User talk:Punkrocker1991

File copyright problem with File:TP-Logo-Black-web.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:TP-Logo-Black-web.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. ww2censor (talk) 04:17, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:TP-Logo-Black-web-100px.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:TP-Logo-Black-web-100px.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. ww2censor (talk) 04:18, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Angela slatter

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Angela slatter, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://girliejones.livejournal.com/1553106.html.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 04:26, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Punkrocker1991, 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, such as Angela Slatter, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may soon be deleted. However, you may be able to prevent this by adding referenced sources that comply with Wikipedia policy at WP:RS, and which clearly assert notability according to WP:BIO

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:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Kudpung (talk) 04:43, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Angela Slatter - other issues

Hi. Notability is not asserted. This article reads very much like a promotional CV (resumé), and is little more than a list of the subject's publications. To avoid eventual deletion, please take a moment to read the guidelines for the creation of biographical articles. Thank you.--Kudpung (talk) 04:55, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Angela Slatter

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Angela Slatter requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), 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. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. ttonyb (talk) 05:21, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

December 2010

Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Angela Slatter, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you. ttonyb (talk) 05:23, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You should wait for others to write an article about subjects in which you are personally involved, instead of writing it yourself. This applies to articles about you, your achievements, your band, your business, your publications, your website, your relatives, and any other possible conflict of interest.

Creating an article about yourself is strongly discouraged. If you create such an article, it might be listed on articles for deletion. Deletion is not certain, but many feel strongly that you should not start articles about yourself. This is because independent creation encourages independent validation of both significance and verifiability. All edits to articles must conform to Wikipedia:No original research, Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, and Wikipedia:Verifiability.

If you are not "notable" under Wikipedia guidelines, creating an article about yourself may violate the policy that Wikipedia is not a personal webspace provider and would thus qualify for speedy deletion. If your achievements, etc., are verifiable and genuinely notable, and thus suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia, someone else will probably create an article about you sooner or later. (See Wikipedia:Wikipedians with articles.) Thank you. VernoWhitney (talk) 14:12, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

CommentThe Australian SF community is a vibrant group of individuals, creating work that is both important and notable. The nature of the community is such that if the strictest interpretation of the Conflict of Interest guidelines were applied, there would probably be no one suitable to document these individuals. Punkrocker1991 (talk) 23:02, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Angela Slatter for deletion

The article Angela Slatter is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Angela Slatter until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. ttonyb (talk) 05:58, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:TP-Logo-Black-web.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:TP-Logo-Black-web.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk 04:30, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you must sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 05:43, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for this, I sometimes forget and have been going back in and doing this. Punkrocker1991 (talk) 05:47, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Australian SF writers and editors

If you'd like to work on some articles about notable Australian SF writers and editors, the following articles could use some work, and you're probably better placed than average to find sources for them: Cat Sparks, Stephen Dedman. Also Russell B. Farr, although you might not be well placed to work on that one yourself. If you've got some sources for that one send them my way and I'll tart it up to C-class for you. - DustFormsWords (talk) 02:13, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I had aimed to work on updating a bunch of articles on Australian SF, also plug some gaps to do with upcoming writers who are starting to wield some clout. But, given the struggle to get Angela Slatter, a writer who has had two published collections, added to wikipedia, I'm somewhat disheartened. If Angela Slatter doesn't qualify, why should Cat Sparks? Cat has no publications at book length, and has only won Australian SF awards. I could find and add sources, but do not know why I should bother. Punkrocker1991 (talk) 02:23, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, on the basis of Cat's current article, you could well argue that she's not, which is why I was hoping you could improve it. But, arguing for the reverse, Cat's a multiple Aurealis winner - almost certainly a notable award - while as I understand it Angela's only been nominated? Correct me if I'm wrong. Cat's also able to (arguably) source her notability to significant discussion in reliable independent sources, such as interviews on sites such as Tabula Rasa and Ticonderoga Online. They're only arguably reliable sources though, and then only because they have a strong local reputation and clear editorial control. Typically blogs and zines won't be accepted by Wikipedia. Normally I'd say you could follow the example of Cat's article by slapping an interview up on Ticonderoga, but obviously Ticonderoga has published her so that's not going to be independent. The SMH piece is really the kind of thing you're looking for for Angela, but you'd need something more substantial so that it would classify as "significant discussion" - that is, something with enough detail to meaningfully inform an encyclopaedic article. I contribute to a lot of AfD debates, so I can assure you that the discussion there is not indicative of a bias against Australians - I've seen American authors with far more credits get deleted. - DustFormsWords (talk) 02:39, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify, I'm not seeking to argue the merits of Cat's inclusion. I know she is worthy and notable, and should be here. There are a whole bunch of writers that should be here: I'd certainly like to see entries for all Ditmar and AA winners, and anyone who has racked up a handful of nominations. I am concerned that the Australian SF awards aren't given the recognition they deserve, hindering attempts to recognise the winners. The irony here is that I abhor having to use awards as a criteria as while I don't personally necessarily believe they are always the best measure of success, they seem to be what others want to see to justify notable. Punkrocker1991 (talk) 02:31, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's probably not the place to start that crusade, though. The place to start it is in the mainstream press. Once you have significant coverage in reliable sources, Wikipedia won't have an issue. - DustFormsWords (talk) 21:57, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure it's a crusade, I'm just looking to increase knowledge in something I have been interested in for almost 20 years. This isn't just about adding to wikipedia, I'm also working with the mainstream press where I can. Punkrocker1991 (talk) 22:35, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't someone over here in Canberra publish a biographical-dictionary-style book on current Australian small-press SF a couple of years ago? Nicole Murphy, maybe? (I forget, but the CSFG would know.) That would be a great starting place for sourcing notability for a lot of editors, if not writers. - DustFormsWords (talk) 22:55, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Donna Maree Hanson, and it was a fine tome of small press, big press and other stuff, came out around 2005. I have a copy at home, so may look back over this when I'm back in the house, thanks for the idea. Punkrocker1991 (talk) 12:27, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Apparent COI

Please explain your involvement with the article on Russell B. Farr, and your continued editing (e.g. [1]) of articles on authors published by Ticonderoga Publications, in light of WP:COI and your apparent self-identification as Farr [2]. Thanks. EEng (talk) 20:17, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ResponseI have made a statement on my user page, you may wish to refer to this first. I have spent a lot of time reading and studying WP:COI. As I have now voluntarility disclosed a COI, from here on in I'd like you and others to assume good faith. Nothing I have read on WP:COI explicitly prohibits me from editing articles published by Ticonderoga Publications, however it does recommend strongly that any editing I do be done with the strictest adherence to NPOV. I believe that I have done this. I have also not made any attempt to discourage other wikipedians from changing these articles, nor have I made a single reversion to any changes made. My involvement with these remains purely academic, and wherever possible I am suggesting changes to Russell B. Farr on that articles talk page. I thank you for your attention to my work, and welcome you to review all of my changes for NPOV, and apologies if you think I'm an asshat. Punkrocker1991 (talk) 01:16, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wet Ink Short Story Prize

Hi, I recently knocked up a page for the Wet Ink Short Story Prize in my user space. I was wondering if you knew of any sources that may help stengthen the notability of the article. Thanks, Salavat (talk) 06:13, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

found a couple of links from writers sites but couldn't find anything about the winner - I'll keep looking. Punkrocker1991 (talk) 01:29, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the links, ill have a look at them and then i think ill take the page into the main space, so if you find any more sources the page will be located over at Wet Ink Short Story Prize. Thanks, Salavat (talk) 10:15, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

thanks

Hi Punkrocker - just wanted to say a quick thanks for your efforts on the Bloodsongs magazine entry deletion discussion. Dubbothedevo (talk) 13:32, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No probs -- I haven't had as much time as I'd like to devote to editing on wikipedia of late, but do try to jump in when there's something I know a little about. I hope we can save this article, I'd hate to have had to resort to my old dead tree editions for nothing :) Punkrocker1991 (talk) 13:37, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Big Brother

Hi, Thanks for voting in favor of the deletion. Would you mind spread the word around? It's currently 7-3 to keep the article so we need some more votes. The other side seems to be very cocky. You might want to read some of the most resent discussions on the deletion pages about the verifiability of some of the source material being used in the article and possibly glance at the articles yourself. Any help you can provide would be greatly appreciated. Jschro (talk) 14:31, 17 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure I can help much with spreading the word, I'm just a guy who edits some pages and don't really mingle wiith many other users. I'd put some faith into a closing admin working out that it really is a crystal ball situation and that when the time is right, the page can be re-created. Punkrocker1991 (talk) 14:57, 17 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]