User talk:Hagtobel

November 2017

Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. This is just a note to let you know that I've moved the draft that you were working on to Draft:Hans Fässler, from its old location at User:Hagtobel/sandbox. This has been done because the Draft namespace is the preferred location for Articles for Creation submissions. Please feel free to continue to work on it there. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to ask me on my talk page. Thank you. | Uncle Milty | talk | 14:33, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help, Uncle Milty.--Hagtobel (talk) 13:42, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

December 2017

Hello, I'm SNUGGUMS. I noticed that you made a change to an article, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Snuggums (talk / edits) 20:53, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Hans Fässler (January 19)

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

The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you.

The comment the reviewer left was:

This article reads very well and the subject certainly sounds notable; however, it needs inline citations rather than a list of longer references at the end so as to allow editors to verify claims made in the article. I encourage you to take this on - it seems like an article that would be good to have otherwise.

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:Hans Fässler 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:Hans Fässler, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and save.
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.

The Drover's Wife (talk) 10:20, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Hagtobel! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation 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! The Drover's Wife (talk) 10:20, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Hagtobel - thanks for your comment on my talk page. Although your article is very good otherwise, the problem is that it almost completely lacks inline citations, which makes it extremely difficult to verify the article content. For instance, if I (as someone unfamiliar with the content) wanted to check some of the more contentious claims, such as the criminal proceedings against him, I couldn't easily do it: the only inline source in the "politician" section is a speech that only confirms the street renaming - perhaps the least contentious thing in there. To check any specific fact regarding those criminal proceedings, I'd have to read everything in the long list of sources, many of which are offline and difficult to access. Wikipedia needs these higher standards of verifiability because while you probably do the right thing, not everyone does, and we have to be able to check contentious material, especially in articles about living people. The Drover's Wife (talk) 20:37, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't matter if the citations aren't in English - people just need to be able to verify specific claims. This is still easily enough done with proper inline citations making clear which statement is sourced from which reference. The Drover's Wife (talk) 20:34, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo, The Drover's Wife – I have been trying to provide some of the necessary inline references and will continue to do so. Will it be you again who decides on whether the article Draft:Hans Fässler is accepted or declined or will it be somebody else? Thanks and best wishes from wintry Switzerland: HagtobelHagtobel (talk) 18:04, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Hans Fässler has been accepted

Hans Fässler, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as C-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. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can 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.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Chetsford (talk) 20:34, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Hagtobel. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced change

Hello Hagtobel. Please be aware that this change about the University of St. Gallen presents negative information ('frivolous spending behavior') but includes no source. It is close to a violation of WP:BLP to do this, so please follow up quickly with a published source. Otherwise other editors may revert your change. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 04:55, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have now undone your change, but if you manage to find a source, you may be able to restore it. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 16:07, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]