User talk:Leeapp

CS1 error on Business courts
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Business courts, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:Qwerfjkl/Botpreload&editintro=User:Qwerfjkl/boteditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:Qwerfjkl&preloadtitle=Qwerfjkl%20(bot)%20–%20Qwerfjkl_(bot)&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 16:20, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
 * A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. ([//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Business_courts&action=edit&minor=minor&summary=Fixing+reference+error+raised+by+%5B%5BUser%3AQwerfjkl%20(bot)%7CQwerfjkl%20(bot)%5D%5D Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:Qwerfjkl%20(bot)/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F1162034251%7CBusiness%20courts%5D%5D Ask for help])

May 2024
Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. A page you created or have recently made significant changes to, Complex litigation courts, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for pages, so it has been blanked and redirected. Three typical reasons for this are that: (1) the article's subject appears to fail our notability guidelines; (2) the article is unsourced; or (3) the sources used in the article are unreliable. The page's history is preserved and it is possible to restore the article: If you believe that this page should remain included on Wikipedia or that this action was taken in error, then you may revert the edit that blanked and redirected the page.Your first article has more information about creating articles, and you may also want to read our introduction page to learn more about contributing. Thank you. voorts (talk/contributions) 03:59, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Please start a split discussion on the original article talk page. voorts (talk/contributions) 03:59, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I was trying to split some material from an article I'd been working on off and on over the years, and quite a bit over the last month, after getting a notice that this article (Business and Commercial Courts) had some excesses that might require splitting. Since I had written everything being moved, I guess I took for granted I could just do it.  Alas, looks like I really did not know what I was doing, and now don't have the new page, and have lost the information from the original page.  And now for some reason the original page is redirecting to the wrong title.  As an older person, not sure I can figure this all out, and I'm in a time crunch over the next few weeks to be able to do it.  Hopefully, the work I've put in over the past month or so won't be eliminated until I can find the time how to figure it out.  Yikes! Leeapp (talk) 04:12, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Everything is still in the page history (right next to the edit button). You should be able to copy what you need from there. I recommend working on a draft if you're going to create a fully-fleshed out split. Happy editing, voorts (talk/contributions) 04:14, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks Leeapp (talk) 04:15, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

Guideline
Hey Leeapp. I've taken notice of your interest in American business litigation and have reason to believe you might be citing work which you helped to produce. Since you are new here, I think it would be good if you read the guideline at WP:SELFCITE which applies in the event you cite a source which you created. Not passing any judgement on you, but figured you should be aware of it sooner rather than later. -Indy beetle (talk) 03:44, 10 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Thanks for pointing that out. I have cited some law journal articles and book chapters on the subject of business courts on occasion, on which I was a co-author, since sometimes those articles or chapters provide a good source of basic factual information that are not easily found elsewhere. I don't believe that it's been excessive, and I've only used them for facts and not opinions. In the case of one of the articles, it's considered seminal on business courts in the U.S. and it's hard to avoid using it to bring out some basic points on this subject. (It's been cited by people other than me studying or writing on the subject over the last 20 years.) I don't think the Wikipedia rules are saying it's forbidden, but that it shouldn't be excessive.  I can go back through the Wikipedia articles I've worked on and see where I can replace references to my own articles where it could be seen as excessive, or strip out information that might be unnecessary to the Wikipedia article that is supported by my own articles.
 * I can understand and appreciate the concern about self-promotion or having a personal agenda. At this point, I'm an old retired guy and have no personal stake in the legal world or legal academic world in which those articles were written, and am just interested in providing some basic factual information about courts and judges that might be of value to folks generally who are looking up information on Wikipedia.  Leeapp (talk) 05:27, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started
Hi Leeapp. Thank you for your work on Gail A. Andler. Another editor, ARandomName123, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 09:36, 19 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Yes, she is alive. I’ll edit the language to clear that up. Thanks  Leeapp (talk) 16:15, 19 July 2024 (UTC)