User talk:Axs912

Welcome![edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia, Axs912! I am I dream of horses and have been editing Wikipedia for quite some time. Thank you for your contributions. I just wanted to say hi and welcome you to Wikipedia! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page or by typing {{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. I love to help new users, so don't be afraid to leave a message! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!

I dream of horses @ 19:24, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I dream of horses thanks for reaching out to me. Thanks for the cookies. I do have questions and am putting together an article on Wikipedia for school. Its a project to create a Wikipedia page. I would like to do the page about the summer camp I went to as a child. Should I send you the article? A lot of this stuff is really confusing to me and difficult to use however I am intrigued by this new world I've been introduced to. It took me forever to figure out the refences :). Ok I am going to try and sign this and figure out how to send you a talkback on your talkpage. (Axs912 (talk) 20:05, 8 October 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Again, welcome!

You don't need to send me your article, because it's on your user page. Putting an article on your user page before you "officially" published it is called "userfying".

If you're able, I'd suggest trying to do something other than writing articles for a while, so you can get used to Wikipedia. You are highly encouraged to be bold, but article writing, like I'm sure you have found, is a very time-consuming project. I've been on Wikipedia for a long time, and I haven't even wrote one article!

At least glance through these:

Words to avoid, and notability are a must, since I believe these are the two things that will probably get your article deleted,
How to properly do an inline citation,
Article wizard, a program that takes you step-by-step on how to make an article, and article incubator, a place where you can put your article without worrying too much about getting your article deleted, while still having it benefit from collaborative editing.

I'm a little worried that I may have overwhelmed you. I hope I haven't! --I dream of horses @ 04:11, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks I dream of horses. I appreciate the advice. I have already started the article and have used the article wizard to create it. Did you happen to take a peek at it? Do you have any advice? I spent a lot of time working on it :). (Axs912 (talk) 19:14, 10 October 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Yes, I've looked at the article. I'd suggest getting some secondary sources, to make sure that what you're saying is reliable. --I dream of horses @ 20:56, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all your help and advice I dream of horses. I have found a few more secondary sources. I am going to put them on the site. Do you recommend I take some of the ones I have that link to the Camp WEkeela website down? How does a site like "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyler_Hill_Camp" not get banned when there are no references? I just want to get the best understanding of Wikipedia possible and appreciate how nice you have been to me. I also would like to get a good grade in my class but I would like to do that by doing whats right for wikipedia. Look forward to hearing from you. (Axs912 (talk) 15:36, 13 October 2010 (UTC))[reply]

It's much better to have sources in your article the day it is published, however, you can get by with a verifiable claim to notability.

You should probably remove the current inline citations you have, putting the more important ones in external links, then use the secondary sources as the inline citations when you can. --I dream of horses @ 20:06, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A Quick Note On Talkbacks[edit]

When leaving talk backs, remember to replace "your username" with your actual username ie. axs912. So, instead of {{talkback|your username}} use {{talkback|axs912}}. Hope this helps. Set Sail For The Seven Seas 256° 53' 0" NET 17:07, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Camp Wekeela for deletion[edit]

A discussion has begun about whether the article Camp Wekeela, which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Camp Wekeela until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 14:08, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Need help[edit]

Hi I dream of horses. I hope you are well. I tried posting my article and it was nominated for deletion by some person who has really not been nice. Can you help me at all? (Axs912 (talk) 16:30, 26 October 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Why do you say that they haven't been nice?

You can comment on the deletion, if you want. I dream of horses @ 18:35, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I mean take a look at what they have written to me. I made some changes to the article and added more secondary sources. Would you take a look? I have commented on the deletion. (Axs912 (talk) 19:19, 26 October 2010 (UTC))[reply]

I still don't understand why you are offended. You don't own articles on Wikipedia, especially since the article is no longer userfied. The message that the nominator put on your talk page, above, was something that was pre-written years ago. If you're offended that your article has been put up for deletion, that's something that every article creator (good faith or not) needs to deal with, and new wikipedians, are no exception. --I dream of horses @ 20:31, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you go to my article and look at what he wrote as reasons for the deletion and how he answered my questions concerning making the "Wikipedia" article better I think you would understand. I am not referring to the message above I am referring to the comments in the deletion of the article discussion. I apologize if I am being unclear or impolite that is not my intention. When you first reached out to me I was under the impression you wanted to support me. Will you support me and give me advice to make my article a keep? (Axs912 (talk) 21:17, 26 October 2010 (UTC))[reply]

I don't think you are being impolite, just unclear. That's commonplace on the internet, where there is only words to rely on, many cultures and languages, and many brains interpreting the same thing, and nothing to apologize for.

I don't think what the nominator said was impolite at all, or at least, that wasn't what was meant. Maybe he could've said it in a way that was more gentle, however. You have to realize that people that do what you did, that is, write an article immediately after creating an account, usually end up writing articles so bad (sometimes intentionally, sometimes not), that they end up being speedily deleted. This isn't prejudice, this is a fact. Getting a discussion on whether or not your article gets deleted is a compliment, even if a backhanded one. --I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 19:56, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey JJB[edit]

I was wondering if you could help me a little with my article. That guy was quite rude to me and I am just trying to be a part of the Wikipedia community. I am currently looking for more secondary sources for my article. What other advice do you have? Thanks so much (Axs912 (talk) 16:51, 26 October 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Hey again JJB - Thanks for your reassurance on my article I really appreciate your support. I also welcome feedback to make it better. The books you recommended I take a look at had some great sources of information I could not find. I added both books to the article. I have also made an effort to tone down and promotional aspect of it. In addition I have categorized it and fixed the orphan status. How will the process work as time progresses? How can I continue to improve my article to ensure it is not deleted? Thanks Wiki Friend :). (Axs912 (talk) 19:31, 26 October 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Questions below in bold

If the deletion discussion closes as "keep", it is generally safe from that point on unless its quality significantly degrades.

If it closes as "no consensus" there is a risk that another nomination might someday happen and a consensus might tip against the article, but that is not likely if you maintain the article use a WP:WATCHLIST) when you have new sourced info. — John J. Bulten — continues after insertion below

*what would cause the discussion to close as a keep or no consensus?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Axs912 (talk • contribs)

Per WP:AFD, admins and other experienced editors look for AFDs that are over 7 days, ensure they are personally uninvolved, read all the arguments, and determine which set reflects consensus (or determine there is no community consensus), based on various arcane rules; complicated ones take a bit longer. JJB 21:16, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

You could also edit the template that appears in the article by clicking its "e" or "edit" link, and then copying the code for one of the other camps and carefully inserting the copy changed to Wekeela. — John J. Bulten — continues after insertion below

*I dont fully understand what you mean here— Preceding unsigned comment added by Axs912 (talk • contribs)

That's quick to do, I'm doing it now and linking you: At the bottom of the article, left of "Camping Facilities in the state of Maine", is "v • d • e" for view, discuss, edit. I click "e" and copy the code "[[Camp Vega]] ([[Fayette, Maine|Fayette]]){{·wrap}} ", including the final space. (That camp needed alpha sorting anyway.) I paste it in a second time, in alpha place, and change Vega to Wekeela and Fayette to Hartford twice. Save page. JJB 21:16, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

But the basic WP "game" is to uncover as many WP:RS as you can in the first week; I count at least five, which for many people would keep it, but some editors keep arguing until there are 20 or 30 sources due to professed reliability concerns. If you know anyone who works with the camp, first read about conflict of interest, then while following that guideline feel free to contact them and ask if they have any local newspaper clippings about the camp that are not ads. JJB 20:04, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Is the camps website is valid source?

Thanks for taking the time to educate me John. (Axs912 (talk) 20:21, 26 October 2010 (UTC))[reply]

After notability is established by outside sources (which I think has been done), it is appropriate to begin to use camp website data in accord with WP:SELFPUB on self-published sources. There are several more restrictions on using selfpubs than other sources, but they are recognized as useful on a wide variety of points. JJB 21:16, 26 October 2010 (UTC) Oh, ads and job openings are considered self-published also (see also WP:AD), but may occasionally provide otherwise notable information, although it's best to find other sources for such info. JJB 21:19, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

THANK YOU SO MUCH John you are great man. I appreciate your help so much. I am not sure I fully understand what you did but I trust you. Do I need to take any other steps or is it now up to the Wikipedia gods? (Axs912 (talk) 21:31, 26 October 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Just humans around here, actually. First, click the "watch" tab at the top of the camp article, past the "history" and "move" tabs; that will add the page to your account's watchlist (ditto for any other pages you want to watch, like {{Summer camps in Maine}} and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Camp Wekeela). Whenever you're logged in you will see "my watchlist" at the top of every page, and clicking that will show you who made the last change to your articles at any time, and the edit summaries. That will tell you about what new activity is going on; check your watchlist a couple times a day.

If there is no new opposition at the AFD, it should close as keep or no-consensus (default keep) at the scheduled time, based on my limited experience (if it does get deleted there's always a specialized deletion-review board, how about that?). If you do see new data, remain calm, and politely address problems raised. Most important, keep an eye out over the next week for any new reliable sources, and add them or (if it's quicker) mention them with a link at the AFD whenever you find them. JJB 21:52, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Wekeela Article[edit]

JJB - I have found two more articles and just wanted your advice on integrating them onto the Wekeela page.

http://www.downeast.com/node/12154

http://www.boston.com/ae/celebrity/articles/2009/07/08/tee_time_for_entourage/?page=2

Both mention celebrities who attended Wekeela at some point in their life. In addition, football star Terry Kirby works with the camp during the summer. Question: Can I go on to Terry Kirby's website and put that on his Wikipedia page? I do not have documentation excluding the Wekeela website which is where I learned this information.

How would you approach this? Thanks again (Axs912 (talk) 17:31, 28 October 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Just use your judgment on inserting the two new sources. Adding even one sentence from each with a valid reflink will allow them to be noted and rated by the AFD closer. You can also add the info about Kirby to the camp page and his own WP page, because on his page it's not a self-published source, and on the camp page there are enough third-party sources to permit occasional use of self-published sources. JJB 17:39, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Hey John - Sorry to keep bothering you but you've been a great help. I am putting a piece for notable people associated with Wekeela who went there or worked there in the past as I mentioned. I found an article that mentions Terry Kirby working there but it is also a fairly promotional. Would you be willing to take a look and let me know if you think its appropriate? http://www.k12academics.com/national-directories/camp/camp-wekeela (Axs912 (talk) 14:45, 29 October 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Yeah, that would be regarded as sort-of self-published, because it clearly follows a camp script, but its being a directory means it probably has editorial oversight to prevent ridiculously promotional statements. In short I would think it could be used for the Kirby point only (and possibly one or two other points), and it's much better than using the camp's site for the data, but it wouldn't increase the degree of notability, only the breadth of the coverage. Others might disagree with my judgment, but it won't affect the AFD much, and probably won't be very controversial in itself either. Looks like you've already got it in a well-developed section.

If an editor took significant exception to an insertion on the article talk page, that might generate a consensus against it, and if you ever see a consensus (such as 2 editors vs. 1), best to back off from the insertion and work other angles. But in general you're on safe ground: just be WP:BOLD and edit freely, and if there is a serious disagreement with your work it'll manifest sooner and be resolved more directly than if editing is hesitant. JJB 14:57, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

So should I make note on the AFD that I added this article and the articles about Dempsey and Garson? (Axs912 (talk))

No need to chime in too often if nobody else is. The closer is responsible to note all the additional sources, and almost always does. JJB 15:04, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Ok if you feel I need to throw anything else in there to defend myself please let me know. I have also added a ton of things to the "what links here section" (Axs912 (talk) 15:07, 29 October 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Hey JJB - it seems now when I click on two of my references that I can no longer access the information it had about Camp wekeela. Does this make these references no longer good secondary sources? How do I find out if the wiki supervisor approves the article or not? (Axs912 (talk) 17:41, 1 November 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Which two references? If something was once a good secondary source, it remains so, even if it goes offline; it must still be verifiable by some method, of course, but sometimes it can be found another way, sometimes it can be trusted to be in print, sometimes good faith is given to the inserter. The seven days are over, so the next admin or experienced editor who comes along looking for AFDs to close (we don't have supervisors) will make the decision at any second now. If the links suddenly went bad, and if you don't find another way to get their copy, just put a note to that effect on article talk; I'll update the AFD. (Also, no need to keep sending me talkback messages, I am watchlisting your user talk page.) JJB 23:30, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

There is no other way to say this John but you are the man! :) (Axs912 (talk) 05:29, 2 November 2010 (UTC))[reply]

No problem, we do like to welcome contributors, so they keep contributing to other topics as well (feel free to jump in anywhere). The AFD closed with a "no consensus, default keep" result, which means the closer (it happened to be Stifle this time) did not want to assert there was a consensus on either side, but the article is kept by default. That means, keep improving it whenever you come across new sources; there is a slight risk that the same or a different group of editors will still argue at a later AFD that it's deletable, but it's bad form to renominate a deletion right away, so even if someone had a vendetta against the article, they would at least wait a month or two (and you'd be notified). Take your time, get comfortable with WP's policies, try editing some nice noncontroversial articles, and you'll have a voice when you have something to say on topics that really matter to a lot more people than you can know. JJB 23:35, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks so much John. Do you know how I can post a picture on the article? I was thinking about emailing the camp and asking permission if I could use one of their pictures? (Axs912 (talk) 16:33, 8 November 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Pictures are a bit harder; start with WP:IMAGE. Emailing is good, but stick to one picture of the main camp buildings, as would be encyclopedic; you might get away with a photo of the director also. When you email, tell them to state who took the photos and to state that that person, and any persons pictured, license them under both the WP:GFDL and the WP:CC-BY-SA licenses. (Use links "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:GFDL" and "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:CC-BY-SA".) Then go to WP:UPLOAD and follow the instructions for photos released to you by others. When you get to inserting the "text of the license", copy the licensing statement from the email, along with your own statement of when received and who from. In theory that much will prevent them from deletion by ordinary process, although there are lots of exceptions, and you may need to explain later if asked. Don't take it hard if a photo is deleted because for legal reasons they are much more difficult to sustain if challenged. JJB 16:51, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Is it maybe not worth doing it? Could a photo bring negative attention to the article that might cause people to want to delete which would start another discussion? (Axs912 (talk) 17:46, 8 November 2010 (UTC))[reply]

No, that's much less likely. What usually happens is that someone discovers the photo in a search months later and then argues with some aspect of its licensing, and the better this is handled upfront, the better for keeping the photo. You can put the photos on your watchlist too after they're uploaded. Feel free to go ahead. As for the risk of reopening the deletion discussion for other reasons, do as much as you can to establish multiple independent sources now, and then keep it on maintenance level, meaning that whenever you see new good independent sources, take a moment to add them, or at least link them from talk (very useful when on the go, nobody deletes useful links from talk). JJB 18:05, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

What do you mean by talk?

Talk:Camp Wekeela. Every content page, of any kind, has a talkpage as its "flipside". JJB 18:41, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Hey JJB - I uploaded a bunch of pictures. The owner of the camp was quite receptive and sent me the necessary email immediately and I forwarded it over to the permissions email. Would you mind taking a look and letting me know what you think? Thanks for your help bro. You've been amazing. I am debating what to do next hah! (Axs912 (talk) 19:14, 9 November 2010 (UTC))[reply]

OK that's a great start. First, add the Little Bear Pond photo to the Hartford, Maine article where it mentions it, as a lake photo can be used in more than one article. The building photo can be retained without much argument if its permission goes through correctly; the use of a second waterfront photo would be debatable but might also sit for months without anyone objecting. If someone argues that the waterfront photo leans excessively toward advertising and WP:UNDUEWEIGHT, either (1) don't fight its deletion, or (2) demonstrate from sources that both photos are necessary for a good understanding of the topic, although that's a hard slope to climb. The other two photos have good keep rationales. I don't know the OTRS process, but you've already done the right thing in notifying commons user Rubin16, and just wait on a reply (or watchlist his talk page with your commons account) on that issue. You've really done everything that a good article would be expected to do; you might go to Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting for your next guidance, and ask the article to be rated and listed as one of the WikiProject's articles. If they rate it B or higher, you can also see WP:GA about requesting it be made a good article, although that probably would require letting people provide other balancing POVs (cutting back some text, e.g.). Anyway, I wish you well in going forward. JJB 21:55, 9 November 2010 (UTC)