User talk:TedDougal'n'Jack

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

Hi TedDougal'n'Jack! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

-- 05:14, Monday, January 6, 2020 (UTC)

Mission 1	Mission 2	Mission 3	Mission 4	Mission 5	Mission 6	Mission 7
Say Hello to the World	An Invitation to Earth	Small Changes, Big Impact	The Neutral Point of View	The Veil of Verifiability	The Civility Code	Looking Good Together

Get Help

About The Wikipedia Adventure | Hang out in the Interstellar Lounge

March 2020

Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. This is just a note to let you know that I've moved the draft that you were working on to Draft:Leo Igwe, from its old location at User:TedDougal'n'Jack/sandbox. This has been done because the Draft namespace is the preferred location for Articles for Creation submissions. Please feel free to continue to work on it there. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to ask me on my talk page. Thank you. Sulfurboy (talk) 05:56, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Leo Igwe (March 9)

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:

Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Leo Igwe instead.

The comment the reviewer left was:

This appears to be an effort to add information to the existing article. Articles for Creation is not used to add to existing articles. Please either discuss your proposed changes on the article talk page at Talk:Leo Igwe or edit the article boldly and be prepared to discuss your edits after you have made them. If you have questions about how to expand an article, you may ask at the Teahouse.

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:Leo Igwe 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:Leo Igwe, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" 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.

Robert McClenon (talk) 14:05, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, TedDougal'n'Jack! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation 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! Robert McClenon (talk) 14:05, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The One (TV program), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Psychometry. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:37, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

detection of gravity and levity on wikipedia

It would have been very easy to have taken your comment at the Gravity Discovery Centre as being literal rather than what could be possibly humorous without any designation as to which way it was taken. It can be a tricky stance if there is no indication of which way it is meant to be... JarrahTree 10:49, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In the last 15 years there have been editors who really exhausted themselves trying to inculcate a sense of scientific thinking into subject areas that they had very literalist views of things - User:science apologist (since disappeared) was a notable rager through areas he/she had problems with. Thanks for adding the link - best of luck. JarrahTree 05:20, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Its all bollocks without WP:RS

All the hard work comes to naught without adequate citations - it is seen as either WP:COPYVIO territory or WP:OR - please make an effort to find ways to substantiate all the extra bits. JarrahTree 06:01, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rejuvenate WikiProject Skepticism

Hello - my name is Susan Gerbic (Sgerbic) and I'm writing to you because at some point you joined Wikipedia:WikiProject Skepticism. This might have been months ago - or even years ago. With the best of intentions the project was created years ago, and sadly like many WikiProjects has started to go dormant. A group of us are attempting to revitalize the Skepticism project, already we have begun to clean up the main page and I've just redone the participant page. No one is in charge of this project, it is member directed, which might have been the reason it almost went dormant. We are attempting to bring back conversations on the talk page and have two subprojects as well, in the hopes that it might spark involvement and a way of getting to know each other better. One was created several years ago but is very well organized and a lot of progress was made, Wikipedia:WikiProject Skepticism/Skeptical organisations in Europe. The other I created a couple weeks ago, it is very simple and has a silly name Wikipedia:WikiProject Skepticism/Skepticism Stub Sub-Project Project (SSSPP). This sub-project runs from March 1 to June 1, 2022. We are attempting to rewrite skepticism stubs and add them to this list. As you can see we have already made progress.

The reason I'm writing to you now is because we would love to have you come back to the project and become involved, either by working on one of the sub-projects, proposing your own (and managing it), or just hanging out on the talk page getting to know the other editors and maybe donate some of your wisdom to some of the conversations. As I said, no one is in charge, so if you have something in mind you would like to see done, please suggest it on the talk page and hopefully others will agree. Please add the project to your watchlist, update your personal user page showing you are a proud member of WikiProject Skepticism. And DIVE in, this is what the work list looks like [1] frightening at first glance, but we have already started chipping away at it.

The Wikipedia:WikiProject Skepticism/Participants page has gone though a giant change - you may want to update your information. And of course if this project no longer interests you, please remove your name from the participant list, we would hate to see you go, but completely understand.

Thank you for your time, I hope to edit with you in the future.Sgerbic (talk) 07:33, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Susan. Sorry for the long silence. I got quite busy (I now have 3 part-time jobs!) and also lost my confidence a little after that edit of the Gravity Discovery Centre, in which I couldn't find good reference to quote, etc. I should probably revisit it and see if I can at least tie up a few loose ends. Maybe you can suggest a way forward on that and then I can move on to helping with the stubs, for example? TedDougal'n'Jack (talk) 02:06, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just move on ahead and don't look back on it, nothing has to be perfect and maybe you will come back to it later. Sgerbic (talk) 03:54, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:Wildlife interaction at Wildlife Show 2016 Wild Life 160629 JWyld.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Wildlife interaction at Wildlife Show 2016 Wild Life 160629 JWyld.jpg. However, it is currently missing information on its copyright and licensing status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can verify that it has an acceptable license status and a verifiable source. Please add this information by editing the image description page. You may refer to the image use policy to learn what files you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. The page on copyright tags may help you to find the correct tag to use for your file. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please also check any other files you may have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Vladlen Manilov ✉ / 04:02, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for File:A display at the memorial Wildlife Show Wild Life 160629 JWyld.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:A display at the memorial Wildlife Show Wild Life 160629 JWyld.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 04:30, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Enthusiasm

Sheesh, hard to know where to go with this - The Nats article has been given your enthusiastic approach, and is, in one sense 'great!!', but lack what is needed for a genuine wikipedia encyclopedia article -

WP:RS does not mean a large collection of links to the website, WP:ONESOURCE

WP:MOS specifically states that external links are not specifically exposed in text

I will try to start the repair job, (no doubt hampered by others) to give you a sense of

what is needed to recover the article - please understand that wikipedia is not a website,

but an encyclopedia that is tied to reliable sources. Recent social events do not make an article, you maybe need to find blog space for things like that.

Please be patient, and please take note of what edits follow you, in good faith, thanks JarrahTree 09:51, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]