User talk:Builder018

Your submission at Articles for creation: Corunna, Ontario has been accepted
 Corunna, Ontario, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the  [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_talk/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Corunna,_Ontario help desk] . Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Thanks again, and happy editing! Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 23:32, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Excited to have contributed my first article! Builder018 (talk) 23:35, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you!

 * Cheers! Builder018 (talk) 17:14, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Editor Advice?
I noticed you took care of one of the edit requests on the Rush Limbaugh page, and I was just debating on trying to request temporary full protection on the page. Something I've never done before and am not confident I know the expectations of. But the number of edits, even by registered and confirmed users, is so overwhelming that we have multiple requests to remove what could be called vandalism 5 minutes after it's already been reverted. Are you an administrative-aware enough editor to tell me if we should request full protection on the page for at least a day or two, or if that's an excessive request at this point? Thanks for any input you can offer. CleverTitania (talk) 18:18, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Hey! Yeah, there definitely is a massive abundance of edits, I just popped by quickly to help with the backlog of edit requests. What I'd personally recommend is give it about a day to calm down, and if there's still a large number of edits, make an extended protected request at RfPP. Extended protected will limit it to anyone with 500 or more edits, so most newer but still autoconfirmed users can't edit. It should be noted though, usually the only time Extended Protection is granted is either in cases of prolonged vandalism, edit wars, or constant major changes to large articles; if it’s simply a lot of editors working on a project, there’s likely no need for it, and instead the talk page should be utilized to sort things out. Make sure to leave another message if you need any more help! Builder018 (talk) 18:24, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Sorry I didn't reply sooner. "Real world" stuff got crazy again. Thanks so much. That's exactly the kind of clarification I was looking for. And often I feel like, when I try to ask questions like this, the person thinks I'm just asking them to fix something for me or to argue over a the way experienced editors tend to do it, when I'm just trying to get a better understanding of what more experienced editors would do and why. I really appreciate your help. CleverTitania (talk) 22:21, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
 * No worries about the timing of replies, I'm very aware of how hectic life outside the internet can get. If you ever need any more clarification I'm more than happy to help, so feel free to drop me a line! As far as the Limbaugh article, editing seems to have mostly died down by now, so protection seems unnecessary at this time. Builder018 (talk) 22:24, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Advice re: Holy Trinity Church article
Thanks for reaching out! I'm honored. I read your article and it works as a stub. If you want to improve it further... Try using active voice to help the prose flow. This technique can also be useful for adding more information. Example: Who rededicated the church in 1987? Find a way to name the neighborhood (Corktown?) and link to that article. The 120 year jump in the middle of the History section is jarring. That section reads more like a list of facts than a narrative. That's OK for a stub, though. Iterating/expanding in public is part of a wiki's charm! DetroitCatholic.com might be a useful resource for more information about the parish history and neighborhood outreach. As the article grows, you and other editors can smooth out the transitions between time periods. I hope that was helpful and that you'll let me know if I can be of any more assistance. Nheyob (talk) 13:58, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Nheyob, Thank you for your help! I've done some reworking to be more active voice but that's not something I'm particularly strong with. I've included the suggested information, as well as done my best work, in part using the Detroit Catholic source (which completely avoided my initial source sweep), to bridge the large gap in the history section (the largest gap is now only ~35 years). If you would be able to give the newer sections a quick sweep for grammar and prose that would be greatly appreciated, and thank you for your help once again! Builder018 (talk) 07:58, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the delay. I've pasted your text to my Sandbox.  I'll let you know when I'm done with it and you can take what you like. Nheyob (talk) 15:04, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I have edited the article text in my sandbox for readability and to include more hyperlinks. If you think it works better, please feel free to copy it for the article.  Also, I noticed some apparent factual errors.  I didn't see anything in the source you cited to indicate that Fr. Aloysius Bleyenburg owned the steamboat (maybe I missed it?), and the parish center was funded by a parish family, not Msgr. Kosanke.  Moreover, I thought that the first public exhibition of electric light was interesting, so I added it.  Nheyob (talk) 14:39, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you! I do believe the ownership of the steamboat was in the source (which ultimately isn't a big deal to include), though the parish center funding was on me for mistaking. I greatly appreciate your help. Builder018 (talk) 16:07, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Most Holy Trinity Church (Detroit, Michigan) has been accepted
 Most Holy Trinity Church (Detroit, Michigan), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the  [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_talk/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Most_Holy_Trinity_Church_(Detroit,_Michigan) help desk] . Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Thanks again, and happy editing! Bkissin (talk) 16:19, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun! Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 02:47, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:41, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:50, 28 November 2023 (UTC)