User talk:Dwilus

AfC notification: Draft:Hyperbolastic Functions has a new comment
 I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Hyperbolastic Functions. Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 03:24, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Hyperbolastic Functions (March 24)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Robert McClenon was:

The comment the reviewer left 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:Hyperbolastic Functions 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:Hyperbolastic Functions, 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, 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:Hyperbolastic_Functions Articles for creation help desk], on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Robert_McClenon&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Hyperbolastic_Functions reviewer's talk page] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Robert McClenon (talk) 19:20, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

March 2020
Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to Hyperbolastic functions, it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. ''Please don't add content based on your own deductions. When you add content, please add the source or sources that you summarised to write the content. Other editors shouldn't have to be guessing where you got the information from.'' RexxS (talk) 23:16, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you for providing the source for your last edit. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 15:50, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Because the source was already cited in the following sentence, I did not see a need to cite it. I will be more mindful when editing the document. Your efforts in making this a publish-worthy article are much appreciated!
 * Yes, it's true that having the same source for the next sentence lessens the need to cite that sentence. If the whole paragraph had been added in one edit, that would be an obvious assumption, but when you add a sentence in the middle of an existing paragraph, it's always best to add a cite at that time. They can always be consolidated to the end of the paragraph later if someone thinks the individual ones are unnecessary. Better to have too many citations than not enough. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 17:58, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Because the source was already cited in the following sentence, I did not see a need to cite it. I will be more mindful when editing the document. Your efforts in making this a publish-worthy article are much appreciated!
 * Yes, it's true that having the same source for the next sentence lessens the need to cite that sentence. If the whole paragraph had been added in one edit, that would be an obvious assumption, but when you add a sentence in the middle of an existing paragraph, it's always best to add a cite at that time. They can always be consolidated to the end of the paragraph later if someone thinks the individual ones are unnecessary. Better to have too many citations than not enough. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 17:58, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, it's true that having the same source for the next sentence lessens the need to cite that sentence. If the whole paragraph had been added in one edit, that would be an obvious assumption, but when you add a sentence in the middle of an existing paragraph, it's always best to add a cite at that time. They can always be consolidated to the end of the paragraph later if someone thinks the individual ones are unnecessary. Better to have too many citations than not enough. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 17:58, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

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

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

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:59, 28 November 2023 (UTC)