User talk:MarthaDaisy

Welcome!

Hello, MarthaDaisy, 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! JarrahTree 01:29, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Potential conflict of interest

Hello, MarthaDaisy. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places, or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic, and it is important when editing Wikipedia articles that such connections be completely transparent. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, we ask that you please:

avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your family, friends, school, company, club, or organization, as well as any competing companies' projects or products;
instead, you are encouraged to propose changes on the Talk pages of affected article(s) (see the {{request edit}} template);
when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or to the website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Please take a few moments to read and review Wikipedia's policies regarding conflicts of interest, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. Thank you. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:09, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

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. --SineBot (talk) 08:15, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Solved!

AfC notification: Draft:Alice Waddington has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Alice Waddington. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 22:52, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Alice Waddington has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Alice Waddington. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 10:19, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I have tried to reduce the number of sources cited as much as possible to avoid bombarding and will be submitting the article for review tomorrow. Wish me good luck!

Marthadaisy MarthaDaisy (talk) 00:16, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft about Alice Waddington.

Hi MarthaDaisy. I'm not an AfC reviewer, but I saw your post at the Teahouse. After glancing over your draft, I noticed a couple of things: (1) You have embedded some external links into the body of the article; (2) you've added footnotes to section headings; and (3) the large number of sources being cited.

The first "problem" is not really in accordance with WP:CS#Avoid embedded links and WP:EL#cite_note-7. This is something which can be fixed fairly easily by simply formatting the embedded link as a footnote if it's meant to be used that way; adding it as an external link if it doesn't fall under WP:ELNO; converting it to a wikilink if a stand-alone article exists for the target page; or simply removing the embedded link altogether if none of the other suggestions work.

The second "problem" is not really recommended per MOS:HEAD, but it is also a fairly easy fix: simply move the footnote to the appropriate location within the relevant section.

The third "problem" is more difficult to fix and requires that you actually go through and re-check each and every citation for relevance. Fifty-two citations is not excessive if they all are relevant and absolutely needed for verifying article content. However, there is a tendency for some new editors creating an article for the first time that "more is always better" when it many cases the opposite may be the case for the reasons explained in WP:BOMBARD. Too much infomration can make it harder for reviewers to sort through everything and assess the Wikipedia notability of the subject. Too much detail is also not really needed for the reasons explained in WP:NOTEVERYTHING. You may actually be able to improve the draft by removing the excessive detail and focusing on the content that establishes Waddington's Wikipedia notablility, and the sources which show that she has received significant coverage in reliable sources that WP:BIO requires.

Finally, since you are writing about someone associated with the filmmaking, you might find some helpful information at Wikipedia:WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers. You can also ask questions or for advice on the projects talk page. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:31, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Alice Waddington has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Alice Waddington. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 19:35, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please will you stop repeatedly removing the comments at the top of the draft it is NOT helpful. Theroadislong (talk) 20:15, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I just saw this too! Again, sorry for removing the comments on the draft, thought it was neccesary for submission I feel terrible aaah thank you for the heads up MarthaDaisy (talk) 20:44, 9 April 2017 (UTC) Marthadaisy[reply]

April 2017

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Draft:Alice Waddington, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. You have been repeatedly asked NOT to remove comments, PLEASE stop Theroadislong (talk) 20:20, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oh no, I had no idea I had been noticed before!! I thought I need to remove them for submission of my draft. So sorry if it came across as disrespectful, I am still a bit lost on how wikipedia works as a whole and trying to learn. Thanks for the heads up!

Marthadaisy MarthaDaisy (talk) 20:25, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Alice Waddington has been accepted

Alice Waddington, 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. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post 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!

SwisterTwister talk 03:51, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, MarthaDaisy. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by Joseph2302 (talk) 23:42, 27 April 2017 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, MarthaDaisy. 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]