User talk:Freddygotfingers

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/S.m.o.g.

I'm sorry that it looks like the article you created is going to be deleted but I thought you might like a slightly more thorough explanation as to why. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia that anyone can edit and because editors are not required to have any formal qualifications no one can put their own original research or work on Wikipedia (see WP:OR and WP:NOT#OR), in order for content to be included it must be verifiable (see WP:V) by citing reliable sources (see WP:RS) such as newspapers (not tabloids), news networks, academic writings and industry publications. Sources which do not have a reputation for fact checking and accuracy are not generally considered reliable, additionally sources which are open for the public to edit are not considered reliable - this includes Wikipedia itself and other sites such as urban dictionary. Finally Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information (see WP:NOT#INFO) not everything that exists is deemed to "deserve" an article. Topics must be considered notable (see WP:NN), this means that they have received significant coverage by reliable secondary sources independent of the subject - this is not usually the case for neologisms (see WP:NEO). Additionally Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia not a dictionary (see WP:NOT#DICT) so a pure dictionary definition is not sufficient to be the basis of an article - Wikimedia does have separate a dictionary project called Wiktionary. In this case because the term that is the topic of the article is so new it is unlikely that it will have received the kind of coverage that demonstrates notability or have been integrated into culture enough for any article to be more than a dictionary definition. If you view Category:LGBT terms you will see that there are many articles for other terms in the area of sexuality but they should have received the kind of coverage to establish their notability and be the basis of a reliably sourced verifiable encyclopaedia article's. If you still think the article should be kept feel free to put your point across in the AfD discussion, one good argument based upon Wikipedia's policies and guidelines can be enough to shift the consensus in your favour. If you wish to try and write another article I would recommend first reading Wikipedia:Your first article which should help to make sure that you choose a topic suitable for the encyclopaedia. If you require more help you can go to WP:HELP or contact me on my talk page. If your article is deleted do not feel discouraged - all your future contributions will be valued and I hope you continue to edit Wikipedia. Regards, Guest9999 (talk) 22:22, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion of S.m.o.g.

Please do not make personal attacks. Wikipedia has a strict policy against personal attacks. Attack pages and images are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who continue to create or repost such pages and images in violation of our biographies of living persons policy will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you.

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 article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Merenta (talk) 13:11, 12 May 2008 (UTC)