User talk:BecomingPhill

Reply
I've seen your message, but I'm just about to go out for the day. I'll give you a detailed reply, but it may not be today  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  04:21, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

I'm back. Your article had been tagged by another editor as unreferenced, and autobiography and of unproven notability. I deleted your article because
 * it did not provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that it meets the notability guidelines. You gave no references. I noticed that you gave some external links in the text (where there actually shouldn't be any) but they were to Wikipedia and IMDB, self-editable sources not acceptable for notability.
 * it was written in a promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic. Examples of unsourced claims presented as fact include: has various production styles that rely from samples to synthesizers and acoustic session players... attributes his style to... &mdash; I've seen worse, but it's a press release not an encyclopaedia article
 * You have an obvious conflict of interest when it comes to editing articles about this subject. Thank you for declaring your interest. If, after reading the information about notability linked above, you still believe that your organisation is notable enough for a Wikipedia article (and that there is significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources), you could, if you wish, post a request at Requested articles for the article to be created. See also Best practices for editors with conflicts of interest.

I'll post the text here shortly for you to work on  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  15:25, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

More
I've taken out the two urls from the text, there shouldn't be any except in External links of Reference sections. Bare urls as refs are unhelpful, write them as [url description], I've done ref 2 for you so you can see what I mean. References should immediately follow punctuation.

OK, so you have references now. It's better to have fewer high-quality refs, such as newspapers, than lots of lightweight sources like blogs and music sites of unknown editorship. You need to make it clearer why you think you are notable. Notability isn't transferable, so the fact that you have worked with notable people or films doesn't make you notable, unless the success of the film is clearly linkable to your input.

As it stands, it would might avoid a speedy deletion, but may be nominated for a deletion discussion on notability grounds  Jimfbleak  -  talk to me?  05:12, 20 June 2013 (UTC)