User talk:Ejody

Nomination of Jody Eldred for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jody Eldred 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/Jody Eldred 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article.  DGG ( talk ) 21:38, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Reply to your email
I'm replying here to your email to me, with some further information.

first, A Wikipedia article needs to show notability with references providing substantial coverage from 3rd party independent published reliable sources, print or online, but not blogs or press releases, or material derived from press releases. If you have such sources, it may be possible to rewrite an article; otherwise, it will not be possible to write an acceptable article. The most important source will be a published one discussing your national award. The material must be sourced precisely. If you have literally "shootig all the stories for ABC's Peter Jennings, Diane Sawyer, and Robin Roberts." you need a third party source for it. I remind you that nobody has any way of knowing that anything on WP is true unless thee is a published source for it, and you have provided none. A Wikipedia article needs to be written like an encyclopedia article, not a press release--don't praise the person. Don't include material that would better belong in an advertisement or a web page, such as a  list of the photographic equipment they own, or vague claims that. You can't use vague claims, like "A frequent speaker and lecturer at conferences, workshops, and film and journalism schools across America including USC and UCLA,". Remember not to copy from a previous publication , even your own -- first it's a copyright violation, but, even if you own the copyright and are willing to give us permission according to WP:DCM (permission that irrevocably gives everyone in the world the right to copy, reuse, and modify the material) , the tone will not be encyclopedic and the material will not be suitable. Just as this was not.

Include only material that would be of interest to a general reader coming across the mention of the subject and wanting the sort of information that would be found in an encyclopedia. Do not include material that would be of interest only to those associated with the subject, or to prospective clients--that sort of content is considered promotional.

As a general rule, a suitable page will be best written by someone without Conflict of Interest; it's not utterly impossible to do it properly with a conflict of interest or as a paid press agent, or as an autobiography, but it's relatively more difficult: you are automatically thinking in terms of what the subject wishes to communicate to the public, but an uninvolved person will think in terms of what the public might wish to know. And keep in mind that the goal of an encyclopedia is to say things in a concise manner, which is not the style of  press releases or  web sites, which are usually more expansive. And remember that if you are notable, other people will know it, and write the article. That you have to write it yourself tends to show just the opposite.  DGG ( talk ) 22:04, 17 March 2013 (UTC)