Talk:Fire Through the Window

Untitled
I don't understand half of what is going on here. All the images are owned by me so I "should" have all the rights to use them surely? And I have permission from the band to enter them into Wikipedia.

If someone could please explain to me what is wrong with the page (despite the citations) that would be a great help. Again this is my first wiki entry so im still learning the ropes.

Also, why is this page tagged for speedy deletion? There are millions of band pages on Wiki, what makes this one any different? It exists for fans to read up about the band. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MattyC69 (talk • contribs) 15:29, 9 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi. The speedy deletion has already been declined, as the article does assert notability, but that assertion will need to be verified with reliable secondary sources, or the article is likely to be considered for deletion by other means. Primary sources, like the band's website and Myspace, cannot be used; for this, you need references from newspapers or magazines, for instance. The tone issues tagged primarily relate to the lack of formality. Wikipedia is meant to be an encyclopedia, and we strive for an encyclopedic tone in articles. Referring to individuals by their first names, Marc and Sinead, or calling them "love birds" is not quite the right tone. "you can watch it on YouTube" is very much not the right tone. (That specific instance is no longer a concern, though, as I've removed the youtube links per the external links policy. Material hosted in violation of copyright policies on youtube can't be linked in Wikipedia articles.) As far as the images are concerned, you may own the right to use them, but unless you declare that and properly release them for use on Wikipedia, we can't host and display them here. If you took the pictures, you need to identify yourself as the source and indicate that you are releasing them under GFDL, which gives the right to anyone else to use them (for profit or otherwise), so long as your authorship is credited. The image use policy may clarify that for you. More about image copyright tags can be found here. I hope this answers your questions. If not, please elaborate. This page is on my watchlist for now. After several days, it may not be; at that point, if you want to ask of me specifically, you should probably follow the link to my talk page. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 15:48, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Ah! :)) thank you very much for the detailed and speedy reply! I was very confused because the reasons for the problems etc. weren't highlighted but you've just done that now. I completely understand your reasoning for links to YouTube and MySpace etc. and I will certainly avoid this in the future. I'll also be sure to add citations when I figure out how to add them :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by MattyC69 (talk • contribs) 15:55, 9 January 2008 (UTC)


 * No problem. :) For that, you may want to read WP:CITE. Wikipedians seem really to like footnotes, so the reference section method is probably the best to go with. In terms of notes on talk pages, after you type your comment you can sign your username by typing four tildes ( ~ ), which Wikipedia will automatically turn into your username & a time stamp. There are also two shortcut ways to do that. You can click on the signature button [[Image:Signature_icon.png]] located above the edit window, or you can click on the tildes after Sign your username below the edit summary box. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 16:02, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Great :) Thank you for all your help! --MattyC69 (talk) 16:10, 9 January 2008 (UTC)


 * How does one re-direct searches to this page? For example if someone searched for "FTTW" instead of "Fire Through The Window" it would get re-directed to this page. --MattyC69 (talk) 10:42, 11 January 2008 (UTC)


 * One creates a redirect page. The steps for that are here. :) I would like to note that you're still in need of secondary sources, without which all of your hard work could be jeopardized. Don't forget to cite a newspaper or magazine article along the way. Also, I see a couple of spots in the article that are problematic with regards to neutral point of view. This is meant to be an encyclopedia article; it's not up to us to pass judgment. We don't call people "talented" unless we're quoting a journalist and citing him. :) Also be aware that you can't include any information in the article that is not found in your sources (Wikipedia lingo, that's called "original research"). It can be hard when you are personally familiar with a subject to restrict yourself to verifiable information, but it's required. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:11, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

No problem :) It's all part of the learning experience. I'll crack it eventually. Thanks again for the quick reply :) --MattyC69 (talk) 07:51, 12 January 2008 (UTC)