User talk:Topherjchambers

Nomination of The Book (film) for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Book (film) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Book (film) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Pichpich (talk) 16:56, 23 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Steven Durgarn[edit]

The article Steven Durgarn has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable actor: no evidence of meeting notability guidelines in WP:NACTOR

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. --Animalparty! (talk) 23:22, 23 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Topherjchambers, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

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:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! --Animalparty! (talk) 23:22, 23 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest[edit]

Hello, Topherjchambers. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places, or things you have written about in the article The Book (film), you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic, and it is important when editing Wikipedia articles that such connections be completely transparent. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, we ask that you please:

avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your family, friends, school, company, club, or organization, as well as any competing companies' projects or products;
instead, you are encouraged to propose changes on the Talk pages of affected article(s) (see the {{request edit}} template);
when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or to the website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Please take a few moments to read and review Wikipedia's policies regarding conflicts of interest, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. Thank you. --Animalparty! (talk) 23:23, 23 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

questions[edit]

So, since everything that I posted is up for deletion (only hours after I posted it) I still have not been informed as to why some pages are still up (for years) when the pages that I posted are similar in many ways. The page I linked to in The Book, Joel D. Wynkoop is no more or less notable than Steven Durgarn. Joel D. Wynkoop has been in more films, but only a handful are out and most are direct to video ones that I never heard of. And I am sure that the person that put it up is related to Mr Wynkoop, if not paid by him to do so. There are tons of pages that I have came across with similar items to what is being proposed for deletion. And I haven't even been able to finish updating the pages. At worse, in relation to pages that I have seen on here, I may have been a little early posting.

Mr. Durgarn was one of the winners in the first "Crash the Superbowl" Doritos commercial contest, which was the first one to also win the million dollar prize. Other than that, he has been in a few award winning feature films, including Proxy which got distribution with IFC from the Toronto Film Festival, Beverly Lane, Bloomington, and Suck it up Buttercup. Anyway, go ahead and delete... I am done caring. And not coming back here again. Topherjchambers (talk) 02:42, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia and copyright[edit]

Hello Topherjchambers, and welcome to Wikipedia. All or some of your addition(s) to Steven Durgarn has had to be removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material without permission from the copyright holder. While we appreciate your contributing to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from your sources to avoid copyright or plagiarism issues here.

You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. However, there are steps that must be taken to verify that license before you do. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are public domain or compatibly licensed), it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at the help desk before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you can, but please follow the steps in Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:06, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notability and Wikipedia[edit]

Hi! I thought I'd give a bit more information on the article's AfD nomination.

Ultimately the problem here is one of notability. In order to show that the movie passes WP:NFILM or WP:NFF you have to show where the movie has received coverage in independent and reliable sources, like news articles or pieces written about the movie in RS websites like Dread Central. Notability isn't inherited by the film's existence in any form (WP:ITEXISTS) or by it having ties to people who might be notable on their own merit (WP:NOTINHERITED). For example, Bill Oberst Jr. is one of the "It Guys" in horror right now and his name is recognizable to most, yet only a fraction of his movies pass notability guidelines.

You also cannot use anything released by WP:PRIMARY sources, meaning that you can't use anything released by the company, its cast/crew, or anyone/anything affiliated with the movie. It ultimately boils down to coverage, honestly, and it's difficult for most films, especially indie films, to gain this coverage. This is partially because there are so many films that are made and released in any given year. The existence of other articles on Wikipedia also doesn't really mean much because the other article might not pass notability guidelines or it might be notable for its own reasons. (WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS) If anything, this can backfire because it'll result in the other article getting deleted, which is typically not the desired intent. I've written a bit about the basics of notability and AfD here.

Now what I recommend at this point is that you start working on promoting the film via the usual outlets. The main horror websites and magazines are your best bet here: Dread Central, Fangoria, Rue Morgue, Shock Till You Drop, HorrorNews.net, and so on. It'd also be worthwhile to talk to some of the other outlets like Ain't It Cool News, since they tend to have a soft spot for indies. You can and should hit up the blog websites, but just be aware that the blog websites are almost never considered to be reliable sources on Wikipedia. (This is because they're usually self-published, don't undergo the type of editorial oversight required by Wikipedia, and are rarely cited as an authoritative enough source to over come SPS concerns.) Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:31, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]