User talk:P.fronek

Welcome!
Hello, P.fronek, 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 may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may soon be deleted.

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! red dog six (talk) 08:49, 7 August 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

Speedy deletion nomination of Podsocs


A tag has been placed on Podsocs 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 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 the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent 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. red dog six (talk) 08:49, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Question for administrator
 ok - thank you to both

--P.fronek (talk) 04:53, 8 August 2012 (UTC) I cannot work out this system - my entry Podsocs has been deleted. it is verifiable, does not violate any conditions and is suitable for wikipedia - can a reviewer please contact me to help - thank you
 * It was deleted partly on the basis of section g11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, that is, as blatant advertising, and indeed, it read as what one would expect to find on a website of an organization lauding themselves but not what one would expect of an encyclopedia entry. Not as blatant as some but still quite full of ad-speak. Please note that blatant advertising is not limited to commercial companies at all. See Wikipedia is not here to tell the world about your noble cause. You would need to rewrite this in an encylcopedic tone with neutral facts and get rid of the puffery. The references need a lot of work too. You had a list of references but it was completely unclear what they verified or whether they might show any notability because there were no inline citations. Please see Referencing for beginners--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 06:35, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I concur with what Fuhghettaboutit said; I would also like to stress his point about Notability, which is Wikipedia's admission criterion, and is is not a matter of opinion but has to be demonstrated by references showing "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." Significant means more than just listing-type mentions; reliable excludes Myspace, Facebook, blogs, places where anyone can post anything; independent excludes the subject's own website, affiliated ones and anything based on press releases. The test is, have people independent of the subject thought it significant enough to write substantial comment about?


 * Since your podcast was launched less than two weeks ago, it is unlikely that it has yet attracted the independent comment needed to establish notability. None of the references you give are the substantial independent comment about PODSOCS which would be required - see WP:42.


 * I suspect that you are thinking of Wikipedia as a notice-board which you can use to publicise your new podcast, but that is not the role of an encyclopedia, and Wikipedia is extremely resistant to being used for promotion of any kind, even of worthy causes. I have conversations like this so often that I have written User:JohnCD/Not a noticeboard to explain the issues.


 * Wait until PODSOCS is established and has attracted independent coverage. Even then, it would be best to leave it to someone uninvolved to write about it. JohnCD (talk) 09:10, 8 August 2012 (UTC)