User talk:Hilarymack

September 2010
You should wait for others to write an article about subjects in which you are personally involved, instead of writing it yourself. This applies to articles about you, your achievements, your band, your business, your publications, your website, your relatives, and any other possible conflict of interest.

Creating an article about yourself is strongly discouraged. If you create such an article, it might be listed on articles for deletion. Deletion is not certain, but many feel strongly that you should not start articles about yourself. This is because independent creation encourages independent validation of both significance and verifiability. All edits to articles must conform to No original research, Neutral point of view, and Verifiability.

If you are not "notable" under Wikipedia guidelines, creating an article about yourself may violate the policy that Wikipedia is not a personal webspace provider and would thus qualify for speedy deletion. If your achievements, etc., are verifiable and genuinely notable, and thus suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia, someone else will probably create an article about you sooner or later. (See Wikipedians with articles.) Thank you. Happysailor (Talk) 08:29, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Hilary Mackelden
A tag has been placed on Hilary Mackelden 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, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles – see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, 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. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. andy (talk) 08:32, 15 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi Hilary, I deleted your recent article because it did not provide independent verifiable sources that it meets the notability guidelines. *It is now wikipedia policy that biographical articles about living people must have references. You need to have independent references to verify the claimed biographical facts, and to establish that you are indeed notable. It is important that biographies about living people are accurate in view of the possibility of libel action is we get it wrong  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  18:45, 15 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes, autobiographies are strongly discouraged because of problems with objectivity, but there is nothing to stop you writing the article. The main points are that the content and alleged notability are verifiable to independent verifiable sources, although you could use your own website for basic stuff like DoB and family. Take care not to copy stuff verbatim from websites, including your own, unless it's explicitly public domain or similar. Anything that's not purely factual, such a comments on the quality of the work, must have impeccable sources, and should be balanced by any negative reviews. You might want to look at some of these to see what the best we can can do looks like, although I'm not suggesting for one moment that you aim for FA! Articles on your plays are fine, as long as they follow the guidelines and are objective. Each play should be notable in its own right, not just because its written by a notable person (you might own a cat, but that doesn't in itself make the cat notable), so a play that's not had a professional run might struggle. Hope this helps. If you want to do a draft, why not put it here and let me know when you are ready?  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  10:36, 16 September 2010 (UTC)