User talk:Sarahwyo

Welcome

Hello, WyomingWildlife, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions.

I notice that one of the first articles you have edited appears to be dealing with a topic with which you may have a conflict of interest. In other words, you may find it difficult to write about that topic in a neutral and objective way, because you are, work for, or represent, the subject of that article. Your recent contributions may have already been reverted for this very reason.

To reduce the chances of deletion, you might like to draft your article before submission, then ask me or any other editor to proofread it. To start creating a draft article, just click your user name at the top of the screen when you are logged in, and edit that page as you would any other. If the page you created has already been deleted from Wikipedia, but you want to save the content from it to use for that draft, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page.

The one firm rule we do have in connection with conflicts of interest is that accounts used by more than one person will unfortunately be blocked from editing.

If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, 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:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! GregJackP (talk) 11:52, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

April 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit that you made to the page Wyoming Wildlife Federation has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Please use the sandbox for testing any edits; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing for further information. Thank you. Praefectorian (talk) 02:08, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

April 2010

Hi! I am trying to have a Wikipedia page that looks exactly like the National Wildlife Federation page. We are an affiliate of NWF and they suggested that we start a page like theirs. Can you help me? {{helpme}} Your question. WyomingWildlife (talk) 02:12, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, the username you have chosen seems to imply that you are editing on behalf of a group, company or website.

There are two issues with this:

You may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, you must exercise great caution when editing on topics related to your organization.
Your account cannot represent a group of people. You may wish to create a new account with a username that represents only you. Alternatively, you may consider changing your username to avoid giving the impression that your personal account is being used for promotional purposes.

Regardless of whether you change your name or create a new account, you are not exempted from the guideline to avoid editing where you have a conflict of interest. For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations.

Beyond that, there are some very useful pages you should review that will help you to better create articles here. Some important ones are:

Introduction
The five pillars of Wikipedia
Editing Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style
How to write a great article

It is essential you cite reliable sources for the content of your articles. This is particularly important when adding or changing any facts or figures and helps maintain our policy of verifiability. Take a look at Wikipedia:Citing sources for information about how to cite sources and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. For help on citation formatting, it may be easier for you to use the citation tool. Also, please feel free to visit the New contributors' help page. There a lot of useful information there, as well as people willing to help. For examples of what a good new article consists of, please check out Wikipedia:Articles for creation. You can follow the directions and have an editor work with you on making a good article, or you could just look at some recent requests there and look at the difference between accepted and declined articles. There are some very big points to keep in mind:

Articles require significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject.

Significant

References that are about the subject - it is in the title or chapter heading. Not passing mentions. Not directory listings. Not just any old thing that happens to have the name in it. Several of them - not just one. It must be notable.

Reliable sources

Something that is 'generally trusted' to tell the truth. A major newspaper. A factual, widely-published book. High-quality mainstream publications with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. Not blogs, not myspace. Verifiable.

Independent

Nothing written by the subject or paid-for by the subject. Not their website. Not a press-release. Not primary sources.

If you need help, you can check the help pages, add a question to the village pump, look in Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page. Also, you could create a new section at the end of your own talk page, put {{helpme}}, and ask your question. Also you can talk to us live, with this or this. The last of those is particularly useful - please try it; pop in now and say hello.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Best of luck to you! ^Avicenna_sis @ 02:39, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

{{helpme}} I just edited the Wyoming Wildlife Federation page. Is it verifiable?

Help, please!

{{helpme}} I just edited the Wyoming Wildlife Federation page. Is it verifiable?

Sarahwyo (talk) 01:51, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I just took a quick glance, but it seems OK. I'm not sure what you mean by "verifiable." I think someone removed something that was not supported the source indicated. Maurreen (talk) 05:01, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Posting in Village Pump seems to been a form of chumming for jackasses, given the stupid flag someone laid on top. Just grit your teeth. I don't think there's a shadow of a doubt that the subject of the article is "Notable," which is the main thing you need to worry about regarding deletion by the anal retentive, annoying, bossy sort... With respect to style, there are a couple things you could do that would be helpful. One is to write a lead summarizing the subject — and making a note of how it is "notable" without using the word "notable."

Example: The Wyoming Wildlife Federation is an American sportsmen's conservation organization in the state of Wyoming. Established in 1937, the WWF had a membership in 2009 of 5,000 members and was influential in the doing of this and that since 1980. — Borrow that phrasing and insert a couple important facts.

Then skip a line and put in a headline called something like ORGANIZATIONAL HISTORY and say the same stuff (and lots more) all over again.

Another thing that needs to be done is the installation of "Categories." Everything on Wikipedia needs at least one. One basically needs to find a couple similar pages and borrow the categories used there. I will hop over and add a couple categories for this article. Articles that don't have Categories get picked up by the software and attract (sometimes unwanted) attention.

Finally, the form of the footnotes isn't really fully kosher — at least to my eyes. The more kosher things are, the less the chance that a jackass will try to derive existential meaning by trashing your work. I will go "kosherize" one footnote and you may want to do the same for the others. Or not.

Hang in there, it's a little tricky getting up to speed with all the rules and regulations. One of the rules is IGNORE THE RULES and the fundamental principle is BE BOLD, so don't let people bully you.

Drop me a line if you need help or have questions. — Tim Davenport, Corvallis, OR MutantPop@aol.com Carrite (talk) 04:24, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I just put the first footnote into what is, to my taste, "good" form. It is still missing a page number, which should appear right before the retrieval date. I note that the document you are using as a citation doesn't seem to document either the foundation date or the membership level, so be SURE to find the page of the pdf document that substantiates what you are trying to substantiate and make a note of it. I really strongly recommend that you do footnotes using the system I used rather than the CITE WEB template — it's not really any harder and it looks a lot better on the page — and the nicer that things look, the less crap that people will flip you over content. Anyway, play with it and don't let people bully you. Carrite (talk) 04:43, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]