Spillon

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

File copyright problem with File:NeutraliseIT.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading File:NeutraliseIT.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 file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Istcol (talk) 15:02, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Royal-T a YAA company

A tag has been placed on Royal-T a YAA company requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

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. ttonyb (talk) 04:58, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

October 2009

Please do not remove speedy deletion notices from pages you have created yourself, as you did with Royal-T a YAA company. Please use the {{hangon}} template on the page instead if you disagree with the deletion, and make your case on the page's talk page. Thank you. ttonyb (talk) 05:04, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Royal-T a YAA company, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you. ttonyb (talk) 05:05, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of NeutraliseIT

The article NeutraliseIT has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable product lacking GHit nad GNEWS support. ttonyb (talk) 05:11, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

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. ttonyb (talk) 05:11, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Fargos

A tag has been placed on Fargos, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous 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 guidelines on spam as well as Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information. 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. tedder (talk) 05:18, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:Royalt new small.JPG

Thank you for uploading File:Royalt new small.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 file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 21:30, 17 April 2010 (UTC)