User talk:Jgscanlon2099

Welcome!

Hello, Jgscanlon2099, 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:

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 click here to ask for help here on your talk page and a volunteer will visit you here shortly. Again, welcome! Fiddle Faddle 16:08, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (May 25)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time.
Please read the comments left by the reviewer on your submission. 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, you can find it at User:Jgscanlon2099/sandbox.
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.

Thank you for your
contributions to Wikipedia!

Please remember to link to the submission!

You can also get real-time chat help from experienced editors.

(t) Josve05a (c) 11:24, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Jgscanlon2099, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about 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! (t) Josve05a (c) 11:24, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (May 25)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time.
Please read the comments left by the reviewer on your submission. 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, you can find it at User:Jgscanlon2099/sandbox.
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.

Thank you for your
contributions to Wikipedia!

Please remember to link to the submission!

You can also get real-time chat help from experienced editors.

—Anne Delong (talk) 11:25, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to your Articles for Creation Help Desk question

Hello, Jgscanlon2099! I'm Timtrent. I have replied to your question about a submission at the WikiProject Articles for Creation Help Desk. Fiddle Faddle 16:08, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Reelkandi (August 20)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. 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:Reelkandi 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 get real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Chris Troutman (talk) 19:29, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Draft:Reelkandi (August 29)

Well done with references, but not yet ready - please see review comments at article top. Thanks! --Gryllida (talk) 13:09, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Reelkandi has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Reelkandi. Thanks! Fiddle Faddle 10:41, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Reelkandi has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Reelkandi. Thanks! Fiddle Faddle 12:13, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Reelkandi has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Reelkandi. Thanks! Fiddle Faddle 22:36, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Reelkandi has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Reelkandi. Thanks! Fiddle Faddle 14:36, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Afternoon Tease has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Afternoon Tease. Thanks! Fiddle Faddle 14:37, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Accepted Reelkandi

Hi, I've accepted your article on Reelkandi. It certainly seemed like you have put a lot of effort into it, and I'm glad to see it pay off. I've seen you a couple of times on the IRC help channel, and as a reviewer and helper at the help channel I would like to thank you for putting in the effort over months to help improve Wikipedia. Thanks! Darylgolden^(talk) 13:48, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

We should expect more feedback as it's exposed to the bigger namespace now (and a bigger amount of people are working on it). It has been classifies as belonging to WikiProject Internet culture and folks from there should also pick it up shortly. They should be our best friends here, as enthusiasts familiar with the topic to an extent, — and if you're interested you can look at the project page and see if anything looks interesting or familiar.

Again thanks. :-) --Gryllida (talk) 13:52, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Mothering - a temptation to resist

Now is a good time to read User:Timtrent/A good article, noting especially the small item about mothering and fathering. Fiddle Faddle 14:34, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

yes, its quite like that, mothering and fathering...

so what happens to life of article now? that means it cant get declined? and that it improves, as others add their comments, edits?

All articles are, at all times, potentially vulnerable to deletion nominations. What you have achieved is an article that, even if nominated, is unlikely to be deleted. That is all any of us can achieve.

Over time other editors will alter the article, and that is a good thing. We guard it, you guard it, against vandalism, but we cherish edits that improve it, even if we disagree with them. "My work is best" is a natural reaction when we see an edit by others, but we must, instead, consider dispassionately what has been done, and notice that it does, probably improve our work. If we disagree with it for valid reasons then we have the option of changing what has been done, or discussing it with the person who did it, on the article's talk page, drawing their attention to the disucssion on their own talk page if we believe it to be necessary. Or we can do a combination of that. See WP:BRD.

Consensus, not my opinion nor yours nor theirs, wins the day. Fiddle Faddle 06:10, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Afternoon Tease has been accepted

Afternoon Tease, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

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.

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!

Fiddle Faddle 12:27, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

thankyou fiddle faddle

once again thankyou Fiddle Faddle greatly appreciated for all your help here/.

can i just ask what does the line you put mean below (and i quote)

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.

thanks,

Jgscanlon2099 (talk) 18:34, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It means that you do not need to wait for reviews, if you choose not to wait.

What I do when I create an article is to create it in my own user space. Look at the edit history here, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=E._E._Speight&dir=prev&action=history for example, oldest first. You can see that I started it as User:Timtrent/E E Speight, and, when I felt ot was sufficiently well referenced to survive, I moved it myself to become an article. I made the call that it would survive, and, so far, it has. Even so, there are parts of it that cannot be referenced. They have survived because they are facts 'unlikely to be challenged', but I cannto object if a pedantic editor removes them.

Does that explain things well, especially with an example? Fiddle Faddle 19:25, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: you can also create new articles in draft namespace without submitting them for review. You can ask for help from fellow contributors without having the collaboration bear a "reviewer-reviewee" relationship, but rather, work together in a collaborative fashion. Drafts are not indexed and only expire after about 6 months of inactivity.

--Gryllida (talk) 22:13, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jgscanlon2099 yes that makes sense, i went thru it and in fairness, unless an editor wants to be pedantic and check sources, its all about fact, as you say...so thats encouraging as i want to do more now, its such a buzz (when you know more what you;re doing and get into the groove)...

now a separate question, just for example, this link.... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Base79 1 the box thats on the right, what is that? how is it put in? 2 whats the value of it being there? is it supposed to represent when a company's page? 3 so how is that different to the type of article we have been working on...?

many thanks Jgscanlon2099 (talk) 20:13, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The box is an infobox, produced by a template such as {{Infobox company}}. They have a use. Reelkandi might benefit from one, but let someone else enjoy placing it there. It is really a short précis of the simple facts of the article. Some folk favour them, some do not. The major reason is prettification, I suppose.

Experiment in your sandbox with things and enjoy finding out how things work. look at otyher articles where they are deployed and figure out how to deploy them yourself. We all do it that way. A little step is better than a grand leap, though! Fiddle Faddle 20:31, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You might also look at the history tab in Bullycide, where I created it right in main space. If you are sure of what you are doing then that works, too. However, creating articles is not the only fun. Editing some that mean something to you is good, too. Later, when you have more experience, jon the folks who review drafts. IT takes a bit of experience and learning to think the Wikipedia way first. Fiddle Faddle 21:25, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

September 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Reelkandi may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

}}

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 21:35, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]