User talk:SyLvRuUz

A belated welcome!

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, SyLvRuUz! I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may still benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center.

If you don't already know, you should sign your posts on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~) to insert your username and the date.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Again, welcome! Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 16:20, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

SyLvRuUz, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi SyLvRuUz! 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 AmaryllisGardener (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:03, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Tammy L. Kernodle has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Tammy L. Kernodle. Thanks! Bkissin (talk) 22:57, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Tammy L. Kernodle has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Tammy L. Kernodle. Thanks! DGG ( talk ) 04:38, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Help me!

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Please help me with... When is an acceptable time to resubmit an article after addressing an editor's concerns? The article I have authored is Draft:Tammy L. Kernodle. In general, does one need to wait for a go-ahead from an editor who has already looked at the page, or can one resubmit before getting an editor's go-ahead? Thanks for your patience with a new user! SyLvRuUz (talk) 21:18, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@SyLvRuUz:, there isn't any specific time period between submissions but re-submission should be based on the reviewer's comments. That is, if you feel you've gone over the comments thoroughly and addressed them each to your best ability, then go ahead and re-submit. If you can't address them, then there's no reason to not leave the draft in the draft space until you can. If you think that the reviewer's concerns are not applicable for some reason or other, you can use the article talk to express why. I hope that helps. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 21:37, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Eggishorn:, Thank you for your helpful response. The process is a bit clearer to me know. Take care! SyLvRuUz (talk) 21:42, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Tammy L. Kernodle has been accepted

Tammy L. Kernodle, 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!

Bkissin (talk) 23:22, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats!

I just saw that the Tammy Kernodle article was published. Congrats! I read part of her piece on Nina Simone and it blew my mind; there is much more I plan to read. Thanks for introducing me to her, thanks for the contribution, and thanks for your perseverance. JSFarman (talk) 23:43, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@JSFarman: Thank you for your congratulations, and for your digital companionship in helping me publish the article on Kernodle. Sorry for this very slow response! I just published an article today on Philip Ewell, and thought you might want to check it out! Take care. SyLvRuUz (talk) 17:20, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Very cool article (very cool subject) - thanks for pointing it out! Also - "digital companionship" is such a great phrase - I will use it frequently. Thanks! JSFarman (talk) 01:23, 4 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@JSFarman: Of course! It's an extension of "digital citizenship," which is what I consider contributing to WP. See you around! SyLvRuUz (talk) 01:47, 4 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Philip Ewell

Nice work on this article! I see you already saw my DYK nom before I could leave you a message. If there are any other hooks or changes to the current hook, feel free to suggest an alternate hook. I took care of the QPQ review part of getting the hook approved. Best.4meter4 (talk) 17:10, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@4meter4: Thanks for you for reading the article, for the compliments, and for the DYK nomination! How did you find your way to the article? What does the rest of the DYK process look like? SyLvRuUz (talk) 17:17, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am a member of WP:WikiProject Classical music‎ and I saw your comment on the talk page. The reviewing process is summarized here: Wikipedia:Did you know/Reviewing guide. If you ever need help nominating an article, just drop me a message and I will gladly walk you through your first solo nomination. New nominations can be made at Template talk:Did you know. The instructions are pretty clear. Just, FYI, it is customary to review a DYK article before you nominate one (known as a QPQ- "quid pro quo"). The reviewing guide will let you know the eligibility criteria for a DYK nom. If you have any questions feel free to ping me.4meter4 (talk) 17:29, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Did you know/Supplementary guidelines is also helpful.4meter4 (talk) 17:32, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@4meter4: Thanks for the links and clarification. So are there any next actions I need to take since you nominated the page? Is it best for me to review the nomination or allow another user to do so? Thanks for your patience with me and your willingness to help. SyLvRuUz (talk) 17:36, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

For right now there is nothing more for you or I to do. Another editor will have to review it for DYK. As the article creator you can not review your own article, and I can not review it because I nominated it. I reviewed another DYK article for this nom's QPQ. Basically, if the reviewer finds any issues in the article (such as close paraphrasing, lack of citations, etc.) then we will need to fix those. I'm not anticipating any issues, because you have done quality work that is within wikipedia policy. Once the reviewer approves the article, an administrator will promote the article into a prep area found at Template:Did you know/Queue. Eventually it will appear on the main page once that prep area is moved into a Queue.4meter4 (talk) 18:35, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Philip Ewell has been nominated for Did You Know

Hello, SyLvRuUz. Philip Ewell, an article you either created or to which you significantly contributed, has been nominated to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page as part of Did you know. You can see the hook and the discussion here. You are welcome to participate! Thank you. EnterpriseyBot (talk!) 08:03, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Philip Ewell

On 2 July 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Philip Ewell, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that music theorist Philip Ewell received "anti-Black statements and personal ad hominem attacks" following his claim that Western music theory is shaped by a "white racial frame"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Philip Ewell. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Philip Ewell), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:03, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations!4meter4 (talk) 11:45, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like it received 6655 views from DYK. Thanks for the nomination! How do I know if the page received those views in 12 hours or in 24 hours? SyLvRuUz (talk) 12:27, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

COI Request to Improve Black Girls Rock!

Hello User:SyLvRuUz. I work with Black Girls Rock!, and therefore have a conflict of interest (COI) relationship. The organization is now much more than an awards show, so this article is quite out of date. I believe in adhering to the Wikipedia rules, therefore I’m looking for an editor that can help me improve this page. I was wondering if you might find it a good use of your time to help with article improvements? I look forward to your reply. Thank you, G Smiley BGR (talk) 16:35, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello G Smiley BGR: Thank you for reaching out with this request. I am happy to do some work to update and improve Black Girls Rock!. If BGR has received any recent notable and reputable publicity that you think would help in updating the article, please point me toward those sources. I will of course do some research myself. I note that a 2016 NYT article is not currently cited on the page. I will do research to see if I can substantiate with reliable sources how it is more than an awards show. Out of curiosity, how did you come to find my page and decide to contact me? Looking forward to helping out! SyLvRuUz (talk) 18:04, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for your speedy response User:SyLvRuUz, and for already starting the research and page editing process! I found your name in connection to the Wikipedia:WikiProject Black Women Creatives and I thought Black Girls Rock! might be a good fit considering your interests. I have drafted some content on the history of the organization with formatted sources. If I share the content on the article talk page, would you be so kind as to provide feedback? The organization has several programs in addition to the awards show, but I thought history might be a good place to start. Thank you. G Smiley BGR (talk) 21:11, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Capitalizing Go

Please join discussion here. Thank you. Coastside (talk) 14:01, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Oxalis palmifrons has been accepted

Oxalis palmifrons, 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!

KylieTastic (talk) 20:31, 28 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:04, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Current discussion on Philip Ewell's Talk page

Hey, as another frequent editor on Ewell's page, you may wish to chime in on the current discussion on his talk page. I've been reverted twice, so without someone else chiming in, I can't do much else without it being an edit war. PianoDan (talk) 18:16, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi PianoDan. Thank you for informing me. I've chimed in on PE's talk page. SyLvRuUz (talk) 19:16, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Current discussion on Jounral of Schenkerian Studies Talk Page

Me again! Our old anonymous friend is back, this time on Talk:Journal of Schenkerian Studies. Since he says "2 to 1" represents overwhelming consensus after an hour of discussion, I thought you might care to chime in. Totally understand if you can't be bothered. PianoDan (talk) 20:29, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Article needing help

The article on Peggy Pettitt needs help. Can I just add it to the main black women creative project page? Just Another Cringy Username (talk) 17:37, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:49, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]