User talk:JTA

Welcome to Wikipedia!

Season's Greetings JTA, welcome to Wikipedia!

I noticed nobody had said hi yet... Hi!

If you feel a change is needed, feel free to make it yourself! Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone (yourself included) can edit any article by following the Edit this page link. Wikipedia convention is to be bold and not be afraid of making mistakes. If you're not sure how editing works, have a look at How to edit a page, or try out the Sandbox to test your editing skills.

You might like some of these links and tips:

some General guidance.
Tutorial and the Manual of Style.
Find out how to revert, move and merge pages.
Sign your posts on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~).
Add yourself to the New user log and a regional notice board
Ask questions at the Village pump or Help desk.
Use the Show preview button
Provide an Edit summary
Add the correct image copyright tag to any images you upload
Take a look at Consensus of standards
Create a User page

If, for some reason, you are unable to fix a problem yourself, feel free to ask someone else to do it. Wikipedia has a vibrant community of contributors who have a wide range of skills and specialties, and many of them would be glad to help. As well as the wiki community pages there are IRC Channels, where you are more than welcome to ask for assistance.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me on my talk page. Thanks and happy editing, -- Alf ^melmac 21:10, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Bittlestone moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Mark Bittlestone, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:42, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Mark Bittlestone (March 9)

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

See WP:NBASIC "People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject." The current draft is largely dependent on sources closely affiliated with the subject - the website and the subject's Instagram account are primary sources, for example. Is there any significant coverage in newspapers or magazines that could be cited?

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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Mark Bittlestone and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Mark Bittlestone, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 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.

Paul W (talk) 10:26, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, JTA! Having an article 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! Paul W (talk) 10:26, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Mark Bittlestone (July 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 Missvain 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:

Hi.

I’m sorry, but the sourcing here isn’t helping the subject meet our General Notability Guidelines. The majority of the coverage is either social media, websites and things associated with the subject, passing mentions, or from hyper local news outlets. We would need more coverage like the Chortle piece, and more regional and national coverage.

We need *significant* coverage in notable media outlets or by notable publishers about Mark Bittlestone. Examples: magazine and newspaper reviews and features about Mark Bittlestone specifically; books or peer-reviewed white papers written ABOUT Mark Bittlestone; television and radio features ABOUT Mark Bittlestone.

If those are available, please improve this submission. If not, then it might not be the right time (WP:TOOSOON for Mark Bittlestone to have a Wikipedia article.

I hope you will consider improving existing Wikipedia content about other subjects of interest!

If you have any questions please ask them at WP:TEAHOUSE.

Thank you for contributing to 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:Mark Bittlestone and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Mark Bittlestone, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to 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.

Missvain (talk) 21:28, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Mark Bittlestone (August 26)

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

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:Mark Bittlestone 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.

DavidEfraim (talk) 13:54, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

TLA

I notice that you are one of the small elite group of editors who have Three Letter Acronyms as usernames. Recently another editor with that distinction, JMF, suggested forming ourselves into a club. If you wish to join, add [[Category: Wikipedian TLA club|{{subst:PAGENAME}}]] to your user page. That will put a userbox there, and also add you to Category:Wikipedian TLA club. Alternatively, if you don't want a userbox, you may add yourself directly to the category. JMF has also added a place on his user page for members to add their usernames to a list if they like. (If you aren't interested then of course please just ignore this message.) JBW (talk) 13:06, 13 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Mark Bittlestone has been accepted

Mark Bittlestone, 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!

Tutwakhamoe (talk) 16:27, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion discussion about Jamie D'Souza

Hello JTA, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

While your contributions are appreciated, I wanted to let you know that I've started a discussion about whether an article that you created, Jamie D'Souza, should be deleted, as I am not sure that it is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia in its current form. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jamie D'Souza.

Deletion discussions usually run for seven days and are not votes. Our guide about effectively contributing to such discussions is worth a read. The most common issue in these discussions is notability, but it's not the only aspect that may be discussed; read the nomination and any other comments carefully before you contribute to the discussion. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Dclemens1971}}. And don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:42, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion discussion about Jamie D'Souza

Hello JTA, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

While your contributions are appreciated, I wanted to let you know that I've started a discussion about whether an article that you created, Jamie D'Souza, should be deleted, as I am not sure that it is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia in its current form. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jamie D'Souza (2nd nomination).

Deletion discussions usually run for seven days and are not votes. Our guide about effectively contributing to such discussions is worth a read. The most common issue in these discussions is notability, but it's not the only aspect that may be discussed; read the nomination and any other comments carefully before you contribute to the discussion. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Dclemens1971}}. And don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Dclemens1971 (talk) 21:15, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]