Jump to content

User talk:Wiae

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by DinoGamer24 (talk | contribs) at 20:06, 25 December 2015. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Rodney Jerkins question

The information I edited on Rodney Jerkins site is factual, relevant and very constructive. It will be in the news soon, so do you need this to hit the papers and then can I resubmit about how he is a racist, disillusion and dangerous? The people deserve to know the facts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.43.165.131 (talk) )

Denial of Page for Adriana Martin

On December 15, 2105 you denied my submission for a page on Adriana Martin. I understand why and have endeavored to make improvements. Might you have a moment to look at it in my sandbox as provide feedback? I am still researching more independent links also. Thank you. Mstomasik (talk) 08:05, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Mstomasik: Hi, the issue with User:Mstomasik/sandbox is that it still contains a good deal of primary sources (Martin's social media, own website, things she's written, press releases from PRWeb), and the references that are independent of her don't offer substantive, in-depth coverage. Sources must be reliable, independent and must offer significant coverage. Thanks! /wia🎄/tlk 14:51, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I will continue to work on that issue as well.Mstomasik (talk) 15:44, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Page was moved to: Draft:Adriana_Martin Mstomasik (talk) 10:40, 18 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

16:34:05, 18 December 2015 review of submission by Nmd1978


Not clear what happens now. Is there something else I need to do, or is this just in the queue waiting to be re-reviewed?

@Nmd1978: Hi, yes the draft is resubmitted and the copyright issue looks to have been taken care of. A reviewer will be along in the coming days or weeks to give their feedback. In the meantime, you are welcome to continue working on the article—ensuring that sufficient reliable, independent (third-party) sources that discussed the subject in significant detail, for example. Thanks, /wia🎄/tlk 17:33, 19 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Season's Greetings

File:Xmas Ornament.jpg

To You and Yours!

FWiW Bzuk (talk) 18:47, 19 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! /wia🎄/tlk 00:16, 20 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]


A barnstar for you!

The Special Barnstar
Thank you for your work at the Articles for Creation project. Your help is greatly appreciated, so keep doing what you do! Mz7 (talk) 02:41, 20 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Mz7! /wia🎄/tlk 02:44, 20 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A cup of tea for you!

Thank you so much for your additional copy editing on Animal Park of the Monts de Gueret. That was really nice of you, and you've certainly made that new editor's day by accepting their first article. Cheers! w.carter-Talk 17:33, 20 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm happy to help! Thanks, /wia🎄/tlk 22:47, 20 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

19:10:09, 20 December 2015 review of submission by Elin08


Kindly state what is meant by a variety of reliable, independent (third-party) sources?

@Elin08: Sure thing! Reliable sources usually come from reputable magazines, journals, books or news sources (whether online or offline). They should be places that have an editorial policy or editorial board—something that assures a certain level of quality and oversight, basically. Independent sources should be removed from the subject itself. For example, the subject's own website, social media pages and interviews don't count as independent sources. Finally, we will need several such sources—not just one or two—and they should offer significant, in-depth coverage of the subject.
For more detail on these guidelines, you can take a look at WP:42, which is a convenient summary of the types of sources we are looking for. Thanks, /wia🎄/tlk 22:53, 20 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiclaus' cheer !

Wikiclaus greetings
Michael Q. Schmidt talkback is wishing you the happiest of Wikiclaus' Wikipedian good cheer.
This message is intended to celebrate the holiday season, promote WikiCheer, and to hopefully make your day just a little bit better, for Wikiclaus encourages us all to spread smiles, fellowship, and seasonal good cheer by wishing others a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone with whom you had disagreements in the past, a good friend, or just some random person.
Share the good feelings and the happiest of holiday spirits from Wikiclaus !
Thank you for the Christmas cheer! /wia🎄/tlk 23:04, 21 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you!

Thank you for your feedback, it was the kind of information I was seeking.

Gaby (talk) 19:50, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Jasel.Cantu: Not a problem. I'm happy to help! Feel free to inquire here if you have any other questions in the future. Thanks, /wia🎄/tlk 12:20, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Mall of Africa

Good day to you

Thank you for informing me of my errors in the Draft of that article. All my additions were in good faith and I had no knowledge of my plagiarism.

I ask that you could assist me in improving this article so that it follows the regulations of Wikipedia and can be accepted.

Many thanks Manor4 (talk) 12:08, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Manor4: Hi, thanks for dropping by! I've gone ahead and removed the copyrighted content from the draft. The revisions will soon be "hidden" by an administrator. You're welcome to expand the article with some of that content, but be sure to always write in your own words. Even "close paraphrasing" comes too close to a copyright infringement, and so it is important to always choose your own words.
In practice, I find the easiest way to avoid copyright issues is to write the draft without flipping back and forth from the sources to the draft. Instead, write using your memory of what the source said, and then check after to make sure you have accurately stated (in your own words, of course) what the source said.
The draft is still submitted for review, so another reviewer will be along in the coming days or weeks to give you more substantive feedback about the draft. Thanks, /wia🎄/tlk 12:11, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Wikiisawesome: I highly appreciate your feedback. I will put your advice into affect for all my future additions. Manor4 (talk) 12:18, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

17:25:17, 23 December 2015 review of submission by TreatyOak


Hi-

I'll find some additional external references for Deltic Timber Corporation, per your suggestion. I wrote this page because I was doing some research on a related company and I was surprised that nothing was here about Deltic, so I thought I'd add it.

One note: you said that "vertically integrated" was a buzzword and that it violates a neutrality principle. "Vertically integrated" has a very specific meaning, and it's actually NOT a buzzword. In a business setting, it means that a company makes things that link together in different stages of production. In Deltic's case, they own timberland (wood), they grind up the trees (sawmills), they make plywood, and then they sell houses that use that plywood. Vertical integration isn't necessarily a good thing or a bad thing; it's just a strategy. In the old days, Ford Motor was vertically integrated: they owned iron ore, they owned steel plants that used the iron, they made cars from their own steel, etc. Now, they're no longer vertically integrated; they buy steel from a different company, which buys iron ore from yet a different company. (I could go on to explain why Deltic might choose to be vertically integrated or not, but I'll spare you.)

Enjoy your vacation!

@TreatyOak: Thanks for dropping by! I've seen terms like "vertical integration" used in several drafts on Wikipedia, and often promotionally. However, I appreciate your explanation of vertical integration, and if it is not meant in a promotional sense, then it should be acceptable. Thanks again, /wia🎄/tlk 00:27, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

LARC continued

Hiya so regarding London Action Resource Centre and our previous discussion, well the same material is still being added and removed, so the dispute continues and I'm wondering what can I do? Help would be welcome, I'm assuming the time was found to be a factor, so how much discussion is needed before action can be taken? Thanks for any response Mujinga (talk) 23:56, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Mujinga: Hello! Yes, I recall this page. It seems like there might be enough discussion to take it to dispute resolution. However, that need not be the first step. If the reliability of the sources is at issue, there is the Reliable Sources Noticeboard. There is also the option of a Request for Comment about the issue, which may result in a binding conclusion. You can also take it to the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard, but ideally it would be better to have extensive discussion before bringing the issue to that forum. I have not looked at the substantive content at issue so I do not recommend any particular course of action right now. As always, the more discussion, the better. Thanks, and let me know if I can help you further! /wia🎄/tlk 00:11, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
thanks for the speedy response and some more options! Mujinga (talk) 00:27, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

78.26's RFA Appreciation award

The 78.26 RFA Appreciation award
Thank you for the participation and support at my RFA. It is truly appreciated. I hope to be of further help around here, and if you see me doing something dumb, you know where to find me. Again, I thank you. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 24:01, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@78.26: Supporting was an easy choice. Congratulations! /wia🎄/tlk 00:12, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

00:10:29, 24 December 2015 review of submission by Hkanderson


Help needed


To whom it may concern,

Many thanks for reading the edits to the article, I am working for SCORE International however I wanted to ensure ask how I change the category since apparently I had this listed as an tarmac race when, correctly as you pointed out, the article needs to reflect that it is an off-road racing category.

Thank you and happy holidays,

James

@Hkanderson: Hi, thanks for dropping by James! The issue with the draft is that it seems to just explain the rules and regulations of a racing company. That sort of content is better suited for inclusion on the race's website, but it is not really suitable for Wikipedia. You may want to take a look at WP:EVENTCRIT, which explains what must be shown about an event before it is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia. Thanks, and do let me know if I can be of further assistance! /wia🎄/tlk 00:14, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas!

Merry Christmas!!
May you and your family have a very Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year,

Thanks for all your help and support, and of course all your work, on Wikipedia!

   – Onel5969 TT me 03:50, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 20:06:03, 25 December 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by DinoGamer24



DinoGamer24 (talk) 20:06, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Wiae&oldid=696775764"