User talk:Josephgalasso

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

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

Your submission at Articles for creation: Andrew Radford (March 28)

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

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of people and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), 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:

Include coverage from independent reliable sources - please do not copy and paste content from elsewhere.

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:Andrew Radford 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 use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 18:46, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Josephgalasso, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that 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! CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 18:46, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Andrew Radford (March 28)

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

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines for academics and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), 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:

Not satisfying the applied standards.

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:Andrew Radford 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 use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

SwisterTwister talk 23:23, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Andrew Radford

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Draft:Andrew Radford requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from http://essex.ac.uk/langling/staff/profile.aspx?ID=85. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed 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. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 00:26, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Image without license

Unspecified source/license for File:Radford Photo.png

Thanks for uploading File:Radford Photo.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 20:45, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

andrew radford grants permission to use family photo of himself for proposed wiki page.

thanks, joseph galasso

Andrew Radford <ndrrdf@gmail.com> Today, 3:14 AMGalasso, Joseph A Dear Joseph,

Here is the answer I got from CUP. It's a family photo, taken by Khadija.

Is this enough?

Best,

Andrew

Your submission at Articles for creation: Andrew Radford (April 6)

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

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of people and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), 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.

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:Andrew Radford 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 use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

TimothyJosephWood 18:03, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

AfC submission

Hey Josephgalasso. In order for your draft to be accepted, it needs to show that the subject meets our notability guidelines, which means that they need to have been written about in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject. The only sources you currently have appear to be official bios, which are often very useful for raw information, but they don't count toward notability because they're not considered independent. What you need to find are instances where others have decided the subject is important enough that they took the time to write about him. Every professor at every institution ever has their own bio page, so that doesn't really say anything about whether the subject is more than a run-of-the-mill professor. TimothyJosephWood 19:26, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 20:12, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

advicde

I'm an experienced editor here concentrating on articles on academics. Of course Radford is unquestionably notable, as both an author and professor--the standard is at WP:PROF. However, your drat article is very close to the bio on his website and his publisher's site, and needs to be rewritten. Organize it in paragraphs: Education, Career in chronolgoical order, with exact years foreach position, and then Publications. Just describe his work, don't praise it. It speaks for itself. But do add references to published reviews of his book. You can;t include the quote from Chomsky unless it has been published somewhere, and you need to give the reference. When ready, let me know on my talk page, and I'll accept it. I apologize on the behalf of WP for the inapplicable advice you have been given. DGG ( talk ) 05:39, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

thanks DGG for advice. will provide new draft following suggestions. Josephgalasso (talk) 16:55, 13 April 2017 (UTC)joseph[reply]

Thanks DGG. here's link to my sandbox on Andrew Radford--just to give you a sense of how it's proceeding. i'll send you completed final draft to review. thanks so much again for your help and advice... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Josephgalasso/sandbox

Josephgalasso (talk) 15:26, 14 April 2017 (UTC)joseph[reply]

hi DGG. here's a new draft of Andrew Radford. you asked me to send you a heads-up before i submit. planning to submit soon. permission to use family photo of Radford has been granted. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Josephgalasso/sandbox Josephgalasso (talk) 17:34, 20 April 2017 (UTC)thanks. joseph[reply]

Andrew Radford revised page submitted (21, April 2017)

thanks DGG. i have just submitted final revised page.i saw that an earlier preliminary page was already posted (via category: 'British linguists'). could we please be sure to upload this new final april 21 draft of submission? thanks so much again for your help with the entry. best regards, joseph Josephgalasso (talk) 17:59, 21 April 2017 (UTC) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Josephgalasso/sandbox[reply]

thanks again DGG. the <Andrew Radford (linguist)> page is now up. i am very grateful for your help in the process. joseph Josephgalasso (talk) 18:43, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi DGG. I see for some reason the andrew radford photo <Radford_Photo.png> has been deleted/ AR has given me complete freedom to use the photo in all circumstances.. which tag should i use when i upload it to his existing site? i'll try once again. thanks j Josephgalasso (talk)

File permission problem with File:Photo Radford.png

Thanks for uploading File:Photo Radford.png. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. – Train2104 (t • c) 11:30, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

permission for upload photo for Andrew Radford

thank you (train2104) i have sent the relevant email msg expressing permission to use the Andrew Radford phot (see enclosed emails below): ee permission granted personally to me by Andrew Radford via email below:

andrew radford hereby grants me permission to his family photo (taken by his wife). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Josephgalasso/sandbox

thanks so much, joseph

joseph Galasso Ph.D. English / Linguistics Dept. Office: Sierra Tower (ST) 810 California State University, Northridge https://csun.academia.edu/josephgalasso From: Andrew Radford <ndrrdf@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, April 6, 2017 3:14 AM To: Galasso, Joseph A Subject: Fwd: RE: Fw: copyright for photo of andrew radford

Dear Joseph,

Here is the answer I got from CUP. It's a family photo, taken by Khadija.

Is this enough?

Best,

Andrew

I hope this helps. thanks so much joseph Josephgalasso (talk) 17:51, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (April 22)

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:

Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Andrew Radford (linguist) instead.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Please review this draft and the article and add any additional information to the article.

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:Josephgalasso/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 use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Robert McClenon (talk) 03:52, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Structure building model of child language for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Structure building model of child language 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/Structure building model of child language 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 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. P 1 9 9 ✉ 15:58, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, User:Josephgalasso/sandbox

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

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. JTP ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:54, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest editing

Hello, Josephgalasso. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the page Andrew Radford (linguist), you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI 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, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your COI when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you.

Please also stop just reverting the same edits without any explanation - open a discussion on the talk page if you disagree, but as I have said in my edit summaries, this is a biography and the content you keep re-adding is not biographical about Radford hence does not belong here, alongside the potential COI issues you have. Thank you, Melcous (talk) 00:27, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Josephgalasso. 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]