User talk:Spillon

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Westside Church

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Westside Church, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}. Mattinbgn\ talk 09:52, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't get back to you earlier, I meant to get back to you later on that day but I got a little distracted.
You asked "Are you saying that a church must be popular enough to have secondary source information to be included in a wiki??" The answer (for Wikipedia at least) is clearly yes. See Wikipedia's guidelines on notability, in particular the primary guideline "A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." If a church (or football club or school etc.) does not meet that standard it is unlikely to avoid being deleted from Wikipedia.
Your argument about Westside Baptist Church is not a good one. Lots of articles don't meet Wikipedia guidelines; that doesn't mean we need to keep adding to that list. See this essay for discussion on why that argument is not generally accepted by the Wikipedia community in deletion discussions.
If you want to save the article, I would look for independent sources that assert the notability of the church. Regardless of whether the article is kept or not, I would encourage you to stick around. Part of the fun of Wikipedia is finding sources to include with new articles. Cheers, Mattinbgn\ talk 11:07, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
No, sorry. Sources asserting notability need to be independent of the subject. See here for some of the reasons why Wikipedia insists on having independent reliable secondary sources. Cheers, Mattinbgn\ talk 11:24, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
It's not a great source, but it is a start. The source should also state why the subject is notable. The source can either be included a footnote or as an external link. See Wikipedia:External links and Wikipedia:Footnotes for help with this. Note, if you think the article should be kept, you can remove the tag (called a PROD tag) from the article. If you do that, then if someone wishes to delete the article, it would then go to Articles for deletion where the community decides if it should be kept or not and you get a chance to have your say. Cheers, Mattinbgn\ talk 11:38, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome

Hello Spillon, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, they have helped improve Wikipedia and make it more informative. I hope you enjoy using Wikipedia and decide to make additional contributions. Some resources to help new Wikipedians include:

How to edit a page
Editing tutorial
Picture tutorial
How to write a great article
Naming conventions
Manual of Style

As a contributor to Australian articles, you may like to connect with other Australian Wikipedians through the Australian Wikipedians' notice board and take a look at the activities in Wikipedia:WikiProject Australia and associated sub-projects.

Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ~~~~; this will automatically produce your name and the date.

If you have any questions, please see Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, try the Wikipedia:Help desk, or ask me on my talk page. Or you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Thank you for signing up!

Mattinbgn\ talk 11:07, 14 October 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:WestSide Church Logo.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:WestSide Church Logo.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 01:52, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Westside Church AfD

Your page was nominated for deletion because another editor felt that it did not meet the notability criteria. You can find out more about the deletion process by visiting this helpful page. To answer your second question, your AfD must be closed by an administrator, who will decide if the page should be deleted. This will happen about five days after the nomination. If you would like to improve the article, you probably should add more references and provide information about why the church is significant. In my opinion, however, I do not believe that the subject is notable enough to justify an article about it. — Wenli (reply here) 01:16, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

If you want the article to survive AfD, it has to state why it is "notable" or "significant", and provide third party sources that are reliable that support that claim. jonathon 12:07, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:WestSide Church Logo.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:WestSide Church Logo.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 13:33, 28 October 2007 (UTC)