User talk:Mikepanic

Image copyright problem with Image:POP CORN.jpg
Thank you for uploading Image:POP CORN.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 21:59, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Mike Petrakis


A tag has been placed on Mike Petrakis requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, individual animal(s), an organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or why the subject of the article is important or significant: that is, why an article about it should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you can assert the importance of the subject,. Clicking that button 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 article's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. You may freely add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

See the guidelines for specific types of articles: biographies, websites, bands, or companies. CanadianLinuxUser (talk) 13:45, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Mike Petrakis for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mike Petrakis 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/Mike Petrakis 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 good 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. NellieBly (talk) 00:50, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Your message
Hi, Mike: I noticed your message to my talk page. I nominated this for deletion not because I doubted the accuracy or verifiability of the information contained but because I doubted the subject's notability. Wikipedia has strict guidelines with respect to whether a living person is notable enough to pass our notability requirements, and one of those guidelines requires in-depth coverage of the person in multiple reliable sources that are completely independent of the subject. So for instance, in your case if you could find in-depth reviews of you or your work in newspapers, magazines, reliable websites (not blogs, unless they're affiliated with a newspaper or magazine) or some other media that isn't related to or created by you and has editorial supervision, that would satisfy the requirements. Unfortunately, nothing that you have created yourself - your Twitter feed, your Facebook or Myspace pages, your website - is considered either a reliable or an independent source for Wikipedia's purposes.

Please note that this is a discussion for deletion, not a speedy deletion. I chose this option because this type of discussion takes seven days to grind its way toward completion, so that gives you seven days to find the independent, reliable third-party sources that Wikipedia requires.

Wikipedia also strongly discourages autobiographies: I invite you to read our guidelines on autobiography to find out why.

If you have any questions about whether a source is reliable or not, please feel free to write back on my talk page. Thanks! --NellieBly (talk) 01:59, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or  located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 02:53, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Your reply
As I mentioned above, nobody is contesting the fact that you exist. Wikipedia isn't here to give free advertising to people, so bare existence isn't good enough: you need to make the case that you are notable per our policies. The first two links you provided don't prove notability, and adding them to the article won't increase the chance of the article being kept:


 * http://thenewcollectorsbook.com/2007/07/04/mike-petrakis/ - This is something you wrote yourself. It's neither independent nor in depth.


 * http://www.cyberwit.net/publications/30 - Contains your name and nothing else. This only speaks to your existence. Again, nobody is questioning your existence.

These two are possibly useful, so you may wish to add them to the article:


 * http://www.adgblog.it/2009/05/19/adg-myspace-5000-amici-mike-petrakis-vivid-pop-art/ - blogs are not usually considered notable, but this is the official blog of an art school so there may be some leeway here. And it looks like it could contain some in-depth criticism.


 * http://www.whatsup-corfu.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1348:past-present-petrakis&catid=4&Itemid=2 - this is more of what we're looking for.

I am personally not making the decision here: the decision will be made by Wikipedia editors in general. I invite you to go to the page where the discussion will be taking place (after you add these last two sources) and discuss the matter with them. Again, if you haven't read our rules on autobiographies, I strongly encourage you to do so.

Good luck! --NellieBly (talk) 03:28, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Conflict of interest
Hello Mikepanic. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Mike Petrakis, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about following the reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:


 * Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
 * Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
 * Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam).
 * Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content 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 a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 06:57, 27 December 2011 (UTC)tokyogirl79

Welcome and Happy New Year
Welcome!

Hello, Mikepanic, 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 messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! (Mike, I'm not going to address the question of deleting articles. As you are new, I hope you will read the guidance in the links provided in this message. They will help explain what Wikipedia is all about and your role, as an editor of Wikipedia, applies. Happy New Year!)  --S. Rich (talk) 05:50, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Manual of Style