Jump to content

User talk:Lauryndavis

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

Your submission at Articles for creation: Sandy Hudson has been accepted[edit]

Sandy Hudson, 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!

Bkissin (talk) 17:30, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Syrus Marcus Ware (August 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 ReaderofthePack 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:
I restored the history, however this also needs substantial editing for tone. Also, if you were paid or otherwise asked to create this page, you must disclose your conflict of interest.
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.
ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:07, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, Lauryndavis! 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! ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:07, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome![edit]

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

I noticed that one of the first articles you edited 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 of use and our policy on paid editing.

Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

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! ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:07, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi! Let me know on my talk page if you need any help! Offhand the biggest issue with the page is the tone, as it was written from a promotional, non-neutral point of view. If you're coming from a marketing background then this can be harder to pick up on since buzzwords and promotional terms are everyday things that you're used to using. There are also some issues with the sourcing, as some of it didn't back up the claims.
For example, you used a book published in 2014 to back up claims that Ware's article received widespread attention and controversy, however as the article was published in 2020 it won't be able to back up this claim. You also used the article itself for this, which also can't back up the claim of it being widely discussed and debated - you need independent, secondary sources for this. You also want to be careful about the size of the claim, as widespread can be kind of vague since people can have different opinions about what widespread actually means. (IE, it can mean a global or continental scale or it can mean widespread within academia, widespread on the Internet, and so on.) Offhand it looks like it has been discussed, however it doesn't seem like it received the level of discussion claimed in the draft. I don't see any coverage about controversy either, so at most we can say that Ware published an article but that's about it. We also need to be careful about listing article publications in the lead, as this is seen as fairly routine for scholars and activists. There can be a list in the publications section, but it should be limited to the most notable publications (ie, the ones that have received coverage) as otherwise a list can grow fairly long since it can be very common for some to publish a lot. (Some have 200+ articles!)
I am going to try to clean this up some and resubmit it, but I wanted to leave some notes to explain what I'm doing. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:19, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notes[edit]

Here are a list of notes while I was editing:

  • I'm whittling down the lead. This should be a summary of the most majorly notable points of the article. To that end I removed mention of him being a twin, as this is something that isn't really vital-vital.
  • I removed the word "core" since that can be seen as a little promotional. Since he looks to have been a founding member, I'm using that term instead - it's more precise and also carries the implied importance of Ware for BLMT.
  • There's no true need to list academic history in the lead unless there's a lot of independent coverage for this, as it's seen as more of less routine. It's more vital to focus on things like Ware's activism, art, and books.

I may list more as I edit more. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:26, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

More notes:

  • Do you have a list of Ware's upcoming books? We can list those in the bibliography section - I changed the publications section to a bibliography list type of section.
We can also list his most notable publications as well. He has a selected publications list so that may be good to use.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Syrus Marcus Ware has been accepted[edit]

Syrus Marcus Ware, 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 20% 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!

ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:04, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Lauryndavis&oldid=973611686"