User talk:Carrymeaway
Well, simply rewrite it. Make sure it follows notability. Check WP:BIO. --Esanchez(Talk 2 me or Sign here) 00:55, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
RE
[edit]To start off, I didn't delete it for the second time. Either way, I was gonna delete it. The page was coming from one source, which doesn't completely make it notable. It needs more more than one source of one site to make what you were writing notable. --Esanchez(Talk 2 me or Sign here) 17:17, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
- Call it whatever you want. Wikipedia has a policy on the notability of a person for an article. --Esanchez(Talk 2 me or Sign here) 22:38, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
- Read our standards of notability. The person in question didn't meet them. Most published authors (like myself) are not notable enough to get their own articles in Wikipedia. --Orange Mike | Talk 23:05, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
- There are hundreds of thousands of authors of new books every year. Most of them never achieve notability. I am sorry this distresses you so much, but the grim reality of the modern publishing industry is that most books never achieve notability, and most authors are in the same boat. If this book had been a bestseller, or the author had been the subject of serious press coverage, then the decision would have gone the other way. The last thing in the world we can treat as a reliable source is an author's own website, which is a marketing tool, not a scholarly source. You wouldn't be able to rely on anything from Faith Hill's own website (or Tim McGraw's, either), for the same reason; they're only concerned with making themselves look good and sound important. The same goes for every author's website. --Orange Mike | Talk 23:21, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
- Wikipedia is not meant to be a means of publicizing anything. We purge ruthlessly any edits which seem to be intended to publicize or advocate any person, product, subject, ideology, meme, etc.; all of these are lumped under the rubric of "spamming Wikipedia." Persistent spammers can be banned, and the websites they push can even be blacklisted in extreme cases. The only content we want here is impartial information from already-published reliable sources, which can be verified. If something is not already being noticed in the world, it shouldn't be inserted here. --Orange Mike | Talk 23:30, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
- There are hundreds of thousands of authors of new books every year. Most of them never achieve notability. I am sorry this distresses you so much, but the grim reality of the modern publishing industry is that most books never achieve notability, and most authors are in the same boat. If this book had been a bestseller, or the author had been the subject of serious press coverage, then the decision would have gone the other way. The last thing in the world we can treat as a reliable source is an author's own website, which is a marketing tool, not a scholarly source. You wouldn't be able to rely on anything from Faith Hill's own website (or Tim McGraw's, either), for the same reason; they're only concerned with making themselves look good and sound important. The same goes for every author's website. --Orange Mike | Talk 23:21, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
- Read our standards of notability. The person in question didn't meet them. Most published authors (like myself) are not notable enough to get their own articles in Wikipedia. --Orange Mike | Talk 23:05, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Your recent edits
[edit]Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button 
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name 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) 22:37, 20 March 2008 (UTC)