User talk:Spinninglotus

Why did you delete the magazine listing? Wikipedia archives hundreds of magazines in this Wikipedia archive here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Monthly_magazines

Frank, when re-writing the contributed listing, should I follow the model that MovieMaker magazine uses? I believe that is blatant advertising, whether you've heard of the magazine or not. Please tell me why you haven't deleted MovieMaker magazine? I am a magazine lover, and while I love this magazine, I am just trying to prove my point that the deletion process here in inconsistent. I see tons of advertisements and plugs for people, software, companies, and products in Wikipedia. Thanks for answering all of my questions. Please address the question here about MovieMaker magazine, because this will help me know whether to continue trying to contribute for free or not. confused keys

How about Optimize Magazine? Does that fit your guidelines? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optimize_(magazine)Spinninglotus (talk) 21:43, 26 October 2008 (UTC)confused keys

AfD nomination of StudentFilmmakers Magazine
I have nominated StudentFilmmakers Magazine, an article you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/StudentFilmmakers Magazine. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. KurtRaschke (talk) 04:37, 25 October 2008 (UTC) KurtRaschke (talk) 04:37, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 20:28, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Comunication
Please use talk pages to communicate with other editors. Although I do have email enabled on my account, it is for communication which for some reason needs to be private. Your concerns regarding article deletion are not private; I will answer them here on your talk page. Thanks! Frank |  talk  20:45, 26 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Frank, when re-writing the contributed listing, should I follow the model that MovieMaker magazine uses? I believe that is blatant advertising, whether you've heard of the magazine or not. Please tell me why you haven't deleted MovieMaker magazine? I am a magazine lover, and while I love this magazine, I am just trying to prove my point that the deletion process here in inconsistent. I see tons of advertisements and plugs for people, software, companies, and products in Wikipedia. Thanks for answering all of my questions. Please address the question here about MovieMaker magazine, because this will help me know whether to continue trying to contribute for free or not. confused keys


 * MovieMaker Magazine appears notable; there are plenty of hits in the Google News archive. I do not spend my time trolling around Wikipedia looking for articles to delete. As far as I know, most administrators don't. We do check the Category:Candidates for speedy deletion page to see which pages other editors have put tags on for deletion. Frank  |  talk  22:53, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

How about Optimize Magazine? Does that fit your guidelines? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optimize_(magazine) Spinninglotus (talk) 23:07, 26 October 2008 (UTC)confused keys


 * I answered this question on my talk page, where you first asked it. Frank  |  talk  23:10, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Deletion Concerns
In response to your four emails to me regarding deletion of the article you created, please consider the following:


 * Articles are not deleted on Wikipedia just because someone feels like it. Deletion occurs because something does not meet community standards for inclusion. There are quite a number of reasons articles can be deleted, including speedy deletion, which has many sub-categores, proposed deletion, and articles for deletion, commonly referred to as AfD. It is true that only administrators are able to delete articles, but administrators are entrusted by the community to implement standards, not personal whim.
 * The majority of the magazines you listed in your longest email to me are so clearly notable that I do not have to even look at their articles to know this: Rolling Stone, Seventeen, People, Vogue, Mademoiselle, and Sports Illustrated have been a part of American pop culture as long as I can remember, and while I'm not as old as dirt, I'm old enough to be the parent of four kids, one of whom is in college. While simply having heard of something does not make it notable, these titles are so overwhelmingly a part of society that it would be a simple matter to establish notability if for some reason these articles did not exist.
 * The article you created was about a magazine that does not currently appear to have any notability. Note that I used the words "appear" and "currently". I am human, and I do make mistakes. If this magazine truly IS notable, then we can get some references to show that notability. I did, however, do a search before deleting the article and could not find any evidence of notability shown in reliable, third-party sources.
 * The initial decision to delete ultimately rests with a single editor; in this case it was me, but it could have been any of the over 1600 administrators of the project. We typically are implementing community consensus. I have deleted a bit more than 1000 articles from Wikipedia, and before I was an administrator, I recommended hundreds more for deletion that were deleted by admins. I haven't generated much controversy with these actions, so I am fairly certain I am correctly implementing consensus in the vast majority of cases.
 * The main concerns for inclusion are notability and verifiability. In addition, in this case, it may be that WP:CORP applies, because the magazine in question seems to be promoting a particular group. That is not to say that it can't be in the encyclopedia. Keep in mind, however, that notability must be established, and it must be from verifiable, reliable, independent sources. I encourage you to read through those guidelines to see why Playboy is obviously notable, while the magazine you created an article for doesn't yet appear to be so.

Please feel free to ask any questions, or to consult with other editors. Note that your article did have a short AfD discussion, in which the consensus was quickly reached that it was an advertising article and should be deleted. Also, it was nominated for deletion by a different editor. So hopefully you can see that this was not a unilateral decision, and it was absolutely in no way a personal action; we are all about content around here.

Finally, if you disagree with the deletion of an article, there is a process to follow for that as well: it's called deletion review, and you are welcome to go to that forum. You have already contacted me, and I have already indicated why the article was deleted, so that would be an appropriate next step if you wish. Feel free to continue to engage me with questions before doing that; I'm not sending you elsewhere, just letting you know there are other steps to be taken if you really feel things aren't being done correctly.

Hope this all helps; let me know if I can explain anything further. Frank |  talk  21:12, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

How about this magazine: Swank (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swank). I'm an honest person wanting to be an honest contributor, and here are the porn guys getting away with their listing, (as they always do, spamming the world and Wikipedia). Does Swank magazine fit Wikipedia guidelines, and is it newsworthy for real? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swank confused keys