User talk:Pcourteau123

This is Pcourteau123's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Arthur Greenleaf Holmes (April 23)

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

The comment the reviewer left was:

Does not meet WP:ENT, not clear how this person is Wikipedia 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:Arthur Greenleaf Holmes and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Arthur Greenleaf Holmes, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, 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.

AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 01:02, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Pcourteau123! 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! AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 01:02, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Arthur Greenleaf Holmes (May 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 AngusWOOF 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.

The comment the reviewer left was:

That's fine if he's popular as a character. The article title can still be about the character. The issue is that he needs more news coverage. Compare to the Larry Bud Melman and Triumph the Insult Comic Dog which are mostly about fictional personas.

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:Arthur Greenleaf Holmes and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Arthur Greenleaf Holmes, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, 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.

AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 18:26, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nominating Articles for Deletion

Hi! I noticed you nominated 6 articles for deletion in an 8 minute span, and wanted to be sure you were aware of the Wikipedia deletion policy, especially WP:BEFORE. From WP:NEXIST: "The absence of sources or citations in an article (as distinct from the non-existence of sources) does not indicate that a subject is not notable. Notability requires only the existence of suitable independent, reliable sources, not their immediate presence or citation in an article. Editors evaluating notability should consider not only any sources currently named in an article, but also the possibility or existence of notability-indicating sources that are not currently named in the article." Did you carry out the expected checks before the nominations? Orville1974 (talk) 23:54, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dealing with dead links

When you encounter a dead link in an article, such as [[1]] , please do not remove it. An archive of the link may exist on the Internet Archive, or possibly on the original site. You may be able to fix the broken link by going to the article's history page and clicking on the blue text "Fix dead links" or by visiting https://tools.wmflabs.org/iabot/index.php Alternatively, visit the Internet Archive at https://web.archive.org and submit the broken link. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 03:49, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Arthur Greenleaf Holmes concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Arthur Greenleaf Holmes, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 23:14, 19 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Arthur Greenleaf Holmes

Hello, Pcourteau123. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Arthur Greenleaf Holmes".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia 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}}, {{db-draft}}, 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.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! CodeLyoko^talk 21:51, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

October 2020

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Atlanta Braves, you may be blocked from editing. Several editors have removed your addition and you continue to ignore direction. Please start a discussion in talk if you disagree with the editors. Nemov (talk) 23:38, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Blah blah blah... Pcourteau123 (talk) 01:25, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

October 2022

Hello, I'm DarkAudit. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to McGirr—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. DarkAudit (talk) 01:44, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to McGirr. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. DarkAudit (talk) 01:53, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

it was not vandalism. david mcgirr, who i know personally, really was mayor of huron south dakota twice. how is adding that info not constructive? i was adding factual info. Pcourteau123 (talk) 01:57, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It is generally considered bad form to include redlinked names into a list like this, and at first glance, mayor of such a small town would not pass the general notability guideline. So while it may not be completely vandalism, it is still not a proper edit. DarkAudit (talk) 02:06, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

his reference is no less significant than any of those other people listed who no one has ever heard of. youre being unnecessarily picky for no reason. Pcourteau123 (talk) 02:23, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A subject has to pass the general notability guidelines, and in this case, the politician guidelines. Again, it is not immediately apparent that he is notable enough to pass that test. DarkAudit (talk) 04:42, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

and thats totally fine. i agree, he's not super famous. MY point is that he's still no LESS significant than any of the other no-name douchebags on that list that no ones ever heard of. clearly that list was put together by someone with very strong leanings towards british/australian/new zealand sympathies and while thats not necessarily a bad thing, some jackass who played cricket in 1930 is somehow so important that HE gets put on the list? another guy who played cricket in the 19th century is SO important as to be included? really? it just proves my point: its completely arbitrary how anyone makes the list. roll the dice, flip a coin, theres no rationale to it. Pcourteau123 (talk) 16:26, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Great Uncle

Can I ask why you keep reverting this despite being pointed to the evidence that A) a great uncle is indeed a thing and B) is more used than grand uncle (which in Ireland would actually be a generation higher anyway?) Even the dictionary definition for grand uncle states it's another term for great uncle. Additionally there is the fact that you are changing the English version against WP:ENGVAR. Just because you personally don't use the term doesn't mean it doesn't exist, and in fact the term you are insisting on inserting which is not a common term in the English variation for the article, is also less used than the great uncle. At this point it comes across that you are being deliberately disruptive. Canterbury Tail talk 17:39, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

youre an idiot. just because lots of people use the wrong term doesnt make it correct. right is right and wrong is wrong. unfortunately there are so many dipshits in the world who do the wrong thing that other dipshits assume its right. oh well, cant fix stupid. Pcourteau123 (talk) 17:52, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

July 2023

Please stop attacking other editors. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. This edit[2] is unacceptable. Nemov (talk) 17:56, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

wah wah wah. Pcourteau123 (talk) 03:34, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:57, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Harry S

Hello, an interesting amount of time. Anyway, I checked the 'S.' reasoning in Harry S. Truman and it makes sense, even though I agree that accuracy is important. He did sign autographs with the period, although I wonder how often or consistent. The Talk:Harry S. Truman/FAQ page does give a full description of the whys and sources used concerning the S. An interesting notice page. Thanks for inspiring my reading of it. Randy Kryn (talk) 04:18, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]