User talk:Mikehollins

Steven Garza moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Steven Garza, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. DMySon (talk) 06:00, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Email

Hello, I'd rather not disclose my email address, so I'm going to respond to your email here. I removed a paragraph, due to it fully being cited by IMDB, which is generally unreliable (Wikipedia:IMDB), I also tagged it because you did not really provide sources to establish its notability. I would suggest you read Wikipedia:Notability to fully understand what qualifies for a article. It must have multiple published reliable sources in the references, in order to qualify it for inclusion as a article. To put it simply, you did not do that. Instead you provided many primary sources Wikipedia:Primary sources. A secondary source (which establishes notability) would come in the form of a Newspaper, or a equivalent, that is unrelated to the subject at hand. Just because the facebook page pops up when you use google does not mean that it is notable. Please read the aforementioned links. Also, for future communication, please do not email, as I would prefer to keep communication on-wiki. Cheers! Sea Cow (talk) 00:16, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I apologies i was not aware of this function, and just became aware of it. I have listed the following sources and pages directly referencing this entry, imdb, discogs, amazon music, iheartradio, wild 105.7, electric sound stage, promoonly (who is an radio industry authority) magazine article featuring the program as a expert penelist on two panels and a nomination for best syndicated ix show.

As a media company doesent it qualify? iHEartMEdia and iHeartRadio are the biggest radio netowrks in the world? Mikehollins (talk) 00:20, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

iHeartRadio is a primary source, since it is too directly related. Imdb is unreliable. All of the sources above don't particularly establish notability. News websites and newspapers writing about the given subject establishes notability to greatly simplify the guidelines. Sea Cow (talk) 00:29, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

so promoonly does not qualify as notable publication when its regarded as an authority in the radio industry? in the guidelines it said to list magazines i dug up a pdf of the publication that was printed and distributed.

Also, many entries under electronic radio shows that are published don't have what you are suggesting? this one doesent have any references at all and has been published for years https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Global_Dance_Session Mikehollins (talk) 00:37, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

just dug this up. this is promoonly https://promoonlypromotions.com// Mikehollins (talk) 00:47, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It needs multiple of those types of sources, not just one. I would suggest you don't refer to other articles, instead, refer to policy. Wikipedia isn't perfect, and neither is their articles. Sea Cow (talk) 00:47, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I see, i read to review similar articles and view them to get familiar which is why i came across those. So be clear having 1 source is not enough right. I am going to investigate further, i already spent a lot of time on my first contribution i want to make sure i am doing what is expected to stay in compliance and continue to contribute further. i have another article i was about to submit for another radio program, i will hold that off until i find more sources for this one. Mikehollins (talk) 00:50, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just read policy, not articles. If you have any more questions, feel free to reach out. Cheers! Sea Cow (talk) 00:55, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

K, so i just read the policy, "We require the existence of at least one source so that the article can comply with Wikipedia:No original research's requirement that all articles be based on secondary sources."

https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability Mikehollins (talk) 01:28, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

https://promoonlypromotions.com/ is a notable source and authority in this topic and article. Also posting article from an online news source blog Mikehollins (talk) 02:03, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The more I look at this source, it doesn't really prove "significant coverage". Its a passing mention, a nomination for a award that's not very major. Plus it's not a major media outlet. I really don't know if this can contribute to the notability argument all that much. I'm going to nominate this for AFD. Sea Cow (talk) 12:44, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am starting to get the impression that this not effort to guide good pracitces but more of a personal bias. What inclines me to think this is that I have reviewed all of the articles in the related topic as any one new to any platform would do to get familiar and only two of the many any type of source. all of them point to their website which i have gone above and beyond to insure that I didint do. I read the guide just like you suggested on here. Promo Only is an Authority and a trade publication not some blog or independent website. I think you are simply not familiar with the radio broadcast industry of which i am a big fan of and the reason I decided to contribute on here. Saying that PromoOnly is not an authority is like saying that Popular Mechancis is not worthy in the science field. I followed instructions I event went and dug up the record labels ISNI, MusicBrainz, Discogs and other authorities, and library confirmation which none of any of the other articles in the similar field have. I am not sure why your giving me such a hard time? I have had other contributors and moderators review this and you are the only one who continues to attempt to discredit my article. Why? Im about to post one for Beta Lounge, out of san fancisco that was one of the first internet radio stations ever and concerned that your going to go in and do the same thing after i stayed up all night writting this. all i ask is that you please be fair, go review the other articles that are clearly not in good standing and apply the same level of guidenss as you have here as our job as contributors is acuracy and they are clearly not. Mikehollins (talk) 12:54, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

iheartmedia is not a major media outlet? its the biggest radio platform in the world, i suggest that you do a bit of research before you make uneducated decisions based on personal opinions. this program was one of the first edm terrestrial radio programs on us radio. the historical significance of that for anyone that is interseted in broadcast history holds value. Mikehollins (talk) 12:55, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Let's move this to the AFD. Sea Cow (talk) 12:59, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

wow! Mikehollins (talk) 13:00, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of PrototypeRadio for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article PrototypeRadio 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/PrototypeRadio until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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.

Sea Cow (talk) 12:46, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Steven Garza (May 20)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by TipsyElephant were:

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

This submission is not suitable for Wikipedia. Please read 'What Wikipedia is not' for more information.

The comment the reviewer left was:

34 of your 57 references are to WP:IMDb, which is not a WP:RS. Please remove all of these references before resubmitting the draft. This is a clear case of WP:NOTEBOMB due to the large number of unreliable sources and WP:PUFFERY because of the long list of irrelevant names sourced to IMDb. TipsyElephant (talk) 14:50, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Steven Garza and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Steven Garza, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

TipsyElephant (talk) 14:50, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Mikehollins! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering 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! TipsyElephant (talk) 14:50, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:PrototypeRadio

Hello, Mikehollins. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:PrototypeRadio, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 00:03, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Steven Garza

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.

A tag has been placed on Steven Garza, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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 deleted 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. PICKLEDICAE🥒 11:35, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

September 2022

Hello Mikehollins. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are extremely strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Mikehollins. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Mikehollins|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. PICKLEDICAE🥒 11:36, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I do not have any financial stake and am willing to provide any information you may need to support this. I am not sure why this is being suggested. Out of all my edits this is the only one that has been flagged and quite honestly not sure why. Mikehollins (talk) 12:29, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What is your connection to the subjects you've written about, then? PICKLEDICAE🥒 12:31, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

i have no connection, have not met him, nor the other people i have edited or written about. Mikehollins (talk) 12:34, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Then perhaps you can explain how this is your own work? PICKLEDICAE🥒 12:36, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

One of the courses at my university covered Wikipedia, I took interest in becoming an editor. I was listening to a radio program, I looked it up and it wasn't on wikipedia so I thought it was strange and thought I would make a contribution. I have made many contributions since then. When you spend time learning and contributing you would like to see positive results in your efforts. Rather then creating something else it made sense to complete the project before moving to something new. Really that simple. Mikehollins (talk) 12:39, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That...does not answer my question. You intentionally uploaded it as your own work. Are you saying it is not your own work? PICKLEDICAE🥒 12:41, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am simply learning, and contributing, with the intention to get better at doing so. I am not some kind of business if that is what you are asking. I am a student, would like to become better at editing and contributing is simply a hobby, that is all. Mikehollins (talk) 12:45, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]