Talk:Family Opera Initiative

This article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:

Keep, 27 February 2009, see discussion.
keep, 26 February 2009 (UTC), see discussion.

This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Opera, a group writing and editing Wikipedia articles on operas, opera terminology, opera composers and librettists, singers, designers, directors and managers, companies and houses, publications and recordings. The project discussion page is a place to talk about issues and exchange ideas. New members are welcome!OperaWikipedia:WikiProject OperaTemplate:WikiProject OperaOpera articles

Organizations Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been marked as needing an infobox.

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Family opera initiative

I think it is absurd to delete this page or consider so. The artists working on these projects are major names. The current project, ANIMAL TALES, is the last significant work by George Plimpton. Grethe Barrett Holby is the Founder of AOP and a 15 year veteran of the industry. Eugenio Carmi, Eve Beglarian, Kitty Brazelton: these are all artists of weight. I hope a few of the bloggers here come with some knowledge of contemporary American music. Ridiculous to delete. Tipok (talk) 21:31, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a blog. It is also not a provider of free advertising. As it is, this article only barely escaped speedy deletion on the grounds of blatant advertising and blatant copyright violation. Taking an article to a Articles for deletion discussion instead of speedily deleting it allows experienced editors without a conflict of interest to assess the article's potential for viability and address its problems – as has been the case here. See Wikipedia:Guide to deletion for more. Voceditenore (talk) 07:19, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Future editing

I've re-written this article entirely to remove the promotional tone and copy-pasted wording from the subject's official web site and associated blogs and press releases. It also now conforms to the Wikipedia Manual of Style and has proper references to establish the subject's notability. I'm pretty sure this article will now survive the AfD. Assuming it does, future editors, especially those who are affiliated in any way with Family Opera Initiative or one of its collaborators, must adhere to the following guidelines when editing it.

Before even starting to edit it again, please read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest for guidance.
Remember that you are writing for an international readership, not simply Americans, and not simply your potential customers. Avoid the use of abbreviations like FL for Florida, NYC for New York City and expressions like "around the country" for "around the United States".
Simlarly, Wikipedia is not a newsletter or bulletin board. Avoid terms like "now", "soon", "currently" and "recently" which make the article both imprecise, and in many instances, quickly inaccurate. Instead, use expressions such as "as of 2009".
This is an encyclopedia article, not the web page of your organization or its blog. Do not add casting calls, ticket information, donation or sponsorship solicitation, or overly-detailed production information which is primarily aimed at other orgnizations who may want to hire FOI. The external link to FOI is at the bottom of the article, for readers who are interested in it. That is sufficient.
All additions must be neutrally worded and use encyclopedic tone and style. Any additions which can be perceived by a neutral reader as hype or PR will be removed. See Wikipedia:Neutral point of view and Wikipedia:Avoid peacock terms for guidance.
Do not add links to the external web sites of your collaborators unless they contain a specific page which is needed to explictly corroborate a fact in the article. In such cases, the link should go directly to that page, not simply to the front page of web site. Otherwise, add the links to their Wikipedia articles, if they're not already there. If they do not have a Wikipedia article, then consider writing one that is neutral, in your own words, and properly referenced to reliable sources to establish their notability.
Do not paste in text from your or anyone else's official websites, blogs etc. Apart from the almost invariably unsuitable promotional style, it is a copyright violation unless the sites explicitly display a public domain license. Further guidance can be found on Wikipedia:Copyright violations and its associated pages.
Remember, that once you have written an article on Wikipedia, you and/or your organization no longer own it. It will always have to conform to Wikipedia's policies on content, style and formatting – not to your organization's desired image or marketing goals. Further guidance can be found on Wikipedia:Ownership of articles.

Voceditenore (talk) 08:41, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]