This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
/info/en/?search=Draft:John_Sargent_Pillsbury_Sr.
The reason I do not contribute more is I don't understand the tools and I don't understand how you literally have hundreds of thousands if not millions of entries where there are no citations and maybe a line or two that were accepted but here I spent days trying to research online and ran into numerous issues not because I didn't do the research, but because three men have the exact same name all jammed together within the same time period and working for the same company.
The entire reason I spent a few days looking into this was I started a fictional football league and wanted some info on him as a fictional owner. I did find important information about him which I provided numerous references to.
This citation alone contains more information than most Wikipedia topics provide https://wc.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi?op=GET&db=rlc328&id=I20695 and if it gets posted I can then contact local librarians in Minneapolis and Pillsbury then to add additional information by editing the Wiki entry. I'm sure they could add a lot more to the entry than I could ever do but having a base to work with would go a long way towards convincing them to help.
While I understand I am a novice, and I'll tell you right now I hate using your tools, I put more effort into this than most and I don't accept your reasoning for the rejection. First I added too many citations to Wikipedia. Ok, that I understood and corrected as I accepted that was wrong as I was compiling citations rather than the information as the information I got from different sites but I thought it was ok to use Wiki to cite additional information to link people to. But with all the Wikipedia pages I've been to where there was little or no effort put in at all, I actually am rather insulted by the reason to reject this entry.
There is a genuine need for this article because Governor John Sargent Pillsbury, John Sargent Pillsbury SR and John Sargent Pillsbury JR all have the identical same name and they overlap both in their lifetime on the planet and in the family company so that they get confused and it may be that confusion which results in John Sargent Sr being ignored. Rather than run from him to avoid confusion, would it not be best to create an entry and address the confusion to say here is the answer to the confusion as here we can definitively tell you John Sargent Pillsbury SR didthis this and this but if you have further information you can contribute, please do.
I am not angry because the article was rejected as lord knows I'm not good at working with your tools. But to say there's not enough information to make it worth sharing is insulting when I see so many other Wiki entries that have almost no effort put into them or actually are not needed. But this one I feel is needed to clarify an issue with historic necessity to it.
Just get it up and I'll start contacting everyone I can to contribute to improving it... I will even contact some of the people I used for citations. But I need help in being able to provide them with something they can see as they can't see drafts to help me and maybe I can even find someone who can use the Wiki tools to better improve the article.
Not asking for rules to be broken, just asking for help or I'll just say to heck with this as I added more than enough to justify approving the article so others can contribute and help resolve this issue as John Sargent Pillsbury SR accomplished many things in his life it seems and all it takes is for someone to create a place where it can be added.
My understanding of Wikipedia isn't that it just copies and emulates what other sites already posted... my understanding is that Wikipedia is the first to post important information for others to copy, link to and emulate. I'm just asking for a start as this got my interest but otherwise, it has nothing to do with me or anything I really care about. And isn't that why it's important for people like me to show we care enough to try being involved?
Up to you Chetsford as if you feel it isn't deserving, I'll drop it. But if this isn't deserving, then you need to get to work removing a lot of entries others approved because my submission did include research, citations and information that it appears no one else considered because they just needed someone to take the lead.
Armorbeast ( talk) 19:34, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar | ||
For noticing and awarding my integrity in being honest and handling a past issue and for kindly going out of your way to speak in favor of me getting unblocked for how I handled everything. I am truly touched by how much you further helped my case and I'm happy to work with you on here. I would love to work with you on future discussions and debates and whatnot here on Wikipedia. Just like they say it in California where I'm from, you stay smooth homie! :) DrewieStewie ( talk) 06:51, 22 August 2018 (UTC) |
Greetings Chetsford. As you recently closed an RfC about Donald Trump, perhaps you'd like to take a look at this request for a close review about another RfC for the same article. — JFG talk 10:14, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
Hi Chetsford! I tried to use your recommendations and to change my draft:Joseph Zinker. I think Zinker meets the criterias of ANYBIO (criterion 2), of NAUTHOR (criterion 2 and may be also 1) and could also have an article in Wikipedia as an academic (Notability academics criterions). It's also the author of a book that has been judged one of the "Books of the year" by the magazine "Psychology Today" in 1977 and which is now a classic and a best-seller translated into several languages. I tried to add a lot of sources to demonstrate it. I'm waiting for your opinion. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by DelphineM. ( talk • contribs) 17:50, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
I've just promoted this article. I added it to the "education" section of the FA page, but perhaps you can think of a better place to put it! You can either ping me, or move it yourself if you think it could be better placed. Sarastro ( talk) 22:44, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Dwight Agnew at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Edwardx ( talk) 23:25, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
Hi. Do remember to check back on he outcomes of any articles your have sent to AfD. This may be of help for you with your patrolling. Any questions, don't hesitate to ask at WT:NPR. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 10:48, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:United States elections, 2018. Legobot ( talk) 04:26, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
Dear Chetsford - thank you for your review of my article on James Bielo; I appreciate your input and thank you for your suggestion. Are University run pages considered ‘independent’ sources for academics? Also, are book reviews of a figure considered independent sources? — Preceding unsigned comment added by JonBialecki ( talk • contribs)
Dear Chetsford thanks for the suggestion and the reply; they are both appreciated — Preceding unsigned comment added by JonBialecki ( talk • contribs) 23:53, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
G'day Chetsford, are you sure you want to withdraw Emanuel Moravec? It has two supports already and really only needs one more and perhaps an image tweak for promotion. It would be a shame to give up on all the work you've put into it, along with the reviewers. I've got a full dance card this week with reviews, but could probably look at it over the weekend. Let me know? Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 04:18, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
Hi guys, I just came here because I'd decided to detonate the FAC nom to permit the ACR to continue and a new FAC to be nominated as soon as that happens, and to let Chetsford know that I have a copy of his nom statement for re-use if you don't get to it before the current FAC page is deleted. Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 11:58, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. Cheers, MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 00:53, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
The article Antarctic Treaty issue you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Antarctic Treaty issue for comments about the article. Congratulations! Kingsif ( talk) 01:47, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Schindlerjuden. Legobot ( talk) 04:26, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
Dannylenihan (
talk) 09:16, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
Hi Chetsford - I have re-edited the document and re-submitted. I'm still very new to wikipedia, so it's all quite confusing at the moment. Please let me know if there's anything more I need to publish the article.
Thanks,
D
G'day everyone, voting for the 2018 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2018. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 00:35, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
G'day everyone, voting for the 2018 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2018. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 06:22, 15 September 2018 (UTC) Note: the previous version omitted a link to the election page, therefore you are receiving this follow up message with a link to the election page to correct the previous version. We apologies for any inconvenience that this may have caused.
On 17 September 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article National Philatelic Collection (United States), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the United States government purchased John Lennon's boyhood stamp album for the National Philatelic Collection? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/National Philatelic Collection (United States). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, National Philatelic Collection (United States)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. 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.
Alex Shih ( talk) 00:02, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
Hello Chetsford, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!
The New Page Feed currently has 2700 unreviewed articles, up from just 500 at the start of July. For a while we were falling behind by an average of about 40 articles per day, but we have stabilised more recently. Please review some articles from the back of the queue if you can (Sort by: 'Oldest' at Special:NewPagesFeed), as we are very close to having articles older than one month.
List of other useful scripts for New Page Reviewing
|
---|
|
Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 23:11, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
/info/en/?search=Draft:John_Sargent_Pillsbury_Sr.
The reason I do not contribute more is I don't understand the tools and I don't understand how you literally have hundreds of thousands if not millions of entries where there are no citations and maybe a line or two that were accepted but here I spent days trying to research online and ran into numerous issues not because I didn't do the research, but because three men have the exact same name all jammed together within the same time period and working for the same company.
The entire reason I spent a few days looking into this was I started a fictional football league and wanted some info on him as a fictional owner. I did find important information about him which I provided numerous references to.
This citation alone contains more information than most Wikipedia topics provide https://wc.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi?op=GET&db=rlc328&id=I20695 and if it gets posted I can then contact local librarians in Minneapolis and Pillsbury then to add additional information by editing the Wiki entry. I'm sure they could add a lot more to the entry than I could ever do but having a base to work with would go a long way towards convincing them to help.
While I understand I am a novice, and I'll tell you right now I hate using your tools, I put more effort into this than most and I don't accept your reasoning for the rejection. First I added too many citations to Wikipedia. Ok, that I understood and corrected as I accepted that was wrong as I was compiling citations rather than the information as the information I got from different sites but I thought it was ok to use Wiki to cite additional information to link people to. But with all the Wikipedia pages I've been to where there was little or no effort put in at all, I actually am rather insulted by the reason to reject this entry.
There is a genuine need for this article because Governor John Sargent Pillsbury, John Sargent Pillsbury SR and John Sargent Pillsbury JR all have the identical same name and they overlap both in their lifetime on the planet and in the family company so that they get confused and it may be that confusion which results in John Sargent Sr being ignored. Rather than run from him to avoid confusion, would it not be best to create an entry and address the confusion to say here is the answer to the confusion as here we can definitively tell you John Sargent Pillsbury SR didthis this and this but if you have further information you can contribute, please do.
I am not angry because the article was rejected as lord knows I'm not good at working with your tools. But to say there's not enough information to make it worth sharing is insulting when I see so many other Wiki entries that have almost no effort put into them or actually are not needed. But this one I feel is needed to clarify an issue with historic necessity to it.
Just get it up and I'll start contacting everyone I can to contribute to improving it... I will even contact some of the people I used for citations. But I need help in being able to provide them with something they can see as they can't see drafts to help me and maybe I can even find someone who can use the Wiki tools to better improve the article.
Not asking for rules to be broken, just asking for help or I'll just say to heck with this as I added more than enough to justify approving the article so others can contribute and help resolve this issue as John Sargent Pillsbury SR accomplished many things in his life it seems and all it takes is for someone to create a place where it can be added.
My understanding of Wikipedia isn't that it just copies and emulates what other sites already posted... my understanding is that Wikipedia is the first to post important information for others to copy, link to and emulate. I'm just asking for a start as this got my interest but otherwise, it has nothing to do with me or anything I really care about. And isn't that why it's important for people like me to show we care enough to try being involved?
Up to you Chetsford as if you feel it isn't deserving, I'll drop it. But if this isn't deserving, then you need to get to work removing a lot of entries others approved because my submission did include research, citations and information that it appears no one else considered because they just needed someone to take the lead.
Armorbeast ( talk) 19:34, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar | ||
For noticing and awarding my integrity in being honest and handling a past issue and for kindly going out of your way to speak in favor of me getting unblocked for how I handled everything. I am truly touched by how much you further helped my case and I'm happy to work with you on here. I would love to work with you on future discussions and debates and whatnot here on Wikipedia. Just like they say it in California where I'm from, you stay smooth homie! :) DrewieStewie ( talk) 06:51, 22 August 2018 (UTC) |
Greetings Chetsford. As you recently closed an RfC about Donald Trump, perhaps you'd like to take a look at this request for a close review about another RfC for the same article. — JFG talk 10:14, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
Hi Chetsford! I tried to use your recommendations and to change my draft:Joseph Zinker. I think Zinker meets the criterias of ANYBIO (criterion 2), of NAUTHOR (criterion 2 and may be also 1) and could also have an article in Wikipedia as an academic (Notability academics criterions). It's also the author of a book that has been judged one of the "Books of the year" by the magazine "Psychology Today" in 1977 and which is now a classic and a best-seller translated into several languages. I tried to add a lot of sources to demonstrate it. I'm waiting for your opinion. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by DelphineM. ( talk • contribs) 17:50, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
I've just promoted this article. I added it to the "education" section of the FA page, but perhaps you can think of a better place to put it! You can either ping me, or move it yourself if you think it could be better placed. Sarastro ( talk) 22:44, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Dwight Agnew at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Edwardx ( talk) 23:25, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
Hi. Do remember to check back on he outcomes of any articles your have sent to AfD. This may be of help for you with your patrolling. Any questions, don't hesitate to ask at WT:NPR. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 10:48, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:United States elections, 2018. Legobot ( talk) 04:26, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
Dear Chetsford - thank you for your review of my article on James Bielo; I appreciate your input and thank you for your suggestion. Are University run pages considered ‘independent’ sources for academics? Also, are book reviews of a figure considered independent sources? — Preceding unsigned comment added by JonBialecki ( talk • contribs)
Dear Chetsford thanks for the suggestion and the reply; they are both appreciated — Preceding unsigned comment added by JonBialecki ( talk • contribs) 23:53, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
G'day Chetsford, are you sure you want to withdraw Emanuel Moravec? It has two supports already and really only needs one more and perhaps an image tweak for promotion. It would be a shame to give up on all the work you've put into it, along with the reviewers. I've got a full dance card this week with reviews, but could probably look at it over the weekend. Let me know? Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 04:18, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
Hi guys, I just came here because I'd decided to detonate the FAC nom to permit the ACR to continue and a new FAC to be nominated as soon as that happens, and to let Chetsford know that I have a copy of his nom statement for re-use if you don't get to it before the current FAC page is deleted. Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 11:58, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. Cheers, MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 00:53, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
The article Antarctic Treaty issue you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Antarctic Treaty issue for comments about the article. Congratulations! Kingsif ( talk) 01:47, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Schindlerjuden. Legobot ( talk) 04:26, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
Dannylenihan (
talk) 09:16, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
Hi Chetsford - I have re-edited the document and re-submitted. I'm still very new to wikipedia, so it's all quite confusing at the moment. Please let me know if there's anything more I need to publish the article.
Thanks,
D
G'day everyone, voting for the 2018 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2018. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 00:35, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
G'day everyone, voting for the 2018 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2018. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 06:22, 15 September 2018 (UTC) Note: the previous version omitted a link to the election page, therefore you are receiving this follow up message with a link to the election page to correct the previous version. We apologies for any inconvenience that this may have caused.
On 17 September 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article National Philatelic Collection (United States), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the United States government purchased John Lennon's boyhood stamp album for the National Philatelic Collection? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/National Philatelic Collection (United States). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, National Philatelic Collection (United States)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. 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.
Alex Shih ( talk) 00:02, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
Hello Chetsford, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!
The New Page Feed currently has 2700 unreviewed articles, up from just 500 at the start of July. For a while we were falling behind by an average of about 40 articles per day, but we have stabilised more recently. Please review some articles from the back of the queue if you can (Sort by: 'Oldest' at Special:NewPagesFeed), as we are very close to having articles older than one month.
List of other useful scripts for New Page Reviewing
|
---|
|
Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 23:11, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |