User talk:Sophiebiemans

Speedy deletion nomination of 116 000

A tag has been placed on 116 000 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Rehnn83 ^Talk 09:27, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

116 000

Hello, I have responded to your question regarding your article at User talk:fl#116 000 (unchanging, permanent link to my response). ~fl 07:17, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

The article again

I noticed that you have started editing the article again, and I've just tweaked some things so that they work correctly (and hopefully) as you intended. Some things that you would most likely find useful:

• References don't go anywhere in the == Notes == or {{reflist}} section, you simply place them in the text, next to the piece of information that you want the little number to go next to, like so: If I place <ref>This is a reference in the text here</ref>, I get this:
• You can't reference press releases, as you did on the article. Because they are released by an authority with affiliation with the organization, they are not classified as a reliable source (read WP:RS for info on that). I added a reference to the Ireland Times (which have an article discussing the phone number here) for you as an example. If you're looking for articles about the number, this google news search will help you immensely.
• Don't become scared about the big mess of <ref>{{cite news|stuff=eieuieou|stuff=etc}}</ref>. If you go into Special:Preferences, click on the Gadgets tab and turn on refTools (clicking save), a button like this: will appear in the toolbar when editing. Clicking on that will help to insert similar text without hassle.

Hoped I've helped. Reply here or at my talk page if you need any more help. ~fl 13:00, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Notes

Couple more issues

There are just a couple more small issues that I have with the article, then I am most willing to move it to its correct title.

1. The facts section is not in a format suitable for an encyclopedia. On Wikipedia, we try to explain things by using prose (no lists) in a non-emotive manner. That means that words and phrases like "worried", "must therefore" and "one should have" are not permitted. Try having a short read of one of our featured articles, which demonstrate the way in which things should be written. Try incorporating the facts section into the introduction, starting with a phrase like "The number was commissioned, because <whoever> found that <all your information in linked sentence form>"
2. Most of the facts section (and some misc other bits) appear to be copied from here. Because I cannot ascertain the copyright status of the work, the same rules I outlined on my talkpage apply to it (you need permission). But if you rewrite the facts section in an encyclopedia tone (taking care not to closely paraphrase the document), I don't believe that the resulting text will be copyright infringement.

Again, thank you in advanced for taking the time to rectify these issues. ~fl 11:28, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Moved to 116 000 now

I have deemed the article suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia; it has been moved to 116 000. Be aware that Wikipedia is a collaborative effort, so others can (and most likely will) edit and improve upon your work. ~fl 23:12, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your help! I'm pleased it has been moved to 116 000. Kind regards.