Welcome!

Hello, Editinghurts, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, like Captain forever, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for page creation, and may soon be deleted.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

• Your first article
• Biographies of living persons
• How to write a great article
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Help pages
• Tutorial

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Airplaneman ^talk 21:10, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the tips! I will work on my Wiki-ing! See you around. Editinghurts (talk) 03:29, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Captain forever, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Captain forever. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Airplaneman ^talk 21:10, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Editinghurts. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Captain forever.
Message added 23:45, 30 November 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Airplaneman ^talk 23:45, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've just read your comments on the Captain Forever AFD page and I thought I would explain a few things, since you seemed confused.

First, it is rare for an AFD (article for deletion) page to be closed before about seven days. There needs to be a very clear consensus, one-way or the other, for this to happen. This consensus does not, at present, exist in the Captain Forever AFD and, as such, it is unlikely to be closed for some days. The mods (or admins as the are generally called on Wikipedia) are unlikely to intervene before that point.

Second, your latest comment seems to imply that you think you should wait until the AFD is over ('so we can get this tag removed and start expanding a bit more on the article') to expand the article, nothing could be further from the truth. You are positively encouraged to make bold changes to articles under the AFD process. One of the principle functions of an AFD is cause such a change in a substandard article. In fact may really good articles only became that way after editors, fearing their deletion, improved them during a AFD.

Finally I would give you this advice when 'voting' (its not really voting but the term will do for now) on an AFD.

Comments like 'its notable in X community', 'I like it', 'I would pay money for it' or 'its famous in my opinion' are seldom helpful. It is best to try to appear detached from a debate. Do not show a strong personal connection to the subject of the article for it will just make people dismiss your views, no matter how well formulated.

Always always always cite policy if you can. Read over WP:N and the sub articles. There are very few articles that you cannot make a case for based on some rule in there. Once you've cited a policy (for example WP:BK or WP:GNG) always cite the part of the policy that passes (for example for a book that’s won a notable award I would say WP:BK point 2) and then explicitly say what part of the article meets that point.

In the Captain Forever AFD, I cited WP:WEB point 3, WP:BK point 2 and WP:NOTFILM point 3. I could have just said it won a major award and that’s notable but I did not. I cited policy showing that winning a major award is generally considered notable and in doing so, I think I made a better, more convincing, case.

An argument like this is worth so much more than the other kind its not even funny. Not only will closing admins pay more attention to your comments but new users (both new to Wikipedia and new to this particular AFD), coming along to the AFD, are much more likely to come in on your side if they see a well reasoned response that clearly citing policy arguing for ‘Keep’. Humans are very much creatures of first impression and its hard for us to change are opinion about something when we've made up our minds.

Anyway, I hope this helps.--Elfwood (talk) 10:27, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry I didn't understand! I am obviously a very new wikipedian, and I apologize sincerley if I did these things wrong.

Thank you for your helpful advice, I will continue to work at becoming a better editor!

It really helped, --Editinghurts (talk) 12:42, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]