User talk:Yamfri

Archives

Index Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 180 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 5 sections are present.

An article you recently created, Geoffrey Holt (philanthropist), 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. — Sagotreespirit (^talk) 06:46, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've submitted Draft:Geoffrey_Holt_(philanthropist) for review, please check it out when have time. Yamfri (talk) 04:54, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

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:

This is an interesting article but to start with it's written a bit like a short story or obituary. It needs to be rewritten to be more like an encyclopedia entry.

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:Geoffrey Holt (philanthropist) 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.

BuySomeApples (talk) 05:05, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Yamfri! 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! BuySomeApples (talk) 05:05, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I've fixed the article the best I could and resubmitted for a review. Thanks! Yamfri (talk) 15:39, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

Subject not notable per WP:BIO1E. This is a single story from Brattleboro Reformer which was grabbed up by AP, and then outlets like USA Today and cable news rebroadcast it. This subject will likely be re-forgotten in less than twenty years as the town blows through the money it was given. Notability on Wikipedia has to be permanent, not transient.

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:Geoffrey Holt (philanthropist) 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.

Chris Troutman (talk) 17:39, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Chris,

• First: WP:BIO1E is about "whether an article should be written about the individual, the event or both", not about notability per se.
• Anyway, Wikipedia:What is one event? Holt's act of giving his fortune was not an "event" per se, it was 22 years of his life from 2001 when he established the trust and all formalities till his will was executed upon his death in 2023. It was an "event" only from the news media POV.
• I disagree with the assertion that "outlets like USA Today and cable news rebroadcast" a single story from Brattleboro Reformer. Please, read the sources in the article: they are independent in-depth reportings, not simple copy-pasting by syndicated outlets.
• I've added two new in-depth sources, The Washington Post and The New York Times.
• I do believe the subject satisfies WP:BIO basic notability criteria. In addition, the subject "has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in a specific field" (WP:ANYBIO). The money may be gone in a year or 20 years, by the record of his donation will stay permanently in the history.

Respectfully, Yamfri (talk) 21:26, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:42, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

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.

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:

Well done on creating the draft, and it may potentially meet the relevant requirements (including WP:GNG, WP:ANYBIO) but presently it is not clear that it does. As other reviewers have noted, Wikipedia's basic requirement for entry is that the subject is notable. Essentially subjects 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. To properly create such a draft page, please see the articles ‘Your First Article’, ‘Referencing for Beginners’ and ‘Easier Referencing for Beginners’. Additionally, the draft tends to read too much like a CV, which Wikipedia is not. Also, if you have any connection to the subject, including being paid, you have a conflict of interest that you must declare on your Talk page (to see instructions on how to do this please click the link). Please familiarise yourself with these pages before amending the draft. If you feel you can meet these requirements, then please make the necessary amendments before resubmitting the page. It would help our volunteer reviewers by identifying, on the draft's talk page, the WP:THREE best sources that establish notability of the subject. You may also wish to leave a note for me on my talk page and I would be happy to reassess. As I said, I do think this draft has potential so please do persevere!

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:Geoffrey Holt (philanthropist) 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.

Cabrils (talk) 01:07, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Geoffrey Holt (philanthropist), 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!

Cabrils (talk) 05:47, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On 15 December 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Geoffrey Holt (philanthropist), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Geoffrey Holt, an unassuming New Hampshire man who worked as a groundskeeper in a mobile home park where he resided, left $3.8 million to his small town after his death? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Geoffrey Holt (philanthropist). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Geoffrey Holt (philanthropist)), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Z1720 (talk) 00:02, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

		Hook update
		Your hook reached 15,479 views (645.0 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of December 2023 – nice work!

GalliumBot (talk • contribs) (he/it) 03:28, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On 23 December 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Sylvia Bloom, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that having worked as a secretary for 67 years, secret millionaire Sylvia Bloom retired at the age of 96 and willed US$8.2 million to sponsor underprivileged students? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Sylvia Bloom. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Sylvia Bloom), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Aoidh (talk) 00:02, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Secret millionaire philanthropists has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 02:13, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]