User talk:Damienkeating

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Annie Morris.
To edit the submission, 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. Please remember to link to the submission!
You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 19:49, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Annie Morris concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Annie Morris, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 180 days. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 19:16, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Annie Morris

Hello Damienkeating. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "Annie Morris".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Annie Morris}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 16:00, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

July 2014

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include, but are not limited to, links to personal websites, links to websites with which you are affiliated (whether as a link in article text, or a citation in an article), and links that attract visitors to a website or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the page, please discuss it on the associated talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you....Modernist (talk) 13:50, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Modernist, I've read the the external links guideline and nothing is offended. There are a bunch of websites provide sources in the external links, such as Web Gallery of Art, Artcyclopedia.com, Wikipaintings.org. I just discovered Owlstand.com is another source useful for reading. It is well curated and presents the artworks in their original dimensions. It's a unique resource on the web so far with an intuitive viewing experience for its users. All these exhibitions are useful and they are not spam or meaningless promotion. As an evidence, right now average users spent 6 minutes in Owlstand.com after they are referred from Wikipedia, therefore it means they actually think the link is useful for them. Have one more think about this and please let me know if you have any questions. Best wishes. Damienkeating (talk) 14:25, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's a commercial site offering works for sale; that is why it is correctly described as spam...Modernist (talk) 15:23, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Modernist, it's not a commercial site, and you can't buy anything there. There are all open domain images there. Check out the About page: Owlstand is found to display the beauty of old and contemporary artwork online. Thanks. 37.205.58.146 (talk) 15:45, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]