User talk:Ziggy4601

Welcome!

Hello, Ziggy4601, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, like Redwood Mary & Plight of the Redwoods Campaign, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for page creation, and may soon be deleted.

You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the Article Wizard. Thank you.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 08:34, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Redwood Mary & Plight of the Redwoods Campaign[edit]

A tag has been placed on Redwood Mary & Plight of the Redwoods Campaign requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a clear copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 08:34, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable sources policy[edit]

I've just finished a major edit on Redwood Mary, an article you recently contributed and as a result I wanted to ask you to have a look at the reliable sources policy. There were 14 references in the material you contributed, but only one of them met the definition of reliable sources in Wikipedia's terms; articles by arm's-length third-party experts writing in reputable publications like books and magazines. Things like the subject's own newsletter, blogs, unpublished letters by the subject, etc., don't qualify and thus the material they attempted to reference became merely unqualified assertions. In addition, Wikipedia doesn't allow unreferenced opinions as assertions about the nature of various conflicts; Redwood Mary's personal feelings about a specific tree or an anti-logging campaign just cannot remain unless they have reliable sources to back up that someone other than the subject herself thinks that these ideas are notable. At present, I would guess that the next administrator to look at this article will arrange for its deletion because of the lack of reliable sources; this might be something you would wish to remedy. I would strongly urge you to read and master Wikipedia's notability policy and the reliable sources policy; if you're finding it difficult to master the standardized way that Wikipedia articles are coded and referenced, you can use the Article Wizard, copy the formatting from other articles or simply ask for help. Best of luck with your continued contributions. Accounting4Taste:talk 21:58, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Redwood Mary[edit]

The article Redwood Mary has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Insufficient reliable sources to back up the limited claims of notability

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Accounting4Taste:talk 15:22, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AfD Nomination: Redwood Mary[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, but all Wikipedia articles must meet our criteria for inclusion (see What Wikipedia is not and Deletion policy). Since it does not seem that Redwood Mary meets these criteria, an editor has started a discussion about whether this article should be kept or deleted.

Your opinion on whether this article meets the inclusion criteria is welcome. Please contribute to the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Redwood Mary. Don't forget to add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of each of your comments to sign them.

Discussions such as these usually last seven days. In the meantime, you are free to edit the content of the article. Please do not remove the "articles for deletion" template (the box at the top). When the discussion has concluded, a neutral third party will consider all comments and decide whether or not to delete the article. Accounting4Taste:talk 22:46, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]