User talk:Native8

Welcome!

Hello, Native8, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, like UNRESERVED: The Work of Louie Gong, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for page creation, and may soon be deleted.

You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the Article Wizard. Thank you.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. 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 have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Plutonium27 (talk) 08:53, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of UNRESERVED: The Work of Louie Gong

The article UNRESERVED: The Work of Louie Gong has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

WP:Notability independent video production promoting footwear products. Fails WP:NOTADVERT. Links/refs do not support article's claims or requirements of WP:RS. Creator may also have a WP:Conflict of Interest

While all 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 {{dated prod}} 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 {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.Plutonium27 (talk) 08:53, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Longhouse Media

I've tidied the refs and headings. The article asserts notability, although it's maybe a bit borderline. It still reads as promotional, presenting aims as facts eg Longhouse Media provides youth (with?) the skills either needs a reference to prove that it has succeeded, or to be rephrased as Longhouse Media attempts to provide youth with the skills. There are other similar examples. We are told nothing factual about the organisation. How many staff? - where is it based? - what is its budget? It's all just about the wonderful work it does.

The article isn't really neutral; it only discusses the work of the organisation, not the organisation itself, it accepts the organisation's claims at face value, and presents aspirations as facts. Has nobody ever criticised this organisation? Are there no differences within the organisation? Are its clients always happy with the service. Does it never fail?

Thanks for letting me know about the rewrite, but it needs a bit more work yet. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:34, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's OK to use the company as a reference for purely factual info like staff numbers, budget etc. It's more contentious stuff like its notability and how successful it is which need independent sourcing. Although links to websites are good, they are not essential - see Barn Swallow which uses websites, books and journals, which often don't have on-line versions - the main thing is that the sources are reliable and could be checked if someone wanted to make the effort. A minor style thing, have a look at what

Are there really no concerns or criticism or shortcoming? It still reads like an insider's view to me, rather than being neutral. Didn't the two university studies find anything that could be improved? Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:58, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

UNRESERVED: The Work of Louie Gong

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. When you make a change to an article, please provide an edit summary for your edits. Doing so helps everyone to understand the intention of your edit. It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you.

The WP:Proposed deletion tag has been removed from the above article by an IP editor. Please note it still may be nominated for deletion under WP:AFD. Plutonium27 (talk) 09:51, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Louie. Yesterday I asked Jim to take a look at the "Unreserved" article: I wanted a second opinion, Jim is way more experience at this than me and I saw that you've had some productive discussions with him re another article (which I haven't seen btw). Anyway, I've copied our messages re this request from our talk pages onto the talk page of the article and it would be best IMO if all communications re were henceforth kept there, so we know where we are and others can readily follow it. I'll be copying this message there, which is also where any replies, messages etc should be at too.

As you can see from both the history and messages Jim has restored the proposed deletion tag.

The fundamental problem is the notability of the subject of the article: the film. Sources such as MSNBC and the Seattle Times are indeed considered reliable but a mention in or by them does not in and of itself automatically confer notability. These two cited references do not appear to support claims that the production satisfies notability requirements.

The other issues, such as promotion and conflict of interest, still exist too. Removing the link to Van shoes does not alter the suspicion that the film is primarily a promotional piece for someone who has recently begun selling cutomized fashion sports shoes. Claims that the production is essentially an exploration of the changing face of American culture and society... seem somewhat disingenuous. As for the COI, the way clear to fixing that with the current circumstances just doesn't seem on.

Somewhere, within the incidental issues and ideas raised, may possibly lie the germ of an article (though more probably an expansion of an existing one). The Portal:Indigenous peoples of North America would be one place to explore such possibilities to get involved. You write well and, with your evident enthusiasm for Native American?mixed heritage culture, your skills would be very welcome. Plutonium27 (talk) 20:30, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above message has been copied to to Talk:UNRESERVED: The Work of Louie Gong. Please add any reply, comments etc there so that all discussion re this article can be readily seen by other editors. Thanks. Plutonium27 (talk) 23:04, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of UNRESERVED: The Work of Louie Gong

I have nominated UNRESERVED: The Work of Louie Gong, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/UNRESERVED: The Work of Louie Gong. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Plutonium27 (talk) 04:56, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of File:Longhouse Media Logo - FINAL - 2010.pdf

A file that you uploaded, File:Longhouse Media Logo - FINAL - 2010.pdf, has been listed in Category:Candidates for speedy deletion because it is not an image, sound or video file and does not appear to have any encyclopedic use. See section F10 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you feel that this file has a use in the encyclopedia, please place the {{hangon}} tag on File:Longhouse Media Logo - FINAL - 2010.pdf, then go to its talk page (by clicking Discussion at the top of that page) and insert an explanation of how the file is useful to the encyclopedia. Thank you. Cloudbound (talk) 18:05, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Louie Gong portal wiki.JPG

The file File:Louie Gong portal wiki.JPG has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Uploaded for UNRESERVED: The Work of Louie Gong. No other use.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 02:08, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Longhouse Media Logo - FINAL jpeg- 2010.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Longhouse Media Logo - FINAL jpeg- 2010.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next seven days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 02:08, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]