User talk:Gregorywall

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Your submission at Articles for creation: Lawrence Marvin Langer (October 11)[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 Gbawden was:
This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
Please reference properly - see WP:REFB
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 when they have been resolved.
Gbawden (talk) 07:13, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Lawrence Marvin Langer has a new comment[edit]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Lawrence Marvin Langer. Thanks! Legacypac (talk) 11:44, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Lawrence Marvin Langer has been accepted[edit]

Lawrence Marvin Langer, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Hell in a Bucket (talk) 04:40, 29 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Editing advice[edit]

Information icon Hello, Gregorywall. I noticed that one of your recent edits added a link to an image on an external website or on your computer, or to a file name that does not exist on Wikipedia's server. For technical and policy reasons it is not possible to use images from external sources on Wikipedia. Most images you find on the internet are copyrighted and cannot be used on Wikipedia, or their use is subject to certain restrictions. If the image meets Wikipedia's image use policy, consider uploading it to Wikipedia yourself or request that someone else upload it. See the image tutorial to learn about wiki syntax used for images. Thank you. PhilKnight (talk) 21:05, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]


copypaste[edit]

Some elements of the Langer article read as if they were copied or WP:close paraphrase from an outside source. This is not permitted. Please check, and rewrite affect parts in your own words--don't just remove a few words, but rewrite those parts entirely. The inities L.e. appear atthe end of the article. What do they stand for? DGG ( talk ) 04:42, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

December 2019[edit]

Information icon Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits, it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. Thank you. Cerebral726 (talk) 16:26, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Help me![edit]

I am about to write a new article on Maui Waui. Parts of the information is from the brother of one of the original growers. If I cite the grower's brother's name and quote him, will that be accepted?

Please help me with...

Gregorywall Gregorywall (talk) 15:53, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Answered on IRC. Praxidicae (talk) 16:11, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Maui Wowie (April 28)[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 Etzedek24 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. 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.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
Needs better sourcing. These should be direct links, not copy-pasted article titles. The Cannabis in Hawaii section is really not needed. Will get in touch with Wikiproject Cannabis to see what they can add.
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 when they have been resolved.
Etzedek24 (I'll talk at ya) (Check my track record) 04:19, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, Gregorywall! Having an article 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! Etzedek24 (I'll talk at ya) (Check my track record) 04:19, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Maui Wowie[edit]

Hello, Gregorywall. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Maui Wowie".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 14:52, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Harvey Feigenbaum (October 25)[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 Passengerpigeon was:
This submission reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Submissions should summarise information in secondary, reliable sources and not contain opinions or original research. Please write about the topic from a neutral point of view in an encyclopedic manner.
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 when they have been resolved.
Passengerpigeon (talk) 17:42, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Harvey Feigenbaum (November 18)[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 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.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
needs independent sources please also read WP:REFB for help with formatting sources correctly.
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 when they have been resolved.
Theroadislong (talk) 16:58, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Harvey Feigenbaum has a new comment[edit]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Harvey Feigenbaum. Thanks! Hitro talk 06:32, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Harvey Feigenbaum (April 3)[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 DGG was:
This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
Needs rewriting. Open words shows excellence , the facts in the article should show it. Every specific fact needs a reference. Don't say "Man consider" - it is necessary o be specific.
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 when they have been resolved.
DGG ( talk ) 20:19, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Motorola[edit]

I want to insert my grandfather's name into the Motorola page as the first person to buy a Motorola radio. Right now it says H.C.Wall. His name was Herbert C. Wall. As proof, I have his obit that identifies him as a Motorola dealer and a letter from Bob Gavin, the son of the original owner of Motorola and former president of Motorola identifying my grandfather as an early contributor to the success of the business. Can I download the obit and letters as proof that H.C.Wall was Herbert C. Wall? Gregorywall (talk) 15:54, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Harvey Feigenbaum has been accepted[edit]

Harvey Feigenbaum, 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.

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.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Missvain (talk) 15:26, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

December 2023[edit]

Information icon Hello. Your recent edit to Bishop Luers High School appears to have added the name of a non-notable entity to a list that normally includes only notable entries. In general, a person, organization or product added to a list should have a pre-existing article before being added to most lists. If you wish to create such an article, please first confirm that the subject qualifies for a separate, stand-alone article according to Wikipedia's notability guideline. Thank you. Meters (talk) 23:48, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewing Draft:George Clyde Hale[edit]

Hi @Gregorywall: I'm reviewing your Hale article and I'm having a hard time establishing notability because of the bare links and references you've used in the article. I've converted some references to some template, but for the news articles, I'm having a tough time verifying that the article isn't original research given the number of patents it cites to (these would be primary sources and would make the article OR). Do you happen to have links to the sources that you've used? I can appreciate that not everything is online; I have access to some historic journal articles, if you can provide more information other than just newspaper publication name and date, I can help with that. I would need the article title and author, this would help in verifying this information. microbiologyMarcus (petri dish·growths) 20:14, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Marcus. I agree that the references need help. I can eliminate #2 because the information is contained in #6. If you could find a link for #6 the rest of the title is "George C. Hale, Ph.D. Biography as issued by The Commanding Officer, W.E. Larned.,Ord. Dept., Picatinny Arsenal, Dover, New Jersey, Dated Dec. 1, 1943 and submitted to John J. O'Connor, Editor, Ordnance Dept., Office of the Chief of Ordnance, Washington, D.C.. I will update #3 which is "1948 Obituaries from The Sullivan Dailey Times on Nov. 11, 1948" where you call Donna K. Adams and she copies a microfilm and then sends you the copy by email. #4 left out the email link that's present in the original draft. #9 I should eliminate this reference too because I just wanted to list all 29 patent numbers and I really only need to reference Patent 2,011,578, Haleite. Can you help with the Larned article and I can eliminate Referenc 2 and Gregorywall (talk) 23:50, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I hit reply to early. I can eliminate doveradvance and all the patent numbers. How do I fix the Sullivan newspaper article and can you find the Larned article? Anything else? Gregorywall (talk) 23:53, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hey @Gregorywall: I'm going to try and touch on all your points below. There's a guide at WP:REFB that explains citations and templates in more detail, but I'm going to try and give personalized advice here as it applies to the Hale article.

Citing patents[edit]

Patents (as primary sources) are okay to be used as citations (see WP:PRIMARY) but can't be the only thing used to support an article; in fact Wikipedia has a template for patents. You can see how I've formatted them in the article <ref>{{cite patent |country=US |number=2011578 |gdate=1935-08-20}}</ref>. You can even include multiple patents within the same <ref> tag so as to not WP:OVERKILL. That might look something like <ref>{{cite patent |country=US |number=2011578 |gdate=1935-08-20}}{{cite patent |country=US |number=1234567 |gdate=1901-01-01}}</ref> which would look like this[1] (notice the "; " for grammar in the list in the references section (that was a madeup patent by the way).

References

  1. ^ US 2011578, issued 1935-08-20 ; US 1111111, issued 1901-01-01 

You can also name sources to use them again later. Adding name = "patent" allows us to cite something once <ref name = "patent">{{cite patent |country=US |number=2011578 |gdate=1935-08-20}}</ref> makes one named reference[1] and we can use it again by invoking <ref name = "patent"/> somewhere else[1] so long as you use the closing "/" Notice the a,b in the reference hyperlinking to the two locations using this same reference. You can see an example where I've already done this once on reference 10 in the Hale article for the military explosives technical manual.

References

  1. ^ a b US 2222222, issued 1901-01-01 

which brings me to my next point...

No need to remove references[edit]

I don't think there's a need to remove any references for anything you've written. I have no doubt that you actually have the hard copies or microfiche of the references you cited. I don't have any reason to doubt you and like I mentioned earlier, there's nothing wrong with using offline sources. You just need to make sure to have cited them properly, this can be done with the {{cite news}} or {{cite journal}} templates. Just like the patents demonstrated above, placing certain information in specific fields in templates will automatically format your references and make it easier for other editors to verify in the future. There's more general info at WP:REFB, and using the citation toolbar easily looks up info based on DOI. Using templates can be tricky though, so feel free to practice in your sandbox.

Cite as much info as you can[edit]

When you use these templates, it's important to identify classic things that help anyone locate the info you're citing such as the article title, the newspaper name, the author (if given) and date. In the event that I can't find it, other editors might be able to find it as well. Your account may be too new, but the Wikipedia Library at wikipedialibrary.wmflabs.org gives great access to sources not traditionally accessible. The email that you mentioned isn't citable (it's most likely a primary source) but the information probably came from somewhere and that can be cited.

I'm going to take a look at the info you provided once I get a chance and fill in the templates and such. I have access to some sources on the wikipedia library so I will also look there.

In the future, feel free to start your reply with the {{ping}} template using {{ping|MicrobiologyMarcus}} so I will be notified of your response.

Thanks, microbiologyMarcus (petri dish·growths) 15:52, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@MicrobiologyMarcus:. Hi Marcus. Thank you for helping to clean up my references. As I mentioned earlier, some of the information I wrote about was contained in 2 or more references so I deleted the dover news article and substituted it with the Larned. I think the changes should tidy up my references. Gregorywall (talk) 18:39, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Gregorywall: I've accepted the article, but there are still some statements of fact about the subject that need additional referencing. You'll find I've tagged these with {{citation needed}} on the article. Thanks for your contributions to the project, happy editing! microbiologyMarcus (petri dish·growths) 19:50, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: George Clyde Hale has been accepted[edit]

George Clyde Hale, 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 B-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a fantastic rating for a new article, and places it among the top 3% of accepted submissions — major kudos to you! 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.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

microbiologyMarcus (petri dish·growths) 19:49, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 9[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited William Harrison Nebergall, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Crest. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 18:03, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Gregorywall&oldid=1218096588"