User talk:MolingLuachra

March 2023

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Once upon a time have been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: Once upon a time was changed by Moling Luachra (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.86821 on 2023-03-06T19:39:17+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 19:39, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't vandalism, thanks Moling Luachra (talk) 08:42, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Créachta Crích Fódla (April 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 Greenman was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
reliable
secondary
independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Créachta Crích Fódla and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Greenman (talk) 07:30, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Moling Luachra! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation 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! Greenman (talk) 07:30, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Créachta Crích Fódla

Hello, Moling Luachra. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Créachta Crích Fódla, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 14:01, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Seán de hÓra moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Seán de hÓra. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit for review" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Ratekreel (talk) 14:20, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wren Day

Please remember that Wikipedia articles like this should be based mainly on academic published sources. While there may not be direct evidence, numerous reputable scholars believe the custom has ancient origins. A Wikipedia article should include those views. We can't just censor them, even if we think they're wrong. I myself don't fully agree with them, but our own opinions don't matter here.

Any alternative views should be included alongside the majority view, as long as they're based on academic published sources. So feel free to add those.

I've added more sources, and changed the wording to "many scholars believe". So hopefully that addresses your concerns. However, if you still think sources are being misquoted and misrepresented, then you should take that to the article talkpage. – Asarlaí ^(talk) 10:42, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]