User talk:Jasecbruce

[Duncan Lewis Solicitors]

Welcome

File:Verifiability and Neutral point of view (Common Craft)-600px-en.ogv

A video showing the basics of verifiability and neutral point of view policies.

Welcome!

Hello, Jasecbruce, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like Wikipedia and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! - Ahunt (talk) 16:10, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WP:COI

Hello, Jasecbruce. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may need to consider our guidance on conflicts of interest.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. Ahunt (talk) 16:19, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Jasecbruce, you are invited to the Teahouse

Hi Jasecbruce! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Jtmorgan (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 01:17, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

Charles (Nish) Bruce QGM, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post 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.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Basket _Feudalist 19:39, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Charles (Nish) Bruce QGM, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Mirror (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:20, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Freefall (Autobiography).
To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the reviewer's talk page. Please remember to link to the submission!
You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Nimuaq (talk) 12:00, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Freefall (Autobiography) concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Freefall (Autobiography), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 180 days. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 12:23, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Freefall (Autobiography)

Hello Jasecbruce. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "Freefall (Autobiography)".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Freefall (Autobiography)}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 08:01, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (August 2)

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

Infobox is not properly formatted. Lede sentence should be bold-faced.

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 User:Jasecbruce/sandbox and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also get Wikipedia's Live Help real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Robert McClenon (talk) 18:38, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Ewen Cameron Bruce has been accepted

Ewen Cameron Bruce, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post 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.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Sulfurboy (talk) 17:15, 3 August 2015 (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) 16:59, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Jasecbruce. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Jasecbruce. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Duncan Lewis Solicitors (March 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 Chetsford was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere 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, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

The comment the reviewer left was:

The references, though voluminous, don't contribute to WP:CORPDEPTH as they are largely WP:ROUTINE and passing references like this one from CNN: "Our client has been wrongly implicated in this matter; he categorically denies being the individual concerned and has irrefutable proof that he was in the United States at the time of the incident," Duncan Lewis Solicitors said in a statement. There is also a heavy advertorial quality about this, with its exhaustive list of practice areas and office locations. There's also WP:PUFFERY by appending the lists of awards with the word "success." Finally, the entire article is written as a series of lists and not in prose format as is customary.

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:Duncan Lewis Solicitors 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:Duncan Lewis Solicitors, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and save.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Chetsford (talk) 07:52, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

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

WPCORPDEPTH WPROUTINE WDPUFFERY

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 the submission 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 the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Jasecbruce (talk) 13:20, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Chetsford, Thank you for your time reviewing this draft. Following your advice, I have made changes to our content. Below I have provided my justifications;

WP:CORPDEPTH / WP:ROUTINE • The references included now are, in my opinion, not passing references. The CNN article you referred to in your comments is an article specifically on the firm's client and has quoted their statement on his behalf. I would not class that as a “passing reference” as the article focuses around the statement and that of the police. • I have reviewed the other references and eliminated those that are trivial.

WD: PUFFERY • Thank you for this. I have simplified the text and removed majority of the “peacock terms” to ensure the article come across in a more objective manner. • I have reduced the ‘Industry Awards’ section.

Golden Rule 1. Significant coverage: a. the directory listings included in the ‘Legal Rankings’ section includes links to Legal 500 and Chambers & Partners guides – these are fully independent and highly regarded legal recommendations and rankings and therefore of significant note – they cannot be compared to the inclusion in lists such as “best of” or “top 100”. b. The abundant list of reputable media outlet’s articles either includes a quote from one of the firm's solicitors, on an issue or type of case that they are known for, or is on one of their clients and includes their actions.

2. Reliable sources: a. As above, the media outlets are reputable and reliable, and the legal directories (Legal 500 and Chambers & Partners) are the authority on firm rankings. They spend about 9 months per year researching, interviewing and fact checking before publishing their guides. b. Bailii reported cases are written independently and open to the public in a legal database, reporting on the facts of the case.

3. Independent sources: a. Majority of the links used are third party. Those that are linked back to our website are below. I have included the footnote number for your reference:

8. Mentioning our Investors in People Gold Accreditation Award 10 & 11. Links to our Areas of Law and offices to avoid listing 13. Our in-house diversity report 61. in depth article on work 118 & 121. commentary on pro bono work 8 & 123. Links to our “in the press” section – including the media coverage.

These are largely reports or commentary on work undertaken, keeping to the facts and not heavily bias.

If I have interpreted your guidance incorrectly I invite your opinions and instructions.

Thank you for your assistance

Jasecbruce (talk) 13:20, 11 June 2018 (UTC)JasecbruceJasecbruce (talk) 13:20, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Duncan Lewis Solicitors has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Duncan Lewis Solicitors. Thanks! CNMall41 (talk) 19:42, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Duncan Lewis Solicitors (June 24)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by CNMall41 was:

The draft contains many issues that need addressed. The section on "rankings" is promotional all in itself. Why include a "individual lawyers recommended" section? This is purely promotional and not suitable for an encyclopedia. There is also WP:OR and other content that does not show WP:CORPDEPTH. The tone of the draft also reads like an advertisement for the firm.

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:Duncan Lewis Solicitors 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:Duncan Lewis Solicitors, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

CNMall41 (talk) 19:44, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Duncan Lewis Solicitors (November 1)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by JC7V7DC5768 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). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Hi, thanks for your effort but you still haven't added sources showing how Duncan Lewis Solicitors passes WP:CORPDEPTH. Reliable, sources ,independent of the subject, a paragraph or more. Don't resubmit until these issues are fixed.

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:Duncan Lewis Solicitors 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:Duncan Lewis Solicitors, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

JC7V-talk 21:09, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Jasecbruce. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Duncan Lewis Solicitors has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Duncan Lewis Solicitors. Thanks! Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 18:42, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Duncan Lewis Solicitors (June 1)

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Scope creep was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia.

scope_creep^Talk 15:36, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Duncan Lewis Solicitors

Please do not use Wikipedia to promote businesses. Wikipedia is not a trade directory. If you want to list a company for potential customers to find, please consider alternative outlets. Thank you. scope_creep^Talk 15:38, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Duncan Lewis Solicitors concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Duncan Lewis Solicitors, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:22, 2 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Duncan Lewis Solicitors

Hello, Jasecbruce. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Duncan Lewis Solicitors".

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! HasteurBot (talk) 02:01, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]