User talk:Cchristman1

Hello, Cchristman1. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, 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.
Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
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.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. ErikHaugen (talk | contribs) 21:55, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your contributed article, Christopher Christman

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, Christopher Christman. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – Chris christman. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Chris christman – you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to 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, you can place a request here. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. Jinkinson talk to me 21:57, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Chris christman for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Chris christman 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/Chris christman 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. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 22:01, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Cchristman1. You have new messages at WikiDan61's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Please bear with my Wiki folleys. I have been trying to set up a wiki presence similar to what my friend: https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Evan_jacobs has created for himself. His page was not created by other people on his behalf. It is a counterpart to his other pages, most of which he created. I mean this in a positive current, as I simply pointing to a practical example to reference. And while I am not a member of the Producers Guild, been nominated for an Emmy, and am not particularly "notable" as per the assesment of me, our day to day functions are very close to the same, and we have worked together on some of the same projects he cites and in supporting roles..

Is a certified source simply a magazine write up where I am mentioned? I ask because the standard seems a bit subjective and I would love to comply and provide what is needed, so I am not deleted.... :) Does a source such as the following count a something certified? Or perhaps a mention in an issue of Cinefex? Thank you

http://www.fxguide.com/quicktakes/visual-effects-society-announces-nominees-for-6th-annual-ves-awards/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.214.25.43 (talk) 00:03, 14 December 2013 (UTC) or

http://books.google.com/books?id=eGJbJqE3c4UC&pg=PR14&lpg=PR14&dq=chris+christman+animation&source=bl&ots=10Jt_4Thwi&sig=Ofud_CCfSaVvECxD31NZhlo6VMc&hl=en&sa=X&ei=6KCrUvSTNoO52AWAm4DACQ&ved=0CDEQ6AEwATgK#v=onepage&q=chris%20christman%20animation&f=false — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.214.25.43 (talk) 00:07, 14 December 2013 (UTC) or

http://www.animationmagazine.net/schools/11_2.html

Chris,

First, I'll note that you added the same note to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chris christman, but you forgot to log in. It's important to log in prior to making edits, so they can properly attributed.

Second, and much more importantly, you haven't read and understood the note I left you at my talk page. Wikipedia is not a place to write your own autiobiography. It is not a social media site like Facebook or LinkedIn. It is not up to you to "set up a Wiki presence", and just because your friend did it, that doesn't mean you should. It was a bad idea when he did it and it's a bad idea now. The only difference is he didn't get caught at it (yet).

The standard for notability for biographies is pretty clear. The links you provided, where your name is merely mentioned, even where your name is mentioned as having been nominated for an award, are not sufficient. Based on these links, the only verifiable information we would be able to include in your bio is

Christ Christman is a VES Award-nominated special effects producer. He was nominated for his work on the cartoon series Ben 10. His other credits include Osmosis Jones, Armageddon, Dinosaur and Con Air.

Not much of an article, is it? In order to write a complete biography of you, we'd need articles, interviews, profiles, etc., that were about you exclusively and that were published in reliable sources (sources that are presumed to have an editorial review process, so probably not Joe's Entertainment Blog, but probably the Huffington Post, and definitely major publications such as Variety, or any other trade journal that covers your particular profession. Since you have not provided any evidence that such coverage exists, we have no basis on which to build a verifiable article about you. The facts that you know about yourself are not really germaine here. We can't all go to you personally to verify these facts, and, frankly, we can't always trust people to write the truth about themselves.

So, the bottom line is