Jump to content

User talk:Andrea Burgess

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Andrea Burgess! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 07:01, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Getting Started
Getting Help
Policies and Guidelines
The Community
Things to do
Miscellaneous

Andrea Burgess, you are invited to the Teahouse![edit]

Teahouse logo

Hi Andrea Burgess! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Come join other new editors at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a space where new editors can get help from other new editors. These editors have also just begun editing Wikipedia; they may have had similar experiences as you. Come share your experiences, ask questions, and get advice from your peers. I hope to see you there! TheOriginalSoni (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse
This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 16:11, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Neoga Public Library (December 17)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by DGG was:
Small town libraries of this sort are generally not considered notable.
You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved. DGG ( talk ) 10:18, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Neoga Public Library concern[edit]

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Neoga Public Library, a page you created, has not been edited in 6 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:33, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Neoga Public Library[edit]

Hello, Andrea Burgess. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "Neoga Public Library".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by one of two methods (don't do both): 1) follow the instructions at WP:REFUND/G13, or 2) copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Draft:Neoga Public Library}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, and click "Save page". An administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. JMHamo (talk) 10:20, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Nadia's Initiative (November 8)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Robert McClenon were:
This draft appears to be about both Nadia's Initiative and Nadia Murad. A Wikipedia article should be about one subject. Any additional details about Nadia Murad can go into the article that we already have.
The proposed article does not have sufficient content to require an article of its own, but it could be merged into the existing article at Nadia Murad. Since anyone can edit Wikipedia, you are welcome to add that information yourself. Thank you.
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.
Robert McClenon (talk) 21:56, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Nadia's Initiative (November 16)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Robert McClenon were:
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.
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 organizations and companies). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
This draft, as rewritten, is written like an information brochure of the organization, and is promotional. The organization may be notable, but this draft does not establish notability. It isn't necessary to list details about all of the Board members.
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.
Robert McClenon (talk) 09:19, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Nadia's Initiative (December 7)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by AngusWOOF was:
This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
Still reads like an ad or brochure for the organization. Remove bullet points and listings, and convert to prose.
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.
AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 02:05, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Nadia's Initiative has a new comment[edit]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Nadia's Initiative. Thanks! Legacypac (talk) 06:34, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Nadia's Initiative has been accepted[edit]

Nadia's Initiative, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

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.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 02:15, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Carl Gould (Professional Speaker) moved to draftspace[edit]

An article you recently created, Carl Gould (Professional Speaker), does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) 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 and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. — Newslinger talk 14:03, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 20[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Pocas Pascoal, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Angolan and Cité (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:14, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

January 2019[edit]

Information icon Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Draft:Carl Gould (professional speaker) a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:28, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you've blanked the draft – that's usually taken as a request to delete. However, since you'd also improperly copy-pasted it into mainspace, I've not yet deleted it. If you want to work further on the draft, please add or restore at least some content to the page.
You are apparently editing for money rather than out of any interest in improving our encyclopaedia. For reasons that I personally just can't understand, that is still (barely) tolerated here, under strict conditions. Please (re-)read Wikipedia:paid-contribution disclosure, particularly this section, and then take care to stick to those requirements. Thanks, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:44, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Russell Surasky moved to draftspace[edit]

An article you recently created, Russell Surasky was apparently created for pay. Paid editors are VERY STRONGLY DISCOURAGED from directly editing affected articles, and should put new articles through the articles for creation process. You may submit it using the Articles for Creation template on the page. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:49, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

January 2019[edit]

Stop icon
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for violating copyright policy by copying text or images into Wikipedia from another source without evidence of permission. Please take this opportunity to ensure that you understand our copyright policy and our policies regarding how to use non-free content.
If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 14:11, 27 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Due to paid editing in mainspace, working with others to circumvent Wikipedia processes, and copy and pasting other peoples work into Wikipedia you have been blocked. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 14:12, 27 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Andrea Burgess (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Thank you for considering my unblock request. Breaking rules due to ignorance is still breaking rules, so I understand if the request for my username to be un-banned is denied, but please consider removing the ban from this IP address. This computer belongs to my school and I have to return it in May. The following are my reasons for requesting reconsideration: Paid editing: I am guilty of this. I was told on January 23rd that “Paid editors are VERY STRONGLY DISCOURAGED from directly editing affected articles, and should put new articles through the articles for creation process” – I took that warning to heart, and the only editing on my account since then has been to add two references to a draft page on that same day. I have done nothing since and did not plan to edit for pay again, or edit at all, until I better understood the rules. Working with others: Also guilty – Rapture’s Andrew Ryan is my significant other. He has used this computer while I’ve had it and I asked him to look over a page that I think was still a draft. I have no idea if he’s even used the account before or since. He did not receive payment for this from anyone. It is not a sockpuppet account and I did not intend to circumvent the Wikipedia process – I just wanted an extra pair of eyes to see if there was anything I was missing. I was unaware that this wasn’t allowed. I know there isn’t much proof I can offer for this, but I’m owning up to all the other things I did wrong (and honestly, I think it would be easier if I did have control of the account), so hopefully that is enough. Copy/Paste – I was told the things I copy/pasted were not copyrighted materials, available anywhere else, and were given to me with all rights necessary to claim ownership. I figured if that was okay for pictures to be uploaded, it would be the same for words, but I guess I was wrong. I was unaware that I was doing anything wrong, but it will not happen again. As you can see, this account is nearly five years old. It has only been in the past two months that I’ve made any of these mistakes and I take it very seriously. If you unblock my username, I’ll go back to doing the things I was doing before all this – occasionally adding internal links and fixing spelling/grammar. Thank you for your consideration. Andrea Burgess (talk) 19:55, 28 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Procedural decline only. This unblock request has been open for more than two weeks but has not proven sufficiently convincing for any reviewing administrator to take action. You are welcome to request a new block review if you substantially reword your request. O Still Small Voice of Clam 17:02, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Who told you that the material you copypasted is not protected by copyright? Your friend? I hope not, for him. By the way: It seems like you generally understand copyright. Since you say above that you friend used the same computer, the only way I see for unblock you is WP:SO, which means no editing or docking or likewise for 6 months. I hope you dont have up this account and wikipedia already. Jannik Schwaß (talk) 20:10, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry[edit]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Andrea_Burgess&oldid=1067287980"