User talk:Sylvan1971

Welcome!

Hello, Tbliss558, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, like Fund for wild nature, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for page creation, and may soon be deleted (if it hasn't already).

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Ravenswing 00:34, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Fund for wild nature[edit]

A tag has been placed on Fund for wild nature, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Ravenswing 00:34, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

November 2010[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:

editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. -- Rrburke (talk) 02:53, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Robert Piser for deletion[edit]

A discussion has begun about whether the article Robert Piser, which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert Piser until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. -- Rrburke (talk) 03:28, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of The Daily Palette for deletion[edit]

A discussion has begun about whether the article The Daily Palette, which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Daily Palette until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. -- Rrburke (talk) 03:35, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits[edit]

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you must sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 03:04, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

December 2010[edit]

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you must sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. Dloh cierekim 01:51, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback[edit]

Hello, Sylvan1971. You have new messages at Rrburke's talk page.
Message added 02:15, 10 December 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Daily palette prefix:Wikipedia:Deletion review[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.

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and the page that you created has been or soon will be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button that looks like this: which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Reaper Eternal (talk) 00:23, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Daily Palette, afd,[edit]

Hello, Sylvan1971. You have new messages at Dlohcierekim's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Disambiguation link notification for November 27[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Robert Piser, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Berkeley. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:31, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: director) (December 1)[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 TJH2018 was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of people, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1), 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.

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:Richard Levine (writer/director) 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.

TJH2018 talk 17:10, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Tbliss558, 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! TJH2018 talk 17:10, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Richard Levine concern[edit]

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Richard Levine, 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) 01:33, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Richard Levine (writer/director) concern[edit]

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Richard Levine (writer/director), 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) 01:33, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 30[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Imagine (John Lennon album), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Imagine (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:18, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problem on Imagine (John Lennon album)[edit]

Content you added to the above article appears to have been copied from https://www.aetv.com/specials/john-and-yoko-above-us-only-sky, which is not released under a compatible license. Copying text directly from a source is a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policy. Unfortunately, for copyright reasons, the content had to be removed. Content you add to Wikipedia should be written in your own words. Please leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:43, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Richard Levine (director) has been accepted[edit]

Richard Levine (director), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can 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.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

DGG ( talk ) 08:21, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Palmer Report[edit]

Please seek consensus, rather than making the same edit against consensus every few months. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 00:22, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

These use of descriptives such as “fake” are not supported by the references. If you review my changes instead of simply rolling them back, you will see I did not delete or change the opinions of the sources. What I changed was Wikipedia’s statement of fact that some content is “fake.” This is far from the neutral dictionary Wikipedia is intended to be. It smacks of political bias. Please undo your undo. Tbliss558 (talk) 23:33, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is a strong consensus to use that label. The are numerous discussions with analysis of sources in the talk page archives. The onus is on you to get consensus for the change you'd like to make. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:36, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have any evidence of this supposed "consensus"? The onus is on you to provide it - if it exists.

My edits reflect the fact that I am simply looking for a neutral tone. You appear to have an axe to grind.

Where do you derive your authority for inserting personal opinion into an article? Tbliss558 (talk) 17:58, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Palmer_Report/Archive_3#Semi-protected_edit_request_on_22_August_2021

Talk:Palmer_Report/Archive_4 - Pretty much that whole archive

Talk:Palmer_Report/Archive_5 - Most of this archive

Talk:Palmer_Report#Would_appreciate_certain_editors_stopping_the_personal_attacks_like_calling_Palmer_Report_Russia-phobic_and_Nazis.

Any further discussion should take place on the article talk page. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:56, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No “consensus” found. Opinion only. Tbliss558 (talk) 15:19, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Palmer_Report Tbliss558 (talk) 15:28, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

American politics discretionary sanctions[edit]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:41, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bruce Ryan (May 31)[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 Robert McClenon was:

The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you.

The comment the reviewer left was:

See Referencing for Beginners and the instructions on footnotes. In-line citations are required in biographies of living persons.

Please revise this draft with properly formatted footnotes before resubmitting. You may ask for advice on references at the Teahouse.

This draft has no references. Notability cannot be established without references.

Do not resubmit this draft without references. You can ask for advice about references at the Teahouse.

The title of this draft either has been disambiguated or will require disambiguation if accepted. If this draft is accepted, a hatnote will need to be added to the primary page to refer to this page. If there is already a hatnote on the primary page, please review whether a disambiguation page is in order instead.

The primary page is Bruce Ryan.

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:Bruce Ryan 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:Bruce Ryan, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" 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 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.

Robert McClenon (talk) 02:30, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

working on citations; didn't expect it to be reviewed immediately Tbliss558 (talk) 23:53, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bruce Ryan (June 1)[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 KylieTastic were:

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 people). 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.

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:

Note IMDB is not a reliable source see WP:IMDB - please remove and replace

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:Bruce Ryan 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:Bruce Ryan, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" 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 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.

KylieTastic (talk) 17:35, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

IMDB is user generated and edited; it's just as reliable, for better or worse, as wikipedia. Tbliss558 (talk) 19:20, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bruce Ryan (production designer) (November 1)[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 Greenman 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:

Please don't waste reviewer's time by resubmitting without addressing previous concerns. The Early life section is still entirely unsourced. Personal life section, entirely unsourced. Since there is unsourced personal life info, please also address WP:COI.

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:Bruce Ryan (production designer) 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.

Greenman (talk) 12:22, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bruce Ryan (production designer) (January 4)[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 TheChunky were:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
reliable
secondary
independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

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 people). 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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Bruce Ryan (production designer) 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.

❯❯❯ Chunky aka Al Kashmiri (✍️) 14:12, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bruce Ryan (production designer) (May 6)[edit]

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Rusalkii was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: No improvements since the previous decline. Every source is either a trivial database entry or has Bruce Ryan mentioned in one line - there is no substantive coverage here at all. If you don't have any additional sources with at least 2-3 paragraphs about Bruce Ryan, specifically, it will just continue to be declined, wasting your and our time.

Rusalkii (talk) 18:20, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Bruce Ryan (production designer)[edit]

Hello, Sylvan1971. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Bruce Ryan (production designer), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 19:02, 6 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Laura Bliss (October 18)[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 Greenman were:

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.

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 people). 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.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Sources need to be independent to help establish notability. Sources need to correctly verify statements, for example the claim that she founded Maplab leads to the front page of that website, which makes no such claim.

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:Laura Bliss 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.

Greenman (talk) 07:29, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Are you serious? I take your point regarding MapLab but you’re saying NYT, The Atlantic, etc aren’t independent or reliable? That’s just wrong. Sylvan1971 (talk) 23:36, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I would edit my initial reply if possible. It was a bit rough and I apologize. I did find and add another citation from Bloomberg that indicates she founded the MapLab newsletter. It's a tweet from Bloomberg, a reliable source, but I would not be surprised if Wikipedia does not consider tweets to be reliable, not matter the tweeter. The other citations are above reproach. Sylvan1971 (talk) 01:29, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Laura Bliss (October 31)[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 Spinster300 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 people). 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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Laura Bliss 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.

Spinster300 (talk) 19:01, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Laura Bliss has a new comment[edit]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Laura Bliss. Thanks! Tagishsimon (talk) 03:08, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Laura Bliss[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:Laura Bliss requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from https://www.laurablisswrites.com/. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

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. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 02:23, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Laura Bliss (November 11)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted because it included copyrighted content, which is not permitted on Wikipedia.

This submission appears to be taken from https://www.laurablisswrites.com/. Wikipedia cannot accept material copied from elsewhere, unless it explicitly and verifiably has been released to the world under a suitably free and compatible copyright license or into the public domain and is written in an acceptable tone—this includes material that you own the copyright to. You should attribute the content of a draft to outside sources, using citations, but copying and pasting or closely paraphrasing sources is not acceptable. The entire draft should be written using your own words and structure.

You are welcome to write an article on the subject, but please do not use copyrighted work.

Draft:Laura Bliss may be deleted at any time unless the copied text is removed. Copyrighted work cannot be allowed to remain on Wikipedia.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page. or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 02:23, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am an I.P. attorney and can assure you that there was no copyright violation. However, if you will please restore the draft (it is, after all, unpublished) I will promptly address the fact that my draft is organized similarly to the external site you referenced. Sylvan1971 (talk) 17:20, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I put many hours into this article and do not have a copy. It's not fair to delete my work without notice. PLEASE restore it as an unpublished draft so I can promptly address your issues. Sylvan1971 (talk) 17:29, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Laura Bliss (November 18)[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 WikiOriginal-9 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 people). 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.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Wikipedia subjects need in-depth coverage (full-length articles, not just passing mentions) in usually at least 3 reliable sources that are not written by or affiliated with 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:Laura Bliss 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.

~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 07:48, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest[edit]

Hello, Sylvan1971. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, 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, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{edit COI}} template);
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest § How to disclose a COI);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam § External link spamming);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to 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 Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. S0091 (talk) 20:53, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Bruce Ryan (production designer)[edit]

First, you need to be transparent about any WP:COIs you have and make the appropriate declarations on your User page. I do think Ryan meets the notability criteria given the awards but it needs a lot of clean up to remove all the puffery and statements that fail verifiability thus violates WP:BLP so is not in an acceptable state. If you do these things, leave a note on my talk page and I will review the draft. And, yes, Wikipedia is inconsistent for various reasons and in many ways that is a feature rather than bug (i.e. policies/guidelines/norms change, we are humans, etc.) yet also can be unfair or at the very least annoying. S0091 (talk) 21:38, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the helpful suggestions and advice you gave with respect to the Bruce Ryan page. I endeavored to make the changes you suggested, removing unverifiable or subjective information (based on IMDB credits which Wikipedia chooses not to recognize). Please review at your convenience and let me know if you think it needs additional revision or can be moved along the publication process. Thanks again. Sylvan1971 (talk) 22:20, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also address your COIs. For the draft there are still unsourced statements and Def Poetry Jam was not his show. IMDB is not a reliable source because users can update profiles and they do not fact check (same with Discogs). I will use IMDB for hints (not as source) when looking for potential sources, though. For example, I research a particular claim to see if I can find a reliable source like the AFI catalog or news sources. S0091 (talk) 22:37, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reply. Ryan indeed designed the Def Poetry Jam. I’ll add an appropriate source. Sylvan1971 (talk) 16:16, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your prompt reply. Ryan did indeed design the Broadway (and touring) Def Poetry Jam. The source I noted (not IMDB; as I wrote earlier, I know IMDB disallows this source) indicates this. I have 5 other sources confirming this. Perhaps you are thinking of the tv series. Please advise regarding "unsourced statement." Thanks again. Sylvan1971 (talk) 01:43, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Bruce Ryan (production designer) has a new comment[edit]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Bruce Ryan (production designer). Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 17:02, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comments. I have addressed them by removing/replacing sources to which you objected. Sylvan1971 (talk) 19:24, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Bruce Ryan (production designer) has a new comment[edit]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Bruce Ryan (production designer). Thanks! S0091 (talk) 19:31, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is no COI with respect to this page. (There is a COI with respect to another article I am editing and I will address that separately.) Your accusation of a "history" of "multiple COIs" is without foundation and borders on libel. Please retract it. Sylvan1971 (talk) 19:48, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Be careful about using language like "libel" as that could be construed as a legal threat (read that) which is a blockable offense but I don't think that is your intention. I could lay out your history, the connections across articles you have edited and another account which dates back to 2008 (not your name change, another account which shares the name of an article you created) but I don't want to to do that. I engaged with you in good faith, stated you needed to disclose three times yet your ignored it time and again. You do not need to disclose who you are or the specifics behind the COIs, only that you do. First confirm you have read WP:COI and relating specifically to Bruce Ryan, please confirm you do not know him/have any affiliation with him that meets the definition. S0091 (talk) 20:41, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As I wrote in my message directly above, there is no COI relating to Bruce Ryan.

I am not aware of a COI dating to 2008 or elsewhere (except one, as noted above). If you are, please let me know and I will do my best to address. Perhaps you are referring to Fund for Wild Nature, a 501(c)(3) I briefly and modestly supported 15 years ago ago and was surprised at that time to find Wikipedia did not have an article about. So I submitted one, which has been reviewed and edited by other editors 45 times in the 15 years since that time. In good faith, I have no connection with the organization and do not believe there was ever a COI.

I do not have another Wikipedia account so please let me know what you refer to by "another account which shares the name of an article you created."

Finally, my name change was simply to become less identifiable, as are most editors including yourself. It's no secret; it's obvious to any editor who chooses to look at my history.

In closing, I do appreciate your engagement and hope we can move forward with the Bruce Ryan article, one issue at a time. This dialog is intended to demonstrate I am trying to meet Wikipedia's standards. Thank you. Sylvan1971 (talk) 00:39, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Laura Bliss (April 21)[edit]

Your recent article submission has been rejected and cannot be resubmitted. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Sirdog was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: All 4 prior declines indicate that the sourcing present is insufficient as it does not meet the standard of our notability criteria, being that they are reliable sources which provide significant coverage to Laura Bliss and of which are completely disconnected from her. Almost every source is material that Laura has written or co-written, with most other sources being interviews (which are non-independent) or are otherwise being unrelated to her. Based on me doing a cursory search online, I cannot find any sourcing which may satisfy our notability. Thus, I am unfortunately going to reject this draft. If the draft submitter can find 3 sources which they believe meet our notability standards, and can explain how they do so on my talk page, I will reverse my rejection.

—Sirdog (talk) 05:34, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your response. I will respond substantively soon but, in the meantime, as a longtime editor myself, I’m respectfully asking you to rescind “cannot be resubmitted.” I don’t see a basis for prohibiting resubmission; it’s unnecessarily harsh and verges on punitive. Thank you. Sylvan1971 (talk) 05:34, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The "cannot be resubmitted" is because, after reviewing the article, available sourcing online, and the 3 declines on the basis of inadequate sourcing, I've made the determination that it is likely the topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia and rejected the article. This is bureaucratically different then a decline in that it stops the draft from being re-submitted, since if the topic is not notable, no amount of writing will overcome that problem and thus continuing to submit is not a productive use of editor time.

This is not at all meant to be punitive, though I can sympathize that it comes off that way. As mentioned above, if you provide 2-3 sources which meet notability standards and thus show me that I am incorrect in my assertion regarding the subject's notability, I will reverse the rejection. —Sirdog (talk) 07:45, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciate the quick reply and explanation. The article has been substantially revised since its prior rejections. I will revert to you point by point soon. Thanks again. Sylvan1971 (talk) 21:00, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your review of this draft article. As I mentioned last month, here is a detailed response to your decline, in which you generously invited an appeal. I want to start by noting that the previous declines are not entirely relevant in that the article has been revised ab initio subsequent to those declines. In addition, and with all due respect to those editors, some of the comments appear to be based on an overly hasty review of the draft. There were, and remain, many “reliable sources not written by or affiliated with the subject.”

Sources which meet notability (reliable and significant):

1. Employment as a staff writer and editor by The Atlantic and Bloomberg, in and of itself, demonstrates the subject’s output and expertise has been rigorously, independently and objectively evaluated. The same can be said for each publication that has published the subject’s writing. Most of these sources (e.g., New York Times, etc.) are widely considered reliable and are cited throughout Wikipedia and elsewhere.

2. Being sought out as a speaker on television and radio and in various public venues (e.g., N.Y.U., Boston Public Library, Columbia University, M.I.T., etc.) likewise demonstrates that the subject’s output and expertise has been independently verified and objectively evaluated. The sources referenced meet the standard of reliability.

3. The subject was named a Pulitzer Prize finalist yesterday. This is reflected in the current draft. This is a textbook example of notability.

4. Earlier in 2024 I added a reference to the selection of the subject’s investigative piece as (a) a semifinalist for Harvard Kennedy’s School’s Goldsmith Prize for Investigative Reporting and (b) a Best in Business honoree for the Society for Advanced Business Editing and Writing. These reliable, disconnected sources meet the standard of notability.

5. The subject’s selection for an M.I.T. Knight Science Journalism Fellowship demonstrates the subject’s output and expertise has been rigorously, independently, and objectively evaluated by a reliable source.

6. Selection and publication of the subject’s book by Hachette, one of the world’s five largest publishing houses, demonstrates rigorous, independent, and objective evaluation of the subject’s output by a reliable source.

7. Selection and publication of the subject’s podcast (itself based on an independently published investigative piece written by the subject) by iHeart Radio, a unit of the largest radio broadcaster in the United States, demonstrates rigorous, independent, and objective evaluation of the subject’s output by a reliable source.

Thank you again for taking the time to review this draft. I look forward to your comments. By the way, if you can improve the draft, have at it! Sylvan1971 (talk) 23:14, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. You should also be aware that the subject's work is already referenced in Wikipedia five times (not that I would cite them!): 1. Coworking 2. Remote work 3. Transportation safety in the United States 4. Catherine Haussard 5. Elisabeth Haussard. It would be useful to be able to cross reference to a page about the subject and their work. In fact, if you search Wikipedia for the subject, you will be invited to create a page about them. Sylvan1971 (talk) 23:34, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's nice to hear from you again, Sylvan1971. I just wanted to respond to ensure you don't feel like I am ignoring you. However, a recent legal obligation will result in me probably being unable to review the material above until, in a worst case scenario, the evening of May 16th, and in a best case scenario, this weekend. Please be patient with me. —Sirdog (talk) 02:24, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]