User talk:Xismyhero

September 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm Gtwfan52. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Kalamazoo, Michigan have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, you can use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Gtwfan52 (talk) 16:32, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did to Kalamazoo, Michigan, without verifying it by citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Please stop adding nicknames unless you can cite there use in a reliable source. Gtwfan52 (talk) 03:13, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 11 February[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 Paris page, your edit caused a redundant parameter error (help). (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) 00:26, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Humphrey Goldenbollocks (February 23)[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 DoubleGrazing was:

It appears that your submission is either an attempt to be humorous rather than factual, or is an obvious hoax. As Wikipedia strives to contain only factual entries, we can not accept your submission 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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Humphrey Goldenbollocks 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.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 19:14, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Xismyhero! 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! DoubleGrazing (talk) 19:14, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Humphrey Goldenbollocks[edit]

Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, introducing hoaxes, such as Draft:Humphrey Goldenbollocks, is considered to be vandalism and is prohibited. If you are interested in how accurate Wikipedia is, a more constructive test method would be to try to find inaccurate statements that are already in Wikipedia—and then to correct them if possible. If you would like to make test edits, please use the sandbox. Under section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, the page has been nominated for deletion. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges.

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. DoubleGrazing (talk) 19:14, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for explaining your reasoning and directing me to the teahouse! That said, the page is not a hoax. I added a reference to a reliable academic source when I created the page and have since added more similarly academic references from different sources on the article's talk page. I have contested the speedy deletion and will resubmit it now. Thanks again for all you do! <3 Xismyhero (talk) 20:52, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Humphrey Goldenbollocks (February 23)[edit]

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by KylieTastic was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia.

KylieTastic (talk) 21:10, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Plesingho moved to draftspace[edit]

An article you recently created, Plesingho, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Bbb23 (talk) 00:30, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for the comment. The page was made with citations from the Open Domesday project who's data comes from the University of Hull and the Survey of English Place-Names which is operated by the Queen's University of Belfast and the Universities of Edinburgh and Nottingham. Can you explain how they aren't considered reliable or independent? Xismyhero (talk) 02:14, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's not that the sources aren't reliable or independent, it's that they aren't enough to demonstrate notability. Per WP:GEOLAND, you need to show that this place not only exists/-ed, but that it had some sort of legal recognition and a permanent population. Otherwise, you need to find multiple secondary sources that are independent and reliable, and that cover it significantly (not just as passing mentions). -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:46, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Robert of Ulcombe (February 24)[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 Chetsford was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

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:Robert of Ulcombe 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.

Chetsford (talk) 08:44, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]