MickeyHuff
Welcome! edit
Hello, MickeyHuff, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
- Introduction and Getting started
- Contributing to Wikipedia
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page and How to develop articles
- How to create your first article
- Simplified Manual of Style
You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or , and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Killiondude (talk) 23:26, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: Project Censored has been accepted edit
The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.
- If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
- If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .
Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!
TeaDrinker (talk) 03:21, 14 February 2018 (UTC)Thanks for all your work on the Project Censored article. I assume you're the director. It is probably best to declare your conflict of interest per WP:COI and potentially WP:PAID (more or less a formality since you're already editing under your own username, but good to follow procedure). Thanks again for all your work and if I can be of any help, feel free to drop me a line on my talk page User talk:TeaDrinker. --TeaDrinker (talk) 03:25, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi TeaDrinker thanks so much for your offer. As for declaring the conflict of interest what is the best way of going about that?Thank you again for your help. MickeyHuff (talk) 02:18, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for the reply, if you put the following on your userpage (just click the user tab above)
{{UserboxCOI |1=Project Censored }}
- It will make a box that says you have declared a conflict of interest with Project Censored. Since you're editing under your own name, this is (to my mind) a bit of a formality. But should it come up, such a disclosure should follow the letter of the policy (and there's already a note on the talk page of the article Talk:Project Censored). You should, but you're not required to, not edit the articles with which you have a conflict of interest, and take major concerns to the article talk page. If any problems arise, and you have questions or need a second set of eyes on something, feel free to write a note on my talk page User talk:TeaDrinker and/or send me an email (there's an "Email this user" on the left side menu of User:TeaDrinker).
- My take on what's going on is that you have hit on a bit of a sore spot with many Wikipedians. Since we're all volunteers, we usually want to work on articles in an area of our interest (myself, I most often work on articles about animals). Folks who write articles that sound very promotional about articles are seen as detracting from the quality of the encyclopedia, so volunteers end up fixing them. However few volunteers really want to spend their time fixing up articles about organizations, companies, CEOs, etc. So there's a tension between accepting lots of articles which technically are about people or topics we should have in the encyclopedia, but there being far more people who want to write favorably about them than neutrally about them. This draws many volunteers away from the areas they would prefer to work on to keep the constant stream of articles neutral in tone, something that most are not happy about. My interpretation is that many editors are therefore quick to find a reason to delete articles that seem overly promotional (in most cases, having a promotional tone is not itself grounds for deletion).
- At the same time, the deletion of the Project Censored article put you in a difficult spot, which I very much understand. To me, the notability argument doesn't hold much weight once we look at all the news coverage of Project Censored (both the work done and the organization itself). I'm also happy to help improve the article if I can. Thanks again and let me know if you have any further questions or concerns, --TeaDrinker (talk) 03:00, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks so much User:TeaDrinker for your help. I went ahead and made the changes to my user page. MickeyHuff (talk) 22:14, 24 February 2018 (UTC)