User talk:Davesterrett2

Your article draft
Hello Davesterrett2. I'm writing you in response to your last comment on Changing username/Simple, where you asked how to move your article draft to mainspace. As for the technical part, you need to use the "move" option located on the top of the screen, and then choose the target location (see WP:MOVE for the full details). Before you do so, let me point out that all articles on mainspace should comply with Wikipedia's policies on verifiability, neutral point of view and no original research. Also, subject are expected to be notable, which in Wikipedia's context means that the subject must have received significant coverage by independent reliable sources. As for your particular draft, let me point out two things in particular: I know this may be a lot to take in at once, but these policies and guidelines are in place to ensure that the project meets it's goal. Let me tell you that you can always place a request for feedback to get additional input about the article, and there's also the help desk if you don't know how to do something (such as styling, using tables, etc.). Of course, don't hesitate to leave me a note here or on my talk page if you have any doubt. Best regards — frankie (talk) 14:23, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) All content must be verifiable. I understand that this is yourself you are writing about, and as such it may seem obvious that that should serve as verification, but for the purposes of an encyclopedia that is somewhat lacking. Primary sources such as your own websites are certainly admissible, but it is stressed that articles should not be based solely on primary sources, so secondary and tertiary sources must be included to support the content.
 * 2) As for notability, I performed a cursory search online, and I wasn't able to find any independent reviews of your work, so I think it's possible that notability cannot be established at this point. If you have any material that would help on that matter please bring it forward, since otherwise you may find the article nominated for deletion shortly after moving it to mainspace. Such reviews don't necessarily have to be part of the "final" article, as references are there to support the actual content, but they must exist.

Re: User:Davesterrett2
Hi Frankie,

I apologize that I did not make myself clear – I am a friend and supporter of Dave Sterrett. My intention is only to show that he is an up and coming author in Dallas, TX. I had used Josh McDowell’s Wikipedia page as a reference, as Dave has co-authored books with McDowell (and I apologize on the excessive amount of background information!) Would it be best if I created my own username, then created an article for Dave, written via my username? I didn’t know how Wikipedia worked when I first created his page (and obviously, I created it wrong!) Should I copy and paste the edits that you made (and thank you profusely for helping me with the edits… I appreciate your time!) – but create an article via my name? (thus, showing that Dave is not trying to promote himself). Again, thank you for your advice and help! sb Davesterrett2 (talk) 19:34, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Review
Hi, Davesterrett2. First let me say, as I'm not entirely sure if you are actually Mr. Sterrett, I'll be referring to him in third person in the meantime. I've reviewed the draft and took the liberty of making several changes, both in style and in content (the previous content is still available through the history). You'll notice that many of the references are gone, as I only left the three that are being used inline to support the content. I'm not an expert and I didn't wanted to dwell too deep in the theological issue, so most of the references were not needed. Of course, feel free to expand the issue and reintroduce the references as required to support it, just keep in mind to maintain a neutral point of view, to give due weight, and not to synthetize. The main issue remains, and that is of notability. As I said before, I don't think notability has been achieved yet, which reflects in the absence of critical reviews of Mr Sterret's work besides "O" God. Sometimes it happens that media attention is so large that it suffices, but in this case I don't think it is enough to justify the inclusion of a biography of a living person (there might be a better case for an article on the book itself, but it isn't overwhelming either). Still, that is just my opinion, so let me invite you again to place a request for feedback so you can get a second opinion. In the meantime, perhaps it would be good to move the draft to the sub-page User:Davesterrett2/Dave Sterrett (since there is an old version there, you'd need to tag it for deletion with, and once it's deleted move the new version over), because your userpage is meant to hold information about yourself, and also that way any discussion about the draft can take place in its corresponding talk page. Best regards — frankie (talk) 03:55, 28 September 2011 (UTC)