User talk:Lukegilliam

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for page creation, and may soon be deleted.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type   on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Where to ask a question or ask me on. Again, welcome! Gpia7r (talk) 16:04, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Your first article
 * Biographies of living persons
 * How to write a great article
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial

Disagreement With Label No New Research
I would like to know precisely what research I have posted is new. The film Dogma has been written about by literally thousands of people. I would like to mention here that it is my colleague George Kourounis who suggested that I post a very basic piece of bigraphical data here on the Wiki website. Both myself and George Kourounis worked on the film Dogma. Specifically I worked as an audio engineer. The film is notable and at least two of my fellow co workers (George Kourounis, Michael Snow, and Bruno Tocanne) have been published and in some cases my work has been published with them. Specifically Bruno Tocanne. I would also like to mention I was right in the middle of placing an external reference to a published site for one of the elements in my article and someone here on Wiki removed it before I could save the page?? It explains here that Wiki is open to the public and that if information is well referenced and is predominantly factual that it can be posted. How can that be if the editors don't even allow people the chance to place the references in there?? I'm not sure you are correct on the point Wikipedia:No original research. Please prove me wrong.

Thank you --Lukegilliam (talk) 17:08, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Request For Information From Wikipedia

May I politely ask

Oscarthecat

to explain what exact word or sentence I placed in my article that states 'New Research' or presents a conflict of interest to the parties mentioned in the article. I ask this in good faith as I made an effort to write an article that was not of a promotional nature, that was indeed bold, that was factual, and gave public domain readers some information that is actually published. Also for the record below is the external reference that I was in the middle of posting when my article was deleted:



Please Oscarthecat can you explain your words.

Thank you, and with kind regards, --Lukegilliam (talk) 17:35, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Luke Gilliam requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.) or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you.  Teapot  george Talk  16:44, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

In The (interest) Of Providing Factual Information
I would like to disagree firmly (but politely ) with a point on this page:

[but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant]

was stated with regards to my article. I'm not sure if I agree. After spending close to a year recording and releasing music for Bruno Tocanne, all of which has been published and released to the public, the above label being written in regards to my name is not something I agree with. If the label insignificant applies to my work then may I ask does it also apply to Bruno Tocanne's work which is quite extensively published in a Wikipedia article called, if I am not mistaken, Bruno Tocanne. ?

Please clarify, --Lukegilliam (talk) 17:18, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

If you have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:
 * 1) editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
 * 2) participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
 * 3) linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. For more details about what, exactly, constitutes a conflict of interest, please see our conflict of interest guidelines.  Teapot  george Talk  16:45, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

July 2009
You should wait for others to write an article about subjects in which you are personally involved. This applies to articles about you, your achievements, your band, your business, your publications, your website, your relatives, and any other possible conflict of interest.

Creating an article about yourself is strongly discouraged. If you create such an article, it might be listed on articles for deletion. Deletion is not certain, but many feel strongly that you should not start articles about yourself. This is because independent creation encourages independent validation of both significance and verifiability. All edits to articles must conform to No original research, Neutral point of view, and Verifiability.

If you are not "notable" under Wikipedia guidelines, creating an article about yourself may violate the policy that Wikipedia is not a personal webspace provider and would thus qualify for speedy deletion. If your achievements, etc., are verifiable and genuinely notable, and thus suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia, someone else will probably create an article about you sooner or later. (See Wikipedians with articles.)  Oscarthecat (talk) 16:46, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

This is a message for Oscarthecat. I have read what you have written and respect that what you have written makes sense. However I would like to disagree on your point labelled as.

Wikipedia:No original research

I would like to know precisely what research I have posted is new. The film Dogma has been written about by literally thousands of people. I would like to mention here that it is my colleague George Kourounis who suggested that I post a very basic piece of bigraphical data here on the Wiki website. Both myself and George Kourounis worked on the film Dogma. Specifically I worked as an audio engineer. The film is notable and at least two of my fellow co workers (George Kourounis, Michael Snow, and Bruno Tocanne) have been published and in some cases my work has been published with them. Specifically Brutno Tocanne. I would also like to mention I was right in the middle of placing an external reference to a published site for one of the elements in my article and someone here on Wiki removed it before I could save the page?? It explains here that Wiki is open to the public and that if information is well referenced and is predominantly factual that it can be posted. How can that be if the editors don't even allow people the chance to place the references in there?? I'm not sure you are correct on the point Wikipedia:No original research. Please prove me wrong. Luke Gilliam--Lukegilliam (talk) 17:05, 3 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm not really clear what you are suggesting above?

An article that you wrote about yourself has been deleted becauseto quote "the article appears to be about about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.) or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable" If you can prove notability with secondary references then you should have no problems... but it is never a good idea to write about yourself... if you are truly notable someone else will write about you! All good wishes  Teapot  george Talk  20:27, 3 July 2009 (UTC)