User talk:Montague22

Welcome!

Hello, Montague22, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome!

Goodwill, The Amity Group

By now, you might have noticed that I have reverted your changes twice. There is a reason for this. You have started the article, but you have provided no claim of notability, nor a single source to show why this article passes the criteria at WP:CORP. Please do not revert again unless you are providing the needed improvements to arguably claim notability. You might be interested in reading WP:42. Continuing to revert an article that has legitimately been redirected without providing a rationale or engaging in talk with the party who is redirecting might be seen as disruptive, so I would suggest you either establish notability or begin a conversation about it. Dennis Brown (talk) 18:34, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I replied on your talk page. I am referencing a book published in 1985 by author Guy Jones. It doesn't exist on the web that'w why im writing this page. There is a great historical story that needs to be told.

i replied there as well. it is better to keep things in one place, i don't care where, but in one place. Dennis Brown (talk) 20:52, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia! Stop by the Teahouse anytime!

Hello! Montague22, you are invited to join other new editors and friendly hosts in the Teahouse. An awesome place to meet people, ask questions and learn more about Wikipedia. Please join us! SarahStierch (talk) 19:55, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Goodwill, The Amity Group ‎

I suggest that either you work on this article in your sandbox until it is complete or mark the article as {{underconstruction}} else it will continue to be reverted to the redirect or tagged as unreferenced, non notable etc. I would suggest you continue in your sandbox until you have a much more finished article but whichever you choose please do not mark an article in mainspace as being a sandbox. As expressed previously there is nothing currently to show that the company is notable, if as you say you are referring to a book then cite the book. It doesn't have to be available on the internet, paper based references are perfectly acceptable. There is a specific template {{cite book}} for this purpose. NtheP (talk) 22:42, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

More on Goodwill, The Amity Group

I have reverted your recent edits to this article, as the entire thing appears to have been copied from a history of the group as published by the group itself. Whether or not this is the case, the article still fails to assert any notability (i.e. has anyone other than you ever written about it?), no cite any sources. Prior to taking your sandbox back to the main article space, why don't you ask for a review of the article while it's still in your user space? WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 20:41, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So you removed 3 chapters!! Yes, all this is from a very old book, I'm condensing it o a wikipage on behalf of the organization, the CEO. No one owns rights to those photos anymore. If the org does than I have authority to publish them just like I have authority to reproduce the history of the org. Later I'm writing about its modern operations. is this okay? Or are you going to want a link somewhere on the web. This history book doesn't exist digitally. This is why it is a great service to have the facts from this book on a wikipage.

Possibly unfree File:Amity-collection-truck.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Amity-collection-truck.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 20:54, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:Machine-shop-John-St.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Machine-shop-John-St.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 20:55, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:Craftsman-loom.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Craftsman-loom.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 20:55, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:Refurbished-stoves.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Refurbished-stoves.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 20:56, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have authority to use these photos from the CEO of the organization. Obviously I don't have a link to these are no where on the internet, they are 70 years old and very poor quality. I don't get it?

Montague22 (talk) 08:54, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:1423-main-st-east.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:1423-main-st-east.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 20:57, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please fill out our brief Teahouse survey!

Hello fellow Wikipedian, the hardworking hosts and staff at Wikipedia:Teahouse would like your feedback! We have created a brief survey meant to help us better understand the experience of new editors on Wikipedia. You are being selected to participate in our survey because you either received an invitation to visit the Teahouse, or edited the Teahouse Questions or Guests page.

Click here to be taken to the survey site.

The survey should take less than 10 minutes to complete. We really appreciate your feedback, and we look forward to your next vist to the Teahouse!

Happy editing,

J-Mo, Teahouse host, 15:48, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Message sent with Global message delivery.

Goodwill - The Amity group

Can you confirm that the writing is all your own, the style is such that I am concerned that you are just cutting and pasting from Places of caring which would be a breach of copyright. Neither is close paraphrasing acceptable, the article really must be written in your own words. NtheP (talk) 14:45, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The chapters are signficantly longer and detailed in the actual book, I'm using it as a reference the same way I wrote University papers and condensing the work. So the writing is mine, but the historical facts are facts, so in that regard some of the sentences may be similar and the quotes I've used are from that person and also the same in the book. How would you like me to prove this? Montague22 (talk) 10:50, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I don't need further proof now but as it stands there is a hell of a lot of text added with just one line at the bottom saying you've drawn on Places of caring and without explanation it looked a bit dubious. Adding specific citations to the book at the relevant points in the text e.g. giving page numbers would help, then if there are any further concerns raised, reference can be made to the book. The references can be inserted using <ref>Jones (1985) p. XXX</ref> simple, but it will be enough. The quotes, well a quote is a quote and those can't be changed. NtheP (talk) 15:11, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]