User talk:Geoffproehl970

Welcome!

Hi Geoffproehl970! 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! DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:02, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Geoffproehl970. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Draft:Mark Bly, 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 or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} 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. DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:02, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Mark Bly (April 3)

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 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:

Could be notable, but the sources cited are insufficient to establish that, consisting of primary source (interview, works written by the subject, etc.) and passing mentions. We need to see what others have said about him in reliable, independent secondary sources providing significant coverage of the subject. (See WP:GNG for guidance.)

Or if some sort of specific notability is being asserted per WP:AUTHOR, please specify clearly where this arises and what evidence supports the assertion.

Also, too much of the content is not support by referencing. Please ensure that every material statement is backed up by a reliable source, ideally cited inline via footnotes.

--

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:Mark Bly 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:Mark Bly, 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.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:11, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Geoffproehl970! 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! DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:11, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Mark Bly Article

Dear DoubleGrazing - First of all, thank you for your feedback. I have read it carefully several times and, now that I have time, would like to revise and resubmit the article on Mark Bly no later than the end of the month (August 2022). Any advice you have for me, in addition to what you have already sent, will be appreciated. When I resubmit, will it go to you or someone else? I'd much rather work with a single editor - you.

With regard to conflict of interest, Mark and I have known each other for many years primarily via annual conferences for Literary Managers and Dramaturgs of the Americas. And I have written positively about one of his books on Amazon. We have played, however, quite different roles in the field itself. Mark is one of the most significant leaders of a first generation of professional dramaturgs. I am not a professional dramaturg, nor a figure in this first wave. I am an academic who has written extensively about the field in both Dramaturgy in American Theatre and Toward a Dramaturgical Sensibility. I co-edited Dramaturgy in American Theatre and have, since the 1990s, compiled an extensive bibliography of publications on dramaturgy, currently over 40 pages long. I have also been an archivist of the field through the University of Puget Sound where I taught from 1994-2019. I have written encylopedia entries on dramaturgy and the dramaturg. I would argue that these perspectives make me the kind of qualified, second-hand author most equipped to detail the work of someone like Mark, and others like him. Leading practitioners, many of them women, are woefully under-represented in Wikipedia.

If, after all, you feel I am too close to the subject then I will leave this work to another scholar. But it seems to me that the real test of this page should finally be how it responds to your notes from a neutral, well-referenced perspective. This is what I hope to address in the days ahead. Thanks for your help and interest. - Geoff Proehl Geoffproehl970 (talk) 19:03, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Mark Bly has been accepted

Mark Bly, 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 B-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a fantastic rating for a new article, and places it among the top 3% of accepted submissions — major kudos to you! 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!

_Signed, Pichemist ^{( Contribs | Talk )} 19:52, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for you positive feedback on the article Pichemist, which is, I must say, a great user name. I am extremely pleased the article has been accepted and that the rating is as positive as it is.

I will in the months ahead continue to work on it to two ends: 1. achieving "good article" status; 2. removal of "close connection" disclaimer.

I am new to Wikipedia and don't know if you have time to respond, but any suggestions you might have, particularly with regards to item #2 would be appreciated. I am, as I noted above, an acquaintance of Mr. Bly but my motivation in writing this article is as a historian of this new field of dramaturgy, which I've written about and worked in for the past thirty years.

I tried to address this in the most recent revisions I did on the article and also in a note in "Talk" about how I viewed the "Conflict of Interest" concern, but we clearly have more work to do.

Any suggestions you might have so that the article does not in any way read as "puffery" and maintains a neutral tone so that the article can stand without any disclaimer would be deeply appreciated. Thanks again for the kind and encouraging words - Geoffproehl970 Geoffproehl970 (talk) 20:33, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Clarification needed" on Bly

Hi, @Geoffproehl970, and thanks for the article. In future, when you've a question about an edit, feel free to click on an editor's talk page link, found in their signature, click on the + sign tab at the talk page top, and ask the editor directly. This will save you time. I highly recommend the Teahouse, for many and sundry questions otherwise.-- Quisqualis (talk) 15:13, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Will do. Thanks for your kind and thoughtful assistance recently and in the past with regard to the topic: Mark Bly. - Geoffproehl970 Geoffproehl970 (talk) 19:23, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 01:00, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]