Contents

User talk:Thenewobjective

Hello, Thenewobjective, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

• Introduction and Getting started
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article
• Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 06:46, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source/license for File:Ralph corsel italo american times byline.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Ralph corsel italo american times byline.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 06:46, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

For many traditional practitioners and fans of science fiction, the term "sci fi" is perceived as a pejorative, and attached to only the worst in that genre, like Amazon Women on the Moon. Please refrain from its use in most contexts. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:29, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Mike, I made this change, however younger generations don't have this hang-up and the abbreviation has mostly lost this pejorative connotation, perhaps due to SyFy network, etc. I've noticed many contemporary writers, such as Jonathan Hickman, routinely use the abbreviation sci-fi without any negative implications. Thenewobjective (talk) 18:54, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you are as close as St. Paul, I do hope you're urging your Fiction and the Future students to come to WisCon in May of 2022. There is no better place on the planet to study the topics of gender, sexual identity, race, class, appropriation, etc. in SF than a WisCon. I'm just a civil service clerk, but WisCon is where I got to talk to Ursula LeGuin and Octavia Butler, to say nothing of Samuel R. Delany and Nisi Shawl. There's just nothing like it. --Orange Mike | Talk 20:02, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, I live in Canada and will not be returning to the Midwest any time soon. My course is online due to the pandemic. However, I'm a big supporter of WisCon's mission and will be sure to let my students know. I regret I was never able to make it during my years in residence in the Twin Cities, as I tended to leave the area once the school year concluded. Take care, and thanks again. Thenewobjective (talk) 18:58, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Le Petit Théâtre de l'Absolu 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.

Singularity42 (talk) 19:14, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You recently created an article, Le Petit Théâtre de l'Absolu. If you look at it, it currently has 4 issues. It is also nominated for deletion. Unfortunately, it is unlikely to survive deletion in its current state. It currently contains orginal research, is not notable, and does not seem to cite any legitamate references. Two references are not links, two do not work, and the one that does says nothing related to the article. The only thing I can find about this theatre is on Wikipedia, which, while I have not checked everything, of what I have checked, seem to either have been added by you, added after this article was made, or added from an article with one of two addition methods I listed above (they are closely related or link to each other). Due to this, I am starting to this that it is a hoax. DO NOT CREATE HOAXES. This might have been a mistake or might have been intentional, but regardless is very harmful to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is a trusted source of reliable information, and this potentionally fake articles infomation could pop up in various other places. If this is not a hoax, please fix the 4 other issues and apoligies for the error, if it is, tag it with either {{Db-hoax}} {{Db-g7}} or both to rapidly delete it. If you don't want to work on it, delete it with {{Db-g7}}. If this article was a mistake delete it with {{Db-error}} or move it. Regardless, this needs rapid attention. @Thenewobjective Starship SN20 (talk) 21:31, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a hoax. I saw reference of the group on the Black Ox Orkestar page, noticed that the page didn't exist, and so I tried to create one. I found the references via academic databases. The Puppetry Journal and alt.theatre are real publications, as is the Chicago Tribune. Perhaps, despite being documented in various publications, the group doesn't meet the threshold for notability, but I am not engaging in a hoax, nor did I do any original research. Thenewobjective (talk) 23:06, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. They may be real publications, and they may not, and there is no why to prove it without you using inline citations. Please use them. The inline citations currently on it either no longer exist or say nothing on the subject. This most definitely does not meet noatbility standards. I have no way to knows if you are correct in anything you say because your references all dont work. There is no current evidence other than you saying it for me to believe it upon. Not that I think you are liar, but people are capable of lying. @Thenewobjective Starship SN20 (talk) 00:56, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• This article was clearly not a hoax and I appreciate your good faith effort to fill in an area of the encyclopedia. I do hope you'll continue to edit other articles! There are plenty that could use your diligent referencing. czar 03:09, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Thanks so much, I appreciate your weighing in. I'm using Wikipedia as a tool in teaching a college class, and this did demonstrate my point about the difficulties of creating new pages! Thenewobjective (talk) 20:56, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Good luck with your class! By the way, if any of the "classics of the field" you're teaching with this term are academic monographs that don't have articles, those are pretty easy for students to write decent short articles on, and they count as notable if they've been the subject of "two or more non-trivial reviews" (see WP:NBOOK). So that's a very easy notability guideline to get a handle on, and you can use it as annotated bibliography writing practice. So long as the reviews are listed in a "Further reading" section or footnoted in the article itself, they should be safe. (The most iron-clad stub I've ever seen is one of czar's, actually: [1]. No one in their right mind is going to try to AfD that.) -- asilvering (talk) 04:13, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Sarenco, is not suitable as written to remain published. An article needs more information and citations from reliable, independent sources to remain in the mainspace. Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline, has suitable content and thus is ready for mainspace, click the Submit the draft for review! button atop the article. Silikonz💬 04:00, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Sarenco 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.

I understand. It exists in Italian Wikipedia, so I was just trying to port it over. Maybe the standards are lower in non-English Wikipedia? I'm too busy now to work on this but will gather a bibliography when I have a chance. Thenewobjective (talk) 23:55, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Thenewobjective! 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! asilvering (talk) 04:29, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Thenewobjective. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Sarenco, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 05:02, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Thenewobjective. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Sarenco".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. 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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:28, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]