User talk:Anne Delong: Difference between revisions
Page contents not supported in other languages.
| Line 1,511: | Line 1,511: | ||
My problem with using a bot for this job is that there are too many different ways that a person could have added references and I feel that human judgement or serious AI is needed to determine if an article is really unreferenced. Someone could just write "I found an article about this in Scientific American called ''The Amazing Life of the Snail'', in Volume 22, Issue 6". How would a bot find that? Nevertheless, in manual mode it might save time, since it may be quicker to tell the bot to send an e-mail than to write one yourself. —[[User:Anne Delong|Anne Delong]] ([[User talk:Anne Delong|talk]]) 15:28, 14 May 2013 (UTC) | My problem with using a bot for this job is that there are too many different ways that a person could have added references and I feel that human judgement or serious AI is needed to determine if an article is really unreferenced. Someone could just write "I found an article about this in Scientific American called ''The Amazing Life of the Snail'', in Volume 22, Issue 6". How would a bot find that? Nevertheless, in manual mode it might save time, since it may be quicker to tell the bot to send an e-mail than to write one yourself. —[[User:Anne Delong|Anne Delong]] ([[User talk:Anne Delong|talk]]) 15:28, 14 May 2013 (UTC) | ||
:I've seen about 3 of these messages today, so it seems to be working to some extent. I believe it detects whether users added ref tags. If they didn't, it leaves a thorough explanation on how to place them on their talk pages (and it's highlighted in green, so they can't miss it). [[User:FoCuSandLeArN|FoCuSandLeArN]] ([[User talk:FoCuSandLeArN|talk]]) 16:16, 14 May 2013 (UTC) | :I've seen about 3 of these messages today, so it seems to be working to some extent. I believe it detects whether users added ref tags. If they didn't, it leaves a thorough explanation on how to place them on their talk pages (and it's highlighted in green, so they can't miss it). [[User:FoCuSandLeArN|FoCuSandLeArN]] ([[User talk:FoCuSandLeArN|talk]]) 16:16, 14 May 2013 (UTC) | ||
== Undue weight banner at [[Regina Martínez Pérez]]'s article == | |||
Hi Anne, you added an ''undue weight'' banner at [[Regina Martínez Pérez]] but no specific concerns were left in the related Talk page. Can you explain at [[Talk:Regina Martínez Pérez#What undue weight?]], please? I'm willing to improve that page and your indications will be useful. Thank you!--[[User:QuimGil|QuimGil]] ([[User talk:QuimGil|talk]]) 17:43, 15 May 2013 (UTC) | |||
| This isAnne Delong'stalk page, where you can send her messages and comments. |
|
| Archives:1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29 |
Hello, Anne Delong, andwelcome to Wikipedia! Thank you foryour contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being aWikipedian! Pleasesign your messages ontalk pages using fourtildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check outWikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place{{help me}} before the question.
Again, welcome! --CherryX (talk)19:32, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
{{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:Also, when you post ontalk pages you shouldsign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being aWikipedian!FoCuSandLeArN (talk)19:32, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Anne, welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your good and constructive edits to theYellow cassava article, every little bit helps to make Wikipedia better. However (you knew that was coming, didn't you!) when you edit articles it is very helpful to people reviewing the article history if you remember to fill in theEdit summary field underneath the edit window with a brief note on what you just did. For example, when you change Yellow cassava to Yellowcassava (which is the right thing to do), you could note in the summary, "Added wikilink". Now people scanning the history can see what you did and don't need to view the actual edit to find out. Keep up the good work, and if you need any help just give me a shout. Regards,David_FLXD(Talk)17:35, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions toWikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you cancreate articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you are more than welcome to continue submitting work toArticles for Creation.
Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!
—Ahnoneemoos (talk)01:31, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions toWikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you cancreate articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you are more than welcome to continue submitting work toArticles for Creation.
Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!
—Ahnoneemoos (talk)03:18, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]Hi Anne, we have something calledWikiProjects in Wikipedia. They are groups of people that share similar interests and work together to improve Wikipedia on specific subjects. I think it would be great if you introduce yourself and join us atWT:OPERA andWT:ONTARIO. You may want to checkWP:TORONTO as well. —Ahnoneemoos (talk)03:26, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
David_FLXD(Talk)04:28, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Anne: I've made some changes to the article (plus see my comments when saving) to bring it more in line with the WikiProject Opera guidelines.
A few things to be aware of:
1. We use the international day-month-year format. I don't know if you are in Canada where they tend to use the intenational standard I think, though yours look more like y-m-d. So more work is needed.
2. Re: Wiki-linking: unless there is an article on someone notable, lots of red links look pretty bad, sop best not to include them - until, that is, you write the articles!!
3. Use "External links" rather than pop these things into odd "Notes" somewhere.
All the best, and welcome to Wikipedia!Viva-Verdi (talk)02:37, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There's no rule about how to go about this process. Either way works and it is your choice as a user.
However, the best way to deal with this is by responding on your own talk page and then posting on the user's talk page to let him know that you replied to his message on your own talk page.
We have a template that helps with this process at{{talkback}}
Here's what you should do:
{{talkback|User talk:Anne Delong}}~~~~This would leave the following on the user's talk page:
your signature would be here automatically
Hope this helps.
—Ahnoneemoos (talk)15:56, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
—Ahnoneemoos (talk)16:25, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content totalk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you shouldsign your posts by typing fourtildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button
or
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk)20:04, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
—[[User:Anne Delong|]] ([[User talk:Anne Delong|talk]])
~~~~
—Ahnoneemoos (talk)16:26, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi:In response to your question, while I've done a lot of work on opera company articles, I've never come across the situation which you describe. However, I see no reason for not including those shows, especially as you have the source of the info to link to.
Under "Productions" you could have an introductory paragraph which lays out the pre-history and name the shows, or you could note it in the intro para.
Hope this helps.
PS: Why is there a complete duplication of shows produced, one in a paragraph form, the other a return to the list? Depending upon how much you intend to write about each production, you could flesh out the paragraphs, one for each, which would a lot more encylopedic than a list of titles.Viva-Verdi (talk)22:16, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It wasn't me that added the list of titles underneath. However, organized information is a lot easier to scan and read (and to insert references!) than paragraphs. I am slowly finding information about the productions; one of the newspapers involved has not been indexed or scanned. What I'd eventually like is to have a paragraph for each production with a year and title as a heading for each paragraph. That will be a compromise between the two formats.—Anne Delong (talk)23:42, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 | Hello!Anne Delong,you are invited to theTeahouse, a forum on Wikipedia for new editors to ask questions about editing Wikipedia, and get support from peers and experienced editors. Please join us!heather walls (talk)07:58, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply] |
| WikiWomen Unite! | |
|---|---|
 | HiAnne Delong! Women around the world who edit and contribute to Wikipedia are coming together to celebrate each other's work, support one another, and engage new women to also join in on the empowering experience of shaping the sum of all the world's knowledge - through theWikiWomen's Collaborative. As a WikiWoman, we'd love to have you involved! You can do this by:
Feel free to drop by ourwebsite, make a profile and see how else you can participate! |
| Your input is requested atWikipedia talk:WikiProject Editor Retention#Input from newly registered user: User:Anne Delong regarding your experience in joining Wikipedia and what can we improve to retain editors like you. |
Hi Anne,
Your name is going around in severalWikipedia:WikiProjects due to your extraordinary contributions to Wikipedia and theToronto Light Opera Association. You fit the profile for the kind of editors that we are looking for in Wikipedia and the kind of editors we wish to retain.
As such, I'm asking for your input on your experience in joining Wikipedia atWikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Editor_Retention#Input_from_newly_registered_user:_User:Anne_Delong. Please join us in the discussion, we promise to notWP:BITE!
—Ahnoneemoos (talk)14:23, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 | The Excellent New Editor's Barnstar | |
| Hey Anne, I have yet to personally interact with you, but based on what I have been hearing, you are doing a fantastic job and are worthy of recognition. I would urge you to help us out by answering those few questions, but whether or not you do so, your contributions are greatly appreciated and I therefore award you the excellent newcomer barnstar! Keep up the great work, and thanks for all of your contributions to improving the sum of the world's knowledge.GoPhightins!01:42, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply] |
—Ahnoneemoos (talk)14:36, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
... asimilar article you are trying to create!? You have told, you are bew to Wikipedia, welcome to Wikipedia, if you have any question, feel free to ask (clickhere) --Tito Dutta (talk)08:59, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Titodutta:Although I did add a reference to that page about visual learning, I am not the one who submitted it. That would be Jason50668128. I think your message needs to go to him. You are right that the Visual Leaerning page already exists. —Anne Delong (talk)09:12, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
ukexpat (talk) has given youa cup of tea. Tea promotes and hopefully this has made your day ever so slightly better.
Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a tea, especially if it is someone you have had disagreements with in the past or someone putting up with some stick at this time. Enjoy!
Spread the lovely, warm, refreshing goodness of tea by adding {{subst:wikitea}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Hi! Writing a new article is a challenge, and adding pictures can make that twice as complicated. And yet, here you are, kicking off a great career (ok, hobby) as a Wikipedia editor. Thanks so much for seeking out help at the Teahouse and for sharing your appreciation with the Teahouse hosts. Not everyone acts so thoughtful in seeking and accepting help, but you did. Thanks for doing that!
 | Great Question Badge |
| Awarded to those who have asked a great question on theTeahouse Question Forum. There are no stupid questions, but some are excellent! Good questions are those that reflect serious curiosity about editing and help others learn. |
Ocaasit| c04:18, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions toWikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you cancreate articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work toArticles for Creation if you prefer.
Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!
|
I recently made a request for this new articleReport on a National Bank, and wrote the material. I blush, but I was confused by my sources, and this is actually an alternate name for theSecond Report on Public Credit. The "Report on the National Bank" needs to be removed; it is a duplicate article. The editor who presided over the original request - "Bonkers" - has not responded to my talk messages.
Can you assist me on this matter?36hourblock (talk)16:36, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, the material for the article is fine, and has been used to update the article that exists,Second Report on Public Credit. Not a problem. And my thanks for your kind help. Best,36hourblock (talk)19:37, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 | I've seen your contributions and attempts to understand policy and process, and you seem to be coming along leaps and bounds. I see a lot of editors struggle atnew pages orArticles for Creation, or give up after one article, so it's really good to see someone stick at it and really make those of us who guide new editors feel we're doing something worthwhile. Maybe we'll see you commenting onWP:ANI soon.Actually, scratch that - that's a terrible idea....22:18, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply] |
Tito Dutta (talk)08:52, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions toWikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you cancreate articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work toArticles for Creation if you prefer.
Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!
Xyphoid (talk)21:26, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]Thank you! I hope to learn to write without spelling mistakes.אורח פורח (talk)07:42, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your comments! I contacted the guy who had written the obituary, hoping to get him to continue the edits. Instead, he's offered to write a draft with further information & references, and send it to me -- that's OK too, of course. As part of WikiProject Biophysics, we're esp trying to improve coverage of scientists from other countries in both en and their wikipedias (also more women, of course).Dcrjsr (talk)13:43, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you editedJoe Bartnick, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pagesNHLPA andKing of Clubs (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.Read theFAQ • Join us at theDPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)11:22, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Tag now removed. Thankyou for your efforts.Op47 (talk)13:22, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've seen you point out various copyright violations at theAfC help desk. Thanky you very much. But I wonder whether it wouldn't be easier if you just nominated the infringing pages forspeedy deletion yourself. Of course you're welcome to go through the help desk and have someone else do the deed, but it's not required.Huon (talk)15:27, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Huon: I am a fairly new editor. The first couple of times that I found copyright problems I asked about them at the Teahouse, and it's a good thing I did, because they gave me good advice, such as comparing dates in the page history to find out which text was the source and which was copied, and checking whether the whole block of text appeared at once. I have now started tagging pages from the new page feed, and will only bring them to the help desk if there's something I don't understand.
However, I've been warned that I shouldn't interfere with the Afc review process in any way that the user might blame me for the article not being accepted. Because of that I was hesitant to put a deletion tag on one of these articles; I figured the people at the help desk were the reviewers and might not notice the copyright problem. If marking Afc pages for deletion is acceptable, I will be glad to do it directly. It's not like I won't have other questions to ask at the help desk! —Anne Delong (talk)20:23, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the feedback! I askedUser:Kailesh29792 to de-fancruft it, because I know I couldn't do it properly.--Dravidianhero (talk)21:25, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If you want a userbox with the computer brand, why not use a digital pic of yours? Size it small (40-50px), you should be fine. (AFAIK, pix of your own property aren't violations, even if a brand logo is visible. I've asked the question at theTeahouse page, tho...) Link to the brand in the descriptor.04:13, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you editedPineridge Bluegrass Folklore Society, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation pageBluegrass (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.Read theFAQ • Join us at theDPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)11:36, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your comment forEuropean Biomass Conference and Exhibition. Could you kindly help me as an experienced wikipedia user to simplify and arrange the text with more neutrality? --Lucarellie (talk)11:04, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Anne! We are having some birthday celebrations as Teahouse turns 1 year-old next week. You're one of the most active and passionate editors I've seen come through the project. I was wondering if you might reflect a bit on your experience at the Teahouse and how it's shaped your growth as a new editor. I'd love to have your responses to any of these questions, possibly for a Wikimedia Foundation blog post which will run on the big day.
A: Another user posted an invitation on my talk page. I found it helpful right away, with friendly yet helpful advice.
A: Everyone tries to put a positive face on the problems presented, even though the hosts must be tired of seeing the same problems go by time after time. I liked the straightforward way that the hosts let me know what was acceptable and what was not.
A: I liked the straightforward way that the hosts let new editors know what was acceptable and what was not, without looking down on anyone for being ignorant. It's been a pretty positive experience.
A: As a librarian and computer programmer I am used to material that is logical and arranged according to a preset plan. Wikipedia is more like a village where the roads have grown in random directions because that's where the first people happened to walk. The Teahouse helped me get past that until I could see the underlying infrastructure and the people that are gradually article by article pulling it toward a cohesive whole.
A: I hope that the teahouse hosts keep up the good work, and attract more super-friendly people to help out. What goes around comes around! —Anne Delong (talk)21:43, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks so much for your awesome contributions to the project, Anne. Really exciting to watch. Cheers,Ocaasit| c20:28, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That's a nice user name. But thanks for the help and appreciation onJohn Sadak. Cheers!User talk:Ashbeckjonathan
What it says in the heading. :)Just plain Bill (talk)22:34, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It's been an exciting year for theTeahouse andyou were a part of it. Thanks so much for visiting, asking questions, sharing answers, being friendly and helpful, and just keeping Teahouse an awesome place. You can read more about theimpact we're having and thereflections of other guests and hosts like you. Please come by the Teahouse to celebrate with us, and enjoy this sparkly cupcake badge as our way of sayingthank you. And, Happy Birthday!
 | Teahouse First Birthday Badge |
| Awarded to everyone who participated in theWikipedia Teahouse during its first year! To celebrate the many hosts and guests we've met and the nearly 2000 questions asked and answered during this excellent first year, we're giving out this tasty cupcake badge. |
For asking lots of questions, and being patient for answers :) Good work.
| Great Question Badge |
| Awarded to those who have asked a great question on theTeahouse Question Forum. There are no stupid questions, but some are excellent! Good questions are those that reflect serious curiosity about editing and help others learn. |
—(academy)01:40, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you editedPodunk Bluegrass Festival, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation pageTim O'Brien (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.Read theFAQ • Join us at theDPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)18:11, 2 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Anne, I have slightly rearranged the DAB page that you created so that the layout is more in line withMOS:DAB. I really have to compliment you on how quickly you have got to grips with how Wikipedia works, excellent stuff! If you ever need help, please don't hesitate to leave a message on my talk page.--ukexpat (talk)18:09, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Anne, thank you for the feedback. I am not much into bluegrass, in fact I only like Bearfoot and The Duhks. However, I like Wikipedia, and try to help keep articles correct, expand them as necessary, and in a few cases, create articles for musical groups or albums where no article exists. I am glad that you have adopted bluegrass bands as one of your interests and are working on improving them.Mburrell (talk)09:01, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
12:55, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding what you said in response to my last post, I know I saw a discussion of allowing users to use the curation toolbar onany page but I cannot for the life of me figure out where that was. Oh well. If I stumble across it again I'll let you know.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing todisambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.Read theFAQ • Join us at theDPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)12:12, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 | The currentTexan Collaboration of the Year isLizzie Velásquez. Every year, a differentTexas-related topic, stub or non-existent article is picked. Please read thenomination text and improve the article any way you can. |
I can't believe how many edits you've made in under 4 months! I strive to be more like you. :)Jami430 (talk)04:51, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
12:29, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I just wanted to leave a quick word of thanks for the reviews you did ofSammy Barr andSammy Gilmore, and the kind words you left on my talkpage. It is lovely wikipedians like yourself that make all this worthwhile! All the best --16:17, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your contribution, I'm afraid I don't know more about theEnglish Phonotypic AlphabetI hope someone can help.--Laurentleap (talk)10:08, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Good feedback. I will make the improvements.
HokiePE (talk)14:09, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
All of the roadsigns refer to it as the Historic Norweigian Grade--should I get some pictures of them?Ajenee (talk)22:37, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited1975 in Canadian television, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation pageThe Fifth Estate (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.Read theFAQ • Join us at theDPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)09:23, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ms. Anne Delong,
Thank you. I shall look at your tags on Thomas Francis McNulty and get back to you if needed. It is unfortunate, but, I myself don't know of any other information on him except the obscure Time Magazine obit already cited, perhaps, another reader, seeing your tags, might be able to help.Albiet (talk)20:52, 19 March 2013 (UTC)Albiet[reply]
 | Thanks for pointing out those copyright violations! Once again the sound judgment I've come to expect from you.Huon (talk)00:51, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply] |
 | The Excellent New Editor's Barnstar A new editor on the right path | |
| Your questions at the Teahouse show you have the best intentions and your work seems to prove that!.Amadscientist (talk)06:57, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply] |
Hello, that would be absolutely fantastic! I really appreciate the offer. :-)
Many thanks!Weir NI (talk)19:22, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Anne Delong, I've replied to your query at theAfC help desk. I must apologize for my comment regarding the copyright violation - notifying others is helpful, but there's simply no need to ask others to tag what you've identified as a copyright violation - tagging it yourself would probably be easier for everybody, including yourself. So please don't take my comment the wrong way, and keep up the good work! Yours,Huon (talk)18:00, 23 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Anne Delong. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion ofUser:Mohammad sameer hussain/sandbox, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern:Not an article, A3 doesn't apply. Thank you. ~01:41, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well, what's the best way to get rid of this article for creation, which has only a title, and the title is on the blacklist, so I can't move it to the article name? —Anne Delong (talk)01:50, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Thanks for all you've done, and my apologies I didn't reply sooner.I shall keep my eye out for more reliable sources in the future! :-)
Many thanks,Weir NI (talk)00:25, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Can't be as famous as I thought I was... I'm glad to know you don't know about DustCoveredSoul, as that means there are at least two of us. I vaguely remember seeing it at CSD, but don't think I did anything to it, and certainly haven't asked about it. I've just tried to find it in deleted articles, but may not have the spelling right. (I am an admin, you see, or was last time I looked...) Just Googled - punk band. I might have deleted it. There were a couple of no-hopers and one or two more. (Had one the other day that had actually written a song but were still looking for a bassist... I presume the song had a bass line so they couldn't go any further.) I've a feeling you messaged the wrong person, but if you find the right spelling or tell me who posted it, I'll let you know what was in it. 8-)Peridon (talk)21:39, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, thanks for the comment. I will be building on that page soon. I have been doing research into the West family and intend to put more into that ranch (they owned many ranches) and the airport soon. Thanks!— Precedingunsigned comment added byCersevcu (talk •contribs)14:57, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 | Thanks for yourAfC reviewing efforts! You seem to get all the truly bizarre cases...Huon (talk)13:29, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply] |
Thanks, Anne, for moving my article,Stan_Modeling_Language to Articles for Creation.Jim.Callahan,Orlando (talk)04:18, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I was making a Wiki page for my Social Media Class, and I am just wondering why my page was declined?— Precedingunsigned comment added bySgriffth (talk •contribs)20:02, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
While you are of course welcome to use the AfC help desk (don't worry about being a "pest"; we encourage asking when in doubt!), there's also a dedicated talk page for reviewers and project members atWT:WikiProject Articles for creation. It's a little more behind-the-scenes and may be better suited to questions about reviewing, as opposed to questions by prospective authors. Once again, Ireally appreciate your work; I'm too lazy to do much reviewing myself...Huon (talk)20:16, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
ArcticKangaroo04:29, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
ArcticKangaroo05:00, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
ArcticKangaroo08:26, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've noticed that you forgot to add your name to theMarch drive page. Since you were not a member of the project when the drive started, you probably missed the announcement, but you already helped a lot so I I think you should add your name.
Nimuaq (talk)10:05, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you editedPaniyiri Greek Festival, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation pageMusgrave Park (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.Read theFAQ • Join us at theDPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)19:14, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, for you help with the name placement it was difficult thank you sooo much!Hulk3200 (talk)04:05, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This article is below 1,500 characters minimum. It's already raised inthe nomination page. --George Ho (talk)07:31, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for adding the references!123.225.52.180 (talk)16:05, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Anne, with help for my Ivan Saric article. The problem I'm running into is getting information about him. It's just not out there. I tried soliciting Ivan directly for information through his facebook page, but I was ignored. If this guy doesn't know how to use the crowd, I was mistaken in considering him a notable (or potential notable). That being the case, I suggest this article for deletion. But all in all, this has been a great introduction to Wikipedia. The format is still a bit foreign to me, but in due time. Thanks again, Anne.— Precedingunsigned comment added byAtherahmedwashere (talk •contribs)01:41, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I hope you aren't too disappointed. The page doesn't have to be deleted, though. Wikipedia has pages sitting around for years in the Articles for Creation section, and sometimes the subject of the article will do something amazing and get in the news a few months later and the article will be finished up. It's just text; hardly takes any space at all. —Anne Delong (talk)04:11, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your encouragement and support, Anne. It means a lot to me. -Ather— Precedingunsigned comment added byAtherahmedwashere (talk •contribs)04:17, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I edited the article (Glenda H. Eoyang), and hope it'll be published.Taljudy (talk)14:44, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Taljudy:
I am afraid that the articleWikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Glenda H. Eoyang is far from ready for the encyclopedia.
First, there are two copies of everything, and I don't know which to look at. Please remove the extra material.
Second, there are promotional external links in the body of the article. These should be removed and if important placed in an "External links" section at the bottom of the article, after the references.
Third, your list of publications needs to be "bulleted" for appearance's sake. I've done the first few for you. Leaving a blank line between paragraphs will also make this article more readable.
Next, this article reads more like a resume. An encyclopedia article is a summary, not an enumeration, of a notable person's career. I found an example,Angelika Amon, which is about right. Notice that there are no external links in the article, because Wikipedia is not intended to promote any business or organization. In the section about her work, the important areas of research are mentioned, and each is backed up with a citation. If you look at the references indicated by the citations, a few of them are to her own papers, just enough to illustrate the type of work she does, and the rest are reliable outside sources, verifying the facts in the article.
Your reference section is a link to a list of citations. This is not an acceptable substitute for proper references. Even if a reader of your article had the time or interest to go through this list, many articles cite others' work in trivial ways such as "See also", or as general references. You have probably read many of these pagers, so find a few that have significant coverage of particular pieces of information in the article, and make citations to them at the appropriate spots in the article. If you would like to see howAngelika Amon's citations were created, you can click on the edit button of her page and take a look.
I hope you find this helpful. —Anne Delong (talk)15:39, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 | The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar |
| In appreciation of the work you do helping to get rid of copyvio AFCs. Thanks.21:54, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply] |
I am currently working on making my article ready for submission. I had it reviewed to find out what I would need in order to make this page worthy of wikipedia. You reviewed it and mentioned that I would need to find and cite outside sources about the game that were not made for or by the game producers, and I would just like some help with looking for these sources. How would I distinguish between a prosessional review and an unprofessional one? I think this would help me out a lot in finding the sources to cite. Thanks again for your time, snd I look forward to your input.Cartographer23554 (talk)00:47, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Cartographer23554. You have asked a very good question. There are reviews everywhere, these days, but many of them are on blogs, and are made by random people who happen to attend a performance or read a book. A problem with a site like that is that people who have a vested interest in a review can go in and review their own product and no one would know.
A professional reviewer is one who works for a newspaper, a magazine, or even a web site that specializes in reviews. These reviewers are independent and know their subject. There are also people who aren't paid, but whose reviews are trusted because they are acknowledged experts and known to be unbiased; however, it's hard to know which ones these are.
Another kind of review to avoid is one on a site that is also selling the item being reviewed, since these are usually self-serving, and almost invariably positive.
I am not that knowledgeable about video game reviews (my favourite game is Tetris and the last game that really captured my attention was made by Infocom). However, I can give you an example of gamespot.com. They have both professional and amateur reviews, but you can tell the difference because the amateur ones are in their blog section and the professional ones are marked "editor" like this one:Need for Speed. You can tell that the site is properly managed.
I hope this helps. —Anne Delong (talk)01:24, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Anne,My article was declined by you. I am very new to wikipedia and really need some help as this is my first article. Please help me in getting appropriate inputs. I would really appreciate your help. I do not even know if this is the place to write you a message. If this is, and if you see this message please respond and give me a solution.
Thanks and Regards, Kishore.— Precedingunsigned comment added byWikishore1985 (talk •contribs)16:07, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there,
I was trying to submit a new article about my friends band (The Royal Blasphemy -http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/The_Royal_Blasphemy). You denied cuz you said that I need to "find some independent news articles or reviews (not blogs) about this group to verify both notability and the information in this article." All the information there was give to me by the band itself. I added some links to there facebook, official webpage, isn't that enough? Or do you want me to send you an e-mail write from the band saying that that information it's true?
Thanks for your help,Mr Omega— Precedingunsigned comment added byMrOmega13 (talk •contribs)10:27, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Mr. Omega13:
I'm sorry; I guess my note wasn't clear. What Wikipedia means by notability is that the band has to have been written about by professional writers such as journalists, authors, reviewers, etc. I didn't ask for references because I thought you were making it up (although this came in the other day...Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Saint Ampersand).
An encyclopedia is a summary and organizer of already published material. If nobody is writing about this band except the members themselves and their friends, then the band shouldn't be in the encyclopedia. If I were to close my eyes and pass it through, it wouldn't do any good, because there are thousands of other editors out there who, as soon as they see a page with no outside sources, will just delete it. As long as the article is inside the Articles for Creation section, it will not be deleted, and you can add to it and resubmit later if the band gets some press.
After getting your message I looked around on the web for a while, but all I could see about this band were items on sites where you post your own material, like Youtube, Facebook and setlist. There are plenty of such places intended to promote bands, but that's not Wikipedia's purpose.
I see that the band is from Portugal. Perhaps you can find some more local material to use as sources. Have they played at festivals or events? If so, did the local newspaper write about them? That's all I can think of. —Anne Delong (talk)11:32, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 | The Barnstar of Diligence |
| For your painstaking contributions to Wikipedia, maintaining a high level of diligence for every single edit, such as with AfC. (and also for your kind words!)FoCuSandLeArN (talk)13:47, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply] |
Dear Miss Delong,
My article was rejected for being blank. I have re-entered the disappeared text and would like to ask you to re-review it.
Thank you.SaflieniSaflieni (talk)21:42, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Done. —Anne Delong (talk)17:22, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Editor Anne DelongHello…
Kindly I receive a letter from you on my talk page a bout my Article for creation Emad Kayyam.
Actually I am trying to start an article named: ((Emad Kayyam Work)) on my sand box which discuss images and media published by Emad Kayyam in the Wikimedia Commons under the category "Emad Kayyam Work".
Kindly I hope you notice that all images & media under the category Emad Kayyam work in wikimedia commons is dual licensed by "CC by Sa 3" un ported & the GFDL and are created, designed and produced by me Emad Kayyam as the corresponding author.
I hope if you let me know if I can start this article on my sand box, or if you please suggest where should I start this article and what is your advice.
Thank you mushEmad Kayyam
--Dr. EMAD KAYYAM 15:23, 10 April 2013 (UTC)— Precedingunsigned comment added byEMAD KAYYAM (talk •contribs)
I've added another suggestion to your questionon where to post reviewing questions at the Teahouse. Keep up the good work!Espresso Addict(talk)01:16, 12 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I would think that is the right forum... I would change your opening line to your proposal and if the people the frequent there think it belongs elsewhere, I'm sure they will tell you.
Technical 13 (talk)12:38, 12 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I've started the discussion. —Anne Delong (talk)23:09, 12 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Following your question at the Teahouse, I thought you might be interested to know aboutthe Linkclassifier script. It gives me a headache, but if you feel that you'd like your version of Wikipedia to look like a rainbow threw up on it, you may wish to give it a whirl!Yunshui 雲水13:28, 12 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Anne,thank you for your consideration of my submittedarticle on BlogUpp and your suggested WHOIS resource. You added a great reference, appreciate it as well.
I've just included aninfobox section, based on Wikipedia website template. The new information collected is based on WHOIS record suggested by you, as well as service's FAQ, which also mentions service creators. Please let me know if there's anything else you feel is missing and I'll do my best.—Ibjennyjenny (talk)14:12, 12 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks so much for your help on my Giga Pets article. I will follow your advice and learn more tips at Teahouse!Rebfield (talk)16:19, 12 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you editedPeterborough Canoe Company, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation pageDuck decoy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.Read theFAQ • Join us at theDPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)14:00, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 | Editor of the Week | |
| Your ongoing efforts to improve the encyclopedia have not gone unnoticed: You have been selected asEditor of the Week, for jumping right in with content creation. Thank you for the great contributions!(courtesy of theWikipedia Editor Retention Project) |
User:The Interior submitted the following nomination forEditor of the Week:
You can copy the following text to your user page to display a user box proclaiming your selection as Editor of the Week:
{{subst:Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/Editor of the Week/Recipient user box}}Thanks again for your efforts!GoPhightins!17:14, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Editor Retention Editor of the Week | |
|---|---|
 Anne is abluegrass musician | |
| Anne Delong | |
| Editor of the Week for the week beginning April 14, 2013 | |
| Here since December 2012, Anne Delong has been one ofTeahouse's most prolific guests, and has impressed everyone with her dedication to learn and maturity. With time, she has grown into the fine editor that she is today, and still frequents there with refreshing questions. Being abluegrass musician herself, it remains her topic of choice, and she has been constantly involved in creating articles. She has also been involved in various projects and active mentoring all the while. Good Wikipedia editing is truly like harmonized singing. Anne Delong's "voice" melds with everyone she works with! In her own words,What goes around comes around! | |
| Recognized for | Being a model "new editor" for Wikipedia |
| Nomination page | |
Done....Do you have one that you Like? Afterall, it will forever be enshrined in theWER Hall of Fame. ```Buster Seven Talk17:46, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]Ocaasit| c19:38, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Mrs. Anne Delong:
Many thanks for your initial response regarding the article for "Alain de Weck". I have in the meantime completed an extensive article on this eminent scientist (who happens to be my father) in the English Wikipedia. There are extensive references including Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs) to scientific articles that are relevant. I believe the article is ready to publish on Wikipedia. I saved it but am unsure if it is in your queue again to be reviewed. I hope it could be published in the next couple of days since my father passed away recently and there is a large community looking for an article on him.
If the English article is approved it is then my intention to create a n equivalent German and French version (a German article already exists but it is very short).
Many thanks for your help and best wishes. (Sorry I am new to Wikipedia and probably making many faux pas)
Prof. Olivier de Weckdeweck@mit.eduDeweck (talk)00:56, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Look at the train of thought I've just had:Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Corps Palatia Munich -->File -->Barnstar.
Coincidence?FoCuSandLeArN (talk)17:01, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Anne,
I am from India and know Surbhi Jyoti(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Surbhi_Jyoti) as an Television and Punjabi(Language) Movies Actor. I regularly watch Qubool Hai(Hindi Television Drama/Serial) in which Surbhi Jyoti is playing role of a girl named "Zoya Farooqui". She is becoming much popular day by day. Here by I request you to review this article again and guide me to make Surbhi Jyoti's article more authenticate.
Thanks,- Nizam KaziCo-Founder, ArtLog DiGi— Precedingunsigned comment added byNizamkazi (talk •contribs)10:50, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for your advice about sourcing an article on Hattie Nestel. I appreciate it very much. And I apologize for using your personal email.
Marcia Gagliardi— Precedingunsigned comment added byHaleyAthol (talk •contribs)17:10, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Dear HaleyAthol: There is no need to apologize about the e-mail. There are times when it might be appropriate to e-mail. However, when talking about Wikipedia, it's better to use the talk pages because the articles are a collaboration between many editors, so everyone can see what has already been discussed and don't keep making the same comments over again. Good luck with your article. By the way, there's a special forum for new editors calledThe Teahouse. —Anne Delong (talk)17:37, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. I am requesting your opinions atTalk:Thomas Savage (died 1611)#Move and add to Thomas Savage as a third party to a discussion which I feel is nearing an impasse. I feel confident that if you chose to participate, your comments ideas and suggestions will be neutral and non-biased in favor or against either of the currently involved participants. If you do not wish to participate, I understand and respect your wishes. Thank you.Technical 13 (talk)19:42, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 |
| Hello, Anne Delong. You're invited to join WikiProject Today's articles for improvement. If you're interested in participating, please add your name to the list ofmembers. Happy editing!TheOriginalSoni (talk)10:35, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply] |
Hi Anne, I am new to Wikipedia and don't really know my away around the system.
You have asked if I have permission for the above jpg.
I am the creator and owner of the diagram which is used in my whitepaper on Acedemia.
The methods to proof ownership seems a little perplexing, can you accept this message as permission?
Thank you for your help.
John Crawford— Precedingunsigned comment added byWikichange12 (talk •contribs)18:45, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I do appreciate the review of my article for creation forVote for the Girls. However, I do believe that there needs to be at least one other source (besides the Vote for the Girls web site) in order for what I believe is a resubmission for the Vote for the Girls article on Wikipeidia.
Other than that, I do respect the decision for the decline as I will try to get more sources and will be more than happy to get free images.Aeverine Frathleen Nieves (talk)09:10, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 | The AFC Backlog Buster Barnstar | |
Congratulations, Anne Delong! You're receivingthe Tireless Contributor Barnstar because you reviewed116 articles during the recentAFC Backlog elimination drive! Thank you for you contributions to Wikipedia at-large and helping to keep the backlog down. We hope you continue reviewing submissions and stay in touch at thetalk page. Thank you and keep up the good work!Mdann52 (talk)12:22, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply] |
Good morning Anne,
Please would you review my submission again as I have added an extra link that should satisfy your reason for rejection. I have a book and whitepaper published on the subject and is not a whim title I am adding to Wikipedia.
Thank you.
John Crawford— Precedingunsigned comment added byWikichange12 (talk •contribs)09:09, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Dear John:
I have looked at your article, but I still don't see any citations to independent sources (not written by you or for you). Has your book received any reviews by journalists or other writers about change? Has it been discussed in the press, other than by its publisher? Have other papers been written that discuss it? I have not declined the submission again to give you more time to add these independent sources, but another editor may see the submission and decline it at any time. If the book and paper are really new, it may just be too soon because no one else has written about them yet. If that's the case, just leave the article where it is for a while, add the sources at a later date, and submit the article then. —Anne Delong (talk)11:41, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You seem to have markedWikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Evolutionary Theory of Mate Selection as duplicate ofWikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Evolutionary Theory of Mate Selection. This does not seem to make sense-- is this what you meant to indicate, or is it a duplicate or copyvio from somewhere else? DGG ( talk)20:33, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You kindly asked who owned the copyright of the Obituary which appeared in the Daily Telegraph on 28/10/1998. The answer is that I wrote an Obituary piece for them on commission. The article I submitted to Wikipedia is my own original longer version which was edited back by the Telegraph. The fact that the Obit was commissioned and appeared would I hope justify Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion. I note that Robin Sutherland's original partner Michael Chow has his own entry which mentions much of the story from a different perspective. Many other references in the piece are also published in my book about the London restaurants of the 1960s, The Spaghetti Tree, Mario and Franco and the Trattoria Revolution, Primavera Books, London, 2009. Thank you again for your advice and assistance!Alasdairss (talk) 10:59, 20 April 2013 (UTC)Alasdair Scott SutherlandAlasdairss (talk)10:59, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Alasdairss: It wasn't me that asked about the copyright issue. It must have beenOtolemur crassicaudatus (talk, the one who placed the copyright notice. Wikipedia is pretty strict about making sure that all of its text is specially written for the encyclopedia, and is not just copies of material published elsewhere. I declined your article for another reason: To be the subject of a Wikipedia article, a person or their work has to have been written about extensively in the media or in books by those not connected to them (in this case restaurant critics, business and local news, etc.) A book written by a relative could be used as a reference for facts, as long as its not the only source, but not to establish notability; only information published by independent authors and journalists count in that case.
About the copyright issue: I don't know about the Daily Telegraph, but most newspapers assume copyright of everything they publish, no matter who wrote it. The most straightforward thing to do would be to rewrite the text so that none of the sentences are the same as in the obituary or in any of your own published works. Then you will not need to worry about that issue at all. Before going to that trouble, though, make sure that you have found those independent sources mentioned above, or the article will be declined.
I hope this helps. —Anne Delong (talk)12:06, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Anne DelongThank you for looking over the page I had created for Kekoo Gandhy.You have ruled out the single reference that I had for this article so far, but I am unclear as to the precise reason, other than the reference should not be by the person. Does this rule out all published interview articles as references, then? What about interview-based articles about him? At least one US academic has produced an item on his life and work in such fashion.Of course, now that Kekoo Gandhy has died, there have been obituaries in several national Indian newspapers. But are any of these acceptable as references?Some of the information, I fear, about his early life is going to be unverifiable through references that are other than the interviews he gave while alive. Should I presume, then, that for Wikipedia purposes those elements of his life will have be absent?Thanks for your input.Kind regardsJim Moody— Precedingunsigned comment added byJimmo (talk •contribs)12:48, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Jim:
You have asked a very good question about published interviews. I believe that Wikipedia editors and reviewers take each case individually in this situation. For example, if a person is interviewed by a professional journalist, and the interviewer writes introductory information, we assume that he or she would have checked the facts before writing it. Also, if the person being interviewed gives non-controversial information, such as "My restaurant is in London, England", the interview can be used to back up that fact. Surely the interviewer would have spoken up it this obvious fact were not true. However, if in the same interview the person says "Everyone loves my spaghetti sauce.", that wouldn't be accepted. An independent food critic would need to write about that. In general, interviews are weak sources because most of the text is the subject's own words, and people don't always see themselves as others see them. The weaker the source, the more are needed to corroborate facts. However, if there are a number of different interviews published in reliable sources, they should be included as references, because the fact of being interviewed means that the subject had come to the attention of the press. Interviews which are not published shouldn't be used at all.
In reference to your article, I see that some of the events happened long ago. There are surely news reports about some of these happenings, but they may be hard to find because there was no Internet then. I faced the same problem when creating this page:Toronto Light Opera Association. I couldn't use my mother's first hand information as a source; I had to travel to a city library and look up old microfilm newspaper records.
By the way, I have removed the Op Cit references in the article and changed them to refer to the actual source. Op cit doesn't work well in Wikipedia, because people will come along and add a citation to a new source in between, and then the op cit points to the wrong reference.
I hope this helps. —Anne Delong (talk)13:46, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Anne,I agree with your post for me regarding the location of Mosport not being in Bowmanville. I actually have family that live just south of the track near Orono. For some reason the track to this day still has their address listed on their website as 3233 Concession Road 10, Bowmanville, and all major racing series including NASCAR and the American Le Mans Series have it listed as Bowmanville including on their international television broadcasts. I'm not sure why, but I believe they put the location of all tracks as being the nearest large population centre. TorontoGuy79
TorontoGuy79 (talk)02:27, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Polygog (talk)03:18, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Anne,
I am the author and copyright holder of the article you cite as copyright violation(http://www.spacetimeandtheuniverse.com/against-mainstream/4620-quantum-keyhole.html).
Please, restore my article my unpublished article. Please advise as to any otherissue(s) that my inhibit publishing User:Polygog/Quantum Keyhole.
Highest Regard,
Kenneth Larimer
Just to clarify, the Quantum Keyhole article was post at wikipedia on 26 July 2010,while thehttp://www.spacetimeandtheuniverse.com/against-mainstream/4620-quantum-keyhole.htmlversion was posted in November 2010 and cites the wikipedia source.
Dear Kenneth:
I am afraid that because the article was newly submitted I assumed wrongly that it was newer than the web site. I can't undo the delete directly, but I will contact an administrator to do so. However, the article will still be declined (but not deleted) unless you can show with several independent sources that Quantum Keyhole has been written about by journalists and other authors. It's part of Wikipedia policy that the encyclopedia isn't to be used to promote new terms and ideas. —Anne Delong (talk)03:56, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Eurolib
Dear Miss Delong,
My article was rejected as unreferenced. We have entered appropriate references alongwith the link to Eurolib website and to our members.
Thank you in advance to consider it.LiutprandoLiutprando (talk)12:34, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Eurolib
Dear Miss Delong,
I have fixed the references as requested.
Thank you once againBest RegardsLiutprando
Liutprando (talk)15:21, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Liutprando:
I see that you have added a couple of good references. However, now that I see your web site, I realize that instead or writing about EuroLib you have copied text from the web site. Wikipedia cannot accept text which is published elsewhere for copyright reasons. Each author must submit his or her own written work, and cannot submit as the representative of an organization. I have blanked out the parts that need to be rewritten.
When you have finished, look at the pink box at the top of the page and you will see a place to click to resubmit the article for review.
Also, please have patience and remember that Wikipedia is a world wide organization of volunteers. Reviewers are not always at their keyboards, and it may take some time before you receive a reply when you post a message. Your first post came in the middle of the night for me here in Canada. —Anne Delong (talk)13:51, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Anne,
Thank you for your time reviewing the state of my article.
You state "Most of the citations you had were created by the group's own people," - In reference to articles I posted in which Justice Action representatives are used as media sources.
I'm not sure I completely understand this.
Whilst the majority of those sources involve Justice Action speaking about its own position on an issue - is not the repeated use of the organisation as a source of information/commentary, in and of itself - not a substantiation of its noteworthy status?
What type of article would be better? One in which Justice Action does not speak or give a position at all?
Can you please clarify? Can I use the articles I have listed? I'm confused as to what the threshold is here? Many of the articles establish the group as an advocacy service, and the unstated implication is that their opinion is noteworthy enough to be contribute to journalistic analysis or discussion of issues at hand.
What other forms of media would be available to a community group like Justice Action other than this sort of coverage?
Thanks a lot for your time and assistance.
Dear Anne DelongThe information presented in the article is now confirmed by the references to the works of David Prangishvili. In all of these publications, in which the discovery of new virus families and their description are reported, David Prangishvili is a corresponding author. This means that he planned and directed the reported studies and that the work has been done in his research group. Moreover, there are articles in Wikipedia on the new virus families described by David Prangishvili and links to them are provided. In the revised article I also mention that David Prangishvili is the author of more than 130 publications in peer-reviewed scientific journals and books. Moreover, the link is provided to the list of foreign members of the Georgian National Academy of Sciences which includes David Prangishvili.
Best regardsuser anastrokovaAnastrokova (talk)13:06, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Anastrokova:
Your article about David Prangishvili is looking pretty good, but it still needs some INDEPENDENT references, ones in which Mr. Prangishvili was not involved in the writing. The publications you put in are good content for the article, and can be used to confirm that fact that he wrote papers, but not for other information in the article. I found one for you in the Encyclopedia of Microbiology, and started a reference section. You can see how the ref tags create the citation numbers automatically.
In the article you say that he received a prize; was there a report in a newspaper or organization journal about the prize? If so, that would make a good reference. He seems to be very well known in this field, so maybe some other scientists have written about his work or he has been featured in a university magazine article. Good luck with this. —Anne Delong (talk)17:05, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Anne! I haven't been around much and am not able to be around enough to do much that is meaningful, but I did want to drop by and tell you that I am very happy to see you have been named editor of the week! It is a deserved award for you. You hit the ground running here and have not really ever stopped striving to make quality contributions to Wikipedia, and for that I say....Thanks and BRAVO!!!!!!Gtwfan52 (talk)16:47, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I have supplied some documentation for my new entry Sip 'n Stroll. I've located websites that are promoting such events. What other type of documentation do you recommend to support the activation of this entry? Thanks for your help!— Precedingunsigned comment added byYhtak2013 (talk •contribs)21:23, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Anne, I saw you are in charge of reviewing the AfC process of my student Hibba Itani's article 'Arab Film Festivals in the Middle East'. Since the article deals with Arab Film Festivals abroad too, I suggest to simply call the article 'Arab Film Festivals'. If you need any more info please contact me. Thank you,Robert Kluijver (talk)23:52, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Have resubmitted my article on the "City of Healing" project in Jordan.I added 3 references which I hope will be sufficient.Thank you for your time and expertise in reviewing my article,it is appreciated.voxclamantis 13:44, 24 April 2013 (UTC)— Precedingunsigned comment added byVoxclamintis (talk •contribs)
Dear Voxclamintis:Unfortunately, one of the references that you have added to South Asian Building magazine is actually the source of most of the text in this article, which is a copyright violation, and the article will be deleted. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept text that has been copied from published sources. —Anne Delong (talk)14:48, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you editedFaculty of Law, Oxford, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pagesRegius Professor of Civil Law andSir Frederick Pollock (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.Read theFAQ • Join us at theDPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)00:18, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Anne. (1)I want to thank you for your work in cleaning up the ref's and for having added two new references. I really appreciate that.(2) Are you aware that there seems to be a sort of "pirate" or "clone" website apparently directed toward a Japanese language audience that is publishing my article?You can see it here:http://wpedia.goo.ne.jp/enwiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Sue_draheimThat website apparently also gives access to all other pending articles as well:http://wpedia.goo.ne.jp/enwiki/Category:Pending_AfC_submissions.Thanks again for all your work.Akhooha (talk)00:24, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Anne,
Thanks for your comment and suggestion on my article, so now I have added the reference for it, can you review it again, if there is still any problem, please feel free to let me know, I will try my best to make it better! Thank you.
kate (talk)03:07, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Anne,
The references in the Sanicola article are there to confirm the statements that the songs have charted. I was advised to do that by Davidwr. Is that cool?173.52.117.156 (talk) 16:26, 25 April 2013 (UTC)— Precedingunsigned comment added by173.52.117.156 (talk)16:22, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I realized why the copyright issue came up, somehow as the "City of Healing" article whichappears in South East Asia Building 2010 originated in my office (DeWolff Partnership Architects)I have never felt any qualms about reproducing it, excerpting or transmitting. I realize now, because it was published by the Southeast Asia Building magazine, the possible copyrightproblem of downloading the PDF though my included reference link. I am certain the publisher gave us permission to redistribute-after all we wrote it!I have extensive first hand experience on this (KHIBC) project at DeWolff from 2005 to the present and am writing a new article in my own words with new content. References as before withSoutheast Asia Building Mag. footnote. Will resubmit asap.voxclamantis 21:14, 25 April 2013 (UTC)— Precedingunsigned comment added byVoxclamintis (talk •contribs)
Dear voxclamantis: I am glad that you are going to rewrite the article. Even if you had written the other text yourself as a representative of your company, I believe that the copyright would lie with the company. Wikipedia has a policy that all of its editors must be individuals, not companies or company representatives, so that a neutral point of view can be maintained in the articles. Please be sure to find other independent sources to add to your article, because if the text of the magazine article was a press release from a company connected with the subject, it is a very weak source. —Anne Delong (talk)04:23, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to thank you for your helpful suggestions and hope that I have been able to incorporate them into the article I am trying to resubmit for review. This is the first time I have attempted to submit an article on Wikipedia and I know I did not properly make use of the helpful tips and suggestion prior to my attempts. I am not able to locate a resubmit button however, and hoped that perhaps you might assist me with a further review and possible acceptance of my article. Thank you for your consideration. The links is as followshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/KGCS-22_Joplin,_Missouri_Southern_State_University
Rjfjelstad (talk)22:52, 25 April 2013 (UTC)Robin Fjelstad[reply]
Dear Rjfjelstad: You seem to have found a bug in the submission process. I asked one of the tech people to fix your page so that you can resubmit. I'm sure they'll fix this up quickly. Sorry, I don't have time to do reviewing today; I'm in the middle of something else, but now that it's submitted another editor will see it. —Anne Delong (talk)14:10, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Anne,What's the preferred reference/footnote style for URLs --- hiding them in between brackets or leaving them exposed and instantly readable?Thanks for your help.Akhooha (talk)00:25, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello,
I just wanted to inform you that I have done some formatting changes on the talk page of your AfC proposal. I have also removed one sign of yours from there (which I think may have been misplaced, but could be a signature). Please feel free to put it back if it was indeed a Support vote.
Also, feel free to revert any changes you think are unnecessary. You may also want to look into the RfC process to gather more discussion.
TheOriginalSoni (talk)01:30, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[Please post a Talkback if you reply to me][reply]
Thanks, The OriginalSoni, I guess you've done this before. —Anne Delong (talk)01:46, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks again. I was unaware of Rfc. Your description made me realize that maybe expecting citations from first time submitters may be expecting too much, and so I added a comment that maybe references in some form or other might be acceptable, since if we set the bar too high we may lose editors. I didn't have any trouble with citations myself when I was a new submitter, but I had the advantage of having had to write many articles and essays throughout my life.
I have revised my description to be a little more clear. —Anne Delong (talk)03:51, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Good morning Anne,
I logged in today to find my article, Justice Action, had been deleted by another use because of reasons of deliberate copyright infringement.
This makes me very sad as I didn't have a final draft saved of what I had written outside of what I submitted here and now I must work on an old draft if I am to resubmit my article. It's also frustrating because my article was approved only a week ago, for it to be approved and then deleted so quickly without offering me any help to improve it first is very frustrating and is a big turn off to this whole process; I feel like I'm wasting my time here.
The person deleted it saying it infringed copyright as content was similar to the justiceaction.org website. I did use content from the site as a basis for what I had written but I thought I had referenced it properly, as in some parts I paraphrased their 'about' page and put some quotes in. Other content I wrote just myself. Perhaps I should have looked over it more before submitting it for review, but I certainly did not infringe any copyright deliberately, but rather through my own error. Why I wasn't given an opportunity to improve the text, add necessary references or just remove bits that were too similar to justiceaction's content I'm not sure.
I will now be resubmitting the article from scratch which is very frustrating as I was really happy with how the other version ended up, and took me a considerable amount of time as I struggle with wikipedia's formatting/code etc.
Is there any way I can recover my article if it has been deleted?
Thanks for your help.
Oceanlovejustice (talk)23:44, 29 April 2013 (UTC)-David23:43, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Oceanlovejustice:
It seems thatBlack Kite is the administrator who discovered the copyright problems and deleted the article. You can leave a message on this administrator's talk page, and ask for the text to be sent to your e-mail address. That way you can change it into your own words before bringing it back to Wikipedia, and you won't have to redo the references, etc. be sure to give the complete name of the pageJustice Action (Australia). Please don't change just a few words; an encyclopedia article should be written from the point of view of a person not connected at all with the organization. I hope this helps. By the way, there is a special forum for new usersthe Teahouse, which I found helpful when I first started. —Anne Delong (talk)02:47, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've corrected the link you posted on their page - there's a space in front of the L which made it a redlink. Took me a bit to work out why I couldn't get to the page. Apart from that, I've deleted their userpage and blocked them for spamusername.Peridon (talk)13:46, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Peridon:
It seems that I was the one who accidentally added the space. I'm not sure how I managed to do this. However, I used the script to decline the page, so why didn't it replicate the page name? —Anne Delong (talk)16:57, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your feed-back on my proposed article about Mohamed Sahnoun. I'll try to follow your suggestions.Sbrass (talk)14:23, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Anne,
On April 17th, I tried to create a newarticle called Econocom. I wanted to create a translation of the correspondingarticle in the French Wikipdia, but the submission has been declined. Do I have to translate the article myself ?
Regards,
Jean-Marc Vidal— Precedingunsigned comment added byJMPVID (talk •contribs)15:34, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Jean-Marc: If I understand you correctly, you submitted an article that was not in English to the English Wikipedia. All of the articles in the English Wikipedia are in English. However, there are volunteers who speak both English and French, and you may be able to interest one of them in translating an article. To find out how, readWikipedia:Translation. However, because these are other volunteer editors like you, there may be a long wait because there are always more articles needing to be translated than there are willing minds to do the work. If you have the ability and time to do the translation, please do it yourself. If the translation isn't perfect, others who read it will make corrections.
I would like suggest that you also visit theTeahouse, which is a great place to have questions like this one answered. Asking one editor might not work if that person happens to be busy or away. —Anne Delong (talk)18:14, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Anne Delong -- Thanks for the reference cleanup. In support of FoCuSandLeArN's comments I added two more independent curatorial essays. Do you think that's enough and that they're uploaded correctly? My first article on Wiki and I'm definitely looking forward to contributing more once I get a sense of code down. Thanks again for your help.Plett bay (talk)—Precedingundated comment added13:57, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Plett bay:
I took another look at your submission and I noticed that you had some citations that weren't showing up because there was no "reflist" template, so I added one for you. I don't know anything about curatorial essays. Are they published somewhere? in an exhibition pamphlet perhaps? I will not be able to review your article right now (writing a 200 page syllabus), but there are many other reviewers looking at the Articles for Creation submissions. —Anne Delong (talk)16:11, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Anne --
I looked up the curatorial essay -- they were published in exhibition catalogues and one of them will be published in Barrow Street's upcoming issue, edited by Peter Covino (University of Rhode Island).
Thanks for the help -- I'm going to work on submitting another article about camera "noise" -- my interest!95.233.224.39 (talk)20:16, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't even know you were editing my article (Lee H. Letts, sculptor) because I am still learning how to navigate Wikipedia---I thought little elves were making the improvements ;-) Thank you so much for your help!Marion Simons (talk)03:32, 8 May 2013 (UTC)Marion Simons[reply]
Dear Anne Delong, thank you very much for your comments. Additional references will be added to the draft article as you suggest.With many thanks,potato67--Potato67 (talk)13:13, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Just discovered thisbot, which I thought you might be interested in. Dunno why I noticed the bot just now; maybe it wasn't active before...FoCuSandLeArN (talk)15:00, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, FoCuSandLeArN. Is this currently being used? I have never seen a message like that on any of the talk pages where I have myself left similar messages.
My problem with using a bot for this job is that there are too many different ways that a person could have added references and I feel that human judgement or serious AI is needed to determine if an article is really unreferenced. Someone could just write "I found an article about this in Scientific American calledThe Amazing Life of the Snail, in Volume 22, Issue 6". How would a bot find that? Nevertheless, in manual mode it might save time, since it may be quicker to tell the bot to send an e-mail than to write one yourself. —Anne Delong (talk)15:28, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Anne, you added anundue weight banner atRegina Martínez Pérez but no specific concerns were left in the related Talk page. Can you explain atTalk:Regina Martínez Pérez#What undue weight?, please? I'm willing to improve that page and your indications will be useful. Thank you!--QuimGil (talk)17:43, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
