User talk:Eincrat

Welcome to Wikipedia!

Dear Eincrat: Welcome to Wikipedia, a free and open-content encyclopedia. I hope you enjoy contributing. To help get you settled in, I thought you might find the following pages useful:

Don't worry too much about being perfect. Very few of us are! Just in case you are not perfect, click here to see how you can avoid making common mistakes.

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.

Wikipedians try to follow a strict policy of never biting new users. If you are unsure of how to do something, you are welcome to ask a more experienced user such as an administrator. One last bit of advice: please sign any dicussion comment with four tildes (~~~~). The software will automatically convert this into your signature which can be altered in the "Preferences" tab at the top of the screen. I hope I have not overwhelmed you with information. If you need any help just let me know. Once again welcome to Wikipedia, and don't forget to tell us about yourself and be BOLD! -- Psy guy ^Talk 01:49, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Myers-Briggs articles

Hi, Eincrat. I noticed you added several articles related to the Myers-Briggs test, such as Group Dynamics (Myers-Briggs). As they stand now, they're essentialy empty and lacking context, which may make them eligible for speedy deletion. You might want to go back and add some context to them before creating more. Joyous | Talk 17:00, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, we do not create duplicate articles. We create an article once and then use #redirect from other titles. -- RHaworth 17:12, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am trying to create a format so that the information in one article can be easily moved to another article. Right now the INTP ISTJ etc. categories are empty space. I figured we should develop the topics like relationships all at once then transfer the information. 17:18, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

I have reconsidered. It makes more sense to create Relationshiips, Careers, etc. in the categories INTP, ESTJ etc. than it does to do it the other way around.

It looks fairly promising but will obviously need to be fleshed out. However, you really need to start with a descriptive overview of the individual types, so I'd add a section "Description" as the first heading. I also don't think it's a good idea to add sections that have headings but no content -- rather, you should have some content to start off with, even if it's only one or two short sentences that others can come in behind you and expand. Also, stubs need to be marked as such, otherwise, as Joyous said, you'll probably find them ending up being speedily deleted. I'd take a look at Wikipedia's guidelines on creating stubs if I were you. Jammycakes 22:12, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice. Basically I have been doing it the way I have because its efficient. I'll create a short descriptor once I get the cognitive functions written. Eincrat 22:16, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is also important to note that much of what you have written follows to closely to the wording in the book, Please Understand Me II. This is akin to plagiarism. I appreciate that you have spent so much time creating these articles. I also have a strong interest in personality types, but it's important that you do not take so heavily from copyrighted sources.

Rswfire (talk) 08:39, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pedagogy (Myers-Briggs) redirect page proposed for deletion

[edit] Pedagogy (Myers-Briggs) listed at RfD

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect [[:[edit] Pedagogy (Myers-Briggs)]]. Since you had some involvement with the [edit] Pedagogy (Myers-Briggs) redirect, you might want to participate in [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2009 January 16#[edit] Pedagogy (Myers-Briggs)|the redirect discussion]] (if you have not already done so). AlotToLearn (talk) 01:50, 16 January 2009 (UTC) --AlotToLearn (talk) 01:50, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A study on how to cover scientific uncertainties/controversies

Hi. I have emailed you to ask whether you would agree to participate in a short survey on how to cover scientific uncertainties/controversies in articles pertaining to global warming and climate change (survey described here). If interested, please email me Encyclopaedia21 (talk) 16:34, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:57, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Theta Network (June 19)

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

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

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

Theroadislong (talk) 15:39, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Eincrat! 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! Theroadislong (talk) 15:39, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Theta Network has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Theta Network. Thanks! Hatchens (talk) 16:47, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Theta Network (July 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 Stuartyeates 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.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Wikipedia articles are built on independent secondary sources with in-depth coverage of the subject. Sources that don't meet these criteria need to be removed. I took a look at a handful of the wall of references and none of the ones I looked at were independent AND had in-depth coverage of the network.

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:Theta Network 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:Theta Network, 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, 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.

Stuartyeates (talk) 19:53, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Theta Network (July 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 HighKing 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.

The comment the reviewer left was:

The article is WP:REFBOMBed to within an inch of its life. The subject or Topic of this article is confusing. The first sentence claims it is a mesh network but most of the references talk about the company or founder or patents or announcements or blockchain - which links back to why this article is refbombed. I suggest that the author of this article takes a step back and figure out what the topic is. At the moment it appears to me to be a thinly-disguised attempt at writing an article about the company. Keep it short and simply. Wikipedia is not a platform for white papers or promotion or "explaining a company/product" articles. The appropriate guideline is WP:NCORP and I would draw specific attention to WP:ORGIND and "Independent Content" - please ensure you have at least two references that speak about the *topic* and don't rely on info/interviews/announcement/etc.

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:Theta Network 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:Theta Network, 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, 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.

HighKing⁺⁺ 10:28, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Elongate article

Hello User:Eincrat, I'm reaching out because you're listed as a contributor to the Cryptocurrency WikiProject. I am trying to get a draft published in the Cryptocurrency domain, but it's a bit difficult as the reviewers seem to have an opposition to the topic of crypto as a whole. Meanwhile there are other topics published with significantly less notability. As you are knowledgeable on the subject, could you please look at the draft and let me know if you can assist? Thank you! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Elongate_(cryptocurrency)

I am not sure who sent this to me so I am just going to reply here. I am not sure what advice I can give you as I have been struggling with the same kinds of issues in regards to Theta (and I have sources from places like Bloomberg and Huffington Post, as well as patents). The cryptocurrency project doesn't appear to be very active. I basically just added myself in it and didn't hear anything back. You could probably do the same. No one in wikipedia appears to have any idea as to what constitutes notability in regards to cryptocurrency and the acceptance parameters appear to be ad hoc. Sorry I can't be of any more help.Eincrat (talk) 09:19, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:13, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Theta Network

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

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:17, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]