...are people. Any signature with "bot" in it is an automated program. For example, ClueBot automatically reverts (reverses) edits it determines are vandalism, and leaves a message on the purportedly offending editor's Talk page. There are false positives when editors add content in good faith (meaning they believe what they did improves the article), but ClueBot 'sees' it as vandalism. This can happen when an editor adds content without adding a supporting reference at the same time. David notMD (talk) 17:52, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there,
Just a quick note to say please don't add/enable categories on draft pages as per WP:DRAFTNOCAT. The categories are only for published articles. Good up the good work otherwise though! -Kj cheetham (talk) 21:13, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Awesome, thanks for being so welcoming! I'll definitely hit you up with Qs. And thanks for checking out some of my students' pages! They are really excited about the potential to have their projects meaningfully contribute to wikipedia, so I'm trying to make sure that I know enough to be able to advocate for their pages being edited and not quickly deleted! I'll check out those links - many thanks! Csoconn (talk) 00:21, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately there is quite a backlog for AFC at the moment, so some articles may take months to get reviewed. :( Reviewers often don't check them in any particular order. I'm not involved with AFC myself, but minor things I often see done imporperly on new articles include things like: including the person's name as a top level header at the top, using promotional "peakcock" language, using academic titles most of the time, sentance case of headings, using external links in the main body of the article, relying too much on primary sources, etc. Making sure the article is notable in the first place is more major though! -Kj cheetham (talk) 11:37, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. The reason I noticed the student articles was they were flagged up on my watchlist when the categories were added, as I keep an eye on things like Category:Women scientists. Let me know if there's any specific articles you'd like me to glance at though. -Kj cheetham (talk) 11:47, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ooooh, @Kj cheetham:, I actually do have a question! I'm not entirely sure I understand the workflow of sandbox --> draft --> the AfC committee. For instance, this draft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Tadashi_Fukami?action=edit (which came from a sandbox submission). I notice it doesn't have an AfC tag. Should it? Can I initiate that or is that for a volunteer above my level? Some of the draft pages have a thing saying "speed this up by flagging it for a project" (e.g., the women in STEM wiki project), but I don't see that option here. Why is that? Thank you for your help thus far!
Generally the sandbox is just for experimenting and trying out new things. More experienced editors typically would start a new article straight as a draft. Draft:Tadashi Fukami is not currently in the queue at all for review by WP:AFC. As the tag is missing for some reason, you need to go into edit source and add {{subst:submit}} to the very bottom of the draft to submit it. I'm not reviewing it myself, but I would say the list of publications is excessive - should only be a small sample of representative publications. It should focus more on the person. I see someone else already disabled the categories, but I also changed the section headers to sentance case. It's best to avoid refernces in the section headers too, as has been done for "Honors & awards". -Kj cheetham (talk) 11:43, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! Helps a ton. I'm going to get through grading these projects and then go through and make some of these changes, hopefully later this week. Thanks for the many tips! Csoconn (talk) 05:43, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
HiCsoconn! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, what to do when someone sent me a message?, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days (usually at least two days, and sometimes four or more). You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please feel free to create a new thread.
Jeanette Davis, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 20% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
Kj cheetham, you're very kind! It's been such a rewarding experience figuring out the ins and outs of wikipedia! Thank you SO MUCH for your help along the way - really, really appreciated! Csoconn (talk) 00:24, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The training includes instructions for setting up a structured course page, with tools for tracking student work and encouraging peer review. Please also see this helpful advice for instructors.
If you run into problems or want some feedback on your Wikipedia assignment plans, try posting to the education noticeboard.
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by MarioJump83 were:
"Notable publications" section isn't sourced for most part.
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:Jiquan Chen 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:Jiquan Chen, 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.
Hello, Csoconn!
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! MarioJump83!11:05, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Csoconn, thanks for submitting this draft! Unfortunately I'm going to decline your submission because it is not quite sourced. MarioJump83!12:12, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, MarioJump83 - thanks for the heads up! This is my student's draft page from last semester, and I'm happy to make those changes. I will also ask in the TeaHouse, but I haven't been quite able to figure out the best practice on this yet - for notable publications, should I be sourcing as a wikipedia citation to a website for the paper/book, or linking to an "external to wikipedia" link? I've seen it done both ways when I checked out other wiki biographies of academics (and some pages do both). Let me know if you have a preference! (Also, Stina2121, heads up!) Thanks! Csoconn (talk) 15:10, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
HiCsoconn! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, how to source "notable publications" in a biography page for an academic?, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days (usually at least two days, and sometimes four or more). You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please feel free to create a new thread.
Priyanga Amarasekare, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
Tadashi Fukami, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
Beatrice Crona, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 20% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
Jiquan Chen, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
Hello Csoconn! Your additions to Maria Carmen Lemos have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, it's important to understand and adhere to guidelines about using information from sources to prevent copyright and plagiarism issues. Here are the key points:
Paraphrasing: Beyond limited quotations, you are required to put all information in your own words. Following the source's wording too closely can lead to copyright issues and is not permitted; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when paraphrasing, you must still cite your sources as appropriate.
Copyrighted material donation:Ifyou hold the copyright to the content you want to copy, or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license the text for publication here. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices. Persistent failure to comply may result in being blocked from editing. If you have any questions or need further clarification, please ask them here on this page, or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 01:00, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]