User talk:Emilywlk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Your submission at Articles for creation: Lamont Sincere (April 22)[edit]

AFC-Logo Decline.svg
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Exemplo347 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.
Exemplo347 (talk) 00:38, 22 April 2017 (UTC)


Teahouse logo
Hello! Emilywlk, 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! Exemplo347 (talk) 00:38, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Emilywlk[edit]

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.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page you created, Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Emilywlk, was tagged as a test page under section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

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 removed 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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Exemplo347 (talk) 00:23, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Emilywlk[edit]

This will deleted as a test as it is malformed. Also, on reviewing your editing history, it is clear that your request would not be successful. Adminship requires 1000's edits and many years of hard work. Maybe in the future. Dlohcierekim 06:38, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Lamont Sincere (June 29)[edit]

AFC-Logo Decline.svg
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by KGirlTrucker81 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.
KGirlTrucker81 huh? what I've been doing 20:41, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Lamont Sincere (July 25)[edit]

AFC-Logo Decline.svg
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Pariah24 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.
Pariah24 (talk) 04:14, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Lamont Sincere (August 21)[edit]

AFC-Logo Decline.svg
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by RileyBugz 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.
RileyBugz会話投稿記録 00:21, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Lamont Sincere (November 7)[edit]

AFC-Logo Decline.svg
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Chrissymad 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.
CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 19:53, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Draft submissions[edit]

Hey, just a few quick notes regarding Draft:Lamont Sincere: first, please do not remove old decline notices, as it allows new reviewers to see how the article has progressed since creation. Second, when you submit the draft, please place {{subst:submit}} at the top of the page instead of copying old submission templates, as this will perform the submission properly with the right time and attribution. If you have any questions please let me know. Primefac (talk) 12:51, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Please do not remove old draft decline notices. Continuing to do so will result in a temporary block from editing. Primefac (talk) 14:53, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
I'm not sure how much clearer Primefac could have been but your most recent edit that removed the declines and resubmitted with absolutely no changes addressing the issues is becoming a nuisance and is a waste of other editors time. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 18:57, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
Consider this your final warning. I have no issues with you working on drafts, or submitting drafts, or editing Wikipedia in a productive manner. But at AFC we have rules and guidelines regarding submission and decline notices, and if you choose to repeatedly go against those norms you will be blocked from editing for being disruptive. Primefac (talk) 21:17, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Scale of justice 2.svgHello, Emilywlk. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

[edit]

I noticed you added this note to something under construction indicating it might be paid editing. Please read this.

Information icon

Hello Emilywlk. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, and that 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 egregious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to Black hat SEO.

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, and if it does not, 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:Emilywlk. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Emilywlk|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, please do not edit further until you answer this message. ☆ Bri (talk) 19:08, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello I am not getting paid for editing. I just left a link in my sandbox to read information about it. Ive removed the template from my sandbox and saved it in my watchlist instead. Emilywlk (talk) 18:44, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: The Party Tour (2017) has been accepted[edit]

AFC-Logo.svg
The Party Tour (2017), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

KGirl (Wanna chat?) 12:17, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: 2x Entertainment (December 25)[edit]

AFC-Logo Decline.svg
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by CNMall41 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.
CNMall41 (talk) 00:23, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Warehouse Music Group (December 29)[edit]

AFC-Logo Decline.svg
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by John from Idegon 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.
John from Idegon (talk) 03:00, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
Emily, you questioned my comment at your application for addition to the list of AfC reviewers. I'm sorry, but if you cannot even review your own work correctly, why should you be trusted to review others' works? The above article made no showing whatsoever of notability. It also contained at least one incomplete sentence, and it contains promotional language, something you have been cautioned about in the past. Please do not waste other editors' time with frivolous requests for permissions. You are clearly not qualified for AfC reviewer, if for no other reason than simply not meeting the base qualifications, and you've made at least two requests for it. That on top of an absolutely frivolous attempt at WP:RFA, something I am probably not quite qualified for with six years experience and almost 70,000 edits, give the appearance that you may be WP:Hat collecting, something that is considered disruptive. Also, you've been questioned about paid editing in the past. Repeated attempts to gain reviewer rights that you are not qualified for tends to reinforce the notion that maybe your work is not being done with the intention of improving Wikipedia, but instead to further your own goals. I am not saying you were not telling the truth when you denied paid editing; rather just that repeatedly asking for the right to approve articles may reinforce others suspicions. Anyone can edit Wikipedia, but to truly learn the skills needed for advanced permissions takes time and practice. Please stop asking for advance permissions until you have more experience. Thanks. Hope 2018 treats you well, and gives you the time to gain the needed experience. John from Idegon (talk) 03:22, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you John from Idegon for taking the time pointing out things that I need to learn before being a AfC reviewer in the future. I like Wikipedia a lot as you can see and I just want to help out. I understand your concerns. This is just all a learning experience and process for me to gain more knowledge of the Wiki world. You have to make mistakes to learn from your mistakes and I'm definitely learning from them. Once again thank you for breaking everything down for me. I will check back for permission when I'm completely ready. Emilywlk (talk) 04:02, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

One of the best ways to gain understanding of what makes for notability is to see what doesn't. To that end, I'd suggest journeying over to Articles for deletion. Read the intro page and the instructions on how to nominate and how to comment, and then spend a couple weeks just reading the discussions, following at least a couple that interest you all the way through from nomination to closing. I'd suggest holding off on actually !voting until you've become familiar with the lay of the land. Of course, reading all the notability guidelines is a must, and remember that notability is based in the pillar requirement of verifiability. We require multiple good references because you need multiple good references to write a complete article. A wise man told me how to create articles here (and truth be told, I do not do that much. Most of my time is given over to fighting vandalism and updating and improving existing articles.)
  1. Use what you know to lead you to sources for what you want to write about.
  2. Look at the sources you have and decide if they meet our standards for reliable sources.
  3. Look at your sources and determine if they are truly academically independent of the subject you are writing about. Things that aren't are: the subject's website; the subject's employer's website; anything based on an interview with the subject or a principal of the subject; anything obviously written off a press release (look for promo language, no byline on the article, certain publications that specialize in posting press releases, like PRNewswire, and trade magazines)
  4. Once you have done all that, and this is the important part, FORGET EVERYTHING YOU ALREADY KNOW.
  5. Proceed to write your article, paraphrasing what your sources have said. If it isn't in the sources, it shouldn't be in the article. Remember that you cannot take what source A says, and what source B says, and conclude that therefore C must be true. Somebody somewhere has to have written "C".
I hope you find this bit of wisdom helpful. Credit for it goes to a fella that is a regular host at TEAHOUSE, a relatively new administrator named Cullen328. Thanks for what you do, and for wanting to do more. Some of us are willing to help you learn. Just ask. My dear ol dad (RIP) liked to say, "The only dumb question is the one you do not ask". Doubly true here. John from Idegon (talk) 23:38, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 27[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Casanova (rapper), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page New York (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:24, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Samuel Jimenez has a new comment[edit]

AFC-Logo.svg
I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Samuel Jimenez. Thanks! L293D () 15:58, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Samuel Jimenez (March 24)[edit]

AFC-Logo Decline.svg
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Power~enwiki 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.
power~enwiki (π, ν) 03:18, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Lamont Sincere (June 4)[edit]

AFC-Logo Decline.svg
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Shadowowl 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.
» Shadowowl | talk 06:59, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Draft:Lamont Sincere[edit]

Ambox warning orange.svg Draft:Lamont Sincere, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Lamont Sincere and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Draft:Lamont Sincere during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Drewmutt (^ᴥ^) talk 18:58, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Lamont Sincere (July 3)[edit]

AFC-Logo Decline.svg
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Drewmutt 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.
Drewmutt (^ᴥ^) talk 19:06, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 8[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited BlocBoy JB, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Digital download (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:05, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Smash David (July 12)[edit]

AFC-Logo Decline.svg
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Drewmutt 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.
Drewmutt (^ᴥ^) talk 18:29, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 16[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Lamont Sincere, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Brownsville and Crown Heights (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:10, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

Warehouse Music Group moved to draftspace[edit]

You saw the note by the reviewing editor, I assume? Please do address the issue - you need independent, in-depth sources, not promotional, superficial, or in-house coverage. If the draft reappears in mainspace in this condition, it will likely be out put up for deletion for lack of demonstrated notability more or less immediately. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 15:38, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Ok thank you. I appreciate the feedback Emilywlk (talk) 11:48, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:2x Entertainment[edit]

Hello, Emilywlk. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "2x Entertainment".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. CoolSkittle (talk) 19:43, 13 October 2018 (UTC)