User talk:Solo4701

Welcome!

Hello, Solo4701! Welcome to Wikipedia! 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! v/r - Seawolf35 ^T--C 16:59, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Getting Started
Contributing to Wikipedia • Tutorial • Your first article The five pillars of Wikipedia • Simplified ruleset How to: edit a page • upload an image
Getting Help
Frequently Asked Questions Directories and indexes 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 Manual of Style (Simplified) • 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 The Signpost (Wikipedia's newspaper)
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

Your submission at Articles for creation: Frank Sylvano (January 22)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Mach61 was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of music-related topics). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Find A Grave is an unreliable source, and shouldn't be used

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:Frank Sylvano 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.

Mach61 (talk) 07:13, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Solo4701! 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! Mach61 (talk) 07:13, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

JiDion revert

Hello Solo, I reverted your addition of a DOB to JiDion's article; please read WP:DOB, they should be reasonably sourced if we are to include them. Thank you. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 00:23, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alright. I've changed it and provided sources Solo4701 (talk) 01:05, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I should've been more specific; for a birthdate, we need a reliable source or confirmation from JiDion to include. The sources you provided are user generated ones; these birthday sites don't have editorial oversight, and they tend to copy from Wikipedia. So we can't be certain if they are actually accurate. The ideal source for a birthdate would be some interview/profile from a known outlet or some post/video from JiDion. Until then, it's best to leave a detail like this out of a biography; DOBs aren't necessarily required. Hope you understand, Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 05:30, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

February 2024

Hi Solo4701! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor at Owen Benjamin that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia—it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Thank you. Ca ^{talk to me!} 15:41, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it's not limited to Owen Benjamin. Just never mark your edits as "minor edit". No one's ever gotten into trouble for not checking that little box. Ca ^{talk to me!} 16:22, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Owen Benjamin

Wikipedia policy is that secondary or tertiary are preferred over wp:primary sources. Please read the link as to why. Thank you Adakiko (talk) 03:44, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh okay. I'll change it then Solo4701 (talk) 03:45, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lead section is only for listing most prominent features about the subject of the article. While the fact a source has a bias does not make them automatically unreliable, they should be attributed in-line. For example you can do "Anti-Defamation League says Benjamin supports x and y" on the "Views" section of the article if you wish. Ca ^{talk to me!} 09:17, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 12

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ernest M. Skinner, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Clarion. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 18:04, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

July 2024

Hello, I'm Notwally. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Owen Benjamin, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. There are also particular requirements for including dates of births on biographies of living people. – notwally (talk) 22:15, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Frank Sylvano

Hello, Solo4701. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Frank Sylvano".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:05, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Percival Miller moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Percival Miller. 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 your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. –TANBIRUZZAMAN (💬) 21:38, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on William Fraley

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page William Fraley, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

A bare URL error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 02:22, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Trent Horn

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 Trent Horn, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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. JTtheOG (talk) 18:19, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

While this wasn't promotional enough for outright deletion, it had issues (I found at least one biographies of living persons violation, and more importantly, has only one presumably independent source. Organizations he's worked with or been affiliated with are not independent. To demonstrate notability, you would have to find a substantial quantity of reliable material about this individual that is neither by him, nor anyone having any affiliation with him. If such material does not exist, an article on this subject would not be appropriate at all. If it does, stick to what the independent sources say, and use the non-independent ones sparingly if at all. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 21:10, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose I should provide a link to the draft, shouldn't I? It's at Draft:Trent Horn. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 21:14, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas Chevers moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Thomas Chevers. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability and Most of the existing sources are not reliable.. 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 your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. bonadea contributions talk 17:57, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't mean to be argumentative, but what makes the sources I listed unreliable? They're all books or census data, and the article I referenced was from a history PhD who was well-versed on the topic and provided his own sources. As for the number of sources, I assumed the amount I put would've been adequate considering there are quite a few articles of historical figures with a similar amount or even less (e.g. Jean Antoine Joseph Fauchet, Matthew Byndloss, Henry Waite Plummer, Alexandros Mavrogenis, and many more) Solo4701 (talk) 19:18, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not trying to second-guess your judgement—I just want to develop a greater understanding of the Wikipedia ToS.

Thanks,

Solo4701 Solo4701 (talk) 19:19, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

September 2024

Hello, Solo4701, welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. Your editing pattern indicates that you may be using multiple accounts or coordinating editing with people outside Wikipedia, such as Howtodotheharlemshake (talk · contribs) and Vorpalicious (talk · contribs). Our policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow this, and users who misuse multiple accounts may be blocked from editing. If you operate multiple accounts directly or with the help of another person, please disclose these connections. Thank you. bonadea contributions talk 17:59, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Bonadea,

Thank you for reaching out. I want to clarify that I am not the person behind the accounts mentioned (Howtodotheharlemshake and Vorpalicious). I am not using multiple accounts nor coordinating edits with them. I do sometimes share Wikipedia articles I've written in chatrooms, but that is rather with the intent of having people read them rather than edit—which I would presume is the whole purpose of Wiki (i.e. sharing knowledge and expanding the human psyche). I operate solely from this account; I understand Wikipedia’s policy on multiple accounts and have no intention of violating it.

If there’s anything further I need to do to ensure transparency and adherence to the guidelines, please let me know. I’m committed to following Wikipedia’s policies, and I really enjoy editing on here.

Best regards,

Solo4701 Solo4701 (talk) 19:09, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 15

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Trent Horn, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page BA.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:54, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hoax/incorrect information in articles

Hi, I've raised concerns at Mathew Miller, a draft article of yours which you recently moved to mainspace, that the content cannot be verified by the sources - and that what you describe as an "incomplete sketch" from an "1865 newspaper" is some kind of photoshop filter applied to an AI upscale of a questionable, unattributed image from findagrave.com.

There's a talk thread at Talk:Mathew Miller. Belbury (talk) 09:07, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I moved it to draftspace and will work on it later. Solo4701 (talk) 10:32, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. But could you give some context for what's going on here? What led you to describe this image as a 1865 newspaper sketch? Belbury (talk) 10:38, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well for historical context, photographs were often rendered as sketches in newspapers because they weren’t easily reproducible at the time. I suppose I'll remove it if it raises skepticism among Wikipedians. I also did feel reluctant about adding it, as it seemed odd to me as well, but I thought it was more appropriate than other options given its placement next to his late 1850s/early 1860s career. That said, I’m not inclined to argue over something so trivial.

But here is the real subject of the matter: is there any real reason you labelled it as a "hoax"? I mean, I could understand labeling it with the "check sources" template or something of that sort—but hoax? Did I write too extensively on him or something? Solo4701 (talk) 12:00, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well nevermind I can see why. I’ll make it more brief and provide direct references from books. Solo4701 (talk) 12:14, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Want to thank you for not just mindlessly removing it from draftspace like all the others so I could actually see for myself what to improve. :) Solo4701 (talk) 12:22, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Whether the image you put in the infobox is a genuine newspaper sketch or a photoshop filter of an AI-upscale of an image taken from an unreliable findagrave.com user is not "trivial", and alongside the drawing of J Pinkney Henderson misidentified as Miller, is the main reason I labelled the article as a possible hoax. User:Bonadea has also said on Draft talk:Mathew Miller#Possible hoax that Miller doesn't appear in some of the sources you are citing and that the claim that he booked voyages to China and Thailand is "blatant enough for a G3 speedy deletion".

You've taken a {{verify sources}} template off of Percival Miller saying "But the article has already been reviewed??" but this article had never been reviewed, it was a copy-and-paste of your draft at Draft:Percival Miller. I've moved the page to Draft:Percival Miller (politician) given the concerns on verifiability. --Belbury (talk) 12:38, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've done the same for Draft:Frank Sylvano and Draft:Trent Horn, as articles that you created as drafts and moved directly to mainspace yourself. You're welcome to put them through the draft review process if you think they're ready to be reviewed. Belbury (talk) 12:48, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And I moved Draft:William Fraley to draftspace for the same reason, and because the sources in the article are not reliable. --bonadea contributions talk 13:41, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]