User talk:Cacatcat10

Welcome!

Hi Cacatcat10! I noticed your contributions 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

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! Gleeanon409 (talk) 09:42, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Jim Eigo (September 17)

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:BIO.

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:Jim Eigo 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:Jim Eigo, 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 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, 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.

Clarityfiend (talk) 04:01, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Cacatcat10! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Clarityfiend (talk) 04:01, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Jim Eigo

Hello, Cacatcat10. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Jim Eigo".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Ə XPLICIT 07:13, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: The Daniels House (July 5)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by S0091 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. 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 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 the reviewer left was:

Many of the sources are unreliable (blogs, Haunted Happenings, etc.) and the link to Historic Salem Inc. does not work and the reference details are unclear (publisher, the relevant page numbers, when published, etc.). Please also see the notability guidelines for buildings.

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:The Daniels House 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:The Daniels House, 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.

S0091 (talk) 01:03, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Important notice

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 articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. 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.

~ ToBeFree (talk) 17:12, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ToBeFree - I added information to the page on 4/24, and it was removed on 4/28 because it required more sources. I added in more sources on 7/2 which were promptly removed by an unidentified user on 7/6. I added them back on 7/7 because I thought was an error, then an unidentified user removed them on 7/7 citing harassment. I added them back on 7/7 because they are from trusted news sources, including a quotation by Stanley himself to Yale Daily News. I have since not edited the page. Unidentified users seem to want/not want this information on his page, despite a direct quotation from a trusted source by Stanley himself as to the importance of his Twitter account. It looks as if several other editors, unidentified and identified, are taking this up and going back and forth with each other, for which I have and want no part. But the claim of harassment made by the unidentified users is unjustified. Cacatcat10 (talk) 17:38, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, that's understandable. No worries about the efforts for providing verifiable content with citations. Please note though that combining sources into something neither source said is a form of (prohibited) original research on Wikipedia. Also, Wikipedia articles should be based mostly on secondary sources, not primary sources like Twitter posts. It is thus reasonable to keep the material removed if it is based only on original research and primary self-published sources.

Regarding harassment claims, I haven't been investigating these, and my messages are unrelated to such claims.

You may like to discuss the content on the article's talk page, Talk:Jason Stanley, simply by clicking "New section" there and providing reasons for re-adding the content. However, if I see correctly, it does seem to be incompatible with policies as described above. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 17:51, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ToBeFree - Thanks for your response. I certainly don't want to get into an edit war. I am still pretty new to this, so I may try the talk page when if I have time. Cacatcat10 (talk) 17:54, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Feel free to remove the red warning above (or any message you like to); it was only for your information and is not meant to be a permanent wall of shame. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:05, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hah! Thanks. I don't know how to remove it. I will look into it. Still figuring all of this stuff out. Thanks for your kind messages. Cacatcat10 (talk) 18:07, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:The Daniels House

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:The Daniels House 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://thingstodoinsalem.com/index.php/2022/06/27/the-daniels-house-salem-ma-a-review/ and https://www.danielshousesalem.com/about. 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. Jalen Folf (talk) 23:28, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: L. Peter Callender has been accepted

L. Peter Callender, 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!

S0091 (talk) 18:24, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]