User talk:OSeveno

Welcome!
The Wikipedia volunteer OSeveno gladly provides space to discuss his contributions to Wikipedia.

Friedrich Christiansen photo
Hello,

I deleted again the group photo of officials in Hague in the article of Friedrich Christiansen. The photo did not show Christiansen. I wrote the direct evidence in its talk page. Please check it and do not place the photo back to the article. It is incorrect.

Thank you

with regards

AntonyZ (talk) 09:27, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Overleg gebruiker:OSeveno


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Overleg gebruiker:OSeveno requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. –Ammarpad (talk) 10:24, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Royal resolution (Netherlands) moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, Royal resolution (Netherlands), 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 click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.  CASSIOPEIA(talk) 06:22, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Never heard of Draft before. Is this some kind of new policy? When was this implemented? And how? -- oSeveno (User talk) 11:24, 21 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Hi OSeveno, Good day and thank you for your questions. See below
 * There are two way to create article in Wikipedia (1) From Article of Creation (Draft) which cater for new editors and (2) via New Page (NPP) for experienced editors. Inregardless which channel an editor create an article, it will go through a review by either a reviewer for acceptance prior it will be published in Wikipedia main space. When an article is created in New Page and it is deemed not meet the notability guidelines, then the reviewer has the right to move the page to draft space for the create to rework the article. The different between create the article via new page and AfC is that via AfC, if the page is not accepted, the review will leave a message on the draft page (see the grey panel and click on the blue highlighted texts) and sometimes the reviewer will leave a comment under the  grey panel to advise the create what is needed and why the draft is decline.
 * Your article above was created without providing source and that is the reason it was moved to draft space for you to rework. Do note, content claimed need to be supported by (1) significant coverage (at least 3) of (2) independent, (3) reliable sources which the sources talk about the subject in length and in dept and not merely passing mentioned. Sources from books, newspapers are suitable - see source HERE. Once you have provide the source via inline citation - see inline citation, then you could click the submit button on top of the page for review. Let me know if anything I could help.  CASSIOPEIA(talk) 11:52, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your kind reply. When was this way of working introduced? I am trying to figure out how I missed it? -- oSeveno (User talk) 12:30, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi OSeven, I read it somewhere before but could not find the link at the moment, from my memory I believe AfC set up was in 2007 and new page was around 2012/4 and the new page reviewer right set up in 2016. Thank you.  CASSIOPEIA(talk) 13:05, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Royal resolution (Netherlands)


Hello, OSeveno. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Royal resolution".

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 nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the, , or  code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, 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.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia!  CASSIOPEIA(talk) 02:03, 2 September 2019 (UTC)


 * In stead of just judging my work, someone could have made an effort and lend a hand. The all over more and more formalist tone and the new page reviewer right from 2016 are some of the developments on en:Wikipedia which have caused me to minimize my contributions. The Anglophone centralist culture on Wikipedia dictates everything. I will not allow my work to be censored by people I didn't get the right to vote in office. People that appear to do nothing else then judge other people's work. The English language community is too narrow minded for people from other cultures, to want to be a part of. Too bad, the Wikipedia project appeared enlightened, but in reality it is far from that. But I'm sure you already have some copy-and-paste formalist answer ready. -- oSeveno (User talk) 10:05, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

CfD nomination at
A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at  on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. –Aidan721 (talk) 03:05, 27 January 2024 (UTC)