User talk:PT1021

Welcome
Hello, PT1021, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your edits to the page Ordo Supremus Militaris Templi Hierosolymitani have not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may be removed if they have not yet been. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles. As well, all new biographies of living people must contain at least one reliable source.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type   on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! SudoGhost 13:42, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

File:JPardeeHouse.JPG missing description details
Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:JPardeeHouse.JPG is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:09, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 26
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Newport Reading Room, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page George F. Baker. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:26, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Unspecified source/license for File:Burgee of The City Island Yacht Club.png
Thanks for uploading File:Burgee of The City Island Yacht Club.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like PD-self (to release all rights), (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner) 21:45, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

City Island Yacht Club moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, City Island Yacht Club, 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 follow the confirms on the Articles for Creation template atop the page.  CASSIOPEIA(talk) 06:52, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

September 2018
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours to the page Robert Gayre has an edit summary that appears to be inaccurate or inappropriate. The summaries are helpful to people browsing an article's history, so it is important that you use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did. Feel free to use the sandbox to make test edits. These weren't stylistic changes as they actually changed the meaning of the text. Doug Weller  talk 18:53, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Wakefield Advisory Group


A tag has been placed on Wakefield Advisory Group requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company, corporation or organization that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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. Largoplazo (talk) 16:48, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

January 2019
Hello, PT1021. Thank you for helping to build Wikipedia-- the world's largest free content encyclopedia. I'm sorry, but a page you created Wakefield Advisory Group has been deleted as meeting one or more of the Categories for Speedy Deletion.

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia-- subjects of articles must meet notability guidelines with reliable sources which are unconnected with the subject  and which provide verifiable information. '''Someone unconnected with the subject needs to have written a great deal about the subject. '''

Any deficiencies should be remedied before reposting as they can lead to repeated deletions.

The new user tutorial can help you avoid future problems.

If you want to try again, please use the Article Wizard or articles for creation to guide you through the creation process.

You may find this tool useful for finding sources: Google custom search

Don't feel discouraged. My first attempts at creating articles were deleted too. You can ask for help at the TEAHOUSE

-- Dloh cier ekim  (talk) 16:52, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Wakefield Advisory Group


A tag has been placed on Wakefield Advisory Group, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:
 * It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Business for more information.
 * It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

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. Largoplazo (talk) 17:34, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
 * What? This again!-- Dloh cier ekim  (talk) 17:47, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment This is utterly unimproved from the last iteration. Businesses must meet WP:CORP to have encyclopedia articles on Wikipedia. This is sourced entirely from the subject's web site. Wikipedia has no interest in what a company has to say about itself. All content must be cited from reliable sources that are unconnected with the subject and have a reputation for fact checking. Further, Wikipedia has no interest in providing free advertising space to businesses, which is the upshot of posting content from the company's web site here.-- Dloh cier ekim   (talk) 17:52, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

In response to your comment just now at Talk:Wakefield Advisory Group, "This page should not be speedily deleted because there is ample evidence that its contents are cited, verifiable, and according to industry sources -- relevant to the industry's development. Please do not continue to perform summary judgments until YOU can support the reasons for your actions with evidence.": Further, the company, as far as I can tell, falls far from meeting Wikipedia's notability policy. Being true or even verifiable is insufficient for inclusion: topics must be what Wikipedia calls "notable", that substantial attention has been given to it by reputable sources. I find no independent coverage online for "Wakefield Advisory Group" (and I'm excluding the few mentions of a Cushman and Wakefield advisory group), so there's nothing out of which to build a case that the company meets the general notability guidelines or the guidelines specific to organizations. Largoplazo (talk) 18:39, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Speedy deletion under WP:CSD A7 is self-explanatory: The article attributed no encyclopedic significance to this advisory firm. It explained that this consulting firm, essentially, gives advice.
 * Speedy deletion under WP:CSD G11 as irremediably promotional: Half the article consisted of their own language from their own website promoting themselves (Wikipedia isn't an outreach vehicle), and half of the remainder consisted of bullet points highlighting what makes them a good firm to do business with.
 * I think I more than adequately explained that the article as it sat did not meet WP:CORP. And, once again, Wikipedia is not a venue for company promotion. You are of course, free to appeal at WP:DRV. My advice would be to attempt to create a draft article via WP:AfC using only content cited from reliable sources unconnected with the subject, and to then submit said draft for review. Thanks, -- Dloh cier ekim   (talk) 19:43, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
 * "... more than adequately ...": you might think so, but then they protested as though they hadn't at all gotten the point and claimed no justification had been given for the deletion, so I spelled it out. Largoplazo (talk) 20:09, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
 * And quite well, I think.-- Dloh cier ekim  (talk) 22:19, 30 January 2019 (UTC)