User talk:PureProvidence

Welcome
Thanks for expanding John F. MacArthur. A page number would be perfect. Thanks and welcome to Wikipedia. Jesanj (talk) 19:58, 6 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the review! I am still trying to figure out how to use this thing!RobF[[Special:Contributions/75.173.197.171|75.173.197.171 (talk) 22:47, 6 May 2012 (UTC)


 * You're welcome! There are plenty of people here willing to help you learn. I'll leave some links for you. Jesanj (talk) 00:15, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

I just submitted my first article to Wikipedia. I feel ill at easy because it is the bio of a person, which, as I read is subject to extra examination. I tried to use caution, write it from a Neutral Point Of View and quote reliable source. I just request that if I have mistakenly did something wrong that it not be rejected outright, but I be given a chance to correct it. Would you look at it for me or some else that check out these edits, and give me some suggestions? You have been very kind to review my edit with John MacArthur. Thank you again for your kindness!

User:PureProvidence|RobF75.173.197.171 (talk) 00:48, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Sure. I understand your concern. I can do it in a few hours how does that sound? A link would help but I can probably find it myself just fine (from looking at your edit history). The hurdle is Notability (people). So it totally depends on the person, and what they are known for. Also, to sign your posts, while you are logged in, you can type ~ . Happy editing! Jesanj (talk) 00:51, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Welcome!
Hello PureProvidence, welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Our intro page contains a lot of helpful material for new users—please check it out! If you need help, visit Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place   on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Jesanj (talk) 00:15, 7 May 2012 (UTC) That is great.

He is the link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell_Kelly

There is no rush because I am going to bed in an hour. Is this how I should sign my posts, or do I specify my name? I am still confused and not exactly sure. With the name PureProvidence and would I sign it: ~  or PureProvidence~

~ This is the Basic criteria for Wikipedia notability:

A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has been the subject of multiple published[3] secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent of each other,[4] and independent of the subject.[5]

I have 7 secondary sources that are reliable, and intellectually independent of each other, including:

CBS Sunday Morning show, strong evidence that he was a major contributer to an article in the Wall Street Journal (he announced in a Yahoo internet forum about the article ahead of time, and the announcement was stamped with the date of the announcement before the article was published),

Revelation TV in the United Kingdom broadcast through satellite thoughout the United Kingdom, Charisma Magazine online, Christianity Today magazine, WAVA-FM in Washington, D C and the St. Petersburg Times. I am hoping this is sufficient.

PureProvidence~ ~
 * Awesome. You followed my instructions too well! You weren't supposed to type out the nowiki things. =) You'll get it. So, I took a look. I have some good news and some bad news. The good news is he might be notable according to Wiki world. I'm not convinced. One way I establish notability in a situation like this is with WP:CREATIVE #3. I did this at Jonathan Oberlander, for example. The tip is this: try to cite the fact he's an author to scholarly/serious book reviews. I also did this at Adam Berinsky and Robert Martensen. So I can't guarantee the guy is notable. The bad news is this: some of what's there doesn't really belong in an encyclopedia. And it's not quite neutral. There's a bit of puffery. I removed some of it. Anyhow. Let me know if you have any further questions. Jesanj (talk) 03:31, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! I an not surprised by the need to remove some of it because it was too puffy. I have already filtered out the source material to reduce puffiness, and I an not surprised that I missed some of it.

I don't have time for the next 12 hours to work on this because I have to go to work. I am confused by what you said, but I will take what time I have and study WP:CREATIVE #3, Adam Berinsky and Robert Martensen

Thanks again for your help. You are a lifeline!! RobF PureProvidencePureProvidence (talk) 11:18, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:51, 24 November 2015 (UTC)