User talk:Mbphnyc

This is Mbphnyc's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Collaborating, Learning and Adapting (April 6)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by SwisterTwister was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of websites and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Particularly we would need all additional significant sourcing.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Collaborating, Learning and Adapting and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

SwisterTwister talk 18:57, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mbphnyc, you are invited to the Teahouse![edit]

Hi Mbphnyc! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Worm That Turned (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:03, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Collaborating, Learning and Adapting (April 8)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by TheSandDoctor was:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Draft is off to a good start but more citations would be beneficial.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Collaborating, Learning and Adapting and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

TheSandDoctor (talk) 05:13, 8 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Learning Agenda has been accepted[edit]

Learning Agenda, 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 may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

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 leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

SwisterTwister talk 23:36, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

May 2017[edit]

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to United States Department of Labor, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. I'm not sure why you thought Learning Agenda was a useful addition to the "See also" section of this article. Julietdeltalima (talk) 19:43, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at PricewaterhouseCoopers. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Please stop adding Learning Agenda to the "See also" sections of articles not related to Learning Agenda. If you think I'm wrong about this, please talk to one of the editors at the Teahouse. Julietdeltalima (talk) 19:45, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Link from one article to another using wikilinks, not external links[edit]

@Mbphnyc: Welcome to Wikipedia! You have not been properly inserting wikilinks (links from one article to another) in your edits such as this edit (Learning agenda) and this edit (Organizational learning); you have been mistakenly inserting external links instead of wikilinks. Please learn how to insert proper wikilinks and refrain from making this mistake in the future. Help:Link provides more information on this topic. Thanks, Biogeographist (talk) 19:59, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Collaborating, Learning and Adapting (May 17)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Chris troutman was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the general guideline on notability and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

The comment the reviewer left was:

CLA is a USAID concept so I'm not sure it's notable. This draft steals at least two sentences from USIAD materials that must be rewritten or quoted. The fact that this draft continually refers to "the literature reviewed" makes it read like an academic essay. This isn't written an an encyclopedic entry about CLA; it's pushing for CLA's use. There are better, more independent sources out there is this is too sloppily-written for me to accept.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Collaborating, Learning and Adapting and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Chris Troutman (talk) 08:11, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification needed[edit]

@Mbphnyc: Please see Talk:Collaborating, learning and adapting § Clarification needed. Thanks, Biogeographist (talk) 19:41, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest[edit]

Hello, Mbphnyc. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. GermanJoe (talk) 16:58, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]