User talk:Bastions

Your submission at Articles for creation
 Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.
 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia&.
 * To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the [ reviewer's talk page] . Please remember to link to the submission!
 * You can also get | live chat help from experienced editors.
 * Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Jorgecarleitao (talk) 22:06, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation
 The Hall Affair, Gosport, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you are more than welcome to continue submitting work to Articles for Creation. Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia! MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:52, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
 * If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
 * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.


 * Greetings, your article is published, but still needs some work. I suggest you swing by the Teahouse for advice from volunteer mentors. MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:52, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation
 Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.
 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia&.
 * To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the [ reviewer's talk page] . Please remember to link to the submission!
 * You can also get | live chat help from experienced editors.
 * Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! ~ Matthewrbowker Talk to me 06:28, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation
 Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.
 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia&.
 * To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the [ reviewer's talk page] . Please remember to link to the submission!
 * You can also get | live chat help from experienced editors.
 * Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! CharmlessCoin (talk) 04:11, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
~ Matthewrbowker Talk to me 18:47, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Notes on your submissions
I've received your revised articles, and I've started the process of transferring the revisions to the Stephen Weeks article. What I'm going to do now is give you a run through of just what I've been doing so that you can try yourself. That way, you can learn how things work here and hopefully be successful with future contributions.

Here's a list of ways to properly format your articles:
 * Italics: To make text italic, simply put two apostrophes on either side of it, like this . Keep in mind that I do mean apostrophes, not quotation marks. Same goes for boldface, except you use three apostrophes.
 * References: You have right idea with using numbered footnotes, but the way Wikipedia does it is a bit different. Instead of literally typing a number in brackets and then typing the reference at the bottom of the page, we use an automated reference system which I will explain. When you want to place a reference in the text, first type this tag: . This completes the reference itself; there will now appear a superscript footnote in brackets where we typed the reference. So where does that text appear? We need to place a reference list at the bottom of the article, in a section labeled "References". To do that, we simply type . You can see how this works by clicking "Edit" on nearly any article in Wikipedia.
 * Line breaks: A strange quirk of Wikipedia is that pressing Enter once does absolutely nothing to the text. In order to create any sort of line break, you need two carriage returns. If you need instead to start a new line directly below the current one, you must place a line break with this code: , but this typically isn't done in articles.
 * Internal links: You can see in my revisions that I placed links in the text to other articles. This is usually done with places, people, and other notable topics that (a) we probably have an article on and (b) readers might like to know more about. The method for doing this is fairly simple; if I want to place a link to the article about England, I simply surround it with double brackets. That is, I type England, which produces this: England.

The general thing to remember is that Wikipedia isn't like a word processor; it uses a different means of formatting. Like I said, I've started you off on the Stephen Weeks article by importing the new text and fixing some formatting and references; you can see what I did here. However, I unfortunately simply don't have the time to go through such a long article and fix the references and formatting. So I recommend you use the guide I've given you above to work on improving your submissions. This way, you'll end up learning how to do this yourself, and can edit in the future without using valuable time going through other editors.

If you need help with anything specific, you may find the Cheatsheet helpful; if not, you can feel free to ask me on my Talk page. You can also use the help desk, or even our live help chat. Robert Skyhawk (T C) 00:35, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Stephen Weeks concern
Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Stephen Weeks, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 180 days. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 16:28, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Your draft article, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Stephen Weeks


Hello Bastions. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "Stephen Weeks".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply and remove the  or  code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code:, paste it in the edit box at this link , click "Save", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 14:04, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Notice of Neutral point of view noticeboard discussion
There is currently a discussion at Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic Hall Affair. Thank you. -- Orange Mike &#124;  Talk  02:37, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

Hall affair
I have raised some concerns regarding this article on its Talkpage, Talk:Hall affair. KJP1 (talk) 15:37, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
 * As no improvements have been made, I shall push this article to Articles for Deletion. KJP1 (talk) 09:11, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Help me!
Please help me with dealing with editors who have queried certain things or criticised other facts in two articles I have prepared on allied subjects. To be truthful, I am old and I am now fully engaged on a long and exhausting piece of research and subsequent writing....I'm too old a dog to learn new tricks. Is there some friendly editor who will take my original articles or revisions typed in Word, with proper footnotes and references of course, and then post them - in my name is OK? And an editor with whom I might correspond by email? I suppose that might seem like asking you to revert to sending messages by pigeonpost... but I have just wasted an hour replying to an editor, only to find I've nowhere to send it! Bastions (talk) 11:01, 27 March 2020 (UTC)


 * You can use the help me template to request help on editing questions, but not for dealing with contested content.
 * Editing by proxy is generally not allowed. If they are your words, they need to be attributed to you as in your user account.
 * The content you have created certainly seems to raise some questions and you could help by addressing some of those questions; it is not any more difficult than it was to type in this help request.
 * From what you've said here, the kinds of work you want to contribute to Wikipedia are largely original research, something that is not allowed. There are other places where it would be welcome, but not on Wikipedia itself.  — jmcgnh (talk) (contribs) 16:02, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
 * If it's me you were wanting to contact, you can do so here, on the Hall Affair Talkpage, or on my Talkpage. KJP1 (talk) 09:32, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
 * You are being given rather poor advice here but all the same the article, as it stands, is not suitable as an article. I have contacted you at User talk:Bastions. Thincat (talk) 10:47, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Hall affair for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hall affair 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 Articles for deletion/Hall affair until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. KJP1 (talk) 09:15, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Hall affair article
I see Hall affair has been suggested for deletion and I think this is a pity. I am also disappointed that some people have been rather unkind in the way they have been referring to your work. I'm sure that the subject could be made suitable as an article (I have created many substantial articles) and would be happy to put in a major effort to help, if you wish. Many of the issues can be solved by editing and the fact that your references are not online is not a problem in principle (and it should not have been given as a reason for deletion). However, I do not have access to these newspaper archives and I would need access to help enough to be worthwhile. Can you either scan the articles and email them to me (I can talk you through how to do this if it helps) or post me photocopies (I can let you know my postal address)? Let me know by replying here. Do not worry too much about the deadline of a week for deletion. The article can be restored again as a draft if it is going to be improved. Finally I see you are describing yourself as "old" – so am I! – so I hope you are well and very best wishes, particularly at the present time. Thincat (talk) 10:38, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
 * - Just one observation. The conflict of interest, which I am quite certain exists, would need to be declared in any event. KJP1 (talk) 07:59, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, that is a guideline (and one I strongly agree with) that applies in COI cases. If the author is being paid then WMF terms of use come in which are mandatory.Thincat (talk) 08:12, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Stephen Weeks


Hello, Bastions. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Stephen Weeks".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the, , or  code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! TheImaCow (talk) 08:18, 11 May 2020 (UTC)