User talk:Eviladam
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Welcome
Welcome!
Hello, Eviladam, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
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 need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Friday (talk) 19:55, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Evil Adam
BTW, don't feel bad if Evil Adam gets deleted. You've got a couple things working against you here: 1) Based on your username, people are going to say you're making the article in an attempt at self-promotion, and 2) lack of sources. I notice all music guide doesn't know anything about this band, that's usually a bad sign for an American band. If the band has any albums on a major label (or, indeed, any albums at all) you should probably list them. The soundtrack stuff is better than nothing, but I doubt it's enough for the article to survive a deletion discussion. Hope this helps. Friday (talk) 19:59, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
They act on these things too fast, I've been trying to update so many different aspects of it all piece by piece, but they rush to try to delete something even though barely any information is up there yet. They should give things at least a day or 2 to be populated before they try to delete something. It's maddening, as I try to update this while I'm trying to do work at my job as well! Nth Man 21:35, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
Yah, I agree. Even tho I prodded it, I wouldn't have rushed off to WP:AFD yet. Afd generally runs about 5 days, though, and if the article improves in that time, the person closing the discussion should take that into account. Anyway, sorry your introduction to editing Wikipedia turned out stressful for you. Also- I wouldn't spread the articles out too thin if I were you- for example, if the claim to fame of René Rosa is the band, he shouldn't have his own article, he should just be mentioned in the main band article. Otherwise people will see it as even more of an attempt at self-promotion. Friday (talk) 21:42, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
Ok, well obviously I'm brand new to this, and this system is a bit complext to get started with, so I thank you for your time looking these things over. Is there a way to make the names refer to the other pages and what not and NOT have them as separate articles, since different people will be cross reference over time with different things? ex (Rene Rosa is in evil adam, does work for the national entertainments collectible association, is a published writer with works that will be added to the wikipedia, and also contributes to horrorhound magazine which would be added to the wikipedia eventually as well) Nth Man 21:47, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
- I would check out WP:BIO for the guideline of inclusion of biographies. Even if someone's a published writer, that's pretty far from meeting the guidelines. The general rule of thumb I use is, say someone writes for a certain magazine. Do we have an article on that magazine? If not, make that first- don't make an article on the individual writers. The magazine is going to be more significant and more verifiable than an individual writer- a magazine generally has many many writers. I've been employed by organizations that have Wikipedia articles, but I don't add mention of myself to those articles or make an article about myself. Basically, people don't tend to look kindly on people writing articles about themselves. We need verifiability and neutral point of view, and those are tricky when writing about yourself. As for making an article with two names, check out what I did to René Rosa - that's what you were asking about, I believe. Friday (talk) 21:58, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
- I understand what you are saying =) I'm going to try to update as much information as possible to get everything accurate, including sources and find publications and online reviews and what not. In the meantime, I was wondering what would separate Evil Adam from a band such as Divinity Destroyed, as they have not been marked for deletion or anything of the such and are comporable minus the fact that they have not been featured on soundtracks and such. The article has sparse information beyond a full listing of the names of the songs they have, Thanks! Nth Man 22:56, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
- From the looks of Divinity Destroyed, there's nothing to indicate that it meets WP:MUSIC guidelines- I wouldn't be surprised if someone came along and nominated it for deletion. I generally check allmusic.com to see if there's a bio before suggesting a deletion, being listed there is usually an indication that the band had gotten real media coverage. The reason people care about band articles is that we get a TON of kids in here writing about their garage band. It seems clear to me that Evil Adam is pretty far from a garage band. Whether they strictly qualify under the music guideline I don't know, but they look to me like they're reasonably in the right ballpark. I don't imagine they hand out CBGB bookings to too many garage bands. Anyway, the other thing to remember is that Wikipedia isn't consistant, so sometimes one band article will be kept while another similiar one gets deleted. Not much we can do about that, it's just how it goes. Friday (talk) 23:10, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
- Gotcha, so some things just fall through the radar I guess. Updated a lot of stuff that makes this all more concentric. Trying to get as much info in everything as possible, so much work goes into these things, I wish some of the sites and things that used to have lots of info up for these various subjects were still up, or not purchased and changed over time. Thankfully the "internet archive" is a good place to look for things when other sites have expired. How do you think things are looking now? Nth Man 19:04, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
- From the looks of Divinity Destroyed, there's nothing to indicate that it meets WP:MUSIC guidelines- I wouldn't be surprised if someone came along and nominated it for deletion. I generally check allmusic.com to see if there's a bio before suggesting a deletion, being listed there is usually an indication that the band had gotten real media coverage. The reason people care about band articles is that we get a TON of kids in here writing about their garage band. It seems clear to me that Evil Adam is pretty far from a garage band. Whether they strictly qualify under the music guideline I don't know, but they look to me like they're reasonably in the right ballpark. I don't imagine they hand out CBGB bookings to too many garage bands. Anyway, the other thing to remember is that Wikipedia isn't consistant, so sometimes one band article will be kept while another similiar one gets deleted. Not much we can do about that, it's just how it goes. Friday (talk) 23:10, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
- I understand what you are saying =) I'm going to try to update as much information as possible to get everything accurate, including sources and find publications and online reviews and what not. In the meantime, I was wondering what would separate Evil Adam from a band such as Divinity Destroyed, as they have not been marked for deletion or anything of the such and are comporable minus the fact that they have not been featured on soundtracks and such. The article has sparse information beyond a full listing of the names of the songs they have, Thanks! Nth Man 22:56, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] A failsafe for Evil Adam
- Based on how the Afd debate is going, it looks like Evil Adam is going to get deleted. As you've learned, though, all it would take are a few very tiny breaks for this band and it would cross the threshold into bands that meet WP:BAND and qualify for articles. Therefore, I've taken the liberty of copying the page to User:Mareino/Evil Adam. If Evil Adam does get deleted, my version of the page will stay (if you want to be doubly sure, you can copy the whole thing to User:Eviladam as well). That way, when Evil Adam gets its interview in Spin/label contract/whatever, you don't have to recreate the entire page from scratch, you can just edit the copy that's waiting in limbo. --M@rēino 01:08, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
- I followed your suggestion and copied the stuff over to the userpage as well. Will the Album sub thingies, and image for the band logo, stay around if the main Evil Adam entry is deleted as well? Nth Man 15:16, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Image Tagging Image:Eviladamskull.gif
 |
|
Thanks for uploading Image:Eviladamskull.gif. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.
If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. 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 qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as {{fairusein|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 media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. 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 any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Nivus(talk) 09:43, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
