This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Dan Chan, and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: Dan chan. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally moving or duplicating content, please be sure you have followed the procedure at Wikipedia:Splitting by acknowledging the duplication of material in edit summary to preserve attribution history.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 01:20, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Grayfell. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Dan Chan because it appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. Grayfell (talk) 08:36, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article Dan Chan has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

BLP does not have enough secondary sourcing to establish notability. I looked through books, newspaper articles and website but I did not find any secondary sources which discuss Dan Chan's life and career in detail.

Would photos of performing at events constitute notable sources? Most of the articles did not keep. I have photos of each event. But for privacy reasons and non-disclosure agreements I don't want to include photos. Here's a timeline of just some of the notable events in the career timeline. http://www.danchanmagic.com/Schedule_for_Bay_Area_Magician.asp

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((proposed deletion/dated)) notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing ((proposed deletion/dated)) will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Binksternet (talk) 21:55, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Dan Chan 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/Dan Chan 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. Binksternet (talk) 03:08, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Danielgchan, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your edits to the page Dan Chan have not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may be removed if they have not yet been. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles. As well, all new biographies of living people must contain at least one reliable source.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Simplified Manual of Style

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, ask me on my talk page, or you can type ((helpme)) on your user page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  Grayfell (talk) 05:15, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

To respond to your question above: no, photos would probably not work. Wikipedia sources need to be WP:VERIFIABLE, and if at all possible WP:SECONDARY. For example, your diploma is not a good source, because it's incredibly inconvenient for anybody else to see it. Beyond that, nobody is denying that you have performed many shows, that's not the only problem. There is also a larger problem of notability (WP:ENT). The guidelines for Wikipedia articles about entertainers ask that an article demonstrate at least one of the following:

1. Has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions.
2. Has a large fan base or a significant "cult" following.

6 Groupon runs, Living Social, Amazon Local and Google Offer have run Dan Chan's dinner show.~~~~

https://www.facebook.com/pages/San-Francisco-Bay-Area-Magician-Dan-Chan-Magic-Man/27888504435 with 9,300 plus fans. ~~~~

1. Has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment.

Gained a reputation for performing rarely seen Bian Lian around the world, Also gained a reputation among many magicians for pickpocketing a difficult skill. youtube testimonial of pickpocketing here. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQ1Ecser3wI ~~~~

I have a few article clippings all of which I only have scans and photos of most of them are no longer found on the web. I also have a one page Campus Activities independent article.~~~~

In addition to the above articles, I would strongly suggest you take a look at WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY. Grayfell (talk) 06:12, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It is considered good Wikipedia etiquette to post comments and responses at the end of a section, to make it easier for other people to follow the discussion. If you would like to respond item-by-item, you can do so by beginning a new line with a colon (:) which indents the line to make it distinct. Otherwise it's impossible to tell which parts of this conversation you wrote, and which I wrote, and it becomes very confusion for everybody else. Also, please sign your comments by typing ~~~~ at the end of you post.

As for your questions, Youtube and Facebook are almost never reliable sources. Books (not self-published) and newspapers are a good start. If you have gained a reputation for Bian Lian performances, find articles other people have independently written about it. Likewise with pick-pocketing. Wikipedia has a guide on identifying reliable sources: Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. I strongly recommend you read it. Good luck. Grayfell (talk) 09:18, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I can see how it can be confusing, but to clarify, typing four tildes at the end of a post automatically adds a signature. I added the 'no wiki' part in my explanation so that it would display on the page without adding my signature. You should not copy that part when signing, just the four tildes. You might find WP:SIGNATURE helpful. There is also a show preview button right next to the save page button. Also, again, it is a lot easier to follow a conversation if you add new parts to the end, rather than in the middle.

The sources do not need to be online. That's a common misconception, but newspapers and books are fine, as long as they have been published. Are these established papers? From WP:RS: "News reporting from less-established outlets is generally considered less reliable for statements of fact." If the Campus Activities profile is from the NACA magazine, that might be a good source. The thing you are looking for is factual reporting, not press-releases or 'puff pieces', and not passing mentions, either. I hope that's helpful. Grayfell (talk) 06:46, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Bian lian. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include, but are not limited to, links to personal websites, links to websites with which you are affiliated (whether as a link in article text, or a citation in an article), and links that attract visitors to a website or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the page, please discuss it on the associated talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you. —C.Fred (talk) 16:17, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Daniel G Chan, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please follow the prompts on the Articles for Creation template atop the page. ... discospinster _talk 18:14, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions; however, it appears you may have written a Wikipedia article about yourself. Creating an autobiography is strongly discouraged – please see our guideline on writing autobiographies. If you create such an article, it may be deleted. If what you have done in life is genuinely notable and can be verified according to our policy for articles about living people, someone else will probably create an article about you sooner or later (see Wikipedians with articles). If you wish to add to or change an existing article about yourself, you are welcome to propose the changes by visiting the article's talk page. Please understand that this is an encyclopedia and not a personal web space or social networking site. If your article has already been deleted, please see: Why was the page I created deleted?, and if you feel the deletion was an error, please discuss this with the deleting administrator. Thank you. creffett (talk) 21:02, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Draft:Daniel G Chan, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Randykitty (talk) 05:10, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]