User talk:Jlb348

Welcome!

Hello, Jlb348, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. 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! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! —C.Fred (talk) 22:10, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! I have just deleted Image:Children with Autism wikipedia write-up 2.pdf, partly because it was blatant advertising, and partly because it was not a valid image type. Image space is intended for images (JPEG, bitmap, scalable vector (SVG), etc.) that are intended to augment articles. Since this image did not meet those guidelines, and since PDFs are not a supported image type by the Mediawiki engine, it was deleted. —C.Fred (talk) 22:10, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to Image:Children's Autism Services of Edmonton wikipedia write-up 2.pdf. While objective prose about products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Thank you. —C.Fred (talk) 22:24, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Autism Services of Edmonton

As I noted in the above comment, objective prose about a topic is welcome. The images failed this criteria, because:

It is not prose per se, because it is an image. (Incidentally, that also means it would not be searchable with the Wikipedia search engine.)
It is not objective, because it is promotional copy written by the agency.

A better solution is to write, in original text, an article at Autism Services of Edmonton. The article can draw on information from the agency's web site and from news articles about the agency as sources, but it should not re-use the text wholesale. Not only does it lead to an article sounding like blatant advertising, but it also creates issues with improper use of copyrighted text.

Be prepared to demonstrate that the organization is notable per Wikipedia standards. While it probably does good deeds locally, the burden of proof is on the writer of the article to demonstrate that the subject is notable within the global scope. Has it won national awards? Did it start a fundraiser or programme which is unique, or was unique until other agencies copied their formula? This is an area where independent reliable sources will be critical: other editors will give more credence to claims made in newspapers, etc. than claims made in press releases by the subject agency.

Finally, remember that Wikipedia is collaborative, so even if you start with a basic description of the agency and links to where it's been covered in the media, other editors will join in to help craft it into an article fitting with the style and tone of Wikipedia. —C.Fred (talk) 17:42, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]