User talk:Danandrewsreporter

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Danandrewsreporter, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as "Carla Howe", may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Tea House, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Comatmebro ^{~Come at me~} 01:25, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of "Carla Howe"[edit]

The article "Carla Howe" has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Flirting with celebrities does not make a person notable enough for a wikipedia page.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Comatmebro ^{~Come at me~} 01:25, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Carla Howe for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Carla Howe is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carla Howe until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. VQuakr (talk) 00:15, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi![edit]

Hi, I saw your latest reply at the AfD. Sorry you feel frustrated with my deletion nomination and the language of "Google hits", but I think my statement was a pretty clear use of contrast (hence the use of the conjunction "but"). Also, I am not an administrator. Regards! VQuakr (talk) 06:36, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Bottom line Sir, No you were not clear...Yes I did communicate with Wiki public relations (see bellow)....Yes, I will be documenting how ridiculous you are. Even at this point saying you were clear and your not...

Jay Walsh jwalsh@wikimedia.org 2:30 PM (17 hours ago)

to me Dear Dan,

Thanks for your email to the Wikimedia Foundation.

The Foundation does recognize that editing for the first time, specifically navigating processes like creating a new article, can be challenging for new users. Wikipedia is operated by a passionate community of volunteers, and it's really important to understand the policies and procedures that Wikipedians use to determine what knowledge should be shared in the project. Editors are highly focused on the quality of information, and they carefully scrutinize references and citations and the overall notability of subjects to make sure they are appropriate to be shared in Wikipedia. Even when adhering to those policies, a new editor may find a lot of scrutiny or attention on their first contributions. Some Wikipedians try to really focus on helping first-time Wikipedians, but as a volunteer-driven project there aren't always enough experienced Wikipedians around to help new editors out.

Wikipedia is also a free project, which means it is shared under a free license, so no copyrighted material (including images or other text) can be included. Because of that Wikipedians will endeavor to make sure submitted material does not violate copyright. I'm not suggesting you submitted anything that was copyright, but Wikipedians will want to be totally sure that material is safe to use on the project, and if they don't see definite proof they may delete material to keep the project safe from legal threats by copyright holders.

In answer to your primary question, the Foundation does appreciate that the social and technical knowledge necessary to edit Wikipedia makes it pretty challenging for newcomers to get involved. The core of the Foundation's technical and programmatic work right now is focused on making it easier for new and experienced editors to contribute to Wikipedia. The main project under way to help with that is VisualEditor (you can more about it here, including how to enable the beta tool https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:VisualEditor). VisualEditor makes it possible to edit Wikipedia without understanding wiki code, which is a major barrier to first time editing. The Foundation is also working on improved tools to help users communicate with each other, and to know when their attention is needed on a discussion or change.

The Foundation's engineers and developers are also carefully studying the new experiences of Wikipedians, including experiences like yours. They are looking at simple on-screen cues, improved documentation and help text, and other small features to help new users understand what's happening when others get involved, and the Foundation is trying to find better ways to thank and appreciate people for their contributions.

As a new editor there is a good chance you may have your first work reverted or deleted, which isn't a positive experience. The Foundation is studying those situations and trying to develop assisstive technology to help you as a new editor and experienced editors who want to work with you to improve the quality of your contribution.

You can read some recent blog posts from that team about their ongoing work: https://blog.wikimedia.org/2013/12/20/new-draft-feature/ https://blog.wikimedia.org/2013/11/01/wikipedia-next-generation-discussion-system/ https://blog.wikimedia.org/2013/04/25/try-new-login-accountcreation/

Ultimately though its the community of editors who create and develop policies and best practices for the projects, and those are really meant to ensure that the final product - the articles people read - are of the highest quality possible. That means the editorial process takes time, involves a lot of discussion, and may not happen instantaneously. It's a lot like good journalism - editors care very much about the editorial style, writing, use of images etc that collectively make the publication as good as readers expect.

I hope that helps - let me know if you have any other specific questions.

Jay Walsh (for Wikimedia communications)

Forwarded message from Dan Andrews <andrewsd@knoxfocus.com> ---

From: Dan Andrews <andrewsd@knoxfocus.com> To: press@wikimedia.org Subject: Subject to article currently being written Date: 2014-02-07 03:36:04

End forwarded message ---

Danandrewsreporter (talk) 13:21, 8 February 2014 (UTC)danandrewsreporter[reply]

Sorry to hear you do not think I was clear. Wikipedia has its own terminology that can be quite daunting to a newcomer. In the future, feel free to ask for clarification on my talk page (linked in my signature) before spending significant amounts of your time attempting to address anything. VQuakr (talk) 19:07, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

February 2014[edit]

This is your only warning; if you make personal attacks on other people again, as you did at Carla Howe, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. -
→Davey2010→→Talk to me!→ 14:19, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:East Tennessee Society of Professional Journalists concern[edit]

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:East Tennessee Society of Professional Journalists, a page you created, has not been edited in 6 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:32, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 12 April[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

On the Draft:Jacob Whitesides page, your edit caused a missing references list (help | help with group references). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:15, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Jacob Whitesides (April 17)[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 CookieMonster755 was:

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

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:Jacob Whitesides 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.

CookieMonster755 (talk) 05:17, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! 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! CookieMonster755 (talk) 05:17, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Jacob Whitesides (April 18)[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 Wikiisawesome was:

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

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:Jacob Whitesides 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.

wia (talk) 16:40, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:East Tennessee Society of Professional Journalists[edit]

Hello, Danandrewsreporter. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "East Tennessee Society of Professional Journalists".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by one of two methods (don't do both): 1) follow the instructions at WP:REFUND/G13, or 2) copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Draft:East Tennessee Society of Professional Journalists}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, and click "Save page". An administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. JMHamo (talk) 13:16, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]