User talk:ThePoetsCottage

Welcome
Hello, ThePoetsCottage. Welcome to Wikipedia. I am Mlpearc a volunteer with the Account Creation Team and I received your account request. You are welcome to leave questions, comments on my talk page at anytime  here . Here is some useful information to get you started. Mlpearc  powwow    00:34, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation
 Väinö Kohtanen, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article. You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you are more than welcome to continue submitting work to Articles for Creation. Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia! MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:18, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
 * If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
 * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

WP:SHAREDACCOUNT
Hi. The userpage of this account suggests that it is being used by multiple different people. This is contrary to WP:SHAREDACCOUNT and other Wikipedia policies, and - if used in the fashion implied - will result in a block. Also see WP:ROLE. Guliolopez (talk) 00:06, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi. I updated the userpage bio. Only one person has ever used this account and has had access to the password, the second person merely provided expert peer-review of the written content prior to it being uploaded/saved to ensure accuracy, comprehensiveness, appropriate referencing, and objectivity. This process is commonplace in academic/scholarly writing and I would be very surprised if initial peer-review of submissions by a secondary expert, prior to submission, is not permitted by Wikipedia. I hope this clarifies your concerns which seem to imply that multiple people are making submissions under one account, which is inaccurate in this instance. The actual account is indeed only used by one person as per the guidelines, but the content they are submitting is being subjected to the scrutiny of a second expert (who was credited - but no longer is to save confusion) to ensure the reliability and rigor of the submission, and hence, Wikipedia. (ThePoetsCottage (talk) 07:26, 5 May 2018 (UTC))


 * Hi. Thanks for changing the userpage. And confirming that the account password isn't shared. If it was, it would need to be changed. On some of the points you note:
 * "surprised if initial peer-review [..] prior to submission, is not permitted". Wikipedia is specifically designed for collaboration and peer review within the project. It's pretty much the whole point of the project. Coordination outside the project is unnecessary.
 * "[you] seem to [inaccurately] imply that multiple people are making submissions under one account". The tone here seems to suggest that I assumed something. On my own. I did not need to infer or "imply" something which you had already specifically stated.
 * "to ensure accuracy, comprehensiveness, appropriate referencing, and objectivity". You might want to take another look at (at least) the latter of these. In this single quasi-promotional edit, flowery statements like "picturesque village" and "vibrant culturally and demographically diverse community" were added. Personally I'd question whether the "objectivity" goal is met with this type of content change. (Adjectives like "picturesque" and "vibrant" are relative. At best. And partially subjective. At worst. If the goal is "objectivity", then consider avoiding terms like these entirely. Or, at least, attribute whose relative/subjective opinion is being described.)
 * All the best. Guliolopez (talk) 01:53, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

Looks like I am being Wikistalked! :D Out of all of the entries I’ve made on Wikipedia you found only two descriptives (you call it “Flowery”) you didn’t agree with – looks like I am doing really well. Report me by all means if you feel so strongly about my ability to contribute to Wikipedia and my position of having my contributions looked over by a second person before uploading them to a public forum. Your concerns and tone, however, suggests an agenda at best, a vendetta at worst, and I would recommend you take some time question your motives. Have a good day. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:598:9286:225C:6D6D:D772:8A6A:DE16 (talk) 04:06, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Leona G. Running has been accepted
 Leona G. Running, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article. You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer. Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia! KylieTastic (talk) 14:48, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
 * If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the  [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_talk/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Leona_G._Running help desk] .
 * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.