User talk:CrownP

Welcome!

Hello, CrownP, 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 Josh Valdez, 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! Darkness Shines (talk) 15:39, 24 September 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 Josh Valdez


A tag has been placed on Josh Valdez requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

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". 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. Darkness Shines (talk) 15:39, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Josh Valdez


A tag has been placed on Josh Valdez 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 clear 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. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

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, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". 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. Darkness Shines (talk) 15:40, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Josh Valdez


The article Josh Valdez has been proposed for deletion because, under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one. Darkness Shines (talk) 21:13, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Josh Valdez


A tag has been placed on Josh Valdez requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

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". 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. Darkness Shines (talk) 21:36, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Move
I've moved the contents of your userpage back to where they belong. User talk should be on the proper place so that people can find it, and so it doesn't get deleted if the page it's been moved to gets deleted. Peridon (talk) 21:55, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

hello i am working on this biography and published it but then i got deleted i added a more correct format of refrences, the notability should all be in the article itself. please shed some light if anything more needs to be done!
 * Rather than keep creating the article, set it up as a draft on this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:CrownP/draft. Then you can follow the instructions to have it reviewed before it goes live.  Pay particular attention to notability requirements.  Does this person receive significant mention in several independent and authoritative sources such as books, newspapers, magazines, and expert websites.  Let me know if you have any questions, Ocaasit 02:45, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation
 You recently made a submission to Articles for Creation. Your article has been reviewed and because some issues were found, it could not be accepted in its current form; it is now located at Wikipedia&. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. Feel free to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved. (You can do this by adding the text to the top of the article.) Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! The Blade of the Northern Lights ( 話して下さい ) 00:31, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation
 Josh Valdez, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. Thank you for helping Wikipedia! Alpha Quadrant   talk    23:27, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
 * The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see what needs to be done to bring it to the next level.
 * Please continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request.
 * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider

Question regarding COI policy
Good day. I appreciate the effort you have spent in developing the article Josh Valdez. It seems, though, that some people that draft biographical pages are closely associated with the subject of the article, and Wikipedia policy strongly discourages this. Please see the Wikipedia policy called Conflict of Interest for more information on what a COI is and why it is discouraged. As a result, it would be helpful and appreciated to know (in a way that protects your privacy) if you do or do not have a potential COI with regards to Josh Valdez. Thank you. ~ Pesco  So say•we all 15:23, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Your article has been moved to AfC space
Hi! I would like to inform you that the Articles for Creation submission which was previously located here: User:CrownP/draft has been moved to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/draft, this move was made automatically and doesn't affect your article, if you have any questions please ask on my talk page! Have a nice day. ArticlesForCreationBot (talk) 03:20, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation
 Thank you for submitting an article to Wikipedia. Your draft submission has been reviewed. However, the reviewer felt that a few things need to be fixed before it is accepted. Please take a look and respond if possible. You can find it at Wikipedia&. If there is no response within seven days, the request may be declined. If this happens, please feel free to continue to work on the article. You can resubmit it (by adding the text  to the top of the article) when you believe the concerns have been addressed. Thank you. Sceptre (talk) 18:48, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

hello, for any people out there i need help and im totally out of ideas. ive sourced all my information but learned its primary sources and i cant base my article on them. i really dont know what to do i cant find any secondary sources, everything is press releases and stuff if anyone could look over my article and help me it would be appreciated. the information is all real its just the im not sure what to do about the sources


 * Hi, listen. I've said some kind of mean things at the Articles for Deletion discussions, because we get so many people here who write articles about themselves, trying to make themselves seem important.  I can see that isn't what's going on here.  The problem is, sorry to say, that it doesn't look like Mr. Valdez isn't what we call at Wikipedia "notable."  The doesn't mean he's not a good guy, and hard working, and maybe he's got a brilliant future. I really mean that.


 * But to be "notable" there has to have been magazine articles, newspaper reports, things like that written about him. People have to have discussed him.  There have to be more than just one or two different articles, and they have to be "independent" of Mr. Valdez -- it can't be things that people around him (coworkers, family, friends) wrote about him -- it has to be stuff written by people who don't know him personally.


 * Also, a lot of articles are what we call "routine coverage". For example. lots people win local community awards, and local newspapers usually have a picture and something nice to say about that.  But that's not "in depth" about the person.


 * It also doesn't matter so much what the person has done, but (like I said before) what other people have said about what he's done. Being on a community board, or having certain kinds of jobs, usually doesn't matter unless he's been in the news, in depth, for something he did in that role.


 * None of the sources listed in the article is the kind of stuff I'm describing. So I'm afraid, for now, he's not notable by Wikipedia standards.  But he seems to have a bright future, perhaps in politics or community leadership, and when he's been covered in depth in the news -- and that could be many years from now -- he may qualify then.


 * I'm writing this because you seem sincere and I don't want you to be discouraged. I think the best way to get started on Wikipedia is not to write a whole new articles, but to just wander around looking for errors that needs correcting, or an article that needs more information which you feel you can write about.  But there are rules about that you need to learn too.  They best thing to do is to add something to an article's talk page, describing what you want to add to the article and asking for help in doing it right.  There are plenty of people want to make you feel at home here who will walk you through it.


 * Good luck. EEng (talk) 16:06, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

about the josh valdez article for creation
hello i was just wondering if you could give me any knowledge on to improve my article i am open to anything. im trying very hard to fix this article u, but am a bit new. i have read all the guides. if you could let me know what exactly is the problem so that i may correct it or, can you be more specific with your critique, i am open to any and all advice. please let me know what you didn't find appropriate.
 * Hello. The main issue is that all the references seem to be from press releases of one form or another.  There isn't anything that shows that, beyond the immediate local community this person serves, that his notability has been demonstrated.  See WP:BIO and WP:NOTE for more on Wikipedia's policies on this.  Also, many times, the person writing this type of article often times is someone closely affiliated with the article subject themselves, or is the actual person talked about in the article.  This is heavily frowned-upon.  See WP:COI for conflict of interest information.  I do appreciate the time and effort you've spent to develop the article; however, it just doesn't look like there's enough out there yet to demonstrate Mr. Valdez' notability for Wikipedia's purposes.  ~  Pesco  So say•we all 04:07, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

accidental article creation
i created the page, but its not done. i was experimenting with the links. if the article is not good please bring it back to draft i will make the needed corrections. this is not someone trying to spam and article. ive been working on this for months. sorry for any trouble this causes

Nomination of Josh Valdez for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Josh Valdez is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Josh Valdez (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. ~ Pesco  So say•we all 03:59, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or  located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. mabdul 14:21, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

to EEng thank you
i was getting frustrated with the community here because no one seemed to give me straight answers and live chat was pretty rude as well, but also many times helpful not to knock them. i just want to thank you for being very descriptive about all this i completely understand what you are saying! i know now that it is not so much my writing as it is his status if you will. again thank you all that you wrote really made me feel a lot better about this whole endeavor. i know everyone here is very busy and i appreciate the time you put into your message.
 * Yeah, I am pretty busy but when I saw your "Need help" messages I couldn't bear the thought of your feeling so hurt. Here's another hint: If you put an idea for an article change on the article's talk page, usually there are lots of people watching the page who will respond.  If you make it clear that you're new and not really sure what to do people will be more detailed in their replies.  If after two or three days no one responds, add    just above your question, and that will add a banner like this:


 * The page is automatically put on a "need help" list, and hopefully someone will come around soon and answer your question. I've never used this before myself, so I don't know how long this takes, whether they have a lot of volunteers or not, etc. I think this might work better than chat, because with chat you're sort of under pressure.
 * There's a lot to learn at first about Wikipedia, but after a few months you'll feel a lot more comfortable.  Again, good luck.  EEng (talk) 21:33, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
 * CrownP, I would just feel better if you said whether you have a conflict of interest with Josh Valdez or not, as I asked twice above. Like if you are him, or one of his friends or relatives, or a work associate of his.  Because if you are, it's really frowned-upon to directly work on an article you have a conflict of interest in, whether the person is notable or not.  And I would agree with the advice of EEng; while logged in, work on correcting small mistakes you see all around Wikipedia.  You will learn how Wikipedia works, and also show other editors that you didn't come to Wikipedia with the sole intent of making an article on Josh Valdez. ~  Pesco  So say•we all 18:09, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

CrownP to Pesco
Oh no I am sorry for never stating it, I am an advocate for Latino equality in America. the most contact I have is is a short email conversation asking permission to make a wiki for him. I am a college graduate, and saw his contributions to the community and nation as an opportunity to try out article writing on wiki, as well as a chance to acquire a new talent. I didn't realize at the beginning of this that the references were not acceptable. That's what caused my trouble mostly.
 * I'm assuming good faith on your part, but there are a couple things that need explaining if this is the case. On the image you uploaded here that is used in the Josh Valdez article, you used the login CrownP but said the author of the image was "Josh Valdez" with a link to your Wikimedia user page, which was deleted because, I'm guessing, it linked to the Josh Valdez article.  As CrownP, you claimed that the photo is your own work and that you are the copyright holder.  This gives the impression that you either are writing an autobiography or you are impersonating the subject of the article.  Neither are good, and I would like to know if you could explain? ~  Pesco  So say•we all 02:19, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Pesco, let's drop this line of inquiry; you're coming perilously close to WP:OUTING CrownP. The article will be deleted and salted no matter what.  I'm guessing CrownP got the photo, and permission to use, by email from the subject, and tried to express that in the licensing info -- I don't think there's actually a way to do that except through OTRS so CrownP did the best he could and it came out sort of mixed up.  Let's let CrownP's future behavior be our guide.  EEng (talk) 09:15, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Per WP:OUTING, "However, once individuals have identified themselves, such information can be used for discussions of conflict of interest in appropriate forums." That's all I'm doing.  I am asking CrownP to clarify the situation, because it looks like a conflict of interest.  A lot of CrownP's actions have looked suspicious to experienced editors, and while this may well have been unintentional, I was trying to explain to CrownP what they did that aroused suspicion, because that could help explain some of the "rudeness" CrownP says they encountered from the community.  Ideally, I would like to see CrownP, whoever they are, take your advice and start building experience within Wikipedia by making small edits to other articles, and build up from there.  ~  Pesco  So say•we all 15:32, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Look, it's no big deal, but essentially you're asking CrownP to choose between admitting he's impersonating the subject (which is some kind of no-no, I suppose) or confirming he actually is the subject. Though I'm not at all sure what you'd be doing would be wrong, that wouldn't exactly be a voluntary self-ID on CrownP's part, so I doubt the passage you quote would necessarily control.  So let's, as you say, wait and see if he takes my advice. EEng (talk) 01:41, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
 * It was an attempt on my part to say what the actions looked like to an experienced user, and to offer CrownP the opportunity to explain what really happened. (And it would be re-confirming what was already voluntarily posted at the image description page.) Instead of an explanation, the response was "I am new," which is fine, and will hopefully lead to positive contributions in the future.  So as you say, let's wait and see. ~  Pesco  So say•we all 15:05, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

I understand what your saying. I am thinking i look suspicious cause i am new, and really have no experience with wiki previous to this so my actions are on more of a what ever works thinking not a rule and regulations unlike the editors, over time though i have learned that the rules of wiki are the most important thing about it and what really makes wiki legitimate. Though for now i am done here anyway, i will most likely go around really reading articles from an editorial stand point and do as you guys said correct a few here and there to better learn the rules. sorry for the outing thing like i said i am new and i just honestly haven't read all of the information i should have before taking this on. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CrownP (talk • contribs) 20:57, 6 November 2011 (UTC)