User talk:Thefactmanirud

Hi Thefactmanirud! 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 Naypta (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

20:30, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

April 2019

Hello, I'm SounderBruce. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Madison, Wisconsin have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles should be written objectively, using independent sources, and from a neutral perspective. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. Sounder Bruce 06:24, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SounderBruce, Do you have any examples of any other section on the Madison, Wisconsin page that could appear promotional? I am fairly new to editing Wikipedia and want to make sure not to make that mistake again. Best, Thefactmanirud (talk) 03:10, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Almost all of it. Almost all of it had some flavor of promotional or subjectivity. And all of it has been reverted. Statements like the following are chock full of unattributed subjectivity, uncited opinions, and unnecessary superlatives. These may be appropriate to a tourist brochure or a real estate flyer, but they have no place on this project. None:

"a strong culture that revolves around locavore food offerings"
"boasts a thriving nightlife"
"desirable and trendy area"
"home to much of the bohemian culture in Madison"
"boasts an impressive [amount] of park space"
"beautiful views of Lake Mendota"
"incredibly popular Opera"
"highly popular place to visit"
"popular and thriving nightlife"

If you are unclear on the impartial tone expected of the project, and why/how to avoid judgement-laden terms (like "popular" and "thriving") please read WP:TONE and WP:PROMO. If unclear on why it is important to remain objective, and to attribute subjective opinions to specific people (like "beautiful" or "impressive") please read WP:NPOV and WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV. Otherwise, if your goal in editing is anything other than to improve the project (and you have a vested interest in something other than improving Wikipedia), then take a glance at WP:COI. WP:PUFFERY and other "words to watch" guidelines are also likely worth a look. Thanks. Guliolopez (talk) 16:55, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, sorry about that. I went back and erased as many things that don't follow WP:NPOV and WP:PUFFERY that I could find.

As I said, I am fairly new, but happy to discuss edits with anyone so I can learn quickly. I would love to follow the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle.

A belated welcome!

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Thefactmanirud. 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 benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Wikipedia:Questions, or place {{help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there.

Again, welcome! Dolotta (talk) 00:43, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Redefined A Cappella for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Redefined A Cappella 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/Redefined A Cappella 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. DGG ( talk ) 08:24, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Madison, Wisconsin

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Madison, Wisconsin you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of AmericanAir88 -- AmericanAir88 (talk) 22:00, 9 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Apologize for the failure of your GAN

Hello,

I apologize for failing Madison, Wisconsin as a nomination, but the article had several issues present that fails the criteria. I do see that you put a ton of work into the article and I am asking to not be discouraged from this review. Keep up the good work and chin up. AmericanAir88^(talk) 22:05, 9 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Madison, Wisconsin

The article Madison, Wisconsin you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Madison, Wisconsin for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of AmericanAir88 -- AmericanAir88 (talk) 22:21, 9 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]