User talk:Todrick

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello Todrick, 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 have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  Splash^talk 00:23, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Charlie Wenzel

Hi there Todrick. Yes, articles can be undeleted easily by admins. In this case, the Articles for Deletion debate was really very clear and very recent. That rested on the fact that the event was largely unremarkable in itself, and the term "wenzeled" a newly invented term, which Wikipedia, being an encyclopedia rather than a dictionary (or Urban Dictionary) doesn't carry. I note for example that the first Google hit is to Urban Dictionary: that's not usually a good indicator of encyclopedicity, wouldn't you agree? (Wiktionary is a wiki-dictionary, and does carry neologisms to a certain extent. I don't know the criteria there, and would suggest you read around there a little to avoid wasted work.) Also, the event was forecast to fade away quite soon, and I don't think 'quite soon' has had time to pass yet. If this term has gained genuine currency and received some coverage outside forums and blogs (e.g. mainstream media) in a few months time then you could think about remaking the article. If you want to avoid your work being deleted as a recreation of previously deleted material, you might check at Wikipedia:Deletion review first. This wouldn't be necessary if the new article was obviously significantly more likely to be kept than the previous. You might look at WP:V, WP:RS, WP:NOR and WP:N to see other hurdles articles here ought to cross. Stylistic links are also in the welcome message just above. A lot of reading, but I think you'll see the sort of reason this was deleted more clearly if you touch on some of it.

Thanks for your interest in Wikipedia; I hope you stick around. (PS, only about 150 of those Google hits are non-repetitive.) -Splash^talk 00:23, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

In fact, probably more immediately pertinent than the reading list you have above are: What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Neologism. -Splash^talk 01:19, 29 November 2005 (UTC)