User talk:Drm310/Archive 21

Enoneo
Hi, Drm310. Here are the details of the book I mentioned: "The Oxford Companion to Australian Children's Literature" by Stella Lees and Pam McIntyre. Published by Oxford University Press Australia, 1993. ISBN 0 19 553284 8. Sorry for the delay, I had to order the book and have it sent to me! Relevant pages: 196 etc.  Thank you - and best wishes.--Enoneo (talk) 03:56, 13 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Thank you - I have added those details to the citation. It looks like quite a bit of work has been done on the article by other editors, and its quality has greatly improved. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 21:18, 13 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Thanks for that Drm310. Yes, the page looks heaps better now - and am grateful to all those researchers who did the work.
 * I didn't know the Oxford book existed until one of the "deletion" crew mentioned that if my books were listed there then that was all they needed (to prove I was a writer, I suppose). Finally getting slightly cooler in S.E. Queensland, soon we'll be getting out our warmer clothing. Hope all is well where you are. Cheers!--Enoneo (talk) 22:50, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Copyright
How does one show proof that they were given permission to use Information?ISupportThinLines (talk) 03:56, 14 April 2021 (UTC)


 * You cannot donate copyrighted material that isn't yours, even if the copyright holder gave you permission to do so. They themselves have to be the ones to provide verification that they are the copyright holders, and submit their authorization to release the copyrighted material to Wikipedia. They must follow the steps outline in Donating copyrighted materials.


 * They will also have to understand that by releasing their material to Wikipedia, they are making it available to be freely copied, distributed, re-used and/or adapted into derivative works - possibly for commercial purposes - by anyone, not just Wikipedia itself. Granting this permission is both permanent and irrevocable. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 05:38, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Alright. Thanks for information. Can I contact you again if I have any more questions or concerns? ISupportThinLines (talk) 12:16, 14 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Yes, you can, although I am by no means a copyright expert. I know of a few other users who are more experienced at dealing with copyright issues.


 * Another point I should raise is that, even if the material is successfully donated and incorporated into the article(s), it may be edited by others at any time. No single editor, nor the article's subject, has any right of ownership or control over an article's contents, and it cannot be "locked" to a version that a particular editor prefers. Disagreements over content should be discussed civilly on the article talk page to try to reach consensus. If that fails to resolve it, there are other dispute resolution measures available.


 * One last question. Are you affiliated with any of the subjects that you're writing about, personally or professionally? If so, it is important that you disclose these connections, as it may cause concerns if you have a conflict of interest. It's particularly important - mandatory, in fact - if you are being paid to do so. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 14:03, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

pausing on edits to Jefferson County Public Schools (Colorado)
HI I didn't know I needed to wait until the name change went through. Will pause and resume later.

And I am the only one making edits to the page as of today, so I guess I am 'warring' with admins bc of the name change issue. I'll just stop and come back to it in a day or so.

Thanks LG LGJeffcoCommm JeffcoCommServices (talk) 20:19, 21 April 2021 (UTC)


 * I don't think you quite understand though... the onus is on you to propose a new name for your account that complies with Wikipedia's username policy.


 * You were initially blocked for the username issue. The block was later reversed... but I believe the reversal was an error. The initial block would have still allowed you to submit an unblock request on your user talk page, with a proposed new name.


 * I'll see if I can sort this mess out and give you a clear set of instructions for how to proceed. In the meantime, please don't resume editing the Jefferson County Public Schools article until otherwise advised. Thank you. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 21:15, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

I did submit a name change request - I requested to change to LGJeffcoComm. @dragonfly6-7 helped through all this and had unblocked me so that I could post my response to Serols about my first content edit. I went to some page that allowed me to enter my new username request and reason why ... I didn't use the "unblock request on my user talk page" because @Dragonfly6-7 helped me with that.

Still not making any edits yet. Have not had any response about name change request.

Thanks LG LGJeffcoComm (used to be JeffcoCommServices)

Notability Standard - Question
Hello. You sent me a welcome message and suggested I post the autobiography in user page. You are correct that I did not read the additional information. I assumed you meant to post the autobiography on the user page instead of as an article. I did not read your message quick enough to go in and make appropriate changes to comply with the requirements.

The main reason for submitting the page request was to offset a page that was created for another person with my name that now shows up when people search my name on Google. While I did not intend for the page to be a personal "website" or hosting page, I do think that my prior experience and media mentions are as good if not far better than other submissions on Wikipedia. I did my best to structure it as other Wikipedia articles are structured, focusing on third-party content and links to those sources to support my text.

I do understand that Wikipedia is a platform for people to write about other people and not provide factual first hand information. I do understand the thought behind not allowing people to write their own page because it could be wonky or including self promoting text.

That being said, there is another page for someone named Gary Pick that I think should be deleted. With respect to your statements that I don't deserve a page on Wikipedia, this person named Gary Pick played a handful of soccer games in the U.K. and wasn't in the press at all until he was arrested for something recently. He is not more notable in my opinion.

I own multiple companies, have verifiable credits in several notable media productions and have worked for many notable companies. The other guy just kicked a soccer ball around a few times and he is more notable than me, according to your logic.

I'm not sure if the deletion of the page has not barred me from having a page in the future. I'll have to spend some time researching that. But, in the mean time, I would appreciate it if, using your high standards, you request that this page be deleted also. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Pick

Thank you for your attention to this matter. I'm not 100% certain this is the proper way of responding to your message. I did not see any kind of 'reply' option on the message notification. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Garypick (talk • contribs) 00:29, 24 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your message. I can understand why my message might have seemed discouraging, however there are a few important things about Wikipedia that new users are not often aware of.


 * We generally discourage people from writing autobiographies. That is because it is very difficult to be an objective judge of one's own notability, at least by Wikipedia's standards. It is also difficult to write about oneself from the required detached, neutral point of view, and avoid using unpublished personal knowledge or experience. We only care about what reliable, third-party sources have chosen on their own to publish about an person/thing as sources for article content.


 * It's also important to realize that if you are notable enough for inclusion, you won't have any right of ownership or control over an article's content. Any user that edits an article in good faith - which we always assume until proven otherwise - can make changes at any time. That means that no single editor can "lock" an article's content at a version that they prefer, or insist that other editors leave the article alone. Content disputes should be discussed on the article's talk page in a civil manner with the goal of reaching consensus. If that fails to resolve the disagreement, then other dispute resolution measures are available.


 * We also caution users that an article about you isn't necessarily a good thing. Including both positive and negative information about a person is fair game, if it is reliably sourced and written with the proper balance. This is often referred to as the law of unintended consequences.


 * If you genuinely believe that you are notable enough for inclusion, and you have a sufficient number of reliable sources to back this claim, then you can attempt to create a draft article using the Article wizard. This will allow you to make a draft article and then submit it for review by experienced, uninvolved editors. They will then publish the article if they evaluate it to be worthy of inclusion, or send it back to you for revisions.


 * In addition, if you believe that the person in the existing article for Gary Pick is not worthy of inclusion, then you can nominate it for deletion on the basis that he does not meet our inclusion criteria for association football. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 01:52, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

What wrong
What wrong with my post? I want to write about the project. Wealthdrillercore (talk) 06:39, 24 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Sorry, but your user page did not conform to Wikipedia's user page guidelines. It is intended for basic information about yourself, your interests and goals as they relate to editing Wikipedia. Although a lot of freedom is allowed in personalizing your user page, it is not:
 * an encyclopedia article (and should not be styled to look like one)
 * a workspace for a draft article
 * a personal website, blog, or social media site
 * a space for self-promotion or other advertising
 * a CV/resumé
 * a lengthy autobiography
 * The user page guidelines have additional information on what is and what is not considered acceptable content. Thank you. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 06:45, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

That "article"
Saw your post at Talk:Bettye Kearse & agree. This particular editor seems to be treating WP as their blog or webhost (as in WP:NOTWEBHOST...) Shearonink (talk) 19:35, 27 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Yes, and it looks like there is a new WP:SPA account editing the article, which always raises my suspicions of WP:SOCK or WP:MEAT. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 19:58, 27 April 2021 (UTC)


 * The article's been deleted but there's still also Draft:Bettye Kearse... Shearonink (talk) 00:47, 28 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Doesn't look like there's anything actionable there (yet). Worth keeping an eye on, anyway. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 03:43, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

RfA nom
Dear Drm310,

I was thinking about your RfA poll a while ago, and looked at your talkpage and saw quite a few thoughtful responses to questions in recent times. That, combined with your track record, makes you an excellent RfA candidate but for content. I am willing to nominate you, and I think you have a shot right now. Here are two choices: Let me know what you want to do. If you decide to run right now, e-mail me your statement and answers to the three standard questions, as well as any concerns you may have with a possible run, and we can have subsequent correspondence there.
 * You can run right now (well, after any burrs are smoothed out and immediate ducks are in a row), and pass in the high 70s/low 80s; we have had an RfA pass with even less content work and far less maturity than you, but that was in the discretion range of the bureaucrats after a tense 'crat chat; I don't think an immediate run would be so tense, but it won't quite be smooth sailing either.
 * You can work on an article to promote it to Good Article status, which would probably take months (largely due to the GA backlog), and then let me know when you're done. This will take some time and will probably raise your percentage to "only" around the high 80s, but should deactivate some of the opposes.

Thanks,

– John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 14:46, 17 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Thanks very much for the vote of confidence! Thinking about the choices you outlined, I think I would opt for the second. Putting some time into working on GA nominees would give me some experience in an area I'm currently unfamiliar with. Plus, it might also allay some objections that my work on content is disproportionately low. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:18, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, let me know of any developments as they come. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 15:19, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi Drm310, I just thought I'd be nosey and stick my 2c worth in. I can see content work in places like Lyell Gustin, lots of Teahouse participation with helpful comments like this, and sufficient activity at AfD. Looking at your activity chart, and what you've been doing where, I see a strong parallel with Requests for adminship/331dot - lots of user talk activity (owing to NPP-related user warnings and notices) against not so much mainspace, and that was a pretty successful RfA. I think John's comments above are pretty fair and make perfect sense - I can go into more specifics, but I'd rather do it off-wiki because of WP:BEANS. However, I think I've nominated quite enough RfA candidates for the time being, and I would greatly encourage newer admins like John to search out candidates and get a nomination sorted for them. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  12:20, 21 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I'll consider that. I still would like to get my feet wet with GA work just to get a bit more experience. Then I'll make a decision if I'm ready to face the jury! --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 16:53, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
 * , If you want an article GA reviewed, ping me when it's ready and I'll prioritise it, provided it's a topic I either know about or can learn about quickly (so nothing about the Israeli - Palestine conflict, please!) Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  17:42, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Talk:Cleanaway
Hi. I updated the template you left here, to note the paid editor has changed username, and acknowledged a connection. (In fairness to them, this is the first they've been asked and they were open about it.) Could you doublecheck it? It's not a template I'm familiar with, but it looks correct to me. Thanks. 92.24.246.11 (talk) 12:39, 22 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Yes, you did modify the template correctly. However, because they disclosed that they are being paid by Cleanway, they actually require a slightly different template: connected contributor (paid). I've moved them inside of that on the talk page. You can see how I modified the talk page . --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 16:59, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you! :) 92.24.246.11 (talk) 17:19, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

New to Wikipedia
Hi thank you for the feedback. I'm new to creating posts/articles here so my apologies in advance for my novice mistakes. I'm actually trying to start contributing by creating a page about me. So perhaps I've started in the wrong way.

Here is my DRAFT.


 * Personal info deleted. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 19:31, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

Donalfennell (talk) 18:34, 3 June 2021 (UTC)


 * I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding about what Wikipedia is for. It is not a personal website or social media page where you can talk about how great you are, or write an exhaustive list of all of your life's accomplishments. We highly discourage users from writing about themselves, for reasons explained at Wikipedia is not about YOU and Autobiography. We certainly never allow users to promote themselves or their work.


 * The userpage guidelines describe what is an is not acceptable content for your userpage. Ideally you should write a small amount of personal information, as well as your interests and goals as they relate to editing Wikipedia.


 * Please review the following links below when you have a chance.


 * Autobiography
 * Wikipedia is not about YOU
 * An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing
 * Conflict of interest
 * Yes, it is promotion


 * --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 19:31, 3 June 2021 (UTC)


 * That is not my intention here.
 * Like your page it is a page detailing interests, experience and contributions
 * Donalfennell (talk) 19:38, 3 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Then I would advise you from using any kind of company writeup, like you did describing the company you founded ("DropzApp is an audio social network app ...", etc). Including that content makes it appear that you are attempting to publicize the company and use Wikipedia to gain new customers.
 * Also, your lengthy "entrepreneurial history" resembles resumé/CV content. This is more appropriate for a site such as Linkedin.
 * Omitting these two parts would make it much more acceptable for use as a userpage. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 19:51, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

I have updated as suggested. Fingers Crossed Donal Fennell (talk) 15:59, 4 June 2021 (UTC)


 * I don't see anything on your userpage, but I see you've been working in your sandbox. If you're going to use that content for your userpage, then you don't need references, since a userpage is not an article. But other than that, it looks pretty good. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:08, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Drm310 for your help. Much appreciated. Unfortunately it was all removed. Donal Fennell (talk) 23:33, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Deletion
Hi,

I am looking to get the ACS Wikipedia page up and running, I am an employee of ACS in the marketing department.

How can I get this over the line as to creat the Wikipedia page for ACS?

Kind regards Matthew — Preceding unsigned comment added by Matthewholton (talk • contribs)


 * Hello Matthew,


 * Thanks for your message, and for disclosing your employment with ACS. However, a clear and easily noticed disclosure of your paid editing is required to comply with the policy. You should follow the instructions in the notice I left on your talk page about using the template on your userpage. If you need help, I can assist you.


 * Before I say anything else, I should emphasize what Wikipedia is. It is an encyclopedia - a general reference that contains articles about notable topics. Topics are deemed notable if they have already gained sufficiently significant attention by the world at large and over a period of time, and are not outside the scope of Wikipedia. We consider evidence from reliable and independent sources to gauge this attention.


 * In the case of companies and organizations, they are not entitled to have Wikipedia articles merely because they exist; they must meet Wikipedia's notability critieria for companies. Your company must have already been the subject of in-depth coverage from multiple reliable, third-party sources. Trivial or incidental coverage by secondary sources is not sufficient to establish notability. Primary sources like a company website can be used to present basic facts and figures (eg. year of establishment, number of employees, annual revenue) but won't count toward establishing notability.


 * Your draft article also lacks the preferred method of verification for its content. Inline citations in the form of footnotes are by far the most common and most easily understood method for citing the sources of your content. Footnotes are placed immediately at the end of a sentence or paragraph, which allows the reader to associate a given bit of material with the specific reliable source(s) that support it.


 * From looking at the sources you used, I can tell you now that this would not be accepted in its current form:
 * The Scottish Enterprise source was largely written by your company's COO, making it a primary source that lacks the required objectivity and independence.
 * The Industry.fashion source mentions ACS only in passing. There is no in-depth coverage of ACS in this piece.
 * On the other hand, The Herald is established mainstream press and the article was written by a Herald staff member, so that would be considered an acceptable source.


 * Going forward, you'll need to find more independent sources like The Herald that provide in-depth coverage of your company. You will also have to take great care in wording your article from the required neutral point of view. Even well-intentioned editors can introduce unconscious bias when writing about a subject where they have a conflict of interest, particularly when there is a financial incentive. I'd also advise that you review the conflict of interest (COI) guide and FAQ/Organizations.


 * I have added a header to your sandbox which includes a button to submit it for review, which you can use when you feel that it is ready. Just so you're aware, there is a lengthy backlog of articles awaiting review, so it could take weeks or even months to be completed. A reviewer may also move your page to the draft article space, which is the preferred location for articles in progress - so don't be alarmed if that happens.


 * Good luck with your future edits. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:21, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Diana Berrent
Hi DRM Have revised and fine-tuned my draft for Diana Berrent https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Diana_Berrent Am ready for a follow up review - not sure how that works, but invite your opinion and comments as we move towards a review and hopeful approval. Thank you and have a great day! Skiman514 (talk) 14:28, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * I am not a Wikipedia administrator, and I have not got the access rights to delete pages; I merely nominated it. An administrator did the actual deletion(s).


 * Are you in any way affiliated with TKS Teaching, or the "" account that originally created the page? --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 17:02, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

No. I am creating many pages for many new topics articles in wikipedia .Only. — Preceding unsigned comment added by David Combs (talk • contribs) 17:13, 14 June 2021 (UTC)


 * OK, the reason I asked is because your account was created shortly after the account was created, and you re-created the page only a couple of hours after the first version had been deleted. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 17:24, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Seeking help
Hi! I saw your messages re Booker T name. Can you please help me? I don’t fully understand how to add the proper affiliations or use the various links you sent to attach to pages. However, I also did leave a message on Booker’s talk page. Thanks for any and all help. Chr1717 (talk) 14:51, 24 June 2021 (UTC)


 * It looks like you are getting good assistance on the article talk page now from other editors. I think I will just hang back for the time being, so I don't just add unnecessary noise to the discussion.


 * If you require help with the disclosures on your userpage, I can help you with that. Are you paid directly by Booker T himself, or are you employed by an agency which he has hired for representation? --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:51, 24 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Hi! Thank you. So this is a two parter. A) we keep getting the links updated and then they remove updated links and only leave the links with wrong information so truly not sure what to do there.


 * B) I work directly with Booker so happy to reflect that. Now that said, I do also work at an agency but that is different from my Booker association. BUT because they know I’ve been working on this, they’ve asked me to tackle a few of our client’s pages too. So I’d love to know how to show that affiliation for those pages so I can make needed updates. Thank you in advance for any help. I’m trying to do this the correct/honest way snd be respectful to the people, like yourself, who do Wikipedia edits all the time. This is y’all’s space and I’m just a guest in it trying to do right by the people I work with. Chr1717 (talk) 16:13, 24 June 2021 (UTC)


 * I see the talk page discussion has progressed since you left your last comments here. Regarding part A), this is just the normal discourse of discussion and compromise on Wikipedia in an effort to reach consensus. As you noted, the sources having incorrect information was the problem, and therefore getting that corrected on those sources is the solution. Wikipedia is merely a summarized retelling of material previously published in secondary sources; we follow, we don't lead. I know it can be frustrating when these changes don't happen as quickly as you might like, but protecting the integrity of the encyclopedia takes priority over all other concerns.


 * Regarding part B), here are a couple of iterations of the paid template that you can place on your userpage (User:Chr1717).


 * For Booker T, whom is your direct employer for editing the article about him:


 * For any other articles you are editing on behalf of your agency's clients:


 * Just substitute your actual employer's name in place of "Agency XYZ" and then the article titles in place of "article 1", "article 2", etc. You can add bullet points with article links indefinitely. If you're copying out of the edit window, omit the "  " and "   " tags that you might see. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 20:29, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Regarding the deletion of the user's page - Shaban Roman Petrovich
Good day. My name is Roman Shaban. I recently registered in the English Wikipedia, and unfortunately, I immediately made a mistake. I apologize for that. How could I fill in the information about the user in the right way. thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shaban Roman Petrovich (talk • contribs)


 * Please review Wikipedia's userpage guidelines, which outline the acceptable use of your userpage. Other than that, and the advice that I already posted on your user talk page, there is not much more I can suggest. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 14:32, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Regarding the deletion of the user's page - Jeff Milling
Hello, I would appreciate some feedback for how I can clarify my affiliation with the sport of freeskating without it being considered advertising. My company does not have a wiki page or other pages, so I must use the 'about-us' pages. I intended to create my profile in order to clarify my affiliation so that I might write the article (factual, non-advertising) about the sport of freeskating. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JeffMilling (talk • contribs)


 * You can mention your company's name, but please don't describe it in promotional terms. It looks like the user has  the offending content.


 * In the meantime, please familiarize yourself with the conflict of interest guidelines so that you avoid making any edits to topics that are unduly self-serving. Please also realize that while we welcome the input of subject-matter experts, we require that any content you add is cited to sources that are deemed both reliable and independent of the topic. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 19:21, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter September 2021
Hello ,

Please join this discussion - there is increase in the abuse of Wikipedia and its processes by POV pushers, Paid Editors, and by holders of various user rights including Autopatrolled. Even our review systems themselves at AfC and NPR have been infiltrated. The good news is that detection is improving, but the downside is that it creates the need for a huge clean up - which of course adds to backlogs.

Copyright violations are also a serious issue. Most non-regular contributors do not understand why, and most of our  Reviewers are not experts on copyright law - and can't be expected to be, but  there is excellent, easy-to-follow advice on COPYVIO detection here.

At the time of the last newsletter (#25, December 2020) the backlog was only just over 2,000 articles. New Page Review is an official system. It's the only firewall against the inclusion of new, improper pages.

There are currently 706 New Page Reviewers plus a further 1,080 admins, but as much as nearly 90% of the patrolling is still being done by around only the 20 or so most regular patrollers.

If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process or its software. Various awards are due to be allocated by the end of the year and barnstars are overdue. If you would like to manage this, please let us know. Indeed, if you are interested in coordinating NPR, it does not involve much time and the tasks are described here. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. Sent to 827 users. 04:31, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Mohammad El Medawar
Dear Drm310, I understand very well your deletion of my article.

The text that I wrote is exactly the same as the text written in this Wikipedia article below https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Langston

Mr. Michael works as a professor at a university, and I work also as a lecturer in a reputable university. Mr. Michael work in research field of Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning, and I work also in the research field of the same topics. Mr. Michael has multiple publications and he mentioned only 1 reference, and also I have multiple publications and I mentioned 1 reference.

May I know why my article is deleted while the article of Mr. Michael is available online.

I'm willing to listen to you, know what wrong I am doing and to correct my mistakes. My ultimate goal is to have my profile published on Wikipedia.

I truly believe that my article is notable (unique), I am not advertising myself, and I have an important award, and a very notable invention in the field of education. Moreover, I didn't write the article myself. Someone wrote it for me in a very neutral and non biased way, and I am just publishing it under my name. If that suits you, I can send it to you and you can publish it under your name so it doesn't show as autobiography

--MohammadElMedawar (talk) 10:26, 23 September 2021 (UTC)


 * You have received some good feedback from several other editors on your talk page, such as, and . I don't have anything else to add at this time. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:31, 23 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your time. They told me to check the WHATABOUT and OTHERSTUFF page but I didn't understand what I need to do with it.
 * More than that, I already added my paragraph to the Requested articles/Biography/By profession, but I'm not sure if anyone notices this page. So I am asking you, please, for additional assistance in order to have my article published. Much appreciated MohammadElMedawar (talk) 15:41, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

second account
yes that is just me. i forgot my password so i made a new one. what should i do? how to disclose? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sablemason (talk • contribs) 06:54, 13 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Thank you for clarifying this. I have added a template to your userpage to indicate that is your original account.
 * Please be aware that the usual rule is "one person, one account". Wikipedia has a strict policy against using multiple accounts for illegitimate purposes, which is referred to as "sockpuppetry". Please do not use the Billsamiga account again, even if you remember its password. Please use your Sablemason account from now on.
 * I also reverted your edit on the Billsamiga talk page, where you removed the notice and your response. Other editors might be suspicious that you were attempting to conceal having a second account. Better to leave that alone and not touch the Billsamiga account or its talk page ever again. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:51, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Writing a new article
Is there a way for me to find a writer for my article? Can you write an article for me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by BJDDS (talk • contribs) 10:44, 19 October 2021 (UTC)


 * I personally do not have time to devote to writing an article for the Mars Society Philippines. But there are more fundamental problems:
 * Any topic on Wikipedia must be notable to merit an article - that is, it must be of interest to the world at large and over a period of time. The evidence we use to gauge the interest of a topic is the existence of in-depth coverage from reliable sources that are independent of the topic.
 * In the case of organizations, they must meet the notability criteria for organizations. An organization is not entitled to have a Wikipedia article just because it exists, and it cannot assert its own notability; only significant coverage from third-party sources can do that. Lack of sufficient quantity and quality of coverage means that the organization isn't notable enough to have a Wikipedia article, and no amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability. The only sources you have provided are the organization's own website, which is a primary source and lacks the required independence. While it can be used as a source for basic facts and figures, it cannot establish the organization as being notable.
 * You have also copied and pasted content directly from the organization's website into Wikipedia, which is against Wikipedia's copyright policy. Any content you submit to Wikipedia can be copied, re-used, distributed and adapted for derivative works by anyone in the world, free of charge and for all time. That's why when we discover content that has been copied or closely paraphrased from a copyrighted source, it is immediately deleted unless it has been released for use by the verified copyright holder.
 * So, until you can provide evidence that this organization has already acquired significant third-party coverage to meet the notability criteria, an article about it will not be accepted. I'm sorry that this message wasn't more favourable, but a lot of newcomers to Wikipedia make the same mistake. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 14:42, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

User:ShimsCabot
Hi, thank you for your interest. I am primarily a writer of news media for websites and social media. In the past, I have been asked to create page additions for Wikipedia, however, I have not been involved in adding any of it. I do not have access to the accounts used. My recent article, which has now been deleted, was my first attempt at creating a page and adding it. I hope to be able to continue creating articles and adding suggestions for page improvements using my ShimsCabot username, so the Notice of Paid Work Relating to Wikipedia on my User Page is worded to cover onward contributions. Do you have any advice or guidance in this respect? ShimsCabot (talk) 13:44, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I have just read your advice to BJDDS above and it is very useful - thank you ShimsCabot (talk) 13:47, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm glad that you were able to get some good information from my previous post. Also, don't get discouraged if your first effort was unsuccessful. As you've no doubt discovered, there are a myriad of policies and guidelines on Wikipedia that are nearly impossible for a newcomer to pick up immediately. The guide Your First Article is a good place to get familiar with the editing process.
 * You started off on the right foot by being transparent about your connections to topics. Since you've shown that you're editing in good faith, I'm certain that you will benefit from other editors being willing to help you. Best of luck! --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:44, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi Drm310 🍁, before I make a request for edits to Patrick McGuire (solicitor) I have been looking at a number of the current requests on the backlog list and I was wondering, in your opinion, do you feel it would be better to request edits section by section (with references) one request at a time or to make a single request for all the changes at once (probably around 25,000 bytes). Or perhaps a sandbox version would be a more effective way to request the changes. I would value your advice. ShimsCabot (talk) 11:42, 2 November 2021 (UTC)


 * I don't know if one strategy is any more successful than another. My instinct is that smaller edit requests are less intimidating than big ones, and are more likely to be picked up sooner. Some editors might get put off by a large request that seems like more work, and not bother trying.


 * In your request, use the Reflist-talk tag at the end. That is a special tag to encapsulate your references just at the end of your post. The regular reflist tag used in articles will place your references at the bottom of the talk page, which can be a problem over time. As new comments get posted, the reflist section will always get pushed underneath them, moving them further away from your post over time. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:37, 2 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Thank you, that's really useful - I will have quite a few sections to seek appproval for, and I don't want to become a nuisance, but I will try the smaller edit requests and see how I go. ShimsCabot (talk) 16:09, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Your note to me
I am quite confused by your note regarding my change to the article about Jonathan Schaech. You referred to my having a conflict of interest. You are mistaken.

I do not know the gentleman. I am a fan of his work, nothing more - as I suspect many are who write or edit articles. I saw his concern on Twitter, over Tom Hanks not being included as the director of That Thing You Do, and I tried to help. (Mr. Hanks is the director, and it was an Oscar-Nominated film.)

While I understand your belief that Mr. Schaech has a personal interest, I do not understand your taking me to task.

I edited occasionally, many years ago - when Wikipedia was rather lawless - so I understand times change and there are new rules. I will abide by them accordingly. I am a believer in facts, that is the only reason I made the change.

Best - Writeriowa (talk) 02:53, 30 November 2021 (UTC)


 * At the time, this article was in the midst of a content dispute with Mr. Schaech and his representatives. Several single-purpose accounts, operated by parties who had obviously been canvassed outside of Wikipedia to take his side, had appeared to add content to his preference. Since your first edit was to this article at the time of this dispute, I assumed you could have been one of them.


 * Mr. Schaech was using his Twitter account to falsely portray himself as a victim of bullying, and demonizing the good-faith efforts of other editors to keep the content in line with Wikipedia’s core content policies of neutrality, reliable sourcing and no original research. He made no attempt to achieve consensus; instead, he operated under the belief that he had some right of ownership or control, when in reality he never had such a right, and never will.


 * Content disputes should instead first attempt resolution on an article’s talk page, in a process of civil discussion and compromise between both sides. If this fails to achieve the desired consensus, then further dispute resolution measures can be utilized.


 * I appreciate your desire to help as a fan of his work. However, let this be a cautionary tale about how social media can be used to manipulate others and import them into a conflict. I hope this has not soured your experience here and if you are still interested in contributing, I encourage you to check out some of the links in the welcome message I posted. Thanks and best wishes. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 03:52, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Suggestion
Hello, Drm310,

If you come across what looks like an article draft on an editor's main User page, please consider moving it to Draft space rather than tagging it for deletion. Many new editors don't realize that they can't use their User page as a sort of Sandbox and it would be kinder to move the page to the correct location than delete it as long as there are not major problems like copyright violations.

There are even scripts like the one I use to "Draftify" pages (see User scripts/List) that do all of the work and also let the editor know that the page has been moved. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 04:24, 22 December 2021 (UTC)


 * Thanks . I've installed the MoveToDraft script and will try it out next time I see a salvageable userpage-draft candidate. Cheers. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 14:33, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Nervous New Editor Desiring Nothing but Compliance
I am profusely apologetic for my rookie errors. I admit a few of the terms confuse me and perhaps I should have taken more time to ask for help before beginning. Direct article editing vs articles for creation stumped me. The artist's page I am attempting to create is one of 3 independent artists whom I represent and write press for at no charge for a contractual term. Each year, I have tried to help 3 different independent artists with notability and help increase their media visibility. This is my first attempt to create a Wikipedia page. Presently, I am not directly or indirectly compensated by The Fabulous Moonshyne Brown. I am really unsure how I should proceed and would like to know how to fix this when I attempt to create articles for the other two artists; none of whom pay me directly or indirectly at present. Please help! I thank you in advance.

RhondaRFleming (talk) 15:40, 24 December 2021 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your reply. If you receive no compensation (financial or goods/services in lieu), then you would not be considered a paid editor. However, since you are representing their interests, you definitely have a conflict of interest (COI) and should review Wikipedia's conflict of interest guide before proceeding further, if you haven't done so already.


 * Please be aware that not every person or thing is entitled to have a Wikipedia article - mere existence isn't enough. Wikipedia has the concept of notability. Any topic must have already gained significantly sufficient attention from the world at large and over a period of time. A subject's notability is proven by the existence of significant coverage from multiple sources that are both reliable (having an established reputation for fact-checking and editorial oversight) and independent of the subject (having no financial stake in the subject's portrayal). Wikipedia has further refined the notability criteria for musicians, which you can read at this link. Please be aware that an artist cannot use Wikipedia to gain notabilty; they must already be notable before being allowed to have a Wikipedia article. Therefore writing with the intent to promote, publicize or advertise anything or anyone is prohibited.


 * Wikipedia heavily favours coverage from mainstream news organizations and academic press, as well as reputable publishers of newspapers, books and magazines. For music-related topics, there is a list of commonly-used sources at WikiProject Albums/Sources which comments on their reliability. Note that self-published sources - where the person writing the content also publishes it - are almost always rejected. This disqualifies almost all social media, blogs, and other sources with no editorial oversight. Primary sources like the subject's own website, or articles consisting of interviews with the subject, can be used to verify basic facts and figures, but cannot establish them as notable.


 * This underscores the difficulty with COI editing. While it is not prohibited outright, it is highly discouraged due to the difficulty in writing from the required neutral point of view, relying on third-party sources and omitting unpublished personal knowledge or experience. Given all that, you are still welcome to try if you're up for the task. I would definitely make use of the template on your userpage, User:RhondaRFleming. Being open about your affiliations will help gain the trust of other editors. Good luck to you. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 16:42, 24 December 2021 (UTC)


 * Is it permissible for me to add the COI this to the article I wish to publish now? Is there a high possibility I still will have difficulty having my submission accepted?  I appreciate all help as I wade in uncharted territory.  Thank you!! RhondaRFleming (talk) 18:18, 24 December 2021 (UTC)


 * You can place the template on your userpage, located here: User:RhondaRFleming. If you have trouble getting the exact syntax correct, I can assist you.


 * Your draft article was declined because it did not find this person sufficiently notable for inclusion. I see you've edited it since then, but I can't guarantee that it will be accepted. A lot of your sources are of dubious or unknown provenance. As mentioned on WikiProject Albums/Sources: Online retailers such as iTunes and Amazon.com should also be avoided. It can be seen as inappropriate to directly link to a site where one can purchase the subject in question. Wikipedia's role should not be used to advance the sale of an album nor to promote one retailer over another. Likewise, Instagram is social media, which is self-published and won't help your article either. Quality of sources is valued more than quantity. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 19:12, 24 December 2021 (UTC)


 * Duly noted. I thank you and others in the Wiki Community for helping me.  I was drowning and overwhelmed RhondaRFleming (talk) 20:09, 24 December 2021 (UTC)


 * You're welcome. I might not be online much over the next few days, but feel free to post at the Teahouse if you have questions. It's a message and advice forum specifically for new users like yourself, and someone is likely to see any messages you post there. Best wishes. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 20:16, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

Help request from Skiman514
Hi CRM Help me Hello, Merry Christmas and happy healthy holidays. You made recent comments and suggested edits on an older version of this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Survivor_Corps_(COVID-19)

Wanted to reach out again as we have grown and evolved and get a 2nd look. Please advise - happy for any further support, guidance and assistance in getting this (new) article ready for prime time, With thanks, Skiman514
 * Reformatted and tagged as Help me-ns., I'm guessing you're specifically asking for help on a particular subject that he's involved in. This talk page is effectively Drm310's inbox, so he'll see all messages here. The Help me template is used, typically on your own talk page, to request quick-response help from the volunteer helper group. If you need more help, there are links in the orange box below. – Anon423 (talk) 20:11, 28 December 2021 (UTC)


 * I have made a few more changes on your draft. External links should not be embedded in the article body, so I have removed them. I converted the New York Post one into a proper footnote, although I have also tagged it as unreliable. WP:Perennial sources lists the New York Post as an unreliable source. I also removed the Facebook group link, as social media links are considered to be external links to avoid.


 * This draft still makes a lot of bold claims without providing the necessary third-party references to verify it, such as:
 * "Survivor Corps (COVID-19) is one of the largest grassroots movements in America dedicated to actively ending the global SARS CoV-2 pandemic."
 * "The movement has evolved into one the most active and robust COVID-19 data sets and research tools in the world."
 * "Their principal platform is their public Facebook group, providing accurate, current and science-based information [...]
 * Your goal is not to embellish this group's reputation, but rather to write a plainly factual and cold, emotionless description of their activities, as already reported on by third-party sources. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 21:53, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

Skiman514 (talk) 02:56, 29 December 2021 (UTC) Thank you. This is very helpful and I will continue to neutralize the language and cite additional sources and links to confirm and verify as noted above. Regards, @skiman514 Skiman514 (talk) 04:01, 30 December 2021 (UTC) Re the New York Post - they are being cited not as a source per se, but merely the channel / platform by which the principal had her 1st person account / video diaries (x9) published

moved submisson
Dear DRM310

Thank you for moving my submisson to the correct Daft namspace. Before I contiune making aware I have conflict in that am writing the article on myself. I understand this is discouraged. Shall I stop and discard this submisson ? Prefer not to waste my time and yours if so. Awkig213 Awkig213 (talk) 16:15, 4 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Hello, and thanks for your message. I don't really have a clear "yes" or "no" answer for your question. Autobiographies are generally discouraged on Wikipedia, as it is difficult for a person to write about themselves from a completely neutral point of view and only use information taken from reliable sources. As well, we often say that an article about you isn't necessarily a good thing, because if accepted, you will have no right of ownership or control over its contents.


 * That said, it is possible that you might meet Wikipedia's definition of a notable academic, so I think it's still worth a try. I will do my best to evaluate the content you have submitted against the notability criteria, and also ask for the assistance of other editors. In the meantime, I would encourage you to make a formal disclosure on your userpage (User:Awkig213) with the template. Your transparency will be appreciated and help establish the trust of other editors that you are contributing in good faith. Thank you. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 16:33, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

thank you. Wil do as suggested regards CoI. also will look to see if someone else can write it instead Awkig213 (talk) 17:06, 4 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Just keep in mind that if you ask someone who knows you either personally or professionally, then they would also have a conflict of interest and be obligated to disclose their relationship with you as well. Thanks. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 17:26, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Okay, noted. Have to admit I doubt all the other comparable notabale academics entries of whom I know, were done without CoI ! Awkig213 (talk) 17:48, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

I wonder if you could help on two items regards the submssion. i) How you arrange for the content box to come after the first paragrpah not before and ii) how yu generate a Summary (?) table box. If correct you have added the COI requirment ? With these I am done. Awkig213 (talk) 17:32, 5 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Hello again Professor Aigbirhio. The table of contents box is automatically generated to appear under the lead paragraph. This is in line with Wikipedia's manual of style that maintains a consistent appearance amongst articles. I don't believe this can be changed.


 * I'm not exactly certain what you mean by a summary table box. Could you point out an example from another article?


 * I have good news to pass along. Another editor reviewed the draft and agrees that you meet the notability criteria. So after we fix any other formatting issues you'd like to address, the draft can be submitted. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 18:53, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Dear DRM310, Thanks for the respone and the good news regards notability criteria. Firstly good to hear about the contents table. Just in my draft it seem to be before the 1st paragrph rather than after. As to what I mean by "summary box" as in an the  article  for "Edward Bullmore" from Cambridge. The box/table on the right of the article Awkig213 (talk) 19:08, 5 January 2022 (UTC)


 * What you're referring to is called an "infobox". In the Edward Bullmore article, it uses this one: Infobox scientist. You can click on the link and see if it will be useful for the draft. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 20:34, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Dear DRM310, thanks for the info and support. Draft submisson completed and sent for review. Awkig213 (talk) 12:46, 7 January 2022 (UTC)


 * You're welcome; I'm glad that I could help you. I see now that the draft was accepted and has been published in the main article space - congratulations! --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:49, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Dear DRM310, What seems to come up on the google search for my wikipedia submission is the "Talk" page rather than the "Article" page. Is there anything I can do to change this ? Awkig213 (talk) 09:34, 12 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Google sometimes takes several weeks to properly index newly created Wikipedia articles. We have no control over Google's processes, so my advice is just to be patient and keep checking periodically. In time, it should sort itself out and the main article page should be the top search result returned. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 13:36, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

okay thanks .Will keep a watch on it Awkig213 (talk) 09:47, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Thank you!
Hello, Daryl,

Because of the work I do reviewing expiring drafts, a ridiculously high proportion of my edits are notifications on user talk pages. I've recently noticed how frequently I see very helpful messages from you instructing new editors about things like the correct use of User pages or the folly of trying to write an autobiography. They are posted usually months earlier than the messages I'm currently leaving for them.

You might be surprised how many experienced editors only communicate on user talk pages when they are warning or sanctioning editors with templates saying they are in danger of being blocked. Providing actually helpful guidance to new editors who are unfamiliar with Wikipedia policies isn't as common as we all wish it would be and I just wanted to say thank you for taking the time to try and guide new editors with advice they can use instead of just warnings about what they are doing wrong. It's seen and appreciated! Liz Read! Talk! 06:13, 8 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Thank you, I appreciate your kind words. I can understand the temptation for "drive-by" tagging and messaging, given that Wikipedia is constantly assaulted by promotional editors. It's easy to become cynical and assume that everyone with a problem userspace page must have purely self-serving motives. But after being here for as long as I have, I've realized that a sizeable portion of users honestly had no idea that they were doing anything wrong, and genuinely wanted to do the right thing.


 * I have to credit two other editors with inspiring a couple of my own custom boilerplate messages. 's page User:Anna Frodesiak/Cuw-promo-username-block was the inspiration for my own version, User:Drm310/Userpage; and the late 's frequent messages provided the basis for my page User:Drm310/Notyou. I sincerely hope that those messages, plus a few that I wrote from scratch, have turned a few problems editors into productive ones.


 * And thank you for all of your admin work, and also reviewing drafts. I know the backlog is formidable and it's a rather thankless job. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 07:14, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

AW: Welcome
Hi Drm310 Thanks for your message and for bringing the issues to my attention. This was only a draft and I am going to create a company account for the Wikipedia entries, and I thought by creating the subpage I was doing everything right. I've moved it to the sandbox now (hope that is ok), and it would be great, if you could proofread it before I create the company account and move this article. Andrea.ca (talk) 11:44, 11 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Let me put the brakes on that right away. If by a "company account" you mean either A) an account named after the company, or B) an account shared by multiple people from the company, then both are violations of Wikipedia's username policy.


 * Wikipedia accounts represent individuals, not companies, organizations or groups of people. An account is meant for only the person who creates it, and only they are ever allowed to access it; sharing access is prohibited. The name of an account cannot be the name of a company/organization/group unless is it combined with the individual's name (e.g. Mark at Company XYZ), again so that individual representation is preserved.


 * Also, if you were thinking about using multiple accounts, let me point out Wikipedia's policy on using multiple accounts. This is a generally discouraged practice, as the potential for abuse is high. I highly advise you to use only one account, as editors can be blocked for using multiple accounts for inappropriate purposes.


 * Finally, if you are representing the interests of this company and/or any others, then please review Wikipedia's conflict of interest guidelines. And, if you are being paid to do this (either in the course of your employment or as a third party representative), then it is mandatory that you disclose this information per Wikipedia's non-negotiable paid editing disclosure policy. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 14:55, 11 January 2022 (UTC)


 * After writing this, I found that you have been active on German Wikipedia. It's important for me to inform you that while German Wikipedia allows official, verified company accounts to edit Wikipedia articles, English Wikipedia does not. Each language version of Wikipedia has its own sets of policies and guidelines. Most policies and guidelines are very similar, but others - the username policies in particular - are different. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:00, 11 January 2022 (UTC)


 * I have also left a related message on your German Wikipedia talk page, de:Benutzer Diskussion:Andrea.ca. Danke. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 21:49, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Response
Thank you for your message all very helpful - I have managed to confuse myself and have created two different accounts to create the page for Sue Anstiss so the other page is also mine from a different account. I am going to delete this account and focus on the other one to create the page and include the COI information you mentioned.

Kind regards ¬¬¬¬ — Preceding unsigned comment added by HANKAT001 (talk • contribs) 15:10, 12 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your message. And yes, please log out and abandon your account and stick to using the  account going forward. Wikipedia's policy on multiple accounts generally discourages operating more than one account, as the potential for abuse is high and the likely outcome is one or more of the accounts being blocked.


 * Once you have logged back in as, please also make the required disclosures per WP:PAID on your userpage (User:Khannon1, using the paid template). Thank you. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:15, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Deletion
Ok, I really appreciate your suggestions. I’m looking to edit the correct way if me being published, I’m not looking to promote my self on Wikipedia I’m looking to add my career in there and my life like every other artist. I’m looking to proceed the right way. Can you please let me know where I went wrong and what I need to improve and what changes need to be done in order to successfully being published the correct way? Thanks for your help and support. 92.232.56.145 (talk) 22:39, 13 January 2022 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry but because you're logged out, I have no idea who this is, or what article you are referring to. I cannot see your username, only your IP address . Please log in to Wikipedia and reply to this message. Thanks. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 22:42, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

What's wrong
Y do you keep selecting my articles Kareninaq mine (talk) 06:23, 19 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Your userpage (User:Kareninaq mine) is not an article. It is a special page for you to write a small amount about yourself, as well as your interests and goals as they relate to editing Wikipedia. As I mentioned in my message on your user talk page, your userpage is not a practice area or workspace for making new articles. That should be done in either your user sandbox (User:Kareninaq mine/sandbox), or the draft article space.


 * Creating new articles on Wikipedia is not an easy task. You should review some of the links in the welcome message I just left on your talk page, in particular the introduction to Wikipedia. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 06:31, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

I don't have many accounts
Am having a problem with people who edit my work and abuse other accounts using mine I really don't know if you can help me secure my page were by other users can't edit it I will be so great full Kareninaq mine (talk) 09:43, 19 January 2022 (UTC)


 * I am not sure what you mean, so I will answer as best I can.
 * First, you do not own or control any content on Wikipedia, even content you create. Anyone is free to edit any article, at any time, and we always assume good faith of other editors unless there is evidence to the contrary. Consensus is Wikipedia's fundamental editorial model. Content disputes should be discussed politely on the article talk page. If this fails to resolve the disagreement, then further dispute resolution measures can be utilized.
 * Second, while the customary is to leave other users' userspace pages alone, they are not exempt from Wikipedia's content policies and guidelines. Twice you used your userpage to copy the content of the article List of Ugandans by net worth. This is an inappropriate use of your userpage, and therefore it was deleted - correctly - as a blatant misuse of Wikipedia as a web host. Please don't keep posting inappropriate content to your userpage.
 * Finally, there is an investigation into the possibility that you are using multiple accounts for inappropriate purposes. If you wish to defend yourself against this claim, then please post comments at Sockpuppet investigations/Izaaqnewton, under the section dated 19 January 2022 and underneath the heading "Comments by other users". --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 14:32, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Twinkle?
Was this automatic by Twinkle? If so, you should report this bug on the Twinkle page, it shouldn't be warning the creator's of a user talk page. Pika voom Talk 15:01, 20 January 2022 (UTC)


 * That was my own careless mistake. I blindly nom'd the page for speedy believing it was their userpage, not their talk page. I realized my mistake and reverted it but of course, you being the creator of their talk page, got Twinkle's speedy notice. Sorry for the confusion. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:13, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Also, I don't think Twinkle makes any distinction between pages in the article or user spaces... the page creator gets notified of a speedy deletion nomination, regardless of where it exists. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:15, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I realized that, but I think Twinkle shouldn't be doing that, what's the point in notifying the creator of someone else's talk page? It would be a simple exception to add to Twinkle. Pika voom  Talk 15:16, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I would bring it up at Wikipedia talk:Twinkle, although it seems this has been discussed already. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:28, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I guess there is no point in bringing it up as it appears to be so by design to notify others of a possible mistake. Pika voom  Talk 09:40, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

Response to questions regarding my relationship with CollegeCurlingUSA
Per your request for information regarding my relationship with the organization College Curling USA, on whose wikipage I have recently been editing.

I have been Chair of USA Curling's College Curling Committee for 10 years now. This is a volunteer position for which I receive, and have never received compensation.

USA Curling is the National Governing Body for the sport of curling in the USA. If you have any questions regarding my status, I can give you email contact information for both the CEO of USA Curling and that of the Board Chair. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.212.214.149 (talk) 22:56, 8 February 2022 (UTC)


 * I assume that message above was left by you. Please note that you were logged out at the time, and the message was automatically signed by an automated script that inserts your IP address. You might have been logged out unintentionally if you had logged into Wikipedia but then were inactive for a while. I’m not sure how long a login session lasts while you’re inactive, but after a period of inactivity, your web browser might lose the session data and log you out.


 * As for the rest, thank you for explaining your relationship with the organization. I don’t believe we need any further information from the organization. We assume good faith so I will abide by that guiding principle. I would advise that you add the UserboxCOI template to your userpage so that others can see your disclosure.


 * I might want to discuss the content you’ve been adding, but I will take that to the article’s talk page. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 06:51, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Yes, that was my response. Apologies for not logging in first. I am new to this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gordon at CollegeCurlingUSA (talk • contribs) 16:32, 9 February 2022 (UTC)


 * No problem, there is a lot to learn on Wikipedia. One thing is to please sign your posts on talk pages. I have left a message on yours with detailed instructions on how that is done. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 17:09, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Development Trust Associations Scotland wiki page request
Dear Wiki team,

My colleagues at DTAS were wondering if it would be possible to add a sub section with further details about our COSS service as below? I understand that we should be done through the wiki talk pages and hopefully this is all the correct procedure? Could you let me know if it is ok for someone at Wiki to add to the DTAS page?

Thanks for your time and help, With best wishes, Sheila

PS: We also have a Community Shares Scotland programme so may request an expansion separate section on this.

The Community Ownership Support Service (COSS) supports community groups in Scotland to take a stake in or ownership of publicly owned land or buildings. It also offers support and advice to public bodies on asset transfer. The service was expanded in 2017 following the introduction of the Community Empowerment (Scotland) Act 2015, which brought in new legislation to facilitate asset transfers. The Act introduces a right for community bodies to make requests to all local authorities, Scottish Ministers and a range of public bodies for any land or buildings they feel they could make better use of. They can request ownership, lease or other rights as they wish.[1] The COSS service is delivered across Scotland and provides individual community groups and public bodies with an advisor-led support service, from the first steps to the completion of the asset transfer. It’s support includes a combination of: •	Advice on all aspects of the asset transfer process •	Written materials and guidance •	Training courses on asset transfer and project development •	Web access to information on good practice, toolkits and case studies •	Sign-posting to other support agencies Communities are also able to link into the Development Trusts Association Scotland’s wider network to explore the wide range of business models being adopted by other communities throughout Scotland and across the UK. COSS is funded by the Scottish Government. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SheilaDTAS (talk • contribs) 11:03, 23 February 2022 (UTC) SheilaDTAS (talk) 11:09, 23 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Hello Sheila. I have reviewed your post and regrettably, there are some problems. First, a couple of minor points:
 * There is no Wikipedia "team"; there are no groups of editors employed by Wikipedia to edit articles. Wikipedia's users are entirely individual volunteers, working here during their free time, according to their interest and availability.
 * The proper place to request changes is on the article's talk page - in this case, Talk:Development Trusts Association Scotland. It should take the form of an edit request, using the Request edit template. The template link contains further detail, so I won't repeat it here.
 * Now, unfortunately the bigger problems. I will explain why this request would certainly be refused.
 * Your text was largely a close paraphrasing of text found on your organization's website (https://dtascommunityownership.org.uk/about-coss). Because the contents of that website are copyrighted, for policy and legal reasons you cannot post content from it verbatim, or with superficial changes - even if you are the copyright holder or have the copyright holder's permission. All content on Wikipedia (text or images) is free for anyone to copy, re-use and/or adapt into derivative works (even for commercial purposes), free of charge and in perpetuity. Therefore, we require any copyrighted text to be donated for use by the verified copyright holder, which releases the copyright both permanently and irrevocably.
 * Wikipedia articles are about topics which meet its definition of a notable topic; the mere existence of a person/organization/thing is not enough. In the case of an organization, it must meet Wikipedia's notability criteria for organizations, and these criteria apply equally to for-profit businesses and non-profit organizations. This means that an organization must have already received significant coverage from multiple reliable sources that are independent of the organization itself. We don't have any interest in what an organization or any third-party representatives wants to say about it. An organization's own website is a primary source which can verify basic facts and figures, but cannot establish notability.
 * Some people believe that charities or other organizations doing good work deserve articles for that reason, but we have to respond by saying that Wikipedia is not here to tell the world about your noble cause. The notability criteria alone are what determines whether an article about an organization should exist or not - nobility is not the same as notability.
 * I'm afraid to say that if their is insufficient independent coverage of this organization from reliable sources, the article may be a candidate for outright deletion. I think you should focus your efforts on finding coverage from third-party sources who chose to write about your organization in-depth without any inducement. A lack of such coverage means that this organization is simply not notable enough for inclusion.
 * --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 18:26, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Re: Draft:JayTAkridge page--Can I re-write a deleted page for reconsideration?
Hello, I understand that the draft page I submitted has been deleted for copyright reasons. If I rewrite information about Jay T. Akridge in my own words instead of using those directly from his Purdue University profile, will it be acceptable? I am not writing the article about myself, by the way; I am a first-time user of Wikipedia and used his name to keep track of my work.

Any guidance you can provide would be appreciated.

Jtamurraystate (talk) 21:43, 3 March 2022 (UTC)Jtamurraystate


 * Writing content in your own words is the recommended method. Please be certain to include citations to reliable sources in your draft, as that will be required to evaluate whether this individual is notable enough for inclusion. As well, please review the requirements for biographies of living persons.


 * However, you should not use a person's real name unless you are that person; otherwise your account might be blocked to prevent impersonation. Please request a change of username for a new name that represents you as an individual and conforms to Wikipedia's username policy. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 21:56, 3 March 2022 (UTC)