User talk:WashD101

Hi.

Automatic invitation to visit WP:Teahouse sent by HostBot

Hi WashD101! 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 peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Osarius (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 20:40, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Roger W. Jones) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Roger W. Jones, WashD101!

Wikipedia editor Sulfurboy just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

good article, interesting bio. thanks for your work.

To reply, leave a comment on Sulfurboy's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

User:WashD101 - sandbox

The list in User:WashD101/sandbox needs to be limited to only those winners for which an independent reliable source can be found to support the entry and there needs to be a column for the source. You also may want to have a column for photos of the individuals. The list itself (the page User:WashD101/sandbox) can be put in a stand alone article such as List of Roger W. Jones Award for Executive Leadership recipients. It would be nice to be able to shorten that list name, but it really depends on how the sources refer to the topic. If you want to do the list right and attract editors to help with the list, use Wikipedia:Featured list criteria to develop the list and model the list after a few of those lists in Category:FL-Class awards articles. As for the text, the reason footnotes are put at the end of a sentence is to say that is where the information is sourced. Typically, each sentence only needs one footnote. I use two footnotes when I build a sentence from two different sources. When editors see something like "The Roger W. Jones Award for Executive Leadership is awarded to the top two of these 6,100 each year, meaning this award goes to a top echelon of less than 0.001% U.S. public service members.[6][7][8][9][10][11]" they see an issue that may need to be addressed. Also, written correctly, the lead of any article generally should not need footnotes because it should be a summary of what the body of the article says. See WP:CITELEAD. When editors see footnotes in a lead of a non-controversial subject, they see that the lead may need more work. For a list article, it may be different because there may not be that much of an article body written. -- Jreferee (talk) 09:39, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks User talk:Jreferee, I am trying to model after Alfred I. duPont–Columbia University Award and I've heard from other editors that they've never shied away from having more references that add to the source? Different styles... different tastes? What are your thoughts about Alfred I. duPont–Columbia University Award? WashD101 (talk) 01:44, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Alfred I. duPont–Columbia University Award article is listed as a stub class (it probably is a start class). Using an FL class list --

FA	A	GA	B	C	Start	Stub	FL	List	Category	Disambig	Draft	File	Project	Template	NA	???
0	0	36	304	896	4,630	3,131	726	9,238	11,063	54	87	334	40	3,435	1,941	1,953

as an example list helps avoid problems. See the top of Category:FL-Class awards articles for the list category class template. I'll put something together so you can get an idea of what I am getting at. -- Jreferee (talk) 14:20, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot Jreferee... I guess I'm now just waiting to see how the dispute ends, it currently seems to be leaning to overturn but no closure has been reached? I noticed that User:Brycehughes restored some the references that I had, that you deleted, back... so I guess there are differing opinions on having more or less references that add to the source? I follow you on the FL-articles, and that's something to strive for if all of us can actually edit the article without it being sudden deleted without any communication from the admin? IBM Award is a good model to strive for similar to this one perhaps? WashD101 (talk) 03:15, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

More about Roger Jones award

I posted here, under the heading "Policy issues". I addressed a couple of your concerns since no one else had.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 21:57, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Roger W. Jones

Hello, WashD101. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "Roger W. Jones".

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. JMHamo (talk) 22:53, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]