User talk:BenjaminR44

Welcome!

Hello, BenjaminR44, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Michael League, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! KGirlTrucker81^{huh? what I've been doing} 14:38, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Michael League

The article Michael League has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. KGirlTrucker81^{huh? what I've been doing} 14:38, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, BenjaminR44! 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! — Masum Ibn Musa ^Conversation 14:38, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Getting Started
Contributing to Wikipedia The five pillars of Wikipedia • Tutorial • Your first article How to: edit a page • upload an image
Getting Help
Frequently Asked Questions New contributors' help page Where to: ask questions • make requests Tip of the day Request administrator attention
Policies and Guidelines
Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Simplified Manual of Style • Three-revert rule Copyrights • Non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • Sock puppetry Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The Community
Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump IRC channels • Mailing lists Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community (The Signpost)
Things to do
Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Maintenance • Peer review • Requested articles Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism
Miscellaneous
Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Proposed deletion of 22 Cortlandt Street

The article 22 Cortlandt Street has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable street, GNews coverage lists only one passing mention. Fails GNG.

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. KGirlTrucker81^{huh? what I've been doing} 21:37, 13 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of 22 Cortlandt Street for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 22 Cortlandt Street 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/22 Cortlandt Street until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. KGirlTrucker81^{huh? what I've been doing} 21:55, 13 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Albany Street (Manhattan)

The article Albany Street (Manhattan) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unremarkable street with no references to establish notability

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Sounder Bruce 23:04, 14 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited General Motors Building (Manhattan), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page International Style. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:12, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Cedar Street

The article Cedar Street has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails to state notability in line with WP:GNG

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Imzadi 1979 → 22:55, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Celestina007

Hello BenjaminR44 You accused me of being harsh when all I'm doing is trying to save you from making the same mistake almost every new editor is prone to make. I need you to understand that without fundamental knowledge of basic Wikipedia polices, creating articles isn't a right move, oh well that aside, I have assisted you in your John Street (Manhattan) article, I created a reference section for you, so when you put citations in your article it automatically goes there, you don't need to worry about that now. Just endeavor to start putting some inline citations/Reference in your article so the notability can be established. When you do that, nobody can delete your article as you would have proved your article is about something/someone notable.Celestina007 (talk) 15:01, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Celestina007 Fair enough. Thanks for the help. Im sorry for getting mad. Ill do my best not to make the same mistakes, but if I do please let me know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BenjaminR44 (talk • contribs) 19:24, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia and copyright

Hello BenjaminR44, and welcome to Wikipedia. All or some of your addition(s) to Liberty Tower (Manhattan) have been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. While we appreciate your contributing to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from your sources to avoid copyright or plagiarism issues here.

You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. However, there are steps that must be taken to verify that license before you do. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are public domain or compatibly licensed), it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at the help desk before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you can, but please follow the steps in Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:51, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Albany Street (Manhattan) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Albany Street (Manhattan) 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/Albany Street (Manhattan) until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Sounder Bruce 23:35, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited One Liberty Plaza, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page International style. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:51, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problem on Gold Street (Manhattan)

Material you included in the above article appears to have been copied from the copyright web pagehttp://forgotten-ny.com/2006/07/gold-street-manhattan/. Copying text directly from a source is a copyright violation. Unfortunately, for copyright reasons, the content had to be removed. Prose you find online is almost always copyright, and cannot be copied here; it's against the law to do so. All prose must be written in your own words. There's more information about copyrights and how it applies to Wikipedia at Wikipedia:FAQ/Copyright. Copyright law and its application are complex matters, and you should not edit any more until you have taken the time to read and understand our copyright policy. Further copyright violations will result in you being blocked from editing. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:28, 26 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Transportation Building

Hello, BenjaminR44. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, Transportation Building, for deletion because I don't think it meets our criteria for inclusion. If you don't want the article deleted:

edit the page
remove the text that looks like this: {{proposed deletion/dated...}}
save the page

Also, be sure to explain why you think the article should be kept in your edit summary or on the article's talk page. If you don't do so, it may be deleted later anyway.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:05, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 29

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 55 Water Street, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page International style. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:07, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Streets in Manhattan

Please stop creating one-line sub-stub articles on streets in Manhattan. Not every street -- even in as great a city as New York and as great a borough as Manhattan -- is notable, and your creation of, for instance, Commerce Street (Manhattan) and Cornelia Street, is not supported by the lack of content in the articles. Please be more circumspect in your article creations. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:01, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

PLease do not undo the redirect on Commerce Street without expanding the article to make it notable. If you do it again, I will nominate it for speedy deletion. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:52, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (90-94 Maiden Lane Building) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating 90-94 Maiden Lane Building, BenjaminR44!

Wikipedia editor Boleyn just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Thanks for taking the time and trouble to create this - it's appreciated. It's now been reviewed and has had some improvement tags added. If you have the time, could you look it over and see if you can help address any of the issues raised in the tags? Thanks again for your hard work.

To reply, leave a comment on Boleyn's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Boleyn (talk) 18:30, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of 875 Fifth Avenue

The article 875 Fifth Avenue has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The building at this address does not appear to be notable. See also WP:MILL.

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}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. VQuakr (talk) 21:09, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, as with your creation of one-line sub-stub "articles" on Manhattan streets, which I complained about above, creating one line sub-stub "articles" on non-notable buildings is also disruptive, and you should stop doing so. Here's my suggestion: if a building is not listed in the AIA Guide to New York City, the Guide to New York City Landmarks (which means it's not a New York City landmark), is not part of a New York City historic district, discussed in the Encyclopedia of New York City, is not on the National Registry of Historic Places or a National Historic Landmark, do not create an article on it. If you suspect that a building is notable even though it meets none of these criteria, do not create an article unless you can find at least one substantive source on it -- and I'm not talking about a mere listing on Emporis or Structurae or similar sites, I'm talking about a source that discusses the article's history and architecture in detail. Absent such a source, you should not waste your time writing an article which is just going to be deleted anyway. You should also read our notability guidelines, which you can find at WP:GNG. Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:59, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Spaces after periods

You do not need to waste your time making sure that there are two spaces after each period in Wikipedia articles. When rendering, the system treads a single space and a double space exactly the same. The two spaces standard was necessary on typewriters which are monotype, to make sure that the period had the proper amount of "air" after it, but it is not necessary on Wikipedia. By doing this you clog up people's watchlists, so it would be appreciate it if you refrained from doing so. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:11, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

May 2017

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. You can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! Murph9000 (talk) 00:45, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not use styles that are unusual, inappropriate or difficult to understand in articles. There is a Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. It looks like some of your edits may be just changing spaces between sentences. Please do not do that, as both single and double spaces are allowed, and they should not be changed from one style to the other. Some people believe the double space is obsolete, others (including myself) believe that it is still correct typography. There is no single correct answer to it, so both are allowed, and edits which only change spaces are generally considered disruptive. See MOS:PUNCTSPACE. The same goes for the Oxford comma, although I'm not certain if you were changing those or not. See MOS:OXFORD and MOS:COMMA. Murph9000 (talk) 00:51, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You are still routinely failing to provide edit summaries and making needless and disruptive changes to spaces in articles. For example, this edit to Deutsche Bank Building was unconstructive and entirely unnecessary. This type of change has absolutely zero benefit to Wikipedia (MediaWiki takes care of that and the visual result is not changed for viewers). It is especially annoying for those of us who use a monospace font for editing, as you make text which was previously double-spaced harder to read and edit. This causes irritation to many editors and completely unnecessary clutter in page history, recent changes, watchlists, and your contribution history. It also wastes the time of potentially many other editors, as they try to figure out what your unexplained changes actually did. Per MOS:PUNCTSPACE, you should not be making these changes. If you continue to do this, after being asked nicely to stop doing it, it may end up being considered to be disruptive editing, and could result in loss of editing privileges. Stop doing this, and you need to start providing accurate and reasonably descriptive edit summaries for all of your edits (WP:FIES). Thanks. Murph9000 (talk) 00:02, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not edit pages within another user's personal space without either invitation or a very good reason and explanation (which needs to be given in the edit summary), as you did at User:MainlyTwelve/51 Astor Place. I have reverted your change because it was unexplained and inappropriate. Edits to other users' pages without a good reason can cause unnecessary irritation, or even be seen as disruptive editing, so please avoid it in general. Blank edit summaries on such edits are particularly problematic. Thanks. Murph9000 (talk) 00:47, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your addition to The Ritz Tower has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. SorryNotSorry ✽ ✉ 11:55, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Nai Palm

The article Nai Palm has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. South Nashua (talk) 16:20, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

May 2017

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at One Maritime Plaza. Magnolia677 (talk) 21:25, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox parameters

Hi, just wondering – what is the purpose of rearranging the parameters in the infoboxes of Hong Kong buildings? Thanks, Citobun (talk) 02:48, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of US Bank Tower (Billings)

The article US Bank Tower (Billings) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

no reason to thing thing this small office building is notable,

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}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. DGG ( talk ) 09:00, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You've been asked to stop creating sub-stub "articles" about non-notable subjects such as this - the ninth tallest building in Billings, Montana, a glass box with no notable architect or architecture. Please stop before this becomes an issue for the Administrators' noticeboard, and your ability to create articles is taken away. Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:40, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Bank One Center (Charleston)

The article Bank One Center (Charleston) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable: "5th tallest building in Charleston, West Virginia", no notable architect or architecture.

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}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:32, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of 10 Cabot Square

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 10 Cabot Square requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, a group of people, an individual animal, an organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content, or an organized event, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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 removed 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. Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:36, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of 10 Cabot Square

The article 10 Cabot Square has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No credible claim of notability

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}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:35, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Would you please...

...take a look at the changes I made to Ritz Tower, 2 White Street, Bennett Building (New York City), 175 West Broadway Building, 32, 34 & 36 Dominick Street Houses, 130 Cedar Street, 339 Grand Street House and 97 Bowery Building? The information I added was, for the most part, all available to you in their designation reports and in the AIA Guide to NYC, which can be found on Google Books. There's really no excuse for you to create one-line sub-stubs instead of fleshing out the articles yourself, so it would be great if we didn;t see any more of that kind of editing from you: no more sub-stubs on non-notable buildings, and real short articles on notable buildings such as landmarks. Otherwise, you are simply making others do the work you should have done yourself in creating the article. Thanks, Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:42, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Scripps Center

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 Scripps Center requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, a group of people, an individual animal, an organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content, or an organized event, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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 removed 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. Beyond My Ken (talk) 13:14, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

One more non-notable article creation like this, and I'm bringing you up to the attention of admins at AN/I. You must use better judgment about what subjects to create sub-stub articles about. Beyond My Ken (talk) 13:16, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Scripps Center

The article Scripps Center has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

no claim of notability

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}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Beyond My Ken (talk) 14:19, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I am interested in general in saving articles about notable buildings. I am not sure about Scripps Center...it looks like an important building perhaps, and there are one or more Pinterest pages which include a pic of it among collections of post-modernist work, but I am not immediately finding substantial text explicitly about it. There's this list of 15 notable Cleveland architectural works which does not include it. User:BengjaminR44, do you have more about this? If it does get deleted, you can ask the deleting administrator to provide you a copy of the article to Draft space or your User space, so that it can be developed more perhaps. --do ncr am 00:30, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

BenjaminR44: I have withdrawn the AfD for this article, as new information shows that it appears to be notable. Whyever did you not include the information that it is the fourth tallest building in Cincinnati, which is sufficient, in my view, to make it notable? Please, when you create an article, include anything that's pertinent to the subject that would indicate its notability. Beyond My Ken (talk) 17:00, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problem on Peter Anderson House

In the future, please add attribution when copying from public domain sources: simply add the template {{PD-notice}} after your citation. I have done so for the above article. Please do this in the future so that our readers will be aware that you copied the prose rather than wrote it yourself. Thanks, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:01, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thanks for letting me know :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by BenjaminR44 (talk • contribs) 16:03, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Actually User:Diannaa was not correct, the NRHP document is NOT in the public domain. The article needs to be further revised now.

To Diannaa and to BenjaminR44, hi, I come to this page this time after noticing BenjaminR44's addition on 13 July at Reynolds-Weed House, another NRHP-listed place, in Wisconsin. I was guessing they used the NRHP nomination document, and I was going to suggest they begin to adapt the following reference blank: <ref name=nrhpdoc>{{cite web|url={{NRHP url|id=__}}|title=National Register of Historic Places Inventory/Nomination: __|publisher=[[National Park Service]]|author=__ |date=__ |accessdate=__ 2017}} With {{NRHP url|id=__|photos=y|title=photos}}.</ref> when they add NRHP document info to articles. We do need contributors to expand NRHP articles.

However, I figure out that the following passage was simply copy-pasted in:

Nearly square in dimension and symmetrical in design, the present building is a large, two-story Italianate house of double-wall salmon brick construction. Its broad truncated hipped roof, covered with stamped tin shingles, is intersected by center attic-level pediments above all elevations.

That is distinctive language written by Diane H. Filipowicz in October 1982, but it was presented as if it is written in the voice of Wikipedia editorship. It was pasted in without any attribution at all. Paste-in that way is plagiarism (because attribution for both information and specific wording is necessary but not given) and we don't want that. It is also copyright violation; the NRHP nomination document is NOT in the public domain, nor is the NRHP document for Peter Anderson House. The documents were written by private parties, not Federal employees, and the National Park Service gets the right to publish the documents at their website but explicitly does not take copyright away from the original authors. Facts about NRHP documents not being in the public domain are covered at wp:NRHPHELP and in past discussions at the copyvio noticeboard.

Diannaa went out of their way to try to be helpful, though they are not as familiar with NRHP documents as many long-term NRHP editors, but not even their request was followed at the Reynolds-Weed House article a week later. I just added the NRHP nomination document as a source, and changed it to a quote in the article, so this article is fixed up okay now. BenjaminR44, we really do need help expanding NRHP articles, and I would like to help and encourage, not to turn negative and harass about proper sourcing. I hope you will contribute in the NRHP area, and please feel free to ping me or post at my Talk page to invite me to check or improve anything or to answer questions. Please feel free also to post at wt:NRHP. --do ncr am 15:30, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Anderson House article has been revised, is fine now. --do ncr am 14:35, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Florida NRHPs

Hi, i happened to have Earle House (Sarasota, Florida) on my watchlist and noticed your "cleanup" edit there. Hey, if you are not aware of it, the biggest way anyone can clean up NRHP articles in Florida is by adding the great NRHP documents as references. You can see that docs exist for that one by clicking on the NRHP reference number in the infobox, which goes to National Park Service webpage for it, which links to photos document and to text document. Instructions are at wp:NRHPhelp, but basically all you need to do is copy the following:
<ref name=nrhpdoc>{{cite web|url={{NRHP url|id=__}}|title=National Register of Historic Places Inventory/Nomination: __ |publisher=[[National Park Service]]|author= |date= |accessdate=2017}} With {{NRHP url|id=__|photos=y|title=photos}}.</ref>
and fill in the reference number as id= field, to build a reference to it. I have been doing that again and again for many other NRHPs in other states. If you're editing in Florida, it would be great if you could do some of that... Any which way, thanks anyhow for your editing, keep up the good work. cheers, --do ncr am 03:41, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much!!!! Im glad my work is appreciated!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by BenjaminR44 (talk • contribs) 01:06, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please sign your comments. Use 4 tildes (i.e. "~~~~") at the end of the message, and the system will automatically add your account name and a date & time stamp. Thanks. Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:22, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and also please use colons (i.e. ":") to indent your comment to make it easier to distinguish from the comment above. One colon indents one tab, 2 indent 2 tabs, etc. Thanks, Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:25, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nelson House (Latham, Alabama)

Thanks for creating this article. Could you please add your references? Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 06:28, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

To BenjaminR44, I revised that article to fix its NRHP infobox. You can get an automatically generated NRHP infobox, filled out with specifics for any place that was NRHP-listed by some date in 2010, at a website online. See wp:NRHPhelp for details.

Also for an article like this, or any other, you should please include inline references for any information you provide. In this article, I think you must have accessed the National Register document and photos at here, but you did not cite the document. There's info how to cite the usual NRHP documents at wp:NRHPhelp, too, but for this article it happens to be a bit more difficult, because it is covered in a bigger study about Creole and Gulf Coast Cottages and the material is split between two documents. Here are the citations that should work:

<ref name=nrhpdoc>{{cite web|url={{NRHP url|id=88002814}}|title=Creole and Gulf Coast Cottages in Baldwin County (Continuation): Nelson House / Reynolds House |publisher=[[National Park Service]]|author=John Sledge |date=November 10, 1987 |accessdate=July 10, 2017}} With {{NRHP url|id=88002814|photos=y|title=11 photos from 1987}}.</ref><ref name=mps>{{cite web|url={{NRHP url|id=64000012}} |title=National Register of Historic Places Inventory/Nomination: Creole and Gulf Coast Cottages in Baldwin County |publisher=[[National Park Service]] |author=John Sledge |date=November 10, 1987 |accessdate=July 10, 2017 }}</ref>

I leave it for you to copy-paste that to the article, would you please do that? sincerely, --do ncr am 14:36, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much thats very very helpful! Much appreciated. BenjaminR44 (talk) 14:48, 10 July 2017 (UTC)BenjaminR44[reply]

A page you started (Nelson House (Latham, Alabama)) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Nelson House (Latham, Alabama), BenjaminR44!

Wikipedia editor Kudpung just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

To avoid deletion, please provide the source of the NRHP listing.

To reply, leave a comment on Kudpung's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:31, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please respond, or else!

Hey, I am trying to support your editing in Wikipedia by adding to some articles you created and by commenting in sections above, including thanking you for your contributions.

I note that there are comments from several editors who are appropriately reaching out to you to give you notice, to try to influence your editing. I strongly suggest that you reply to them! As a newish editor, you are being welcomed and encouraged, but it is hard to get established in Wikipedia and the most common outcome in my opinion is that new editors get blocked/banned from participation because they don't take feedback seriously. Please do reply. I predict that if you don't, you will get blocked/banned fairly soon by some administrator (not by me, i am not an administrator).

Note on this Talk page you officially have zero edits in the history, except as a non-logged in editor and/or without signature. Please practice by a reply to this message, hopefully indented by use of a colon (":"). Please use the "~~~~" signature trick to sign your posting here. I am sorry, it is in fact embarrassing how antiquated is the Talk pages / communication system of Wikipedia, but it is what we have to work with. --do ncr am 14:46, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Im sorry its just so unclear how to use this talk page but I think Im getting the hang of it. BenjaminR44 (talk) 14:49, 10 July 2017 (UTC)BenjaminR44[reply]

Yay that is a start, apparently your first use of the four tilde character trick. Hey, i have "watchlist"ed this page and likely will see others' comments here and may try to help out further. But feel free to contact me at my Talk page, especially if you have commented here and I seemed to have missed it. --do ncr am 16:05, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please use edit summaries

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. You can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! 32.218.32.73 (talk) 20:41, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of List of celebrities accused of sexual misconduct after Harvey Weinstein for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of celebrities accused of sexual misconduct after Harvey Weinstein 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/List of celebrities accused of sexual misconduct after Harvey Weinstein until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. TheGracefulSlick (talk) 00:19, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve State Street (Manhattan)

Hi, I'm Seth Whales. BenjaminR44, thanks for creating State Street (Manhattan)!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. This article only has one reference. It would be improved with more.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

SethWhales^talk 07:52, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've expanded and referenced the article, but, BenjaminR44, this is an object lesson in why you should not be creating articles (and I do realize that this one was created a while ago). You come along and make a stub that is essentially unsourced, containing inaccurate information, and then walk away from it, leaving other editors to fill in the dots. Your version of State Street (Manhattan) should probably have been deleted, since it made no clear case for the notability of the street. With the information I've added, there is now a chance that it will be deemed sufficiently notable.

The last "article" you created, which was a list of names of men who had been accused of sexual misconduct in the post-Weinstein era, was deleted at AfD, several others of yours have also been deleted, and at least one was saved only because I and a few other editors argued that notability could be shown if the article was filled out. Until the post-Weinstein article, you've been good about not creating articles, and you should continue on that path until you can create articles that will stand on their own and not make work for others.

You should thank Seth Whales. I made an edit to State Street (Manhattan) a while back, and made a mental note then that it needed to be fixed, but forgot about it. It was only Seth Whales' tagging of the article which brought it to my attention again. Beyond My Ken (talk) 09:53, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, BenjaminR44. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, BenjaminR44. 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]