User talk:MassiveEffect

Welcome!

Hello, MassiveEffect, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Space Engine, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, 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 helpme 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 Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! MikeWazowski (talk) 01:40, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Starting an article
 * Your first article
 * Biographies of living persons
 * How to write a great article
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial

Speedy deletion nomination of Space Engine


A tag has been placed on Space Engine, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Business for more information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, 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. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. MikeWazowski (talk) 01:40, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Space Engine


A tag has been placed on Space Engine, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Business for more information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, 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. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. MikeWazowski (talk) 22:52, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Status and Advice
As reviewing administrator, I  deleted it. The article was indeed hopelessly promotional, talking about minor details of the software, talking about the way the program hoped to be important after it got out of beta, talking about the overall general importance of the general subject and of program of similar purpose.

It might be possible to write a proper article, and I  protected against further re-reation for a week to give you time to do so correctly. . A Wikipedia article needs to show notability with references providing substantial coverage from 3rd party independent published reliable sources, print or online, but not blogs or press releases, or material derived from press releases. this article had no such references, and if there are none available, then it will certainly be deleted from Wikipedia no matter how it is written--if this should be the case, wait until you have such references. It's the normal assumption that a program in beta does not have them--full product reviews by thirdparties published in independent publications are the usual ones needed, but not mere mentions of the program. Remember not to copy from a web site, even your own -- first it's a copyright violation, but, even if you own the copyright and are willing to give us permission according to WP:DCM, the tone will not be encyclopedic and the material will not be suitable.

Include only material that would be of interest to a general reader coming across the mention of the subject and wanting the sort of information that would be found in an encyclopedia. Do not include material that would be of interest only to those associated with the subject, or to prospective purchaser--that sort of content is considered promotional. Keep in mind that the goal of an encyclopedia is to say things in a concise manner, which is not the style of  press releases or  web sites, which are usually more expansive.

As a general rule, a suitable page will be best written by someone without Conflict of Interest; it's not impossible to do it properly with a conflict of interest or as a paid press agent, but it's relatively more difficult: you are automatically thinking in terms of what the subject wishes to communicate to the public, but an uninvolved person will think in terms of what the public might wish to know. If you think you can do it right according to our guidelines, do so, but expect the article to be carefully checked for objectivity and sourcing.  DGG ( talk ) 01:52, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

replying to your coment at
Wikipedia can be very rough and hard on editor. They have hard and fast rules that the people who delet articles don't explain. You have to be able to take some being kicked around if you want to continue to edit here. I advise you not to take it personally, as this is the way they treat newbies in general, not just you.

It is very discouraging but the best way to go is to read lots of articles amd guidlelines/polices and read lots of articles to you can see what the rules are here. And look at the edit version so you can see the code.

Please feel free to ask my any questions, and I can try to help you with edition and formatting.

Best wishes,  KennethSides (talk) 01:53, 9 November 2011 (UTC)!

Never wish to edit here again but thanks for the explanation.

Welcome!

 * }


 * Hopefully these links will be more helpful. Please look through them. Wikipedia is very hard to master.  KennethSides (talk) 01:57, 9 November 2011 (UTC)