User talk:RuthBCCampbell

Welcome![edit]

Hello, RuthBCCampbell, 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! BracketBot (talk) 14:26, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

December 2015[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Lip reading 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:

Processing. J. Speech Lang Hear Res. 58(3):1093-102. doi: 10.1044/2015_JSLHR-H-14-0360</ref>) are as important as the visibility of the speaker (see '[https://www.ucl.ac.uk/dcal/projects/tabs/

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 14:26, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Edits on Lip Reading[edit]

Hello!

I see that you've edited a lot of the Lip reading article. However, it doesn't look like you're quite done your re-write yet. I have reverted your edits and suggest you do your editing in a Userspace Draft until you feel that the article is complete. Then you should copy it over to the main article.

You can still access the source code from your old edits through this link by clicking the "edit" button in the corner. You can then copy the code to a new userspace draft and continue editing there.

Happy Editing! --70.49.108.190 (talk) 09:18, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Lipspeaking (January 25)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Onel5969 was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the general guideline on notability and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia 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:Lipspeaking 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.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:04, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! RuthBCCampbell, 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! Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:04, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Lipspeaking (January 26)[edit]

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

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the general guideline on notability and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia 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:Lipspeaking 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.

SwisterTwister talk 04:44, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Lipspeaking (February 3)[edit]

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

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:Lipspeaking 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.

LaMona (talk) 22:10, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest[edit]

Hello, RuthBCCampbell. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, please:

avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your circle, your organization, its competitors, projects or products;
instead propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. Thank you. Theroadislong (talk) 09:18, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: lipreading (February 26)[edit]

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

Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Lip reading instead.

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:RuthBCCampbell/sandbox/lipreading 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.

MatthewVanitas (talk) 12:36, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

March 2016[edit]

Hello, I'm Graham87. I wanted to let you know that I removed one or more external links you added to the page Lip reading, because they seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page, or take a look at our guidelines about links. Thank you. Graham87 11:50, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), such as at WP:MCQ#Sam Loyd lipreading puzzle, please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

I've replied there to your question. ww2censor (talk) 11:53, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I've removed the template which headed this piece which suggested it was too closely linked to just one authority. The piece contains references and citations to a wide number of reputable sources, and I have checked that views are not misrepresented. I solicited views and obtained inputs from both user groups (hard of hearing and lipreading teachers) and from academic colleagues working in speech perception. I am pretty sure this is both neutral and authoritative..but would welcome more collaboration to improve it further! RuthRuthBCCampbell (talk) 13:53, 26 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]