Jump to content

User talk:Kapyidu

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Welcome!

Hello, Kapyidu, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages 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, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to leave me a message or place "{{helpme}}" on this page and someone will drop by to help. You can also contact me if you wish by clicking "talk" to the right of my name. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 15:21, 14 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back

[edit]

I see that you've been inactive, welcome back. Your edit at astrology also reflected the sources already used there more than the previous sentence, thanks for that. —PaleoNeonate18:09, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

The article Donna McNeil has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Lack of WP:SIGCOV (depth of coverage not sufficient, and some of the used sources are not independent of the subject); subject does not meet WP:ANYBIO criteria

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. —Alalch E. 23:21, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Depth of coverage is significant and sources include several reliable newspapers including Now This, Courier Gazette, as well as two book publications. All sources are independent of the subject with the exception of the organization she is part.
Subject is a Creative Professional and meets "The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors."
Lack of knowledge in this field and/or misogyny is not sufficient reason for disqualification. Kapyidu (talk) 23:30, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Donna McNeil for deletion

[edit]
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Donna McNeil 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/Donna McNeil 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.

Alalch E. 23:54, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

[edit]
The Original Barnstar
Thanks for writing a biographical article about a woman, we need more of that. I hope the deletion discussion does not discourage you. There is a group of us who want to make more articles about women, we hang out at WP:WOMRED. You are welcome! CT55555(talk) 02:26, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Maria Sweeney (June 9)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by SafariScribe was: 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.
Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 01:15, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, Kapyidu! 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! Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 01:15, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Maria Sweeney (June 9)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Ratnahastin was:  The comment the reviewer left was: 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.
Ratnahastin (talk) 05:08, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This pages uses all reliable sources, all of which are publications, and all sources are interviews or book announcements about the subject. Interviews about the subject appearing in Publisher's Weekly or The Philadelphia Inquirer are plainly sufficient. Kapyidu (talk) 12:20, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Maria Sweeney (June 10)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Relativity was: 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.
Relativity ⚡️ 02:17, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please tell me which source is not reliable. These are all notable publications. Kapyidu (talk) 02:43, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Maria Sweeney (July 7)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by SafariScribe was: 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.
Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 15:58, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, this reasoning exhibits bias and is based on deep inaccuracies. These references are explicitly centering the subject. Did you look at the articles before rejecting? Thank you. Kapyidu (talk) 16:03, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Maria Sweeney (July 7)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Theroadislong was: 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.
Theroadislong (talk) 16:15, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, thank you for your review. The reasoning offered here is inaccurate. Did you read the articles before declining? Thank you. Kapyidu (talk) 16:16, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Maria Sweeney (July 7)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by SafariScribe were: 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.
Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 16:37, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Maria Sweeney has a new comment

[edit]
I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Maria Sweeney. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 21:05, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Maria Sweeney (July 8)

[edit]
Your recent article submission has been rejected and cannot be resubmitted. 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 SafariScribe was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: From the sources, it is simply concudable that the subject isn't notable, and no amount of sources added will make it either. Source 2 and 3 is about a book written by the subject of this drat, hence has nothing 'extraordinary' about the author. It is either how good the book is or the vice-versa. Source 7, 8, 10—12 are also about the book, though there is about two unreliable source. Source 9 is an interview and per WP: INTERVIEW, isn't a reliable source (not that they can't be, but for this context). Clarified?
Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 10:41, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Katrina Bello (August 30)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Hoary was:  The comment the reviewer left was: 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.
Hoary (talk) 02:32, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]