User talk:Congha2540

Your submission at Articles for creation: Tawny Chatmon (February 12)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Theroadislong was:

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.


 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Tawny Chatmon and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Tawny Chatmon, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "Db-g7" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
 * If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
 * If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help 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_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Tawny_Chatmon Articles for creation help desk], on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Theroadislong&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Tawny_Chatmon reviewer's talk page] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Theroadislong (talk) 20:36, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Tawny Chatmon has a new comment
 I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Tawny Chatmon. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 21:08, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Tawny Chatmon has a new comment
 I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Tawny Chatmon. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 21:12, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Tawny Chatmon has been accepted
 Tawny Chatmon, 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=Tawny_Chatmon 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! MurielMary (talk) 09:15, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Seven Days (magazine) moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, Seven Days (magazine), is not suitable 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 " " 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 click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Hey man im josh (talk) 22:13, 2 September 2022 (UTC)


 * I am trying to fix a problem on Wikepedia. People have confused Seven Days, a newspaper in Vermont, with this old magazine for the late 70s. All of the names listed as working there were drawn from the staff list in the August 1978 and I have corrected the incorrect references on those people's pages. Since it's a magazine from the late 1970s, there is not much that can be linked to. I could add an image of the staff list if you wish. Congha2540 (talk) 22:19, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

September 2022
Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give a page a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Seven Days (magazine). This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases for registered users, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Requests for history merge. Thank you. Hey man im josh (talk) 22:39, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give a page a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Seven Days (magazine). This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases for registered users, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Requests for history merge. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 01:39, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Seven Days (magazine)


A tag has been placed on Seven Days (magazine) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company, corporation or organization that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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. Hey man im josh (talk) 22:41, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Seven Days (magazine) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Seven Days (magazine) 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/Seven Days (magazine) 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 until the discussion has finished. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:00, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Request re: Image
Hi @Congha2540. Could you please reduce the size of your Seven Days cover photo, and re-upload the image here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:File_Upload_Wizard ?

For Step 3: Tag the image for now as:


 * "This is a copyrighted, non-free work, but I believe it is Fair Use." (the middle option)
 * "This is the official cover art of a work." (fourth sub-option)

For "please explain how use of this file will be minimal", say:


 * Image will be used only once in the article about Seven Days magazine.

And then we should be OK to use it. Technically I believe your photo is a derivative image of an orphaned work (because copyright holder Institute of New Communications, Inc., a nonprofit educational organization, folded in 1980 with no known "owner" after the fact), but until we have conclusive proof of that, it's best to play it safe. (In any case, the image as it stands now was tagged for deletion in Wikimedia Commons, because it's a derivative work with no further explanation.) Cielquiparle (talk) 07:51, 20 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Hi again @Congha2540. I should have explained: Wikimedia Commons doesn't accept non-free / "Fair Use" content, but Wikipedia does under certain conditions (see the guidelines under WP:NONFREE), which is why I asked if you could reduce the size and upload it to the Wikipedia File Upload site instead. (Reducing the size is in part what makes it fair use. If the bot decides the image isn't small enough, it will automatically resize it for you overnight...but at the moment it is definitely still too big. (The specifications on size for non-free images is also available through the guideline page.) Thanks for your help. Cielquiparle (talk) 18:48, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Never mind... I've now taken care of it. No action required. Cielquiparle (talk) 09:22, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Congha2540 (talk) 16:54, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
 * @Congha2540 My advice to you now is to just chill! I remember the first time I encountered the Articles for Deletion process, and how frustrating it was... And then someone finally explained to me that you just have to be very patient, trust the process, and actually resist the temptation to keep saying "more" because it looks bad if you do. This is all pretty "advanced" for a new user, so just relax... Cielquiparle (talk) 00:36, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I appreciate the advice and the incredible work you have done to improve the entry. I added one more thing I found, but won't do anything more and will trust in the process. Congha2540 (talk) 20:36, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Next steps
First, well done on flagging Seven Days (magazine) for inclusion on Wikipedia. The article has been kept! A very important and interesting addition, which also clarifies a lot of confusion.

Second, please know that every single editor involved in the deletion discussion was very experienced and very knowledgeable about the rules. Everyone was genuinely trying to help you *and* trying to make sure Wikipedia was providing accurate information from reliable sources. But yes, a deletion discussion is a tough place to "learn". That's why there are so many warnings to new users not to jump straight into creating new articles.

Third, as a matter of priority, before you do too much more on Wikipedia, please take some time to read the rules. Even if you have read them before, please read them again (and again), as I'm sure you will find new meaning in them now. As you read, please pay attention to the explanations of why the rules are the way they are.

Yes, there are an overwhelming number of policies, guidelines, and essays, but I would suggest starting where all the automated notices were pointing you to start with:


 * Notability
 * What Wikipedia is not
 * No original research
 * Verifiability
 * Reliable sources

Finally, I wanted to say that I did notice that your editing improved over time – even when I ended up deleting some of your edits, I could tell that you were learning fast. So I really think it's just a matter of getting familiar with the rules and trying to walk a bit more before you run. Even though it does feel like you just completed an obstacle course of sorts. The obstacles were there for a reason. Time to figure out why...and you will fly. Cielquiparle (talk) 09:11, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Seven Days (magazine)
Vanamonde 12:03, 17 October 2022 (UTC)