User talk:Thomas8868

November 2024

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions; however, it appears you may have written a Wikipedia article, or a draft for a Wikipedia article, about yourself, at Draft:Thomas Li Academic. Creating an autobiography is strongly discouraged – please see our guideline on writing autobiographies. If you create such an article, it may be deleted. If what you have done in life is genuinely notable and can be verified according to our policy for articles about living people, someone else will probably create an article about you sooner or later (see Notable people who have edited Wikipedia). If you wish to add to or change an existing article about yourself, you are welcome to propose the changes by visiting the article's talk page. Please understand that this is an encyclopedia and not a personal web space or social networking site. If your article has already been deleted, please see: Why was the page I created deleted?, and if you feel the deletion was an error, please discuss this with the deleting administrator. Thank you. FifthFive (talk) 05:51, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing this out, I saw the wiki's guideline, and decided to just keep this as a draft rather than a submission. Thomas8868 (talk) 06:10, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: University of Canterbury Faculty of Engineering (November 14)

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

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:University of Canterbury Faculty of Engineering and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, 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.

Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 06:03, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Thomas8868! Having an article draft 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! Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 06:03, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: University of Canterbury Faculty of Engineering (November 14)

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

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
reliable
secondary
strictly independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Primary sources do not establish notability per WP:ORG. Note that while universities by and large are notable, individual faculties / departments / colleges etc. by and large aren't.

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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:University of Canterbury Faculty of Engineering and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, 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.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:43, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DoubleGrazing University of Canterbury Faculty of Arts, Faculty of Law, and Faculty of Education all have their own wiki pages. Faculty of Engineering (as one of the six faculties at University of Canterbury) is just as notable. https://www.universitiesnz.ac.nz/universities/university-canterbury

There is a lot of historical documentation about this faculty (used to be called college): https://discoverywall.nz/album/130/259

Could you please suggest some edits for this wiki page? Thomas8868 (talk) 07:07, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notability means that multiple independent and reliable third parties (mainly secondary sources) have published significant coverage about something. If such sources exist, you need to summarise what they have said, and cite them as references. Merely asserting that something is notable isn't enough, we need to see evidence of that. And whether articles exist on this university's other faculties (the so-called WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument) isn't relevant; they may well have notability or other problems of their own. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:13, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DoubleGrazing https://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/ED1412/S00023/uc-signs-contract-to-redevelop-engineering-precinct.htm

"Engineering is the University of Canterbury’s most recognised discipline"

https://energylight.net/why-energy-light/case-studies/university-of-canterbury-canterbury-engineering-the-future/

""Canterbury Engineering the Future" included a comprehensive modernisation of existing technical systems as well as the creation of a new centralised atrium. The objective was to create a dynamic, 21st century learning environment to attract the best academics in the profession and to qualify graduates to lead the engineering world of the future." - no other faculty in Uni of Canterbury have this sort investment into buildings.

https://teara.govt.nz/en/photograph/21586/engineering-students-1905

More history foundation

https://jasonbooks.co.nz/p/design-for-a-century-a-history-of-the-school-of-engineering-university-of-canterbury-1887-1987

there is a lengthy book about the faculty of Engineering

https://georgemoon.com/2018/06/historical-anecdotes-from-the-university-of-canterbury/

historical accounts

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/education/78093998/university-of-canterbury-engineering-programme-drops-in-global-ranking

university of Canterbury's engineering is ranked around 50, while the whole uni is only ranked around 260. https://www.topuniversities.com/universities/university-canterbury-te-whare-wananga-o-waitaha

In your opinion, would those sources counts? Or am I really far away from gathering enough secondary sources of evidence? Thomas8868 (talk) 07:44, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Let's see:

The 'Scoop' piece is a press release, ie. primary source, and not independent.
EnergyLight is a primary source.
The next one (Teara) doesn't provide significant coverage.
The Design for a Century book is published by CUP, ie. not independent.
The next source is a blog, but the book it talks about could be useful?
The Stuff article could be okay, at least the parts that aren't commentary by someone from the university.
Top Universities is (mostly) a primary source.

So you potentially have something there, but not yet enough to satisfy WP:ORG. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:18, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing out regarding primary source vs secondary source, and for independence. However there is a trade-off between independence of the source and the proximity/quality of the information.

How about this additional list:

https://www.artscentre.org.nz/about-us/history/ There are clickable articles about famous academics and buildings from the faculty of Engineering.

https://www.engineeringnz.org/programmes/heritage/heritage-records/canterbury-school-engineering-laboratory/

A second source discussing about Faculty of Engineering, by Engineering NZ (a professional association).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ENSOC

The largest Faculty society in University of Canterbury, that is the Engineering Society.

The Canterbury College Engineering (now called Faculty of Engineer) Society was founded by the Engineering School Dean, Professor-in-charge Robert Scott on 19 May 1897 when the School of Engineering was merely 10 years old.

Reference in that wiki page:

1) Neutze, Diana; Beardsley, Eric (1987). Design for a Century: A History of the School of Engineering, University of Canterbury, 1887–1987. Christchurch: University of Canterbury.

https://www.pressreader.com/new-zealand/the-press/20131005/282256663208765?srsltid=AfmBOorVz-E4mM0Pv0axwB8mpQVy3zx7TLrgNOWePTU3Ii7wJ2oC7wm5

Eric Beardsley is a journalist at the Press Newpaper, so for him to co-author a book, this would be a secondary source from a journalist (even though it is published by Canterbury University Press, a reputable publisher).

https://books.google.co.nz/books/about/As_for_Tomorrow_I_Cannot_Say.html?id=ii9vJgAACAAJ&source=kp_author_description&redir_esc=y

Diana Neutze, has a PhD in English, and published numerous books with various publishers. Shows that Diana Neutze is a reputable source.

2) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Scott_(engineer)

Who was the Dean of the Faculty of Engineering. Thomas8868 (talk) 20:50, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome / nau mai

On behalf of Wikimedia Aotearoa New Zealand (WANZ), kia ora, hello, kia orana, nǐ hǎo, talofa lava, bula vinaka, guten Tag, hola, malo e leilei, fakalofa atu, namaste, salâm, see tahay. Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful.

General

Introduction
The five pillars of Wikipedia
How to edit a page
How to write a great article
Simplified Manual of Style
Your first article
Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community
Feel free to make test edits in the sandbox
and check out the Task Center, for ideas about what to work on.

Specific to Aotearoa New Zealand

Wikimedia Aotearoa New Zealand runs local in person meetups in some cities and has a regular series of events where you can find people to help you on your editing journey or just hang out with like-minded people. Check out local Meet Ups and online editathons. We organise an annual conference and the next one will be in Christchurch in March 2025.
Join our Facebook group and follow us on Twitter
Think about becoming a member of Wikimedia Aotearoa New Zealand

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome! Alexeyevitch^(talk) 03:28, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you are interested in learning more about Wikipedia, I suggest going to to this page and looking at a scheduled meetup in Christchurch. Our next meetup is on December 1st and there are three attendees that will be present there and could assist you in your editing career. Alexeyevitch^(talk) 03:41, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]