User talk:Researcherasc

Sage or something has given you a c ookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Welcome! (We can't say that loudly enough!)

Hello, Researcherasc, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

If you have any questions or problems, no matter what they are, leave me a message on my talk page. Or, please come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{Help me}} on your user talk page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

Please sign your name on talk pages and votes by typing four tildes (~~~~); our software automatically converts it to your username and the date. We're so glad you're here! Meatsgains^(talk) 16:55, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May 2024

Your edit to Brenda Dervin has been removed in whole or in part, 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 information on how to contribute your work appropriately. For legal reasons, Wikipedia strictly cannot host copyrighted text or images from print media or digital platforms without an appropriate and verifiable license. Contributions infringing on copyright will be removed. 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 very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. — Diannaa (talk) 12:08, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear @Diannaa, Thank you for catching this. I am shocked and appalled and very sorry. I did not mean to violate copyright. I too take it seriously. I noticed that Brenda Dervin's Wikipedia page was sadly sparse, lacking impact section which was however in the cite (references) already on page. I meant to put it in as an extract or excerpt within quotes. Is that permissible? I am still learning editing, thanks for any help you can give. Best, Anita Researcherasc (talk) 15:43, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We shouldn't be quoting her own cv. What we're looking for at Wikipedia is in-depth coverage from secondary sources, not copypaste or quotes from someone's own opinion of their work. — Diannaa (talk) 18:32, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's not her CV but In Memoriam published after / upon her death by her Uni dept. Is that still objectionable? I just want to help improve that Wikipedia page and adding her impact on disciplines beyond LIS and communications would be of help, I thought. Plus it would address the gender imbalance in content, that I've been advised by others to help improve. I know Dervin's impact for a fact from my own years of teaching and research in LIS and libraries and no, I don't know her and never met her! If I summarize the disciplines, what kind of evidence is acceptable? Do you need the citations from each discipline or would a generic link to her Google scholar profile suffice? Thanks! Researcherasc (talk) 18:58, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I found it in her CV, which was published in 2007. Content should be sourced to secondary sources unrelated to the subject. Her university dept and her own CV are what we call primary sources - they are directly related to the subject of the article, and are not very useful for that reason. Secondary sources are things like magazines, reliable websites, and books. — Diannaa (talk) 11:58, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (May 19)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Qcne was:

This appears to be a duplicate of another submission, Bharat_Mehra, which is also waiting to be reviewed. To save time we will consider the other submission and not this one.

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 User:Researcherasc/sandbox 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.

Qcne (talk) 18:38, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Qcne, I created that article too but didn't submit it for review yet as I wanted to practice in my sandbox. The other is missing the sections like Education and Career, Impact, Awards, Publications, etc. like I have in this one in my sandbox. When I saw the message to move to that page I tried but sadly, I am still learning and couldn't move the content from here to there. Any advice? Researcherasc (talk) 19:01, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for missing this message- frustratingly it doesn't notify me and I manually check for replies. Hopefully my answer to your Teahouse question helps. Qcne (talk) 18:56, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Researcherasc! 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! Qcne (talk) 18:38, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bharat Mehra (May 20)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Qcne was:

See comment on Teahouse - ping me if you would like me to review again when the content has been cut down as recommended.

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:Bharat Mehra 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.

Qcne (talk) 18:55, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bharat Mehra has been accepted

Bharat Mehra, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting 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. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Qcne (talk) 20:38, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]