User talk:KSfrostie

July 2013
Hello. Your recent edit to Valparaiso, Indiana appears to have added the name of a non-notable entity to a list that normally includes only notable entries. In general, a person or organization added to a list should have a pre-existing article before being added to most lists. If you wish to create such an article, please first confirm that the subject qualifies for a separate, stand-alone article according to Wikipedia's notability guideline. Thank you. ''The person you are writing about is not the person you are linking to. The refs you provide are not reliable. please stop trying to get this guy in. He isn't notable.'' Gtwfan52 (talk) 14:58, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Responce: This is a matter of opinion. I am in the process of creating a page for him, I just have not had the time to figure out how. If you would like to tell me how I would be more than happy to do so. Otherwise please give me more then a few hours to figure this out. Thank you


 * Fistly, when you want to speak to another editor on Wikipedia, you generally leave a message on their talk page, not by email. Second, when you do post something on a talk page, you need to "sign" it by typing 4 tildes ( ~ ) at the end.  This adds your username and a timestamp.  You're new and no-one expects you to know anything on how Wikipedia works.  I will leave you some links to various policies and to a Q&A forum where you can get help with your questions.  I will be happy to help you too.  Just drop me a note on my talk page.


 * That being said, let me talk to you about the content of your email. I understand that there is lots about Wikipedia you don't know, but there are a couple glaring things you are going to have to know if you want to continue.  First, we assume good faith always.  If you look at the content of the email you sent me, you aren't.  I don't know who this dude is and I don't care.  What I do care about is improving this encyclopedia  Second, and this is probably the most common problem "new kids" have at Wikipedia:  notability probably doesn't mean what you think it means.  You are applying your real world definition of notability to this issue and it doesn't apply.  It doesn't matter whether you think this guy is notable or I think this guy is notable or Jimbo Wales thinks this guy is notable.  Those are our subjective opinions and we are all entitled to them.  It doesn't factor in a bit on whether or not he is notable for Wikipedia's purposes.  You see, notability is what we call our standard of inclusion.  It is fairly objective.


 * The term notability comes from the fact that by definition, encyclopedias are what is known as tertiary (third level) sources. For any given subject there is material out their connected directly to the subject (ex, a person or company's website).  These are primary sources.  Then there are things like newspapers, internet content books magazines, and other media that talks about them.  Those are secondary sources.  A tertiary source will only write about what secondary sources are writing about (or making note of, hence the term).


 * What is required to show notability for Wikipedia is reliable sources that are completely independent of the subject writing in detail about the subject. The last time I reverted your guy, reliable sourcing was the problem.  For a source to be reliable, it has to be vetted, or fact-checked.  Newspapers, traditionally published books, magazines, TV and radio news, respected academic journals and the websites associated with all of those are fine, because they have a well-established history of fact checking and stand some liability for their errors (libel).  Self edited things like Facebook and YouTube  are definitely NOT reliable, because anybody can put anything they want on them.  Most blogs fall into the same category.


 * One last thing, and I apologize for this being so long. Having edits reverted is a commonplace occurrence here.  This is a collaborative project.  If you put something in without reference, and someone removes it, it is on you to properly reference it before putting it back.  That is our fact checking process here at Wikipedia.  However, Wikipedia is not considered a reliable source for Wikipedia either....go figure.  Happy editing.  Things good back in NW Indiana?  I haven't lived there for nearly 40 years, but I am a proud Brickie living now in Oregon. Gtwfan52 (talk) 00:28, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Welcome


Welcome to Wikipedia! Listed below are some brief introductions containing all the basics needed to use, comment on, and contribute to Wikipedia.


 * Main Introduction – What is Wikipedia?
 * The Five Pillars – What are the principles behind Wikipedia?
 * Quick Introductions to:
 * Policies and guidelines – How does Wikipedia actually work?
 * Talk pages – How do I communicate in Wikipedia?
 * Referencing – How do I add sources to articles?
 * Uploading images – How do I add and use images?
 * Navigating Wikipedia – How do I find my way around?


 * What Wikipedia is not - even though everyone can edit it, Wikipedia is still an encyclopedia.

If you want to know more about a specific subject, Help:Help explains how to navigate the help pages.

Where next?

 * If you wish to express an opinion or make a comment, Where to ask questions will point you in the correct direction.
 * If you would like to edit an article, the Basic tutorial will show you how, and How to help will give you some ideas for things to edit.
 * If you would like to create a new article, Starting an article will explain how to create a new page, with tips for success and a link to Wikipedia's Article Wizard, which can guide you through the process of submitting a new article to Wikipedia.
 * For more support and some friendly contacts to get you started, the Editors' Welcome page should be your next stop!