User talk:Parplaywright

Welcome

Hello, Parplaywright, and welcome to Wikipedia!

Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask at the help desk, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! †dismas†|^(talk) 22:16, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
Introduction Contributing to Wikipedia The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page Intuitive guide to Wikipedia
Finding your way around
Table of contents Department directory Help directory
Editing articles
How to develop an article Simplified Manual of Style

Getting help
Frequently asked questions Cheatsheet Our new user help forum, the Teahouse Where to ask a question Help pages New contributors' help page Article Wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles
How you can help
Community Portal Join a WikiProject Follow Wikipedia etiquette Practice civility Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community

Your help desk question

You have a response.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:30, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Michele Ragusa (April 10)

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

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.

The comment the reviewer left was:

As said earlier, add all available major publications

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:Michele Ragusa 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.

Yashovardhan (talk) 18:41, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Parplaywright, 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! Yashovardhan (talk) 18:41, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Michele Ragusa (April 10)

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

First, let me start by saying that (for once) all of the references come from reliable sources, so good on you for that. That being said:

75% of the given references do no more than verify that Ragusa was in a show.
19% are little more than "she was in a play and was fantastic at it" (which acts as verification and a "review" of the performance itself). These are good references, but for notability purposes we really need more than just reviews of a performer's ability.
The last 6% (which is two references for those math nerds) actually talk about Ragusa herself. Theater Mania and Broadway World, fyi. We need a few more like this in order to flesh out the article and have it be more than a bare-bones "here's a list of every piece she's ever been in".

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:Michele Ragusa 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.

Primefac (talk) 23:14, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Michele Ragusa has been accepted

Michele Ragusa, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-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. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post 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!

Primefac (talk) 17:12, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Patrick A Riviere concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Patrick A Riviere, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:33, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Shania LeClaire Riviere concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Shania LeClaire Riviere, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:34, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Mary Ellen Ashley concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Mary Ellen Ashley, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:33, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Mary Ellen Ashley concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Mary Ellen Ashley, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:32, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Patrick A Riviere (April 30)

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

The comment the reviewer left was:

Fails WP:CREATIVE and WP:GNG. I'm not seeing much media attention, reviews, etc.

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:Patrick A Riviere and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Patrick A Riviere, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, 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.

Clarityfiend (talk) 07:08, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

Thank you Parplaywright (talk · contribs) for your recent addtition/contribution to the Medgar Evers page. You've got now the references I did not have when I tried to make a similar addition a couple of months ago. Your contribution has already been reverted by one of the editors who also was the first one to revert my addition back then. I don't expect my reversion to stand this time either, because back then there were 3 editors that finally blocked my addition. I expect that their coalition of 3 will resume their edit warring this time also. But at least we are two this time, not just me alone. Maybe in time a third editor will also join us, and by then we maybe can go to dispute resolution. You can see the whole history of what went down with my addtition on the page history and on the talk page of the article. Keep up the good work and kudos for the references you added. I had also the movie review from the NYT back then as reference, and when the addition stands maybe it can be re-added. But your references should be good enough for it to stand this time, hopefully. Cheers. warshy ^(¥¥) 16:44, 26 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Warshy:References or not, both are unacceptable.

A You-tube excerpt from the film is not a reference that film is in any way an accurate portrayal (and You-tube is not permitted anyway).
A Guide to writing fiction is, by its own admission, not a reference, especially as it is a review of the original fictional novel which is no more an encyclopaedic reference than the film.

A third editor may join you, but without any valid references that the film is an accurate portrayal of events, the edit cannot stand and dispute resolution will only consider cases backed by reliable and verifiable references of factual accuracy. In any case in view of the number of editors who have opposed its inclusion (counting also the consensus in the original discussion a few years back, you need more than three to reverse the established consensus. This issue has been exhaustively discussed on the talk page - twice, and thus far the position has not changed.

Incidentally, the editors who disagree with you are not a 'coalition' and to make such a claim is WP:ABUSE. We are unrelated editors who just happen to agree with one another (possibly because we understand the Wikipedia policies on reliable sourcing of facts and the exclusion of trivia). 86.154.151.124 (talk) 12:22, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The owner of the page has not expressed himself yet, and I for one, would not allow (and have not allowed in the past) you to raise your bunk on my own user page. As far as I am concerned, you are not welcome here in the least. It is clear to me that you are on WP to just police it and censor it from a particular point of view. What you write above is complete bunk of the same sort you have already put on the article page. This is an encyclopedic mention of the movie and of certain important elements it contains, such as the role Medgar Evers and his assassination play in it. If a movie is an accurate portrayal of a certain issue or not, does not apply to a mention of the movie in WP in the appropriate section, and of elements that are contained in the movie. The snipped referred to is allowed on WP, as are other YouTube sources, and it shows that the element referred to is in the movie, and how it fits in the overall plot. We will eventually go with this to dispute resolution if needed, and your arguments above will be just debunked. In the meantime, you can continue putting it in the article talk page, but not here, as far as I am concerned. warshy ^(¥¥) 17:03, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is not your talk page. You do not have the right to decide who posts here and who does not or who is welcome and who is not. I am not 'policing' anything as you put it. I (and others like me) are just enforcing the Wikipedia policy concerning the inclusion of unreliable sources in articles on a particular subject.

You have not yet got the message. ALL references and material in support of an encyclopaedic article must be reliable, accurate and verifiable. The material that you are attempting to include, is by your own admission, fiction. That makes it unreliable and inaccurate and therefore as far from encyclopaedic as it is possible to get. This issue has been exhausted on the article talk page in two separate discussions with consensus easily in favour of its exclusion on both occasions. In both cases the grounds are that the film content is an unproven portrayal of Evers; that Evers appearance is incidental to the plot of the film.

If you continue to edit war in this area a referral to the adimins for persistently adding unreferenced trivial material is on the cards. I make it that you are currently at 7RR over this issue. 86.154.151.124 (talk) 12:50, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Patrick A Riviere (July 25)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Scope creep 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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Patrick A Riviere and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Patrick A Riviere, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, 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.

scope_creep^Talk 22:17, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

COI notice

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions; however, it appears you may have written a Wikipedia article about yourself. Creating an autobiography is strongly discouraged – please see our guideline on writing autobiographies. If you create such an article, it may be deleted. If what you have done in life is genuinely notable and can be verified according to our policy for articles about living people, someone else will probably create an article about you sooner or later (see Wikipedians with articles). If you wish to add to or change an existing article about yourself, you are welcome to propose the changes by visiting the article's talk page. Please understand that this is an encyclopedia and not a personal web space or social networking site. If your article has already been deleted, please see: Why was the page I created deleted?, and if you feel the deletion was an error, please discuss this with the deleting administrator. Thank you. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:15, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Patrick A Riviere (November 25)

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 reasons left by DGG were: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. This submission is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: apparent self-promotion

DGG ( talk ) 03:29, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Patrick A Riviere

Hello, Parplaywright. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Patrick A Riviere".

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! Lapablo (talk) 08:42, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]