User talk:Productionweb

Welcome!

Hello, Productionweb, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Gilo ö 04:42, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Big deal productions[edit]

You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the Article Wizard.

Thank you.

A tag has been placed on Big deal productions, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be unambiguous advertising that only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add {{hangon}} on the top of Big deal productions and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Gilo ö 04:42, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To answer your question[edit]

The first article you created was unambiguously advertising. This, for example, could be straight out of an ad or press release: "From fiction to documentaries, reality-show, reporting journalism or multiplatform content, they create, direct and promote throughout the world, works of eccentric talents by pushing the limits of imagination with a creative and innovative vision." The second time, there was no content at all placed in the article. Both of these are reasons for speedy deletion.

If you are affiliated with this organization, I would suggest you don't get involved with an article on it. If you are not, and you want to write about it, you will need significant coverage from reliable sources not affiliated with the article's subject written about it. If that type of sourcing does not exist, the subject is not one an article would be appropriate for, since it wouldn't meet our requirements for notability. If they do, and you can point me to them, I'd be happy to help you with getting an article together in an appropriate neutral tone. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 05:10, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Final warning[edit]

It is positive that you are asking for help, but not in that you are ignoring it and continuing to recreate an inappropriate, promotional article at Big deal productions. If you persist in doing this, you will be blocked from editing. I strongly encourage you to read the suggestions and links given, and not recreate the article again until you fully understand them. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 06:03, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

i still don't understand, an authorisation was sent to; [email protected] from the owner of the site to use a part of the text description from the website... like your guidelines asked for. i will read again... but i really don't understand then. can you help me by telling what i sould do then please for it to be accepted? i changed the text for it to not be promotional and i gave you the permission to use the text so... don't know what to do next. thanks you very much for your help.

Even if you have permission to release the copyrighted text under the CC-BY-SA license (and keep in mind, this would mean that anyone in the world is free to copy, reuse, and modify it without your permission, including for commercial use), and you chose to do so knowing that, it still promotes the company. You need to cite sources that are not affiliated with the organization, and are reliable. If substantive sourcing of that nature does not exist, the organization is not an appropriate article subject. If it does, please point me to it, and I'll help you write the article in a neutral tone. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 06:14, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

here are some links about the company; http://www.just-movies.org/imdbphp/imdb.php?mid=0361920 http://www.imdb.com/company/co0088253/ http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=185759626382&v=info&ref=search http://ftvdb.bfi.org.uk/sift/title/654226 http://www.telefilm.gc.ca/document/en/01/18/jul1998_sep1998.htm http://www.linkedin.com/companies/big-deal-productions http://www.roxanneducharme.com/2009/07/abysses.html http://hollywood.premiere.com/movie-A%20Monk's%20Voice http://www.amnestyusa.org/filmfest/slc/2003/sept20.html http://www.amnestyutah.org/films.htm

please let me know what i should do next

thanks you

From looking through those sources, they appear to be neither reliable nor in-depth (many of them allow anonymous and self publication, and others are simply lists or name drops). If there is not in-depth coverage of this organization by reliable sources not affiliated with it, it is not appropriate for an article. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 06:37, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

and another one http://www.qfq.com/4dcgi/index.4d??7939

I don't see anything more than a passing mention of the subject in that article (I'm presuming it's the "Glaz Entertainment" I get from translation, otherwise there's no mention at all, but even if so it's just a mention in passing). At this time, it does not appear that there is sufficient sourcing to support an article on that organization. Please consider writing on something else. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 06:43, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

well there are very reliable articles at this site; http://www.qfq.com it is the official website for the industry in quebec, canada... but to read the articles, you need to be a member a pay. there are several artciles that have been written since 1997. about the company's projects, the director nathalie ducharme, interviews, etc.

if you go on this page; http://www.bigdealproductions.com/NATHALIE_DUCHARME.html you can see all the press release and in depth article that were written over the years... but they are in french. go in the PRESS RELEASE section in the bottom of the page and click on all the links to read the articles. they are all there... and there are a lot of them.

i'm sure that should be sufficient since you have all the names of newspapers in whicj those articles were released, and dates. thanks for getting back to me on that

I don't even see "Big Deal Productions" mentioned in most of those articles. Most of them seem to be covering an actress. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 06:58, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

_____________________

the woman that you describe as an "actress" is the president of big deal productions. She is a producer and director with 15 years of experience; http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nathalie_Ducharme

she gave numerous interviews on her work produced by big deal productions and numerous articles were written on her company's work. if you can read frecnh, you will understand that all the article talk about the projetcs produced by the company, reviews, interviews. You can read the BIG DEAL PRODUCTIONS name along the articles............

an interview with the president of big deal productions about 2 documentaries shot in vancouver canada, produced by big deal productions and directed by nathalie ducharme; http://www.bigdealproductions.com/uploads/Picture_4.png

an interview with the president of big deal productions on a documentary series shot in india and produced by big deal productions; http://www.bigdealproductions.com/uploads/Nathalie_Ducharme_en_qu_te_d_images_en_Inde2001.jpg

an article about a documentary on a canadien actor produced by big deal productions; http://www.bigdealproductions.com/uploads/Picture_7.png http://www.bigdealproductions.com/uploads/Picture_7.png

with all your respect, those are reliable and detailed articles from very reliable sources in Canada. Among them, QUI FAIT QUOI is the official and very reputable TV and FILM magazine in QUEBEC. They have a monthly magazine coming out each month + a website magazine coming out each day about what's going on in the industry, interviews, reviews, etc.

please let me know what to do next???

can this be ok... IT IS BASED ON A COMPANY FROM MONTREAL AND IT IS WHAT THEY HAVE IN THEIR PROFIL;

'BIG DEAL PRODUCTIONS is a Canadian film production company. The company is based in Montreal, Quebec, Canada and is headed by founder, producer and director Nathalie Ducharme, who serves as President.'

SOULD I WRITE THIS THEN? it sould be ok since the same kind of company located nearby with similar experience wrote this.

thanks for letting me know

I've really been trying to let you know. You are involved with the organization. Leave the article alone. It's been deleted several times now, including after discussion. If the organization is truly notable, someone will eventually write the article. It's best to avoid writing or editing articles where you are involved with the article's subject, as this represents a conflict of interest. Maybe you'd be better to edit some general articles on film or filmmaking, and ask someone to revisit this article at a later time. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 03:12, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits[edit]

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 08:32, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ok thanks for the information... i didn't know, sorry! i'll try it now. can you help me with my page? how can i take off the alert message on top of it? and what is wrong exactly with my description? thanks--Productionweb (talk) 08:37, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The warning is there for a reason—you seem to be affiliated with the organization, and are writing the article. We strongly discourage that, you should generally stick to articles on subjects that you don't stand to gain from. However, it doesn't have an ad tone anymore, so that is positive. I'm going to try to get someone who speaks French to more fully evaluate the sources you brought up, though it concerns me they seem to be scanned into a website without any type of assertion of permission, so they may be copyright violations. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 13:45, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

well, i adjust it a little like you asked... and beside that, i don't know what to do more than this. the company exist since 1997 and has produced numerous documentaries and TV series. they had a press coverage and some of the big articles are only available for members of TV industry in Canada. The articles are accessible to everyone for a certain amount of time after, you need to register. the company's projects won a few awards and some of their projects travelled and were seen all over the world... i'm really surpise and sorry that you think this company is not worth being in expedia. it is your decision and i respect it.--Productionweb (talk) 16:21, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

can you please explain to me what is going on? thanks you--Productionweb (talk) 17:56, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Previously, the article was speedily deleted. We have various criteria under which an article may be deleted immediately, such as promotional content or copyrighted material, which is why it was previously deleted several times. The article no longer fits any of those categories, which is why I did not speedily delete it the last time. Another editor nominated the article for a deletion discussion, where editors will discuss whether the article should or should not be deleted. You can participate in that discussion, if you wish, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Big deal productions. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 03:41, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Big deal productions[edit]

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Big deal productions. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Big deal productions. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:12, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]