User talk:AnRoCa

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

Hi SaveCambodiasWildlife! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

-- 07:15, Thursday, March 23, 2017 (UTC)

Mission 1	Mission 2	Mission 3	Mission 4	Mission 5	Mission 6	Mission 7
Say Hello to the World	An Invitation to Earth	Small Changes, Big Impact	The Neutral Point of View	The Veil of Verifiability	The Civility Code	Looking Good Together

Get Help

About The Wikipedia Adventure | Hang out in the Interstellar Lounge

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

Hi SaveCambodiasWildlife! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

-- 07:15, Thursday, March 23, 2017 (UTC)

Mission 1	Mission 2	Mission 3	Mission 4	Mission 5	Mission 6	Mission 7
Say Hello to the World	An Invitation to Earth	Small Changes, Big Impact	The Neutral Point of View	The Veil of Verifiability	The Civility Code	Looking Good Together

Get Help

About The Wikipedia Adventure | Hang out in the Interstellar Lounge

Your username

Welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that your username, "SaveCambodiasWildlife", may not meet Wikipedia's username policy because usernames which imply they represent a specific company, organization or group are not allowed per WP:ORGNAME.. If you believe that your username does not violate our policy, please leave a note here explaining why. As an alternative, you may ask for a change of username by completing this form, or you may simply create a new account for editing. Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:55, 23 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (April 6)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by KGirlTrucker81 was:

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Simply an advertised company profile.

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 User:AnRoCa/sandbox and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

KGirlTrucker81^{huh? what I've been doing} 06:46, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! AnRoCa, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that 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! KGirlTrucker81^{huh? what I've been doing} 06:46, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Andrea: no problem, i understand. i will post in teahouse to get direction, which sections need to corrected.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Save Cambodia‘s Wildlife (April 7)

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

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

The comment the reviewer left was:

This draft still reads like an advertisement for the organization. The article should focus on what others have written about the organization (if they have). This draft still focuses largely on what the organization says about itself. If you have further questions about why this draft reads promotionally, ask at the Teahouse.

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:Save Cambodia‘s Wildlife and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Robert McClenon (talk) 06:23, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Save Cambodia's Wildlife (April 11)

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

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

The comment the reviewer left was:

We would need all additional major independent news.

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:Save Cambodia's Wildlife and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

SwisterTwister talk 20:50, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Save Cambodia's Wildlife comment

Hi AnRoCa. In response to this comment you left at Draft:Save Cambodia's Wildlife, any page on Wikipedia can, in principle, techinically be edited by any editor at any time. Draft are not owned by anyone in particular (even their creators) as explained in WP:OWN, so often another editor will occasionally try and improve/fix problems they notice in a draft in good faith. In such cases, it is not necessary to discuss things draft's creator or get permission in advance. In this particluar case, the editor who seems to have made the changes is Maproom so if you want to know why those changes were made, you should look at the edit sums left in the page's history or ask Maproom about them on the draft's talk page. Just for reference, many experienced editors do tend to avoid editing a draft unless specifically asked to do so as a courtesy, but many others also are just bold and make improvements they feel is necessary. Neither approach is right and neither approach is wrong. The idea behind collaborative editing is to try and work together to improve articles, etc. so that they meet Wikipedia's MOS and relevant policies and guidelines. This is a very important point to understand when it comes to Wikipedia because any attempts to try and exert ownership of article content usually quickly leads to problems with other editors. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:27, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Marchjuly, thank you for the clarification. I didn't know that :( I am an absolute beginner. I thought editing is possible once the article is "live"...Thanks again so much for your patience and explanation :-) Andrea

As I posted, some exprerienced editors will ask as a courtesy before editing a draft, while others will just make improvements. Since we are discussing a draft, there's lots of wiggle room so if you don't like the changes which were made you can (1) simply undo them, or (2) discuss them with the person who made them. I'm pretty sure that Maproom was just trying to help out, and not trying to take control of things. Serious violations of policies and guidelines involving WP:BLP or WP:COPYVIO in drafts are usually removed immediately once they are noticed, but formatting matters, etc. are not considered serious problems at the draft stage so many people just leave them as is. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:19, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Noted, Marchjuly, I was not offended, just confused. I am aware that the article now has better chances of passing :-) Andrea

Signature needed

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --David Biddulph (talk) 06:01, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, AnRoCa, 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:

You may also want to take 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! --David Biddulph (talk) 06:02, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Save Cambodia's Wildlife

Hi AnRoCa,

I am the editor who made extensive changes to the the draft. I was aiming to get it to comply with Wikipedia's policies, and to increase its chances of being accepted for a move to article space. But I shall respect your wishes, and do no more. Maproom (talk) 08:19, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Maproom, thanks for letting me know and i appreciate your help. I was just irritated, because it didn't receive any information. I do hope i can contact you for help. Thanks again, i know you are trying to help :-) AnRoCa (talk) 08:35, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The answer to your recent comment on your draft is given in the hidden notes included in the previous edit by the editor who was trying to help you. Note also that I had corrected the heading levels a few days ago, to comply with the Manual of Style; you subsequently reinserted the errors which had been corrected, so someone had to correct them again. A number of people are trying to help you, so you need to read the changes which they are introducing, and understand what they are saying in their edit summaries. --David Biddulph (talk) 05:59, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi David, thanks for your help. I really appreciate it and don't want to seem unthankful - i am not! Please understand i am new and try to read as much as i can about the rules, but don't know all of them (yet). It took me a moment to understand that the headlines have to be the way they have been corrected. I will leave them like that. Where do I find the EDIT SUMMARY though to find out about the hidden notes? I'm sorry not to be smarter. AnRoCa (talk) 1.28, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Click on the "View history" tab at the top of the draft page. Note that in my message the words "edit summaries" were in blue, indicating that they were a wikilink. --David Biddulph (talk) 06:34, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi AnRoCa. It was me who made the edit that David Biddulph is referring to above. I only did so to fix the section levels and put things in their proper locations. The hidden notes were probably a little to hard for a fairly new editor such as yourself to catch. I should have just posted something on the draft's talk page instead. Anyway, the reason you've got references showing up in the "Further reading" section is because you've added citations to the entries. You don't really need to do that as explained in Wikipedia:Further reading. Just provide the information referred to in WP:CITEHOW without any citations.

As for the hidden notes themselves, you can only see them in the editing window. They are little messages I left which look something like  except I actually added some suggestions as the "Hidden note". -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:37, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Marchjuly, which official links are ok to use? The official website and facebook? I've seen other pages do that as well. Thanks for your recommendation. AnRoCa (talk) 11.11, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Generally, only a link to the main official website is considered acceptable as explained in WP:ELMINOFFICIAL -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:54, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

i now only left the offical website. should i leave it as sole entry under External links or move it somewhere else? AnRoCa (talk) 11.29, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi Marchjuly again, For further reading i am still unsure how to best link to the references. Would you kindly show me one example? When I list the study, my intention was to show the links where i found them... THANKS A MILLION, Andrea AnRoCa (talk) 11.14, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Not sure if I understand this question. You don't really need to add citations to a "Further reading" section. If there's something you wish to cite about a particular entry, then consider figuring out a way to add that information somewhere within the body of the article. A FR section entry really only needs to be a simple bullet list of these books or whatever. You should try to include as much information about the entry as possible as explained in WP:CITEHOW. An example of what I mean can be seen at Viking metal#Further reading, a featured article which appeared on the Wikipedia's Main Page as "Today's featured article" on March 1, 2017. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:18, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

but i don't use citations?! should i remove the in-wiki links at further reading? sorry, i am lost. AnRoCa (talk) 1.42, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi Marchjuly the third, for "Networks & Membership" you also recommended a different kind of presentation / linking. Could you show me an example how to best do that as well? Thanks, Andrea AnRoCa (talk) 11.17, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia articles should not have external links embedded into the article content like this as explained in WP:CS#Avoid embedded links and WP:EL#cite_note-7. If any of those organziations you've listed have stand-alone Wikipedia articles written about them, then you should simply wikilink them. If they do not, then you should maybe considering not including them because it's possible they are not Wikipedia notable enough for a stand-alone article. Another option would be to drop the list and simply write out the section as prose as explained in WP:PROSE. You can then use inline citations to reliable sources which show the connection between SCW and these organizations. The connection should be encyclopedically relevant to the reader per WP:NOTEVERYTHING, and not just attempt to mention these organizations by name somewhere within the article in order to try and enhance the notability of the SCW. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:07, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

i edited it as suggested. however, none of the networks have wikipedia entries. is it better to remove them or leave them as is now? thanksAnRoCa (talk) 11.30, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

New question: is the order 1. References, 2. Further reading, 3. External links correct? I have seen and it makes more sense that 1. External Links, 2. Further Reading, 3. References, no? AnRoCa (talk) 1.43, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Please refer to WP:ORDER. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:29, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Save Cambodia's Wildlife (May 11)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by I dream of horses 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.

The comment the reviewer left was:

After some thought and clean up, I have decided to decline. A lot of the references I've left behind after removing social media, press releases, and references not mention SCW barely mention SCW at all (with the exception of a couple of references behind a paywall, and one or two not in English). It could very well be that Save Cambodia's Wildlife doesn't yet qualify for an article.

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:Save Cambodia's Wildlife and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

I dream of horses If you reply here, please ping me by adding {{U|I dream of horses}} to your message (talk to me) (My edits) @ 04:34, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Save Cambodia's Wildlife (September 8)

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

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Sourcing typically just mentions the comp in passing.

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:Save Cambodia's Wildlife and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Sulfurboy (talk) 04:31, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Save Cambodia's Wildlife has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Save Cambodia's Wildlife. Thanks! Dial911 (talk) 22:17, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Save Cambodia's Wildlife (February 2)

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

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

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:Save Cambodia's Wildlife 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:Save Cambodia's Wildlife, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and save.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Chetsford (talk) 17:21, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Save Cambodia's Wildlife has been accepted

Save Cambodia's Wildlife, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can 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.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Legacypac (talk) 16:38, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Legacypac, thank you so very much for the approval and your support! :) AnRoCa (talk) 12.25, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Save Cambodias Wildlife logo

Please see the note I left at c:User talk:AnRoCa about this logo. You cannot really just upload logos to Commons under a "CC-by-sa" license without providing some sort of verification that the file has been released under such a license. This can be done in a couple of ways as explained in c:COM:OTRS#Licensing images: when do I contact OTRS?. This might seem an unnecessary bit of red tape, but try and remember that a "CC-by-sa-XX" license basically allows anyone anywhere in the world to download the file from Commons and use for any purpose, including commercial; moreover, once a file has been released under such a license, it cannot be revoked or canceled. Therefore, Commons wants to be 100% sure that the copyright holder understands this and agrees to the terms of the license. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:37, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Marchjuly, thank you for the note and your help. I organized to send an email for confirmation as stated in the recommended link -- AnRoCa (talk) 11:57, 28 March 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.79.26.118 (talk) [reply]

Hi AnRoCa. Whoever sends in the email should receive a reply which contains an OTRS ticket number. This is sort of like a reference number that you can use to find out information if ncessary. OTRS verification can sometimes take sometime, so you need to be patient. If the file is by chance deleted before verification is completed, do not re-upload the file since this will only confuse things. Deleted files are not gone forever; they are only hidden from public view and can easily be restored once whatever issues they have have been sorted out.

Finally, please try to remember to log in when you post. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:05, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Noted with lots of thanks, Marchjuly. -- AnRoCa (talk) 10:10, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, AnRoCa. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, AnRoCa. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:21, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Save Cambodia's Wildlife (SCW) logo with slogan "Conservation through education".png

The file File:Save Cambodia's Wildlife (SCW) logo with slogan "Conservation through education".png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Superseded by file with VRT permission.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 13:07, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]