User talk:LazyLilac

Reply on Arthur Charles Evans request for help[edit]

Greetings, reply here: Wikipedia:Requests for feedback/2011 March 20. Let me know there if you have further questions. MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:14, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Anthony Charles Robinson (February 12)[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 Onel5969 was:

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.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Anthony Charles Robinson and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
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.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:57, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! LazyLilac, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that 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! Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:57, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Anthony Charles Robinson (March 2)[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 LaMona was:

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.

The comment they left was:

"evangelist" "champion" "appreciated" - totally advertorial.

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:Anthony Charles Robinson and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
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.

LaMona (talk) 01:27, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Anthony Charles Robinson (March 8)[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 Kikichugirl was:

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.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Anthony Charles Robinson and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
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.

— kikichugirl ^oh hello! 23:23, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Anthony Charles Robinson (March 29)[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 LaMona was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of people and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

The comment they left was:

This doesn't explain any of his accomplishments in enough detail to understand why he might be notable. Also, you need to remove primary references plus references to youtube, twitter, and other social media, which cannot be used.

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:Anthony Charles Robinson and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
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.

LaMona (talk) 04:25, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Anthony Charles Robinson (July 8)[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 Tseung Kwan O was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of people and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Notability of subject involved still isn't shown.

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:Anthony Charles Robinson and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
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.

Tseung Kwan O (talk) 23:39, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Anthony Charles Robinson (August 6)[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 LaMona was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of people and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

The comment the reviewer left was:

The references need to be about him, and substantially about him. Entries in lists do not support notability, nor do quotes nor short mentions. A number of the references do not support the text they follow. You should begin with the content of sources and create the article from that, rather than creating the article and then shoe-horning in references that don't have the same content.

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:Anthony Charles Robinson and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
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.

LaMona (talk) 23:10, 6 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Anthony Charles Robinson[edit]

The article Anthony Charles Robinson has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable, reception of OBE is not a notable event and that seems to be the main claim of notability on this subject.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 18:40, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I realise that the references need improvement, but while this article was in edit no-one flagged the references which may be an issue, now it's published I have found that some are not relevant. I am working to improve the references now. LazyLilac (talk) 07:44, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Terms of use[edit]

At Teahouse in March you said you were "a freelance virtual assistant". This puts you squarely in the class of paid editors who must declare not merely that they have a conflict of interest, but must declare on every article to which you contribute the full disclosure required by our Terms of Use, particularly with respect to paid contributions without disclosure. This is not optional, and editors violating the TOU after being notified of them can be and usually are banned. Please go back retrospectively to the work you have done here and make the necessary disclosure. DGG ( talk ) 21:31, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

To be as clear as possible, if you receive any consideration whatsoever, in money or in kind, for the editing you perform, you must at the very least make a statement on your user page listing the articles in question. It is helpful if you make the disclosure on each affected article talk page as well, but you must do at least one of those sooner rather than later, before somebody bans you from Wikipedia. --RexxS (talk) 22:02, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have added the COI to this article, being a new Wikipedia editor means I am not familiar with everything in the terms and conditions, which is why it's only now I have added it. I did not write the article for Anthony Charles Robinson, a copywriter did, he paid me to put it on Wikipedia, I am still not sure if that means I need to declare. Either way it is done now. LazyLilac (talk) 07:41, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, you will need to get them to agree to their text being reused under an open licence; please see WP:OTRS. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:57, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, something else to add to the to-do list. Is there a Creation of Wikipedia pages for Dummies or Wikipedia Rules for Dummies book available? I feel I need these. LazyLilac (talk) 14:45, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The nearest we have is Wikipedia:Your first article. it's not a bad starting point, and don't be afraid to reach out to any of the editors who have posted here for help or advice if you're ever in any doubt about something. --RexxS (talk) 15:19, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I think I read that way back in 2011 when I did my first article... maybe should have done a refresher before I started this one. LazyLilac (talk) 15:20, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

August 2016[edit]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for advertising or self-promoting in violation of the conflict of interest and notability guidelines. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Orange Mike | Talk 21:13, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Orangemike: This block is - especially in the light of the discussion in the preceding section; and the declaration on the article's talk page - utterly unwarranted. Please unblock immediately. And please ensure that your unblock summary notes this. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:24, 13 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

While I believe you may not have been as thorough in your disclosure posts as I would like, I have unblocked you, based on Andy's usually quite sound judgment that you intended full compliance. --Orange Mike | Talk 00:23, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, this was only my second Wikipedia page, the first I did in 2011, so I should have looked up the rules before starting... I won't make that mistake again. LazyLilac (talk) 09:49, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Anthony Charles Robinson for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Anthony Charles Robinson is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anthony Charles Robinson until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 14:53, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Hello, LazyLilac. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]