Talk:Michael Bartlett (director)

Contested deletion
This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because... Michael Bartlett does not yet have a wikipedia page and he has directed several films and has won many awards for those films. I will read the rules and revise the page so that it does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion or become a talk page. Thank you for your understanding and patience.
 * I've declined the deletion, however the article was written like a press release and was pretty promotional overall. As such, I've created a very quick version of the article without all of the promotional puffery. It makes it a stub, but this also saves it from being deleted outright as unambiguous promotion. Be very, very careful about how you write things, as putting in information about where people can buy or watch a movie of his can be seen as spam. The same thing goes for putting his films in bold lettering and liberally sprinkling quotes throughout the article in order to make him seem more important. Rather than make him seem notable, this is probably what made so concerned. It tends to backfire pretty hard. I also have to warn you that you cannot remove speedy deletion tags from an article, so please do not do this with articles in the future, if any more are nominated. Also be careful of name dropping in the article. In most cases this is unnecessary and... you guessed it, can make an article seem more promotional. On another "be careful of promotion" front, avoid putting review quotes in the article, as this is typically unnecessary for most film directors on Wikipedia - especially if the film already has an article. The reason I'm emphasizing all of this is that making an article seem promotional, even if it's done unintentionally, can result in a quicker deletion than if it had been tagged for notability.
 * That aside, I was also concerned that you had details in the article that weren't really backed up with RS, like all of the information about his past and the quotes from the director. This poses a WP:BLP issue because we can't verify that any of this is true. If you have a source then that'd be different, although you'd have to show that it's a WP:RS, preferably one that is independent of the director himself, given that the article claimed that he worked with some well known people.
 * Something else to be careful about is just inserting trivial details. There's no real reason to mention why Bartlett moved to a new area, as people tend to move all the time. If anything, most of the time we tend to just list people's current homes since it can be so common for people to move frequently. The only time an emphasis should be put on the moves is if the move was extremely monumental and had an enormous impact on the area itself and on the person. In order to show this you'd have to have a lot of sourcing to back this point up - and not by the person themselves.
 * Finally, I have to ask: are you Bartlett or someone who was asked to create this page? The reason I'm asking is because of how promotional the article was. This typically tends to happen when the article is written by the person themselves or by someone who was paid or otherwise asked to create the article, especially if they're part of a marketing company. If this is the case, you must read over WP:COI and disclose any conflict of interest you may have. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  06:38, 4 October 2016 (UTC)


 * This doesn't mean that you can't add some things back, but it must be written neutrally and sourced extremely well to show that it's particularly relevant as far as Wikipedia goes. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  06:44, 4 October 2016 (UTC)