User talk:Timtrent

Messages for Fiddle Faddle and for Timtrent should be left here. This is the home account for Fiddle Faddle, which is both my nickname and my alternate account. When you begin a new message section here, I will respond to it here. When I leave message on your Talk page, I will watch your page for your response. This maintains discussion threads and continuity. See Help:Talk page#How to keep a two-way conversation readable. If you want to use {{Talkback}} to alert me about messages elsewhere, please feel free to do so.

It is 8:03 AM where this user lives. If it's the middle of the night or during the working day they may well not be online

I do not remove personal attacks directed at me from this page. If you spot any, please do not remove them, even if vile, as they speak more against the attacker than against me.

In the event that what you seek is not here then it is archived (0.9 probability). While you are welcome to potter through the archives the meaning of life is not there.

Team Sandeep Mash

Dear Timtrent

We sincerely appreciate your feedback but please don't misunderstand us. We are not trying to create any promotional or advertising page. In the previous submission, we added so many references and citations as we received a comment stating that your article doesn't adequately show the subject's notability. Since we are new to Wikipedia, we do not have idea to create a page. For your reference, you can watch Mr. Maheshwari's videos. He has been doing inspirational seminars free of cost and has been considered as the role model of the Youth of India. We wish to create this page so that maximum youth can take inspiration from his life and can move ahead on the path of success. Therefore, kindly guide us how to proceed.

Best Regards Team, Sandeep Maheshwari — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sandeep mash (talk • contribs) 12:39, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

The alleged references you added do not meet our needs. For a living person we have a high standard of referencing. Every substantive fact you assert, especially one that is susceptible to potential challenge, requires a citation with a reference that is about them, and is independent of them, and is in WP:RS, and is significant coverage. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources.

I view this as an attempt to push the gentleman into the limelight. Wikipedia may not be used for this purpose. Many "inspirational speakers" try to push their profiles here. In addition you may not use the same account for more than one editor. Fiddle Faddle 12:44, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

16:04:28, 23 September 2015 review of submission by Eric Musgrave

• Eric Musgrave (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Don McCarthy (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello, I have ensured all points made in this entry like to reliable sources such as newspaper articles. Please do advise me on anything else I need to do in order to have the page ready to go live.

Thanks,

Eric

I'm not quite sure what is going on with the errors at the foot of the page. You may need expert hep with that. I suggest you deploy {{Helpme}} on your talk page, link to the draft and say "Please help me sort the error messages out!" which is what I would do if it happened to me. Experts drop by remarkably quickly

I don't often re-review, always thinking other eyes produce a better result for you, so, when the oddity is sorted out, resubmit with pleasure. Fiddle Faddle 16:08, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

How to resubmit? Stephen Tsang

Hi Fiddle Faddle,

My article on Stephen Tsang, which was originally too closely paraphrased to its sources, has since been edited, and I would like to try again at submitting it. I thought I did this correctly, but perhaps was mistaken, as it looks like it's no longer in the queue for review. Why did you mark is as not being an AFC submission? How should I go about resubmitting it?

Thanks for your help. Justus727 (talk) 18:35, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

@Justus727: This is a technical thing. I'll try to explain.

• Stephen Tsang is an article, albeit one far to close to the original text. It is not a draft article, which would have been Draft:Stephen Tsang.
• Articles are those in what we call "The Main Namespace", which means they have no prefix ("Draft:" is a prefix)
• One cannot submit an article as an "Article for Creation" because it has already been created. Instead one must deal with it as an article, for good or ill, warts 'n all.
• Because of the copyright issue, you have created and are, I hope, editing Talk:Stephen Tsang/Temp which is a holding place for the paraphrasing to be ripped away, prior to your stating at Talk:Stephen Tsang that you have ripped out the paraphrasing
• After you do that, which I see you have, the process is (I think) that an admin drops by, checks that the copyright violation has been removed, and, if so, places the page you have worked on into the space the "bad article" occupied.
• There is no need to submit for review

In future you may wish to learn your trade by using the Articles for Creation (AfC) process, which is a process of

Create > Submit > receive feedback > edit to incorporate the feedback > resubmit (etc

I think you will enjoy the process far more than the one you are in right now. At present the process you are in is rather arcane, and is the one we used to have for every editor, new and experienced alike. The AfC process is designed to make learning our odd ways much easier.

Does that help to some degree? It;s rather hard to explain it in a way that makes easy reading. Fiddle Faddle 19:03, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Hey Fiddle Faddle

That definitely helps! Thanks for clarifying. So at this point I should take up a sit-and-wait strategy until and admin reviews whether the copyright issues have been addressed?

Thanks for all your help!

Justus727 (talk) 19:14, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

@Justus727: There is nothing to lose and everything to gain from polishing the temporary article to ensure absolutely that it does not contain any content form elsewhere and is as good as you can make it.

If you are in any way impatient, once you are satisfied that the article is compliant (the burden is on your shoulders for this) you can ask for administrative help by placing {{Admin help}} on your own talk page, linking to the temp page, perhaps linking here, to this discussion to avoid restating things, and asking your question of a helpful passing admin. I am not 100% sure of the rest of the process since I have not been subject to it as it stands today. I was, once, a number of years ago, but the process was different. Fiddle Faddle 19:22, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Ella Ridge View Holiday Inn Contents

Hi thanks for your reply.The question is i can't access the page now.if i can access i can change the contents with new contents.How can i get through this??the Page is marked for immediate delete it means i cant edit it right?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rkvisit (talk • contribs) 02:15, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

You can use the WP:AFC process to create another page. The original one has been deleted. Fiddle Faddle 06:21, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

Am Law firm

Hello, Dear Timtrent I know that you considered our article for deletion and on 18.09.2015 it was deleted. So would you be so kind to tell me what was wrong in our article in order for me to understand and not to make such mistakes in my later articles. I would also like to know whether it is possible to restore the article after making all the necessary changes in it. Thank you in advance!!! Maria step (talk) 11:06, 25 September 2015 (UTC) Maria step

@Maria step: I remember very little about the article except from what I have said when I proposed it for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AM Law Firm. I am afraid I review a very large number of articles.

What you hope to learn is whether A M Law Firm may be recreated one day. The answer is that it may.

Before considering re-creating it you need to be clear on the purpose of Wikipedia and the reason you wish to have an article about your employer. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia. It records the facts that others have reported, provided such reports meet our needs. These reports are used as references. We have very strict requirements for references. We require references from significant coverage about the topic of the article, and independent of it, and in WP:RS please. See WP:42. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources.

You should be aware that bad things are reported as well as good. Should A M Law Firm be found to have been reported as doing something inappropriate that will be recorded in due course in any Wikipedia article about them.

What purpose is there in an article on your employer in Wikipedia? You may not use us to list your achievements. Indeed, since you have a conflict of interest you are advised not to do anything at all in this putative article. You may not use us for PR purposes, nor to try to build or enhance your reputation.

If you insist on attempting to re-create the article be aware that any article that is essentially similar to the deleted article will be deleted on sight, with no discussion. Therefore the re-created article must be significantly different from the deleted one.

Since you have a conflict of interest you need to use the Articles for Creation method of creating a draft, then submitting the draft for review. You may not create an article on your employer in the main namespace directly. Nor may you pay others to do so. Nor may a paid editor do so.

If you intend to edit Wikipedia as a hobby, editing in ways entirely unrelated to your employer, then this guide will help you. If your intention is to publicise your employer, then I suggest you walk away now, because it will only end in disappointment. Fiddle Faddle 12:39, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

Teach pitch

Hi Fiddle Faddle, Hope you had a great holiday:) Right before you left you had taken the time to look at the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:TeachPitch I submitted and you gave me lots of good tips on how to continue on the level of using external links and referencing to them. After your advice and retrieval of the sources I used then, I worked on the text and added more links, I resubmitted the article but then received similar comments on the use of the links and the referencing. Naturally I am committed to make this work and happy to work on the referencing. Can you give me some advice? I hate to ask as I know you must be very busy but any feedback you can give me on the article and (the notability of) its links would be massively appreciated. Many thanks! Chy syl (talk) 12:54, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

@Chy syl: It is rare that I re-review a draft, primarily because different sets of eyes give the best overall result. I suggest you ask Gparyani to elaborate on their review. One thing I see, a permissible thing, is poor stylistically. The set of references is all dumped at the end. As a matter of style they are better set out so that each cites a single fact you assert in the draft. This is not mandatory except in biographies or lengthy articles, but is a good habit to get into. Fiddle Faddle 13:16, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

18:05:37, 26 September 2015 review of submission by 74.124.171.179

• 74.124.171.179 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:DePauw Fire Company/Putnam County Operation Life (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

HI, please help me determine the steps to change the title of the draft as a reviewer suggested. I cannot seem to find a way to edit the title; it appears outside of the edit box and does not have a button or any other mechanism to change the text that I can determine. Otherwise, I have revised the draft again per the feedback I received in the prior rejection. ----

If you register for an account you will be able, after a short period, to make a move yourself. Meanwhile, if you tell me the name you wish for, I will consider and make that change in your behalf. Fiddle Faddle 18:25, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

21:14:59, 26 September 2015 review of submission by BCBADPHD

• BCBADPHD (talk · contribs)
  • User:BCBADPHD/sandbox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello, The article entitled Somnambulism Alert Dog was rejected because it appeared to come from a copyrighted source. I wrote the entire article myself using my own words and references over the past 24 hours. I am a scholar and professional writer who is interested in contributing to Wikipedia. Could you please let me know what portion if any is from a outside copyrighted source so I can remove or modify as appropriate. I did write the entire article on my own and saved it under "Drafts". I am new to how to have a article reviewed on Wikipedia and it appeared I needed to cut and paste it into the Sandbox to submit for review. If that is incorrect, I can submit the article another way. I read that typically 4 days has to elapse and 10 edits must be made before you can submit a draft article and if that is the case I can wait until that time elapses as well. Thank you