User talk:Pablobanos

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for helping us build a great free encyclopedia. We have five basic principles, but other than that, we advise that you be bold and edit. If you ever have any questions or need help, feel free to leave a message at the help desk, and other Wikipedia editors will be happy to assist you.
 * Welcome!

Thanks again and congratulations on becoming a Wikipedian!

P.S. New discussion threads for you will appear at the bottom of this page.

Fundación Avina
This is an automated message from MadmanBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Fundación Avina, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.informeavina2010.org/english/que-hacemos.shtml.

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.) MadmanBot (talk) 14:54, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Fundación Avina


A tag has been placed on Fundación Avina, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, 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 from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Ghorpaapi (talk) 14:55, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Please do not remove speedy deletion notices from pages you have created yourself, as you did with Fundación Avina. If you believe the page should not be deleted, you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Click here to contest this speedy deletion, which appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the article's talk page. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Thank you. JamesBWatson (talk) 00:26, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Fundación Avina
I am sorry that I have not had time to make a proper reply today - I will get to it tomorrow, definitely! JohnCD (talk) 22:27, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Advice
The article was deleted as a result of a deletion discussion at Articles for deletion/AVINA Foundation. That means that before it can be reinstated you must either convince me, as the administrator who closed that discussion, the the problems identified have been overcome, or failing that appeal at WP:Deletion review.

I have undeleted the article and moved it into your user space at User:Pablobanos/Fundación Avina where you can work on it. Read WP:Your first article for general advice. You will see that the two issues that concerned contributors to the deletion debate were notability and promotion.

Notability: Wikipedia is selective about subjects for articles. The criterion used is called Notability, and 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 not connected with the subject thought it significant enough to write substantial comment about?

That has the advantage of being a more objective test than "Do we think it's important?" and also of ensuring that there are independent sources for the article. It is quite a tough test, and many worthy organizations, especially new ones, cannot pass it. That is not at all to their discredit, but it means they are not suitable subjects for a global encyclopedia. The test applies to non-commercial organizations and "good causes", too - we have an explanatory essay entitled Wikipedia is not here to tell the world about your noble cause.

We have a principle WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS that we do not normally accept arguments that "you have that other article so you should have this one", but since you mentioned the article Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation you will see that its reference list leaves no doubt about notability. Think hard about notability. See WP:Notability (summary) for what it means. If you cannot find independent sources to establish it, you will be wasting your time and effort.

Promotion: Wikipedia does not make it clear enough to new users that it is not a place for people or organizations to "tell the world" about themselves. As a result, people constantly try to use it that way, and it has become extremely resistant to anything of the kind. One reason why we discourage people from writing about anything they are close to is that editors with a conflict of interest, with the best intentions, write the story the organizations wants to tell, not what a general reader might want to know. I am sure you did not think you were writing promotionally, but you will see that the contributors to the deletion debate thought you were.

When writing, make a strong effort to think of yourself, not as writing for the organization, but as writing for Wikipedia about the organization, from outside. Bear in mind the WP:Verifiability policy: "any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source", and when writing any glowing adjective, or indeed any claim, imagine a hostile critic saying "Who says? Can you prove that?" Don't talk about the organization's intentions and hopes for the future, or list worthy aims from its mission statement, but about what it has achieved. No opinions, only facts, neutrally stated and cited to reliable sources, preferably independent ones. Write in your own words, without copying from the website.

A good approach to writing an article that would remove any doubts about notability is recommended by an experienced editor at User:Uncle G/On notability: "When writing about subjects that are close to you, don't use your own personal knowledge of the subject, and don't cite yourself, your web site, or the subject's web site. Instead, use what is written about the subject by other people, independently, as your sources. Cite those sources in your very first edit. If you don't have such sources, don't write."

By now you are thinking "This is much harder than I thought, all I wanted to do was tell the world about this good cause!" I have gone into all this at length not because I wish to discourage you, but to help you understand what is involved, and to avoid the common situation where a new contributor expends a lot of time, energy and emotion on what was always a hopeless cause. If Wikipedia is a more valuable resource than Myspace or Facebook, it is only because we have standards and rules on notability, verifiability and conflict of interest.

Regards, JohnCD (talk) 22:10, 9 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you John for the information. I'll follow this advice to rebuild the article. Regards

Comment on your revisions
Those sources are helpful, but would be better actually built into the article as references. I suggest you scrap the "Avina offers services that... " list, which sounds very like the organization telling the world about itself (and is probably why people at the deletion debate thought the article was promotional) and instead have a "Recent Avina activities include" list with brief mentions of the activities those references are about, using the links as references. Any organization can have a list of lofty aims, actual achievements is what count. JohnCD (talk) 21:39, 20 August 2013 (UTC) John, thanks again for you help, I'll follow your advices. Regards--201.212.253.83 (talk) 14:45, 21 August 2013 (UTC) John, I've made the changes you suggested an I've add relevant information. I want to know if you consider I can submit the article again. Thank you for your help. RegardsPablobanos (talk) 14:22, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Your submission at AfC Fundación Avina was accepted
 Fundación Avina, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article. You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. . Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia! Dominicskywalker (talk) 21:29, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
 * If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
 * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Thank you for the information. I'll do my best to improve the article. regardsPablobanos (talk) 12:04, 17 October 2013 (UTC)