User talk:Joshua A.C. Newman

Welcome!

Hello, Joshua A.C. Newman, 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, like Shock: Social Science Fiction, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for page creation, 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, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

• Your first article
• Biographies of living persons
• How to write a great article
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Help pages
• Tutorial

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 Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Ironholds (talk) 16:06, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article Shock: Social Science Fiction has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

no assertion of notability

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ironholds (talk) 16:06, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm offering to assist in notability cleanup. Vampyrecat (talk) 18:17, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I see that someone added a review as an external link to the article. I'll fix it so it's actually a citation to a reference. That should help with the notability problem, but any other references will also help. Vampyrecat (talk) 18:21, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Joshua A.C. Newman 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 a person or group of people, 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, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Mo ainm~Talk 17:50, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Joshua A.C. Newman, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:

1. editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
2. participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
3. linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. Mo ainm~Talk 17:51, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I am a member of the RPG project on Wikipedia. If you will give me a little assistance I can clean up some of the conflict of interest problems. I don't know who you are and I've never heard of your game before, so I don't have a conflict of interest while editing your game articles under the Wikipedia guidelines. Do you have links to online reviews or reporting on your game? Do you have any printed references? Do you have any mentions in any podcasts? If so, please put them here or on my talk page and I will edit the articles to include them. I may not be able to save your page(s) from speedy deletion, but I can recreate them if they are deleted for conflict of interest if you give me the raw materials. Feel free to dump all the information you have on my talk page or here. Vampyrecat (talk) 18:09, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I should add that I probably won't be able to establish notability for a biography of a living person article for Joshua Newman at this time, but I can help keep the deletionists from getting rid of the game article. Vampyrecat (talk) 18:14, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like the article itself has cleared the minimum standards. I really just started the seed of the article and it looks like a few other people have jumped in to add links. If you want to add more links to reviews, though, there are a good number at this point, though most are about earlier editions. There's this one: [1] this one [2], and this one [3] for instance. There's also the Story Games Codex entry here: [4]. Thanks for your help! (talk) 17:51, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have been working on the game article. I added references to the first three reviews you listed. I added some criticism of the poor editing in the first edition. Since two of the three reviews criticized the poor editing of the earlier versions, I think it is important to include that information in the article to keep the tone neutral. I think the "Shock:" Wikipedia article could use a little more editing and I will work on it more later. If you have references and information about other RPG related topics I would be happy to work on those articles as well. It really helps keep one's article from being deleted if more than one editor works on it, and while I haven't done all that much editing I have a basic understanding of the reference templates that are currently favored. Most of the articles I originally created were flagged for deletion and some were actually deleted rather than being kept or merged into other articles, so I am sympathetic to new editors' hard work suddenly disappearing. I do think the game article will survive since several people jumped in to work on it and since it has a lot of reviews. It's really tough to get a biography of a living person to survive, but you can just put the info on your user page. Don't give up on Wikipedia! Welcome! Vampyrecat (talk) 18:23, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Jonathan Land 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 a band or musician, 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, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for musical topics. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. The Thing // Talk // Contribs 14:00, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Velntina Tereshkova.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, we also need to know the terms of the license that the copyright holder has published the file under, usually done by adding a licensing tag. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged files may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the file will be deleted 48 hours after 17:15, 21 October 2010 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. dave pape (talk) 17:15, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As the tag notes, the image page needs two things - source information, and a copyright tag. The source info should be more descriptive than "a motion picture record"; ideally it should say who created the original image and where/when it was published; at the very least, give as much information as you can regarding where it comes from. The source details are important just like citations for article text - so that readers would (hopefully) be able to verify that the image really is what it says it is.

But the copyright tag is more important. It's not public domain - a Soviet photo or film from 1963 is going to still be under copyright. Finding the copyright owner and getting a free license in this case seems pretty unlikely, so it would need a non-free tag, something like {{Non-free historic image}} or {{Non-free film screenshot}}. Given the historic nature, that's possible, but you'll have to follow the guidelines at WP:NONFREE carefully - include a proper rationale on the image page, and ensure that the image really adds value to the article (i.e. it's not simply decorative - added just for the sake of having a picture). --dave pape (talk) 03:14, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]