User talk:Archiecrowley

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Archiecrowley, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

Introduction
The five pillars of Wikipedia
How to edit a page
How to write a great article
Simplified Manual of Style
Your first article
Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community
Feel free to make test edits in the sandbox
and check out the Task Center, for ideas about what to work on.

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 need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome! — Wug·a·po·des 19:21, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Some technical stuff[edit]

Hi Archie, I was told about some issues you were having with creating articles. On the English Wikipedia we require at least 10 edits and a 4 day old account before allowing article creation directly in articlespace. For edit-a-thons admins can temporarily grant exceptions to that restriction. In March I granted you that temporary exception which is why you were able to create articles, but that expired after about a week. You made your tenth edit about an hour ago (congrats!) and since your exemption expired you had trouble creating an article earlier today. That should be solved now that you are autoconfirmed, but looking at User:Archiecrowley/Lavender Languages and Linguistics Conference, there are some policies about article creation and content that I wanted to explain before you move that draft to articlespace

The two main concerns are whether it meets Wikipedia's inclusion criteria and the use of copyrighted images. To have a separate article, a topic must have significant (i.e., not trivial) coverage in multiple sources that are editorially independent of the topic. With the sources in the article, it's not obvious that the LLLC meets those criteria; for example the LSA piece was written by Leap so it is not editorially independent. While it can be used as a source of information, it doesn't help justify whether it meets our inclusion criteria. The piece in Out is better since it is editorially independent, but some editors might disagree on whether it is "significant coverage" of the conference. It might be better to include this information in existing articles like LGBT linguistics or an article on William Leap until we find more coverage of the conference to justify a separate article.

The second concern is the use of copyrighted images. Wikipedia is a free (as in freedom) enyclopedia and so we greatly prefer images that are irrevocably licensed so that anyone may use them for any purpose anywhere at any time. For this reason we typically cannot accept images which you did not create. For example, fliers from a 1993 conference are copyrighted by the flyer creator, conference, or institution (even without a copyright notice) and so it is unlikely that the flier is available under a suitable license. For that reason it is very likely that those images will be deleted from Wikimedia Commons in the near future, so don't take it personally. We have some very strict exceptions for historically important images where a suitably licensed version cannot possibly be created, and the 1993 conference flier probably falls into one of those exceptions. However that means it needs to be uploaded to Wikipedia (rather than Commons) and used in a live article (not a draft) with a valid rationale.

This is probably all very overwhelming, but I'm happy to help whenever you need me. Either leave a message on my talk page or "ping" me to a talk page using {{ping|Wugapodes}} Creating a new article is one of the hardest tasks for a new editor to accomplish, but don't get discouraged! Lots of editors are willing to help, and the information almost always has a place somewhere on the encyclopedia even if not as a separate article. — Wug·a·po·des 18:28, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I notice that you went ahead anyway. It is extremely rare that a wikipedia article on a series of conferences is considered notable, and if I listed it for an AfD discussion it would be very likely deleted, which to say the least, is not a good experience for a new user. It is also quite unhelpful for this to happen to an article in this field. To give you a chance to improve it, or, more practically, to follow Wugapodes' suggestion of moving a summary of the material elsewhere (I'd suggest the text about the conferences, but not the list), I'm returning it to draft space.

Certainly we need more coverage of LGBT topics. The best way of doing this is to make articles on people and organization that would clearly and undoubtedly be considered notable, rather than at best marginal. DGG ( talk ) 22:26, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi DGG, thanks for chiming in! Archie added some sources since I posted the above comment, and I thought they improved the case for notability. So while I agree it's still marginal in terms of notability, I should say that I told Archie to publish to mainspace if they were willing to follow through with the AfD process should that happen. My thinking, especially with the new sources, was that while it may well go to AfD, a clear explanation of why they think the sourcing shows notability, then other editors might be convinced. Even so, I think your final point is a good one to consider. Improving articles we already have is often better than starting from scratch since the information has a lower risk of being "lost" through deletion or draftification. I also think there's a knock-on benefit that having the information available somewhere increases the chances that the topic becomes notable in the future since it increases the likelihood that independent writers see it and think it worth covering. Sorry for the long winded response, but thanks for the friendly advice and explanation. Hopefully Archie sees it soon and we can work through next steps with your thoughts in mind. — Wug·a·po·des 23:40, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lavender Languages and Linguistics Conference moved to draftspace[edit]

An article you recently created, Lavender Languages and Linguistics Conference, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more high qualioty citations from reliable, independent sources, or alternative , to have some of the content moved to an existing article. I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can work on this with minimal disruption. DGG ( talk ) 00:00, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Lavender Languages and Linguistics Conference[edit]

Hello, Archiecrowley. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Lavender Languages and Linguistics Conference, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 23:03, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Licensing for "COZIL’s 2nd Annual Pride Month Wikipedia Edit-a-thon"[edit]

Hi Archiecrowley! Hope you're having a wonderful summer or winter. Could I get a confirmation that "COZIL’s 2nd Annual Pride Month Wikipedia Edit-a-thon" can be republished on The Signpost and is licensed under CC-BY-SA 3.0 (both your contributions and Ananthanarayan's)? Thanks so much! 🐶 EpicPupper ^{(he/him | talk)} 01:43, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started[edit]

Hello, Archiecrowley. Thank you for creating Lal Zimman. User:Pyrrho the Skipper, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for your contribution. Please add references from independent sources, as most sources in this article are primary.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Pyrrho the Skipper}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Pyrrho the Skipper (talk) 18:13, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]