User talk:Thewayweis

Speedy deletion nomination of Stanley Leopold Fowler

A tag has been placed on Stanley Leopold Fowler requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

A11 - comment - see Google search result yield "stanley%20leopold%20fowler" here

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. DrStrauss talk 16:54, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Stanley Leopold Fowler

The article Stanley Leopold Fowler has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This appears to have been a real person. However, the sole source being YouTube and not being able to find much on Google, this simply does not satisfy WP:GNG.

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. Safiel (talk) 20:18, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

January 2017

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Stanley Leopold Fowler has been reverted.
Your edit here to Stanley Leopold Fowler was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hf5rLNGlj0M, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RFSFaEve2DM&app=desktop) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a media file (e.g. a sound or video file) on an external server, then note that linking to such files may be subject to Wikipedia's copyright policy, as well as other parts of our external links guideline. If the information you linked to is indeed in violation of copyright, then such information should not be linked to. Please consider using our upload facility to upload a suitable media file, or consider linking to the original.
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 15:46, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Thewayweis, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits have not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and has been or will be removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or in other media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles. Additionally, all new biographies of living people must contain at least one reliable source.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! 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 need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask a question on your talk page. Again, welcome. JarrahTree 16:01, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Help me!

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Please help me with...speedy deletion ...It was proposed that the article I contributed be deleted and it gives several option one to contest in talk, the other says visit the page (highlighted) then go on to contest the deletion button (which I cant find) and third is to remove tag ( I dont know where) please advise as the deletion deadline is 21.Jan.2017.

Thank you in advance :)

Thewayweis (talk) 11:14, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The speedy deletion (a quick process with very restrictive criteria for what may be deleted that way) has been declined, but the page is still proposed to be deleted via another process. At the very least the article would need quite a bit of rewriting to turn it into a valid encyclopedia article; right now it's a mess, badly-formatted, whose main sources are self-published works by a relative, with the main sources including a press release and a self-published book by his daughter. The other online source beyond the press release probably wouldn't be considered reliable and does not cover Fowler in any appreciable detail anyway. Huon (talk) 12:10, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am new here and I would appreciate guidance if possible. Stanley Leopold Fowler is a real person who built an astonishing historic building in Armadala, Western Australia using the blueprints that are an exact measurement of the original Shakespeare Buildings, now archived by Amy Hurst, who is an archivist at The Shakespeare Birthplace Trust. The videos initially stated as reference, are an authentic documented journey in real time, plus there are many articles, pictures and a letter from Linton Reynolds. Unfortunately as I stated initially, in the talk/stanley leopold fowler all this was happening in the 70's, therefore not much is online.There is no relative, as you proposed, and the information is substantiated from the daughter. What I am trying to say is, thank you for the critique, but it would have more constructive, if you gave some guidelines as to what to do next or even how to format the article. The last reference I added is a completely independent one a guide to the Elizabethan Village. So with the title 'HELP' I am still waiting for a constructive response or an answer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thewayweis (talk • contribs) 13:29, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The thing you need to sort out is the referencing. You have some malformatted text in the references section at the foot of the article, but you need to ensure that each reference is attached to the text which it is supporting. You'll find an explanation at Help:Referencing for beginners. You can also find information about sourcing at WP:Reliable sources. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:30, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've formatted one of the references to give you an example as to how it's done, see this edit. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:03, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Image upload help

You asked a question on The Teahouse and it was suggested to you that the person who had the rights to the photo should sign up for Wikimedia Commons. However, you responded by saying something about an email that wasn't clear. It's very important with copyright to get everything exactly right, so please explain what you meant.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:45, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and thank you for responding and I truly hope this is the correct place to answer :). The owner of the resources to support the article Stanley Leopold Fowler has given me permission via e-mail to upload the material in support of the article. I did forward this by email to wiki and they have responded that I could upload and they will look at the material ...fingers crossed this is going to be sufficient. If there is anything I am overlooking please let me know ...all guidance is truly appreciated...Thank you :)

Thewayweis (talk) 12:08, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You should use a colon to indent. I hope you mean you received permission to use the correct license. Permission cannot be granted for use just on Wikipedia, but it has to be granted for any purpose, even commercial use, as long as the photo is credited. I was going to suggest the response by Psiĥedelisto to this question to explain things. Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 16:45, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You also need to read WP:PERMISSION to make sure the person who grants permission does it the correct way. I've had some Internet problems so I got way behind on responding to people on The Teahouse.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:33, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Stanley Leopold Fowler references

Please read WP:REFSTART

Nomination of Stanley Leopold Fowler for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Stanley Leopold Fowler 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/Stanley Leopold Fowler 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. Theroadislong (talk) 12:10, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Thewayweis. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places, or things you have written about in the article Stanley Leopold Fowler, 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. Theroadislong (talk) 14:49, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your help desk question

I'm not sure what you were referring to in a Help Desk question when you said you had to get permission from those who wrote articles back in the 1970s. As long as you write the information contained in those articles in your own words, there should be no problems.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:38, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]