User talk:Mistermchugh

Welcome!

Hello, Mistermchugh, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Draft:Digital Literacy Coach, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 16:56, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Digital Literacy Coach

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Draft:Digital Literacy Coach requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a clear copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from http://doverdlc.blogspot.ca/2014/04/what-is-dlc-what-does-dlc-do.html. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 16:56, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Digital Literacy Coach (December 25)

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

The comment the reviewer left was:

Specifically, this is formatted as a journal report, not an encyclopedia article.

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:Digital Literacy Coach 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.

SwisterTwister talk 04:27, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Digital Literacy Coach (January 22)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by David.moreno72 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.

The comment the reviewer left was:

needs a major rewrite

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:Digital Literacy Coach 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.

David.moreno72 05:31, 22 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Mistermchugh, 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! David.moreno72 05:31, 22 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the chuckle

I´ll have to use "arboreal proximity" sometime. Reminds me of an episode of The West Wing: "What do you want me to say!? "The president, while riding a bicycle, came to a sudden arboreal stop."" Good luck with your editing! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:59, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Digital Literacy Coach (March 5)

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

The comment the reviewer left was:

While changes have been made since the previous review, this still reads too much like an essay and not nearly enough like an encyclopedia.

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:Digital Literacy Coach 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.

Waggie (talk) 21:06, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Digital Literacy Coach (April 6)

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

There are external links in the body of the article. All external links should be moved to the end in a section titled"external links". Also, the first occurrence of the subject name should be in bold (edit it while fixing other problems)

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:Digital Literacy Coach 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.

Yashovardhan (talk) 08:37, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I didn't realise I should avoid using external links, but the guidelines for how and why are rather baffling, so I've removed them, except one which I've formatted as a reference site instead. MisterMcHugh (talk) 10:04, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Digital Literacy Coach (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 Yashovardhan Dhanania 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.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Still wouldn't accept it. I just went through the lead and it still reads like an essay. Needs more improvement to meet Wikipedia standard

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:Digital Literacy Coach 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.

Yashovardhan (talk) 11:12, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Digital Literacy Coach

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Draft:Digital Literacy Coach requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from http://doverdlc.blogspot.ca/2014/04/what-is-dlc-what-does-dlc-do.html. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. ProgrammingGeek^talktome 14:21, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Mistermchugh. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by Yunshui ^雲 _水 11:40, 12 June 2017 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).[reply]

MfD nomination of Draft:Digital Literacy Coach

Draft:Digital Literacy Coach, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Digital Literacy Coach and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Draft:Digital Literacy Coach during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Legacypac (talk) 01:12, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Digital Literacy Coach (June 27)

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

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User:Mistermchugh/Digital Literacy Coach 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.

DrStrauss talk 17:29, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Digital Literacy Coach (September 1)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Narutolovehinata5 was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject—see the general guideline on notability, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1), 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.

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:Digital Literacy Coach 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.

Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 01:44, 1 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Narutolovehinata5 this role is well represented in the literature, but as indicated in the article under a wide variety of terms, so you feel the article can be rejected purely because of nomenclature? See this guy on linked in who I encountered just this week, https://www.linkedin.com/in/gabriel-lucas-514b582/ his role is purely to recruit people in these kinds of roles, and yet you don't feel this deserves an entry on Wikipedia? If I changed the title to 'Ed Tech Coach' would you be happier? It would have more hits in a Google Search, due it's preference as a term in the USA (as opposed to internationally), but I doubt it would be any better represented in the literature. MisterMcHugh (talk) 04:37, 1 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's not because of the article title, but due to an apparent lack coverage of the term "Digital Literacy Coach" itself in reliable sources. There are some in the article but they don't appear to be enough. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 04:53, 1 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I can't win, I have loads but have already been cautioned about not overloading my article with too many references, now you want me to add more references? So frustrating. So if I find more references that you deem to be 'enough' will that suffice? How many do I need to include, I have many. MisterMcHugh (talk) 05:32, 1 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia isn't about winning, it's about contributions. And it's not really about the quantity of the references in the article, but the quality. Generally speaking, it's better to have just enough citations to reliable sources (like books or news sites) than to bombard an article with citations to non-reliable sources (like Blogspot, YouTube videos, or Facebook, for example). While there is a minimum number of references that is encouraged (usually at least one per paragraph), there's no maximum and it really depends on the content anyway. If you're still having trouble, you're free to seek for help and advice at Wikipedia:Help desk or at Wikipedia:Teahouse. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 05:47, 1 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to be bold and suggest you just move the page to mainspace. The move function is often hidden under More on the toolbar at the top. Let it sink or swim in mainspace. Legacypac (talk) 05:50, 1 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea what main space means!

This does come down to nomenclature, and general usage v academic usage, for example: Google searches "digital literacy coach" = 40,300 results "educational technology coach" = 60,000 results

But in Google scholar the former = 16 results, and the latter - 7 results. Maybe you can appreciate my predicament? I'm happy to use either term, but the former (DLC) is the term that is more accurate in terms of etymology, as there really is no such thing as a 'educational' technology—there is only technology, which may or may not be used for educational purposes. MisterMcHugh (talk) 05:56, 1 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mainspace is where normal "articles" live. currently this page is in draftspace. Legacypac (talk) 06:02, 1 September 2017 (UTC) Ah, thanks - OK, I think I've done it, move > Wikipedia, which I'm assuming is main space... MisterMcHugh (talk) 06:10, 1 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Narutolovehinata5 your definition of the term 'reliable sources' seems highly subjective to me, based on the searches above there are plenty for both that go beyond Facebook and YouTube et al. Does the fact that 'educational technology coach' is mentioned in two published books fulfil your definition of 'reliable source' more appropriately? If so I can update the article accordingly. MisterMcHugh (talk) 06:06, 1 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Instructional Technology Coach (October 14)

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

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject—see the general guideline on notability, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1), 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:

Subject is not notable.

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:Instructional Technology Coach 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.

DavidWestT (talk) 16:24, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

DavidWestT I have to ask how you define 'notable'?

A Google search for"instructional technology coach" produces 238,000 results

A Google intitle search: 1370 results

Google Scholar search for "instructional technology coach”:

98 results spanning a wide range of notable, authoritative academic sources

A Google Scholar intitle search - two results, one book, one journal MisterMcHugh (talk) 02:14, 15 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia:Notability DavidWestT (talk) 17:16, 15 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have, which is why I included the evidence above which clearly shows that this subject has, "received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" and so "is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list." --MisterMcHugh (talk) 01:56, 16 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Legacypac Premeditated_Chaos DavidWestT I still have had no reason given why the above evidence would not mean this article is not 'notable' enough. You can clearly see this article is one that has has a great deal of time and effort dedicated to it, and yet you feel your best contribution to this is deletion? --MisterMcHugh (talk) 06:22, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of Draft:Instructional Technology Coach

Draft:Instructional Technology Coach, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Instructional Technology Coach and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Draft:Instructional Technology Coach during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Legacypac (talk) 17:43, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion, the topic as written, did not demonstrate WP:N. Maybe a different approach or better sources? I don't know. You could ask for a WP:REFUND I suppose. Legacypac (talk) 06:47, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]