the article. Keeping Wikipedia accurate and verifiable is very important, and as you might be aware there is currently a push to encourage editors to cite the sources they used when adding content. Can you list in the article any websites, books, or other sources that will allow people to verify the content in it? You can simply add links, preferably as inline citations, or see citation templates for different citation methods. Thanks!

(User:Piotrus|Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus)

historical figuresEdit

{{subst:PRODWarning|Sir Nothing Goes}}

Another editor has added a "prod" template to the article : Sir Nothing Goes , suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor did not believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, (see "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree with the notice, discuss the issues at its talk page. Removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, but the article may still be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached, or if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria.

Dear friend, to get this article to stay in you must: 1. Provide some more information about the subject 2. Provide at least two references to reliable sources about the subject's life , accomplishments, or role in history 3. explicitly say in the first sentence why he is important .

For less notable individuals, try including them in a group article. 

If you do not do this immediately, the article will probably be deleted in a day or two--though not by me. If this happens, just recreate it, but take you time--maybe in a week after careful preparation I apologize for not having the time to help personally.

organisationsEdit

  • Read [[WP:BFAQ|our Business FAQ]. It's oriented towards businesses primarily, but it deals with non=-profit groups as well. The basic point is that we are an encyclopedia, not an place to post public relations material or a directory information. The first paragraph of your article described your mission of spreading the gospel through contemporary media. OK, we have many articles on thousands of the organized groups doing this, but you need to show that you are notable already for it, as demonstrated by third party published reliable sources, print or web, talking about your work. We can't help you become notable; once you are, and sufficiently so that people will look in an encyclopedia for information about you, then we will want to include the organization. Otherwise, it's just public relations, advertising in the hope that you will become really visible and important. If you have sources to show this, rewrite the article including them. I checked, and I cannot find them. The remainder of the article was contact information--but that's for a directory. It is just possible that an article on Lou Butterfield might be acceptable, but that will depend not on me, but on what the community here decides.
  • This is a very significant organization in Texas and is the state's largest PAC. The article should be expanded but not deleted. [[User:Fayepaynter|Fayepaynter] 22:26, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
    • I accept this but others may not. I advise the very rapid expansion of the article and the addition of reliable source. The way things work around here now, you probably have a few hours. If deleted, feel free to re-created it if you add substantial content, making sure that it's not copied from elsewhere. If re-deleted anyway, which does happen, I suggest that you first make sure you have a very sound case, and then apply at WP:Deletion Review Good luck with it.
  • "All content from this page is original content..., I wrote every word of this... There are no copyright violations, nor is this considered spam. This page is a work in progress as are all pages on WIKI, and its content will be improved over time."
    • please be aware that this will be checked from the organization web pages. if any of the text appears there, it is automatically copyright to either you or the organization unless you specifically donate it to us under the terms of the GFDL license. Please see WP:COPYRIGHT for the necessary procedure.
please additionally be aware that the material must not sound like a press release, and the present material does. You must provide factual information sourced to outside reliable sources about the organization and its accomplishment. A vague discussion of plans and goals is, frankly, considered as advertising. I have accordingly marked this page for a delayed deletion process to permit your to rewrite it properly. However, any other administrator may decide to delete it at any time, so I advise you to do it very quickly.

I have given you a head start and a guide by deleting some clearly inappropriate material DGG 23:10, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

  • Please see our Business FAQ, which applies to commercial and non-commercial alike. What this article will need at the least is evidence that it actually is currently important, supported by 3rd party independent reliable published sources, print or online (but not blogs or press releases). If you can do this, then you may want to make the article in user space first, as it advises there. Please select another user name though, and declare specifically on your user page any conflict of interest.

companiesEdit

  • I am informing you -- merely as a friend -- that this possibly useful page, on your organization, Incorporated Self-Aggrandizement has been or

probably soon will be put on the AfD list to discuss its possible deletion, if it does not contain a little more relevant information about notability, and good references.

I would much rather have it able to stay in, but it will need in particular

  1. some information about the number of users, or the size,
  2. information about the use of the web site
  3. articles about the company or its products in general and professional newspapers or magazines, in print or on the web
  4. reviews about the products, in print or on the web

I'd advise you to act fast--these processes proceed very rapidly, and some of the people there quite reasonably want to delete an article like this if it is unimproved.

  • OK, I have changed to a slower method of deletion to give you several days to improve the article. Remove the advertising, and see WP:COI. By WP standards, all of most of the article says how good the company is, rather than describing it. The final part on description of the product is in what we consider excessive detail, more suitable for a product brochure. As a rough guide, if it reads like something you would hand to a prospective customer, it's wrong for WP.

The only way to actually show what your product is that is sometimes accepted is a single photograph or screenshot, but we can only use it if your formally donate it to us under the provisions of WP:DCP, which means releasing all rights, even the right to commercial use. There is no guarantee that the gift will remain of WP if it is thought inappropriate, and the gift is nevertheless irrevocable. See WP:COPY for further information.

  • Siggi's skyr,

you are certainly welcome to repost it as long as you improve it. The content said only that it was one brand of skyr , which county in NY the milk came from, and who sells it. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a directory. The information provided is available in many web sites, and in some cases in fuller form. I see from them that it has been known in Iceland as a specific brand, but this was not mentioned in the article, What you need to do is describe the product--and what there is special about this brand that would be important to a reader of an encyclopedia . That's step one--to provide encyclopedic information. Step two is to omit sales information-and who sells it is exactly the sort of thing to omit. The third step, essential for any article, but certainly for a commerical product, is to have two references, print or online, talking about it to show that other people think it important. They have to be from 3rd party sources unrelated to your business. They have to be published sources--blogs do not count --they have to be edited, published material. . Checking Google, the Observer article about you would be a good source for an article about Siggi, (but see WP:AUTO & WP:COI before you write it)--however, it does not mention the brand of skyr. The Epicurious blog --a resource I myself use for practical purposes--would not count--anyone can send in materials. If there's no English material, you can use Icelandic, if you provide a translation of the title and the key words. Please be aware of WP:COI. It is not prohibited to write an article about your own product, but such articles are looked on extremely carefully. If the article is inadequate, someone will surely delete it. Any editor can mark an article for deletion, and any admin can delete.

product redirectEdit

  • The other similar products in the list of Essential Forgettable Gifts do not have articles of their own, and it is not clear why this should be an exception. I therefore propose to incorporate the additional important & useful contents into the part on the Essential Forgettable page, and retain this page as a redirect crossreference to that section. This will actually get it more visible among the others of its category. If you think this would be inappropriate, say so on the article talk page, for there is then a formal process fin which you will be able to contest the proposed change.
  • The only way that is sometimes accepted to actually show your product is a single screenshot or photograph, but we can only use it if your formally donate it to us under the provisions of WP:DCP, which means releasing 'all rights, even the right to commercial use. There is no guarantee that the gift will remain of WP if it is thought inappropriate, and the gift is nevertheless irrevocable.

journalsEdit

Officially, we discourage COI, but you are right that in practice it does help build up articles, especially in areas were we don't quite have enough interested editors. So there is no reason why you cannot add pages, but be aware that they will be very closely examined. Therefore they should stay unquestionably within the rules, which I'd like to explain further.
  1. It's frequent for people expert at the customary sorts of advertising and publicity to feel a little out of place when working here; I & some others have worked with a fair number by now, getting them used to our style and requirements.
  2. What we want from articles describing journals (and other products) is a description of he product, with some sort of reference. We do not want material talking in general terms about how good it is or who should buy it. We want information only, not persuasion. The editor actually has a conflict of interest also, although that may not be noticed as easily since it will be one at a time. I may notice, since I try to examine all new journal articles.
But I don't think you're clear yet about the rules:
  1. You must explicitly donate the copyright for every page and for every image, using the forms as listed on WP:Copyright. Each time you need to ay that you are authorized to do so, and that you donate the text under GFDL, with no restrictions on its use. Read the GFDL license first--this means that the text you release can be copied and used and modified by anyone, even for commercial use--it's essentially the same as putting it in the public domain, except that there's a link back to where it came from. It is not reversible. But you may not want to use the text:
  2. Only factual language is acceptable describing the journal. You can list its principal field. For the journal that had sections I did this by listing the 4 sections. The usual paragraph on its aims is considered advertising copy, as is a broad listing of all the related fields of science. Similarly saying that it will be of interest to all researchers in chemistry (etc). Taking for example the version of Asia-Pacific Journal of Chemical Engineering, I'll explain in italics.

"The Asia-Pacific Journal of Chemical Engineering (usually abbreviated as APJ), is a peer-reviewed scientific journal, published since 2006 by John Wiley & Sons. In six issues per year, OK so far it publishes high quality papers and special topic issues in chemical-engineering related and specialised areas.all journals say they publish high quality papers; all journals with chemical engineering in the title cover chemical engineering. If the title is non-descriptive, then there's a point in such statements. That a journal publishes review articles or symposia is worth mentioning--we don't at the moment have classification for them, but they are planned. Asia-Pacific Journal of Chemical Engineering will focus particular attention on the key areas of; Process Application (separation, polymer, catalysis, nanotechnology, ferrous metallurgy), Energy and Environmental Technology (natural resources, coal gasification, gas liquidation, air pollution control, water treatment, waste utilisation and management) and Food, Pharmaceutical & Bioengineering (biomaterials, bioprocess, biochemical engineering) this is simply a list of all the applied fields; if said at all, I'd write It emphasizes applied rather than theoretical studies. but dont repeat the name. of the journal too often. Formerly known as Developments in Chemical Engineering and Mineral Processing: The Australasian Research Journal, published by Curtin University of Technology in print only (ISSN:0969-1855). we want this information, and in fact we'd like a statement of what formats a journal is published in--many humanities journals for example are still not online. 1 Audience/Readership Readership will include researchers working in chemical or process engineering –particularly in the emerging areas of fluid mechanics, particle science and biotechnology, nanotechnology, catalysis and process systems engineering. The Asia-Pacific Journal of Chemical Engineering is of interest to professional chemical engineers working in industries that involve chemical processes." we do not want this. it's obvious, unless the orientation is such as to say "meant for practical engineers rather than academic researchers" or the like. '

  1. What else do we want: actually, quite a lot there are many useful things you can say: * The name & institution of the editor in chief, but usually just the editor in chief. Some publications with extremely notable past editors in chief should list them, but it's usually excessive. We use this information to establish the notability of the scientists concerned--any ed. in chief of a major journal will get a WP article. Not the whole board. * You can say whether its published from the US or the UK. *You can say if its included in major online services beyond your own, such as ebsco or proquest & if there is an embargo, as there usually is for journals like these, how long it is. *You can give the circulation. *You can and should give the major indexing services. Not all the little ones like Aluminum Abstracts, but: ChemAbs, Web of Science, Scopus, Inspec, Compendex, Medline/PubMed, Biosis, Psych Info, or the analogous ones in other fields. This is a major factor in establishing notability for a journal. *You can and should give the impact factor. The current ones are 05; the 06s probably wont be available until July or August, & they should then be updated. Only the most recent should be given. It can also give the rank, but give it as 4th out of the 80 journals in ___. It means more than just 4th, because 4th could be 4th out of 8. Do not give the price; do not give the purchase options. Use the Wiley and Sons category and the subject-journal categories--the higher level ones are filled automatically. Do not link to other wiley journals or to wiley, the categories will do it.
there's another thing I'd like to try--list the four highest citation papers ever published. I think the people who dont know about scientific journals will understand that.
Give references to UlrichsWeb, usually where you give the circulation, and to JCR, where you give the impact factor. If there's anything else available, give it.
and one final practical point from my experience here--don't do more than 2 at a time. Ten a week will make a difference here, and we want the articles.

What is really neededEdit

I've been working in large part on improving articles about magazines and journals since I joined WP--I'm now one of the many administrators here--so let me tell you what is actually needed for improving these articles, because improvement is needed, and in more respects than mentioned above. (I was meaning to get around to Elsevier one of these days, but it's so big I wanted to save it for last) With respect to trade magazines, the article should:

Give information about how frequently it is published, the starting date of publication, any previous titles, and the dates of title changes.
If it is available online, say so, and give the date of beginning availability.
List the editor in chief, if there is one. Say what company or institution he comes from. Put a link for his name and the institution name. WP uses these links in evaluating importance of the people. Even if its a red link, use it, so we know we might need an article. If the company or institution is red, check if you have the proper form.
List the major indexes that cover it--just the major ones, and just the relevant ones--for example, Chem Abs indexes every journal that ever has a chemical article, but just the chemical articles, so its only appropriate for chemistry & engineering title. If it's covered by Web of Science or by Scopus , say so.
If it should be in Journal Citation reports--a few trade magazines are--give the current impact factor in the form:

The [[2006]] [[impact factor]] is x.xx, which is 4th of 40 in the engineering subject category. the "of 40" part is to clarify if its 4th of 4, or 4th of 40. Give a footnote reference to [[Journal Citation Reports]] (brackets as specified) If you give these for any, you must give them for all journals, even if they are last in the class. But if they are not included, you don't have to say anything.

Give the circulation, if you give it for all magazines of the class. The reference for this can be BPA--if you use it include the word "audited" (and please write an article on BPA so people know what it is) but I normally use Ulrich's, even though the figures are approximate. Link to Ulrich's.
ALWAYS give the ISSN, both print and online.
Use the journal infobox template on at least all academic publications--no reason not to use it for them all. [1]
If it is a controlled-circulation journal say so, and help me write a page explaining what that is.

It should not:

List the editorial board, or any people other than the editor in chief.
Have the typical sentence used in ads and web pages: "This magazine is intended for ... (it's almost always obvious), but if the contents or orientation is much different than expected from the title, it should say so.
mention pricing, or through what packages it is available.

Optionally (this is an experiment) If it is available through major full-text service like Lexis or Ebsco , say so, linking them. If there is an embargo period, give it , using a link to [[embargo (academic publishing)|]] The symbol just before the closing brackets is a vertical pipe symbol, usually shift-backslash, so it comes out reading just embargo.

As for categories, we're still experimenting. Separate posting.

If any articles should get deleted by speedy, or threatened, please let me know and I will check what's up and give my opinion. There is a level of significance below which we do not go. Or if there are other problems. If someone suggests that any of the above material is not appropriate, please let me know so i can discuss it with him. Better me than you.

journal categoriesEdit

trade journalsEdit

authorsEdit

When writing an article about an author, at the very least, add their best selling books. A good place to get the information from is WorldCat, look for the number of libraries holding them, as I added for [[ ]]. Now go add add the science fiction too, and look for some reviews of this famous author, and find her year of birth at least as a start to the biography.

unencyclopedic essaysEdit

I am informing you as a courtesy that that this possibly useful page, has been or probably soon will be put on the AfD list to discuss its possible deletion.

  1. It is possible that you might be able to make good articles out of them--preferably one good article--if
    1. it were written in the style used in other WP articles,
    2. in a more concise way,
    3. in what are clearly your own word,
    4. with references given,
    5. and several related sources indicated
    6. (and links to and from other WP pages).

I'd advise you to act fast--these processes proceed very rapidly, and the decisions are generally--and very reasonably --to delete the article if it is unimproved beyond the present state. I apologize for not having the time to help personally. --

nn collectionsEdit

  1. I'm informing you as a courtesy that this possibly useful page,

Questionable Reactionary Songs, needs to read like an encyclopedia article, or it will probably be deleted. What will be needed--fast--

    1. arrangement in paraagraphs with the text of the items inserted as block of quoted text; it is necessary to use only the first verse, and say, so, for you may otherwise violate copyright--of course these songs are old, but if you a using a post-1923 text of them, that version is probably still copyrighted. If you can find an older source, use it and include the date.
    2. citations to where each of these items have been published or placed on the web.

I'd advise you to act fast--these processes proceed very rapidly, and the decisions in general are-- quite reasonably-- to delete the article if it is unimproved beyond the present state. I apologize for not having the time to help personally. --


external links to images and collectionsEdit

Dear fellow librarian, as one of the administrators here let me give you some advice about this. Please be very careful in making external links to items in your collection. You are doing it well, but I think I should be a little explicit. The practice here is likely to be regarded by some people here as WP:SPAM, and if it is, the net result is likely to be that the entire library site will be put on our blacklist. This has already happened to one or two collections that were added too aggressively, and it has taken me considerable trouble to persuade people to reinstate them & I have not always succeeded--administrators here can only do what the consensus lets them do--we do not make policy. . I am concerned that this will inhibit the usefulness of the encyclopedia, because we do want to link to the best material. Let me suggest:


1/In cases where your library does hold the best freely accessible collection in the world, then it is permissible to put in a link to the collection--I think the link to the Galapagos Collection is for example justified. But the practice here is only to link to the very few best possible sites--if you know of another site that is better, you should enter that one. In either case, you should put a note on the article talk page saying what you are adding and why, to prevent anyone from thinking you have a conflict of interest--see WP:COI. For example, I do not think the link for Playing House is sufficiently descriptive. (the information does not have to go within the link, iit is aceceptable to annotate the link briefly, as [url XYZ collection] of material on A. Please don;t go by what you see on the page necessarily--many of the present links have been added carelessly. (Ideally one would say material "on a at the Wisconsin Digital Library," to be up front about it--the name of the special colection itself is usually meaningless.)
2/In cases where you hold an available primary text of the document being discussed, and can link to it directly, then it can make sense to add it, similarly to the way we link to such sites as Project Gutenberg. as an example, the link to the Plombal material seems appropriate. Again, you really should state this on the article talk page, and watch it for objections.
3/Where you have an good image, consider whether you can upload the file. The problem here is that we require a GFDL license for it, which is less restrictive than your standard license, as it permits reuse and modification by anyone for any purpose.

If you have any problems, just ask at my talk page or by email from my user page

nn university departmentsEdit

I am informing you as a courtesy that this page on the Department of Baraminology at Minute State University has been or probably soon will be put on the AfD list to discuss its possible deletion.

To avoid this, the page needs the following , or it will probably be deleted

  1. remove the last paragraph- I don't have time to help you in more detail
  2. Listing the faculty leaders of the research groups with their titles and degrees--if they are already in WP, make the links.
  3. List any major grants or awards the institute has received
  4. Listing a few notable published papers in really major journals, and saying they are notable.
  5. most important, find 2 outside sources that mention the Insitutute--web or print is ok, but the college newspaper is not.

I'd advise you to act fast--these processes proceed very rapidly, and some of the people there usually --and generally rightly--want to delete an article if it is unimproved beyond the present state. I apologize for not having the time to help personally. --

nn schoolsEdit

  • You've added enough to show it's a good high school==but there are many other good high schools. But there has to be something to show that it's distinctive. Suggestions: 1/notable alumni if the school has been established long enough--& you should add that date to the page. 2/notable people who may have spoken there 3/ victories in athletic or academic competitions 4/whatever else the school did that got recognition outside your own town.
And there must be a 3rd party source, preferably two--print or web. --even a local newspaper. Do not just rely on the web--the town library will have files of the newspaper, in some format or other, and also clippings files for local events. First try its web site, and then go there and ask for help, saying why you want it--all librarians know about WP

I apologize for not having the time to help personally. --

  • (by Noroton) Hi MRaimondi,

Welcome to Wikipedia! The article you created, Lanier Middle School (Buford, Georgia) has been nominated for deletion by another editor. Please particpate in the deletion discussion (link at the top of the article).

The article could use some improvements, and if improved it will likely survive the deletion decision, but changes should be made within the next several days -- after five days, a decision is normally made. Thomas Jefferson Middle School (Arlington County, Virginia) is an article that recently survived a deletion discussion, and you might want to look at that for ideas on how to improve the article. If you have any questions, feel free to leave a message on my talk page.
  • (Possibly notable but unref) friendly:

I want to commend you on the work you have begun on this article, and offer some tips to help to insure edits to the article conform to the wikipedian guidelines. I see that you have used yourself as a reference for much of the material in your latest edits, which is not allowed at wikipedia. Only published references are allowed, and editors cannot personally act as a reference by vouching for the statements in the articles. That would be one form of what wikipedia terms "original research", or WP:OR, which is strictly forbidden at wikipedia. The Welcome Message gives links to important guidelines at wikipedia, but these might be most helpful to start with since so much work is already underway in the article. It would be a shame see it go too far afield of the guidelines and have to see much of it come undone because it doesn't conform. Wikipedia:Five_pillars is the key, and WP:Attribution gives further explanation of what is required for verification of the facts given in articles. Also, editors are strongly discouraged from writing about themselves in articles either. Good luck! Professor marginalia 21:39, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

criminalsEdit

  • How about this BBC article?[1]. It details the crime and the sentence received. SteveO 23:31, 11 June 2007 (UTC) *I would accept it, provided you do not emphasize the details of the crime beyond the unavoidable & do not copy the content--some of these articles do copy newspaper content, and that makes them an easy target. Doesn't mean that others would accept it--I'm very flexible about this but my views are not always taken as consensus. Good luck with it.

queries to usersEdit

companiesEdit

I happened to come across this page about your company, and it it quite possible that it may soon get nominated for deletion if it does not contain a little more relevant information about notability, and good references.

I am writing merely as a friend, and I would much rather have it able to stay in, but it will need in particular

  1. some information about the number of users, or the size,
  2. information about the use of the web site
  3. articles about the company or its products in general and professional newspapers or magazines, in print or on the web
  4. reviews about the products, in print or on the web

I'd advise you to act fast--these processes proceed very rapidly, and some of the people there very reasonably want to delete an article if it is unimproved beyond the present state. I apologize for not having the time to help personally. --


  • another text:
Most important piece of advice: there must be some third party sources for everything significant that you say. In particular, the awards you mention are good criteria, but they should be backed by references to newspaper or trade magazine sources reporting them. Web or print is OK. Similarly, if this organization is the major one in he field, there will be articles at least in trade magazines discussing it. You are the person best positioned for finding them. Further, no company gets to be in a dominant position in this or related industries without some litigation. Cite it.
And yes, more technical discussion is appropriate, but it should not come from your web page or product information. If they are major features, there will be 3rd party sources or interviews talking about them. And there is something else--if any of the text is copied from web or print published information, it must either be rewritten entirely or we need a GFDL or equivalent copyright release, essentially putting that material into the Public Domain.; see the WP article on copyright, WP:COPY

I apologize for not having the time to help personally. --

Advice to the stubbornEdit

It is not me that you have to convince that you are notable. It is the other people at AfD that will have to be convinced, and they will have to be convinced by what is in this article. I have a fairly good idea of what factors of an academic career people here thing relevant; I also have a fairly good idea of what sort of presentation is taken for vanity. Everyone who voices an opinion at AfD decide for themselves. They will get equal respect, for we are all of equal status. If I think their arguments better than mine, or the data they present more relevant, I say so, and change my opinion accordingly. You can find current and archived discussions collected at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Academics_and_educators and judge the nature of discussions here for yourself.

I try to improve any article I come across that I think possibly worthy, to the extent that I have the ability and the resources and the time. There are hundreds of articles listed for deletion each day, and I try to pick out the 2 or 3 in higher education where my interests and my resources lie. I do whatever I think will be honest and benefit the article. Other editors do analogously. If I can make effective small changes, I do that. Sometime I or others rewrite an article completely, if the people who started the article are not able to do so. But "if you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly by others, do not submit it." You may edit as you please, and so may I; if I think I can do better, I will edit accordingly. I would never deliberately change any article to make it less effective, but I will always remove material in any article I think inappropriate.

My academic qualifications are of no concern to anyone in WP. (I am willing to discuss them off line--email me from my talk page) They are not relevant: it is the quality of work that counts, as judged by WP standards. I only hint at them on my user page to give some idea of the things that interest me. I only allude to them in talk or at an AfD discussion to give some idea of the sort of data I can find. Assuming for a moment I were a senior person in your specialty--which I am not--and I were to say in the discussion that I think very highly of your work, it would not help get the article accepted. It will be accepted based on the facts in the article.

I will give you some personal advice on your talk page. I will comment on the merits of the article at the AfD debate.

and, if nothing worksEdit

  • I have edited it according to my own judgment to what I think will give a reasonably good article & best keep it from deletion--which will make it quite short-- but I alert you it may be deleted anyway. In order to preserve the present form, I have userfied it--copied it onto your user talk page, along with advice about what to create as a new p. in case this one is deleted.

Note that this is all run together: to restore the formatting, remove the tag from the top. and the tag from the bottom. Remember that doing so will activate all the links

  • It seems you have re-created the AfD'd article on Fabrizio Bernardi. It's possible that the subject might be notable under our current guidelines and that a good article could be written, but this is not the way to do it. The way to do it is to ask for a Deletion Review. --I have temporarily userified the article, by moving it to the page User:Bernini/sandbox for you to improve. What additionally is needed is the date & university you received your PhD if you have received it , the dates and place of later postions,, the name of your advisor, the date and university for previous degrees , a list of your papers giving both the publication information & the repository information on arXiv, if available, and the number of citations -- from WebofScience, Scopus, or the ADS. When finished, ask for a deletion review.

Business adviceEdit

commentEdit

you asked me also for some explanation. I did not myself delete the article, I only marked it for possible deletion, and another administrator agreed and did the deletion. First, you understand now about not copying the web site. But second, you now I hope also understand about showing the company is notable. -- see WP:CORP. There need to be references from 3rd party reliable sources talking primarily about the company--product reviews do well, if they are in an actual edited publication, print or web. Blogs and the like are not sufficient for this. Then you have to write it as you would expect to explain to someone what you do and what is important about it, without any puffery. as a rough guideline, it if would do for an advertisement or a press release, the toe is wrong for an encyclopedia. Are your products unique in some important way? Have they been written about in the technical press. If there are patents, it helps, but arent enough unless its clear they are being exploited in a major way. . The company itself--has it been written about in the business or technical press? Are you a leader in the field in a quantitative sense--one of the very biggest suppliers--and have you suitable audited figures to prove it? For a comprehensive guide to all aspects of this, see WP:BFAQ, which also explains how you can release under GFDL license a photograph of an important product or application. (But, and I have to say it, if you are relying on us to help make the company notable, the article won't work. We're an encyclopedia, not a business directory. ) ' )

and there's something else--if you are a knowledgeable technical leader in your field, you might want to contribute to some of the subject articles on machine vision and related subject. But if you do, do not mention your company or its products. Just figure that you are helping the company by increasing knowledge about the possibilities of the technology. That's the way to really contribute effectively. ' (DGG to User:Jpweber)

Finding stuffEdit

  • art on "Questioning" in LGBT(Q) context "I suppose you know that this new article will need to be expanded considerably, or it will unfortunately share the fate of far too many articles dealing with sexuality. WP NOTCENSORED, but you'd never know it from some of the discussions. I'll defend it if it ever gets to AfD, as I generally do, but It'll need more material. And I'm willing to help any good article on this general theme.DGG
Thanks so much for the heads-up. Here's something promising: the quoted phrase "Queer and questioning" returns 42,000 Google hits. Can you give any suggestions as to how to incorporate them? :Joie de Vivre 27 May 2007 (UTC)
Here's where it can get tedious. You have to go through them and try to pick out the ones that are relevant and more than blogs. I usually scan the first 5 or 10 pages until i get somewhere.The search I just used is +questioning +LGBT +queer. Just from the first 30 I noticed 1/ That it's used in a lot of titles for centers, and you could put external links to 2 or 3 of the most recognizable (I see Duke and Princeton and Stanford, among others, and particularly http://www.virginia.edu/deanofstudents/lgbt/comingout.htm ). I have a feeling they all copy the wording from each other. 2/ There are lots of informal publications- I saw http://www.thewitness.org/agw/monroe092904.html , which I'd use as a ref; I think its a well know publication (& you might consider a WP article on it.) 3/ Now the problem is to try to find a really on-point 2 mainstream news sources or the like, which will almost always result in a keep. There are some articles from the Stanford Daily, but it's a student paper and frowned on, & they seem to just mention the term. 4/ (There are some academic journals, but they're harder to get to & they look like they might be using the term in a much more general sense). But some are accessible and I found one with the perfect quote http://www.apa.org/monitor/feb02/generation.html 9/10 of the way down.
    • I've been doing this sort of scanning for years, and I have experience in what sort of things have worked before--but that's not much help at first. I can say that what I look at on google is not the titles or the headings, but the url links at the bottom. And I know to go at least a few hundred items before giving up. Next step, not today, newspapers and academic journals. Do you have access to an academic or large public library? (If not, I will look & email if critical to an article,--if too many people don't ask me. But in this case I am skeptical about success in using the indexes, because "questioning" is such a common word & used so often in a general sense.)DGG 22:50, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

DES new user helpEdit

t appears to me, and to some others that have looked into that matter, that you have been editing both as User:Cees iupui and as User:Iupuicees. It also appears that there have been some problems with your contributions. But it seems to me that you are trying to make positive contributions to the Wikipedia project. I want to help you learn how to do that, and avoid future problems. This message is sent in an attempt to be make things work better for you on Wikipedia.

Copyright issuesEdit

First, about copyright issues. Wikipedia has a legal duty not to violate other people's copyrights. A lot of people seem to think that anything on the web is free for use by anyone, in any way, and so a lot of people post content copied from websites to Wikipedia without permission. Therefore, when we find that things have been copied from a website, it gets treated as a copyright infringement.

Wikipedia attempts to be a free content resource. It is released under the GFDL. this means that even if someone has permission from a website owner "to post the content to Wikipedia" that isn't sufficient. Wikipedia needs to have assurance that the copyright owner knew and agreed to permit anyone to reuse the content, for any purpose, including permission to change it, or sell it, or both; and that this permission, once granted, can never be withdrawn. Lots of people who say that they are posting "with permission" didn't fully understand this, or the site owner who granted permission didn't.

Since Wikipedia is funded by donations, it can't afford to risk a copyright lawsuit. Therefore, if someone is posting copyrighted content "with permission" we need a letter or email from the copyright owner confirming the permission. If you want, i can point you to some standard boilerplate requests for permission that show you what is involved.

Rewriting makes better articlesEdit

Second, even when content is validly posted with permission, other websites often don't make good encyclopedia articles. They have been written for their own purposes, which usually includes promoting a person, firm, institution, project, or cause. But Wikipedia articles are supposed to adhere to the neutral point of view. That means that they describe facts, citing sources where those facts can be verified. That also means that they describe the opinions that people have expressed about those facts, but they attribute those opinions to specific, named individuals or publications, and they cite sources to demonstrate this.

This means that it is almost always better to rewrite based on a source than to copy directly, even if the source is not copyrighted, or has given permission. If direct quotes are made from a source, they should be marked as quotes and a source should be cited. For example, in describing an organization, it may be a good idea to quote its proclaimed mission statement. One might write something like On its website, the FooBar association has said that its mission statement is: "Blah Blah Blah" <citation link>

You crested a number of articles about projects undertaken by the "Center for Earth and Environmental Science" of Indiana University & Purdue University. This seems like a good thing. But you did this in most cases by simply copying text from the website of the project involved. This is a bad thing, even if you had permission, and it is illegal if you didn't. Wikipedia probably should have good articles on these projects. You would probably be a good person to draft such articles. i am willing to help you do that.


User namesEdit

Third, about user names. It is generally best if a single editor has a single user name. Sometimes a user wants a different username to work on different subject areas. A person might want one username for religious topics, and a different one for political topics, for example. But in working on a single topic area, it can get confusing if one editor uses multiple usernames. Also it can give the impression that the editor is trying to avoid restrictions by using multiple accounts. Trying to evade restrictions by using different accounts is, of course, not permitted.

Also, user names which duplicate the names of organizations are generally not permitted. For example User:IBM would not be allowed. partly this is because we cant be sure that a user really is an "authorized spokesperson" for the organization, and partly because the username itself can be seen as promotion, a form of advertising. Imagine User:Joe's Pizza. Both your usernames seem close enough to the name/acronym of the organization whose projects you seem untested in to possibly be a problem.

What I want from youEdit

Fourth, what you need to do.

  1. Please select a user name that you will use from now on, at least in this subject area. It can be either of the names you have used so far, or a new name. (I would recommend a new name, but your existing names are not sufficiently obviously organizational for me to insist.)
  2. Please indicate in a message which user name you will be using from now on. Please also indicate that you understand the points about copyright and rewriting i have made above, and that you intend to comply.
  3. You may place this message on User talk:DESiegel, or on User talk:Cees iupui or on User talk:Iupuicees. I will watch both user talk pages.
  4. Please wait for my response to your message, or a response from another administrator or experienced editor. If you don't' get a response within a reasonable time, you can put {{helpme}} on you user talk page next to a request for assistance, and someone should be along shortly.

What I will do for youEdit

Fifth, what I will do when i get your message.

  1. If you choose to use [[ ]], which is currently blocked from editing, I will unblock it.
  2. I will offer advice, if you wish it, on how to contribute to Wikipedia more effectively, and how to use the various editing tools, citation templates, wiki formatting, and the like.
  3. I will notify the administrator who blocked User that the matter is being dealt with.
  4. I will, if you wish, review and help you improve any future articles.
  5. If you wish, i will offer a formal mentorship, asking any editor or administrator who has a problem with your actions to contact me before taking significant action.

I hope all this will be helpful to you, and allow you to make many positive contributions to Wikipedia. I await your message.

mission statementsEdit

Indeed, the kind of uniqueness of this synagogue should be brought not in some kind of "bullet point" fashion, because a Wikipedia article is neither a Microsoft WORD document nor is it a Power-Point presentation. You can have an entire section for ==Ideological outlook== or ==Core philosophy== and then elaborate, but no crass statement of a "Mission statement" as if this is some kind of "business report" or PR campaign of "talking points" meant to impress someone. In other words, the essence of the synagogue's mission and its uniquines can and must be couched in an encyclopedic manner and not in the synagogue's own propagandistic or high-falutin terms about how it views itself or toots it's own horn, rather it must be written and come across as if an objective outsider were writing a dispassionate and interesting description and explanation of the synagogue's workings, views, history etc. This is what is called WP:NPOV and it is key! That is how articles should be written and no doubt it can and will be done here as well. Thanks again for working to make this into a better article (IZAK, re Temple Shalom of Northwest Arkansas)

encyclopedic styleEdit

  • Omit needless words
  • Try to think of it not as an essay based on sources, but as a report on what the sources say. This is different from school.
  • Short subheads
  • a link for the first use of every significant word or phrase that has an article, like death. Just the significant, just the first. Be sure to put a link around the names of significant places.
  • For significant dates, write it as [[Feb. 29]], [[1999]] with separate links around the day and month, and around the year.

User:DGG, User_talk:DGG, User:DGG/controversy, /pages to revisit, /RS, /priorities. /std talk pp, User:DGG/userhelp, , User:DGG/deltalk, User:DGG/journals, /to insert, /User:DGG/speedies, /sandbox,
/projects, /WP Projects, /other wikis, /tech notes / User:DGG/sandboxuserified/ User:DGG/sandboxuserified2,
User:DGG/DelsToWatch , User:DGG/sandboxConferences , User:DGG/sandbox/libraries, User:DGG/sandbox/LCC

only works after successful authorized user login at the appropriate page.