User talk:TrevorGriffiths

Welcome

Hello, TrevorGriffiths, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Wikipedia Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} and your question on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

We hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 11:27, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Emotional Chaos Theory

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 Emotional Chaos Theory requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about something invented/coined/discovered by the article's creator or someone they know personally, and it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles 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 removed 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. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 12:32, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Rather than deleting, the admin moved the page out of live space into another sandbox page for you, so now you have 2 draft versions one at User talk:TrevorGriffiths/Emotional Chaos Theory and one at User:TrevorGriffiths/sandbox. I would suggest selecting one, blanking the other and putting a {{db-user}} on the one you dont want to use so that it is deleted. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 15:30, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Once your draft version is ready with appropriate citations that demonstrate it meets the requirements for a stand alone article, then you can press the "submit" button to have a volunteer review and give suggestions. Please be aware that Wikipedia doesn't publish original thought - all analysis, commentary, "new ideas" must be verifiable as having been previously published in a reliable source - Wikipedia merely collects and collates what others have already found worthy of discussion. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 15:35, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Based upon a quick google books search [1] it appears that Trevor Griffiths is the only person who has written about "Emotional Chaos Theory". If you are that Trevor Griffiths, please read our conflict of interest policy and how it relates to writing about subjects you are closely related to. If you are not that Trevor Griffiths, please see our user name policy and request a user name that is not an impersonation as outlined here -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 15:39, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Aha! I am getting it - steep learning curve. I am working on the basis of another Wiki rule, assuming good intention. The discussions I am having in a number of academic departments do not count as citations, but at least I am learning how to use your wiki systems for a potential future. Thanks for the feedback.TrevorGriffiths (talk) 17:43, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, writing for Wikipedia is unlike writing for almost any other situation. Most places want and encourage your writing to bring new ideas and new ways of looking at things. Wikipedia editors just collect and curate what others have written. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 17:49, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No original research

Dr Griffiths, welcome to Wikipedia. This duplicates some of what people have said above, but I was called away while I was writing it.

Your article is not yet ready for the main encyclopedia, but rather than delete it I have moved it to User:TrevorGriffiths/Emotional Chaos Theory, a page in your "user space" where you can work on it.

I have to say that I have doubts whether it will be suitable for Wikipedia. I say this not to discourage you, but perhaps to save you from wasting time. Please read the fundamental policy Wikipedia:No original research. You should read all of it, but note the following passages in particular:

"If no reliable third-party sources can be found on a topic, Wikipedia should not have an article about it. If you discover something new, Wikipedia is not the place to announce such a discovery."

"Do not combine material from multiple sources to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any of the sources."

I did a quick search and the references I find about this subject all seem to be associated with you. Unless this subject has been studied and commented on by other people, it is too early for a Wikipedia article.

I have another concern: some of what I found contained text very similar to your article. If this material has been published anywhere before, we need a formal copyright release, as described at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. Just asserting that you are the author and give permission is not enough. Publishing under Wikipedia's CC-BY-SA license gives any reader the right to copy, modify and re-use for any purpose including commercial, and we have to be certain that the actual copyright owner understands and agrees to this.

Regards, JohnCD (talk) 15:56, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this feedback. I am getting the idea now. I am grateful for the contribution Wikipedia makes to my general writing, so that means grateful for your instruction now!TrevorGriffiths (talk) 17:47, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, User:TrevorGriffiths/sandbox

Hello, TrevorGriffiths. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "sandbox".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:16, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]