User talk:Franceslynn/Archive 1

Wikipedia:Conflict of interest
Some reading for you:


 * Conflict of interest

Thanks, IP4240207xx 19:29, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Communicating with other Wikipedians
HOLA!

Okay, some tips about communication with fellow Wikipedians.

FIRST: After you leave a message on a talk/discussion page, sign your name by typing four tildes at the end ~


 * SEE: Talk page guidelines, Talk page & User page for the lowdown, scoop, skinny....

SECOND: Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons is not the place to talk about a certain article. It is to discuss broad policies about ALL BIO'S of living persons. About what should, or should NOT, be implemented in any, and all, of those pages. It is to talk about the contents of Biographies of living persons. You comment should have went here: Talk:Andrew Logan

(PS: go back at look at the very top of this page: Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons, you'll see a blatant waring about what should be discussed there, also, scroll through the content left by other contributors 1) do get a feel about what is being discussed, & 2) to see if you topic has already been brought up [not in this case].)

THIRD: If you need or want feedback about a specific topic, use the tab at the top that says "history", then scroll through the history of either the article, or the talk/discussion page, and look for contributors that have made both QUALITY edits and QUANTITY edits to any given page, then leave a note on their talk page telling them you want to discuss something over at the article talk page.

REVIEW: So, there two basic principles on communication:


 * 1) Where to communicate
 * 2) How to communicate

Don't leave any empty shells laying around you gunslinger! WikiDon 20:15, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Okay ... am beginning to get the hang of it Frances Lynn, author 21:29, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Alumni at Epsom College
I wonder if I could prevail upon you to use alphabetical order when adding to the list of alumni. In general P (for Pepper) tends not to come after W (for Woricker)

Is there a obituary available online? If so please can you find it, and cite it as the others have been?

Fiddle Faddle (talk) 18:04, 27 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Ah, seems not necessarily to have died yet. The ABC list has his house.  Fiddle Faddle (talk) 18:21, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Ritz Newspaper

 * If you have clippings, even undated, that are relevant to the article and have a scanner or a digital camera, I suggest you scan the most significant and upload them taking care to use correct licencing. You may need a release from the publisher for copyright issues because Wikipedia is rightly very hot on copyright issues.  These can then be linked to the article as "living references", possibly in a gallery section if there are more than a couple. Fiddle Faddle 10:31, 3 December 2007 (UTC)


 * OK, please list as much info as you have about it. date, rag, byline, quotation Fiddle Faddle 11:23, 3 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Seems to me, looking at the article now, enough has been done. I suppose the key issue is now whether the community judges it suitable to remain or chooses to delete it.  I'm going to copy it to a sub-page on your user page just in case.  I'll provide a link to it there.  Fiddle Faddle 12:21, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Suggestion for you
This has been a baptism of fire. Have a look at Adopt-a-User and consider being adopted for a while. There's stuff you seem to have a challenge to get used to, and this may be the one key thing that will help. Fiddle Faddle 13:09, 3 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Looking at the extract I would say it adds nothing to the article. I also can't find the original article on their site anywhere.  If you have the exact url (look in the address bar of your browser and paste it here) I will see what I can achieve.  Fiddle Faddle 17:28, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Adoption offer
VivioFateFan I will try to help out. VivioFa teFan  (Talk, Sandbox) 07:42, 4 December 2007 (UTC)


 * You know you might add the article on the Ritz newspaper. This would be a great exercise for you to obtain guidance to get it right first time.  :)  Fiddle Faddle 09:50, 4 December 2007 (UTC)


 * There's loads of relevant stuff on Google. I searched for "Ritz" plus "David Bailey" and came up with a shedload of stuff.  If you work with your adopter you can start it as a test on a sub-page of your user page (see how I created the sub-page on your main page to work out how to do that), and then, when you are content, move it across to the article namespace at the drop of a hat.  I find "little and often" is one of the best ways of article creation.
 * It's not been the easiest start to editing Wikipedia, but every new editor deserves the best chance of success. Fiddle Faddle 10:50, 4 December 2007 (UTC)


 * ROFLMAO BTW ask your adopter to help with your signature.  it really ought to link back to your user page, like wot mine does.  Fiddle Faddle 14:20, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Your signature
This code should help you to get your signature to link to your user page. Frances Lynn,author. Copy this to Special:Preferences under the area that says "signature". Also make sure to check the box that says "Raw signature". VivioFa teFan  (Talk, Sandbox) 14:51, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Creating a subpage
For your question about creating a subpage, I think this should work.

Creating a subpage called "test" (replace the word "test", with the subpage you wish to create.)
 * 1) Edit the page you wish to create a subpage of.
 * 2) Add the following /test, make sure to put the "/" in front of it or else you will create a page in the "article area", after you have done that save the page.
 * 3) Click on the red link, that in case will say "/test", when you get there it should say "User:Franceslynn/test".
 * 4) Add some text then save the page.
 * 5) You have created a subpage.

VivioFa teFan  (Talk, Sandbox) 03:09, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! Frances Lynn,author 09:26, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, what you did was correct in creating a user subpage. VivioFa teFan   (Talk, Sandbox) 10:00, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Saving Frances Lynn
Now that D-Day is imminent/about the deletion verdict, is there any point in my listing all my 2000 AD Future Shock titles in the Reference section, or is that over-kill? Frances Lynn,author 12:44, 5 December 2007 (UTC)


 * not unlike Private Ryan, now.


 * I think you have to look at it as an article that may vanish or may stay. The references would neither do harm nor good at this stage I fancy.  If it goes then it can, after a decent interval, be recreated, but ideally not by you personally.
 * In the intervening period Ritz Newspaper ought to go up and stay up, and redlink to Frances Lynn naming other notable journalists and participants. While Wikipedia is not citable as a source, inward links from other articles do make a difference in discussions.
 * I've no idea, now, whether it will stay or go. Time will tell.  Fiddle Faddle (talk) 13:02, 5 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Looking at the discussion now, if it were a matter of a numeric tally (which it is not)I would close it "No consensus" which defaults to "keep". Looking at the arguments plus the article I would come down on the side of "keep" simply because there is just about sufficient notability to step over the hurdle of keeping.  However I am biased because I have worked on the article.  Even so I think, thought can't predict what the closing admin will do, that it is 52:48 likely to be kept.  Fiddle Faddle (talk) 13:08, 5 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks again for all your invaluable help and tuition. (If the article survives in the future), I might need to update it next year. How does Wikipedia work in this instance? Could I ask you to update it for me? Or, could I 'legally' do it myself? Frances Lynn,author 08:27, 8 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I think, in view of the conflict of interest policy, you should place on this page and ask for assistance in updating the article since you have new information and it is about you.  Because we have worked together (on the article, not in real life) there is the (small) possibility that an uncharitable editor might ignore the doctrine of assuming good faith and suggest we have colluded.
 * That we will not have colluded is not the point. It is as incumbent on us to prove good faith as it is for others to assume it.
 * Oddly my only motivation is the remarkably selfless desire to see a better Wikipedia. And you meet nice and not so nice people along the way.  Fiddle Faddle (talk) 11:39, 8 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Very happy to look at the RN article. The areas that concern me at present are the references.  They need revision along the lines that we have discussed.  As soon as that is done it should move right away into article space.  Fiddle Faddle (talk) 15:57, 8 December 2007 (UTC)




 * I have added the "perfect" ref that includes Haslam and Ritz to the article. I used Cite news within the &lt;ref&gt; and &lt;/ref&gt; tags.  it links Haslam and Ritz; that's important because we only care about Haslam in this article in the same context as Ritz..  See what you think.  This is the exact type of inline references needed for the journalists, FL included, and similar things for the paper itself.
 * The article as it stands is now almost ready for moving to the article namespace Fiddle Faddle (talk) 17:23, 8 December 2007 (UTC)


 * There is no conflict of interest here, not even in adding an inline reference to yourself, because you are not editing anything that will act as puffery of yourself (unless you go overboard about yourself, which you will not :)). "Closed in the 1990s" is sufficient right now.  Someone else is likely to add it later.


 * It is very easy to make the article "live" from your test page, but I can help you if you like. I suggest the use of the "move" tab, which will take it and all its edit history with it, including its talk page.  This preserves all the history and struggle of the creation, too, and is no bad thing.  Fiddle Faddle (talk) 17:39, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

I would like assistance in updating this article as I have new information and it is about me.Frances Lynn,author 12:17, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi, Just a note, Wikipedia generally frowns upon creating Autobiographies on yourself here, I'm not sure what your situation is though. --cmelbyetalk! 19:17, 8 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi, I'm a newbie. I asked for help because I spotted a mistake on my page, but since my Help message an editor has corrected it. Frances Lynn,author 20:03, 8 December 2007 (UTC)


 * (after edit conflict) There's quite a complex history here. The original article was in poor shape and several editors (including Frances before she knew it to be unwise) have worked on it.  It has just survived AfD because of that work.  Not unreasonably Frances wishes the article to be updated because she has extra information, and is aware of WP:COI.  Because I've been advising her I have disqualified myself from editing the article, so she is looking for advice on how best to cause the changes she feels are appropriate to be assessed by another experienced editor (she is inexperienced) and reviewed for inclusion.  Not unreasonably she does nto feel qualified to make that judgment because the article is about her.  Fiddle Faddle (talk) 20:06, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
 * According to Wikipedia:Conflict_of_Interest, follow these instructions when you need to make an edit that could be construed as a conflict of interest:


 * I hope this helps!--12 N oo n 22:00, 8 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for this ... I intend to do this. Frances Lynn,author 22:22, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Haslam/ Parsons
Mr Haslam seems grist to the mill for an article, you know. And there is scope to adding him to Literary Review too. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 20:31, 8 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I may start it myself :) Fiddle Faddle (talk) 20:53, 8 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Nicholas Haslam is started. As every editor is, feel free to add.  Fiddle Faddle (talk) 10:24, 9 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Looks good so far - he was also a consummate party giver - shall try and edit it further (after the RN article) Frances Lynn,author 11:52, 9 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Just remember we can only add cited facts, however appealing reality may be :) Fiddle Faddle (talk) 12:15, 9 December 2007 (UTC)


 * ^^^ that request edit thing. You've "missed" two points!  Point 1:  put it in the talk page of the article itself with the wording you want to add clearly defined.  Point two:  You don;t quite know how templates work, and why should you?  What you do is copy the text exactly as it appears on the displayed (ie not the edit pane) version of the page.  So copy and paste the characters  but just those characters, and copy only those, nothing else.  Fiddle Faddle (talk) 10:24, 9 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for this tip .... I've deleted my incorrect request on this page (shall apply your advice later)Frances Lynn,author 11:12, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

I would suggest Ritz Newspaper is ready
There is no point in delaying further. This is what you do:
 * 1) go to User:Franceslynn/test
 * 2) locate the "move" tab, and click it
 * 3) in the box "To new title:" enter the text "Ritz Newspaper" without quotes, capitaliseed as shown
 * 4) in the box "Reason:" enter "This page was in draft. Moving it to article space".
 * 5) I suggest you untick "Move associated talk page" because it adds no value
 * 6) Click "Move Page"


 * Please clarify: "Ritz Newspaper" without quotes, capitaliseed as shown - I type Ritz Newspaper (without quotes) - in lower case or higher case?

Frances Lynn,author 13:11, 9 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Precisly as it appears on the next line, with absolutely no punctuation or leading spaces or colons or anything else:


 * Ritz Newspaper


 * Fiddle Faddle (talk) 13:14, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Sit back and enjoy what was your work, which you will obviously continue to edit, and enjoy watching others edit it "unmercifully"

And on with edits to or creation of the next article, and the next.

As you get braver and more familiar with the place you will dare to create articles directly in the article namespace.

Meanwhile the page User:Franceslynn/test may be edited and put to any new use you choose.

Fiddle Faddle (talk) 12:57, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Rudget Contributions 14:52, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

== Editing in Wikipedia =

First I would like you to read:


 * Biographies of living persons
 * Neutral point of view (NPOV)
 * Verifiability
 * No original research


 * Manual of Style (biographies)


 * Manual of Style

Then I would like you to look at 20 bio's on here of living people, popular ones, Tony Blair, etc. Look at the way they are formatted, and look at the layout. Your article needs to "Wikified" (Wikify) to look like the other articles. We want all the articles, and bio's, to have the same "look and feel", the same layout. This helps the reader. If articles are in 10 or 20 different formats, it frustrates the reader.

Next, I can't emphasize this one enough: CITE YOU SOURCES!

How to cite sources:

Citing sources and also Citing sources/example style

SEE: Guide to writing better articles (This is a good one!)

While I have a crush on Tina, she is there to "sell" and sometimes publishes things for shock-a-move-ability. Try to present both sides of the story, good and bad, etc:
 * Include only verifiable information

Format books in the suggested style:


 * Author last name, first name. Title. City: Publishing House. Year. ISBN 0000000000

Okay, here are some other tips for you:

Tip 'O the Day: We call internal links: Wikilinkis!


 * Five pillars
 * Help:Contents/Policies and guidelines

Okay, have you seen the film Meet the Parents? I am like Jack Byrnes, and you are Gaylord "Greg" Focker, .... "I'm watching you." (Fingers to glasses to pointing at you.)

Carry on,

IP4240207xx 20:39, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Much meeded advice - cheers! today, I edited my bio - hopefully for the final time - it now looks more in the Wikipedia style (according to one of my mesages!) - I am now going to edit other peoples' entries when I see fit. I've done a couple of amendents already. Frances Lynn

Frances Lynn
This article interests me. The subject of the article, with whom your user name shares an identity, appears to be a writer and journalist of some repute, but the article itself is not an obvious product of a skilled writer. It falls short in many areas, ranging from technical writing skills normally associated with a journalist of high reputation to simple layout issues.

This leads me to ask whether User:Franceslynn is the same person as Frances Lynn, previous versions of the user page notwithstanding.

I have posed this question also to the community at the Biographies of living persons Noticeboard and invite you to comment there. Such comment is wholly optional. This message should not be viewed as a summons, but I do feel that, if you are she, you may wish to enlighten the Wikipedia community.

If you are she, then, despite there being a potential conflict of interest, I think it would be well worthwhile enhancing the article in a wholly neutral manner. I realise that this is hard to do, and have a suggestion. If you place in a new section of this, your talk page, and explain below it that you need some assistance in rewriting something that is about you without falling foul of guidelines, someone will offer you the assistance that you need.

Fiddle Faddle 20:46, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Since reading this message - The person who submited me for Wikipedia wrote my knack for writing scathing comments about celebrities incurred several lawsuits - I was well known as a bitchy columnist from th late Seventies until the late Eighties ....  and one plaintiff did sue Ritz newspaper after what I wrote about him in my column but settled out of court ...... I don't if I should add this to my entry? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Franceslynn (talk • contribs)


 * Please understand that it is not your entry, but has been submitted under the GFDL. It may be about you, but the writing and formatting and layout do not lead me to believe that any notable professional journalist would have written or edited this piece.
 * Equally, please do start to understand the point: One does not write a page about one's self. If one attempts it one tends to get upset by the comments that are made about it.
 * If you put material into Frances Lynn I suggest most strongly that you only put sourced material in that you can cite correctly from reliable sources
 * At present the article is of borderline notability and appears mainly to be verifiable from self published sources. Not many people will stand in the way of a proposal for deletion.
 * You would be better occupied in dealing with other articles than Frances Lynn, who may well be insufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia at all.
 * Fiddle Faddle 22:18, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Sourcing
Please don't remove editorial tags without fixing the problem. The article is currently not reliably sourced in the third-party sources required. See Verifiability for the kind of source expected. If you can provide them, that would be great. Gordonofcartoon 21:16, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

I have edited it - any other assistance would be welcome Frances Lynn, author 22:16, 1 December 2007 (UTC) Also - I didn not submit my original enry! Frances Lynn, author 22:34, 1 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Apart from a bot edit or two and other people flagging the article with tags or improvement, the history shows that you are the sole contributor after the originator put it there.
 * While this is not of itself bad, and you are perfectly entitled to edit articles about yourself (as has been show to you above), you do not seem to take the help you are given.
 * Please look carefully at other biographies, remove all uncited content and format it decently.
 * Please also type ~ at the ned of your posts on discussion pages. This translates automatically to your name and date.
 * Fiddle Faddle 22:48, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

I've edited it further explaining why I became a journalist - but it is difficult editing my own entry! Frances Lynn, author 22:51, 1 December 2007 (UTC)


 * With what do you need help? —Animum (talk) 23:45, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

I've edited my entry (which I did not submit originally) .... I can't see how I can improve it now. ~
 * Dear Franceslynn, as it seems that nobody has mentioned this to you, I would like to clarify something, Wikipedia has a conflict of interest guideline that states you should not create or edit articles about yourself, your company, your family, friends, etc., as you'd likely be unable to do so neutrally. Neutrality is one of the core policies of Wikipedia, and I'd request that you review the basic policies here, as they are quite helpful. Another policy that is helpful to be aware of is the notability policy. It appears that you have provided no reliable sources as references to the article, thus it is considered original research, which is not allowed. Please see here for more information, as well as this page about why Wikipedia suggests you not create articles about yourself. Please also review the Manual of Style to understand how articles should be formatted. The article has a number of issues, mostly related to having no third-party, reliable (i.e. news, reputable magazine, professional/trade journal articles) to reference it. I would suggest that you find some sources, and comment on the article's talk page to allow a neutral, non-involved editor to edit the article, if the sources are reliable. Cheers,  Ariel  ♥  Gold  23:49, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. Someone submited my entry originally - I had no intention of promoting myself/didn't realise I couldn't edit it!! The sources are reliable ... It's midnight here - so shall think about this in the morning! ~ Perhaps a neutral, non-involved editor should edit this article! I didn't realise I couldn't edit my own entry which I didn't submit.... When you say find some sources .... what else can I include? (If it's of any help - this is the link for my biography on my web-site: http://www.franceslynn.org/biography.asp) - I'm too tired to think now.
 * There are no reliable sources given in the articcle. External links to your website, or sites about you or affiliated to you, "reader opinions" about books, blogs, personal sites, etc., are not reliable, third party sources. I realize you did not originally write the entry, but you are the only contributor after that, aside from some bot tags and other tags. The guideline doesn't say you cannot edit it, but just suggests that you refrain from doing so, as it is likely you would be unable to edit neutrally. It is usually best to allow a non-involved, experienced editor to edit the article, in such cases. I would urge you to find some sources that can verify the information, I've added tags to the most important passages that need sourcing, as this is important per the biographies of living persons policy. I hope this helps you understand, I realize that Wikipedia is quite different from other websites, and I also realize how confusing it can be at first. Feel free to ask if you have any other questions! (P.S. to sign your name, do not put the tildes in /nowiki tags, or it does not work :o) Just type four tildes when you're done with the comment, or hit the signature button on the toolbar of the edit window.) Ariel  ♥  Gold  00:18, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah. As ArielGold says, this is a problem. No insult is intended if the prime editor is Frances Lynn. But with Wikipedia, because anyone can edit, the reliability of content has to be judged on reliability of sources cited. Anyone could put up a website and send out press releases saying how famous they are. So, Wikipedia requires third-party sources: newspapers, magazine articles, non-self-published books, etc.
 * So I suggest the editor working as User:Franceslynn should stop adding unsourced material, now. This may well be a misunderstanding of how Wikipedia works. If the main editor, Frances Lynn or not, can find such sources pronto, fine. If not, we go to AFD.
 * Oh soddit. I've passed it to AFD. Let them decide. Gordonofcartoon 01:35, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

If you delete my entry - I hope this won't stop me submitting entries for people I think are notable for Wikipedia Frances Lynn, author 12:30, 2 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Where have your books been reviewed? Can you give a more exact reference for Barry Fantoni's remarks in the Evening News? What issues of Ritz Newspaper were your celebrity interviews in? --Paularblaster 15:13, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Sources, incidentally, don't have to be online - book or newspaper refs are fine, as long as they're sufficently specific for someone else to find if required. Gordonofcartoon 17:06, 2 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I've added full cites for Crushed and Frantic. These are not of themselves sufficient to let the article survive, but they are all weights in the scale pan Fiddle Faddle 23:28, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Frances Lynn
An article that you have been involved in editing, Frances Lynn, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/. Thank you. Fiddle Faddle 09:06, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

I have been asked to read out aloud from my novel Crushed and to talk about in at the Mayfair library on World Book Day! ' - ~


 * Arguments about the article's staying or going should go to Articles for deletion/. I'm pleased on a personal level that you have the chance to read the novel at the library.
 * At the end of your comments, 'just type four "~" marks. They translate automatically into your signature then.  Do please learn from the advice you are given.  There has been a great deal of advice on this page.  We do not have sub-editors here, so you have to be highly critical of everything you do.
 * If you can provided proper independent sources for items in the article they will go a long way to asserting the notability of the subject. You have to provide these within the article, not on its talk page and not on your talk page.
 * At present the Frances Lynn of the article (and I mean no disrespect) is "just another freelance journalist and first time author." Since this is an encyclopaedia we require far more than that for inclusion.
 * Fiddle Faddle 09:43, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hi there. 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. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name 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! --SineBot 15:01, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

What it is
The "Articles for Deletion" (AfD) process is not an automatic death sentence for an article. It exposes the article to peers among Wikipedia editors and asks them for a cogent and coherent argument for or against deletion. The closing administrator is duty bound not to take weight of numbers into account, but to read the arguments and form a view about the consensus reached. In addition they must inspect the article at the point of review and make a judgment about it.

How to counter it
If you are in the slightest bit unsure, place the characters in a new section here and, below it, ask for the help that you need.

The best approach is to cite (read WP:CITE) sources that are (read WP:RS) reliable sources, and to cite them as inline citations within the text. Such citations are delimited between tags. The will add the note you place between them as a footnotes in the "References" section that has been made ready for you.

Once you have done this please state clearly what you have done, and that you have done it at the AfD discussion page. You are perfectly entitled, provided this is done with care, to ask those who have commented ion the deletion to take a further look at the article by leaving neutral messages on their talk pages, but you should avoid rhetoric at all costs. However, many Wikipedia editors haver an inbuilt prejudice against self written or heavily self edited biogs because of the dangers of self puffery. Note that I am absolutely not making an accusation of self puffery.

What it means for re-creation of the article
Generally the process leaves an editor free to re-create a substantially improved version of the article, though there are times when the community judges that this is inappropriate.

Is the system perfect?
Not in the slightest, but it is the best we have.

What do you do next?
You read Frances Lynn from an external standpoint, and you tear it apart, sentence by sentence. If it cannto be cited, strip it out. If it can be cited you add the inline citation between tags.

You model the finished article on any accepted biog. Examples include:
 * Hugh Price Hughes - a stub, neutral,factual, but with inline references that require improvement
 * Auberon Waugh - probably would benefit from a good edit and shortening, but substantial and asserts the notability of the subject
 * Joel Roth - needs a picture and section headings, but otherwise fine

I've shown those to show you some acceptable but wholly different styles of biogs. You could also look with profit at Portal:Biography and read a biog or two there.

Above all, do not panic. You have a number of days left before the discussion is closed to turn Frances Lynn into an acceptable article. If you work at the article rather than talking to folk about it then it is likely but not certain that you will save it. In order to save it you have to show that the person Frances Lynn is a notable person and that their work is verifiable. That is sometimes hard to do if that person is one's self.

Please do not take any of the comments directed to the article personally. Please understand that Wikipedia has no soul, no guilt, and that editors care only about the finished product. Your opinion has as much weight as Jimbo Wales, the founder. His has as little weight as yours.

I truly hope you see and understand the issues and that this essay has been helpful to you. Fiddle Faddle 15:51, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

I do understand the issues and this essay certainly has been helpful. BUT I don't think I can do anything more now to my entry (Auberon Waugh said I was the best woman gossip columnist in the Seventies - but there is no source for that!!) - perhaps my entry would read better if I didn't mention the periodicals that I freelanced for as I can't find a source).  Anyway, I've done my best. Frances Lynn, author 18:16, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

My edits to the article about you
I've edited the article about you in line with guidance and policies. Whilst you may not agree with all the changes, I hope it gives a pointer as to how we present articles. I think the number of links you had in the article were too many, we have some guidance at External links as to what to link to, and I think it is in keeping with that guidance to have just the link to your site. All the other links are on there, I believe, anyway. I've trimmed the interview list and kept the one for which I can format a cite. Again, I don't think a huge list is beneficial, it may look like overkill. Anyway, I hope that explains what I have done, and why, and maybe help show what Wikipedia looks for in an article. I'm not sure the article will survive the deletion debate, realistically it would be nice if we had better sources than your bylines. Have your books been reviewed in any print magazines? Hiding T 20:21, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

The article looks so much better now .... it has given me a real idea how you present articles. I've only had OnLine reviews so far. The one on Reader Views kids was good at http://www.readerviewskids.com/ReviewLynnCrushed.html but I see you have ommitted that link. Unfortunately - I'm unable to supply (better) sources though. I've had some print journalism about one of my library talks I gave at an independent school - but that's it at the moment. Frances Lynn, author 21:04, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Where and when was the print journalism? It might be usable. I'll add the readerviews link back, although someone else may remove it. They mention on their site that some of their reviews have appeared in USA Today, so it's a site of some standing. The only Frances Lynn I can turn up in recent press in a library search is in the Daily Record, Scotland, a woman with health issues. I'm assuming that's not you, but correct me if I'm wrong. Hiding T 21:17, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

The article was in a paper called the Ham & High and no the woman in Scotland is not me. The article is in The H&H Series February 22 2007 in the Books Section - it's titled 'Lynn back at school' - but I don't have a link for the page/article (only for the paper which is http://www.hamhigh.co.uk) - I could call the paper up to see if there is a link for that page and day. but, if there isn't one - I suppose that is of no use? Frances Lynn, author 21:32, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
 * What's the paper say, and what's the title and date. It doesn't have to be online to count as a source, although Wikipedia does show evidence of systemic bias in that direction. Hiding T 09:28, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Also, do you know the date of the edition of theEvening News Barry Fantoni's remarks about you were made? That'd be very helpful.  I'm guessing it was made in a column. All the best, Hiding T 09:31, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

I just heard from the book editor at the Ham & High - she says there is no link for the book page - in the Ham & High on February 22 2007. The piece about me titled 'Lynn back in school' was (in black) on the Books XV page - the title story on the page was 'A grand central station'. The Barry Fantoni piece was titled 'Ritzy Lynne' in the late Evening News - I 'think' he had a (gossipy) column (but unfortuntely don't remember the name) but the (30 year old) clipping I've got doesn't have the date on it. It must have been in the1977 or 78 but as the paper is defunt - there is no way of checking their library records. All the best,    Frances Lynn, author 09:54, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

I DO have another clipping about me which might be relevant. The article was written by Nicholas Coleridge in the Evening Standard - again, haven't got the exact date - it's 1981 (maybe 80). I don't have the exact title of the piece - but it was about Don Boyd, the producer (and director) about his film called 'Gossiip' - he had commissioned me to write the film treatment - Michael Tolkin (who later wrote The Player for Robet Altman) and his brother Stephen were hired to write the screenplay (the production closed down shortly after it started shooting though)) .... Don Boyd talks about me in the artcle (he describes me as a 'crazy English gossip columnist') but Barry Fantoni's piece is more appropriate. The Evening News did have several columns and I suspect that Barry Fantoni had one at the time. All the best  Frances Lynn, author 10:20, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorry - did a typo: It should be 'Gossip'. Frances Lynn, author 10:21, 3 December 2007 (UTC)


 * If you have clippings, even undated, that are relevant to the article and have a scanner or a digital camera, I suggest you scan the most significant and upload them taking care to use correct licencing. You may need a release from the publisher for copyright issues because Wikipedia is rightly very hot on copyright issues.  These can then be linked to the article as "living references", possibly in a gallery section if there are more than a couple. Fiddle Faddle 10:31, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

I have now found the Nicholas Coleridge article called 'Gossip' - from the life of a columnist'. (No date on the cutting - but it is 1981 or 80 .... yes, I do have a scanner - I guess the copyright issue doesn't apply to the Barry Fantoni piece as the Evening News no longer exists - I shall check out the copyright issue with the Evening Standard .... I am a newbie so could you please tell me how and where I upload the cuttings. Thanks.  Frances Lynn, author 10:40, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * left margin "Upload file" Fiddle Faddle 11:28, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm now waiting to hear back from (Solo syndication) at the Evening Standard about the copyright issue. I also asked for the exact date of the article so if they can find it, there will be no need to u/load that article. Frances Lynn, author 10:51, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

While I'm waiting for a response from the E.Standard about the copyright issue, I've just found another article by Nicholas Coleridge article. It is dated Monday, August 1982 the title is 'The best place to shoot the gossips' and Don Boyd, the subject of the piece does talk about me and Ritz Newspaper in the article. So, this is relevant. Frances Lynn, author 10:58, 3 December 2007 (UTC)


 * OK, please list as much info as you have about it. date, rag, byline, quotation Fiddle Faddle 11:23, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Date: Monday, August 2 1982 (page 19). The Evening Standard. 'And The Film That's got Society In A Fizz' is the Headline on top of the page. The article is titled 'the best place to shoot the gossips'. Underneath a photo of Don Boyd - the caption says 'DON BOYD - three parties a night in the cause of research'. The by-line is by NICHOLAS COLERIDGE. The quotation about me?? If that's what you want - it's: 'I met Frances Lynn who was then writing a very cafe society gossip column in Ritz Newspaper. She was absolutely crazy in thos days. One evening we were having dinner and she suddenly said that she'd written a book, basically about herself and her life reporting parties. I immediately commissoned heer to write me a treatment for a possible film.' He does talk about me further which I don't think is relevant - (it's untrue - Boyd later apologised to me) but unless you need to see that as well - I shall supply it. (Did you get this message from me: the Associated Newspapers took over the Evening Standard in 1986 ... spoke to the Express group for reproduction rights who said the article is still in copyright). The Barry Fantoni cutting in the Evening News - its heading is Ritzy Lynne. Fantoni writes "Francis Lynne (Franny to the few friends she has left) wins my accolade as the bitchiest gossip writer in town. As high-priestess of the single-entendre, she has assassinated everybody who is anybody in her two-page column in the bi-monthly magazine, Ritz. Her list of victims includes people like Elkie brooks, Roman Polanski, Diana Rigg, Yves St. Laurent, Elton John and The Eagles. I would like to give some examples of her killing technique - but I can't in case I get into trouble. Asked if she had, in fact, received any writs lately she replied demurely: "Of course not." In a more familiar vein, she adde: 'If I hd, I wouldn't tell you, dahling." His byline is Fantoni. Frances Lynn, author 11:50, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorry - did a typo - it should have been She was absolutely crazy in those days.Frances Lynn, author 11:53, 3 December 2007 (UTC) And, I see another typo: it should be: she added: 'If I had, I wouldn't tell you, dahling.'Frances Lynn, author 11:55, 3 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for adding the references to my page. If nothing else - I now have a much clearer idea on how to present a page, which will come in useful when I submit notables' entries in the future. Frances Lynn, author 12:19, 3 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Seems to me, looking at the article now, enough has been done. I suppose the key issue is now whether the community judges it suitable to remain or chooses to delete it.  I'm going to copy it to a sub-page on your user page just in case.  I'll provide a link to it there.  Fiddle Faddle 12:21, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Many thanks for all your help. Much appreciated. Frances Lynn, author 12:30, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Suggestion for you
This has been a baptism of fire. Have a look at Adopt-a-User and consider being adopted for a while. There's stuff you seem to have a challenge to get used to, and this may be the one key thing that will help. Fiddle Faddle 13:09, 3 December 2007 (UTC)


 * OK! Thanks for the tip. incidentally, is there any point in uploading the piece about me (on the books page)  in The Ham &High dated February 22, 2007? Frances Lynn, author 14:08, 3 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I would say "yes", having due regard to copyright issues. If you let me know (here will do) when it is done I can try to work out how to incorporate it into the article.  Do get the license right!  There's quite a choice.  Fiddle Faddle 15:15, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

The Ham & High just told me - all you need to do is to credit the Ham & High i.e. say it is an excerpt from the Ham & High and where it came from - i.e. on the Books Page and include the Ham & High URL which is www.hamhigh.co.uk

But, This excerpt might not be at all suitable for inclusion - the piece is very slight.

On left hand top of page is H&H SERIES FEBRUARY 22 2007 It's on the BOOKS Page (heading at the top right of page is: BOOKS XV on February 22 2207) (title of piece:) Lynn back in school

St Johns Wood author Frances Lynn is to give a talk about her novel Crushed at a local school. She will be at St Christina's RC prep school in St Edmund's Terrace on March 2. Crushed is aimed at 10 to 12-year olds and the cover has been designed by former St Christina's pupil Helen Ralli, who is now doing a foundation art course at Camberwell College. It tells the story of mismatched twin sisters - one ungainly, the other petite and beautiful - and the quest by the ugly duckling of the family to discover the secret of her birth. For more details on Crushed, visit www.franceslynn.org Frances Lynn, author 16:02, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

The Ham & High just e-mailed me saying credit the Ham & High at the bottom of the piece. Frances Lynn, author 16:48, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

And thanks for adding my books with their ISBNs on my page.Frances Lynn, author 16:53, 3 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Looking at the extract I would say it adds nothing to the article. I also can't find the original article on their site anywhere.  If you have the exact url (look in the address bar of your browser and paste it here) I will see what I can achieve.  Fiddle Faddle 17:28, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately, Ham & High say there isn't a URL for the book page on which my 'article' was on. But, as the piece is so slight, I agree with you,  It adds nothing to the article. Frances Lynn, author 17:52, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

PS. I did try and find the Book page on their site also - but as it came out in February - I couldn't see any Search facility on the site on how to find such an old piece on their site. Frances Lynn, author 17:56, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Adoption offer
VivioFateFan I will try to help out. VivioFa teFan  (Talk, Sandbox) 07:42, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you.Frances Lynn, author 08:27, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Shan't be creating a new article this year though .... but shall definitely need you to help out when I do. Frances Lynn, author 09:40, 4 December 2007 (UTC)


 * You know you might add the article on the Ritz newspaper. This would be a great exercise for you to obtain guidance to get it right first time.  :)  Fiddle Faddle 09:50, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

That is what I intend to do .... but it will have to be the new year now - Can begin to research it though Frances Lynn, author 10:11, 4 December 2007 (UTC)


 * There's loads of relevant stuff on Google. I searched for "Ritz" plus "David Bailey" and came up with a shedload of stuff.  If you work with your adopter you can start it as a test on a sub-page of your user page (see how I created the sub-page on your main page to work out how to do that), and then, when you are content, move it across to the article namespace at the drop of a hat.  I find "little and often" is one of the best ways of article creation.
 * It's not been the easiest start to editing Wikipedia, but every new editor deserves the best chance of success. Fiddle Faddle 10:50, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Many thanks for this .... and shall get started when I am able Frances Lynn, author 10:55, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

To clarify - if I start the article as a test on a sub-page on my user page and start writing the article there - will the adopter be working with me during my 'work-in-progress' stage before I move it across to the article namespace? Frances Lynn, author 11:29, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Er - stupid question - don't respond Frances Lynn, author 12:41, 4 December 2007 (UTC)


 * ROFLMAO BTW ask your adopter to help with your signature.  it really ought to link back to your user page, like wot mine does.  Fiddle Faddle 14:20, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Your signature
This code should help you to get your signature to link to your user page. Frances Lynn,author. Copy this to Special:Preferences under the area that says "signature". Also make sure to check the box that says "Raw signature". VivioFa teFan  (Talk, Sandbox) 14:51, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Frances Lynn,author

Creating a subpage
For your question about creating a subpage, I think this should work.

Creating a subpage called "test" (replace the word "test", with the subpage you wish to create.)
 * 1) Edit the page you wish to create a subpage of.
 * 2) Add the following /test, make sure to put the "/" in front of it or else you will create a page in the "article area", after you have done that save the page.
 * 3) Click on the red link, that in case will say "/test", when you get there it should say "User:Franceslynn/test".
 * 4) Add some text then save the page.
 * 5) You have created a subpage.

VivioFa teFan  (Talk, Sandbox) 03:09, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! Frances Lynn,author 09:26, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, what you did was correct in creating a user subpage. VivioFa teFan   (Talk, Sandbox) 10:00, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Saving Frances Lynn
Now that D-Day is imminent/about the deletion verdict, is there any point in my listing all my 2000 AD Future Shock titles in the Reference section, or is that over-kill? Frances Lynn,author 12:44, 5 December 2007 (UTC)


 * not unlike Private Ryan, now.


 * I think you have to look at it as an article that may vanish or may stay. The references would neither do harm nor good at this stage I fancy.  If it goes then it can, after a decent interval, be recreated, but ideally not by you personally.
 * In the intervening period Ritz Newspaper ought to go up and stay up, and redlink to Frances Lynn naming other notable journalists and participants. While Wikipedia is not citable as a source, inward links from other articles do make a difference in discussions.
 * I've no idea, now, whether it will stay or go. Time will tell.  Fiddle Faddle (talk) 13:02, 5 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Looking at the discussion now, if it were a matter of a numeric tally (which it is not)I would close it "No consensus" which defaults to "keep". Looking at the arguments plus the article I would come down on the side of "keep" simply because there is just about sufficient notability to step over the hurdle of keeping.  However I am biased because I have worked on the article.  Even so I think, thought can't predict what the closing admin will do, that it is 52:48 likely to be kept.  Fiddle Faddle (talk) 13:08, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks .... and I intend to start writing the Ritz Newspaper article as soon as I can Frances Lynn,author 14:08, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

It stayed, this time
It may get nominated for deletion in the future, and may not survive then, but it has survived the current nomination, which gives hope for it to remain in the future. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 07:48, 8 December 2007 (UTC)


 * (I owe you a drink!) Thanks again for all your invaluable help and tuition. (If the article survives in the future), I might need to update it next year. How does Wikipedia work in this instance? Could I ask you to update it for me? Or, could I 'legally' do it myself? Frances Lynn,author 08:27, 8 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I think, in view of the conflict of interest policy, you should place on this page and ask for assistance in updating the article since you have new information and it is about you.  Because we have worked together (on the article, not in real life) there is the (small) possibility that an uncharitable editor might ignore the doctrine of assuming good faith and suggest we have colluded.
 * That we will not have colluded is not the point. It is as incumbent on us to prove good faith as it is for others to assume it.
 * Oddly my only motivation is the remarkably selfless desire to see a better Wikipedia. And you meet nice and not so nice people along the way.  Fiddle Faddle (talk) 11:39, 8 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Very happy to look at the RN article. The areas that concern me at present are the references.  They need revision along the lines that we have discussed.  As soon as that is done it should move right away into article space.  Fiddle Faddle (talk) 15:57, 8 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I haven't quite 'got my head around' how to code references which you showed me how to do. I am studying your suggestions ... I want to work this out for myself. This explains the delay. Frances Lynn,author 16:05, 8 December 2007 (UTC)


 * could you please look at my RN/test article. As you can see I have got a ref up for Nicky Haslam. It's not correct though as the coding shows at the bottom. I have looked at your instructions ... Could you please tell me where I have gone wrong? Once I get the hang of this - I can do all my other references.  Frances Lynn,author 16:46, 8 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I have added the "perfect" ref that includes Haslam and Ritz to the article. I used Cite news within the &lt;ref&gt; and &lt;/ref&gt; tags.  it links Haslam and Ritz; that's important because we only care about Haslam in this article in the same context as Ritz..  See what you think.  This is the exact type of inline references needed for the journalists, FL included, and similar things for the paper itself.
 * The article as it stands is now almost ready for moving to the article namespace Fiddle Faddle (talk) 17:23, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
 * thanks again - it looks really good. I got into a stew about the referencing but I think I have cracked it now. It is almost ready - at the moment can't find out the exact date of Ritz's closure date. It did close down in the early '90's. Also - after the article goes up - I presume I can edit it further (when I get new info)? Frances Lynn,author 17:32, 8 December 2007 (UTC)


 * There is no conflict of interest here, not even in adding an inline reference to yourself, because you are not editing anything that will act as puffery of yourself (unless you go overboard about yourself, which you will not :)). "Closed in the 1990s" is sufficient right now.  Someone else is likely to add it later.


 * It is very easy to make the article "live" from your test page, but I can help you if you like. I suggest the use of the "move" tab, which will take it and all its edit history with it, including its talk page.  This preserves all the history and struggle of the creation, too, and is no bad thing.  Fiddle Faddle (talk) 17:39, 8 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I was going to ask you how to make the article "live" from your test page .... I've just got to do the references for the RN's other contributors which I shall do within the next 24 hours. I feel quite excited about creating the first Wiikipedia article! Frances Lynn,author 17:44, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Help with Frances Lynn please

 * Okay. I shall now place the help me message on this page. (I would also like to un-stub my journalistic entry which of course I can't do myself). Yet again, thanks a lot for your help. My Wikipidia experience started off badly, but at least - thanks mainly to you - I have learned a lot.   Frances Lynn,author 12:17, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

I would like assistance in updating this article as I have new information and it is about me.Frances Lynn,author 12:17, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi, Just a note, Wikipedia generally frowns upon creating Autobiographies on yourself here, I'm not sure what your situation is though. --cmelbyetalk! 19:17, 8 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi, I'm a newbie. I asked for help because I spotted a mistake on my page, but since my Help message an editor has corrected it. Frances Lynn,author 20:03, 8 December 2007 (UTC)


 * (after edit conflict) There's quite a complex history here. The original article was in poor shape and several editors (including Frances before she knew it to be unwise) have worked on it.  It has just survived AfD because of that work.  Not unreasonably Frances wishes the article to be updated because she has extra information, and is aware of WP:COI.  Because I've been advising her I have disqualified myself from editing the article, so she is looking for advice on how best to cause the changes she feels are appropriate to be assessed by another experienced editor (she is inexperienced) and reviewed for inclusion.  Not unreasonably she does nto feel qualified to make that judgment because the article is about her.  Fiddle Faddle (talk) 20:06, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
 * According to Wikipedia:Conflict_of_Interest, follow these instructions when you need to make an edit that could be construed as a conflict of interest:


 * I hope this helps!--12 N oo n 22:00, 8 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for this ... I intend to do this. Frances Lynn,author 22:22, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Haslam/ Parsons
Mr Haslam seems grist to the mill for an article, you know. And there is scope to adding him to Literary Review too. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 20:31, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

That's a thought (about Haslam - to do in 2008). Trying to finish the RN article soon! Frances Lynn,author 20:40, 8 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I may start it myself :) Fiddle Faddle (talk) 20:53, 8 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Oh yes! Go on!( I can tell you a lot about him! ;) )  He featured in Interiors magazine when it was edited by Minn Hogg). I think he features in Debretts too. Frances Lynn,author 21:02, 8 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Nicholas Haslam is started. As every editor is, feel free to add.  Fiddle Faddle (talk) 10:24, 9 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Looks good so far - he was also a consummate party giver - shall try and edit it further (after the RN article) Frances Lynn,author 11:52, 9 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Just remember we can only add cited facts, however appealing reality may be :) Fiddle Faddle (talk) 12:15, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

I shall try and find links for his parties. Also, I can't find a Ref for Amanda Lear/re: Ritz. The only article I've got is posted on Authors Den (with a good quote from her) which I don't think I can use. I can't see if the Ezin article has been published elsewhere. Also, I'm trying hard to find a Ritz ref for David Bailey (with a quote from him re: Ritz). Frances Lynn,author 12:33, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

I would like to ref the celebrity interviews I have put in the RN article - but I think the Frank Zappa interview on the net was found because the interview was included in the Frank Zappa biography by Barry Miles. Would it be okay - if I just /ref the celebrities in the RN article, saying which issues of Ritz (and year) the celebrity interviews I mentioned? re: the Bailey/Ritz ref - there are plenty of articles saying he was the publisher/editor on Ritz - so I might have to resort to using one of them for now (without his quote) Frances Lynn,author 12:42, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

I have now tried to put a reference in for Richard Young but if you look at the RN test page - It's incorrect (the coding shows) - but don't see what I've done wrong. Frances Lynn,author 21:16, 8 December 2007 (UTC)


 * ^^^ that request edit thing. You've "missed" two points!  Point 1:  put it in the talk page of the article itself with the wording you want to add clearly defined.  Point two:  You don;t quite know how templates work, and why should you?  What you do is copy the text exactly as it appears on the displayed (ie not the edit pane) version of the page.  So copy and paste the characters  but just those characters, and copy only those, nothing else.  Fiddle Faddle (talk) 10:24, 9 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for this tip .... I've deleted my incorrect request on this page (shall apply your advice later)Frances Lynn,author 11:12, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

I would suggest Ritz Newspaper is ready
There is no point in delaying further. This is what you do:
 * 1) go to User:Franceslynn/test
 * 2) locate the "move" tab, and click it
 * 3) in the box "To new title:" enter the text "Ritz Newspaper" without quotes, capitaliseed as shown
 * 4) in the box "Reason:" enter "This page was in draft. Moving it to article space".
 * 5) I suggest you untick "Move associated talk page" because it adds no value
 * 6) Click "Move Page"


 * Please clarify: "Ritz Newspaper" without quotes, capitaliseed as shown - I type Ritz Newspaper (without quotes) - in lower case or higher case?

Frances Lynn,author 13:11, 9 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Precisly as it appears on the next line, with absolutely no punctuation or leading spaces or colons or anything else:


 * Ritz Newspaper


 * Fiddle Faddle (talk) 13:14, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Sit back and enjoy what was your work, which you will obviously continue to edit, and enjoy watching others edit it "unmercifully"

And on with edits to or creation of the next article, and the next.

As you get braver and more familiar with the place you will dare to create articles directly in the article namespace.

Meanwhile the page User:Franceslynn/test may be edited and put to any new use you choose.

Fiddle Faddle (talk) 12:57, 9 December 2007 (UTC)


 * What an invention! I've moved the RN article - I shall now aim to edit it further (need to reference it more + more text). Again, thanks for your invaluable help, advice and tuition. Frances Lynn,author 13:27, 9 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Fun, isn't it? Fiddle Faddle (talk) 13:37, 9 December 2007 (UTC)


 * It's addictive! Btw - can I try my coding for References out on the RN test page? Frances Lynn,author 14:00, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Yup. That page is for you to use as you choose! Fiddle Faddle (talk) 14:05, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Good. Frances Lynn,author 14:07, 9 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Put in bio text for Haslam - where he was born + his parentage - this is the link where I found it http://www.nh-design.co.uk/home.html - I presume I need to ref this? Frances Lynn,author 15:10, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
 * (could ref his link about his birth - it comes from Haslam's work website - or try and ref the whole bio from the url at a later date!) Frances Lynn,author 15:27, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Fiddle Faddle - I would like to expand Haslam's page. His bio info is on http://www.nh-design.co.uk/home.html and I know it's all true BUT I don't know if I can supply sources for the info. So should I hold off from expanding his page at the moment?  Frances Lynn,author 23:17, 9 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Err on the side of caution, especially since he is alive. I suspect his life has been fun and controversial, so cited sources are important lest he is libelled by accident.  Fiddle Faddle (talk) 23:28, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

The pedantic real name of Ritz Newspaper
Frances, please could you come to Talk:Ritz Newspaper and join in the conversation there under Article (and periodical) name. Quite reasonably another editor has queried whether the name is accurate. Responding there is important (rather than here) because the discussion is meant to be associated with the article. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 20:50, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Frances Lynn,author 10:09, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Citing sources
In order to cite the website in question:
 * Place the following: " " (without the quotation marks) after the item you wish to cite.

A fun new article you may want to try
Now you are addicted, I was thinking Leonard (hairdresser) might be an interesting article to start. I found a few references that include his work, and he does seem to be absent from WP. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 23:12, 11 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Leonard would be an interesting article  ....I've just done a ref about him on RN - it looks a bit suspect though as I took his quote from a published Ezine article I wrote. Might not be legit?   Frances Lynn,author 23:19, 11 December 2007 (UTC)


 * That ref prolly would not pass WP:RS but there are a fair few that will sloshing around. An article on him could lead (eg) to Nicky Clark(e?) who trained in his salon, or was there or something.  Fiddle Faddle (talk) 23:25, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Just deleted the ref - shall insert a suitable one tomorrow. Frances Lynn,author 23:30, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Question
I think that should be ok according to Wikipedia's policies. VivioFa teFan  (Talk, Sandbox) 03:31, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks ..... Frances Lynn,author 08:40, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Do you?
Need the current contents of /test, if not then you can reuse it for developing a new article if so, then yes you should create a new subpage. VivioFa teFan  (Talk, Sandbox) 22:48, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for this advice. Frances Lynn,author 22:53, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Deleting messages
Yes it is ok for you to do that. VivioFa teFan  (Talk, Sandbox) 12:46, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Ta! Frances Lynn,author 12:50, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

WorldCat
Recommend that you have your publisher have your works listed at:


 * WorldCat "WorldCat is the world's largest network of library content and services"

I look up all books here. Carry on...IP4240207xx 01:23, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately, my publisher who retired this year doesn't know how to do this - i.e. list my works on WorldCat. Frances Lynn,author 14:21, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Reference formatting
I recommend you get wider opinions on this. The problem is, you're being advised by one user with a particular view (as we all have in some stylistic areas) on reference formats. I couldn't give figures, but a large proportion of users don't bother with and similar.

More particularly, the format used by Fiddle Faddle for the reference section in Maley & Taunton and Epsom College is highly non-standard. It's usual to cite the reference, but not quote it in full unless there are special crucial circumstances. Click on random article at top left a few times and see how often you see this.

That scrollbox arrangement is actively forbidden: see CITE. Wikipedia talk:Citing sources should be able to advise further. Gordonofcartoon (talk) 16:35, 14 December 2007 (UTC Thanks for this .... I didn't even know I had a scrollbox arrangement. Shall look into this. Frances Lynn,author 16:58, 14 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm really happy for wider advice to be sought and received. No single user here is correct, but the community holds sway.  I'm also happy for the scrolling to be removed.  However the reference cited for it is a guideline, and thus "should be followed" rather than "actively forbidden" :) There is, of course, WP:IAR, but that should be taken sparingly Fiddle Faddle (talk) 18:27, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Wise decision. Frances Lynn,author 18:39, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Image upload
As long as the person who uploaded the picture follows the image use policy, then it should be ok. VivioFa teFan  (Talk, Sandbox) 05:12, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

I hope he did upload the picture following the image use policy, but I think he did. Frances Lynn,author 07:54, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

When a talk page grows to an unwieldy length
Some people choose to delete old material, others choose to archive it. If you edit my own talk page you will see, at the top, some of the "stuff" there refers to archival, if you wish to use it. Feel free to copy it over and edit it into the head of your own talk page, or as your adopter for help.

This section deals with gettingthe bot to perform archiving:

Note the line

It is vital to edit that line to read:

The "Age-10" refers to time in days after which a "dead topic" will be archived.

That sets the bot to perform archiving, but it does not give the readers immediate access to your archive page.

Thge section:

is the one I use. You will need to edit it to be appropriate for you - probably:

Then, on the archive page itself you will want to add:

And you create the archive page by following the link after you place User talk:Franceslynn/Archive 1 on your talk page :)

This is all for the future, but your talk page is growing fast and may well need archival soon.

Fiddle Faddle (talk) 12:36, 16 December 2007 (UTC) Thanks for this. I shall study it but it might be safe to ask my adopter too. Frances Lynn,author 12:45, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Fiddle Faddle seems to have basically said what I was going to say in similar words, also these links might help you in archiving your talk page.

Hope these links prove useful. VivioFa teFan  (Talk, Sandbox) 14:51, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Help:Archiving_a_talk_page
 * User:MiszaBot/Archive_HowTo (Cut&Paste, for MiszaBot III)
 * User:ClueBot_III (Cut&Paste, for ClueBot III)
 * Thanks .... there is so much to learn! Frances Lynn,author 15:17, 16 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm sure either of us would be happy to do it on your behalf, but it is generally considered polite to wait until asked to do anything other than talk on a talk page :). Additionally, but trying yourself, even if you make a horlicks of it, you will learn far more.
 * Take it steady and do it a step at a time. There is no urgency.  Fiddle Faddle (talk) 16:51, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I want to do it myself - even though I do find it all difficult. And I'm glad there is no urgency at the moment. Frances Lynn,author 19:51, 16 December 2007 (UTC)


 * The only urgency is artificial! When you get brassed off withe the length of this page, that is the time to act!  The more you play the more fun it gets, though!  Fiddle Faddle (talk) 20:03, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I shall have to act soon!Frances Lynn,author 20:35, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Have I archived my talk page correctly? Frances Lynn,author 19:56, 17 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Almost! Would you like me to tidy up for you and you see what I change?  Fiddle Faddle (talk) 23:37, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes please. That would be very helpful to me. Frances Lynn,author 23:52, 17 December 2007 (UTC)


 * THIS page is done. I added a heading (tidiness, removed a  , and a spare link (no longer needed).  Going to archive 1 next.  Fiddle Faddle (talk) 00:17, 18 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Archiving will now happen when the bot next runs and encounters all the conditions it meeds in order to archive parts of the page. I'll keep an eye on it and see when it runs first.  Fiddle Faddle (talk) 00:20, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I see. I almost did it! But, thanks a lot for helping me on this one ..... (I shall now tell my adopter). Frances Lynn,author 00:33, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I doubt if I could have done this properly by myself though so shall have to study the links my adopter gave me.  Frances Lynn,author 00:36, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Changed archive bot
I changed the archiving bot from Werdnabot to MiszaBot (to be specific MiszaBot III), because it seems that Werdnabot is not working anymore. Also the current settings are as follows-

New setup
(This should appear at the top of your talk page)

Explanation
VivioFa teFan  (Talk, Sandbox) 00:56, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
 * It will archive the first 250 Kilobytes [|maxarchivesize = 250K]
 * It will start archiving at User_talk:Franceslynn/Archive 1 [|counter = 1]
 * It will archive any topic that has not been replied to in the last 48 hours [|algo = old(48h)]
 * It will automatically create a new archive when the limit (maxarchivesize) is reached.

Werdnabot may be down, but
Hi Vivio... Shadowbot 3 has taken over its functions and had already archived the page before you changed it :). I guess there are no issues as long and they both use the same archive, esp since the one you chose creates new archives automatically.  The index to the archive files has also gone when you edited it for Miszabot, I fear.  Fiddle Faddle (talk) 07:34, 18 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Now, I'm confused ....! Frances Lynn,author 09:30, 18 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Well, me too! Vivio took something that works and altered it to something else that works, but edited a little too much.  I'm not going to start undoing what he did coz that woudl be silly, but we do need him (the male gender included the female, yadda yadda yadda) to come back and complete what he did.  Or undo it, I guess!  I left you with a working system, the one he chose to replace it with may be better :)  Fiddle Faddle (talk) 09:34, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I fixed it and put the link to the archives back. again. VivioFa teFan   (Talk, Sandbox) 10:38, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot everyone! (but intend to study the links on how to archive anyway). Frances Lynn,author 11:11, 18 December 2007 (UTC)