User talk:Suseydude
An article which you have contributed to/been involved with is being considered for deletion (and possible salting) based upon the following criteria:
- No citations or WP:RS content.
- Possible hoax content.
You are welcome to comment at this article's entry for deletion which was opened at 01.19 on the 23/03/10. Plutonium27 (talk) 22:30, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Stafford Collegiate
A tag has been placed on Stafford Collegiate requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content. You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. — Timneu22 · talk 12:58, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
Help request
can someone please put the correct titles/headers within the main article. thank you --Suseydude 13:39, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
- Hi there. You asked this on the article talk page, but I'd rather answer here, on your own talk.
- Before worrying about the formatting of the article, you need to add references - otherwise, it'll be deleted. Articles must have references to show "significant coverage in reliable, independent sources" - please see WP:VRS.
- The formatting doesn't matter; that can be fixed any time - but the refs are essential.
| How references work |
|---|
Simple referencesThese require two parts;
Chzz is 98 years old.<ref> "The book of Chzz", Aardvark Books, 2009. </ref> He likes tea. <ref> [http://www.nicecupofteaandasitdown.com Tea website] </ref>
== References ==
{{reflist}}
(an existing article is likely to already have one of these sections) To see the result of that, please look at user:chzz/demo/simpleref. Edit it, and check the code; perhaps make a test page of your own, such as user:Suseydude/reftest and try it out. Named referencesChzz was born in 1837, <ref name="MyBook"> "The book of Chzz", Aardvark Books, 2009. </ref> in Footown.<ref name="MyBook"/> Note that the second usage has a / (and no closing ref tag). This needs a reference section as above; please see user:chzz/demo/namedref to see the result. Citation templatesYou can put anything you like between <ref> and </ref>, but using citation templates makes for a neat, consistent look; Chzz has 37 Olympic medals. <ref> {{Citation
| last = Smith
| first = John
| title = Olympic medal winners of the 20th century
| publication-date = 2001
| publisher = [[Cambridge University Press]]
| page = 125
| isbn = 0-521-37169-4
}}
</ref>
Please see user:chzz/demo/citeref to see the result. For more help and tips on that subject, see user:chzz/help/refs. |
ou can either;
- Leave a message on my own talk page;
OR - Use a {{helpme}} - please create a new section at the end of your own talk page, put {{helpme}}, and ask your question - remember to 'sign' your name by putting ~~~~ at the end;
OR - Talk to us live, with this or this.
- The last of those is particularly useful - please try it; pop in now and say hello. Chzz ► 14:38, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
still not sure
{{helpme}} Im still not sure what to do, the information has been gathered from printed resources that are issued to pupils, as far as i am aware they are not available online Suseydude 15:07, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
I have tried to add afew references where i can find them but can someone please have a look and make sure ive done it right. thank you Suseydude 15:36, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
- Hi, that's a good start - thanks - but, you'll need independent reliable sources; also, you need to remove the 'promotional' type of content.
- As you are obviously prepared to try and work within the guidelines, I have removed the 'speedy deletion' tag, so it should be OK for a while - if you can work on it, over the coming days. I will check back; if it doesn't get sorted out, it may still be deleted.
- You need to add references to secondary sources - such as newspaper articles.
- Language such as the broadest possible curriculum, a large range of courses is not acceptable; we need 'cold, hard encyclopaedic fact' - verifiable through secondary sources. See WP:PEACOCK, WP:WEASEL.
- Claims such as operating successfully for nearly twenty years definitely need an independent reliable source, or else they should be removed.
- Currently, each partner has its own identity and culture. This will not change. - according to whom? I do not believe that such claims will be verifiable through independent reliable sources.
- The above are examples of the problems; please amend the article, stick to facts that mostly come from secondary, independent references; use primary sources only with care.
- Ask for help when you need it. Chzz ► 16:38, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
{{helpme}} Hi, I think ive got rid of all the stuff not completly verifiable, I still need to look for some better citations but I think that all the ones I have added cover all of the comments made. can you give your views on anything I have missed. thank you Suseydude 20:06, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
- I'm looking at it right now, and will answer more, here, very soon. Brief: it's mostly OK; few tweaks, and suggestions for future. Thanks, Chzz ► 20:29, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
Doing...
- I've removed some of the more promotional / unencyclopaedic stuff, with this edit.
- It still needs independent reliable sources; the offcom is not enough; it needs referenced facts from some newspapers or something, to show that it is notable. Please try to add some, and ask again. Thanks, Chzz ► 21:15, 16 June 2010 (UTC)