Welcome to Wikipedia, Cjmodica! Thank you for your contributions. I am Sue Rangell and I have been editing Wikipedia for some time, so if you have any questions feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You can also check out Wikipedia:Questions or type {{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
Hello, Cjmodica. 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 conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:
avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Theroadislong 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:Tommy Byars 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.
Hello, Cjmodica!
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! Theroadislong (talk) 15:40, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I am just now finding this page. I am so frustrated but I do appreciate all that you have done to help clean up my article. I am slow at learning how to get around in Wikipedia, and I don't understand it. What else I am supposed to do? Would you please tell me if I need to just give it up or do you see any potential in this article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Tommy_Byars#cite_note-4? I really don't want to give up. Cjmodica (talk) 02:59, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Tommy Byars, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting 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. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
Please use edit summaries when you edit articles. It makes it easier for other editors who look at the Revision history to understand what you are doing. It wasn't that important while the article was a draft, but now you should use them. Happy editing! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:21, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Please note that content like "big bucks" is not encyclopaedic, if it is a quote then put it between quotation marks, but we cannot use slang content like that in Wikipedia's voice. Theroadislong (talk) 16:58, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, thank you so much. I was quoting the the obituary and I will certainly correct it. I also have another question if I may ask it here. I corrected the titles and capitalized the major words in the titles but it reverted back to the original. According to my knowledge, all major words should be capitalized in titles, regardless of position in the title. Am I correct and if so, why did it revert back? Could it be possible that the changes didn't save when I hit the publish button? If I am incorrect, I don't want to keep wrongfully correcting something. Cjmodica (talk) 17:08, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't know that I started it somewhere else. Where do I go to open the correct draft? Thank you. The draft is just a start. I am still finding source information for it. Should I move it to the Sandbox until I find all the source? Cjmodica (talk) 02:03, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted because it included copyrighted content, which is not permitted on Wikipedia.
Some of the information taken was from various sites and I was rewording it. It wasn't ready for review, but someone moved it because I had started it in a draft instead of the Sandbox. Then when I went back to it, it was gone and could not find it. When I trid to go to Draft, I hit the wrong button for review. I thought it was goning to my draft. Wikipedia is extremely hard to find things. It would be much better if draft, review and sandbox were all on the menu. It is very confusing. Someone else can take over or delete. Thanks Cjmodica (talk) 12:55, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Copying text is quite simply not allowed. Copying text and rewording it is likely to result in close paraphrase which is still not allowed. I suggest you start again by writing the article in your own words without copying any text from the sources. See Help:Your first article for some tips on article creation. Navigating Wikipedia can be confusing for a new editor. Help and advice is available at Wikipedia:Teahouse. It's a great place to get your questions answered. Whpq (talk) 13:13, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@TheroadislongI was writing it in my own words and never meant for it to go to review. I own copies of the books, Royal Ancestry, Vol I-V, by Douglass Richardson, Anscestors of American Presidents by Gary B. Roberts and The Farrar's Island Family and Its English Ancestry, Alvahn Holmes. Some of the information was found on WikiTree and Find a Grave which I found to be plagerized also and I was working on making it my own words. As you know, I have only been working in Wikipedia for a few weeks and I am still green at moving around in Wikipedia since it is not user friendly. I started the draft for Judith Jefferson and someone (I Dream of Horses) moved it because I had started it twice and I could not find it. Wikipedia is extremely hard to find things because there is no site menu. It would be less confusing if the buttons for draft, sandbox and review were all together on the menu of ones page. I was working on the article and had taken information from several sites. It was not supposed to be submitted at any rate as I had not even sited all the sources. Yes, I understand that it has to be in my own words, but the FAG information was not their own words either. Much of words were taken from Alvin Holmes' book The Farrar's Island Family and Its English Ancestry. After "I Dream of Horses" moved the draft, I could not find it again. I went to several places to find it and when I finally did find it, I wanted to move it to my Sandbox and hit submit thinking it was going there. This is not worth the time to keep trying. Thank you for all of your help you have given in the past for Tommy Byars which was all of my own words and work. Judith Jefferson would have been my own work when I finished, but because it got moved around and got me all confused, I think I need to just give it up. Thanks again.Cjmodica (talk) 13:43, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but I didn't even get a chance to work on it. Next time I will do my work in my word processor rather than trying to work on your website and then I will copy and paste it to Wikipedia. The work in FAG was also not their own work either. All of that information in FAG was posted in Rootsweb years ago and FAG copied it from the Rootsweb address website that is no longer operating. Some of that information is also found in Farrar's Island Family and Its English Ancestry. I would like to see this woman on Wilipedia whether I do it or someone else does it. More notable women need to be acknowledged. May I start over or should I leave it alone? Cjmodica (talk) 21:30, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Find-a-grave is a user contributed web site, as is Rootsweb. I don't know what type of checks they run against copying text and images, but the fact that they copied it does not mean we are allowed to copy it. When you state Some of that information is also found in Farrar's Island Family and Its English Ancestry do you mean that those sites copied text from that book? The Farrar's Island family and its English ancestry is from 1972 and would still be under copyright. Text cannot be copied from copyrighted sources.
I encourage you to start over, but with very specific advice. Write the article in your own words. Do not copy text from your sources as a way to start the article. Even though you may change some of the words, it may result in close paraphrasing which is still not acceptable. Start the article from scratch and write it based on facts with sentences you write yourself. I also see you've had problems finding your draft. I suggest that you add a section to your user page(User:Cjmodica) to list articles you are working on and then include a link to your draft by adding this to the page: [[Draft:Judith Jefferson Farrar]]. You can then easily reach your draft by clicking on it from your user page. Please continue to take advantage of Wikipedia:Teahouse, a very helpful bunch of editors who can help if you have questions while developing your article. -- Whpq (talk) 16:06, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much. Yes, I will certainly write it in my own words which is what I intended to do in the first place, but never even got a chance to actually work on it. I was looking for the correct sources and began writing in the article. Several years ago, I traced own lineage back from Judith Jefferson through her grandmother, Mary Branch Jefferson who married Thomas Jefferson I, to 742AD, Charlemagne. Additionally, I traced her husband's lineage, George Farrar, all the way back to the same ancestor, Charlemagne. Both she and her husband share the same common ancestor, Charlemagne, as well as I do. I have all of my own work and sources, and that is what I was going to focus on regarding the Jefferson lineage. I had already cited the Royal Ancestry books by Douglass Richardson and was beginning to start writing, just didn't get a chance to put it in my own words. Question: Am I safe to work in Sandbox or should I work in my own computer and then dump it in Sandbox? Cjmodica (talk) 19:17, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You can start in your sandbox, but I will reiterate, do not copy text into your sandbox, draft, article, etc. It is simply not allowed. -- Whpq (talk) 20:29, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"The content on Find a Grave is user-generated, and is therefore considered generally unreliable. Links to Find a Grave may sometimes be included in the external links section of articles, when the site offers valuable additional content, such as images not permitted for use on Wikipedia. Take care that the Find a Grave page does not itself contain prohibited content, such as copyright violations." (emphasis added)
The way I read this, if you use information from FindAGrave as part of your article, you still need to find that same information, reliably sourced, somewhere else in order to include it in the article (since almost everything in an article needs to be referenced). You should start writing an article by gathering reliable sources first, then paraphrase what those reliable sources say (which is, not from FindAGrave). But, as mentioned, you should ask at the Teahouse or Help Desk. David10244 (talk) 08:19, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I see that below, you said you won't continue with this subject. But all of this advice will pertain to things you create in the future. There is a big learning curve here.... David10244 (talk) 08:21, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I knew that FAG was an unreliable source and I have already chalked it up. I appreciate all the help that I have received on Wikipedia. Cjmodica (talk) 15:54, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia and copyright
Hello Cjmodica! Your additions to Draft:Judith Jefferson Farrar have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.
Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. To be used on Wikipedia, all other images must be made available under a free and open copyright license that allows commercial and derivative reuse.
If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into either the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps described at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. See also Help:Translation#License requirements.
It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 12:21, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page you created, Help:Judith Jefferson, was tagged as a test page under section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other test edits you may want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.
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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Whpq (talk) 18:52, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I believe that I am not going to go forward with Judith Jefferson because it is a bitter subject. I will just use this as a learning process. Judith Jefferson was just one in a bucket list. I have many other notable ancestors that I would like to write about. I will bypass her and acknowledge another woman in history. May I ask if I may quote a will that I transcribed from a copy of an original will of a Colonial ancestor in Amercica that was written before 1701? It is my own transcription of the original will. Cjmodica (talk) 20:01, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The will would be public domain, but Wikipedia is not a source repository. A copy of a will might be acceptable for a genealogy, but unlikely to be acceptable as part of an encyclopedia article. I would also be concerned about original research, and it would need to be verifiable. -- Whpq (talk) 20:33, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Not to be discouraging, but if your transcription has not been reliably published, it can't be used as a source. The core Wikipedia pillar of Verifiability means that any reader should, in theory, using the citations in an article, be able to verify the information in that article. I'm not saying that YOU would make stuff up, but some people do make stuff up -- that's exactly why sites with user-generated content are not usable as sources. This includes blogs, IMDB for movies (not so much made-up stuff as just inaccuracies), YouTube videos where people make assertions, etc. I can say in my blog that the population of Denver, Colorado is 500 million. You then want to use that as a reference for an article. You see how my blog is not a good reference for Wikipedia? My blog is not "reliably published with with a reputation for fact-checking and editorial control".
It gets easier once you get the reasons behind the policies. Now you'll see why your transcription of a will can't be used as a source or a reference. Readers can't verify your transcription. Cheers. David10244 (talk) 08:28, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Cjmodica, and welcome to Wikipedia! I have noticed that you are fairly new! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. I also see that some of your recent edits show an interest in the use of images and/or photos on Wikipedia.
If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{Help me}} on your talk page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
I didn't know they were inappropriate. Someone suggested that I need more categories so that is what I was doing. Sorry, I will leave it alone. Being disruptive is NOT my nature. Still learning by mistakes! CharlemagneJane (talk) 20:58, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
