User talk:Marion Mayger

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: 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 need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! GRBerry 19:34, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Deletion Review
G'day, thought I'd drop you a note to let you know I've replied to your question at deletion review and gave you an answer. Mathmo Talk 12:50, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

As the article was deleted via prod, it was restored. Discussion about the situation revealed that the very first edit was a copyright violation, so the article was speedy deleted under WP:CSD. All later versions are deriviate works of that copyright violation, so must be deleted.

Additionally, you said at deletion review that the article was created "for your client". Please read Conflict of interest. If you are a general publicist who choose to do create the article as a means of creating notice for your client, be aware that we are an encyclopedia and only want articles on subjects which are already notable. If you are instead in the business of creating articles here for pay, you may be fraudulently telling your clients that this can be done. We have permanently banned one person from editing Wikipedia because they were in the business of creating articles for pay. See User:MyWikiBiz. Whether or not you are that individual, if your behavior replicates theirs you will be treated as if you were them, leading to all articles you created being deleted under the fifth general criteria for speedy deletion. GRBerry 17:38, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Further to the Deletion Review
After the deletion review was closed, you posed the following question:

I am his Personal Manager, as many people have in the Entertainment Industry, - he has not paid me to write this as an independent article, as an ex DJ on KISS 100 FM, and working for MTV, and an Author, Lindsay is a person that others may find fascinating - hence the reason for this article on him. I would just like the article to be re-instated and dont really understand all of the jargon that has been listed as resons for the deletion...in a nutshell, what do I need to do to make this article acceptable ? the KISS 100 link is verifiable, that is on Wikipedia already if you search for his name.....can I get around this by putting some kind of disclaimer etc.. I mean how do I verify all of this info ? it is true, and of course Lindsay can verify it....I really need your help in telling me what I need to do ? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Marion Mayger (talk • contribs).

This is better discussed here. I'll answer in a minute. GRBerry 18:41, 4 February 2007 (UTC)


 * The article was originally deleted via the proposed deletion process.  In essence, this means that someone thought it should be deleted and nobody objected.  Deletion under that process is automatically overturned if anyone asks, because asking amounts to objecting.
 * However, your statement that the person was a client set off alarms in my head, so before acting I talked it over with some other administrators. One of them determined that the first edit was an exact duplicate of a MySpace page, thus violating the copyright of whomever authored that page.  Wikipedia's mission is to create an encyclopedia that is free of copyright restrictions, which we do under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL).  Material under copyright is not compatible with that mission, so we just can't use it as article text, nor can we keep derivative versions of copyright material. Thus, the article needed to be speedily deleted.  This wasn't an issue of verification, it was one of copyright.
 * If you are also the author of the myspace page, and release it under the GFDL, then we can use it as the starting text for an article. That release will have to occur on the MySpace page (if compatible with MySpace's copyright rules), or wherever the text actually originates from.  (Does this individual have a website?)
 * Additionally, as an encyclopedia, we must cover topics from a neutral point of view. It is almost impossible for the subjects of an article, or their publicity staff, to write content that is neutral.  This is expresed in the conflict of interest guideline far more fully (and probably with better wording) than I can do here.  You do have, for this topic, a conflict of interest by being the subject's "Personal Manager".
 * Our usual working assumption is that if someone is truly notable, their article will be created by an uninvolved third party. Notability (people) gives our guideline on what constitutes a notable person.  There is a current disagreement about how to word the page, but all the bullet points would be there, just possibly with different text around them.
 * I strongly encourage you to read this "guidance for Public Relations people in terms of contributing to Wikipedia". It is one Wikipedian's view, but it is well worth reading, and you are the target audience.
 * If you believe that 1) this person is already notable by our standards, 2) you can write a neutral, encyclopedia article about them (not publicity copy), and 3) you can handle your conflict of interest to make the article be in Wikipedia's best interest, it may be possible for you to start an article. If you do this, I offer two recommendations.  First, read and understand the five primary characteristics of Wikipedia.  Second, spend a few hours over a few days reading and working on articles on topics where you don't have a conflict of interest.  The random article link will deliver you to a randomly chosen pages, but you would probably enjoy more going to topics on which you have a personal but no professional interest - maybe the article on the town you were born in, or your alma mater, or someone prominent in one of your hobbies.  Third, after you are comfortable with what Wikipedia is and how it works, then follow the guidance at Amnesia test for writing an article on this person - forget everything you know, and go look for independently published reliable sources that weren't created by the individual, their PR staff, their employer(s), or their employer's PR staff.  If you can write an article using only such independent sources, that article is more likely to survive.  GRBerry 19:14, 4 February 2007 (UTC)