User talk:Murad1985

Proposed deletion of Pheromone (short film)


The article Pheromone (short film) has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * No evidence of notability for a future film. WP:CRYSTAL applies.

While all constructive 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. —Largo Plazo (talk) 22:39, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Largo, thanks for timely response. I am a little bit new to page creations and such so I'd appreciate if you'd be patient with me. Since you are calling WP:CRYSTAL rule I looked into it and I have a question: What would be a good solution for this? This page is about an upcoming film, that is supposed to be released in near future. As far as everyone can see Wiki has a lot of upcoming film mentioned. So what is different about them that is not applicable in this case. Would an official website reference be enough? Or you suggest something else? --Murad1985 (talk) 00:24, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi. I mentioned WP:CRYSTAL preemptively more than anything else, since sometimes a response to a deletion proposal for an event that hasn't occurred yet or a work that hasn't been released yet is an assurance that it will meet the notability requirements once it goes live. Future films will qualify for inclusion here if release is pretty certain and there is significant coverage of them even before release, which is the case for, say, future films from Steven Spielberg. —Largo Plazo (talk) 03:29, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

January 2014
Hello, Murad1985. 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 Pheromone (short film), 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 ensuring their edits are verified by 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. —Largo Plazo (talk) 22:40, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I do agree with the point that I have affiliation to the subject page. As you may see the way I put the article, there is no point of view in it. It is merely an informative page about the short film. There is no spam and no product advertisement, as well as no competitor dismissal advocacy. I tried to comply extensively with Wikipedia content guidelines and if I haven't I'd like to ask you what suggestions you might give to improve this situation and I'd be more than happy to fix this. Thanks! --Murad1985 (talk) 00:24, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
 * You or someone else would have to identify instances of the sort of coverage in independent reliable sources that would qualify the film under the notability requirements. See, more specifically, guidelines applicable to films. —Largo Plazo (talk) 03:32, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Report Card (film)


The article Report Card (film) has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * No evidence of satisfying Wikipedia's notability guidelines. (Sourced to IMDb, Facebook, Youtube, and a forum.)

While all constructive 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. JamesBWatson (talk) 10:43, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Report Card (film).jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Report Card (film).jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Senator2029 “Talk” 05:43, 4 April 2016 (UTC)