User talk:NuHippie77

Deletion discussion about Fan Free Clinic

Hello, NuHippie77,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether Fan Free Clinic should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fan Free Clinic .

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks, Elblanco123 (talk) 20:04, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Fan Free Clinic

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 Fan Free Clinic, 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 "Click here to 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, you can place a request here. Safiel (talk) 04:07, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Copyvio/promotion

Hey... I wanted to explain why the articles were deleted. The long and short is that the article came across as promotional and the content was taken directly from this link. This makes it a copyright violation per Wikipedia's rules, which we can't accept. Even if FFC gives up the rights to the material (which they would, since I'm familiar with the organization) we would still have issues with the page having promotional tones and phrases. Even if the content is supporting a good cause, we still can't have the article up in that manner. It has to be written in your own words and it has to show how the organization passes Wikipedia's notability guidelines, which are incredibly strict - meaning that both big and small organizations have failed WP:ORG in the past.

Now that said, I am willing to try to help you look for sources. I love the FFC (kind of doxing where I live, so to speak) and while I've never been there, I have several friends, professors, and fellow students that actively support the location. That does sort of give me a WP:COI, I suppose. I do have to warn you about that: if you are operating with a conflict of interest then it's highly recommended that we get someone to help look everything over before re-adding this to the mainspace. AfC is a good place to run articles through, but we can also ask people in other locations to help as well. Offhand I'm not finding much, so it'd probably be a good idea to look for sources before proceeding.

As far as sources go, I'd recommend looking over WP:RS for the basics. Offhand the biggest thing to be careful of is that you don't rely on WP:PRIMARY sources, which are sources written by the FFC or someone very closely affiliated with them. This means that we can't use the FFC's website to show notability, nor could we use a link that was posted by someone who works at the clinic or is otherwise affiliated. Secondary sources such as this one by the RTD and this one by RM are a step in the right direction, although we would still have people complaining that they're local sources. Local sources are usually depreciated in discussions because they're considered by many to be routine local interest pieces. We also need to be careful of passing mentions, such as the one in this article. Those are considered to be WP:TRIVIAL sources and can't show notability. We also need to be careful not to use blog sources since most blogs are self-published and can't be verified in ways that Wikipedia requires. I think that's about it. I'll try to find more sources if I can. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:53, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

• I've made a new article, so it should be good. All we need now is a photo of the current clinic location. If you can take this or if you can get someone at the FFC to take a photo and give you permission to use it, that'd be great. Otherwise we could use the logo but we'd have to upload it as fair use. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:42, 17 April 2014 (UTC)