User talk:Dawnbonfield

This is Dawnbonfield'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.

Top 50 Influential Women in Engineering

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (December 8)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Dodger67 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:

Need independent sources (Not the Women's Engineering Society or the Daily Telegraph) that discuss the list in significant detail. The many inline external links in the lead must either be removed, converted to actual references or listed in a separate "External links" list below the References section.

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 User:Dawnbonfield/sandbox 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.

Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 17:25, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Dawnbonfield, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 17:25, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: User:Dawnbonfield/sandbox has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at User:Dawnbonfield/sandbox. Thanks! Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 17:52, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: User:Dawnbonfield/sandbox has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at User:Dawnbonfield/sandbox. Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 04:40, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (December 9)

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

Please provide a lede sentence with a title.

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 User:Dawnbonfield/sandbox 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.

Robert McClenon (talk) 04:41, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Top 50 Influential Women in Engineering

Hello, Dawnbonfield. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, Top 50 Influential Women in Engineering, for deletion because I don't think it meets our criteria for inclusion. If you don't want the article deleted:

edit the page
remove the text that looks like this: {{proposed deletion/dated...}}
save the page

Also, be sure to explain why you think the article should be kept in your edit summary or on the article's talk page. If you don't do so, it may be deleted later anyway.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:05, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

To the rescue

All the above canned messages have been dealt with by myself and others. We're probably not out of the woods yet but getting there. In the mean time, here's a more general welcome which may help. Andrew D. (talk) 17:40, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Dawnbonfield, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Andrew D. (talk) 17:43, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Writing about the Top 50 Influential Women in Engineering

I am still not sure if you are the person who originally made the Top 50 Influential Women in Engineering list as published in the Daily Telegraph. If you are, then it is not a copyright infringement. You can prove this by modifying the copyright on http://www.wes.org.uk/we50 to specify a CC-BY-SA-3.0 license. That would remove any doubt. Hopefully it does not conflict with whatever deal you have with the Daily Telegraph. However it is a different issue as to whether this is a suitable topic for a Wikipedia page. If the only purpose is to have a list of women to write about, then it would be better off as a project page, as a kind of to do list. The list would fall into the scope of Wikipedia:WikiProject Engineering. I recommend that you sign up with that project. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:20, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Commonwealth Engineers Council

Hello — I have reviewed your article Commonwealth Engineers Council and made some small changes. I have also indicated by way of maintenance tags some possible ways of improving on it. Most urgently, the article needs secondary sources to establish the notability of the subject (see WP:GNG). Also, every material statement in the article should be supported by citing one or more of the sources listed (ideally done using named references, in the case of multiple citations of the same source). Best Regards, --DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:23, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]