User talk:Mr Blumenthal

Welcome! and note on 'hospice'

Hi Mr Blumenthal, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like it here and decide to stay. Our intro page provides helpful information for new users—please check it out! If you have any questions, you can get help from experienced editors at the Teahouse. One other thing: I am surprised that you "don't know of any dialect of English in which the article can be removed from" in hospice. It's rather common in the US. Of course, there is nothing wrong with the example in hospital, either. Happy editing! Cnilep (talk) 02:11, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the welcome, and thanks for letting me know! The only reason I changed it was because the article made it sound like 'in hospice' was an example lifted from British English, where I'm fairly certain that wouldn't be said. Mr Blumenthal (talk) 17:37, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Ghost Boys (novel) has been accepted

Ghost Boys (novel), 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 Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class 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!

echidnaLives - talk - edits 03:43, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Text World Theory (February 19)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Urban Versis 32 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.

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:Text World Theory 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.

Urban Versis 32^KB ⚡ ^{(talk / contribs)} 16:57, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Mr Blumenthal! 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! Urban Versis 32^KB ⚡ ^{(talk / contribs)} 16:57, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Text world theory has been accepted

Text world theory, 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 Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class 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!

Geardona (talk to me?) 20:49, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

March 2024

Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to Memory (Cats song), it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. Thank you. Binksternet (talk) 18:52, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for confirming. I thought I saw that the citation for the lyrical influences from the "Rhapsody on a Windy Night" was also directly from the Eliot poem so I assumed that would suffice for the prelude. I must have been mistaken. Thanks for flagging and removing. Mr Blumenthal (talk) 20:07, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the response. I took another look at the page and trimmed it further, as comparisons between the musical and the poetry should be made by WP:SECONDARY sources. I also took out some less important cover versions, per WP:SONGCOVER. Binksternet (talk) 21:20, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for all of this. If it isn't cheeky to ask (and please just ignore me if it is), do you have any advice surrounding the Buzzfeed Unsolved page? The sources seem largely either poor or nonexistent, and I wanted to clear it up but didn't even really know where to begin (other than rewriting large sections and removing others). I have made a comment on the talk page but haven't heard back- would you just wait for a response there? It seems someone else had similar concerns a couple of years ago and nobody ever replied to their talk page response. Thanks :) Mr Blumenthal (talk) 22:29, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will reply over there at Talk:BuzzFeed Unsolved. You have valid concerns. Binksternet (talk) 00:20, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]