User talk:Johnlogic

2006/04: Anne Sweeney

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Anne Sweeney, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a direct copy from http://corporate.disney.go.com/corporate/bios/anne_sweeney.html. As a copyright violation, Anne Sweeney appears to qualify for speedy deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Anne Sweeney has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. If the source is a credible one, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GFDL, you can comment to that effect on Talk:Anne Sweeney. If the article has already been deleted, but you have a proper release, you can reenter the content at Anne Sweeney, after describing the release on the talk page. However, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Wikipedia.

--ErikNY 16:52, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My apology. I was hasty in copying the article from Disney's site. Since the article's deletion, it has reappeared, hopefully with Disney's (and Ms. Sweeney's) permission. --Johnlogic 03:24, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

2006/09: Programmable Array Logic and the like

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion is only for categories. I've redirected Programmable Array Logic to Programmable array logic and put a {{db-redirtypo}} on the two numbered ones. You can use Wikipedia:Requested Moves to request moving Programmable array logic to Programmable Array Logic if you want. TimBentley (talk) 20:09, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Have added the CapitalMove tag to its talk page, per procedure. Thanks. Johnlogic 21:15, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

2007/05: Spam in John Carlsen

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on John Carlsen, by Stellatomailing, another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because John Carlsen is blatant advertising for a company, product, group, service or person that would require a substantial rewrite in order to become an encyclopedia article.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting John Carlsen, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate John Carlsen itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 05:28, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

2007/12: Speedy deletion of Video Concepts

A tag has been placed on Video Concepts requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company or corporation, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for companies and corporations.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Toddst1 (talk) 20:49, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

2008/02: Disputed fair use rationale for Image:IguanaEntertainmentLogo2black.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:IguanaEntertainmentLogo2black.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 22:57, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2008/07: Vandalism???

Since when is the removal of politically biased material vandalism? 192.25.142.225 (talk) 00:38, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it was vandalism.

It took me a few moments to find what I had reported, but here it is: Comparing revisions to the Motorola page made on 3 April 2008 as of 17:54 (by 198.189.184.252) and as of 17:54, I removed petty vandalism in the form of the comment on line 20 reading "THIS IS SO GAY!!!!!!!".

Clearly this comment has no place here.

Anonymous Agilent Technologies user, please do better research before calling me a liar. - Johnlogic (talk) 23:36, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for File:Station-map-lrg.gif}

Thank you for uploading File:Station-map-lrg.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check:

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's escription page for each article the image is used in.
That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 23:46, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for File:Station-map-lrg.gif}

Thank you for uploading File:Station-map-lrg.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check:

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's escription page for each article the image is used in.
That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 23:46, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Stirling engine introduction/article.

Please see ongoing discussion re introduction on talk pagePv=mrt (talk) 23:06, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have done a little tweaking of my own on the article and also moved two sections with overlapping content adjascent to each other with a view to combining them. I wonder if you would have a look at achieving this as, judging by your previous work, you seem to have a 'way' with condensing and rationalising?Pv=mrt (talk) 11:55, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gone some way towards this myself, moving material in to relevant sections and deleting overlaps.Pv=mrt (talk) 18:02, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

2009/11

ESL shooting (November 2009)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add content (particularly if you change facts and figures) , as you have to the article ESL shooting, please cite a reliable source for the content you're adding or changing. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. Take a look at Wikipedia:Citing sources for information about how to cite sources and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 23:57, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I spawned the ESL shooting page from the page for Richard Farley, the perpetrator. References to source materials are on that page, and I hope to copy appropriate ones over when I have time. - Johnlogic (talk) 20:38, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments at Talk:Jack Tramiel

John, just wanted to let you know I responded to your commentary on my commentary. Also, see by your info page you worked with Atari. Which Atari was it, Atari Inc. or Atari Corp. It looked like Atari Corp. by some of the info I saw. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 04:49, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Marty, and thanks for writing! I worked for Atari Corp. (the consumer product company, on Borregas Avenue in Sunnyvale, CA) in the summer of 1987; I met the Tramiels there, and got to speak with Leonard at length. By the way, about six months later, the ESL shooting occurred across the street.

Did you work for Atari? By the way, I see that you worked on a "flashback" product; do you happen to know Jeri Ellsworth (up near Portland OR)? - Johnlogic (talk) 05:13, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No didn't work for any of the original Atari's. Do contract for the current one using the brand name. Yes, the Atari Flashback 2 and an upcoming Flashback product. Regarding Jeri, yes, we're acquaintances online, haven't had a chance to meet in person yet though I am friends with some of the rest of the DTV team. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 05:44, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deletionism vs. Inclusionism

I appreciate your comments on the Deletionism/Inclusionism page. Unfortunately, your views (and mine) seem to be in the minority. All articles grow from a stub, so the stubs need to be retained.

There's more to it than that, however. The deletionists do a great deal of destruction to articles that are never deleted (by cutting out passages). They seem to think that a good article is small and concise, with only the barest and most essential facts. Many of the deletionists, in my opinion, have biased agendas. Atheists and Christians attack articles on non-mainstream religious movements; scientists with conventional ideas attack articles on new scientific theories; conservatives attack articles on progressive social movements, etc. I think there should be a rule that significant portions of articles cannot be deleted without prior discussion. I also think that people should be asked to refrain from editing articles on subjects about which they have no knowledge. That would stop the most chronic deletionists who run from article to article looking for stuff to delete.--ESB60 (talk) 06:19, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of LaFarr Stuart for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article LaFarr Stuart is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/LaFarr Stuart until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. J04n(talk page) 20:05, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

SJSU Grad and Retention Rates

JOHN:

Your placement of the low four-year grad rate at the TOP of the section is clearly an act of vandalism and is greatly unappreciated by those of us who have invested time and energy in developing what is now a very solid SJSU article. Unlike the vast majority of university Wiki articles, this one is reasonably objective and generally devoid of boosterism. I work in academia, and the standard metrics nowadays are six, eight and even 10-year grad rates. Same goes for retention rates. Please show me any other Wiki article where the 4-year grad rate (and four-year grad rate alone) is placed at the TOP of the Academics section in its own line/paragraph. SJSU's six-year grad rate is around 50% (eight-year is higher) and both its freshmen and transfer retention rates are around 80%. This is very much in line with many other large public universities in CA and elsewhere.

Even much more prestigious academic institutions have relatively low 4-year grad rates. Case in point, I believe Berkeley's is around 50% and the average statewide (CA) is around 30%. Cal Poly's four-year grad rate is around 25%. At Long Beach it's 12%. The six-year average in CA is around 65%. SJSU doesn't even publish its four-year rate anymore, and this is true of many other schools as well, so not sure where the 7% figure even came from. USNWR should not be used as a data source for university demographic and/or G&T data. This data should come from the university itself. USN&WR as a data SOURCE is only appropriate when citing USN&WR's own ranking data.

Also, I should point out the freshmen grad rates don't account for transfer students and grad students, who make up a significant percentage of the total student enrollment at schools like SJSU. Another factor that affects grad rates is impaction. SJSU (along with Long Beach, Fullerton and SDSU) is impacted in EVERY MAJOR. This drives minimum admission standards up and grad rates down... at least in the short-term. You can't simply throw out a single figure (from a secondary source) without providing needed context, etc., and expect others invested in this article not to challenge you.

I understand you have issues with SJSU and your edits to this article in the past have clearly demonstrated you lack a neutral POV since nearly every edit attempts to cast SJSU in a negative light. I am going to leave your edit for now, but I will replace it with applicable six and eight-year stats using SJSU SOURCE DATA and move it to an appropriate position within the Academics section later when I have more time. Londonfifo (talk) 18:51, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I copied the above text to Talk:San_Jose_State_University to continue this discussion there. Johnlogic (talk) 01:57, 8 May 2013 (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) 13:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Johnlogic. 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, Johnlogic. 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]

Orphaned non-free image File:IguanaEntertainmentLogo2black.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:IguanaEntertainmentLogo2black.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:16, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hardware development moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Hardware development, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Vexations (talk) 17:11, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Johnlogic. 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]

Nomination of Brad Fregger for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Brad Fregger is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brad Fregger until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Ian.thomson (talk) 15:04, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Hardware development

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

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.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. JMHamo (talk) 23:17, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Mineral species" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Mineral species. Since you had some involvement with the Mineral species redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 (talk) 23:17, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Los Altos Rod and Gun Club Range for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Los Altos Rod and Gun Club Range is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Los Altos Rod and Gun Club Range until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Hog Farm _Bacon 04:25, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 01:31, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Shooting ranges in California

A tag has been placed on Category:Shooting ranges in California requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:12, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Adding content and relying on blue links for sources

Hi John, You've been around long enough to know that per WP:USERGENERATED, a wikilink is not a reliable source. Toddst1 (talk) 21:55, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

June 2021

Your recent editing history at Sunnyvale, California shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
You are edit warring, restoring unsourced material. Per WP:USERG a blue link is not a source, the WP:BURDEN to provide direct sources is on the user who adds or restores information to any article. Toddst1 (talk) 00:43, 24 June 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) 00:12, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 00:34, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Resonex moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Resonex, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more in-depth coverage about the subject itself, with citations from reliable, independent sources in order to show it meets WP:GNG. It should have at least three, to be safe. And please remember that interviews, as primary sources, do not count towards GNG.(?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:06, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Resonex

Hello, Johnlogic. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Resonex, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 16:01, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Resonex (September 14)

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

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
reliable
secondary
strictly independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. 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:

Well done on creating the draft, and it may potentially meet the relevant requirements (including WP:GNG, WP:NCORP) but presently it is not clear that it does. As you may know, Wikipedia's basic requirement for entry is that the subject is notable. Essentially subjects are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject. To properly create such a draft page, please see the articles ‘Your First Article’, ‘Referencing for Beginners’ and ‘Easier Referencing for Beginners’. Also, if you have any connection to the subject, including being paid, you have a conflict of interest that you must declare on your Talk page (to see instructions on how to do this please click the link). Please familiarise yourself with these pages before amending the draft. If you feel you can meet these requirements (it would be helpful if you could please identify, with specificity, which criteria you believe the draft meets?) then resubmit the page and leave a note for me on my talk page and I would be happy to reassess.

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:Resonex and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit 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.

Cabrils (talk) 06:46, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Johnlogic! Having an article draft 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! Cabrils (talk) 06:46, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Resonex (October 20)

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

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
reliable
secondary
strictly independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. 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:

Declined again. Please see [discussion with the author on my Talk Page].

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:Resonex and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit 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.

Cabrils (talk) 01:06, 20 October 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) 00:28, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Resonex

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

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When 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!} 00:59, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]