User talk:Bhaktigarden

Welcome
Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! Burningview (talk) 19:23, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * 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

Proposed deletion of Brenda Webster


The article Brenda Webster has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Notability. Does not meet: WP:BIO

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing  will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Oliver  Twisted (Talk) (Stuff) 03:55, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Brenda Webster
A tag has been placed on Brenda Webster requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.  ttonyb (talk) 03:55, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Brenda Webster

 * Howdy! I happened on this article in the new page patrol, and I feel the subject was of questionable notability, so I added a PROD tag to get a few other editors involved in making a decison. One of the editors decided the article may have met the grounds for Speedy Deletion. In attempting to give the article fair consideration, I did some minor format and syntax changes to the article, including breaking it up into some rough sections, and finding at least a couple of independent sources for some of the claims in the article. This may not be enough to get past the copyright flag, but it's a step in the right direction. I'm going to leave the rest up to you, as I am unfamiliar with this author. I am also going to copy the article, as it exists now, to your userpage. In the event it is deleted, it will give you a template to work from when you have accumulated enough sources to meet notability guidelines, as expressed here: WP:BIO. Reliable sources are described here: WP:RS. What information can be included without references is described here: WP:V. Best regards on your future edits. -- Oliver  Twisted (Talk) (Stuff) 05:03, 16 September 2009 (UTC)


 * After further work, I went ahead and deleted the deletion notices, and let the editor who had orignally tagged the article for copyvio, know that I had done some work on it. It may still be nominated for deletion, but at least it won't be for copyright violations. On a side note, please feel free to change the Intro, in regards to what Brenda Webster is best known for. Penguin books are fairly notable, so it seemed the most likely candidate to use, without being more familiar with this author. If you can find WP:RS that can be used to assert a different "claim to fame" in the intro, you certainly have my blessing to do so. ;o) -- Oliver  Twisted (Talk) (Stuff) 05:32, 16 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi, thanks for continuing to improve the article. Unfortunately, the intro section has since been edited to no longer meet the guidelines on Wikipedia. An intro section should be one or two sentences describing briefly, the notability of the particular subject. Award nominations are discussed in their own section, and should not be repeated in the intro. Descriptions of the contents of books, as well as publisher information, should also appear in the full body of the article, rather than in the introduction. Please keep in mind this is an encyclopedia entry. I'm going to let you make any additional changes, but please read the guidelines regarding constructing a proper intro. WP:INTRO. Best regards.-- Oliver  Twisted (Talk) (Stuff) 01:48, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Please consider responding to some of these comments. Wikipedia is a community of editors, relying on communication to insure articles are objective as possible. The introduction is now being edited in completely the wrong direction. All of this information is contained in sections below, and is just being repeated, in a non objective, unsourced, and improperly formatted way. Please review the guidelines I have highlighted above. -- Oliver  Twisted (Talk) (Stuff) 02:43, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Help request
(questions from editor have been copied here as a courtesy from the article talk page)

1) There are now two areas where the article is questioned that I don't understand. A citation is being asked for to address a simple summary of a book. I can cite all sorts of summaries. Is this what is being asked for?

2) The general questioning of the introduction, saying it may need to be rewritten. the original intro I submitted was taken from one written by Brenda Webster for redroom.com. It was considered a copyright violation and was then edited to be factually incorrect, saying that Webster is know for her translating and not her novels. So I rewrote it to be more factual and more informative.
 * I have no problem with changing what Brenda Webster is most notable for, though this has to be supported by the sources. An introduction does not contain every novel, a description of that novel, as well as non-sourced editorial comments. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, so naturally, would not read exactly like an autobiography on a writer's site. Publisher information should be contained in the references or sources section, not included inline in parantheses. Please view the helpful articles which are highlighted in blue above, especially. WP:INTRO, and WP:STYLE.

Further help

 * Hi there.


 * The article currently only references primary sources, and that is the major problem at present. In order for readers to be able to verify the information, and to pass the notability guidelines, articles need references to appropriate independent reliable sources. Links to the actual books or publishers are not independent; examples of suitable sources would include newspaper or magazine articles about the person - but they must be independent.


 * Fixing this would solve both the issues that you mentioned. Please read the links above, and perhaps look at some good examples of similar articles, maybe in featured articles or good articles. Do ask again if you require any further help.  Chzz  ►  03:15, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Brenda.webster.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Brenda.webster.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as non-free fair use or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly hi! 09:02, 19 May 2016 (UTC)