User talk:MrsConnaught

Welcome![edit]

Hello, MrsConnaught, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

Introduction
The five pillars of Wikipedia
How to edit a page
How to write a great article
Simplified Manual of Style
Your first article
Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community
Feel free to make test edits in the sandbox
and check out the Task Center, for ideas about what to work on.

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 need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome! Nath1991 (talk) 01:04, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: John Charles Wright (April 21)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Dan arndt were:

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 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.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Fails WP:ANYBIO - lacks any verifiable sources that establish notability. Following a review of the sources provided none of which include any specific references to John Charles Wright or Princess Lizzie.

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:John Charles Wright 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.

Dan arndt (talk) 04:41, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dan, thank you for the message.

I have now added the link with the mention of John Charles Wright's name.

There are other articles, please kindly assist in adding these.

Many thanks

Alice MrsConnaught (talk) 11:33, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@MrsConnaught: Self-published sources (including social media, forums and self-uploading image hosts) are not reliable sources. A source is considered reliable only if it has an established reputation for fact-checking and editorial oversight. This heavily favours mainstream news organizations, academic press, and reputable publishers of newspapers, books and magazines. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 13:23, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Drm310,

There are other sources I have found are on websites. I dont know how to link that in the article. I will add more sources as I do the research.

Many thanks

Alice MrsConnaught (talk) 16:32, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, MrsConnaught! 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! Dan arndt (talk) 04:41, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Prince Joe Duncan Wright moved to draftspace[edit]

An article you recently created, Prince Joe Duncan Wright, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Mccapra (talk) 22:55, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mccapra,

Prince Joe Duncan Wright is the son of Prince John Charles Wright and Princess Lizzy. I was unable to add this link, could you assist. John Charles Wright which is on everybody wiki MrsConnaught (talk) 23:50, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Prince George Garnet Wright moved to draftspace[edit]

An article you recently created, Prince George Garnet Wright, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Bbb23 (talk) 00:46, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:John Charles Wright[edit]

Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, introducing hoaxes, such as Draft:John Charles Wright, is considered to be vandalism and is prohibited. If you are interested in how accurate Wikipedia is, a more constructive test method would be to try to find inaccurate statements that are already in Wikipedia—and then to correct them if possible. If you would like to make test edits, please use the sandbox. Under section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, the page has been nominated for deletion. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges.

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 deleted 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. Bbb23 (talk) 00:52, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, the person John Charles Wright is not a hoax. He was is a real person who was born in 1926 and died in 2004. I obtained record from the birth, records office showing this person existed. MrsConnaught (talk) 09:36, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Joe Duncan Wright[edit]

Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, introducing hoaxes, such as Draft:Joe Duncan Wright, is considered to be vandalism and is prohibited. If you are interested in how accurate Wikipedia is, a more constructive test method would be to try to find inaccurate statements that are already in Wikipedia—and then to correct them if possible. If you would like to make test edits, please use the sandbox. Under section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, the page has been nominated for deletion. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges.

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 deleted 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. —Kusma (talk) 10:59, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Prince George Garnet Wright[edit]

Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, introducing hoaxes, such as Draft:Prince George Garnet Wright, is considered to be vandalism and is prohibited. If you are interested in how accurate Wikipedia is, a more constructive test method would be to try to find inaccurate statements that are already in Wikipedia—and then to correct them if possible. If you would like to make test edits, please use the sandbox. Under section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, the page has been nominated for deletion. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges.

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 deleted 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. —Kusma (talk) 10:59, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May 2023[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text at the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 13:04, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As a dyslexic member of society , wikipedia is unaware that not all members of society can naviagate the site easily. I am happy to use social media to show that this is not a disability friendly publication site. Thank you. MrsConnaught (talk) 13:08, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia does what it can to accomodate users with disabilities, but such efforts can always be improved. However, if an editor's condition affects their ability to edit to the point of disruption, the editor must be blocked to protect the project. I'm not sure how any condition you have is relevant to the block- your edits seemed to be adding hoax topics. Please request unblock by following the instructions above. 331dot (talk) 13:55, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi thank you for your response. Wikipedia can do more to assist members of the community with disability. That's just it, the lack of awareness of how to help users such as myself is creating an unhealthy environment for disabled users who are not always able to navigate the site as easily. '' I'm not sure how any condition you have is relevant to the block- your edits seemed to be adding hoax topics.'' That in itself is a very worrying statement. I explained in the previous messages that I needed assistance, none of which were acknowledged. MrsConnaught (talk) 14:10, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's being acknowledged now. Please make an unblock request to explain how the topic is not a hoax. I'm not presently in a position to examine this matter further, but an unblock request will draw attention. 331dot (talk) 14:15, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I appreciate the time your have taken to assist. Good day. MrsConnaught (talk) 14:20, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can the DeltaQuadBot email be please resent to me.? MrsConnaught (talk) 14:32, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can the DeltaQuadBot email be please resent to me on the email.? MrsConnaught (talk) 15:22, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am unaware what email that may be, but perhaps @AmandaNP knows. —Kusma (talk) 16:05, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I will try AmandaNP MrsConnaught (talk) 19:56, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@AmandaNP Can the DeltaQuadBot email be please resent to me on the email? MrsConnaught (talk) 19:59, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't keep an active log of emails, and I believe with UTRS (the only thing from my bot that sends mail) you can get up to three different emails. So I need to know which one you need resent. -- Amanda (she/her) 21:42, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please resend it to this email, thanks

thegirlwhowillalwaysloveyou at gmail com MrsConnaught (talk) 12:00, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe that Amanda was asking you which e-mail address to send it to but which e-mail.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:11, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That is to say, she was asking which email to resend. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:39, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, its the DeltaQuadBot email that I want resent to me. Thanks MrsConnaught (talk) 21:07, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Could you narrow it down? Can you say what it was about? -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:20, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Its about unblocking the wiki editing and to make sure that the pages for Charles Charles Wright, Joe Duncan Wright and Prince George Garnet's pages are not deleted. Many thanks. I sent an unblock request and I was sent a DeltaQuadbot email, which I need to be resent to the email I can access as I forgot my email password for my other email MrsConnaught (talk) 12:00, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

DFO waves at AmandaNP to let her know. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 12:03, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, so all three emails would be related to your UTRS unblock request, so that's no help. My bot also sends the email through the email you set on Wikipedia. So let me try and make this easy. Your UTRS request was declined with "As you still have access to your talk page, and as there is no private information associated with your appeal, please post your unblock request to your user talk page for administrator review. You can follow the guide at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Guide_to_appealing_blocks." The other email you could have potentially received was the appeal key email, which is rendered useless anyway because your appeal is already closed and only says what I have written above. The third potential email I can't even remember and would have to look through the code for. Maybe this is a hint I need to log and have an interface of emails sent. If you need further information, let me know with specifics, but that should suffice. -- Amanda (she/her) 15:19, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]