User talk:Mailgkhandelwal
Hi, It was a wonderful experience interacting with your class. Hope to see you guys again. Following box provides you with quick links to various help sections. Hope this helps. Enjoy editing...! Regards, Gurmeet
|
Speedy deletion nomination of Asset based welfare[edit]
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Asset based welfare 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.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, 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. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Sparthorse (talk) 07:20, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
Hi, friend![edit]
Allow me to introduce myself — my name is Tim Davenport, "Carrite" on Wikipedia, and I live in Corvallis, Oregon, on the western coast of the United States of America. I'm 50 years old and have been active in the Wikipedia project since 2008.
I was just alerted this morning that I've been assigned as a "Wikipedia Ambassador" to be available to answer any questions you might have about your work on the article Asset based welfare. While I do have a Bachelor's degree in Economics, for the last 20 years or more I have concentrated exclusively on matters of history and political biography, so I will not be of much help to you in locating sources.
Fortunately, I do know a good deal about the mechanics of Wikipedia article writing, its sometimes confusing policies and standards, and its unique internal culture. If I may assist you by answering questions relating to any of these matters, please do not hesitate to ask. Just click TALK behind my user name below and leave a message for me on my Wikipedia "Talk Page," or you may email me directly at MutantPop@aol.com. Be sure to put the word WIKIPEDIA in your email header if you contact me directly so the message is not lost as spam.
Thank you for your forthcoming contribution to the project! Carrite (talk) 17:50, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
And another note[edit]
I see that someone deleted your article yesterday. I have written them appealing the decision. Don't worry too much, content at Wikipedia is hidden, not destroyed — the work still exists. Carrite (talk) 17:50, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
User:Mailgkhandelwal/Asset based welfare[edit]
Per the request by User:Carrite I have restored the Asset based welfare page to your userspace at User:Mailgkhandelwal/Asset based welfare. You can work on the article there, safe for now from it being deleted again, until it is ready, when it can be moved back to the main article space. Davewild (talk) 18:37, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
Your article[edit]
I put up a "Construction" banner on the top of the article, which is an important thing to remember to do that nobody ever tells you about... Basically this lets other people know that one is still working on an article and helps to protect it from deletion. The code for this is two curly brackets { { plus the word CONSTRUCTION and then two curly closing brackets } } . When you're done editing the piece, you pull this so-called "template" down. The software removes construction templates automatically after a week if there is no activity on the article, however.
Okay, now for your article. The substance of the article looks good — a couple things upon which we may differ, such as whether Thomas Paine envisioned a "social democracy" with "central planning," etc., but those are what we call "content matters" and shouldn't be cause for worry in terms of deletion. And you may well be factually right — it's just that stuff like that needs to be footnoted.
Which brings me to the main point. The writing is in place, but the thing missing are footnotes — and these are exactly the things that protect an article from deletion challenges.
First a few words on Wikipedia doctrine, then a bit on how to actually MAKE footnotes. Wikipedia articles are supposed to be about "notable" topics and contain "verifiable" information. The way we all know if something is "notable" and "verifiable" relates to whether something is the subject of (1) significant (2) published coverage in (3) multiple (4) reliable (5) independent sources.
This is a complicated way of saying that a topic needs to the significantly covered in 2 or better 3 or still better 4 books, journal articles, serious newspapers, or web versions of serious newspapers.
If there are no footnotes present, the notability and verifiability of an article is brought into question — and THAT is exactly what fuels deletions. There are, as you are no doubt aware by now, a substantial number of people whose main volunteer work at Wikipedia deals with "quality control," which does involve deletion on a fairly massive scale.
Anyway, you now need to protect your article by making it obvious that it is a "notable" and "verifiable" topic through the use of footnotes.
I recently wrote a short "How to Footnote" bit for another Indian student, let me go grab that now...
Citing sources at Wikipedia[edit]
Citing sources is a little bit tricky. I am going to put a footnote here and you can switch over to the edit screen to see what I typed. First I am going to cite a single page of a single source twice, both for this line here.[1] And that one.[1]
The part that goes inside the first brackets must say ref name= and then you can call it anything you want after that. In this case, I named this source WLC201. The second time you use the same source, you can just use the name you are calling the source, then a space, then a /, and the closing bracket. It is very easy to copy-and-paste this again and again if you are using the same source four or five times. See how I did this in the article Theresa Wolfson last night... Click EDIT THIS PAGE of that piece to see.
Now I will do a simple reference for another source which I am only going to use once.[2]
In this case, you don't give the source a name, you just call it ref.
Does this help?
Footnotes[edit]
Lead[edit]
I have tampered with the lead sentence of your article pretty severely, please take a look at it and make sure that I'm on the mark. It's important to have a clear statement of what an article is about in the very first section... It is another important way to keep "quality control inspectors" from meddling with your work. The line I have down there now probably needs to be expanded some, but that's the basic idea — keeping things short and clear. Carrite (talk) 17:50, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
A "User Box" for your user page[edit]
|
Here is a template for a "Service Badge" for your user page — you can transfer this over there if you want to...
These are informal and are self-awarded based on time and the total number of edits you make — just click in the link of the user box to see the other "ranks" of awards. These are another way to help preserve your work, I think — since using these "badges" does tend to indicate that a person is serious about Wikipedia and makes it somewhat less likely that the "quality control inspectors" will be overly concerned about vandalism or false topics. Carrite (talk) 19:23, 9 November 2011 (UTC)