User talk:Josejnr

Regarding Philip Daniels, please don't blank articles, especially when you remove the AfD notice in the process.

Regarding Modele and your question at the Reference Desk, you need to go to Articles for deletion/Modele and explain how the show is notable, which will usually involve showing some reliable third party sources that have covered the article to satisfy verifiability. See our guidelines for inclusion of websites.

Anyway, welcome to Wikipedia! Sorry you're having a rough start, there is a bit of a learning curve involved in writing an encyclopaedia. --Sam Blanning(talk) 19:39, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

In response to your question
Whether it will exist is not the issue. The issue is, quite frankly, assuming it does exist in a few months, will anybody care? A lot of things get launched on the web. The vast majority sink like a stone without anyone noticing. WP:WEB says, basically, that we document things on the web that have received notice. No way to know, until it happens, whether this one will or not. Once it's launched, if it becomes popular, there's no reason why the article can't be recreated at that time.

If, in fact, you want this article to help gain exposure for Modele before its launch, that is most assuredly against Wikipedia policy. Wikipedia is for things that have gained notability, not things that hope to. Fan-1967 20:40, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia has inclusionists and deletionists. Inclusionists think, "deleting this person's hard work on their article is mean." Deletionists well I don't know, but I believe they feel better about themselves for deleting. Basically, save the article to a text file before it goes. Then you can make it later.

The only way to save something from deletion that has a mass of deletionist votes is if you somehow found 400 working proxies (there may not be that many in existence that wikipedia hasn't banned) to make 50 accounts (proxies are down a lot so 4 per account so you have spares), and fill them with hundreds of edits and many AFD votes, then when your article comes up, you all vote to keep. This is very time consuming and it's probably easier to either get 50 friends or bribe 50 people. Obviously this is against the rules, but that's not the point. It takes this level of difficulty to get it back. The only other shot is if you find 100 fans of the show and they already have wikipedia articles (votes from people who come on just to vote don't get counted) and these people vote and you hope their accounts have long edit histories. My point is not to cheat, but that even if you cheated, it'd be very very difficult.

So for god's sake save it in text so you can put it back up when the show comes on. DyslexicEditor 22:03, 10 July 2006 (UTC)


 * If I may just offer a different point of view to DyslexicEditor's somewhat nihilistic stance - it's not as simple as that. Wikipedia has a notability criterion for the simple reason that, if we didn't, the encyclopedia would be utterly swamped with information which wasn't really of any sort of use to anyone (I seem remember that there was an article about a piece of paper taped to the door of a college dorm in Sweden at some point - yes, it exists, but is it worth its own encyclopedia article?). It's not about being a "deletionist" or an "inclusionist", it's about being reasonable.


 * I thoroughly applaud your efforts to research and write your first article, and I personally think it's a real shame that it happened to fall foul of the notability criterion for inclusion in Wikipedia. As Fan-1967 said above, an article on Modele on Wikipedia would be great once it's started (a lot of things can happen between now and the autumn!), and if it proves popular (and doesn't just get cancelled after four episodes, never to be heard from again - you'd be surprised how often that happens). Can you wait until then? There is nothing wrong with keeping a copy of the article on your hard disk so you don't have to retype it all (as DyslexicEditor said).


 * In the meantime, I really hope you won't be discouraged!! :) Wikipedia is a great place, and I'm sorry that you seem to have had a bit of a rocky start. If I may suggest, try improving existing articles rather than starting new ones to begin with, it's a lot easier, and helps Wikipedia more in the long run, as we have an awful lot of very very short and/or poor articles on subjects which really deserve better. For some ideas, check out the Community Portal. As you edit and read more, you'll get a good feel for what is acceptable on Wikipedia, and how material should be presented. If you've got any questions or want to talk about something, feel free to leave a message on my talk page. Good luck, and I hope you'll stay with Wikipedia! &mdash; QuantumEleven 15:06, 12 July 2006 (UTC)