Magirob

Copyright problems with Portsmouth and district magic circle

Hello. Concerning your contribution, Portsmouth and district magic circle, please note that Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images obtained from other web sites or printed material, without the permission of the author(s). This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://www.portsmouthmagic.co.uk/history.php. As a copyright violation, Portsmouth and district magic circle appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Portsmouth and district magic circle has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message.

If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License (CC-BY-SA) then you should do one of the following:

• If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Portsmouth and district magic circle and send an email with the message to permissions-enwikimedia.org. See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
• If a note on the original website states that it is licensed under the CC-BY-SA license, leave a note at Talk:Portsmouth and district magic circle with a link to where we can find that note.
• If you hold the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the CC-BY-SA and GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:Portsmouth and district magic circle.

However, for textual content, you may simply consider rewriting the content in your own words. While contributions are appreciated, Wikipedia must require all contributors to understand and comply with its copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright concerns very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Thank you. 76.248.149.98 (talk) 13:49, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Hello Magirob. If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, 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 you, 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. 76.248.149.98 (talk) 13:49, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

advice

Please be absolutely certain to send the notice indicated: But instead, you may want to consider rewriting the article, for it is highly promotional by our standards:

there are several major problems:

1. A Wikipedia article needs to show notability with references providing substantial coverage from 3rd party independent published reliable sources, print or online, but not blogs or press releases, or material derived from press releases.
2. It also needs to be written like an encyclopedia article, not a press release--don't praise the organization , say what they do. Don't use words of praise or importance--in fact use as few adjectives as possible.
3. Include only material that would be of interest to a general reader coming across the mention of the subject and wanting the sort of information that would be found in an encyclopedia. Do not include material that would be of interest only to those associated with the subject,the history of the organization meetings of the group is too extensive and detailed. Keep in mind that the goal of an encyclopedia is to say things in a concise manner, which is not the style of press releases or web sites, which are usually more expansive.
4. The people listed do not in general have articles in Wikipedia, so a listing of all of them will appear excessive. I am aware of how difficult it is to demonstrate notability for people in this profession: essentially you need either national level awards, substantial published reviews, or multiple published books, or significant references to them in recognized encyclopedias about the subject. If you cannot provide this, at least give some idea of importance , such as years active and whether fully professional. DGG ( talk ) 14:24, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

As a general rule, a suitable page will be best written by someone without Conflict of Interest; it's not impossible to do it properly with a conflict of interest or as a paid press agent, but it's relatively more difficult: you are automatically thinking in terms of what the subject wishes to communicate to the public, but an uninvolved person will think in terms of what the public might wish to know.

If you think you can do it right according to our guidelines, do so, but expect the article to be carefully checked for objectivity.

For further information see our FAQ about business, organizations, and articles like this and also WP:FIRST.

However, if the name you have used includes or refers to the subject of the article, you must choose another username. As explained in WP:USER, only individuals may edit. When you have a username that is or includes the name of your organization, you imply that you are editing officially, and have a superior right to edit the page. But that is not the way WP works--all editors are considered equal--and your contributions like those of any editor must be justified by sources. I'm sure you do not intend to give such impression, but that's why we have the rule. Therefore, please choose another name. On that user page, you should say whom you are working for.