User talk:JMWalden

Welcome!

Hello, JMWalden, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! --David Biddulph (talk) 17:42, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Gene Van Dyke (March 24)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Onel5969 was:

The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you.

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.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Gene Van Dyke and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:02, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! JMWalden, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that 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! Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:02, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Gene Van Dyke has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Gene Van Dyke. Thanks! SwisterTwister talk 17:17, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Gene Van Dyke has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Gene Van Dyke. Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 22:25, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Gene Van Dyke (April 4)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by LaMona 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 they left was:

WP articles are for facts only. Language like: "Van Dyke set a course in the late 1960’" "Van Dyke became intrigued by deep water potential" "At an early age, he developed an entrepreneurial work ethic," are not neutral in tone. In addition, only those already familiar with the topic will understand "He drilled and developed plays in North Texas " - you need to define this use of "plays". That he was a boy scout is irrelevant -- only include information that speaks to his notability.

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.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Gene Van Dyke and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

LaMona (talk) 00:20, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Gene Van Dyke (April 28)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by 333-blue 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:

And copy edit som mor.

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.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Gene Van Dyke and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

333 -blue 23:08, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Gene Van Dyke (June 28)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Primefac was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of people and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

The comment the reviewer left was:

This is a draft of contradictions. It says he's a great oilman, but most of the sources say he never really struck it rich. The fields he found in TX and LA are hardly worth mentioning (i.e. I can't find much mention online of these fields, who found them, etc). That being said, this source actually says that Union Oil and Gas found Lake Arthur Field. He may have more drilling rights than everyone else, but if he never finds oil he's just an old man buying land. I'll be honest, the lack of online sources makes it difficult (as I cannot check the offline sources), but there just doesn't seem to be enough coverage to meet The Golden Rule. Please add additional independent reliable sources that discuss the subject in detail.

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.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Gene Van Dyke and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Primefac (talk) 19:15, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Gene Van Dyke

Hello, JMWalden. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "Gene Van Dyke".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, 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. 1989 (talk) 00:36, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]