User talk:Jonny1843

Welcome
Welcome to wikipedia, Jonny1843. I reverted your edit to Chase Masterson because the source you added is not considered a reliable source by wikipedia standards.

In general, if you add an external link to an article it should be to a reliable sources, such as an established news site. You can also add then write your question on your talk page and someone will come by to answer your question. This is my favorite way to get help, second best is the help desk.

I've included a couple of useful links below.


 * Introduction -- Wikipedia introduction page.
 * Tutorial -- Wikipedia editing tutorial.
 * Questions — the "where to ask questions" directory.
 * FAQ — quick answers to the most common questions.
 * Adopt-a-User — where a new user can be adopted by an experienced user who will be his/her mentor.
 * Your first article — with information about how to create a good first article.

You can also let me know if you have any editing questions by asking on my talk page.

--IP69.226.103.13 (talk) 00:25, 20 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Not so fast sir. I have to wonder if you've checked the source for yourself. This isn't a text interview that could have been written by anybody, this is an audio interview and you can listen to Chase say everything herself. No I know this isn't a big aintitcoolnews site, but this is valid information and it was only posted just today I think, which is very cool. -comment added by User:Jonny1843 on 04:01, 20 November 2009


 * I think Jonny1843 makes a valid point. With a video interview such as this the reliability of the website that hosts it is not so much an issue, as the authenticity of the information is linked not to the channel but to the source -- in this case, the subject of the article herself. Sach (talk) 13:03, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Maybe, but linking to websites, they have to be reliable and stable, and I see no outside indicators that this website is stable. I searched for information about fancorepodcast.com and found none, only links to it. In addition, I searched for information about this interview to see if the interview itself is considered notable enough for a third party to have discussed it. I found no such information. You know, anyone can interview a star; a local school kid interview some big Hollywood actor about a year ago and the local newspaper wrote about it, and the kid posted the interview to his website and got lots of hits, but the interview is not notable, and stable, and and appropriate link. The notability of the interview must be established, and the external site has to be stable. These criteria, among other are not met, at least according to sources I tried to dig up. I think my removal of the link is appropriate and will hold up. If you have some type of notable source that contradicts me, please let me know, and we can discuss reinserting the interview. "Cool" can be posted on social networking sites, but wikipedia is an encyclopedia. --IP69.226.103.13 (talk) 16:57, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
 * It's not the notability of the interview that has to be established, it's the reliability, and there's no doubt that a statement by the subject of the article about herself is reliable. Anyone looking at the interview can see that it's her and know that the source of this information is the subject herself, and judge it accordingly.  If the information was extracted and used in the article, it should be made clear that it came from the subject, and thus may be biased in the way that any statement about oneself may be biased, but as an external link, that doesn't enter into it. Sach (talk) 20:27, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
 * And notability requires third party sources which are "Every article on Wikipedia must be based upon verifiable statements from multiple third-party reliable sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy." Does the source of the interview meet that requirement? No. If the information is extracted and used in the article and it comes from the subject and it's a press release from the subject, we don't use that as a reliable third party source of information, either. Essentially, her answers in an interview undigested are just that: her own press release. Until a reliable third party source provides us with what is notable, fact checked, and accurate from her oral press releases. --IP69.226.103.13 (talk) 20:32, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Tips
Jonny1843: I've refactored the comments you posted here and elsewhere.

When starting a new topic on a talk page, you should start a new header. You can do this by typing two equal signs on either side of your subject name, eg.

==New subject==.

Then go to a new line and start your message. When you've finished, please sign your message by putting 4 tildes ~ at the end - the system will automatically put in your account name and the time/date stamp. Incidentally, unless you're instructed otherwise on the page, new messages go at the bottom of the stack. Best, Sach (talk) 13:57, 20 November 2009 (UTC)


 * The easiest way to do this is just click the "new section" tab at the top of the page. This will give you an edit screen that includes a box for the title, in which case you just enter your header subject in the subject header box, and it is formatted appropriately. --IP69.226.103.13 (talk) 17:16, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I've changed mine to a "+" and I couldn't remember what it was originally. Sach (talk) 20:36, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
 * How do you change it to a plus? Oh, you use a different skin? --IP69.226.103.13 (talk) 08:44, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
 * No, I use the Monobook default. Go to "Preferences" / "Gadgets" / "User Interface", there should be a switch that changes the "New section" to a "+". Sach (talk) 09:06, 21 November 2009 (UTC)