User talk:Jwilbiz

Re: deletion of Vector Graphics External Links

I explained my reasons for deleting the external links on the article's talk page. Basically, my reason was that the links were either advertising (which is discouraged), or links to vector graphics related software (which I think is covered better in the List of vector graphics editors already linked to in the article, which includes many more programs than were included in the links).

If you disagree, of course, there's nothing stopping you putting some or all of the links back; that's the nice thing about Wikipedia, you can nearly always change things back if you think someone has made the wrong decision!

However, if you want to do that, I would suggest that you read Wikipedia:External links and Wikipedia:Spam first: those are the Wikipedia guidelines (not rules, just guidelines!) on what links should be included. My opinion was that the links in Vector graphics didn't meet the guidelines, and further my opinion is that links that don't meet the guidelines should normally not be included; but that is just my opinion, and I'm not in charge here, so your opinion is just as valid as mine. — Haeleth Talk 08:49, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Haeleth...makes sense. Sorry I made you repeat yourself. I checked the article's Talk page (or so I thought) but as I said, I'm pretty new at this. Although I'm familiar with the non-commercial ideals of Wikipedia, I definitely need to read the External Links guidelines. Thanks for the advice. In general, I believe non-commercial libraries of vector images and additional information should be available to people with the fewest number of clicks. —Jwilbiz 20:24, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Glenn Beck prefix:Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and the page that you created has been or soon will be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. -- Ice (talk) 23:49, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Glenn Beck NPOV

You created an article at Glenn Beck prefix:Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard. This is not the place to start a complaint about that issue. I have reposted the article text at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard#Glenn Beck, which is the correct place. I deleted the article you created. Best of luck. — GorillaWarfare ^talk 23:54, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Let's Go Learn moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Let's Go Learn, is not suitable 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. WhoAteMyButter (📨_talk│📝^contribs) 04:58, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Let's Go Learn (August 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 RPSkokie was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

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:Let's Go Learn and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not make any further changes to 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.

RPSkokie (talk) 12:25, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jwilbiz! 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! RPSkokie (talk) 12:25, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Let's Go Learn

Hello, Jwilbiz. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Let's Go Learn, 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) 13:01, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Let's Go Learn

Hello, Jwilbiz. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Let's Go Learn".

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! Hey man im josh (talk) 12:34, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Let's Go Learn has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Let's Go Learn. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 12:20, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Let's Go Learn for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Let's Go Learn 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/Let's Go Learn 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 until the discussion has finished.

Theroadislong (talk) 09:48, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]