User talk:Coopmancity

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Coopmancity, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as User:Coopmancity/sandbox, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

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 Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, 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! BoxOfChickens (talk · contribs · CSD/ProD log) 02:56, 30 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Coopmancity/sandbox[edit]

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 User:Coopmancity/sandbox, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. BoxOfChickens (talk · contribs · CSD/ProD log) 02:56, 30 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reply[edit]

Hi, thanks for email. I actually looked at the sandboxed version so you didn't need to send the text. Problems with your draft include

it did not provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that it meets the notability guidelines. (organizations and companies) (music) (software) (academics) It is now Wikipedia policy that biographical articles about living people must have independent verifiable references, as defined in the link, or they will be deleted. Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to the company, social media, business directories and other sites that can be self-edited, blogs, websites of unknown or non-reliable provenance, and sites that are just reporting what the company claims or interviewing its management. I can see at a glance that several of your links such as Soundcloud and IMDB are not acceptable, and Amazon is a sales site, also not permitted. I haven't checked the others yet, but few if any seem likely to be acceptable. You need sources as defined in the link above.
Unless you can find real independent third-party refs, he will not meet the notability criteria.
Not a reason for deletion, but bare urls are unhelpful, add a description of the source, formatted <ref>[url description]</ref>. Also you need to wikilink to other articles, I've done a couple for you in the first paragrapgh, add more
it is still written in a promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic. Examples of claims either unsourced or supported only by self-editable sources but presented as fact include: one of the stars on the Discovery Channel ... quickly became a top-producing agent... has been acknowledged as one of the top 25 real estate agents
there shouldn't be any url links in the article, only in the "References" or "External links" sections. that's particularly the case when they are spamlinks.
Again not a reason for deletion, but if you want to use a ref more than once, give it a one-word name. Example, first time <ref name=bbc>[http://www.bbc.co.uk/ BBC home page]</ref>, and next time just use <ref name=bbc/>,

If you have a conflict of interest when editing this article, you must declare it. That's particularly the case if you work for or on behalf of Mr Hopkins. If that is the situation, you are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists, and if it does not, from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Coopmancity. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Coopmancity|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. Please do not edit further until you answer this message. In summary, the tone has mainly been fixed, but you have major problems with referencing. Unless you can find genuine references, the article will be deleted on notability issues rather than promotion. Please note the formatting comments too. Also note that your image will eventually be deleted unless you can prove that the newspaper has released it as public domain, highly improbable. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:53, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

More[edit]

Mr. Hopkins was/is a mentor friend of mine and I am not getting any compensation for this article.— I don't think that merits the formal disclosure above, just bear in mind that you mustn't let your friendship influence what you write.

As far as the photos go, one was pulled from his website and I know the person who took the picture, it was his PR person. The other one was from a public news paper article column he would write as a real estate expert. Are newspapers not public domain?

Copyrighted images are not allowed in Wikipedia, as outlined in this policy, and all images are assumed to be copyright unless they state clearly and explicitly that the text is public domain. You would have to get the copyright holder to donate their image(s) to Wikipedia, as described here; please note that simply asserting on the talk page that you are the owner of the copyright, or you have permission to use the image, isn't sufficient. It's very unlikely that a newspaper will relinquish its rights, but in nay case you will have to follow the release procedure. Effectively, it either has to be your personal photo of him, a US federal government image (PD, but unlikely to help here) or explicitly PD as I've described Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:34, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the spamlink to Amazon, a sales site. I've autoformatted the refs, and I can see that most do not meet our criteria. They are either his sites, editable by him, eg soundcloud, IMDB, MDA, or just reporting what he tells them, like vanderwall. You need proper independent references, or this article will struggle to survive Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:46, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]