User talk:Stablemushrooms

Welcome!

Hi Stablemushrooms! 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! User:Shirt58 (talk) 🦘 09:58, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Shirt58! Thanks for welcoming me. I really appreciate the resources :) Stablemushrooms (talk) 09:59, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Execushe

Hi - all of your edits so far have involved inserting some text based around a report by Execushe. First, please don't add external links to our articles (per WP:ELNO). Second, are you connected in any way to that organisation? Please be aware of the requirements outlined at WP:COI and WP:PAID. Thank you. Girth Summit _(blether) 12:52, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Girth, thank you for flagging this to me. I really appreciate it. I am not connected to the organisation, just happen to research on the subject and attended a few of their webinars. One in particular being with UN Women. The article appears to be gone, is there a way to bring it back with the external link removed? Thank you. Stablemushrooms (talk) 14:26, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Stablemushrooms please don't revert my edits without an explanation in the edit summary (Help:Edit summary). I feel like the insertion of this same content into 6 different articles wasn't really appropriate; and the content also needed work to be a reasonable inclusion and written in Wikipedia style. Galobtter (pingó mió) 14:38, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Galobtter my apologies. do you want to advise on how this particular article could be improved in that case? As of now, it seems to be a relatively new concept that was spurred on by Antonio Guterres' speech in 2020 and has taken on a new form based on research provided by entities like UN Women, ExecuShe, and Female Lead. Stablemushrooms (talk) 14:43, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edit reversion

In this edit here, I reverted some information that appears to be a violation of our copyright policy.

I provided a brief summary of the problem in the edit summary, which should be visible just below my name. You can also click on the "view history" tab in the article to see the recent history of the article. This should be an edit with my name, and a parenthetical comment explaining why your edit was reverted. If that information is not sufficient to explain the situation, please ask.

I do occasionally make mistakes. We get hundreds of reports of potential copyright violations every week, and sometimes there are false positives, for a variety of reasons. (Perhaps the material was moved from another Wikipedia article, or the material was properly licensed but the license information was not obvious, or the material is in the public domain but I didn't realize it was public domain, and there can be other situations generating a report to our Copy Patrol tool that turn out not to be actual copyright violations.) If you think my edit was mistaken, please politely let me know and I will investigate. S Philbrick (Talk) 12:54, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I don't my edit was in violation of the copyright policy. The article I referenced was from https://womensagenda.com.au/latest/women-control-only-1-per-cent-of-shares-at-sp-500-companies/ [7 June], not https://www.smartcompany.com.au/finance/gender-power-gap-women-shares-sp-500-companies/ [8 June]. The former was released prior to the latter article. Stablemushrooms (talk) 14:31, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Gender power gap for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Gender power gap 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/Gender power gap 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.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:17, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks for letting me know. I'm in the process of updating the article to make it sound less reflective, and more neutral and according to Wikipedia policies. Stablemushrooms (talk) 09:00, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Gender power gap

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 Gender power gap 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 discussion, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gender power gap. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, 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 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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Uncle Spock (talk) 09:35, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Uncle Spock Hi, I contested the nomination by leaving a comment in talk page of the article. Does anything further need to be done? Stablemushrooms (talk) 09:48, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, yes that's all that needs to be done thanks.

Would you like me to move it to draft, to give you more time to work on it? Uncle Spock (talk) 10:31, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Uncle Spock Brilliant, thank you.

Erm, do you reckon it needs more time to be worked on? I mean, can you see any blatant errors/room for improvements, in your opinion? Stablemushrooms (talk) 10:33, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it's nearly identical to the last one, but with fewer sources this time. Uncle Spock (talk) 10:34, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Uncle Spock I may have misunderstood the errors from last one, but I was under the impression the tone and angle of the article was off? How it read as an OR or essay. I changed the sentence structures completely and removed the duplicated information (across different sources). Was this not enough? Stablemushrooms (talk) 10:38, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm happy either to let an administrator decide on whether it's sufficiently changed, or to move it to draft for review now if you prefer. Uncle Spock (talk) 10:44, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Uncle Spock could you remind me what happens draft for review? Is it only my eyes that can see it? Stablemushrooms (talk) 10:49, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No, anyone can see and edit a draft. For more information, please see WP:Draft and WP:Your first article. Uncle Spock (talk) 10:52, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Uncle Spock okay, in that case, please move it to draft for review. Thanks! Stablemushrooms (talk) 10:55, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Gender power gap has been accepted

Gender power gap, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now 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. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Rkieferbaum (talk) 19:06, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]