User talk:AnthonyLudwar
Welcome!
[edit]Hello, AnthonyLudwar, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Ian and I work with the Wiki Education Foundation; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.
I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing.
Handouts
|
|---|
Additional Resources
|
|
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 17:17, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Wyoming architectural
[edit]
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Wyoming architectural, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:
- It is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. (See section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Wikipedia has standards for the minimum necessary information to be included in short articles; you can see these at Wikipedia:Stub. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 01:23, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of History of Architectural Engineering
[edit]Hello AnthonyLudwar,
I wanted to let you know that I just tagged History of Architectural Engineering for deletion, because it's too short to identify the subject of the article.
If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.
You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.
Meatsgains(talk) 03:37, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
- You should use your sandbox to draft your article. Only move it to mainspace after it's sufficiently developed. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 12:10, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
Nomination of History of architectural engineering for deletion
[edit]
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article History of architectural engineering is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/History of architectural engineering 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. Daiyusha (talk) 05:32, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
copying within Wikipedia, other
[edit]Hi, you appear to be a new editor and are unaware of some requirements in Wikipedia. I'm glad you have arrived and think you might contribute a lot to our coverage of architectural engineering and other topics, but there are a few things you need to pick up on quickly. It's okay not to know everything, indeed it is impossible to know everything about Wikipedia rules. Hope you don't mind me trying to fill you in a bit here. I mostly edit about historic buildings listed on the U.S. National Register of Historic Places by the way. (Have you looked up what is the coverage of historic places in any home areas of yours? See List of RHPs and zero in to a state then a county or city.)
You will see at the ongoing AFD that I oppose deletion of the article. I further just noticed that you recently copied the table (basically the entire contents of the article) to the wikipedia article on architectural engineering. Then u put the History article up for AFD a few days later. That seems not right, one reason being that it comes across as if you are claiming credit as author of the table (by your edit which did not give attribution of the source), and that you then seemed to be seeking to cover up, by erasing the History article entirely. There is a guideline about it, Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Basically you need to give credit in your edit summary at least, if you copy substantial content from one article to another.
Also, I will grant that it probably should not be a big deal to merge the table from the "History" article to the main article on architectural engineering. But the way to present that would be to propose a merge. Wikipedia:Merging has more specific info. In that process you would post about your proposal to merge, with notice at both pages. That would not be controversial and I think it would go through. That would be qualitatively different than proposing deletion of the material and the edit history showing which editors developed the material, as if it is bad and terrible and must be removed from Wikipedia (at the same time as you yourself seem to deem the material to be good stuff, elsewhere).
About the AFD now, I suggest you withdraw the AFD, i.e. post there to state you wish to withdraw it, so an administrator could just close the AFD. To learn about AFDs, it is good to watch and participate in some (you can see all the ongoing ones through links from wp:AFD, and see how the process works. Probably better to do that for a while before starting new AFDs yourself.
I do appreciate your good intentions and do hope/expect you will stay and participate more in Wikipedia. I will "watchlist" here, so please feel free to reply here and I will probably notice and reply further myself, or post to my Talk page to get my attention if I seem to have missed anything here. --Doncram (talk) 23:50, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
- Oops, I misread the AFD and thought incorrectly you were the deletion nominator. Now seeing Daiyusha's post above, it seems more likely you were the creator of the content, yourself. Argh. See and post at the AFD again if you like, please. --Doncram (talk) 00:00, 19 November 2018 (UTC)