User talk:Lisabagz

Nomination of Craftsuprint for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Craftsuprint is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Craftsuprint until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Amartyabag  TALK2ME  05:54, 17 November 2012 (UTC)Lisabagz (talk) 20:45, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

I would really appreciate some advice to how to make my entry more notable - The sources I have found are all web based - I have been unable to find anything in books, scholars, etc presumably because it is a web based company. There are UK magazine entries, but I thought these would be seen as advertising so didn't include them. Is the alexa rank not a notable source? I tried using the links to source better references, but they are all defaulted to US searches and I haven't been able to change this to the UK and as it is a UK based company this is an issue. I have watched this company grow over the last 4 years and it has a huge following in the UK and is growing globally, which is why I thought it should have it's own page. It has triggered the start digital crafting and has links to scrapbooking, digital stamping etc, and I have found entries for them, so I don't understand why it has no links to any page on wikipedia? Some advice would be appreciated please.Lisabagz (talk) 20:45, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Web references are OK, they just have to be reliable. Use google.co.uk for UK-centric search. As for other stuff, that's not usually a criteria for inclusion. I highly recommend that you go through WP:CORPDEPTH and determine what it is you need to add to that article in order to establish notability and avoiding having it be deleted. Primarily, reliable, notable third-party sources that say "this company is important in its field". In all honesty I couldn't find any that would fit the criteria, or I'd add them. That doesn't mean they don't exist. § FreeRangeFrog 23:37, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks I really appreciate your help, I am trying to source betters refs and have tried to format it better. Lisabagz (talk) 17:14, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

November 2012
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Please make sure to include an edit summary. Please provide one before saving your changes to an article, as the summaries are quite helpful to people browsing an article's history. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 11:46, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Ok sorry no problem, I didn't realise. Could you please help me with my article? I know you flagged it as advertising, but that was not my intention, I tried to write it as a history of events, but think my style of writing has been misunderstood? Would you be able to offer me any advice please how I can improve it ? Lisabagz (talk) 12:32, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

@ Theroadislong - you have made a few edits thank you, however, you have taken out irrelevant info?? - my reference to itunes and the music business piracy is 100% relevant as this was the main inspiration for the website, only craft focussed instead of music. It is referred to on the 'about us' page of the website. It was all about cracking down on pirates. I used an BBC News article about the launch of itunes as a reference, because it explained the similar reasoning behind it's launch and is widely known.

Also you have taken out all reference to competitor websites - Craftsuprint was the first of it's kind, but since its launch many similar sites have been created - I added them in reference to the genre and also to remove the impression of advertising - they are all in competition with the website that my article is about. Could you please tell me how this is also irrelevant? Lisabagz (talk) 22:52, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I was trying to make the article more suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia because as it stands it's likely to be deleted. Please take a look at other articles to see how they are constructed. The details I removed were original research and not relevant to the article. Primary sources are not advisable. Listing competitors is not encyclopedic.Theroadislong (talk) 23:05, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, I appreciate your help I was just a bit confused as I think it looks more like an advert now. I have been trying to look at articles that are relevant to the genre. I looked at Hobbycraft as it was also the first of its kind within the craft industry and this looks to me like advertising also, except that it has lots of press related references. Should I take out the list of events as I have it and keep it more about the actual website and its genre? Lisabagz (talk) 23:15, 21 November 2012 (UTC)


 * I am not sure if you are this IP address (IP purposefully withheld here) who posted on my talk page, but an encyclopedia isn't the place for a list of history. You may wish to include (if it is kept after the AfD discussion) a paragraph about the history, but never lists. You need to prove that there's a reason for it to be in Wikipedia. I'm ignoring all rules in saying it this way, but why should Wikipedia be using server space to host your article? That's the question you need to answer to us. If you say it's notable enough, you need to provide which of the criteria it meets. You also need reliable sources, for example newspapers (online or in print) or online news outlets (cnn.com, foxnews.com, etc.). Examples of not okay sourcing include blogs, websites that can be edited by anyone, most websites that come up as "red" in a site advisor such as McAfee, sites that are blatant advertising (including company sites), etc. If you have any questions after this (I know it's long), feel free to reply here, and I'll get back to it. Thanks! gwickwire &#124; Leave a message 23:40, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, no it wasn't me, I haven't posted on anyone's talk page. I appreciate your input. I have re-written the article entirely to be more encyclopaedic, I am currently working on on obtaining some more notable references.Lisabagz (talk) 10:16, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Crafty Bob.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Crafty Bob.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:03, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Seraphimblade Talk to me 01:34, 5 December 2012 (UTC)