User talk:DCM2015

This is DCM2015's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

AfC notification: Draft:Paul Linnet has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Paul Linnet. Thanks! ~ L 🌸 (talk) 05:04, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice! I will do that. 78.16.118.128 (talk) 12:02, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks for the advice. 78.16.125.29 (talk) 12:11, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are now 2 or more reviews on each book so hopefully it will go through now! I am a teacher and we really feel this page is valid. Thanks! DCM2015 (talk) 12:06, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Paul Linnet (July 24)

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

The notability claim here is his authorship of a series of books, but the books themselves have not been shown to be notable. I'm declining because this shouldn't be sitting in the queue for review when it clearly doesn't meet the criteria to be published to mainspace. I considered rejecting it outright (i.e., with no option to resubmit) because it seems unlikely that appropriate sources exist, given that some effort has been made to locate them. But enough books have one review, that it seems plausible a few of them would have two for WP:NBOOK. Do not re-submit until you're highly confident that you have located 2+ WP:RELIABLE, independent published reviews for multiple of these books. Sources like the Guardian, Publishers Weekly, School Library Journal, etc, are good. Store listings, blogs, Goodreads, YouTube, etc, do not qualify.

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:Paul Linnet 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.

~ L 🌸 (talk) 04:12, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, DCM2015! 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! ~ L 🌸 (talk) 04:12, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:001c9ccc-614.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:001c9ccc-614.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:47, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply. It isn't anywhere else but is a free use image for promotional use, and I thought it would benefit the page. 78.19.242.115 (talk) 10:59, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:001c9ccc-614.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:001c9ccc-614.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F6 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:47, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable non-free use File:001c9ccc-614.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:001c9ccc-614.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of non-free use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of non-free use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable non-free use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable non-free use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file's talk page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:57, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Paul Linnet (August 29)

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

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Likely meets WP:NAUTHOR but I can say now because of the promotional tone of the draft and series of unreliable sources, hence my decline.

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:Paul Linnet 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.

Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 02:29, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]