User talk:Pastadog42
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions to the article Family online safety institute, but for legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition was deleted under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.
If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text—which means allowing other people to modify it—then you must include on the external site the statement "I, (name), am the author of this article, (article name), and I release its content under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 and later."
You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here. You can also leave a message on my talk page. — Gwalla | Talk 20:24, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
Speedy deletion of Family Online Safety Institute[edit]
A tag has been placed on Family Online Safety Institute requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company or corporation, but it 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, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for companies and corporations.
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), coupled with adding a note on the 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 would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. TN‑X-Man 20:33, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
In general, there needs to be documentation on the site itself that the text is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License, or that you are the author (and implicitly have the right to release it under that license). If you have been given permission to release it under that license, you should note this in your edit summary (also, the name of the person who gave your permission, and the date on which it was given, would make it easier to verify). Please note that permission to post is not the same thing as permission to release under the GFDL. See WP:COPYVIO#Using copyrighted work from others for more info.
Really, the easiest way to handle it is to simply rewrite and rephrase the text. There would be no copyright issue in that case. — Gwalla | Talk 19:55, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
FOSI[edit]
There are two issues. While you might have permission to post the text of an organization's website (and I'll get to that), I highly recommend that you rephrase the article into neutral, generic language. Reading the original text, it sounded very much like the organization's official statement of where it began and what it does - the article should instead read like a neutral, outside perspective on what the organization is, where it is based, when it started, what it does, etc. The list of board members is too much, though mentioning a celebrity or notable member is probably OK. You'll also want to talk about why this organization is unique or notable. Is there news coverage about a programme? Perhaps the organization has been involved in a high-profile event? Anything is helpful, but the more sources, the better. With these notes as a guide, have a look and see if there's a way the article might be improved. I'd recommend starting off in your userspace, perhaps by clicking on this link: User:Pastadog42/FOSI, where you can draft an article before posting it to the articlespace. Ping my talk page, and I'll have a look and assist. Best, UltraExactZZ Claims ~ Evidence 19:48, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
- It is much improved, actually - good work. I'll have a detailed look later today, when I get some free time. Thanks! UltraExactZZ Claims ~ Evidence 19:08, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
- I'd add some general information about the organization's mission, perhaps in the context of a "Programmes" heading. I can see the ICRA section being expanded in this way, for example. You'll want to talk about FOSI's primary operations - what does it do the most? What program takes up the most of its time/budget/manpower? Presumably, that operation is focused on FOSI's mission, so it gives some context. "FOSI's primary operations focus on X, Y, and Z. Programmes such as the ICRA further these goals by providing tools and information to internet content providers, and by doing X, Y, and Z, and so forth..." The upshot is that you have lots of sources that show what FOSI does, and some of the dated items under "Past Events" could be used for examples here. There are a couple of formatting items, as well; I'll fix the ones I'm seeing. Good work, though - you're pretty close, but I'd hold back a little longer while you fine-tune. Best, UltraExactZZ Claims ~ Evidence 19:43, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
- No problem - I've got a few minutes, let me have a look. I see a couple things I'm going to convert to prose, from the lists - you'll see what I mean. Again, you're doing good work, here. UltraExactZZ Claims ~ Evidence 20:42, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
- I'd add some general information about the organization's mission, perhaps in the context of a "Programmes" heading. I can see the ICRA section being expanded in this way, for example. You'll want to talk about FOSI's primary operations - what does it do the most? What program takes up the most of its time/budget/manpower? Presumably, that operation is focused on FOSI's mission, so it gives some context. "FOSI's primary operations focus on X, Y, and Z. Programmes such as the ICRA further these goals by providing tools and information to internet content providers, and by doing X, Y, and Z, and so forth..." The upshot is that you have lots of sources that show what FOSI does, and some of the dated items under "Past Events" could be used for examples here. There are a couple of formatting items, as well; I'll fix the ones I'm seeing. Good work, though - you're pretty close, but I'd hold back a little longer while you fine-tune. Best, UltraExactZZ Claims ~ Evidence 19:43, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
- Only two major changes, really. For Programs, I tinkered with the headings a bit, for formatting's sake. I also distilled and combined some of the points, since there was a bit of duplication of information. One thing that we see a lot of in promotional items is repetition - it works well for ad copy, but not so much for regular articles. I'm not faulting you at all - it's natural to make a point and then repeat and expand that point - but it caught my eye, so I tried to remedy it. As for Membership, I'd split the lists to make it more prose-y. I've started the process, but you'll want to move the full members into the paragraph for American and British (European?) members, as appropriate. With a notation about associate members, that does not need its own section as such, which clarifies the paragraph.
- The 2007 conference section seems a little top-heavy to me, but I'm not sure how I would fix it - it looks like good information, particularly since that's one of the organization's big marquee events. Maybe some extra sources, news coverage and such, would help - but I think that's OK as well, so I'm sort of stuck. I'll see what I can do later tonight. I think it's close to ready, with some minor tweaking. How do you feel? UltraExactZZ Claims ~ Evidence 20:55, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
- I think it's good. The article seems to be fairly neutral in tone, and gives a good overview of the organization's activities. It's still a bit promotional, but I'm not sure that there is anything specific I would change. The key thing is that it's not exclusively promoting the organization; it discusses it, but anything too promotional can easily be removed while leaving the bulk of the article. I added a news source, and I'd advise adding any news articles you find - but I think it's ready to go. UltraExactZZ Claims ~ Evidence 16:56, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Placing draft in article space[edit]
If you think it's ready, you should move the draft to Family Online Safety Institute. you do this by clicking on the "Move" command, immediately to the right of the "History" command at the top of your screen. Follow the directions there. In this way, you preserve the edits that make up the draft, which is necessary for GDFL compliance. Good work, by the way. Best, UltraExactZZ Claims ~ Evidence 17:46, 12 October 2008 (UTC)