User talk:Pdriscoll

November 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm K6ka. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Terry Frost because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, you can use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! K6ka (talk) 00:45, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edits to Third bridge[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Your recent edits to Third bridge added the name of an apparently non-notable entity. In general, a person or organization added to a list should have a pre-existing article to establish notability. If you wish to create such an article, please confirm that your subject is notable according to Wikipedia's notability guideline. Thank you! Materialscientist (talk) 12:02, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Third Bridge (February 27)[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 Theroadislong 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 organizations and companies). 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.

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:Third Bridge 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:Third Bridge, 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 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.

Theroadislong (talk) 13:02, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Pdriscoll! 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! Theroadislong (talk) 13:02, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages![edit]

Hello, Pdriscoll. 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 Nick Moyes (talk) 13:55, 27 February 2019 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest[edit]

Hello, Pdriscoll. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the page Draft:Third Bridge, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:55, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Third Bridge[edit]

Hello, Pdriscoll. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Third Bridge".

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! CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 02:33, 2 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Third Bridge[edit]

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:Third Bridge, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Jack Frost (talk) 11:56, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Pdriscoll (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I am in no way linked to Third Bridge, I am not paid by them and the block is inaccurate. The Third Bridge page is simply lacking. As someone with OCD it simply irritates me that there is a gap that's easily plugged

Decline reason:

Procedural decline only. This unblock request has been open for more than two weeks but has not proven sufficient for any reviewing administrator to take action. You are welcome to request a new block review if you substantially reword your request. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. — Voice of Clam (talk) 11:17, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

You didn't pick Third Bridge at random to edit about. What caused you to edit about that company? 331dot (talk) 10:26, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I used to work there and looked them up, pretty simple really. If I found something else missing, I'd add that too - I'm no wordsmith, surely it would be better for someone to enhance the Draft rather than block it's (attempted) author. I couldn't care less if Third Bridge have a page or not, but if Wikipedia is to be full and exhaustive surely everything should be added?

Wikipedia has articles, not pages, and is not a place to document everything that exists. This is an encyclopedia with criteria for inclusion, called notability. 331dot (talk) 12:24, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Which is cool, so surely if someone makes a mistake, it's better to ask them/ talk to them rather than accuse them (wrongly) of posting an advert and ban them without reason? I also have a question, how comes other business are on here? Thank you :) Pdriscoll (talk) 12:31, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We're asking and talking to you now. It isn't wrong that you posted an advertisement. You don't have to be soliciting or selling something to be advertising, at least on Wikipedia.

Most articles about businesses are written by independent editors wholly unconnected with the topic, by editors who took note of coverage of the business in independent sources and chose to write about it, if it meets the criteria. The vast majority of businesses do not.

There are many articles that do not meet the criteria, for various reasons, and are simply unaddressed yet. We can only address what we know about. You are welcome to, once unblocked, help us out by identifying inappropriate articles for possible action. With well over 6 million articles, we need the help. 331dot (talk) 15:04, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]