User talk:Coxyl1958

Coxyl1958, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Coxyl1958! 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 78.26 (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:02, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Haslinda Amin (November 21)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by MurielMary was:  The comment the reviewer left was: 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:Haslinda Amin and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Haslinda Amin, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

MurielMary (talk) 10:46, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi MurielMary I have provide the available references with possible edition Coxyl1958 (talk) 15:04, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

November 2020

Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to Sigma bond, it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 12:35, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Okay, sorry, I will look into the tutorial on citing sources. Coxyl1958 (talk) 13:00, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Haslinda Amin has been accepted

Haslinda Amin, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting 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. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Tagishsimon (talk) 15:47, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Thank you so much Coxyl1958 (talk) 16:25, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Lumen Learning as a ref

Is not acceptable in general. It is mostly cut-and-pasted content from Wikipedia itself. DMacks (talk) 16:21, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Melinda Emerson

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Melinda Emerson, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Praxidicae (talk) 17:46, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

December 2020

Hello Coxyl1958. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are extremely strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Coxyl1958. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Coxyl1958|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. GSS ^💬 05:15, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Well thank you so much for notifying me I'm promoting the topic. I will make sure I correct it. But no one has pay me, all my articles are based on neutral point. I will remove the possible promotion which I included it. Thanks Coxyl1958 (talk) 09:48, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Malia Obama (December 20)

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Robert McClenon was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: This draft has been resubmitted without any visible improvement, or with very little improvement. If you do not know what is needed to improve this draft, please ask for advice rather than making minor improvements and resubmitting.

You may ask for advice on how to improve this draft at the Teahouse or on the talk pages of any of the declining reviewers. (The declining reviewers may advise you to ask for advice at the Teahouse.)

If this draft is resubmitted without any improvement or with very little improvement again, it is likely to be rejected, and it may be nominated for deletion, or a topic-ban may even be requested against further submission by the responsible editor.

This draft has been Rejected by a reviewer in the Articles for Creation review process. DO NOT resubmit this draft or attempt to resubmit this draft or prepare or submit a draft that is substantially the same as this draft without discussing the reasons for the rejection. You may request a discussion with the rejecting reviewer, or you may request a discussion with the community at the Teahouse. A discussion will not necessarily agree to a resubmission.

It should be noted that the reviewer has not decided that the topic is not notable. An article on the topic may be accepted in the future. However, there is no reason to think that this draft will become an article, and there is evidence that this draft will never become an article. If there is to be an article on this topic, this draft must first be blown up and started over.

If this draft is resubmitted without discussion and without starting it over, or if an attempt is made to resubmit this draft or an equivalent draft, without addressing the reasons for the Rejection by starting over, a partial block or a topic-ban may be requested against the submitting editor.

You may ask for advice about Rejection at the Teahouse.

This draft has not been improved since it was declined in August 2020 as being three years out of date. It was still obviously written in 2017 based on what it says about Malia Obama's education.

This does not mean that Malia Obama is not notable in her own right. This does not mean that Malia Obama is notable in her own right. It does mean that this draft will never become an encyclopedic article about Malia Obama. It should either be left alone and allowed to expire, or deleted so that a new draft can be written, or blanked so that a new draft can be written.

If this draft is resubmitted or an attempt is made to resubmit this draft, the draft should be nominated for deletion, and a partial block may be requested.

Robert McClenon (talk) 03:33, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Celai West (December 27)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by MurielMary was: 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:Celai West and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Celai West, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

MurielMary (talk) 03:35, 27 December 2020 (UTC)