User talk:Lonniety

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

Your namespace and article draft[edit]

Hi, Lonnie Carter. I'm presuming you are since Twitter @LonnieTy is and you get email at lonniety@.

First things first. Your userpage shouldn't be an article or even a draft. Draft articles generally go in a subpage, most often your sandbox. Just right-click on "My sandbox" at the top of the page and open it in a new window or tab, then copy what you're working on from your userpage to your sandbox.

Second, please read Wikipedia:Autobiography. I was also going to tell you about how hard it is to establish Wikipedia notability but a glance at Google gave me One-man melting pot and Obie award announcements. I already see enough with no real attempt to search. Duh! No problem establishing notability in reliable sources.

Be aware that once an article is in Wikipedia, anyone can edit it. That includes any enemies and/or compeditors and/or whoever. You will have no control over the contents, only the ability to comment and suggest and make an occasional correction that is justified in the article talk page. I don't think you will find it difficult to get other editors interested in completing your autobiographical article.



A cup of warm tea to welcome you!

Hello, Lonniety, 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 messages on talk pages using 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 ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! DocTree (ʞlɐʇ · cont) Join WER 22:22, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Conflict of Interest[edit]

Hi I see you are editing articles and subjects related to your work. Please read the Wikipedia policy on Conflict of Interest as it is something taken very seriously at Wikipedia. Any edits made to Wikipedia should be for the benefit of Wikipedia and not show favoritism. It is also just generally a bad idea since it is a potential liability for yourself since all of this is on public record should anyone wish to point it out in another paper or forum. For example it's unclear why you deleted the source to the Chicago Reader and replaced it with a URL to the Chicago Times that doesn't work (I searched the Chicago Times website and could not find anything. I'm going to restore the Chicago Reader source since the links works and it's a pretty detailed reliable source for the 2010 performance. Green Cardamom (talk) 20:55, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Oh I see your comment about small vs large paper. That's OK but need a working link if possible. thanks. Green Cardamom (talk) 20:59, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
Try This is the Chicago Sun-Times review by Hedy Weiss on WTTW, Chicago's premiere public television station. There is no Chicago Times that I know of.

Also This is the Chicago Tribune review by Chris Jones.

If it's an issue of fairness, and I think it is, why would the only review cited for the Chicago production be less than favorable from a small paper when the large papers are quite positive? Lonniety (talk)