Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Trufflegoblin. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:
Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Wikipedia:Questions, or place {{ helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there.
Again, welcome (back) ! MPS1992 ( talk) 20:05, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. I hope you don't mind if I share some of my thoughts on starting out as a new editor on Wikipedia: If I could get editors in your situation to follow just one piece of advice, it would be this: Learn Wikipedia by working only on non-contentious topics until you have a feel for the normal editing process and the policies that usually come up when editing casually. You'll find editing to be fun, easy, and rewarding. The rare disputes are resolved quickly and easily.
Working on biographical information about living persons is far more difficult. Wikipedia's Biographies of living persons policy requires strict adherence to multiple content policies, and applies to all information about living persons including talk pages.
If you have a relationship with the topics you want to edit, then you will need to review Wikipedia's Conflict of interest policy, which may require you to disclose your relationship and restrict your editing depending upon how you are affiliated with the subject matter.
Some topic areas within Wikipedia have special editing restrictions that apply to all editors. It's best to avoid these topics until you are extremely familiar with all relevant policies and guidelines.
I hope you find some useful information in all this, and welcome again. -- Ronz ( talk) 19:20, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Kang and Co Solicitors Limited requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company, corporation or organization, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Nat Gertler ( talk) 22:01, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi Trufflegoblin. I'd hoped you would have noticed and commented on my breakdown of your first edit to Naveen Jain. I've not gone into such detail with your second edit because it's more of the same, but this time the sourcing is poorer and the content more promotional in nature. I hope we can discuss this further. -- Ronz ( talk) 22:22, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi Ronz, you undid the whole edit I made the other day, which I found surprising. I've used Wikipedia for a decade and I'm afraid I don't know what the acronym SOAP stands for, you seem to use it a lot so I'd love an explanation! I'm sure there were elements of the edit I made that could easily have been left in, so please tell me what specific issues you had so I can adapt the content until it fits into the article. Sorry if this is a bit of hassle but I can't be the only person who wants to see this article expanded, so I'd be a lot happier if you could undo the edit then give specific reasons for each part you're taking out. Thanks in advance! Trufflegoblin ( talk) 05:22, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
The breakdown of the last edit was good, I did indeed notice, hence the 'thanks' I sent you. When I said 'undo the edit' above, of course I mean 'un-undo the edit' or 'redo the edit'! I think it would be a bit more helpful if you could break it down again because like I said, there are elements that you can leave in the article. Hope all is good Trufflegoblin ( talk) 05:49, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
My "impolite" response to blatant behavioral problems is something that you think is equivalent to your comments made out of the blue? I'm afraid not.
The "notablity review" (a real review of notability is an AfD by the way) isn't helpful given the complete lack of screening for general quality of the sources and relevant content. Do you understand how Garbage in, garbage out applies? Or throw enough mud at the wall, some of it will stick? If you start with poor sources, you will not get anything encyclopedic or neutral. In a BLP, you will not get anything at all because they simply shouldn't be used.
The Women's Safety Xprise is something you had brought up that seems due mention. Glad you added it. -- Ronz ( talk) 16:53, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
Your editing on Naveen Jain is promotional.
Hello, Trufflegoblin. We
welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things
you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a
conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the
conflict of interest guideline and
FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:
In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).
Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you.
Please reply here, and disclose any connection you have him with him, his companies, etc, directly or indirectly. Best regards Jytdog ( talk) 20:00, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.
Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!
Chenzw Talk 03:48, 6 March 2018 (UTC)Hello Trufflegoblin,
I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Joe's Basecamp for deletion, because it seems to be promotional, rather than an encyclopedia article.
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.
You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.
Vexations ( talk) 23:13, 31 March 2018 (UTC)
![]() |
Hello, Trufflegoblin!
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!
KJP1 (
talk)
20:50, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
|
On your userpage you say that you used to edit here 6 years ago. Would you please identify the other accounts under which you have edited? Thanks. Jytdog ( talk) 02:31, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joe Bonington 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.
Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Trufflegoblin. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:
Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Wikipedia:Questions, or place {{ helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there.
Again, welcome (back) ! MPS1992 ( talk) 20:05, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. I hope you don't mind if I share some of my thoughts on starting out as a new editor on Wikipedia: If I could get editors in your situation to follow just one piece of advice, it would be this: Learn Wikipedia by working only on non-contentious topics until you have a feel for the normal editing process and the policies that usually come up when editing casually. You'll find editing to be fun, easy, and rewarding. The rare disputes are resolved quickly and easily.
Working on biographical information about living persons is far more difficult. Wikipedia's Biographies of living persons policy requires strict adherence to multiple content policies, and applies to all information about living persons including talk pages.
If you have a relationship with the topics you want to edit, then you will need to review Wikipedia's Conflict of interest policy, which may require you to disclose your relationship and restrict your editing depending upon how you are affiliated with the subject matter.
Some topic areas within Wikipedia have special editing restrictions that apply to all editors. It's best to avoid these topics until you are extremely familiar with all relevant policies and guidelines.
I hope you find some useful information in all this, and welcome again. -- Ronz ( talk) 19:20, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Kang and Co Solicitors Limited requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company, corporation or organization, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Nat Gertler ( talk) 22:01, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi Trufflegoblin. I'd hoped you would have noticed and commented on my breakdown of your first edit to Naveen Jain. I've not gone into such detail with your second edit because it's more of the same, but this time the sourcing is poorer and the content more promotional in nature. I hope we can discuss this further. -- Ronz ( talk) 22:22, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi Ronz, you undid the whole edit I made the other day, which I found surprising. I've used Wikipedia for a decade and I'm afraid I don't know what the acronym SOAP stands for, you seem to use it a lot so I'd love an explanation! I'm sure there were elements of the edit I made that could easily have been left in, so please tell me what specific issues you had so I can adapt the content until it fits into the article. Sorry if this is a bit of hassle but I can't be the only person who wants to see this article expanded, so I'd be a lot happier if you could undo the edit then give specific reasons for each part you're taking out. Thanks in advance! Trufflegoblin ( talk) 05:22, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
The breakdown of the last edit was good, I did indeed notice, hence the 'thanks' I sent you. When I said 'undo the edit' above, of course I mean 'un-undo the edit' or 'redo the edit'! I think it would be a bit more helpful if you could break it down again because like I said, there are elements that you can leave in the article. Hope all is good Trufflegoblin ( talk) 05:49, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
My "impolite" response to blatant behavioral problems is something that you think is equivalent to your comments made out of the blue? I'm afraid not.
The "notablity review" (a real review of notability is an AfD by the way) isn't helpful given the complete lack of screening for general quality of the sources and relevant content. Do you understand how Garbage in, garbage out applies? Or throw enough mud at the wall, some of it will stick? If you start with poor sources, you will not get anything encyclopedic or neutral. In a BLP, you will not get anything at all because they simply shouldn't be used.
The Women's Safety Xprise is something you had brought up that seems due mention. Glad you added it. -- Ronz ( talk) 16:53, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
Your editing on Naveen Jain is promotional.
Hello, Trufflegoblin. We
welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things
you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a
conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the
conflict of interest guideline and
FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:
In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).
Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you.
Please reply here, and disclose any connection you have him with him, his companies, etc, directly or indirectly. Best regards Jytdog ( talk) 20:00, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.
Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!
Chenzw Talk 03:48, 6 March 2018 (UTC)Hello Trufflegoblin,
I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Joe's Basecamp for deletion, because it seems to be promotional, rather than an encyclopedia article.
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.
You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.
Vexations ( talk) 23:13, 31 March 2018 (UTC)
![]() |
Hello, Trufflegoblin!
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!
KJP1 (
talk)
20:50, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
|
On your userpage you say that you used to edit here 6 years ago. Would you please identify the other accounts under which you have edited? Thanks. Jytdog ( talk) 02:31, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joe Bonington 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.