User talk:Cashewseed

Welcome

Hello, Cashewseed, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask at the help desk, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! KylieTastic (talk) 18:12, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
Introduction Contributing to Wikipedia The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page Intuitive guide to Wikipedia
Finding your way around
Table of contents Directories and indexes Department directory
Editing articles
How to develop an article Simplified Manual of Style

Getting help
Frequently asked questions Cheatsheet Our new user help forum, the Teahouse The Help Desk, for more advanced questions Help pages Article Wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles
How you can help
Community Portal Join a WikiProject Follow Wikipedia etiquette Practice civility Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community

This is Cashewseed's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: St. Gregory Nazianzen Catholic Church (January 27)

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

No references at all - requires significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources to show notability

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:St. Gregory Nazianzen Catholic Church 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:St. Gregory Nazianzen Catholic Church, 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.

KylieTastic (talk) 18:12, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Cashewseed! 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! KylieTastic (talk) 18:12, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Our Lady of Peace Catholic Church

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:Our Lady of Peace Catholic Church 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://catholicalumni.org/schools/our-lady-of-peace-school/?sf_paged=2. 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. S Philbrick (Talk) 00:45, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Fralock (January 28)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by KylieTastic 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 organizations and companies). 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 when they have been resolved.

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

_KylieTastic (talk) 21:40, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Some comments

You need to provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that it meets the notability guidelines. Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to the church, press releases, YouTube, IMDB, social media and other sites that can be self-edited, blogs, websites of unknown or non-reliable provenance, and sites that are just reporting what the church claims or interviewing its management. Except for the most uncontroversial information, you should use independent third-party sources in preference to affiliated sites.
It's not clear to me why it meets our notability criteria. You put the address in the lead, but it's not clear to me why that makes it notable, and you don't have a reference to a historic building listing or similar. Churches, like schools, aren't automatically notable, and this seems to be just another non-historic church, based on what you wrote.
On the copyright issue, as outlined in this policy, we require that text posted here can be used, modified and distributed for any purpose, including commercial but there is no indication that the copied site allows free use. Text is considered to be copyright unless explicitly stated otherwise. Because our text can be copied freely by anyone, just posting text with attribution isn't enough, nor is a close paraphrase of the original. You must write in your own words so it's not recognisable as a copy of the original.
If you have a conflict of interest when editing this article, you must declare it. See also guidance for editors with conflicts of interest.
If you work directly or indirectly for the church, or otherwise are acting on its behalf, you are very strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. If you are paid directly or indirectly by the organisation you are writing about, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Cashewseed. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Cashewseed|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If you are being compensated, please provide the required disclosure.

We often restore deleted text on request, but for legal reasons we don't do so for copyright violations.

I hope this clarifies Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:52, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: St. Gregory Nazianzen Catholic Church (January 31)

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

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:St. Gregory Nazianzen Catholic Church 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:St. Gregory Nazianzen Catholic Church, 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.

DGG ( talk ) 17:44, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of LAFCU

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 LAFCU, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Willbb234^Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 22:14, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest

From the above, it appears relatively clear that you are being paid or compensated to edit Wikipedia. If this is so, it is not disallowed, but disclosure is mandatory. Please do not edit further without answering with a clear "Yes" or "No" to the following question: Are you being paid or compensated to edit Wikipedia, including being asked or expected to edit as a duty of employment or internship? Should you make further edits without such an answer, you will be blocked from editing altogether. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 23:40, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, I am not even a member of the credit union. I am primarily trying to present information on institutions that are familiar to me and seem to be of equivalent notability as other institutions. I am mostly trying to figure out the balance of information needed for an article worth publishing, but it seems as though the standard has shifted from some of the pages grandfathered into the current requirement. Other than that, at this time I am working off of information I can find in a google search. A deeper search will require more time and probably a search through some older periodicals.

@Seraphimblade: pinging, Willbb234^Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 12:53, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for clarifying that. We do not "grandfather" articles in any way, but sometimes poor ones do slip through the cracks for a while. On the talk page of the deleted article, you said that you were using Golden 1 Credit Union as a template. That article, itself, is flagged as having several problems, including perhaps not being notable (meaning, it may not be a suitable subject for an article at all). Language such as "more than one million members strong" is entirely inappropriate; a neutral tone would be to note, with an appropriate source, that the credit union "has over one million customers." However, the fact that another article exists is not in itself an argument to keep another one like it, as it is entirely possible both should not. Instead, before starting an article, ensure that you have found substantial quantities of reference material which is reliable, independent, and covers the subject directly and in reasonable depth. For many subjects, such reference material is very thin or doesn't exist at all, and that indicates we should not have any article on that subject. If it does, ensure that the article sticks only to what the references confirm, and is neutral in tone and content. Starting a new article appropriately is one of the more challenging things to do, so I generally recommend that editors get some experience under their belt editing existing articles prior to attempting to start a new one. You also may be better off starting it as a draft and having it reviewed by articles for creation. While not unlimited, there is more leeway in draft space for problems with articles which, if created directly in mainspace, may result in deletion. Mainspace articles are expected to be ready for the encyclopedia from the first edit onwards. That doesn't mean perfect, but it does mean meeting the minimum standards. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 19:22, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Below is a table of Category:Credit unions based in California that I used to gauge notability of Los Angeles Federal Credit Union (see bold for max/min data). I used Golden 1 Credit Union as a template. I can make the article more encyclopedia'y, but I'm not sure where is the bar is for historical relevance/notability for this to be an article worth of being published.

Name	Year Wiki Created	Year Founded	Assets (bil$)
Altura Credit Union	2009	1957
California Coast Credit Union	2016	1929	2.1
California Credit Union	2018	1933	3
Caltech Employees Federal Credit Union	2014	1950	1.7
First Entertainment Credit Union	2011	1967	1.5
Frontwave Credit Union	2013	1952	0.8
Golden 1 Credit Union	2009	1933	12
Los Angeles Federal Credit Union (LAFCU)	2020	1936	1
Orange County’s Credit Union	2008	1938	1.5
Partners Federal Credit Union	2006	1968	1
Patelco Credit Union	2009	1936	6.06
Premier America	2005	1957	2.1
Reach Federal Credit Union	2010	1971	Merged
Southland Credit Union	2014	1936	0.725
Stanford Federal Credit Union	2009	1959	2
Technicolor Federal Credit Union	2012	1952
Technology Credit Union	2016	1960
USA Federal Credit Union	2009	1953
Wescom Credit Union	2006	1934	4
Western Bridge Corporate Federal Credit Union	2010	1968	Defunct
Xceed Financial Credit Union	2009	1964	1

None of that is relevant. We either have sufficient reference material to create the article, or, well, we don't. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 22:48, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Fralock

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

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 nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 19:36, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:St. Gregory Nazianzen Catholic Church

Hello, Cashewseed. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "St. Gregory Nazianzen Catholic Church".

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 nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 00:08, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]