User talk:Timelord2067

Moreton Bay Morris

Hi. Good to hear from you. There are two hurdles a new article may need to clear in Wikipedia.

Speedy deletion
Deletion

Articles are nominated for "speedy" for a variety of reasons, but I'll focus on one, the only one relevant here. It's known as A7 (nice, friendly title, eh?) and you can find it in full at Wikipedia:CSD_A7#A7. Summarising, to pass A7, you need to make a "claim of notability", ie why is it that they should be in an encyclopedia? That they exist/existed is not relevant - my pet fish exist, but shouldn't be an encyclopedia. What's their claim to fame? What makes them interesting/unusual/special/noteworthy/or best of all: newsworthy? Did they win some notable competitions? Did they get thrown out of something for breaching rules?

Without a notability claim (and I couldn't see one on first glance - it's worth making sure it's right at the very top, so no-one can miss it!) it will be speedy deleted by an admin.

Even with a notability claim, the article may still be deleted, but it would require a deletion debate. To pass one of those, you'll need to demonstrate that it's notable. This is decided by looking at whether it's been the subject of multiple, non-trivial references in reliable sources. Have a look at some of those links.

This is not easy, and it's certainly not easy for a newbie. I'll be happy to help you, if you think it's achievable. --Dweller (talk) 11:07, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NB Starting in your userspace was a good idea. Can I suggest you might find it easier to do so on subpages, rather than your talk? Try this User:Timelord2067/sandbox. As you spend more time here, this talk page will be very important to you and you won't want the it cluttered. --Dweller (talk) 11:20, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I really agree with what Dweller about it the Notability needs to be clear to everyone not to only a few who could see it is. but yeah working in a sandbox might be best right now then you think it ready to be on here try to put it.

One more thing in my mind (which i might be right or might not be right about?) it does not matter how long a article is but if it haves the Notability to say on here hopes thats helps.Oo7565 (talk) 20:19, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just the slightest bit confused... Is User:Timelord2067/sandbox where I put the above articles? - I have made some examples on that page. Also, in your above reply (User:Dweller) you started a page User:Timelord2067/Maree_Sole for me, if I started a page User:Timelord2067/Moreton_Bay_Morris does this then get er, "monitored" for frequency of use? Thanks for both replys, --Timelord2067 (talk) 19:53, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

yeah you can/should put the article in the sandbox now. how i understand sandbox is it your's to do what you want and only you or people you give access to the sandbox to look it at. one more thing i might be wrong but you may have on your user page tell people you have a sandbox. i am pretty sure it not monitored so you can on it as long as you want to.

hope this helps youOo7565 (talk) 20:13, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Either works fine. The "rules" regarding what's known as userspace are looser than in "mainspace" (ie in the encyclopedia itself), however, there are rules. Basically, you can't use it as a blog, or free server space. It's supposed to be for stuff that'll end up in the encyclopedia. So feel free to work on material there to bring it up to scratch, but if people think it's been dumped there and it looks like it won't be improved to a state where it would be includable in mainspace, it'll get nominated for deletion. There's a page I can link to about it, if I can remember the dang acronym. Try Wikipedia:USERPAGES. --Dweller (talk) 20:23, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Found it. Wikipedia:Subpages#Disallowed_uses --Dweller (talk) 20:26, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, this should help explain the rather confusing situation whereby I rescued Maree Sole from deletion for you, put it in your userspace and then (it must have appeared to you) bizarrely nominated it for deletion 2 months later. --Dweller (talk) 10:02, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of New zealand in 2020 for deletion

A discussion has begun about whether the article New zealand in 2020, which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/New zealand in 2020 until a concensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WikiProject Japan! 08:16, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Moreton Bay Morris for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Moreton Bay Morris is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Moreton Bay Morris until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Raymie (t • c) 03:43, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Timelord2067 (talk) 02:28, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]