User talk:Milesco

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:
 * Welcome!
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style


 * Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:
 * Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
 * Maintain a neutral point of view – this is possibly the most important Wikipedia policy.
 * Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page to follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons' policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
 * No edit warring and sock puppetry.
 * If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to [ do so].
 * Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject. Deliberately adding such content or otherwise editing articles maliciously is considered vandalism; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome!

Tetsudo
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Tetsudo, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.tetsudo.co.uk/Level-One-Pages/What-is-Tetsudo.htm.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 21:02, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Tetsudo


A tag has been placed on Tetsudo requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.) or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, 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. JDDJS (talk) 21:02, 6 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Consensus was previously established at WP:Articles for deletion/Tetsudo that there should not be an article about the martial art. If you disagree, please explain, here on your talk page, what has changed in the status of the art. Please provide independent reliable sources to back up the assertion. —C.Fred (talk) 21:15, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Re: Tetsudo article
In response to your message on my talk page:


 * There is no copyright issue here as I am an official of the Tetsudo Association, and the author of the website www.tetsudo.co.uk, identified as carrying the material, and so, I am simply contributing my own material here, as well as there.

Just to clarify, that means that the material that you uploaded here may be re-used by anyone, for any purpose, including commercial re-use, since you have released it under the Creative Commons license.

As an official of the Tetsudo Association, that also means you have a conflict of interest with the subject. That does not forbid you from editing articles about Tetsudo, but it does place a strict burden on you to make sure that all edits are written from a neutral point of view. While the tone was not overtly promotional, there were elements lacking in the article: general history, comparison to other martial arts forms, criticism/commentary from general authorities in the martial arts, etc.


 * There was also a comment about a consensus not to carry information about Tetsudo. … [P]eople looking for information about it are entitled to make an enquiry on Wikipedia and find an article there giving brief but sufficient information.

When discussion was held in March 2010, the consensus of editors was that it was not a notable martial art. It did not meet the specific guidelines (follow the link) for a martial art to be sufficiently notable to have an article. It was also noted that no independent reliable sources were cited. The general notability guideline is that a subject that has received substantial coverage in independent reliable sources is notable. The opposite holds: a subject that has not been shown to have received any coverage in independent reliable sources is presumed to not be notable. With no independent sources cited (only the official website, which is by definition not independent), the subject is presumed to not be notable.

There is a further hurdle: because of that earlier discussion, any new article must be shown to have sufficiently improved on the prior one that it is not a reposting of the old article. Reposting material previously deleted via a discussion is a criterion for speedy deletion.


 * Just to prove my credentials…

Your credentials are not necessary to the general editing staff of Wikipedia. If the text from the website were acceptable content to start an article, then you would need to email the volunteer response team to confirm your donation of the material. However, in this case, the article would still be subject to deletion, even if an "OTRS ticket" were granted to prove that you've freely given away the text. —C.Fred (talk) 22:07, 6 April 2011 (UTC)