User talk:Rowbarton

This is Rowbarton's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (March 30)[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 DoubleGrazing 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 see WP:REFB for advice on referencing using inline citations and footnotes.

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 User:Rowbarton/sandbox 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.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:14, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rowbarton! 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! DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:14, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello back and thank you. I am fortunate to be in my 94th year of life but unfortunately not a whizz kid on a computer and its' language. I struggle with some of the, at times, complex instructions but I still have enough of my marbles to try and improve my submission which I do think is of historical and theistic value to the history of Meaux. My main difficulty is understanding what needs citation - for example a person's probable birthplace might have been mooted and does that need citation? Several things fall into vague categories it seems and I do not want to make the editing annoyingly complicated with 'overkill" or being a bit thick for these people who are doing such a valuable job! Anyway I will keep trying and will use Teahouse if I get stuck. Much of my submission is covered in one historical book and I rely on that for grouping several citations which I hope is OK. but the editor will not want to read a book so I am guessing I have to ID the page as well as the book. I must do as I am told by DoubleGrazing and read WP:REFB again but any help for the above will be thankfully received by an old man doing his best not to be a nuisance!! Rowbarton. Rowbarton (talk) 06:56, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Editing[edit]

As a non-tech nonagenarian I am having a lot of trouble finding my way. I submitted an article on Meaux and the first Protestant church and it was sent back by Double Grazing for revision/ citations. I have worked for hours each day on this but when I finish for the day I complete 'show preview > Explain edit summary > watch this box > Publish page' as instructed but then find when I return next day the additions and amendments do not appear in the text but keep reverting to an earlier page. I have kept abreast by C&P each day's additions but this is obviously not the intent. Can you please tell me where I am going wrong? Rowbarton. Rowbarton (talk) 01:25, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

With this edit [1] you removed all the helpful editing that had been done by other editors to get the draft into some sort of shape ready for acceptance, why did you do that? Theroadislong (talk) 07:27, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comment. As I wrote previously, I am really not up to speed with all that happens in editing and find it very confusing. I assumed that, when I edited and saved, it remained entirely in my private domain until I was ready to submit and, when I re-entered my site next day, I could not find the previous day's saved effort so worked from my notepad and deleted old text and re-pasted each day. I did not realise that others were ABLE even to take an interest leave alone be trying to actively help improve my work and I am both embarrassed and so sorry and offer my profound apologies to all for my clumsiness and ignorance. I will read instructions yet again to see if my ancient brain can grasp it all!! I am not your best example of a Wikipedian I'm afraid. I am pleased to say that I have now managed to submit my final 'best shot' edit for consideration with the citations requested by DoubleGlazing although I suspect it is not in the exact format preferred. I await further commentary or welcome criticism in due course and sincerely thank those of you trying to help this ancient mariner to make port.

Rowbarton. The Fourteen of Meaux. Rowbarton (talk) 08:07, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted your last edit to the draft since it wasn't helpful and accepted your draft, you can see it here The Fourteen of Meaux. Theroadislong (talk) 08:17, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have since completed and forwarded a further submission which I hope has been more acceptable. My understanding is that this is now reviewed further and that I will have some comments on grading in due course. Thank you again for your helpful interest and involvement. Rowbarton "The Fourteen of Meaux". Rowbarton (talk) 07:20, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As explained above and below , your draft has already been accepted, you can see it here The Fourteen of Meaux. I had to revert your previous edit because it removed other editors improvements. Theroadislong (talk) 07:47, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

But my last edit/submission which was acknowledged opened with "In the sixteenth century the teachings of Protestant Reformer John Calvin were fundamental to the Protestant movement in France". The submission attached to your email is an earlier one that I have since reviewed, published and hopefully improved. Rowbarton Rowbarton (talk) 00:42, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Rowbarton Wikipedia can be edited by anyone, it is a collaborative effort, your article was edited on 12 separate occasions since your last edit there which have improved the layout, content and sourcing which previously was not compliant with the the guidelines at WP:MOS. See the history here [2] Theroadislong (talk) 07:42, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: The Fourteen of Meaux has been accepted[edit]

The Fourteen of Meaux, 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 Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class 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.

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

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Theroadislong (talk) 07:30, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Article accepted[edit]

As previously advised above, your article was accepted on 30th April you can see it if you click the link here The Fourteen of Meaux. Successus! Theroadislong (talk) 07:23, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well thank you so much! Successus indeed! Does this mean I need do no more and that the submission is ready to be published in Wikipedia at some future date?

I am sorry to make your road even longer but I sense (with great relief) that the end may be nearer than I dared hope thanks to you and the dedicated team at W. Rowbarton. Rowbarton (talk) 01:34, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Rowbarton As advised multiple times, the draft was accepted/published on 30th April, you can view it here The Fourteen of Meaux.Theroadislong (talk) 08:11, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You do not answer my question. I understand that my draft has been accepted and 'published' but the interpretative Wikipedia meaning of 'published' is not clear to me since it is a term used every time I complete an edit. I was asking if this is final acceptance or does my work now need go through further editing/ ranking/improvement by you or is it approved finally for inclusion at some future date? I am sorry but I seem to be irritating you with my lack of understanding which is the last thing I would wish and creates anxiety. Please leave it at that and again thank you for your kind help in bringing my work to this stage of acceptance. Rowbarton Rowbarton (talk) 11:04, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes this is "final acceptance", though ALL articles can be improved endlessly with further editing by you or others. See Wikipedia:Wikipedia is a work in progress. Theroadislong (talk) 11:51, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. That is splendid news. Take care. Rowbarton. Rowbarton (talk) 11:56, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]