User talk:Yurinator180

Welcome to Wikipedia!!!

Hello Yurinator180! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Below are some recommended guidelines to facilitate your involvement. Happy Editing! Kukin i

Getting Started
Wikipedia Tutorial How to edit a page The five pillars of Wikipedia Manual of Style Be bold in editing How to write a great article WikiProjects
Getting your info out there
Cite your sources Neutral Point of View Point of View Verifiability Uploading images Image use policy
Getting more Wikipedia rules
Policy Library

Getting Help
New contributors' help page Where to ask a question Help Desk Frequently Asked Questions
Getting along
Wikiquette Civility Sign your posts Wikipedians Conflict resolution
Getting technical
Pages needing attention Peer review Utilities Village pump

Kuki ni 03:43, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Village_at_MSU.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Village_at_MSU.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 13:34, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:East Orange Campus High School Back.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:East Orange Campus High School Back.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 03:51, 16 October 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ww2censor (talk) 03:51, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:East Orange Campus High School Side.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:East Orange Campus High School Side.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 03:52, 16 October 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ww2censor (talk) 03:52, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

June 2011

Hello Yurinator180. If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Red Hawk Leadership Honor Society, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:

editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. Brianga (talk) 19:57, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of New Jersey Center for Evidence-Based Practice

You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the Article Wizard.

Thank you.

A tag has been placed on New Jersey Center for Evidence-Based Practice, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be unambiguous advertising that only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item G11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, . Clicking that button will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the article's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. You may freely add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 14:27, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Status and Advice

As reviewing administrator, I deleted the article fortwo reasons: first, it was entirely promotional of the center, and second, it gave no indication of encyclopedic importance.

You said on the talk p.:

[hide] This page also has a talk page (edit | delete). You may want to delete it as well – click [show] to view the contents. [edit]1 This page should not be speedy deleted because...

This page should not be speedily deleted because... - It is an article about a center of excellence at the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, and is a legitimate center of scientific research just like any other. - It is not an article written simply for the promotion of individuals or for the glorification of the organization. It is written for the purpose of informing the general public of its existence. - It is a work in progress, and additional references will be added soon, such as references demonstrating important systematic reviews that have originated from this center of excellence. - It is an integral component of a public academic medical center (and not someone's private enterprise). - It is an important branch of the Joanna Briggs Institute, which itself has a page on Wikipedia.

If you disagree with these findings, or if you have specific reasons as to why it should undergo speedy deletion, please do let me know and I will make the necessary changes to the article so that it may become acceptable by wikipedia's standards."

I reply: A Wikipedia article needs to show notability with references providing substantial coverage from 3rd party independent published reliable sources, print or online, but not blogs or press releases, or material derived from press releases. It also needs to be written like an encyclopedia article, not a press release--don't praise the organization or person, say what they do. Don't talk about the overall importance of the subject,which is mainly what your article talked about--talk about what the specific organization you are writing about has accomplished. Remember not to copy from a web site -- first it's a copyright violation, but, even if you give us permission according to WP:DCM, the tone will not be encyclopedic and the material will not be suitable.

Include only material that would be of interest to a general reader coming across the mention of the subject and wanting the sort of information that would be found in an encyclopedia. Do not include material that would be of interest only to those associated with the subject, or to prospective clients--that sort of content is considered promotional. Keep in mind that the goal of an encyclopedia is to say things in a concise manner, which is not the style of press releases or web sites, which are usually more expansive.

As a general rule, a suitable page will be best written by someone without Conflict of Interest; it's not impossible to do it properly with a conflict of interest or as a paid press agent, but it's relatively more difficult: you are automatically thinking in terms of what the subject wishes to communicate to the public, but an uninvolved person will think in terms of what the public might wish to know. If you think you can do it right according to our guidelines, do so, but expect the article to be carefully checked for objectivity.

Centers within universities are also rarely considered important, unless they are of international reputation by themselves. It would take very good references to show it. International organizations are another matter: in particular, the Joanna Briggs Center is notable , but that does not mean any branch of it is--in fact, as a general rule here (see WO:ORG, the branches of a notable organization if they are branches below the national level are very unlikely to be considered notable here. What you could best do is make a list of the centers, with a link to their individual web sites, on the page for the main organization.

I have also listed the Texas center for deletion--another admin will judge. If either of them are restored, unless they are drastically improved indeed, I shall send them for a community decision, and the consensus will be judged by another administrator. DGG ( talk ) 17:57, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your message on my talk p, and I offer you thanks for your understanding. Perhaps It might help if I give you some comments on the other articles you've been working on, for some of them have somewhat similarproblems.

For National Haitian Student Alliance, I removed a paragraph of non encyclopedic]] content; a list of branches is appropriate; a list of states from which the members come is excessive. The article would be much stronger without adjectives, or with many fewer. Adjectives of praise are one of the things that a make an article appear promotional. Try not to repeat the full name of the organization after th lede paragraph. the group ... or It... is considered preferable. Don't use PR-talk; aim for conciseness. I removed two sentences in the History section to indicate what I mean by this.

Red Hawk Leadership Honor Society is going to have some difficulties; we very rarely keep such organizations except the most famous.T hat the group is dormant does not necessarily imply there can be no article--once something is notable, it remains notable. But a statement about how it hopes to become active again is promotional. You'll need to show notability by very good references from outside the college and that are not based on PR. Some of the material does not belong; we do not reprint the Constitution of clubs. I leave it to you whether to fix the article or ask for deletion. It certainly will not stand as it is, and probably not in any case. (I am giving you my opinion about what will happen here--not necessarily my own position.)

In including a list of notable people, we include only those who have Wikipedia articles or who clearly are qualified for them. To include others, you'll need to see if an article on them will be accepted. Alvarez is probably not going to be considered notable here--most articles on school superintendents havebeen deleted, except for the largest cities; Unless Andre can meet WP:CREATIVE, there won't be an article for him either. Johnson probably also, unless there is something beyond just being pastor of a church. Rosales probably not, also--inclusion in Who's who is not considered to make for notability, nor are internal company awards. Gordon's books appear to be self published. Abdi, judging from his CV, will not meet WP:PROF.

On the other hand Jadotte is notable and an article should be written. But his role in the society is irrelevant to his notability--as with the others. I leave you to make the necessary deletions.

East Orange Campus High School is an acceptable article, but there are some promotional lines that must be removed. Watch out for any sentence with adjectives of praise! And we normally only include the principal--but what we do include , if you can find them, is all the principals from the beginning.

In the article on Montclair State University, you've been adding to the template. But what you have been adding is a number of centers, most of which are unlikely to be able to have supportable articles here. You might do much better to include the list in the article itself. When you do that, it will look better if you remove the links except for the ones that do have articles. (New Jersey School of Conservation is likely to stand as an article, but it needs sources from outside the University.

I hope this helps. My goal is to help you get the strongest sustainable articles, without wasting effort on what won't work here. Some people think we should cover college clubs and research centers and the like more intensively. I do not, but that does not determine the issue or affect the advice I give. The current consensus is quite restrictive (see WP:LOCAL, so if you are going to try, start with the very strongest--ones that are associated with people notable enough for very good Wikipedia articles.

Good luck with them. DGG ( talk ) 21:04, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of AJPM Focus

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.

A tag has been placed on AJPM Focus, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

It appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement of https://www.journals.elsevier.com/ajpm-focus. (See section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.
It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

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 deleted 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. Mvqr (talk) 14:59, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: AJPM Focus (March 20)

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

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
reliable
secondary
strictly independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Company's website can not be used as a reliable reference, they're primary sources. Could you add more references than government records? See WP:COMPANY.

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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:AJPM Focus and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

ANU^writes 16:06, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Yurinator180! Having an article draft 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! ANU^writes 16:06, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:AJPM Focus

Hello, Yurinator180. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:AJPM Focus, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 17:06, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:AJPM Focus

Hello, Yurinator180. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "AJPM Focus".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:16, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]