Expressive101 has given you a fresh pie! Pies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a piping hot pie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Bon appetit!
Spread the tastiness of pies by adding {{subst:Give pie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Expressive101 (talk) has given you a wiki free beer of your choice to wiki drink. This user advises you to not get too wiki-drunk or you could get a wiki-hangover.
Expressive101 (talk) has given you a wiki free beer of your choice to wiki drink. This user advises you to not get too wiki-drunk or you could get a wiki-hangover.
Expressive101 (talk) has invited you to smoke a peace pipe together! Smoking peace pipes promotes WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day happier. Spread the WikiLove by offering someone else a peace pipe, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend who just likes to smoke.
Spread the peace by adding {{subst:Peace pipe}} to someone's talk page! You can use a parameter to insert the name of the recipient and add your own text to the message with a second. Smoking this wiki-peace pipe does not affect your health.
Expressive101 has passed you the WikiJoint! WikiJoints promote... uh... promote... help with... do... wiki... something... yeah... uh, what was I saying? WikiJoints help promote, uh, wiki stuff...and help with...huh?
Message sent regarding targeted editing
Hello, I'd just like to point out that I have sent you a message as a way of seeking dispute resolution and want to reaffirm my view that you are mistaken as to my reasons for being on Wikipedia. I'm just a disinterested user like yourself. I am seeking dispute resolution with you first so that we do not have to involve any further support. I hope we can come to a positive resolution. Thanks! Griseo veritas (talk) 07:35, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Like I said, my edit wasn't personal. Correcting a previous contribution based on a redaction printed by the source itself isn't an insult on your editing—you don't need to lash out. Griseo veritas (talk) 08:05, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your contributions to Clare Foges. Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing because no meet WP:BLP guideline of Wikipedia. please read WP:GNG,WP:BLP and submit for review. .
Your article is now a draft where you can improve it undisturbed for a while.
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Qcne were:
Your first two sources are WP:PRIMARY. The third source is okay, but we need significant coverage in multiple independent sources, so currently this person does not pass WP:NPEOPLE, sorry.
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:Clare Foges 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, Expressive101!
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! Qcne(talk)09:09, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding Ashish Aviral AFD and Dispute editing suggestion
The article you selected for deletion review (AFD) must successfully pass through the patrolling or reviewing process by a Wikipedia editor. I am aware of the reasons behind your choice to nominate this article for AFD. Recently, I relocated your article to the draft space because it lacked "significant coverage in multiple independent sources," which is a criterion for articles to remain in the main Wikipedia space. This move was made purely based on content guidelines and was not motivated by any personal bias or revenge.
I want to emphasize that Wikipedia should not be used as a platform for settling personal grievances or for promotional purposes. The decision to move your article to draft space was driven by the need to maintain Wikipedia's content quality and adhere to its guidelines.
It's essential to engage in constructive editing and avoid disputes. Politeness and a commitment to learning how to create and edit articles according to Wikipedia's standards are key to ensuring a positive editing experience. Failure to do so may result in potential blocks from further editing on Wikipedia. If you would like more details on why this article was chosen for drafty, please feel free to ask for further clarification.
What's the matter mate? I like music but I didn't feel that that particular musician met WP:NARTIST so I took it to AfD. I bear no grudge whatsoever about you thinking my contribution to the encyclopaedia was up to standard. Hence, why I left it and moved on with my day. As for me nominating one of "your" pages, I honestly didn't think ownership was a thing around here. I thought the public owned the pages. Hence the creative commons license at the bottom of each article. What say we put this behind us and be WikiBuddies instead?Expressive101 (talk) 19:21, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Your personal thoughts and feelings are irrelevant in this context; adhering to established policies and guidelines is imperative. Nominating, altering content, and drafting articles should not be taken lightly; they must align with the minimum criteria outlined in Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. I am here only to prevent vandalism and editing disputes. To modify main space articles, you should gain some experience, according to your editing history. Endrabcwizart (talk) 20:13, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Come on mate, that's not a very nice way to speak to a fellow Wikipedia editor. I thought anyone could have a go on here? Isn't that the point? I just want to be your friend. Just because we disagreed on something doesn't mean we can't be wiki-buddies, right? Expressive101 (talk) 09:28, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I came to the conclusion that those subject's weren't notable after I applied the Pokemon test to that particular ontology. If you don't like it you can take me to ANI. Funny, you're the third editor in three days to offer to take me to ANI but so far none of you have followed through. If I didn't know better I'd say you lack the strength of your conviction, sir. Expressive101 (talk) 13:25, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I nominated the Anna Morris page for a speedy because if you look through the edit history you'll see that the page's subject is its main contributor and neither they, not the page's creator (who has a partial COI declaration on their talk page) have declared their COI properly. Expressive101 (talk) 18:53, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Expressive101. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Especially considering the already-flagged question of whether this subject meets Wikipedia's general notability guidelines, the article might benefit from paring back details not relevant to the subject's notability. In my own judgment, which you of course are free to disregard, the article would be considerably stronger at half the length—and so have a better chance of approval.
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|PatrickJWelsh}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.
Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Logan M. Isaac until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 until the discussion has finished.
