User talk:Jaimie.rapt

Speedy deletion nomination of Wikipedia:Kurn Hattin Homes for Children


A tag has been placed on Wikipedia:Kurn Hattin Homes for Children, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which articles can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:
 * It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Business for more information.
 * It appears to be a clear copyright infringement. (See section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) 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. However, even if you use one of these processes to release copyrighted material to Wikipedia, it still needs to comply with the other policies and guidelines to be eligible for inclusion. If you would like any assistance with this, you can ask a question at the help desk.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 19:54, 2 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Also, just FYI: when you're trying to move an article out of your userspace, you need to select "(Article)", not "Wikipedia", from the dropdown menu. The article you made is in the wrong place at the moment because of that.  Not a big deal, and not why it's nominated for speedy deletion, but just so you know for the future.  Thanks! Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 20:05, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Status and Advice
As reviewing administrator, I deleted the article. I read the article carefully first, and i agree with you that the subject is important, and an article could be and should be written about it for Wikipedia. But the current article will not do, for several reads.

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. The difference of Wikipedia from other online resources, is that we provide references to published sources. The sources cannot just be the subject's web page, but to material published by others. This show, first, that the subject is important enough for other people to have written about i, and, second, that the information is accurate, for some particular editorial organization too responsibility for it. The article had no such references. From what you say, they should be easy to find. There must be material about the home in both local histories, and histories of social work & education Second a Wikipedia article needs to be written like an encyclopedia article, not a press release--don't praise the organization or person, say what they do. Don't talk about the overall importance of the subject--talk about what they have accomplished. Remember not to copy from a web site, 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, the tone will not be encyclopedic and the material will not be suitable. (Thus, there is generally no purpose in giving permission; it is better to rewrite.)

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 or donors or students--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 impossible to do it properly with a conflict of interest, 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.

If you want me to look at a later version, just ask on my talk page. I do a lot of work here with scool articles.  DGG ( talk ) 23:59, 2 October 2012 (UTC)