User talk:ShadowGlider

Your submission at Articles for creation: Jim Calarco (September 20)

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit if you feel they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Jim Calarco.
To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the reviewer's talk page. Please remember to link to the submission!
You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Zach Vega (talk to me) 02:20, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! ShadowGlider, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about why your article submission was declined please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there!

Talkback

Hello, ShadowGlider. You have new messages at Zach Vega's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, ShadowGlider. You have new messages at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk#Review_of_Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation.2FJim_Calarco.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Dear ShadowGlider: As a fellow Canadian, I would like to help you to get your article about Mr. Calarco accepted. Here are some things that could make it better:

The IMDB is not considered to be a reliable source, since everybody just puts in their own information. Huge numbers of references to it just look bad. Isn't there one URL at that site that summarizes his acting credits, instead of citing each item separately?

ShadowGlider (talk) 17:12, 20 September 2013 (UTC)ShadowGlider, they are references to IMDB and wikipedia to explain the movies or work so I do not have to. If I say he is married to Claire, I have a link for Claire and a link to where its labelled that they have been married since 1969. Other than a personal facebook message indicating such, I felt it worth citing to indicate where is accuracy is from, I cannot cite personal messages??? I appreciate your help, I am new and I find they reviewer unclear. I am sure I can find everything from newspaper reports but do I need to?[reply]

Sources that are created by or for him (press announcements, links to his web site or facebook page) can be included to show non-controversial facts, but don't contribute to passing "notability" requirements Wikipedia requires independent published coverage.

ShadowGlider (talk) 17:12, 20 September 2013 (UTC)ShadowGlider: I only refer to facebook once and its related to the information presented. IMDB is highly recognized when it comes to movie, televisiona and video information. My subject's resume is there detailing his career.[reply]

Links to other Wikipedia pages or to the main pages of organizations which have Wikipedia pages shouldn't be in your references. Instead, just link to them directly using the double square brackets. I've fixed the first couple of these for you.

ShadowGlider (talk) 17:12, 20 September 2013 (UTC)ShadowGlider: I used these links to support the information presented, why talk about a movie, its details and those related when I mention the movie, I give a wikipedia link first and an IMDB link, that does not support my posibly conflicting or questionable information, its to help the user understand a movie or subject I am speaking of. The links to wikipedia simply help the reader understand or a link to understand about information I am presenting. Seeing wikipedia is world wide some movies or information may not be common to them.[reply]

You really need to find more independent media coverage before you do any more work on this, because the article won't be accepted without it. You have one good one at http://media.cottagecountrynow.ca/special/almaguin/data/pdfs/95/AN12.pdf (Keep in mind that if the source is an interview, only what the interviewer says will be counted, not what Mr. Calarco says about himself), and a small mention at http://www.nugget.ca/2009/01/12/hall-president-humbled-by-honour, but that's all I could find among the long list of references.

ShadowGlider (talk) 17:12, 20 September 2013 (UTC)ShadowGlider: I thought so too, but how many articles do I have to cite for TWO paragraphs of information? its kind of silly, if wikipedia wants more then I think the reviewer should be clear on what my article needs? I do not want to guess, and again, two articles that support two paragraphs should be enough unless some information is questionable, then I ask what is questionable so I can make it less or unquestionable?[reply]

How about http://www.filmnorth.net/news_story.php?p=76 or http://www.northbaynipissing.com/2012/03/one-wish-receives-acclaim-at-west-coast-film-festiva/ ShadowGlider (talk) 17:12, 20 September 2013 (UTC)ShadowGlider: Thank you, I will review and use these as well. I found eight more.[reply]

I hope this helps. —Anne Delong (talk) 14:14, 20 September 2013 (UTC) ShadowGlider (talk) 17:12, 20 September 2013 (UTC)ShadowGlider: thank you for your assistance and support. I simply want to know what is unclear so I can clear it up. Factual information is not a game, if part of my puzzle is missing that I do not see, the reviewer should be tellng me instead of leaving me guessing. I am new, I read most of the helpful pages and one article per paragraph is acceptable unless something is questionable but NO ONE is saying what is questionable, something a reader might doubt. Thank you again for your support.[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Jim Calarco (September 21)

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit if you feel they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Jim Calarco.
To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the reviewer's talk page. Please remember to link to the submission!
You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! TKK! bark with me if you're my dog! 01:28, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, ShadowGlider. You have new messages at Tikuko's talk page.
Message added 02:33, 21 September 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

TKK! bark with me if you're my dog! 02:33, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, ShadowGlider. You have new messages at Zach Vega's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Your submission at AfC Jim Calarco was accepted

Jim Calarco, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

TKK! bark with me if you're my dog! 06:16, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, ShadowGlider. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Jim Calarco, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies. Note that Wikipedia's terms of use require disclosure of your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Hi, sorry to ask, but a suspected COI / paid editor has edited that article, so in clearing up, I'm asking you if you have any connection with the subject. Sorry to bother you, Widefox; talk 15:16, 22 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]