User talk:DeVerdon

International Association of Coaching moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, International Association of Coaching, 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 " " 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. ... disco spinster   talk  18:28, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, understood. Saw the name on the Thomas J. Leonard article and thought it helpful to add a link as per those for the other organisations mentioned, without thinking about adding anything other than that shown on the organisation's website. Perhaps someone who has good references will see the potential link and be better able to publish a better effort than me :) --DeVerdon (talk) 20:54, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:International Association of Coaching


Hello, DeVerdon. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "International Association of Coaching".

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 deleted. If you plan on working on it further 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.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. kingboyk (talk) 22:23, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

April 2020
Thank you for your contributions. It seems that you may have added public domain content to one or more Wikipedia articles, such as Maurice FitzGerald, 4th Earl of Kildare. You are welcome to import appropriate public domain content to articles, but in order to meet the Wikipedia guideline on plagiarism, such content must be fully attributed. This requires not only acknowledging the source, but acknowledging that the source is copied. There are several methods to do this described at Plagiarism, including the usage of an attribution template. Please make sure that any public domain content you have already imported is fully attributed. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 14:37, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Diannaa, Thank you for this kind guidance. I don't entirely understand it and would be grateful if I could check back with you to be sure I do what is required. In all cases the data I have added (yesterday - which I presume are the edits you refer to, like Maurice Fitzgerald 4th Earl of Kildare) has been accompanied with what I thought were clear source data and references, even providing hyperlinks to the very pages where the wikipedia reader can check the data for themselves. By doing so, I was endeavouring to correct and show the reason for the corrections, data that had not been quite correct before the edit. An example: here - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maurice_FitzGerald,_4th_Earl_of_Kildare Note 3. reads:

'Jacobi Grace, Kilkenniensis, Annales Hiberniae', ed. by Rev. Richard Butler MRIA, published in Dublin for The Irish Archaeological Society, 1842. Page 143: ''1347. The Earl of Kildare, with barons and knights, goes to the king to the siege of Calais, which was surrendered to him on the 4th of June. ...Maurice Fitz Thomas, Earl of Kildare, is knighted by the king, and marries the daughter of Sir Bartholomew Burghersh''. - which reads: This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.

The text incorporated is from an 1842 work. The work is referenced, the editor, publisher and date of publication provided. The quoted text, to support what may otherwise be a debated data, is in italics to show it is quoted. There is no plagiarism at all - everything is clearly attributed....or at least that is what I had believed and intended. I had provided far more to support what I edited than the data that had existed there before the edit; all to help the next person who edited it understand the changes and corrections.

I'm guessing there is a protocol I have missed. What I can't quite understand is what precisely would I need to have done to make this acceptable.

If you could take what I wrote above for the Note and edit it - if that isn't asking too much - to show what you are asking me to do, that would be fantastic. Without that I'm left a little mystified even with the Wikipedia guidance.

Apologies if I'm still too unpractised at wikipedia editing.

DeVerdon (talk) 16:33, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Quick further thought - should I have put what are 'Notes' into 'References' - is that the problem? DeVerdon (talk) 16:34, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Diannaa, I have added this at the bottom of Note 5:

i.e. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain. - is that simply all I need to do? Thanks for all your help and guidance. --DeVerdon (talk) 16:51, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Welcome!
Hi DeVerdon! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! Berek (talk) 18:09, 2 August 2020 (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) 01:26, 29 November 2022 (UTC)