User talk:Chucky823

Welcome!

Hello, Chucky823, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Barkly Street Uniting Church Cricket Club, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may soon be deleted.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type helpme on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Meph talk 12:16, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Starting an article
 * Your first article
 * Biographies of living persons
 * How to write a great article
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial

Speedy deletion nomination of Barkly Street Uniting Church Cricket Club


A tag has been placed on Barkly Street Uniting Church Cricket Club, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Business for more information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, 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. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Meph talk 12:17, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Barkly Street Uniting Church Cricket Club
I declined to speedy delete this as I don't see it as unambiguous advertising. However, a number of issues remain.

The most telling is the tone. It reads like a personal tribute page. Please remove all "us", "we" and "our" language. An encyclopedic tone requires the third person. Also, it would be better to write more objectively, from a neutral point of view. It reads more like someone exulting in their glorious past and wondrous future.

The next is sourcing. Again, this reads as though it were from personal knowledge. Sourcing must be from reliable, 3rd party sources unconnected with the subject with a reputation for fact checking with verifiable information.

The subject's notability is in question. Please see the relevant notability guidelines. The lead should contain some claim to notability. "The Tampa Bay Buccaneers are a professional American football team located in Tampa, Florida," for example.

You may want to read Your first article. Thanks, Dloh  cierekim

Copyright problems with Barkly Street Uniting Church Cricket Club
Hello. Concerning your contribution, Barkly Street Uniting Church Cricket Club, please note that Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images obtained from other web sites or printed material, without the permission of the author(s). This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://barklystreetcc.org/barklyst/?page_id=4. As a copyright violation, Barkly Street Uniting Church Cricket Club appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Barkly Street Uniting Church Cricket Club has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License (CC-BY-SA) then you should do one of the following:


 * If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Barkly Street Uniting Church Cricket Club and send an email with the message to . See Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
 * If a note on the original website states that it is licensed under the CC-BY-SA license, leave a note at Talk:Barkly Street Uniting Church Cricket Club with a link to where we can find that note.
 * If you hold the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the CC-BY-SA and GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:Barkly Street Uniting Church Cricket Club.

However, for textual content, you may simply consider rewriting the content in your own words. While contributions are appreciated, Wikipedia must require all contributors to understand and comply with its copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright concerns very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Thank you. Meph talk 16:15, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Close paraphrasing
I realized that in Barkly Street Uniting Church Cricket Club, you attempted to rewrite the material in. However, it is my opinion that the results constitute a Close paraphrasing of the original. I've found that if I copy and paste the material, and try to rewrite it, that it still ends up too close to the original. A better approach is to find more than one source (always desirable), then, put them aside, and write about the subject in one's own words. After writing, return to the original text, and determine whether it is too close (if you have a better memory than I do), or if some points would be better made by an explicit quote and attribution, with the quote suitably short.-- SPhilbrick  T  16:49, 4 June 2011 (UTC)