User talk:Susan E Webb

Regarding your question to Kinu

I thought I'd have a crack. You must get him to say that he releases the image under a Wikipedia compatible license. Just get him to say one of the following, in the exact words, obviously putting it in the first person:

{{GFDL-self}} {{PD-self}} {{cc-by}} {{cc-by-2.0}} {{cc-by-2.5}} {{cc-sa}} {{cc-by-sa}} {{cc-by-sa-2.0}} {{cc-by-sa-2.5}} {{cc-by-3.0}} {{cc-by-sa-3.0}}

Hope I've helped. Ase nine ^(talk)^(contribs) 20:47, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Happy new year to you too. The name's Chris, by the way. Ase nine ^(talk)^(contribs) 16:35, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The only thing I'd be concerned about is releasing a corporate logo under a free license... remember, this gives anyone the recourse to alter it, redistribute it, etc. Citing the logo for fair use in an article might be a better option here, but ultimately it's your client's call. :) --Kinu ^t/_c 20:52, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He could release it under a no derivatives license? Ase nine ^(talk)^(contribs) 13:23, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note. I've had a second look at the deleted article, and I see you do have a problem. There is a fine line in Wikipedia between the boundaries of spam/advertising on the one hand and non-notability on the other, and it is difficult to keep within those boundaries. Added to that is the problem that, as you mentioned, you're being paid by a client to create the article; that brings up problems of conflict of interest which I'm sure you can ethically surmount, but which make every Wikipedian editor far more vigilant. I have two suggestions that I think may be of assistance to you.

First, as it stood upon its recent deletion, the article went into too much detail about what the product did and how it did it. You might think of this as an opportunity to say only a little bit about the product -- anyone who is interested in acquiring it will find out where it is available by using a search engine or perhaps you can provide an unassuming link at the very end of the article. Instead of making this an opportunity to talk about your product specifically, it would be better to talk about the type of product that this is -- to inform people about its category of product. That may mean that you'll have to offer your economic competitors the same amount of space as your own client, and that is actually in keeping with the way Wikipedia works. This isn't advertising, it's pure unadulterated information -- the fewer descriptive adjectives, the fewer glowing terms, the more likely it is to remain.

My second piece of advice is that, as far as possible, you should rely upon what others have had to say about the product (or, as I've noted above, the category). Wikipedia articles are not collections of the writer's opinions, they are collections of quotations that the writer has assembled. Notability, in Wikipedian terms, is only achieved by quoting what others have said about you, not what you say about yourself. The article that was recently deleted had many of the qualities of a press release -- a well-written press release, but a press release nevertheless. One hallmark of a Wikipedia article that truly does have a balance of opinion is that it speaks of disadvantages as well as advantages. If you quote writers who have found fault with the product (or category), it goes a long way towards convincing people that you are presenting a balanced portrait. Another way of doing that is by presenting the history of the concept, with its failures as well as successes.

I hope you've found this helpful. There are a number of resources available here for people who want to contribute useful articles and, if you need further assistance, I'll be happy to point you towards them. I believe that the process of creating a Wikipedia article is quite different from crafting a product monograph or an advertisement, and I think you've made an excellent start by asking for help; very nearly everyone who volunteers here will help you if you ask. Please don't hesitate to contact me if I can be of any further assistance by leaving a message on my talk page. Accounting4Taste:talk 00:41, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Logo xs2theworld3.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Logo xs2theworld3.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:20, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking Dictionary

Haha, that was an awful joke ☺! Anyway, I'll do some cleanup now, but NPOV (Neutral Point Of View) is just basically only stating fact and no opinion, and categorization certainly shouldn't get your page deleted. Wikification is just making it work with Wikipedia syntax. Anyway, I will clean the article up now and just call if you need more help! Ase nine ^(talk)^(contribs) 14:20, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am noting that you have no citations. Do you have any websites that other editors can verify the facts in the article with? Ase nine ^(talk)^(contribs) 14:21, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Always happy to answer your queries. :)

1.) The reason I removed that is that it is more of an ad than anything else, which is not what Wikipedia is about.

2.) Competition is irrelevant to the content of the article itself, since just about anything that is sold will have different companies vouching for place. And I missed them out in the refs by accident, will delete now.

3.) Well, the idea is that you get specific pages on the cite and link them by using the {{cite web}} syntax. If you tell me where the main points are summarized on the site I will do this for you.

4.) The fact that it is almost identical may or may not warrant not warrant it being within the same page as a subsection. If you could tell me how it is similar...?

I'm off to bed now, but I'll be back on tomorrow. If you get asked any questions related to the article's need to be on Wikipedia which you don't know the answer to, feel free to direct them at me. :) Ase nine ^(talk)^(contribs) 22:37, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again

You could indeed post about the company, yes. If you can give me a high res logo, I can turn it into an SVG for the infobox, if you like. With regards to citing the PDF, he/she would need it uploaded on their website so that it can be linked to (the website means that we can see it is genuine). Thanks again. Ase nine ^(talk)^(contribs) 00:08, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and I forgot to say. Even if you client would like two different entries, I should tell you that if editors feel that one is not notable without the other, then they will most likely be merged, or the least important will be deleted. If this happens, I'll make sure to request a merge for you. Ase nine ^(talk)^(contribs) 00:10, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on XS2The World B.V., requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add {{hangon}} on the top of the article and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Awotter (talk) 05:54, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see it's been deleted

I'm going to request an undelete, if there is such a thing. If not, I will contest it and reinstate it from the Google cache. If you give me a couple of days I will rewrite it, too, so that we can be sure it does not breach any guidelines. Ase nine ^(talk)^(contribs) 17:51, 2 February 2008 (UTC) Oh, by the way, see this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Asenine (talk • contribs) 17:54, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rewrite almost finished

If you could pass over any images you want to be in the article, I'll sort out the license tagging. Email them to me at asenine[at]gmail[dot]com. Please do contribute if you wish, the rewrite is temp. housed at User:Asenine/Speaking Dictionary ǝuɪuǝsɐ ^(ʞɿɐʇ) _sʇdpǝ 17:59, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking Dictionary AFD

An article you created is listed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Speaking Dictionary. You are welcome to participate in the discussion there. — Athaenara ✉ 20:50, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]