User talk:JP419

Christian Patriot

I have proposed to move the article. Please comment at its talk page. Gazpacho 05:50, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:Indianamilitiacorpslogo.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Indianamilitiacorpslogo.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Skier Dude (talk) 03:50, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Indiana Militia Corps

Hi,

As much as I'd like to help, I'm afraid I'm out of touch with current policies to properly moderate the discussion. If the article is nominated for deletion, you should make your arguments there, and let the current administrators who are involved in the page clean up to judge the discussion. 4 years ago, consensus was reached to keep the article because it was changed to make it notable. If, notability has changed since 4 years ago, or consensus differs, then I'm sorry, the article should be deleted. I understand you being an inclusionist, but the things I'm finding about it doesn't warrant it necessarily being that notable to have a page on its own. Maybe a footnote in another article, but that's all I can tell. --AllyUnion (talk) 08:32, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick reply. Actually, the article hasn't been properly nominated yet.. Fortunately, the individual in question (in this instance) was kind enough to use the talk page first before making radical edits. I'd hate to see hours of work flushed, because I'm not about to engage in an edit war, though certainly this subject (militias in the USA) has attracted precisely that sort of activity. Could/should edit protection be considered?

This user's concept of notability, and his desire to delete the article, centers around a narrow interpretation of what he considers acceptable sources. He seems to think that ONLY mainstream media (ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, and corporate printed journalism such as Newsweek or USA Today) can be cited. Isn't it true that membership organizations with an online presence such as Constitution.org, or publishing affiliates of an org like TheNewAmerican.com (magazine of the John Birch Society) can be sited a third party sources? (Especially if the material in question is accessible online?)

Oh, one last question: How do I determine who the administrator of a page is? If the page has no administrator, what can I do? How does one go about doing that? There are a number of other pages I am interested in taking a more active role in, assuming that I don't get edit warred / reverted to death for making good improvements.

Thanks again.

--JP419 via email

Membership organizations with an online presence is not a way to establish notability. I'll explain my reasoning why. Suppose you have 10 friends, living within your region (50 miles, let's say) and have them start 10 independent local food review magazines. They all decide to publish their magazines online. You open a restaurant, and have them review it. Does this mean your restaurant is notable enough to merit an article in the Wikipedia?

I'm not saying though, that your references are not notable, but I'm only trying to highlight how the argument could be made for a little cafe out of in the middle of nowhere, who decided on a whim, to put themselves in the Wikipedia for advertisement purposes.

As quoted from Wikipedia:Verifiability: The most reliable sources are usually peer-reviewed journals; books published by university presses; university-level textbooks; magazines, journals, and books published by respected publishing houses; and mainstream newspapers. Electronic media may also be used, subject to the same criteria. Academic and peer-reviewed publications are highly valued and usually the most reliable sources in areas where they are available, such as history, medicine, and science. Material from reliable non-academic sources may also be used in these areas, particularly if it appears in respected mainstream publications.

There is no set "administrator" for page. If you like help from an administrator, you can flag one down either in IRC (#wikipedia-en on irc.freenode.net) or at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (WP:ANI). From WP:ADMIN: Used for matters needing attention from "any passing administrator/s". Although threads here can become long, this board is primarily for incidents and other matters needing advice or attention.

--AllyUnion (talk) 09:55, 20 December 2009 (UTC)