User talk:Modono3

This user is a student editor in Wikipedia:Wiki_Ed/University_of_Illinois_at_Chicago/Public_Relations_and_Digital_Media_(Fall_2018) .

Welcome!

Hello, Modono3, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Shalor and I work with the Wiki Education Foundation; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.

I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing.

Handouts
Choosing an article to edit Editing an article • Add images to articles Citing sources on Wikipedia
Additional Resources
You can find answers to many student questions on our Q&A site, ask.wikiedu.org

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 15:14, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Modono3/sandbox

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 User:Modono3/sandbox, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Sheldybett (talk) 23:51, 18 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Notes

Hi! It looks like your content was restored and moved to Draft:PAWS Chicago. I wanted to leave you some notes about the draft:

This needs editing for tone, as this takes a fairly praising tone towards the organization. One of the easier ways to avoid this is to be fairly "to the point" about things. Avoid things like "in loving memory" since that doesn't really gel with Wikipedia's style.

The lead section mentions a little as to why the organization was created - that's something that I'd more put in the history section.

With the awards section, this should only include awards and honors that the organization has received. Media coverage shouldn't be listed here. In general media coverage isn't mentioned in articles unless there are a lot of sources that cover the event, which is fairly rare. As far as the Charity Navigator goes, that's a rating rather than an award and should instead go into a section on charity ratings. The reason for this is that while getting a higher rating is good, this isn't an award or anything like that - as long as the charity is doing what it should, it should get a better rating. If it isn't, then it will get a low rating. Also, the gold standard mention with Chicago Magazine may not be a major enough accomplishment to list. You also have to show that this is an award or honor as opposed to just a name that they gave the list they displayed.

As far as sourcing goes, make sure that this is predominantly independent, reliable sources. It's fine to use primary sources (things released by the organization or those affiliated with them), but they shouldn't make up the bulk of the sourcing. Interviews are often considered to be primary sources by some editors, so I wouldn't rely heavily on those to establish notability. With sourcing, keep an eye out for press releases or sourcing that looks to be heavily taken from a press release - these are seen as primary sources. For example, this would be seen as a primary source since the writing style shows that it's a press release - the most telling sign is the use of language like "our" and "we". Also look out for trivial sources, which are brief, passing mentions in regards to something else or things like short articles notifying the reader about an event. Those can't give notability either. I'm just concerned that this has too many sources that can't really help establish notability or would be the type that would be seen as questionable as far as notability giving is concerned.

I hope this helps - let me know if you need my help with the rephrasing! Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:08, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: PAWS Chicago has been accepted

PAWS Chicago, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

SamHolt6 (talk) 05:33, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]