User talk:Maximus1925

2

Image copyright problem with File:CBCS Organigram.JPG
Thanks for uploading File:CBCS Organigram.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like PD-self (to release all rights), (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 12:22, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Consortium of Bangsamoro Civil Society
This article has just been flagged for deletion, the reason given being "An advertising piece with no apparent independent sources". I disagree with deleting the article, since the organization is clearly "notable" (see Notability), but have to agree with the assessment. The content of any article has to be backed up by reliable independent sources - sources other than the subject of the article itself. Books, magazines and newspaper articles all qualify as long as they are not published by the CBCS. I did a quick scan on Google and found plenty of sources that would qualify. This is going to be painful since you have put a lot of work into the article, but assuming the decision is to keep it (which I think will be the case) most of the content will have to be replaced. There is nothing wrong with leaving a link to the CBCS website, which any reader can check if they want to find what the organization has to say about itself. But the article needs to be overhauled so it becomes a summary of information about the CBCS derived from independent sources. For example, the following statement would be fully acceptable:


 * In October 2008, about 500 members of the CBCS staged a peaceful rally in Marawi City, calling on the United Nations and the Organization of Islamic Conference to intervene and mediate to end the war in Mindanao and intercede for the just resolution of the Bangsamoro struggle for the right to self-determination.

You can keep improving the article while the deletion debate takes place, which should run for no less than 5 days, and you can add your own comments to the debate. Before doing so, you may want to look at Verifiability, No original research and Neutral point of view. Aymatth2 (talk) 19:40, 19 April 2009 (UTC)


 * See User:Ahpangcoga/Consortium of Bangsamoro Civil Society. I have taken the liberty of created a copy of the article in your user space. I may do some drastic revisions to the public article. If you totally disagree with them, you can cut-and-paste from this copy. Aymatth2 (talk) 01:14, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

---

The Wikipedia editors have an ongoing struggle to remove or "neutralize" articles about commercial or non-commercial organizations that are written by employees of the organizations and come across as promotional material. They typically are factual, but naturally present the organization in the best possible light. Often they mostly reproduce information found on the organization's website, with a tone that is not appropriate for an encyclopedia. Because it is so hard for an insider to write an impartial article about their organization, Wikipedia strongly discourages the practice. In this case, I am sure with the best of intentions, the entire CBCS article reads very much like an official bulletin issued by the organization to inform people about their vision, mission, activities and so on.

If an outsider were to write about the organization, which is very much the preferred approach with Wikipedia, they would look at the CBCS website but mostly use independent sources such as books or newspaper articles that talk about the organization. The result would be an article that is less about the way the CBCS sees itself, much more about the way the world see CBCS. It would talk much less about the way CBCS is organized and operates internally, more about publicly visible activity and external views about the organization, some of which may be negative. Quite likely, a lot of information that you would consider important would have to be dropped because the only source was the CBCS itself. Those are the rules - Wikipedia simply assembles known information about a subject from independent sources. It does not allow self-published material or "original research".

If I had time, I would undertake an overhaul. You might not be very happy with the result, but I hope you would agree that it was factually accurate: every statement would be backed up by a reliable independent source. If you felt that the article was biased or incomplete, you would have to find other reliable independent sources that provided alternate views or additional information.

I am very busy at present, so probably will not have the time. One way to "save" the article, which will be difficult after all the work you have put into it, would be to remove almost all the content and reduce the article to a few sentences, each citing an independent source. Then the article could be carefully expanded later - but still always relying on external sources. Not easy... Aymatth2 (talk) 12:59, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I just noticed another editor has done a major overhaul - much better. There is no way this will be deleted. Aymatth2 (talk) 13:07, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

An article you created maybe deleted soon: Tools which can help you
The article you created: Consortium of Bangsamoro Civil Society may be deleted from Wikipedia.

There is an ongoing debate about whether the article you created should be deleted here:
 * Articles for deletion/Consortium of Bangsamoro Civil Society.

The faster you respond on this page, the better chance the article you created can be saved.

Finding sources which mention the topic of the article you created is the very best way to avoid an article being deleted Findsources3:
 * Find sources for Consortium of Bangsamoro Civil Society: google news recent, google news old, google books, google scholar, NYT recent, NYT old, a9, msbooks, msacademic ...You can then cite these results in the Article for deletion discussion.

Also, there are several tools and helpful editors on Wikipedia who can help you:
 * 1. List the page on Article Rescue Squadron. You can get help listing your page on the Article Rescue Squadron talk page.
 * 2. At any time, you can ask any administrator to move your article to a special page. (Called userfication)


 * 3. You can request a mentor to help you: Wikipedia:Adopt-a-User. But don't wait for a mentor to respond to you before responding on the article for deletion page.
 * 4. When trying to delete a page, veteran editors love to use a lot of rule acronyms. These acronyms don't need to intimidate you. Here is a list of acronyms you can use yourself: Deletion debate acronyms, which will help you argue that the article should be kept.

If the page you created is deleted, you also have many options available. Good luck! Ikip (talk) 21:15, 26 April 2009 (UTC)