Linhmartin
|
–The Obento Musubi (Contributions) 05:06, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
Welcome
editI hope you read the links provided above. Your page, Overseas Telecommunications Veterans Association, is written unencyclopedically. If I can help you editing Wikipedia, I'd be glad to. I just recommend that you write more encyclopedically, and stick with editing regular pages before creating your own pages. — Cuyler91093 - Соитяівцтіоиѕ 07:54, 1 February 2008 (UTC) Thanks Cuyler, but this new OTVA page was created at the behest of the organisation's executive committee and is in my recognised area of expertise as a former corporate communication manager with OTC. I don't plan to edit any pages outside my area of expertise. Linhmartin (talk) 07:59, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
- I'm sorry for the speedy deletion. The thing I have a problem with is that the page is written very unencyclopedically. If you need my help with making it more encyclopedic, then just let me know (I'd appreciate it if you left messages on my talk page instead of here, then I'll respond here). I think you should introduce yourself with the topics of Wikipedia before you make many more edits, and I'll be more than happy to help you get started to Wikipedia. — Cuyler91093 - Соитяівцтіоиѕ 08:08, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks Cuyler but I have no idea how to find your talk page or what your criteria is for "encyclopedic" writing - I was simply responding to a request from the OTVA to recognise their existence, objectives and links to Australia's former international telecommunications carrier OTC via Wikipedia (I also edited the entry for OTC: Overseas Telecommunications Commission, so please let me know if that will be speedily deleted as well). In the meantime, I'll let the OTVA committee know the item has been rejected as "blatant advertising" (although I'd urge you to click the link to their website in order to satisfy yourself that it's a non-commercial and extremely credible organisation that is of some significant importance to historians and researchers).Linhmartin (talk) 08:18, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
- I'm sorry for all of the confusion I may have caused. The grammar and spelling look fine, but the reason why I put "copyedit" on there is because it doesn't use headers properly, and it doesn't use bullets properly. I will do that for you. Regarding the "wikify" template, it's because it doesn't link to any other Wikipedia pages, which is strongly urged by the community. — Cuyler91093 - Соитяівцтіоиѕ 18:36, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
- Yes. I will do further edits. By the way, I was not the one who put the notability tag on (at least I don't think so). Let me check the history after I remove the Wikify tag. One sec! — Cuyler91093 - Соитяівцтіоиѕ 06:15, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
- If you want to discuss the notability issues, then you should talk with User:Nick Dowling. Cheers! — Cuyler91093 - Соитяівцтіоиѕ 06:20, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
February 2008
edit
A tag has been placed on Overseas Telecommunications Veterans Association, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.
If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add
{{hangon}} on the top of the article and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. — Cuyler91093 - Соитяівцтіоиѕ 08:04, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
OTVA (continued)
editThere is now only one problem I have with the article, and it shouldn't be too hard to fix. Just turn the "Highlights from OTVA’s history" section into a paragraph and prose form. It seems a bit unencyclopedic to have those things. Just fix that, and it should be fine. — Cuyler91093 - Соитяівцтіоиѕ 06:31, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
- Also, perhaps it would help if you merged that content into the main article. Whatever you seems best shall be fine, though. — Cuyler91093 - Соитяівцтіоиѕ 06:33, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
Sorry for posting so much; your message was very long and I want to address all of the issues I can. The reason why your citations were deleted was because your citations were also not properly formatted. Don't worry; I know what it's like to be a new user. When I was new, my images kept getting deleted, but I didn't know why. But I shall help you, nonetheless! When you do references, you include tags called ref tags (they look like: <ref>{{cite}}</ref>) with a {{cite}} template. You should see the cite link for more details. What happens is you put the ref tags on the page where you got the information from (a lot like footnotes), and you put the {{cite}} template inside it, filling in the information given. If you need more help regarding this, feel free to drop a note on my talk page. Cheers again! — Cuyler91093 - Соитяівцтіоиѕ 06:36, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
The answer is "yes". You may tell them that this is done and ready to go. I mean, it's Wikipedia. Once it's started, people can edit it and make it better. If you want to make this even better, then feel free to ask me questions. I hope I'm of a bit of help to you. — Cuyler91093 - Соитяівцтіоиѕ 06:48, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
- By the way, what exactly is the veterans association? Is it an association of veterans of OTC and AOTC? — Cuyler91093 - Соитяівцтіоиѕ 06:51, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
Hey again, it sounds like you have good information. Regarding the reference tags, it's fine if it doesn't link to Wikipedia. That's what the cite tags are all about. If it's part of the archives, then you are free to put that as well, even if it's not third party. Heck, on The Carpenters, I must've put about ten sources regarding their official website. Regarding the highlights section, I think that if we add even more information and separate it into sections or paragraphs, it will look really nice. However, baby steps first, right? I just want to say that I'm glad that I could help you. I'm always happy to help a fellow Wikipedian! — Cuyler91093 - Соитяівцтіоиѕ 20:33, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
Re: OTVA
editHi, None of those sources (the staff newsletter, annual reports and organisation's archives) seem to be independent of this organisation. I'd suggest that you have a look at the policies WP:N and WP:V and see if you can find some independent sources. You may also wish to review WP:COI if you're closely linked with the organisation. Regards, --Nick Dowling (talk) 08:37, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
- If I'm wrong and you're confident that the references are sufficient to meet the requirements at Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) simply remove the tag I added to the top of the article. I'm not fussed either way. That said, it would be better if you could reference some books or news reports about this association as staff magazines aren't considered great sources (as they're not independent or nesessarily written to professional standards). Nick Dowling (talk) 09:50, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
- All you need to do to remove the tag is to edit the article and remove the {{Notability|date=February 2008}} bit. Nick Dowling (talk) 08:15, 2 August 2008 (UTC)