User talk:Peridon

Just in case anyone wants to talk to me.... Peridon (talk) 20:42, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

The rest of this is archived somewhere. There's a nice little bot comes in and tidies up. (Could do with one at home...) A very kind person has organised an archive box that even has a search bar in it. (No beer, though...)

PLEASE ADD MESSAGES AT THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE SO THAT I WILL SEE THEM. I LOOK THERE FIRST. Post at the top and you risk being missed altogether. Thanks. Do put a heading inside == == and sign with ~~~~. If you don't get a reply from me (or one of the stalkers...) within a reasonable time, you've probably not read this. If you have read it and ignored it, it's your own fault. If you haven't read it, READ IT NOW. Another reason to post at the bottom is that if you post at the top and someone else posts at the bottom, I'll see their message, but won't suspect there's another. Up to you. Ignore this if you want. Just don't blame me.

Newbie needs help

Hey there. I just joined Wikipedia as a user and want to try my hand at writing an article. I decided to write one on a company I interned with in college, because I noticed it does not exist and was even mentioned in the suggested articles. Turns out that the organization (SoftAge Information Technology Ltd.) did have an article, which was nominated for deletion by you, because of copyright concerns. I was wondering if you could tell me the exact concern so that I can avoid making the same mistakes. Also, it would be great if you could take a look at the draft when it is ready and help me with the article. Evidently, you're quite an experienced editor and it would be awesome if you can help me write a valid article. Don't worry, I already know to avoid the common errors and have begun collecting verifiable third party sources. I will begin working on this, would start paraphrasing the information & organizing it properly while I look forward to your response. PankajVer (talk) 10:35, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

If you could give me the exact title of the deleted article, it would help. I've tried several versions of that name, but none come up. Anyway, if it went for copyright violation, that means it was copied and pasted from somewhere. Most likely from the company site, which means concerns of advertising come in too. Virtually all company sites are way too promotional for us. But any copy and paste is dangerous. Wikipedia is licensed under Creative Commons CC-BY-SA 3.0, which means stuff from here can be used by anyone anywhere, including commercial and modification. Company sites are copyright, and cannot be used here, even if they're not written by PR people and full of buzz words... Apart from that, there has to be notability WP:CORP, and that has to be referenced to reliable independent sources WP:RS. That's usually the hard part, the references. Get them first. Don't just paraphrase anything. It's hard to get away from the original, and a close paraphrase is as bad as a copy and paste legally. It won't be in Wikipedia approved format anyway, and you have to lose the PR aspect totally. Create your draft in your user space, but not on your user page. It's safe there from all but copyvio, attack, spam and hoax tagging. Those aren't allowed anywhere. Peridon (talk) 11:06, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

The page was titled "SoftAge Information Technology Limited", as was created by User:Sujoncristi. I got this information from this person's Talk Page. Also thanks for the advice and the prompt response, I would definitely adhere to these guidelines :)PankajVer (talk) 11:42, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Right. The version I dealt with was SOFTAGE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY LIMITED in caps. That was a straight copyvio and pure PR into the bargain. Looks like various attempts were made to get this up. Document management is probably a vital area in business (or so the document managers would have us believe...), but I can't see it getting much outside attention. It's a 'back-room' sort of business, and those often don't attract enough attention to get a place here. As an example, a company with millions of dollars in turnover. Its products were on millions of Americans' tables every day. But no article. No coverage in reliable independent sources - they made own brand goods for big chain shops. Not one thing leaving the factory had their own name on it. Apart from their staff, the commercial contacts (and the Infernal Revenue...), no-one would know who they were. Anyway, don't use that web page even for a paraphrase. BTW - you must have seen the page when it was up to get the creator's name. That doesn't display to non-admins when a page is deleted, and English Wikipedia user talk pages don't come up on Google (so far as I can see - other languages differ). Peridon (talk) 12:03, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Fair enough. However, though I am not really in the industry anymore (I work in healthcare now, at JnJ), I have interacted with it enough to know that it is important. Also I have found a decent bit of verifiable third party information. Would use the website only when it is absolutely necessary. So I guess I would give this a shot. No I did not see the page when it was up. I did an advanced search and came across Sujoncristi's Talk Page. Thanks for everything PankajVer (talk) 04:05, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi :) I have submitted the draft for approval. It would be great if you can look into it too. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:SoftAge_Information_Technology_LimitedPankajVer (talk) 08:57, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

It looks better, but... "This service mainly includes data digitization. It is characterized by accuracy, cost effectiveness and timely record creation. The company offers the flexibility of manual or online data entry from any format – hand written originals, typed copy, online sources or scanned images. Data coding is conducted in a customized database followed by a quality check" sounds rather promo. You need to avoid any sort of PR type stuff. Also, check your refs to make sure there's actual coverage - in reasonable depth. A lot (like the D & B ones) look to be mentions or listings. Peridon (talk) 10:00, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

On it. Also, it'll be ok to use mentions when one is trying to refer things like memberships and awards won right? Example : Member directory of an organization or list of winners of a certain award on the sponsors' website.PankajVer (talk) 12:24, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Yes, official listings are fine for awards, but try to limit the awards to the most notable ones. For example, when writing about a Nobel Prize winner, one shouldn't mention that he was Form Captain in Year 7 at school, or passed his Advanced Driver test at 25. A lot of people pad new articles out with stuff like that. It just gives an impression of desperation... Peridon (talk) 12:30, 18 August 2014 (UTC).

Fair enough. Also I went and checked my references, D&B ones are actually the most in-depth, but I am removing a few mentions. Thanks for the suggestion. PankajVer (talk) 05:21, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

@MelanieN: Could you have a look at this one? BTW From next Tuesday I'll probably be missing for nearly a fortnight I'll try to get in, but it depends on the availability of signal. Don't know how good mobile signals are in rural France... PS There's another one down the bottom of the page too to keep an eye on if you can. Thanks. Peridon (talk) 13:17, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

I'll take a look but it may be next week before I can get to it. Have fun in rural France! --MelanieN (talk) 14:43, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Daniel Ashley Holliday

I request that my wiki page remain on the Internet. Please do not delete it. For all means please cite my references and claims, and edit/remove them as you deem fit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DashH90Three (talk • contribs) 14:56, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 06 August 2014

• Technology report: A technologist's Wikimania preview

• Traffic report: Ebola

• Featured content: Bottoms, asses, and the fairies that love them

• Wikimedia in education: Leading universities educate with Wikipedia in Mexico

• News and notes: "History is a human right"—first-ever transparency report released as Europe begins hiding Wikipedia in search results

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:51, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Request for Undeletion of CoalShastra

You had deleted my created wiki page, Title: CoalShastra

Following Reasons were cited: speedy deletion criteria G11, G12, A7

G11: The Page was written by me in a completely neutral manner and only absolute facts about various services of the website were listed. But still if you feel any improvement is needed, I will highly appreciate your inputs

G12: The images have been directly provided to me by the website. If you need I can get any form of permission that you may suggest to be had from them. They had explicitly given me the material for wikipedia. Again I am a newbie and would appreciate any pointers.

A7: The article about this website is important as it highlights a unique, one of its kind venture that is meant for the entire coal value chain. Hence visibility provided by wikipedia is very important for the entire community to be able to discover it.

I humbly request you to re-instate the article and to provide me with pointers to improve it.

Shikhar1432 (talk) 08:17, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

I'm not going to restore it because parts were copy and pasted from the company website, and other parts look like close paraphrases. If you want to try again in your user space (make it at User:Shikhar1432/DRAFT - just click that and save it), you must not use anything copied from the company site, or very close to it in wording. That is not allowed because of our rules on copyright. First though, read WP:CORP about notability for companies, and WP:RS about reliable independent sources. You gave a lot of references, and I can't see one that would pass RS. The company site cannot be used to prove notability, and nor can profiles obviously supplied by the company, or mentions in a listing of something. Remember that we use our own definition of notability. Being unique is not necessarily the same as being notable. What we need to see is coverage in independent sources. Outsiders reviews of the company or the site are the sort of thing, but they must be reliable sources. No forums, wikis, blogs, Facebook etc, or anything supplied by the company. No 'interviews' where the CEO talks a lot of PR jargon in what is obviously a setpiece to promote the company. As to promotion, you need to distance yourself from the company (see WP:COI). Write your own thing as though you were a student doing an assignment. Use Google to find references, and build the article around them. Do this first, as if you can't find any it will save time. Not every company gets an article - not like in directories or Facebook. Don't start from the company site. You can quote the TRUST thing in a little section, and put it in quote marks. In fact, the wording wasn't too bad for a company site. They've avoided the worst of the PR jargon. It is still best to avoid using their wording, to save problems later. If they change the wording, you'd need to get them to go through the licensing thing again. (It would have to be an official approach by the company to license the use of the wording, and that removes the copyright protection on it. Wikipedia is licensed for reuse by anyone anywhere, and possibly a rival company could use the wording from here without you being able to stop them. Not a good idea.) For an article here, you need a bit about the history of the company (not a lot to tell, I would think), and avoid the full listing of every service offered (and DON'T say 'offer') with the advantages provided. That looks promo. The site is new - concentrate on a brief showing of how it's notable (our definition), and reference that. Mention the main features very neutrally, and leave it at that for a beginning. Ask for advice and opinions before launching it again. Most regular editors and admins will give opinions. In user space, it's safe except for advertising, attack, copyright violation and hoax. Those get deleted anywhere. OK? Over to you. Peridon (talk) 11:00, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

The Night Runners

As per your request, the following issues with my wikipedia contribution has been corrected. I'd like for you to review it so it can be added to Wikipedia at this time given that they are public figures. Thank you Peridon.

by User:Iampixiedust — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iampixiedust (talk • contribs) 18:26, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

That's going back a bit... OK. The Jawoco ref looks not too bad to me, but the CreateChaos one is very lightweight. Might pass WP:BAND now. I wouldn't delete it, but that's because I think it's borderline. (Admins are never forced to delete anything - we can easily take the position of the Pharisee and the Levite, and pass by on the other side...) Anyway, it's actually an article now unlike the previous version, and you have done some work on the referencing. I suggest asking someone who is more into that sort of music. Anything that gets near X Factor isn't my sort of music. Not snobbery - they just wouldn't touch what I like and what I play, which are not always the same thing). Peridon (talk) 19:20, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

So do i resubmit it in order for it to appear on Wikipedia as an article or will the updated new version appear on itself? Thank you Peridon.

by User:Iampixiedust — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iampixiedust (talk • contribs) 18:26, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

It won't appear by itself. There is some procedure for submitting drafts for review, but I'm sorry to say I don't know how it works. If you ask someone like User:DGG, he'll give a straight opinion and advice. Give him the link [[Draft:The Night Runners]] (copy that from this page, not from the edit window. and include the brackets) and ask what he thinks. Peridon (talk) 09:13, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Deleted page - EuroLotto

I would like to request that my page be restored on Wikipedia. I wrote the copy and it is completely unique - not copied from the site at all. I also believe it to be neutral and not in any way advertising. The reason I created the page is because a Google search for "EuroLotto" prompted a result on the Swedish Wikipedia page. When I read the translated text on the EuroLotto page, I realised it was riddled with inaccuracies. Hence, I wanted to make sure that if there is a page for EuroLotto, it contains the correct information. Please let me know if there are any changes you would like me to make so I can get this page restored. Much appreciated, Katiefraser90 (talk) 11:29, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Interesting. No-one has suggested that it was copied from anywhere at all. I wonder why you thought that. The tag read "as an article about a real person, individual animal, organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content or organized event that does not credibly indicate the importance or significance of the subject. See CSD A7. [and] because in its current form it serves only to promote or publicise an entity, person, product, or idea, and would require a fundamental rewrite in order to become encyclopedic." It was deleted because there was no indication of real significance and because it read like an advertisement. There is no point in me restoring it because it would only get tagged and deleted again. To be successful as an article, you must show notability by our standards contained in WP:CORP and reference this with reliable independent sources WP:RS. Not the company site or the parent company site. They cannot prove notability. (Company sites don't even prove existence - I remember an alleged multi-national corporation that when investigated by us turned out to consist entirely of its website - and most of that was copied from other places.) You should tell more about the company, and not concentrate on the wonderful offerings. Please also be aware that what goes on on the Swedish Wikipedia is not our concern here. The different language Wikipedias are separate and make their own rules (excepting certain legal constraints on copyright violation and libel). Also, please be aware that articles are open to edit by anyone, and material that the company may not like can be added (so long as it is referenced properly). This cannot be removed unless it is proven to be false. You are quite free to rewrite in a more neutral way (do avoid 'offers'), and look at other articles about big companies first. Try Camelot Group and National Lottery (United Kingdom) for related topics, but look at any article about a big company. Collect references first, making sure they are reliable independent sources - not forums, blogs, own sites, Facebook etc, weebly or webpress sites, wikis, PRWire and other press release sites, and interviews that come over as gushing praise or obvious PR work. Peridon (talk) 11:55, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

I've been slacking- haven't sent a kitten in two days. Thanks for all your hard work on Wikipedia as an admin. Cheers!

Cheers, Thanks, L235-Talk Ping when replying 01:16, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

Re: Sirens

Sorry about that, was having trouble finding an appropriate category. If there was one for just a "general" non-notable item I would have selected that one instead. I'll put up an AfD then. MikeM2011 (talk) 05:31, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 August 2014

• Special report: Twitter bots catalogue government edits to Wikipedia

• Traffic report: Disease, decimation and distraction

• Wikimedia in education: Global Education: WMF's Perspective

• Wikimania: Promised the moon, settled for the stars

• News and notes: Media Viewer controversy spreads to German Wikipedia

• Op-ed: Red links, blue links, and erythrophobia

• In the media: Monkey selfie, net neutrality, and hoaxes

• Featured content: Cambridge got a lot of attention this week

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:56, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Maybe I made a beginner mistake?

I created a Wikipedia account a couple or more months ago. I wanted to contribute editing a page of a public company here in my country (Mexico) that had erroneous data regarding some business divisions that had been sold by this company in early 2014, but its Wikipedia page still informed that those were part of this corporation. When my Wikipedia account was ready and I tried to edit the page, somebody had done it already. Nice!!

Today I returned to my account with the goal of creating my first page, a page for a mexican company that doesn't have a lot of public information about it, and thus many people don't know what it really is and do when they hear it or someone recommends it to them. The title was "Comparateca".

I think the way I wrote the page triggered some alerts or something, because you decided to delete it completely. Re-reading multiple times what I wrote, I think I found what was the problem: I put a ".com" after a word. I'm not sure that was the reason, so I decided to ask you about it. Was that the cause of deletion?

I tried to use as a model the page of Amazon (the online store), and I saw "Amazon.com", so I though that if I wrote the name of the company and a ".com" at its side then the people reading the page could know what the domain was and go there without doing another google search to find the company's website. Now I think it is pretty stupid to allow that (using dot-com after a word, brand, name or whatever), since a lot of people would create a lot of spammy pages.

I'm really sorry about that. I hope you can elaborate more of your reasons, if possible.

Regards, ~~Alberto~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Avillat (talk • contribs) 19:35, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

You may not have seen the message I left on your talk page. No, you weren't caught by a filter. They prevent certain edits - for example, I can't post the real name of lulu dot com. There is a black-list which has a lot of the very spammed things on it. We have people that check through new pages and new edits and flag up things that look as though they don't belong. Some things are vandalism, some are advertising, some are hoaxes, some are attacks on people, some are copied from copyright places, and so on. Before I became an admin, I patrolled edits by recently created accounts. I still tag some things, because admins don't usually delete things they find. We like to have someone else look at them. We do also have some bots that patrol for various things - one even searches on Google (I think that's what it does, anyway) to check for things that are violations of copyright. Yours was deleted because your article didn't show that the site passes the notability standards. Please see the message on your talk page. Please do ask questions. Wikipedia is not an easy place for beginners. But if we made it too easy, we'd be over-run by small children writing about their teddy-bears... Peridon (talk) 19:57, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

HELP!!!

Hi,

Would you tell me why you deleted my articles (JRocs and Showa Shins) whereas they both fit all wiki's rules?

You are mentioning A7: Article about a band, singer, musician, or musical ensemble, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject. I read all criteria and both of my articles match several bullet points...

What is wrong then? Is there something (maybe only a word) I should delete?

As I am really lost and I don't understand...

Many thanks,

5.67.26.111 (talk) 10:16, 21 August 2014 (UTC)Chiesco. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chiesco (talk • contribs) 21:35, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

You must definitely avoid 'passion' and 'talented' - those are regarded as promotional here. I've just looked at both articles again, and I can't see one thing they pass on. Also, the links to YouTube are not really acceptable - that looks like promotion again. Please read WP:RS about reliable independent sources, which are needed to prove notability. These don't include own sites, YouTube etc, Facebook etc, forums, blogs, weebly or wordpress pages, wikis, iTunes, download sites and so on. A7 is a short cut to reduce the amount of stuff at Articles for Deletion, the longer procedure. Passing A7 on one point will not mean the article survives a discussion at AfD. Remember that this is an encyclopaedia, not social media or a directory. There is no right to have an article here. The vast majority of musicians don't have articles, and won't have. (Same with companies, professors, politicians (below national or state level), etc. Had it only been a word, we'd have done the job. I've added corrections to tagged articles on quite a few occasions to bring them up to standard. Sorry, but it's too soon. We aren't here to help people up the ladder to fame. We record not the up and coming, but the arrived (and the past it who have come down the other side...). Peridon (talk) 10:32, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi,

I made all amendments on all three articles. Should I create three new articles? Or can I access them somewhere to modify and publicise them again?

Thank you,

Chiesco (talk) 15:18, 22 August 2014 (UTC) Chiesco.

Hi,

I saved a draft on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Chiesco/DRAFT as you mentioned. Do I have to wait for someone to warn me if this is ok or will it be online straight away if it is ok? I would like to upload a picture but it has been deleted on wikicommons, I tried to upload it again but it does not work, could you please let me know if it will be added again if my article is right?

Thanks for your help and I apology for all my questions, but I am a new user and that's great there are people like you helping us! :-)

Chiesco (talk) 15:18, 22 August 2014 (UTC) ChiescoChiesco (talk) 10:35, 22 August 2014 (UTC)Chiesco

Sorry about the mess. Leave the picture. Pics are decoration. Let's get the house built before hanging pictures. You need to get the references in - ones that fit WP:RS. I've asked MelanieN to have a look. She's good at rescuing, but mightn't get to it until after the weekend - shortly after which I'm going off to somewhere with a question mark over internet. Pics at Commons I know nothing about. That's a different place with different rules ad staff. I do know that anything you upload should be your own work (or be in the public domain through age and a couple of other things, and none of these apply here). Pics uploaded here tend to get deleted if they're not in use and/or if there's any query about the origins. Commons stores things that can be used by any Wikipedia, so there might have been a query about your right to upload. With any luck, a talk page stalker will know. (A person who follows what's going on on this page instead of watching Emmerdale or Corrie. Probably more entertaining at times...) Peridon (talk) 17:35, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Chiesco. I'm one of those stalkers Peridon talked about. Don't worry, I don't bite. I sometimes evaluate draft articles and give an opinion. If I think it doesn't qualify for a Wikipedia article, I will tell you; if it does I will help you get it in shape. I will probably not have a chance to look at your draft until Monday or Tuesday so you have plenty of time to work on it. It is "safe" while it is in your draft space. --MelanieN (talk) 17:50, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Yehoshua Ya'acov ben-Avraham

Peridon, you seem to have deleted my article on Yehoshua Ya'acov ben-Avraham with the reason "Article about a real person, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject". I'm wondering, have you read my arguments on the significance of this person on the talk page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by PolitBoxer (talk • contribs) 14:40, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Put one at User:Chiesco/DRAFT (click and save). That puts it in your user space. Then ask someone to look at it. So long as it's not promotional, attacking someone, a copyright violation or a hoax it should be safe there for working on. It's the best way of starting articles. They can't stay there for ever, but they're OK for long enough. Almost any regular editor or admin will give an opinion and advice. We can get snotty when people tell us how things should be and that we're reading things wrong, but when they ask for help we do try. Peridon (talk) 13:11, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Peridon, by User:PolitBoxer/DRAFT (click and save), do you mean I should create the article in my Sandbox first and then let someone (an editor or admin) read it first. I don't understand what this User:Chiesco/DRAFT is, hence the question. Is Chiesco a user or some special type of account where drafts can be created and saved? Do you possibly mean that I should choose the option "Your article will first be created as a draft stored in Articles for creation" instead of "If you are a registered user, you may create your article directly in the article namespace"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by PolitBoxer (talk • contribs) 15:00, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

:Oops. Moved to right place now. I think you posted inside someone else's signature and I copied their name. I'm moving that sig where it should be. Please sign talk page posts with ~~~~, by the way. Your article is now really in your user space. Just save it there until it's been looked at, without any fancy options like AfC. Those are mainly for IP address people - they can't create pages in spaces except Talk: and Draft:. You must add references to reliable independent sources WP:RS. Without refs, it wouldn't last in article space. (Article space is where things don't have anything in front of the title; User space has User:, and there are others you needn't bother with, like Category:, Template: and WP:. They are specialised things. Get your references, and I'm afraid I still can't see enough there to stand as an article. I've asked MelanieN to look in - she's good at rescuing things. Don't rush - if you move it to article space as it is, it'll just be deleted again. Writing about people like Eminem and Lil Wayne is easy - and already done now. New artists don't have the coverage - you really have to work hard to find it. And do understand if we say 'too soon'. The vast majority of musicians don't have articles, and some of them have been performing for 50 years... Peridon (talk) 15:59, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Small heads up I think there is some further confusion. I think you meant to put the deleted Yehoshua Ya'acov ben-Avraham article into User:PolitBoxer/DRAFT and he definately is not an artist.Peter Rehse (talk) 16:37, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Fresh start. The DRAFT thing belongs to User:Chiesco and it's back there now. I got confused by the posting of this thread inside the sig of the poster of the thread above. Yehoshua Ya'acov ben-Avraham - yes I did read the comments and deleted. You say "All this point to the fact that Yehoshua Ya'acov ben-Avraham is and will be accepted as the Messiah of the Jewish people, and this is, you will agree, a factor more significant than notable enough for the Wikipedia article about him to first stay and secondly grow" - if and when he is proved to be the Messiah, then may be the time for an article. In a Google search just done now, I see 22 ghits for "Yehoshua Ya'acov ben-Avraham" and none of them are what I consider reliable independent sources WP:RS. If you repost it, as you are free to, You must not post such a long quote from whatever source it was - that is a violation of copyright. Quotes may be made, but only very brief ones. I would advise reading WP:FRINGE first, and WP:BIO. Peridon (talk) 17:04, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

I am just the peanut gallery and thought I could help clear up some confusion. The actual article has far greater problems than lack of sources and copyvio - I certainly don't think it has a place in Wikipedia. Deleting was the right move - I would even consider a salt. Cheers.Peter Rehse (talk) 17:02, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

• Comment Somehow, this thread and the one above got mixed. I think things are reasonably straight again now. I've struck my remarks that were made in the confusion, but left other people's alone (they can do so if they wish). I have not restored or userfied Yehoshua Ya'acov ben-Avraham. If any other admin feels like doing this, go ahead. If anyone can give help and advice to the user User:Chiesco in the thread above this one, please do so too. Especially about images. We are sorry for this problem, and normal transmission will be resumed shortly. Peridon (talk) 17:45, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Draft: Green Fairy (novel)

Thanks for the info, i'll rewrite it. ps: if the cover is available through google images can it be added using the wizard for copyrighted images ?

I would think not - possibly under 'fair use' as a small image. I'd ask User:Moonriddengirl or User:VernoWhitney about that. And don't forget the notability and referencing policies. No good rewriting if you can't meet them. Not everything gets an article here. Sofawolf is a small publisher, and the furry genre is not a large one (as compared to, say, vampires...). Being with a big publisher doesn't guarantee an article, but gives the best chance. Being self-published gives virtually no chance. Being with a small specialist indie puts the book into a grey area. You will need fairly good independent coverage (and not in Amazon reviews, or goodreads - the fixing that goes on in those is unbelievable). I'm not sure what to suggest - the nearest to furry I've read would be Alan Dean Foster's Spellsinger books, which probably don't count as part of this genre. If they do, they'd be the most notable ones around by miles (our standard of notability - remember, it's 'our ball, our field, our rules'). Peridon (talk) 11:06, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

I am summoned. :) Peridon is right- small fair use. By convention, User:Flameoffurius, Wikipedia allows cover images to illustrate books, with a preference for first print. The cover image must be low resolution. A good page to look at here is Wikipedia:WikiProject Books/Images. I'll note that the article needs to be established before the image is uploaded. Fair use images are not permitted in draft space. So, I'd make sure that notability is satisfied and the article accepted in article space before uploading any cover art. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:14, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, O Genie of the Copyrights. I don't think fair use images are allowed in user space, either. I advise collecting the references first, getting them looked at, and then writing around them if they're reckoned OK. Peridon (talk) 12:18, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm now trying to write the draft again, especially the plot section and I'll use the author page as a source together with the publisher page. The cover image I was going to use is 525*800, it's not really low resolution but i could still reduce it to half. In case the draft isn't accepted again I'll just make small modifications to the pages where the book is mentioned maybe adding external links to them linking to the author site.