This is an archive of past discussions with User:Anon126. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
WikiProject AFC is holding a month long Backlog Elimination Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running from March 1, 2014 to March 31, 2014.
Awards will be given out for all reviewers participating in the drive in the form of barnstars at the end of the drive.
There is a backlog of over 1800 articles, so start reviewing articles! Visit the drive's page and help out!
Your account is autoconfirmed here on the English Wikipedia after four days and ten edits. You have made way more than ten edits, so your account is confirmed when it is four days old (which is at 2014 February 25 09:50 UTC if your log is correct).
The problem is that after the account name was changed from Blackspears to Ray Primero and he had used that for a while, he has now gone back to logging on as Blackspears and that is treated as a new account. Having had the account renamed, he should log on only as the new name. --David Biddulph (talk) 08:49, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
Notification problems + Account Confirmation
If my account is confirmed,then why can ti upload photos to my article?
I went to the upload page and it said your previous message. (4 days +10 edits)
I am not getting notifications,since the time my name has changed.
All older notifications have also disappeared.How can I fix it?
My notification setting is "Send me individual notifications as they come)
Hi, Thank you for your help.
I have another question now, I hope you can answer it.
On the first of March has my article "Elsa Cladera de Bravo" been refused again,
but they don't say what I have to improve.
They suggest contact with editors. How can I improve my article?
Nadezhda Bravo Cladera (talk) 20:11, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
If you want more information on what to improve, you can contact the reviewer by clicking the "(talk)" link either in the message on your talk page or at the top of your article. Anon126 (talk - contribs) 22:46, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
San Roque de Cumbaza, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
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.
There is an important error in a template. I was going to correct it but since the error is in a template I can't.
Visual inline citation guide
Formatting references using inline citations
All information in Wikipedia articles should be verified by citations to reliable sources. Our preferred method of citation is using the "cite.php" form of inline citations, using the <ref></ref> elements. Using this method, each time a particular source is mined for information (don't copy word-for-word!), a footnote is placed in the text ("inline"), that takes one to the detail of the source when clicked, set forth in a references section after the text of the article.
In brief, anywhere you want a footnote to appear in a piece of text, you place an opening <ref> tag followed by the text of the citation which you want to appear at the bottom of the article, and close with a </ref> tag. Note the closing slash ("/"). For multiple use of a single reference, the opening ref tag is given a name, like so: <ref name="name"> followed by the citation text and a closing </ref> tag. Each time you want to use that footnote again, you simply use the first element with a slash, like so: <ref name="name" />.
In order for these references to appear, you must tell the software where to display them, using either the code <references/> or, most commonly, the template, {{Reflist}} which can be modified to display the references in columns using {{Reflist|colwidth=30em}}. Per our style guidelines, the references should be displayed in a separate section denominated "References" located after the body of the article.
Actually, I was able to correct it. I didn't realize that would be allowed. I thought maybe you had created the template. Then when I saw you were on a break I went in search of whatever section would let me notify someone.— Vchimpanzee· talk·contributions·19:05, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
Regarding speedy deletion of Pinky Paras
Respected sir, Inspite of referencing the article is deleted. I would like to know the reason. If you prefer, let me know how it can be improved to standards of Wikipedia. Thanks Royalrajasthan2013 (talk) 11:59, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
The article was deleted because it was overly promotional. If you have the time, please see the relevant policy on this. Otherwise, the main suggestion I have is to read about words to watch, especially "peacock" terms. Statements that use these terms should be cited. (You seem to know how to do this already, so I won't go into too much detail on it.)
Response: As you state, that the article is overly promotional, as I can read the G11 criteria(which was mentioned), it refers to the case that where the subject is notable,(verifiable from web search) then improvement is preferred over deletion. This way, the step taken of deletion is not right as per my views. The subject is quite notable and it can be proven on web search about the subject. Royalrajasthan2013 (talk) 06:47, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
My apologies, but please note that I was not the one who deleted your article. I only tagged it for review by an administrator, so the administrator was the one who made the final decision. You can contact the administrator who deleted it (Jimfbleak) for more information. If you want the article restored, you can go to requests for undeletion. Anon126 (talk - contribs) 21:54, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Response: Thanks for the immediate response. I have contacted the administrator via a message on their talk page. Thanks for your time to answer my query. Best wishes!
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.
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.
hello sir,
can you please help me to improve my article ICDCIT.And i already removed the information of 11th edition 2015 as it was like advertisement and also the important dates from the articles.whatelse i can edit to make it a good one ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nikhilagrawal577 (talk • contribs) 06:22, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
I assume you are referring to Draft:ICDCIT. It is actually not necessary to remove the 2015 event. Future events can be included so long as information about them comes from reliable sources of information. This is the main issue with the article: It has no reliable sources that are independent of the conference. This helps establish what is known on Wikipedia as notability, which is required for articles. I suggest that you search for press coverage of these events. Anon126 (talk - contribs) 20:13, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
help on new article, RepRisk, which was declined as it was found to be advertisement
Hi Anon126,
Can I ask your help please how the article of RepRisk could be rewritten that it does not appear as advertisement? I have read the related policies and I thought I met the notable, independent view requirements. The aim was not to post an advertisement but to make this valuable information available.
I would really appreciate some help pointing me to where the article appears to be an advertisement?
Hello. I assume you are referring to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/RepRisk. If you haven't already, you can read the page on "words to watch" that can introduce bias. There is still some phrasing that seems promotional, for example (all emphasis in quotations is mine):
UBS in 2010 decided to further strengthen its environmental and social risk management program...
The source cited for this statement does say that UBS began using RepRisk's data, but it does not say that UBS's program was strengthened as a result. That is why I believe this is biased. If UBS did in fact improve its program, cite it.
The Government Pension Fund of Norway one of the world's largest investors with over 600bn euro in assets and is considered a leading player in responsible investment worldwide is using RepRisk’s ESG data for ethical screening, among others.
The terms describing the pension fund are subjective and not attributed to any source. Of course, they do not serve to promote RepRisk directly, but I feel as if it is "promotion by association." These terms describing the fund should be attributed to a source or changed.
Thank you for your guidance., I have added References to the Michael E. Nelson article. Do I have anything more to do before it can be uploaded from the Sandbox. Very much appreciate your help to-date. Alex AlexMcCallum (talk) 00:54, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
Yes, I recommend that you fix the formatting of the code. (For starters, HTML tags are usually not the way to do it.) I already suggested the tutorial, but if you don't want to go through that, you can read the formatting cheatsheet.
Disregard
