User talk:Bookleo

Welcome!

Hi Bookleo! I noticed your contributions to Ruben Gallego and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! Marquardtika (talk) 13:50, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

English spelling variations

Please read WP:ENGVAR. You have incorrectly changed several instances of correct spelling based on the article subject to American English spelling. Please don't do that. Schazjmd (talk) 17:01, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, please read WP:INOROUT to understand the use of punctuation with quotation marks in Wikipedia articles. Schazjmd (talk) 17:20, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Will do. Thank you for the heads up. Bookleo (talk) 17:57, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

August 2024

Hi Bookleo! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a specific definition on Wikipedia—it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Thank you. Remsense诉 21:50, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Even if your changes to diction mostly don't change the meaning of sentences, they are changes other editors would generally like to review; ergo please do not mark them as minor. Thanks! Remsense诉 21:55, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Miller Place High School. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. That was not a grammar error. Per the district's website, that school is indeed the only high school. Don't make grammar assumptions that change the meaning of claims. Meters (talk) 21:12, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up. Bookleo (talk) 21:23, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In general, I would characterize edits like the kind you've made to Existence as "not improvements" at best, and potentially reducing clarity on the margins at worst. This is only a litmus test and you still need to use your head, but generally Featured articles and many Good articles do not require this kind of meticulous copyediting for diction, as such issues have already been ironed out and every sentence says what it says the way it does for a good reason. Remsense诉 22:59, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The kinds of changes you're making are sometimes clearly beneficial, but at other times seem more like rigorously enforcing a certain conception of style and parsimony for no clear reason: when this is done across a wide breath of highly visible articles, it can be seen as disruptive. Remsense诉 23:01, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Bookleo. I appreciate your efforts to improve the article Vatican Museums, but some of your edits have been reverted or corrected, in part because your use of English was grammatically incorrect. If you speak a different language more fluently or require assistance, please feel free to ask for help with your proposed edits on the article's talk page. Please don't use an automated tool to alter spelling or grammar if you aren't fluent enough in English to know whether those changes are correct. There are multiple users who would be glad to help you fix grammar-related issues. To find out about other useful contributions you can make to Wikipedia which don't require absolute fluency in English, see Wikipedia:Task Center. Thanks! - Sumanuil. _{(talk to me)} 23:24, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the feedback. I will review my previous edits to ensure I didn't make any unintended errors. Bookleo (talk) 23:38, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have to reiterate what User:Sumanuil said above, but this time in connection with the article Annales school. You made a few changes that were not a net improvement to the article, because a couple of them changed the meaning, probably unintentionally, such as changing the term main source to primary source, which is not acceptable because the latter has a very special meaning. I've undone most of the changes you made in that edit, keeping a couple of the good ones. If you need general help with editing Wikipedia, try the WP:Teahouse. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 23:47, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome

I wanted to welcome you to Wikipedia, and thank you for editing. I do it as a distraction from the "real world" so I know how satisfying it can be. Furthermore, I'm not personally a member of any WikiProject, but I thought you might be interested in the Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors or at least the resources they have linked on their main page to use in improving your copy editing skills. It can take a bit of fumbling around on here until you "get it" (but sometimes I trip up too, after 10 years, LOL). Lalaithan (talk) 02:14, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Lalaithan Thank you for this resource. Bookleo (talk) 11:19, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Simon Shuster (August 27)

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

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.

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:Simon Shuster 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.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:53, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Bookleo! 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! DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:53, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for File:TheShowman BookCover.webp

Thanks for uploading File:TheShowman BookCover.webp. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 14:30, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Bookleo (talk) 15:04, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:TheShowman BookCover.webp

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:TheShowman BookCover.webp. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Salavat (talk) 00:26, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am writing a draft article about a book and want to include the book cover. Should I wait until the article is published to add the photo? Bookleo (talk) 00:58, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: The Showman: Inside the Invasion That Shook the World and Made a Leader of Volodymyr Zelensky has been accepted

The Showman: Inside the Invasion That Shook the World and Made a Leader of Volodymyr Zelensky, 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!

Atlantic306 (talk) 23:03, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Bookleo (talk) 23:58, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

British English

Hi Bookleo, thanks for your useful edits to the MBFR page. Just to note, if a page is using British English (or US English), it's usually best not to amend that unless there's a compelling reason to do so, which in this case I'm not sure that there was. Thanks, Ericoides (talk) 12:22, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for catching that. I will take another look at the article and reverse any edits made in error. Bookleo (talk) 12:26, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:A defence of the constitutions of gov of the USA Book Cover.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:A defence of the constitutions of gov of the USA Book Cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:02, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits to Wolf Hall

Your edits to Wolf Hall seem to been in contravention of the WP policies WP:FICTENSE and WP:ENGVAR. These are well established WP conventions and, furthermore, the second is just good manners for this English author writing a very English novel. You seem to be a very practised editor of topics relating to fiction, so I was surprised to see that you are persisting with this.--AntientNestor (talk) 15:13, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Veronica (2005 Novel) has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Veronica (2005 Novel). Thanks! Atlantic306 (talk) 21:53, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Septology (September 15)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Guessitsavis 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 after they have been resolved.

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

Sincerely, Guessitsavis (she/they) (Talk) 22:04, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Veronica (2005 Novel) has been accepted

Veronica (2005 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!

Dr vulpes (Talk) 05:54, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 16

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The New York Times' 100 Best Books of the 21st Century, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Michael Roth and Marlon James.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:53, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Septology (September 16)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Dcotos 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 after they have been resolved.

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

Dcotos (talk) 17:21, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is this a response to my resubmission earlier today? I ask this because it appears the article remains in the queue for review, as the button for resubmission is unavailable. Please clarify. Bookleo (talk) 21:00, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Septology has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Septology. Thanks! Greenman (talk) 09:22, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Septology (September 18)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by LR.127 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.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Issues have not been fixed since the last decline.

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:Septology 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.

LR.127 (talk) 01:06, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]