User talk:Mburns813

Welcome!
Hello, Mburns813, 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 Master and Victim, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

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, followed by your question, 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! LegoKontribsTalkM 21:38, 13 October 2012 (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

Proposed deletion of Master and Victim


The article Master and Victim has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Does not meet WP:NF, written like an essay and an advertisement.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. LegoKontribsTalkM 21:38, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

This page has been suggested for deletion as it may be considered advertising. I have tried to base the layout of this website on Cabin in the Woods - as this film is of a similar genre. Everything on this page is of a similar factual nature to Cabin in the Woods wiki page. The links I have used the to film's main website are to show where part of the synopsis came from and I have tried to show details of the film's production by referencing a behind the scenes article published by LionsGate. As this film is quite low budget there isn't a massive amount of press about it yet. What else can I do in order to improve the quality of this page? All suggestions are welcome. Thank you.


 * I don't find it overly promotional. Consider finding more references and be sure to read Notability (films). Anna Frodesiak (talk) 05:21, 16 October 2012 (UTC)


 * I really looked and there just aren't enough references to support this article. I'm sorry. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 05:23, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello Anna. Thank you for your kind comment about it not being overly promotional and for looking to see if there was further supporting material that might make it more relevant. It's unfortunate that there isn't more press surrounding it at this time. Thank you as well for showing me the suggested guidelines for Notability (films). This has made it more clear to me as to why Wikipedia may consider removing it. Chances are there would be more press surrounding the film if press releases were sent to horror press websites, though I think it would be better if this was done once the film has a full distribution deal behind it. For future reference, if websites like Fangoria etc were to release articles about the film, is this likely to aid the articles credibility on Wikipedia? Mburns813 (talk) 23:00, 17 October 2012 (UTC)


 * We may consider userfying it to your userspace if you want. This process prevents the article from being seen by a general reader, but allows you to continue to work on it and enhance the sources before unleashing it to the wild again. As of now, it's probably going to end up being deleted. Michaelzeng7 (talk) 20:01, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello Michael, thank you for your quick response. I've backed the file up to a word document, so that if it is deleted I still have a copy of it that I could work on. I would rather keep it open to the public if possible. Would you be able to advise on how far short the article is currently falling from being acceptable? From a link another member has sent me, I'm guessing about five independent sources, but I'm not sure on that one. Also I've noticed that Wikipedia ask you not to re-publish deleted material - which makes sense. If Master and Victim is deleted, but in a few months time there is more material for me to source, would I then be able to upload the article again as long as it included the new sources? Thank you again for your advice so far. Mburns813 (talk) 23:00, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Y Of course! If you can include evidence that a good article can be written based upon significant reliable sourcing at any time, whether it's tomorrow, next month or next year, it will probably be accepted. Michaelzeng7 (talk) 01:29, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Master and Victim for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Master and Victim 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/Master and Victim 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. LegoKontribsTalkM 01:16, 16 October 2012 (UTC)