User talk:Gracenoteseeker

Nomination of Margaret Helen Bayly for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Margaret Helen Bayly 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/Margaret Helen Bayly until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Derek Andrews (talk) 19:59, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi. I left the comment at the deletion discussion suggesting to clarify and properly use book mentions. Please use cite book template and sfn (for multiple references). Also read about repeated citations. Good luck with your edits! -- Bbarmadillo (talk) 21:41, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Related to Margaret Helen Bayly?
hello! Are you perhaps related? 104.163.147.121 (talk) 23:32, 10 March 2018 (UTC)
 * No, I am not related to Margaret Bayly. I just feel that her actions are worthy of special note.


 * I am finding it very difficult as a newbie to figure out how to reply to messages and use the various features of Wikipedia. Hope this reply makes it through.

```` — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gracenoteseeker (talk • contribs) 03:49, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Thoughts on your Wikipedia progress so far
Hi! I'm Geekdiva. I really like your username. It's elegant and creative! I hope that you can endure being a newbie for a little while longer until we can see it on your many edits on the history and talk pages Oliver Wikipedia! ... Heh. I'm using a voice dictation utility k today. That should have been "all over Wikipedia." I'm keeping it in here in hope of a smile.

Unfortunately, I've got the flu, so I'm pretty random in what I can do to help you and what I can follow up on today. Plus, my real life limitations get in the way of this kind of thing anyway. See User:Geekdiva for more on that.

So here are my random suggestions:
 * 1) You would be a 🎆 GREAT 🎆 contributor to WikiProject Women in Red, which is where I saw that the Margaret Helen Bayly article was up for deletion. Their philosophy in general is like the one you give above when asked if you were related to that article's subject.
 * 2) Just because a topic deserves more notice doesn't mean that it has enough notability. I know, sometimes I hate this, too, especially when the topic is a person. For example, my dad came up with an important mathematical concept while working on his Ph.D., but his professor stole his work. Because of this, his professor's name is probably in Wikipedia and my father's never will be. My father deserves notice for his mathematical work, but since nothing can be proved, there is nothing about him in independent sources to create independent notability to create independent note ability. Encyclopedias gather information about topics that already have enough notability.
 * 3) The proper place for gaining Bayly what recognition and notability she deserves is outside of any encyclopedias area of coverage, but it doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. I'm starting to get dizzy so I'm going to have to quit discussing this, but the Women in Red project link to above might have some ideas for you.
 * 4) in the meantime, the info that you do have that is notable (the majority of her article is not) could be added to her husbands article. However, since you are still a newbie, draw up a list on her husband's talk page so that you can get feedback on what points are notable before doing the work of adding them in.
 * 5) Instead of typing ````, did you mean to end with ~ ? See Signatures for more information.
 * 6) Have you worked through the tabs at Introduction? It's excellent for beginners.
 * 7) Here are two other pages I was going to working to the above suggestions, but the flu is really catching up with me at this point so I'll just have to be vague like this: Identifying and using primary sources & What Wikipedia is not.

Whew! Hope something in this post helps! When I was a newbie, the first thing I did was create a whole article from scratch and it was moved to my sandbox. I didn't do much for a while, but my participation really took off after I started making smaller edits, which took away my newbieness and taught me how to make larger edits

What's amazing to me is how much your article looks and sounds like an article that's well put together. Have you done this before? Besides not having the tone of an encyclopaedia here and there and of course the huge issue of notability, I don' have that much further to go.

I'll try to come back later to this talk page and see any responses you might have added to this section.—Geekdiva (talk) 13:38, 12 March 2018 (UTC) Hi Geekdiva, Thank you for your thoughtful reply to my article and newbie-status-dilemma. Learning how to reply to messages has been a trial in itself! No, I have not contributed similar articles to other sites or publications. I am a retired teacher with an interest in history, selling collectibles on eBay and improving my classical guitar playing, among other things.

I knew when writing the article that I was likely making 'mistakes' within the Wikipedia definition of acceptable writing, but had to start somewhere and suffer my editorial lumps along the way. Yes, I have come (recently) to realize that Margaret's significance may fit nicely into her husband's Wikipedia article but am not sure what you mean by 'draw up a list' on his page to receive feedback. How is that accomplished?

My latest problem is trying to create acceptable references for the article for information given to me by email from an archivist to accessed government census lists, border crossing documents, and death indexes. Before finding your message here, I posted a plea for help on the Teahouse page.

Appreciate your enthusiasm and comments!Gracenoteseeker (talk) 18:23, 12 March 2018 (UTC)