User talk:Weir NI

Proposed deletion of Felix Kjellberg

Hello, Weir NI. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, Felix Kjellberg, for deletion because it's a biography of a living person that lacks references. If you don't want Felix Kjellberg to be deleted, please add a reference to the article.

If you don't understand this message, you can leave a note on my talk page.

Thanks, GAtechnical (talk) 18:40, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Weir NI. You have new messages at Basalisk's talk page.
Message added 20:04, 21 February 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 20:04, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Weir NI, you are invited to the Teahouse

Hi Weir NI! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Nathan2055 (I'm a Teahouse host) Visit the Teahouse This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 01:17, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Do you want some help?

I see that you are making another try at creating an article about Felix Kjellberg. I have had some experience in getting articles excepted. Do you want me to change your article into the format that is acceptable to the editors? It would mean removing the links inside the main article, attaching citations to the facts in the article, and removing the promotional and gossipy bits.

Currently the article is written more like a fan site. There are many places on the Internet where you could post it just like this and it would be fine, but Wikipedia has to deal with its subjects neutrally and only include notable information (meaning that journalists or published authors have written about it, not just fans or bloggers).

By the way, the sources don't have to be in English. If a reputable newspaper in another language has written about this man, you can use this too. These days we can usually use Google translate to check the reference.

If you want me to work on this, let me know. It would have to be soon, since I see that the article is coming up for review shortly. —Anne Delong (talk) 12:58, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Completely agree. It needs strong evidence that Kjellberg has been widely talked about in reliable sources. We don't want an article that is just an update on the number of YouTube hits and followers, sourced to his YouTube page! Sionk (talk) 20:08, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Felix Kjellberg (2).
• To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the . Please remember to link to the submission!
• You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Sionk (talk) 19:43, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Well, too late, but I will see what I can do.

Dear Weir NI: I see that the review has happened, but I'll work on it and you can submit it again. I will have to change it a lot, but remember that if you don't like the changes you can always revert them by looking at the history. —Anne Delong (talk) 19:56, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Newspaper article

Dear Weir NI:

One of the references in your list is a newspaper article, but it doesn't say what the name of the newspaper is, or what the date of the article is. Do you know? This is really the best reference, because the other references are all blogs or connected with Felix. Being in the newspaper means that people outside the gaming world are taking notice.

Also, it seems that Felix won a contest. Do you know who was sponsoring the contest and putting up the prize money? If it can be confirmed, this is a good "notability" item, but the article doesn't say who is giving the prize, and where the winners are announced. —Anne Delong (talk) 21:00, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Still not acceptable

Dear Weir NI: I asked the reviewer to look again at the article, but he will not accept it unless the two best sources, the newspaper article an the television interview, are properly sources. For example, who dwas the interviewer, and on what station was the interview aired? What is the name of the newspaper that printed the story, and what date was it published? I'm afraid that without these sources you may not be able to get the article into the encyclopedia. The other sources are mostly blogs and such that don't have recognized editors. —Anne Delong (talk) 13:28, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Felix Kjellberg (2) concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Felix Kjellberg (2), a page you created, has not been edited in 6 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 02:04, 26 September 2013 (UTC)