Welcome!

Hello, Jh10jcd, 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, such as End of Apartheid, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, 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:

• Starting an article
• 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:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  Filing Flunky ( talk) 12:16, 13 December 2011 (UTC) Filing Flunky ( talk) 12:16, 13 December 2011 (UTC) reply

Hello, Jh10jcd, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia!

I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you worked on, End of Apartheid, for deletion because I don't think it meets our criteria for inclusion. If you don't want the article deleted:

1. edit the page
2. remove the text that looks like this: {{proposed deletion/dated...}}
3. save the page

It helps to explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page. If you have any questions, feel free to ask on the Help Desk. Thanks again for contributing! Filing Flunky ( talk) 20:11, 7 December 2011 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article End of Apartheid is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/End of Apartheid until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Filing Flunky ( talk) 12:11, 13 December 2011 (UTC) reply

Well, welcome to Wikipedia indeed. Your experience thus far is all too typical — a new contribution is met at the front gate with a deletion flag, and you are "welcomed" to the project with a canned greeting and a deletion notice. That's very poor behavior by us, don't you think? Rest assured that this is being typed by a real human without the aid of automated scripts and I just wanted to say thank you for your contribution to the project, I appreciate your work, and now it's time to figure out how to save it.

Sometimes newcomers have been here before under another name, so forgive me if I'm reciting stuff you already know. Anyway...

There is a common popular conception that Wikipedia is something like a big whiteboard that anybody can write anything on with the pile of dry-erase pens handily provided. This is an unrealistic view. In reality, there are probably several thousand hardcore volunteers around the globe working intensely on the project, with a very big emphasis placed on matters of form, content, and quality control. Your piece has run into trouble on two grounds, as nearly as I can reckon, it being on the one hand what is called a "content fork" and on the other hand an "essay." I'll go over both of these things now.

The content of Wikipedia is something like a massive jigsaw puzzle, with each article linking to other articles, ideally with each piece a fully "encyclopedic topic." That's the point of all the blue links inside the articles, connecting one piece with the next. There is a real effort made to not have duplicate pieces, however, because this both messes up the puzzle and provides greater opportunity for mischief — a right wing and left wing take on the same subject, for instance, rather than a balanced piece combining the arguments of the two.

So forking is a no-no, even if it is completely accidental.

Secondly, everything here has to be written according to what is called Neutral Point of View. If there is one thing that every single person contributing to Wikipedia needs to understand, to really understand and accept, it is this concept. Please take a moment to read this page if you haven't already: WP:NPOV.

Things that are written not as neutral expositions on an encyclopedic topic based upon published sources but rather are open or disguised polemics written for the purpose of commercial or political advocacy are called "essays" and are typically ruled out of bounds for inclusion at Wikipedia.

I don't feel your piece is such an essay, but I get the sense that part of the objection to the piece might be related to a discomfort with the piece's tone. I just mention this for your consideration.

Now, let's talk about Articles for Deletion, the place to which your piece has been hauled. I tell people that "AfD" (as it is called in the lingo we Wikipedians use) is akin to a public traffic court. Anybody can stop by to voice their opinion, to make a case for finding the piece innocent or guilty of charges. After a week a judge makes a decision based upon the evidence presented with two possible outcomes — the death penalty or walking away scot free.

(Actually there is a "hung jury" outcome as well, in which case the default is to save the challenged material rather than to delete it.) Anyway, you don't want your stuff to be in this traffic court, but once it is one needs to make the best case possible for keeping the stuff.

OR, in the case of your material here, I think, one needs to make the deletion argument moot by integrating the same material into other standing articles. This is called "Merging."

In my opinion, it is highly likely that AfD is going to rule your piece a mandatory "merge" into such things as South Africa under apartheid (which has sub-articles called History of South Africa (1815–1910) and History of South Africa (1910–1948)) and Negotiations to end apartheid in South Africa.

NOW you see why your piece is probably going to be considered a "fork," yes?

Anyway, I would strongly encourage you to modify or copy-and-paste whatever is essential from your piece at AfD to the articles mentioned above. If you feel that unreasonable, you'll need to explain how your piece is NOT a fork of those standing articles in the deletion debate at AfD.

Be advised that article creators DO have the right to express themselves at AfD. Be sure to keep a level head if you do so, don't personally attack your opponents, assume that everyone there is working for the betterment of the encyclopedia in their own way and that nobody is out to get you or to belittle your contribution to the project. Here is the link to the debate, if you lost track of it: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/End_of_Apartheid.

I hope this answers any questions you may have. If I can help in any way, answer technical questions of how to do this, that, or the other thing with our weird software, etc., do not hesitate to ask. You may either leave a message for me by clicking the (TALK) link behind my signature and editing that page like any other Wikipedia page with your message at the bottom, or if it is easier or more comfortable for you, feel free to email me directly: MutantPop@aol.com.

Thanks again for your work and, truly, welcome to Wikipedia! —Tim Davenport, Corvallis, OR //// Carrite ( talk) 17:55, 13 December 2011 (UTC) reply