User talk:BERLINDANCE: Difference between revisions

:Hi ChrysGalley, thank you so much for your help with the submission. I am pretty new to this and I can see now that those long lists of citations look pretty ridiculous. I will carry on refining the references and any further feedback you have would be great. Thanks once again. [[User:BERLINDANCE|BERLINDANCE]] ([[User talk:BERLINDANCE#top|talk]]) 17:04, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

:Hi ChrysGalley, thank you so much for your help with the submission. I am pretty new to this and I can see now that those long lists of citations look pretty ridiculous. I will carry on refining the references and any further feedback you have would be great. Thanks once again. [[User:BERLINDANCE|BERLINDANCE]] ([[User talk:BERLINDANCE#top|talk]]) 17:04, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

::Yes no problem. I hope it isn’t too much work for you but I think it will make the article better for the readers. Just let me know a bit before you resubmit, so I can have another look. [[User:ChrysGalley|ChrysGalley]] ([[User talk:ChrysGalley|talk]]) 17:30, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

::Yes no problem. I hope it isn’t too much work for you but I think it will make the article better for the readers. Just let me know a bit before you resubmit, so I can have another look. [[User:ChrysGalley|ChrysGalley]] ([[User talk:ChrysGalley|talk]]) 17:30, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

:::Hi. I have worked a bit about making the citations a bit more focused and generally tidied things up a bit. It would be great if you could take another look and let me know if this has helped and also what areas still need work and so on. Thanks once again for your help. [[User:BERLINDANCE|BERLINDANCE]] ([[User talk:BERLINDANCE#top|talk]]) 16:39, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

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

—pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 10:30, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, BERLINDANCE! 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! —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 10:30, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

• A bare URL and missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a 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) 21:45, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

• A missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a 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) 22:03, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello BERLINDANCE,

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Uncle Bash007, and I thank you for your contributions.

I wanted to let you know, however, that I have tagged an article that you started, Carol Brown (dance) for deletion, because it appears to be about something that you or someone you know personally invented, coined, or discovered, and it does not indicate how or why the subject is important and/or recognized enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn’t be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion but please don’t remove the speedy deletion tag from the top. If the page is already deleted by the time you come across this message and you wish to retrieve the deleted material, please contact the deleting administrator.

For any further query, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Uncle Bash007}}. And, don’t forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

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

Uncle Bash007 (talk) 23:30, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to Carol Brown (dance). Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability.
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 the draft for review!” button at the top of the page OR move the page back. … discospinster _talk 01:30, 30 August 2025 (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 Qcne was:

This draft’s references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs to

Make sure your draft meets one of the criteria above before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If the subject does not meet any of the criteria, it is not suitable for Wikipedia.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

I am unfortunately not fully convinced this person meets WP:NPROF. I think you’re close. Some stronger independent sources might help?

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.

qcne (talk) 21:06, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Susana Panadés Diaz is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia’s policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Susana Panadés Diaz until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

JTtheOG (talk) 21:17, 25 September 2025 (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 ChrysGalley was:  The comment the reviewer left was:

Hi there, despite me declining this article, I actually think this article can be accepted given the sourcing and WP:CREATIVE. However there are some issues with the sourcing. Firstly the Corriere article is linked via Press Reader, and while many people can see though, most can’t. It’s better to get that cited in the usual way. But the bigger problem with the monster reference pile-up after Bulgaria etc. Also after Buenos Aires in 2024, though that isn’t so bad.
I am happy to help with the wording (we can’t use “etc” for example) but can you resolve the sourcing. It’s better to have one or two good sources rather than nine, which isn’t helpful to Wiki’s readers. I will monitor the draft, so hopefully we can get this resolved fairly quickly.

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.

ChrysGalley (talk) 15:54, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ChrysGalley, thank you so much for your help with the submission. I am pretty new to this and I can see now that those long lists of citations look pretty ridiculous. I will carry on refining the references and any further feedback you have would be great. Thanks once again. BERLINDANCE (talk) 17:04, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes no problem. I hope it isn’t too much work for you but I think it will make the article better for the readers. Just let me know a bit before you resubmit, so I can have another look. ChrysGalley (talk) 17:30, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I have worked a bit about making the citations a bit more focused and generally tidied things up a bit. It would be great if you could take another look and let me know if this has helped and also what areas still need work and so on. Thanks once again for your help. BERLINDANCE (talk) 16:39, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]