User talk:IdeaSandbox

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Welcome!

Hello, IdeaSandbox, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Wikipedia Boot Camp, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

Here are a few more good links to help you get started:

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 have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  Kukini 06:43, 1 February 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Idea Sandbox

A tag has been placed on Idea Sandbox, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable (see the guidelines for notability here). If you can indicate why the subject of this article is notable, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself.

Please read the criteria for speedy deletion (specifically, article #7) and our general biography criteria. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Amarkov babble 01:38, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the note on my talk page. I tend to agree with User:Amarkov - there are clear criteria about notability of corporations - see WP:CORP - and people - WP:BIO. Neither of your articles asserted notability, so were clearly speedy deleteable under WP:CSD:Article criteria #7. There is a drive to remove the excessive commercial advertising on Wikipedia, and I'm afraid your articles currently fall into that category. Gwernol 02:38, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
If you have book or other print references for IdeaSandbox, please post them here and I'd be happy to look at them. If they show notability, I will restore the article so you can add the references to it. Gwernol 02:46, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Here are references to Idea Sandbox/Paul Williams I would include to give the content authority...

IdeaSandbox 03:28, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Its worth reading the guidelines on reliable sources; generally blog postings are not considered reliable sources for notability For the books its not clear what connection to Paul Williams they have. For example Tribal Knowledge is about Starbucks, isn't written by Paul Williams, nor does it obviously feature him. The FastCompany link is not an article about Paul Williams, it just shows he was a customer care project manager for Starbucks. If it had been an editorial article about his imapct it would show notability, just being on a panel assembled by the magazine doesn't. Can you say how each of these references relates to Williams and shows he is notable? Oh, and a Google search is never a reliable source since the results list will change over time. Thanks, Gwernol 03:34, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your time and guidance. While there is a wee bit of vanity, it wasn't about being commercial. I'm just going to have to do some notable things in life that get me automatic placement in Wikipedia... I'm up for that challenge!.

I think the worst part was the way the whole process went down. I had JUST started to post... am still working in the editor and I get an alert that what I'm doing is being edited and is inappropriate content.

When I indicated 'hold on' I'm not done... I got a harsh "that's YOUR problem" message. At this point, I didn't even have time to indicate notable references. While I know Wikipedia is made up of folks from around the globe I thought the culture was more friendly than that. Long story short... I got it, this bit of content wasn't appropriate. But I wish I was treated less like a criminal getting caught tagging a building with graffiti.

Two things soured my experience with Wikipedia...

  • a) I feel you should at least offer authors the opportunity to get past the first few lines of an entry before you tag them as 'rapid delete' - especially when the content was only a few lines long and wasn't breaking the blatant rules of content. (At that point, I could have had a whole list of notable references to post. I wasn't able to get that far).
  • b) That the editors/scanners would be less harsh. It feels like the power of being able to police Wikipedia has gone to this persons head. I'm assuming folks sit and scan for 'latest' pages and swoop in to make sure the entry isn't crap. I appreciate keeping Wikipedia clean, but it seems there are two ways to treat people - a nice way, and a nasty way. This person chose nasty.

Thanks for listening and thank you for your patient advice/discussion.(Your style help is what I expected from Wikipedia) IdeaSandbox 10:35, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../i/d/e/User_talk%7EIdeaSandbox_e900.html"