User talk:Deadbeef

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


hello why my page deleted?

Timothy Ministry Training[edit]

Dear Deadbeef The information on Timothy Ministry Team was outdated. The page Timothy Ministry Team was so outdated, that both the name and address, structure of the organization was no longer accurate. I have been tasked with editing the article. I have copied everything from our updated history, facilities etc to what it says on our website. You seem quite passionate and helpful, would you be so kind as to highlight the sections which you feel should be removed from the updated page which you deleted? I can honestly say that almost everything on the previous version is inaccurate. Kind Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Timothy Ministry Training (talkcontribs) 09:36, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

First off, welcome to Wikipedia! I'm glad that you have an interest in keeping the information on your organization's page reliable and correct.
Wikipedia is supported by many, many policies that help keep the information professional, reliable, and encyclopedic. Your edits do not adhere with the tone of Wikipedia; that is, they are from the point of 'we', 'our', etc. First-person tone is unsuitable for an encyclopedic entry, and should be written as 'the organization', etc.
Primarily, however, your edits are very promotional in nature. Edits speaking praisingly of the church (i.e. "Over one hundred years ago, God did a significant work here through a man call Andrew Murray") are not allowed and are considered unencyclopedic. Articles need to be written from a neutral point of view to help keep Wikipedia reliable. Imagine what Wikipedia would look like if, say, Apple was allowed to advertise its products right on its wiki page!
It is also not acceptable for you to simply copy-and-paste material from your website onto Wikipedia, as copyright issues may arise. Even though you wrote the material, for legal reasons Wikipedia can't rehost text material unless it is free-source or it has received expressed written notice from the author that it is acceptable to do so. However, this would be inappropriate for your case for the reasons above.
Also, all debatable information in the article must be supported by reliable sources. All articles in Wikipedia need support to be considered reliable. In your edits, you introduce large blocks of text with no reliable, secondary (that means not from you) sources to back them up. This is also not allowed on the site, as anyone could change any of the information (they could say you are located somewhere else, for example) and they would be just as right as you because neither of you would have backed up your statements.
Incidentally, you may be required to change your username, as it conflicts with Wikipedia username policy. Usernames that are names of organizations are not allowed as they introduce conflicts of interest when editing. You may change it in accordance with the policy, but you should know that your account will probably not be allowed to stand as-is.
Finally, please read our conflict of interest policy to help understand why your conflict is an issue when you want to edit your own page, as well as steps to take to help get it updated neutrally.
I know this is a lot of reading, and again, I'm glad that you're taking an interest in your organization's Wiki page. Please let me know if you need any more advice, and please consider going to the Wikipedia Teahouse for further help in editing your article.
Hope this helped, and good luck! Deadbeef 10:08, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Thank you so much Deadbeef! After reading your reply I understand a lot better. I updated Timothy Ministry Training its much shorter and I removed all the us and we's. We clearly didnt read up nearly enough beforehand and knowing what we know now, we would like to be honouring towards the rules of Wikipedia. I have learnt so much! We'll refrain from editing our own article in the future. As far as having two articles would it be enough to remove the content of Timothy Ministry Team and re-direct it to Timothy Ministry Training? Would I ask someone within teahouse to assist? Sorry for all the questions I tried to read the help section in how to get a page's name changed yesterday, but if I may be very honest it was all a little bit technical and I didn't understand half of what was being said. Would it be okay if I changed my username to my own name or should it be something less personal? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaypeeroos (talkcontribs) 10:53, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

No worries, glad I could help out. I went ahead and redirected the 'team' page to the 'training' page. It's fine if you want to use your real name, but make sure you're alright with the implications and understand the possibility of opening yourself to harassment. Unlikely, but possible. You can submit a change of username request here. If your article gets deleted, consider recreating it through Articles for Creation. This is a way to make the article, get it checked by other users, and make sure it's ok for submisssion so this kind of thing doesn't happen again. What sounds normal to you might sound promotional to a neutral person; more people helping you make the article is always a good thing. Deadbeef 11:07, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

please do not delete[edit]

Hi, I tired to add the below text and link to the wiki page, but it is getting deleted. This is not spam.

Please see the Video documentary shooted mostly during the early 1970. This portraits the life style of early days kadinamkulam and nearby villagers.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Anilalkg (talkcontribs) 12 November 2014‎, 01:42 (UTC)

Hi Anilalkg,
Please read the first sentence of Wikipedia's spam guideline: "there are three main types of spam on Wikipedia. These are: advertisements masquerading as articles; external link spamming; and adding references with the aim of promoting the author or the work being referenced." You are doing the second two of these three things; by definition, you are spamming the page. If you or the non-account IP you have been using insert the content again one more time, you are liable to blocked from editing by an administrator. In addition, please read WP:NPOV for more information.
Deadbeef 01:49, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of[edit]

Hi Deadbeef, I edited the page because I did not want the article it possible to delete the page entirely from Wiki? Also I created this new page it shows This article is an orphan, as no other articles link to it. Please introduce links to this page from related articles; try the Find link tool for suggestions. (November 2014) at the header and I am quite confused, please help and let me know what changes I should make thanks. Looking forward to your response, C.

Hi @Cheetanah:,
It seems the article you wanted deleted has been deleted already. As for the (UK) one, "orphan" simply means that no other article on Wikipedia links to [Peter Hewitt (UK)]. To resolve this, add links to that article in appropriate articles, and remove the tag. If you can't find any appropriate articles to add links to, that's ok! just leave the tag, and someone will link the articles when an appropriate linking article is created.
Hope this made it a little less confusing; if you need anything else, let me know. Deadbeef 20:53, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Copyright checks when performing AfC reviews[edit]

Hello Deadbeef. This message is part of a mass mailing to people who appear active in reviewing articles for creation submissions. First of all, thank you for taking part in this important work! I'm sorry this message is a form letter – it really was the only way I could think of to covey the issue economically. Of course, this also means that I have not looked to see whether the matter is applicable to you in particular.

The issue is in rather large numbers of copyright violations ("copyvios") making their way through AfC reviews without being detected (even when easy to check, and even when hallmarks of copyvios in the text that should have invited a check, were glaring). A second issue is the correct method of dealing with them when discovered.

If you don't do so already, I'd like to ask for your to help with this problem by taking on the practice of performing a copyvio check as the first step in any AfC review. The most basic method is to simply copy a unique but small portion of text from the draft body and run it through a search engine in quotation marks. Trying this from two different paragraphs is recommended. (If you have any question about whether the text was copied from the draft, rather than the other way around (a "backwards copyvio"), the Wayback Machine is very useful for sussing that out.)

If you do find a copyright violation, please do not decline the draft on that basis. Copyright violations need to be dealt with immediately as they may harm those whose content is being used and expose Wikipedia to potential legal liability. If the draft is substantially a copyvio, and there's no non-infringing version to revert to, please mark the page for speedy deletion right away using {{db-g12|url=URL of source}}. If there is an assertion of permission, please replace the draft article's content with {{subst:copyvio|url=URL of source}}.

Some of the more obvious indicia of a copyvio are use of the first person ("we/our/us..."), phrases like "this site", or apparent artifacts of content written for somewhere else ("top", "go to top", "next page", "click here", use of smartquotes, etc.); inappropriate tone of voice, such as an overly informal tone or a very slanted marketing voice with weasel words; including intellectual property symbols (™,®); and blocks of text being added all at once in a finished form with no misspellings or other errors.

I hope this message finds you well and thanks again you for your efforts in this area. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC).

       Sent via--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC)