User talk:Angelalala222

March 2021

Hello, I'm Allninemice. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Saint-Sulpice, Paris have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Thanks. ANM🐁^{(Talk/Contribs)} 01:34, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hi Angelalala222! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:12, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another thing

Your intended article at User:Angelalala222 is in the wrong place. That page is for, if you want, to write a little about yourself and what you do/want to do on WP. So, my suggestion is that you go to WP:DRAFTS, create a draft with the title David Alexanian (author) (since there's a David Alexanian already) and copypaste your text into that draft, then work on it from there. You can delete the copy at your userpage. Good luck! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:19, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I recommend that you take the time to read WP:BASIC, WP:BLP and, if it applies, WP:COI. In a WP-bio, refer to subject as Alexanian instead of David. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:32, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Gråbergs Gråa Sång. Thank you for your advice. I hope this is how to respond. I have read the suggested articles and have taken your suggestion and made a draft of the article on the author. I am still having trouble inserting the picture though. Do you mind taking a look at the article when time permits and letting me know if it is ok? I am hoping to become a regular writer of articles for Wiki and this is my first attempt at it. Thanks again and best regards Angelalala222 (talk) 23:22, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is indeed. I'll be blunt and go directly to the main problem. Afaict, there is no useful coverage to argue that this should be a WP-article, if you submit it it will be declined. I found no independent reliably published sources about him at all, so IMO this is clearly WP:TOOSOON. Now, there may very well be good sources I didn't find when I googled, but if so, they have to be found and used. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:45, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I appreciate that. In my search I have found there are many author pages on here that are the same. He is a published author and a good one at that. His books are available in every book store in the world. Surely that is a notable thing, no? So what type of sources would verify an author besides his published work? I thought he was deserving which is why I chose him as my first subject. Any help here would be appreciated. Angelalala222 (talk) 09:57, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WP uses the word "notable" in a special way, WP:NOTABLE. Being published in some form and appear on amazon does not make you notable, in this day and age. The question "should we have an article on this whatever" is answered by trying to show sources that are at the same time reliably published (WP:RS, you can see WP:RSP for a few examples), independent of the topic and about the topic in some detail. This excludes blogs, wikis, online bookstores, subjects own websites etc etc. If you can't source it, you don't include it, especially in a WP:BLP. Finding inspiration in other WP-articles can be helpful, but if you do that, try to find it in good ones per WP:Other stuff exists. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:55, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Would the publishers page be a better source? What does an author have to do to be notable if not write books? I hope you know I am not trying to be difficult. Just trying to understand. I went with Peter V Brett's page as an example, and besides the publisher links, I see not much difference in substance. This author is not self published. Thanks. Angelalala222 (talk) 21:54, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What makes an author WP:NOTABLE is that independent WP:RS notice what they're doing and writes about it. A publisher's website, or the author's own, can have some use per WP:ABOUTSELF, but they don't help with the WP:NOTABLE issue. The WP-article article about Peter V Brett is not a very good one and can use improvement (here's a better one: Dede Wilson (baker)). If someone thinks they should, they can nominate it for deletion. However, crappy as it currently is, it has one good source The Daily Telegraph, (independent of the topic, about the topic in some detail and a WP:RS), and others like Variety and The Bookseller have covered him too, so it would probably "survive" a deletion discussion. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:25, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:David Alexanian (author)

Hello, Angelalala222. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:David Alexanian (author), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 17:02, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]