|
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Cummins Allison 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/Cummins Allison until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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 template from the top of the article. PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 15:05, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
Welcome to the first edition of The Olive Branch. This will be a place to semi-regularly update editors active in dispute resolution (DR) about some of the most important issues, advances, and challenges in the area. You were delivered this update because you are active in DR, but if you would prefer not to receive any future mailing, just add your name to this page.
In this issue:
--The Olive Branch 19:00, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
Hi, and a belated welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not add
unsourced
personal observations or speculation on pop cultural references to articles, as you did with
these edits to A Scause for Applause, as this violates Wikipedia's policies of
Verifiability,
No Original Research, and
WP:SYNTH. Wikipedia requires that all material added to articles be accompanied by
reliable,
verifiable sources explicitly cited in the text in the form of an
inline citation, which you can learn to make
here. With regard to material about the content of fiction that is evaluative, analytical or interpretive, the source must be a
secondary source, and it must explicitly mention the information in relation to the work in question. Relying instead on personal observation or interpretation is
original research, and using sources to form original conclusions not explicitly in those sources is
synthesis, which is a form of original research. In addition,
trivial information that is not salient or relevant enough to be incorporated into the major sections of an article should not be included, as per
WP:TRIVIA. If you have any other questions about editing, or need help regarding the site's policies, just let me know by leaving a message for me in a new section at the bottom of
my talk page. Thanks.
Nightscream (
talk)
05:37, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
Hi Dtm1234,
You username was listed under . Your userpage looks fine to me; let me know if you need some specific help. -- JustBerry ( talk) 05:33, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
Hi Dtm1234,
In order to better control the quality of new pages, keep out the spam, and welcome the genuine newbies, the current system we introduced in 2011 is being updated and improved. The documentation and tutorials have also been revised and given a facelift. Most importantly a new user group New Page Reviewer has been created.
Under the new rule, you may find that you are temporarily unable to mark new pages as reviewed. However, this is nothing to worry about - most current experienced patrollers are being accorded the the new right without the need to apply, and if you have significant previous experience of patrolling new pages, we strongly encourage you to apply for the new right as soon as possible - we need all the help we can get, and we are now providing a dynamic, supportive environment for your work.
Find out more about this exiting new user right now at New Page Reviewers and be sure to read the new tutorial before applying. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 04:28, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
|
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Cummins Allison 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/Cummins Allison until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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 template from the top of the article. PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 15:05, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
Welcome to the first edition of The Olive Branch. This will be a place to semi-regularly update editors active in dispute resolution (DR) about some of the most important issues, advances, and challenges in the area. You were delivered this update because you are active in DR, but if you would prefer not to receive any future mailing, just add your name to this page.
In this issue:
--The Olive Branch 19:00, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
Hi, and a belated welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not add
unsourced
personal observations or speculation on pop cultural references to articles, as you did with
these edits to A Scause for Applause, as this violates Wikipedia's policies of
Verifiability,
No Original Research, and
WP:SYNTH. Wikipedia requires that all material added to articles be accompanied by
reliable,
verifiable sources explicitly cited in the text in the form of an
inline citation, which you can learn to make
here. With regard to material about the content of fiction that is evaluative, analytical or interpretive, the source must be a
secondary source, and it must explicitly mention the information in relation to the work in question. Relying instead on personal observation or interpretation is
original research, and using sources to form original conclusions not explicitly in those sources is
synthesis, which is a form of original research. In addition,
trivial information that is not salient or relevant enough to be incorporated into the major sections of an article should not be included, as per
WP:TRIVIA. If you have any other questions about editing, or need help regarding the site's policies, just let me know by leaving a message for me in a new section at the bottom of
my talk page. Thanks.
Nightscream (
talk)
05:37, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
Hi Dtm1234,
You username was listed under . Your userpage looks fine to me; let me know if you need some specific help. -- JustBerry ( talk) 05:33, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
Hi Dtm1234,
In order to better control the quality of new pages, keep out the spam, and welcome the genuine newbies, the current system we introduced in 2011 is being updated and improved. The documentation and tutorials have also been revised and given a facelift. Most importantly a new user group New Page Reviewer has been created.
Under the new rule, you may find that you are temporarily unable to mark new pages as reviewed. However, this is nothing to worry about - most current experienced patrollers are being accorded the the new right without the need to apply, and if you have significant previous experience of patrolling new pages, we strongly encourage you to apply for the new right as soon as possible - we need all the help we can get, and we are now providing a dynamic, supportive environment for your work.
Find out more about this exiting new user right now at New Page Reviewers and be sure to read the new tutorial before applying. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 04:28, 13 November 2016 (UTC)