User talk:Karyn Huenemann

Karyn Huenemann, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Karyn Huenemann! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:03, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

Help me with citations

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

I am updating a Canadian children's literature author's page, with information she is providing for me in emails. How do I cite that appropriately? Also, what do we need to do to have her page no longer be proclaimed a "stub"?

Karyn Huenemann (talk) 19:37, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Information provided by email is the equivalent of personal knowledge and is not a reliable source. All content on WP:BLPs must be sourced to reliable sources.CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 19:49, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Hi Karyn, citations are intended to allow the reader to verify for themselves that the information in an article is correct. It's fine for a citation to refer to an offline source; we can assume that the reader will be able to find the cited sources in libraries etc if necessary, but we cannot have citations which refer to private email communications, as it's impossible to verify. Citations should be to reliable sources such as newspapers, which have a reputation for fact-checking and editorial oversight. stwalkerster (talk) 19:51, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Karyn Huenemann (talk) 16:00, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Karyn Huenemann, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions.

I noticed that one of the first articles you edited was Kristin Butcher, which appears to be dealing with a topic with which you may have a conflict of interest. In other words, you may find it difficult to write about that topic in a neutral and objective way, because you are, work for, or represent, the subject of that article. Your recent contributions may have already been undone for this very reason.

To reduce the chances of your contributions being undone, you might like to draft your revised article before submission, and then ask me or another editor to proofread it. See our help page on userspace drafts for more details. If the page you created has already been deleted from Wikipedia, but you want to save the content from it to use for that draft, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page.

One rule we do have in connection with conflicts of interest is that accounts used by more than one person will unfortunately be blocked from editing. Wikipedia generally does not allow editors to have usernames which imply that the account belongs to a company or corporation. If you have a username like this, you should request a change of username or create a new account. (A name that identifies the user as an individual within a given organization may be OK.)

In addition, if you receive, or expect to receive, compensation for any contribution you make, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation to comply with our terms our use and policy on paid editing.

Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The plain and simple conflict of interest guide
The five pillars of Wikipedia
Contributing to Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using 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 your question on this page and then place {{Help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 21:36, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problem on Kristin Butcher

Content you added to the above article appears to have been copied from here. Copying text directly from a source is a copyright violation. Unfortunately, for copyright reasons, the content had to be removed. Content you add to Wikipedia should be written in your own words. Please leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:44, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

September 2018

Your recent editing history at Kristin Butcher shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
If you continue edit warring and adding unsourced content, you will be blocked. Also read WP:COI. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 15:16, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Edna Jaques has been accepted

Edna Jaques, 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 C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 21% of accepted submissions — 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!

Spicy (talk) 20:30, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Byrne Hope Sanders has been accepted

Byrne Hope Sanders, 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!

MurielMary (talk) 09:37, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Dora Sanders Carney (April 7)

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

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:Dora Sanders Carney 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.

UtherSRG (talk) 17:09, 7 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please be more specific about what to change? All of these sources are reliable: newspaper articles, published books, autobiographical publications by the dead journalist, and an academic SSCHR and CFI-funded research site, which itself links back to governmental records. Karyn Huenemann (talk) 17:17, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please tell me how to fix this? We would like to have this entry active and linked to Byrne Hope Sanders, as well as a couple of other pertinent sites. We are trying to get as many Canadian women journalists into Wikipedia as possible. Dora Carney is a valid contribution, and this entry is a valid piece of academic research. Karyn Huenemann (talk) 17:54, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Dora Sanders Carney

Hello, Karyn Huenemann. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Dora Sanders Carney, 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) 18:01, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Dora Sanders Carney (September 12)

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

12 of the 16 footnotes here are to either Dora's own memoir or the memoir of her daughter, which are thus not third party sources for the purposes of establishing notability -- and two more are to an archival database that is not a WP:GNG-building source.
People don't get over our inclusion criteria by being the author, or the mother of the author, of content about themselves -- people get over our inclusion criteria by being the subject of reliable source media coverage written by other people. But there are only two footnotes here which meet that standard (#10 Brantford Expositor, #16 Vancouver Sun), and two acceptable sources isn't enough.

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:Dora Sanders Carney 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.

Bearcat (talk) 14:20, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for explaining this to me. Karyn Huenemann (talk) 16:51, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ho;w does an academic database become a "a WP:GNG-building source"? Karyn Huenemann (talk) 16:52, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]