User talk:Philjones573

Welcome

Hello, Philjones573, 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! Murph9000 (talk) 20:50, 21 September 2016 (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

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Velella ^{Velella Talk} 23:56, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your username

Welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that your username, "Philjonescomp", may not comply with our username policy. Please note that you may not use a username that represents the name of a company, group, organization, product, or website. Examples of usernames that are not allowed include "XYZ Company", "MyWidgetsUSA.com", and "Foobar Museum of Art". However, you are invited to use a username that contains such a name if it identifies you personally, such as "Jack Smith at XYZ Company", "Mark at WidgetsUSA", or "FoobarFan87".

Please also note that Wikipedia does not allow accounts to be shared by multiple people, and that you may not advocate for or promote any company, group, organization, product, or website, regardless of your username. Moreover, I recommend that you read our conflict of interest guideline. If you are a single individual and are willing to contribute to Wikipedia in an unbiased manner, please create a new account or request a change of username, by completing this form, that complies with our username policy. If you believe that your username does not violate our policy, please leave a note here explaining why. Thank you. Vanjagenije (talk) 08:43, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Philjones573, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Philjones573! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Soni (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:03, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Hillier Parker May and Rowden

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 Hillier Parker May and Rowden, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

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 removed 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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Exemplo347 (talk) 23:19, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Philjones573. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places, or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic, and it is important when editing Wikipedia articles that such connections be completely transparent. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, we ask that you please:

avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your family, friends, school, company, club, or organization, as well as any competing companies' projects or products;
instead, you are encouraged to propose changes on the Talk pages of affected article(s) (see the {{request edit}} template);
when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or to the website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Please take a few moments to read and review Wikipedia's policies regarding conflicts of interest, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. Thank you. Exemplo347 (talk) 23:22, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Misuse of article space

Article space is not for use as a communication tool. If you believe that a decision at an articles for deletion discussion was incorrect or not made in accordance with consensus, you may discuss it with the closing administrator (in this case, me), and if still not satisfied after that, you may request a deletion review. You may not put anything except an encyclopedia article in article space. Please don't do that again. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 01:35, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hillier Parker

Commiserations on the deletion of HPM&R. As you have discovered, Wikipedia can be a brutal place. Despite being publicised as "the encyclopedia anyone can edit", it is all too easy to fall foul of a self-appointed "elite", who know their way around the labyrinthine (and often contradictory) system of rules and policy, and can baffle the newcomer with obscure acronyms, while at the same time ignoring the policies that don't suit them. (See WP:BITE and WP:WL, among other pages.) Your problem was that you got off on the wrong foot by creating an article that appeared to some to be "promotional", and then by appearing to make a connection between the article and a monetary donation. Both of those were clearly misunderstandings, and complete red herrings, but they brought the article to the attention of some of the more critical active editors. If, at the outset, you had created a shorter article, including some relevant references, it would probably barely have been noticed, and the bigger question of notability would never have arisen.

So what now? You may well have been put off Wikipedia for life, but I'll assume for the moment that you still want to get the article in place. I should explain that, although I am a more experienced editor than you (6 years of fairly regular editing), I have generally steered clear of disputes, and I absolutely don't know my way around the system. However, as I understand it from WP:DELETE, the first step is to discuss the issue with the admin who closed the discussion (in this case Seraphimblade). I have started a conversation on his Talk page – User talk:Seraphimblade#Hillier Parker May and Rowden – and you're welcome to join in, but I'm not encouraged by his responses so far, and I'm not really tempted to continue to argue the toss much further. (He has ignored the fact that most of the Delete votes were cast when the article was in a minimalist state, and before either of us had posted our arguments in favour of Keep.) However, on the specific point of your concern about material and references you have lost through the deletion, my understanding is that you can ask the admin to "undelete" the page to a sandbox in your personal userspace so you can work on it and improve it in private – see the discussion at User talk:Iridescent#Henley & Partners page deletion for a parallel case; and, for the concept of userspace and sandboxes, WP:USER and WP:ABOUTSAND). You are also able to appeal against the deletion through a Deletion Review (WP:DRV), but my suspicion is that that will simply lead you into further unpleasant wikilawyering. Otherwise, you are at liberty to begin again, and to attempt to restore the substance of the article in mainspace, provided that you are seen to address the concerns that led to its deletion. My advice would be to attempt to get the article undeleted to your sandbox, and to work on it a bit, maybe over weeks or months; but meanwhile to continue to make minor edits to articles elsewhere on subjects that interest you, which will help you familiarise yourself with Wikipedia norms and procedures. (Creating a Watchlist of articles is a good start: click on the star symbol at the top of any of pages of interest to add them to your list, and then click on "Watchlist" in your personal bar at the very top of the screen to monitor recent edits to them – WP:WATCH for further details.) Good luck anyway. GrindtXX (talk) 14:38, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Since I was pinged here, just for reference, I'm almost always willing to restore an article to a draft or sandbox if someone wants to make a good faith effort at working on it. (I'd prefer a draft so that other editors can see and work on it as well, generally.) The only exception is when there's an issue with the article containing derogatory information about living persons or copyright violations, but no such concerns were raised in this case. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 14:42, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

August 2016

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. Gestrid (talk) 21:46, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Philjones573. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by Murph9000 (talk) 21:21, 21 September 2016 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).[reply]

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Philjones573. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by AntiCompositeNumber (Leave a message) 00:52, 23 September 2016 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Hillier Parker May and Rowden has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Hillier Parker May and Rowden. Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 02:30, 23 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Hillier Parker May and Rowden has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Hillier Parker May and Rowden. Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 18:02, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Hillier Parker May and Rowden (October 31)

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

Declining based on previous deletion discussion. As noted, the author can request undeletion to permit a reviewer to compare this draft against the deleted article.

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:Hillier Parker May and Rowden 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.

Robert McClenon (talk) 18:05, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Philjones573. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by MadScientistX11 (talk) 14:38, 13 October 2017 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Hillier Parker May and Rowden (April 4)

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

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere 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, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1), 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:

It's a little confusing to follow the history, but as far as I can tell, the version deleted at AfD was this one. It looks to me to be almost identical to the draft being proposed now, so I don't see how restoring it makes any sense.

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:Hillier Parker May and Rowden 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:Hillier Parker May and Rowden, 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 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.

-- RoySmith (talk) 01:52, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My opinion is that "Hillier Parker May and Rowden" could be a suitable subject for a Wikipedia article. Another British ex-company, Fisons, has an article about it, albeit a short one. If you still want to get it accepted, my advice would be to remove all the marginal content, including the whole of the "People" section. Maproom (talk) 14:39, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]