User talk:LadyLovecraft

Welcome![edit]

Hello, LadyLovecraft, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing 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 click here to ask for help here on your talk page and a volunteer will visit you here shortly. Again, welcome! Quis separabit? 00:10, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest[edit]

Hello, LadyLovecraft. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Necronomicon Providence, you may have a conflict of interest. People with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, see the conflict of interest guideline and frequently asked questions for organizations. In particular, please:

avoid editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, its competitors, or projects and products you or they are involved with;
instead, propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use require disclosure of your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing, and autobiographies. I don't think that you're a spammer or anything, just that the article's tone makes it seem very likely that you're involved with the convention. It will need some editing for tone, but I do think that it should pass notability guidelines now. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 14:09, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

November 2015[edit]

When adding links to material on external sites, as you did to Necronomicon Providence, please ensure that the external site is not violating the creator's copyright. Linking to websites that display copyrighted works is acceptable as long as the website's operator has created or licensed the work. Knowingly directing others to a site that violates copyright may be considered contributory infringement. This is particularly relevant when linking to sites such as YouTube, where due care should be taken to avoid linking to material that violates its creator's copyright. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If you believe the linked site is not violating copyright with respect to the material, then you should do one of the following:

If the linked site is the copyright holder, leave a message explaining the details on the article Talk page;
If a note on the linked site credibly claims permission to host the material, or a note on the copyright holder's site grants such permission, leave a note on the article Talk page with a link to where we can find that note;
If you are the copyright holder or the external site administrator, adjust the linked site to indicate permission as above and leave a note on the article Talk page;

If the material is available on a different site that satisfies one of the above conditions, link to that site instead. This has direct copyvio from the official website for the convention. This is not permitted on Wikipedia. The convention can give permission for Wikipedia to use the text and I'd even recommend that to an extent since it can make rephrasing things easier, but it will need to be re-written since it's very promotional in tone. I'm moving this to your userspace for the time being, because otherwise we will have to delete this as a copyright violation. In the meantime, since it is very likely that you're related, I need you to file a ticket through WP:ORTS giving permission to use the material. We may not be able to use much or all of it, but it will keep us from having to delete the article history to remove the copyright violations. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 14:13, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Userspace[edit]

I've moved the article to Draft:Necronomicon Providence. The article had several issues.

The first issue was with copyright. As was stated above, copyrighted material cannot be posted to Wikipedia without permission filed through WP:ORTS. Even if you are someone who is involved with the convention (which is likely) you will still need to file permission. We cannot grant permission otherwise. The catch with this is that the majority of any written material will still not be usable because most of the time it was written in order to promote something. This leads to point 2. (You can always change the copyright on the website to fair use, but it's better/easier to just file a ticket to protect yourself in the long run since fair use would make everything on your website usable by anyone.)
The article has issues with a promotional tone. You can see this with portions of the article that use the term "we" or opinion/WP:PUFFERY based terms like "exciting". This is one of the main reasons why using material from somewhere else is highly discouraged, as articles can be deleted on sight if they're too promotional. Avoid things like "highlight the world of Lovecraft". I don't think that you're necessarily here to promote the convention, but be extremely careful about this - especially since you give off a strong impression that you're involved with the con. Even if you're not, the impression will still be so strong that you need to be very, very careful.
The sourcing does need to be a little better. I do think that the new sourcing should be enough to show that the event would pass notability guidelines as a whole, but it does need more/better sourcing to really help back up the various details. Be careful of using WP:PRIMARY sources like press releases. Those cannot show notability regardless of where they were posted because they were written by the conference heads/organization. They can be used to back up basic details, but not show notability. Since this did previously go to AfD and was deleted, people are going to be scrutinizing it far more than they otherwise would.
This isn't an issue with the article per se, but if you do have a COI you will need to disclose this on your userpage or on the article. Things have changed in the last year and disclosure is now required. This doesn't mean that you can't edit, just that you need to be very, very careful about this.
Be careful of covering too much about the con. You don't entirely need to go over every aspect in a great amount of detail. Sometimes it's far better to just summarize things without going into extreme detail. Many convention articles don't go into this amount of detail, partially because this can very easily come across as promotional. Remember, the goal is for the article to be lightly informative - if people want more specific detail they can go to the con website. It's not meant to be an extension of the website itself. I don't mean this to sound harsh, just that this is part of the reason why it came across as promotional. Wikipedia articles aren't meant to be exhaustive. Offhand you could probably merge "gaming, "Art Exhibition and visual artists", and "panels" into one main section. The vendor section should be 86'd entirely. It's a given that a con will have a vendor's room so other than a brief one sentence mention, there's no reason to include anything else and this is one of the biggies that will be seen as overwhelmingly promotional.

Those are the biggest points. The article isn't too bad, it just needs some editing for tone and I really have to stress that it's important that you get permissions filed. This way we can keep or closely paraphrase the portions that do come from the official website without fear of the article getting speedily deleted as a copyright violation. Also, again, be careful about being promotional. Since you do likely have a close COI, this will be harder to spot. However like copyright violations, being promotional can lead to an article getting speedy deleted from Wikipedia. Since this was deleted via AfD, it's easier for people to be more likely to delete something for these reasons so we need to be very careful.

I am willing to help work with you on these things, though, and will try to work on this tonight when I have time. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 14:28, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:15, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Necronomicon Providence[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 Draft:Necronomicon Providence, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which articles can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

It 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. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.
It appears to be a clear copyright infringement. (See section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. However, even if you use one of these processes to release copyrighted material to Wikipedia, it still needs to comply with the other policies and guidelines to be eligible for inclusion. If you would like any assistance with this, you can ask a question at the help desk.

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. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:51, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Hello, LadyLovecraft. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Hello, LadyLovecraft. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Hello, LadyLovecraft. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Cthulhu Cultus[edit]

The article Cthulhu Cultus has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

lack of notability

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Waxworker (talk) 08:15, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Midnight Shambler[edit]

The article Midnight Shambler has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

lack of notability

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Waxworker (talk) 08:28, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Midnight Shambler for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Midnight Shambler is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Midnight Shambler until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Artw (talk) 18:26, 9 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]