User talk:Kim Dent-Brown

This is Kim Dent-Brown's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Talk page messages from before I began using Werdnabot are archived here.

Tip of the moment...

Flashback to Wikipedia's past

Nostalgia is a link to what Wikipedia looked like back in 2001 when we had only 19,000 articles.

The English Wikipedia now has over 6,880,367 articles. (purge server to refresh number). The five-millionth article, Persoonia terminalis, about a rare shrub, was written by an editor in Australia just after midnight on November 1, 2015.

To view an archived version of Wikipedia between 2001 and now, see the Wayback Machine.

Prior tip – Tips library – Next tip

Caught you

(Refresh)

Instead of doing something useful,
you have been staring at this page since 00:50 Monday, September 9, 2024 UTC.

plunge

Kim, I am just learning how to create a page on wikipedia and don't really understand how to cite. I do have articles to cite and am working on the history of the event, but I also think the description of the future event is crucial. I have only entered facts about the 2008 event that are known to be true and should remain unchanged.

Crash Band Page

My article on the band Crash from collegeville PA was speedy-deleted claiming it had no significance, but I fail to see how an article about a band people would want to look up with their biography, discography, and an image could be useless information. Regardless, how can I go about getting the information I wrote about them back to me? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Echoes4258 (talk • contribs) 20:58, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there, it wasn't me who deleted it but an administrator - they will be able to retrieve the text for you if you ask them. You need to type in the search box EXACTLY the title of the page that has disappeared. Then when you get there, you will see a message telling you that you are recreating a deleted page, and showing you a link to the deletion log. Follow the link and you will see the administrator who deleted the page. Click on their name and write a note on their talk page asking for the text you submitted.

However I should point out that this band almost certainly fails the test of notability. If you try and recreate a page about them, first look here and check that the band meet the notability criteria for ensembles. If they do, you will have to be able to cite some sources that can affirm this. Kim Dent-Brown ^{(Talk to me)} 21:08, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

how nice of you!.....

Dear Kim Dent-Brown; not only did you delete what I was writing as I wrote; I have now lost the entire first section of my article on the people of salvation; a famous hadith by Muhammed. Now it is lost; the second section that is left being incomphrehensible without the first section. Are you an expert on Islam? Do you even know what I am writing about: apparently not; your reason being that it was "too short". That is no reason; especially since I was NOT DONE TYPING IT: so how could you even know what point I was making? Or attempting to make? No; you just started erasin it and then let me know after you destroyed a half an hour of work. You are no editor; you are a vandal: and I am reporting this as a case of vandalism: next time wait TILL I AM DONE. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Unicorn144 (talk • contribs) 13:12, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there, I'm very sorry of some work you were doing has been lost. However I did not delete your article: I am not an admin and do not have the power to do this. I tagged it for deletion because it did not seem to me to follow the usual format we expect in Wikipedia articles: please see these links about what Wikipedia is and what it is not. Without Wikilinks, cited references or any other of the usual features of an article, this was just an essay or a piece of original research.

When you press the 'Save Page' button, you are creating a page which goes live onto Wikipedia and you really need to be saving a finished (or nearly finished) page. You can look at successive drafts without publishing them by pressing 'Preview' rather than 'Save page'. Even better, you might consider drafting a page in your own user space such as User:Unicorn144/The People of Salvation. This is NOT part of Wikipedia's public face (although anyone can see it...) so you can slowly draft an article there until it is in the form you think complies with Wikipedia format. Have a look at articles like Qur'an or Hadith to get a sense of how Wikilinks and citations are used.

However when you do eventually post it, do remember that it says at the bottom of the editing page that " If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly or redistributed for profit by others, do not submit it." This does ultimately involve deleting articles which do not conform to Wikipedia policy. If you would like any advice on how to draft the article so it can survive Wikipedia's editorial process, please let me know. Kim Dent-Brown ^{(Talk to me)} 13:30, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In fact I do want to know this: because as the founder and unfortunately spokesman for the New Unification Church I would like to know how to add my church to the existing traditions like Shia; Sunni and Christian and so forth: quoting the same information and others: so I won't be deleted: is there any proptection that these others seem to have that I do not? If the Shia say that Gabriel gave Fatimah a book concerning the Mahdi then can I use this same frame of reference about the same book? The Sufis; of which I am one; also have their own belief about Gabriel: are we then not allowed to present ours? And if not: why not??

I do need advice in trying to proceed; adding "balance" to articles which ask for balance: but not "my kind"; Sufusm is not allowed to state that Mary appeared at Fatimah because it was a sign from Allah about Fatimah herself? Why is our belief not allowed: the Shia belief is there: chapter and verse: what is wrong with mine? Unicorn144 00:51, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there, sorry it's taken me a day or two to respond. I do think there is a great difficulty for you as the spokesman for the New Unification Church in originating the article about the Church. It is perhaps similar to the policy discouraging autobiographies, that it will be difficult for you to be seen to be writing without promoting your own point of view (known as 'POV' in Wiki-speak.) If you do go ahead you will need to read these three policies and make sure you stick by them:

Wikipedia:Neutral point of view which says that 'All Wikipedia articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view, representing views fairly, proportionately and without bias.
Wikipedia:Verifiability:'Material challenged or likely to be challenged, and all quotations, must be attributed to a reliable, published source.'
And perhaps most importantly Wikipedia:No original research: 'Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought'.

If you can manage to draft an article that stays within these guidelines, it will stand a much better chance of surviving the scrutiny of other editors. But first please read carefully the three policies linked above.

There is one further problem with regards to the New Unification Church, but you may be able to overcome it because you know the subject much better than I do. I Googled for the name of the Church and came up with only one hit - your own website. This does not count as a usable source as anyone can set up a website! You need to establish the notability of your organisation from independent sources. In other words you need to be able to cite books, newspaper or magazine articles, authoritative websites outside your control etc who can attest to the fact that the Church exists, and that its existence is significant in some way (ie it's not just a tiny splinter group with its own agenda). If the Church is not such a group, and independent, citable sources can attest to this, then the article is feasible, but I repeat it will need very careful drafting.

I'd suggest that you set up a sandbox page in your own userspace at somewhere like User:Unicorn144/New Unification Church rather than posting a new article straight away. That way you can get feedback from editors like me and Fayenatic without risking having a half-completed article deleted because it does not meet guidelines. Please let me know if you'd like any help with this. Kim Dent-Brown ^{(Talk to me)} 09:18, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea, Kim. - Fayenatic (talk) 12:39, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Guitarmageddon

I can't find a previous AfD discussion for Guitarmageddon, so I removed your speedy tag. (The article was previously deleted, but it was a speedy.) If you can point me to the closed AfD that resulted in a delete, I'll happily delete the article. Thanks!--Fabrictramp 21:25, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, it was a Speedy not an AfD. However the CSD template that I put on does allow that articles recreated after a speedy may be eligible for a second speedy template. I think the article as it stands is probably asking for a speedy tag anyway - but I won't replace the G4 template. Kim Dent-Brown ^{(Talk to me)} 21:28, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is hovering right on the border of blatant ad. :) I've got a watch on the article, so if it gets recreated after the prod it might be time for AfD and salt.--Fabrictramp 21:37, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Leslie Swan

I WON'T LET YOU ERASE MY PAGE OF LESLIE SWAN! NO WAY! THAT PAGW IS THE MOST COMPLETED PAGE THAT I DID EVER! Damicroquete 23:25, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Xilp (community)

Hi... please see my note on the discussion page Xilp (community). I think it's important enough. Thank you. --WikiNickEN 12:47, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately you haven't made the case for notability. For web-based entities you need to meet the criteria laid down here. You cite four references, only one of which is independent. This article doesn't actually mention Xilp anywhere. Kim Dent-Brown ^{(Talk to me)} 13:43, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Did you talk about the report from the TV channel Viva? They report about Tanzfix, that's the part for dancing partners. As i wrote in the article, Xilp contains more than one entry page and consists of more than one community surface. As i don't want to make advertising, i just wrote, that Xilp contains entry pages for different people, but don't mention or link their names.

I also remember a report in a german PC magazine about the entry page for singles some time ago, but i don't know how to find it in the web!?! I just can mention the printed magazine, if i can get the correct issue.

Unfortunately the article was deleted in the meantime, so no one could improve it now... :-(

Could you salvage it?

--WikiNickEN 14:45, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To add this: The german PC magazine PC Welt reports in their printed issue 8/2004 (July/August) on page 141 about the community for singles. And the german PC magazine Computer Bild link to the singles portal in issue 9/2003 (22.04.2003) on page 126 and to the portal for Hamburg in issue 16/2004 (26.07.2004) on page 101.

In the web i found a small one: http://www.monetenfuchs.de/WebKatalog/index.php - but i don't know, if's enough for a reference.

And i know, that datechecker.de reports about the single community of XILP... but they have relaunched their website and i can't find it right now.

--WikiNickEN 15:00, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Royal wiltshire yeomanry.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Royal wiltshire yeomanry.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 19:23, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Licensing and fair use rationale improved. Speedy delete tag removed from image. Kim Dent-Brown ^{(Talk to me)} 21:55, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]