User talk:Taco fleur

Welcome!
Hello, Taco fleur, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as User:Taco fleur, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type help me on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers: 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 Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Theroadislong (talk) 08:14, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Your first article
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * Biographies of living persons
 * How to write a great article
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial

Help me
Hello, couple of questions:
 * How do I change the user name, as I'd like to capitalize the first letter of my last name?
 * Changing usernameCocohead781 (talk) 07:21, 11 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Someone deleted a photo I uploaded, I think they might be on a list for deletion, but where? I was under the impression I cleared the whole CC thing up with others whom I had a long discussion with, and they agreed.
 * How do I get the deleted photo back, and on the pages it was inserted?
 * I was working with https://dashboard.wikiedu.org as the description suggested I could make an online course, which sounded like a great idea, so I wanted to create some online beginners courses to help people out. I went through the steps, one of the steps was to include the article in the course or create it, i created it, that brought down another world of trouble. I'm now realising the functionality on that site might not be for courses I think they are? What are they for? Course, Instructor, Participants, sounds to me like the type of course I'm interested in creating but...
 * Wikiedu is generally meant for educational cources. Cocohead781 (talk) 07:21, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

Great, that's exactly what I'm after, creating an educational course, teach kettlebell training fundamentals. But after reading several tutorials, I did not see anything that would allow a format of: present info, and run the students through an exam. The info part, yes, but not in a structured way, i.e. chapter 1, chapter 2, you should now read 3, now it's time to take an exam etc. Taco Fleur (talk)


 * How do I respond to someone like the user above, i.e. communicate? If I just write here, will the above user get a notification?


 * I always seem to run into this authority, trust thing, who am I, what do I know, proof who you are, and I seem to have to go through to that every-time, it gets a bit boring, and wears me out, hence, on the point of giving up on wikipedia. How can I overcome this, is there some process where I can: proof my experience, show my qualifications, present a reference from someone trustworthy, include links to the books accepted by Amazon that I authored, show the ecourses I created that have been accepted by well known organisations, and so on? And get some kind of tick or something?
 * Getting kind of tired of having to explain most of the above to people who know nothing about the subjects I'm helping to improve, a car expert (example) monitoring work I do in the fitness category, how does that make sense? Should moderators not have knowledge of the subjects they moderate?
 * Getting tired of mens and womens magazines who have a lot of readers, spend a lot of money on advertising, look all glossy etc. but write crappy articles, with no substance, displaying incorrect technique in the stock photos, and much more that's so wrong on a level of insanity, are accepted as TRUSTWORTHY. But sites that actually write information that is based on facts, displays correct technique, is about helping, not getting more readers and display the latest trends, are considered not trustworthy, yes, I'm referring to my site as an example. No, I'm not here to build links, I have several links on wikipedia to other sites I own, I get no traffic from it at all, that's not the point.
 * I was able to delete some content on this page placed there by others, since I could remove it, I assumed it was dealt with and ok? Is it ok to clean up your talk page? Is it a kinda of thing like, if the issue not been dealt with yet, then I won't be able to delete it?
 * Generally, it is common to deal with problems before deleting them from your talk page. You are free to style it however you like (although this may not fall under styling). Even after the problem is dealt with, it is common to archive the thread. Cocohead781 (talk) 07:21, 11 November 2017 (UTC)


 * I'm going to mark this question as "helped". User:Cocohead781 has answered some of your questions. If you include a link to a user, as I just did, they will receive a notification that you've responded with a link to the page. There are also templates named u and ping (and several aliases) that do much the same thing, but may look prettier. As for the "authority" question, that's a long been a mystery to newcomers. An editor's own authority is not something that Wikipedia recognizes as something to respect; all content added to Wikipedia is expected to be sourced to independent, reliable sources and it is strongly discouraged to use your own writings as sources for contributions. We still value experts, since they are likely to know where good sources may be found, but an expert's own opinions should not be particularly obvious in their contributions to the encyclopedia. This "lack of respect for authority" has been criticized by experts who come to Wikipedia expecting to use their own knowledge and being frustrated when their "correct" content additions are reverted. What this means is that Wikipedia is not a venue where you can counter the "crappy" magazines. To do that, you have to either have your own magazine or convince the editors that they should buy articles written by you. This preference for print journalism over websites and blogs may seem a bit outdated, but the collective consensus of Wikipedia editors/contributors still holds that most online content is not vetted as well as quality newspapers and magazines.  &mdash; jmcgnh  (talk) (contribs)  08:40, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Snatch (kettlebell lifting)


A tag has been placed on Draft:Snatch (kettlebell lifting), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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. News Team  Assemble! [talk?]  00:08, 21 November 2018 (UTC)