User talk:Mameoppenheim

This is Mameoppenheim'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: sandbox (November 20)

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

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

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 people). 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.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Too much of the content is unreferenced, and the references that there are, are formatted in an unclear way. Please see WP:REFB for advice.

There is no obvious assertion of notability, and it isn't even entirely clear by what criteria this person might be notable. The sources cited appear to be primary, and as such insufficient to establish notability per WP:GNG.

In general terms, please see WP:YFA for advice on article creation.

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 User:Mameoppenheim/sandbox 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.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:48, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Mameoppenheim! 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! DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:48, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hi Mameoppenheim! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:49, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple copies

Hi, I would have moved your sandbox draft User:Mameoppenheim/sandbox into the draft space, which is the preferred location for drafts undergoing AfC review, but there already exists a draft (of sorts) at Draft:Megan Euker, also created by you. Assuming you want to continue with your sandbox draft, and therefore abandon the other one, could you please blank the Draft:Megan Euker (ie. just delete the contents) which will be taken as a request to delete it. I can then move the sandbox draft there. Thanks, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:57, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ok I deleted the contents Mameoppenheim (talk) 15:47, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No you didn't, it's still there: Draft:Megan Euker. Don't forget to click on the blue 'publish changes' button, so your edit takes effect. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:01, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (November 27)

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:

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 people). 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 User:Mameoppenheim/sandbox 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.

Theroadislong (talk) 10:26, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: User:Mameoppenheim/sandbox has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at User:Mameoppenheim/sandbox. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 10:42, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Megan Elizabeth Euker (December 3)

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 Jamiebuba was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia.

Jamiebuba (talk) 17:50, 3 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello -

Who can I speak to about this and/or get help to get this published? The subject is clearly notable and has received fulbright fellowships TWICE, something that no more than a handful of people on earth have done, in addition to exhibitions at renowned galleries and museums and teaching at the top US universities. Many other wikipedia entries have WAY less notability.

Thanks Mameoppenheim (talk) 18:21, 3 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Megan Euker for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Megan Euker 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/Megan Euker 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.

US-Verified (talk) 15:30, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

April 2023

Hello Mameoppenheim. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to Megan Euker, gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are extremely strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Mameoppenheim. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Mameoppenheim|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. Spicy (talk) 22:09, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]