This page is an archive. Do not edit the contents of this page. Please direct any additional comments to the current main page. |
The article was quickly declined a few times without effective comments until a senior editor stepped in and told the original reviewer that he/she needed to completely read articles before declining. It's confusing to have work declined by people not following procedures.
Impressively quickly. And the help was very very useful indeed. The editors were extremely well informed and very helpful.
I wonder if there's an easier 'trouble shooting' page that could help first time users? I'm still unsure how to create connections between articles and pages...
Impressively quickly. And the help was very very useful indeed. The editors were extremely well informed and very helpful.
I wonder if there's an easier 'trouble shooting' page that could help first time users? I'm still unsure how to create connections between articles and pages...
Several of us made revisions to improve the article -- addition of many more references (online and print), stylistic improvements, better, tighter organization showing range of contribution in this bio. We feel that it can now be upgraded from a C rating to a B rating (compared to others in that category); how do we go ahead and get it re-evaluated for upgrade January, 29, 2011 Heisler57 ( talk) 06:29, 29 January 2011 (UTC)Heisler57 Heisler57 ( talk) 06:29, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
For example, my article was listed as a C-Class. I see the grading scheme but am unclear if I need to add additional references, have too much supplemental information or not enough, or if my article is expressing bias or opinion. I took a couple approved sample pages and tried to mirror the flow of content from those. Any direction here would be greatly appreciated.
Secondly, there was a not that as I am a logged in user, I can create articles in another way. I did not understand what that was saying. Clarification would be very helpful.
Thank you for your time.
I have some questions as a follow up about how to make the time I can spend on WK most useful. The office in which I worked from 1953--1955 was next door to Macfarlane's, and he spoke to me many times each week. The organizational relationship was informal, and one of my two main activities was assigned and followed closely by him personally. So I was a bit upset to find no article for any member of the "hierarchy" -- Leo Pincherle (my immediate supervisor), George Macfarlane, R.A. Smith, W.J.Richards (the Director who became a Companion of the Order of the Bath) -- who really were notable. I am 82. Likewise, from my days at King's College London, there are several faculty who became FRS without articles, and likewise my wife remembers several of the dons at Girton she thinks merit articles. The tension for us is between cluttering WK with articles that are too flimsy and time running out on us. If it is not anti-social to do articles about as long as what I did today for George Macfarlane, then I will press on with more, and hope I can find some students willing to dig for more using search tools I can advise on. (I don't have any students of my own these days, but I may find a class of article that will find volunteers)
Thanks Michael P. Barnett ( talk) 04:07, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
I still can't see how to change the category of the pictures after they have been uploaded.
Taking into account the fact that your reviewers are all volunteers and that they probably have many other papers to work through, I found that they gave me their assessment very quickly.
Thank you for the comments on my article which I found to be fair and constructive. I am a newcomer to Wikipedia and I have a steep learning curve. I hope to progessively improve the article and to make additions and corrections to the text.
One notable problem that I have is with the title that has been assigned to my contribution. This is 'Stockway North Nature Reserve', but this refers to only one of the items in the article, so it is rather misleading. The title that I gave it on submission was 'The Natural Environment in and around Nailsea' which relates to all of the sections of the article. Is it possible to revert to this title? Is there any way that I, as a user, can do this myself. I would be grateful to have your guidance on this. Veteranoak ( talk) 17:30, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
The editing process was very useful experience. You have great reviewers such as (Armbrust) who did a great job in directing me to useful links and supporting me in a professional friendly way. Thanks for this great place, people, and service. ( Saharnsaleem ( talk) 17:46, 25 March 2011 (UTC))
Could you give me some feedback on why there is a Dead End symbol on our entry for National Families in Action after the article was approved by your editors? What should we do next to have this symbol removed?
Thanks.
I assisted the (relatively) new user Cbrody ( talk · contribs) after he followed the WikiProject Articles for creation process and his article T Peter Brody ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) has since been nominated as a DYK candidate. I call this a good result for your procedure -- Senra ( Talk) 18:43, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for all your help. I would be happy if I get some more help on creating side charts and inserting pictures and graphs.-- Shalini61290 ( talk) 16:37, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Over all very quick and easy. Thanks. 109.155.134.117 ( talk) 09:54, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
medi eval = medical evaluation Please consider the special attention that should be featured for "medieval" the concept, bearing the status quo of file edit "shorthand", suddenly reminded that it (the 'word' is actually a file sorting edit that specifies "medical evaluation", with all of the following 'probing the annuls of personal/personnel files maintained. Big changes, small file name size. I guess size, or length, or character enumerate matter(s) very much.
If you care to respond, my e-mail is at (Redacted). I realize that this is a rather large , hefty, left handed lob from the middle of nowhere (which, by the way, changes to 'now here',simply by spacing the word correctly, at the w), so I don't really expect to make too much of a difference initially, but it would be really very much appreciated if you could let me know what your thoughts or reaction is...
~shade brisance~
The great auk is not extinct
I didn't realize that I wouldn't be able to edit the first section later. I would like to change the wording a little, but is that possible or not? Probably it's a good idea to warn people that that part will not be editable later.
No
Slow
Make easier and more understandable instructions
yes
no
Awsome!
Make it a bit more simpil
Yes I thought the reviewer was firm but fair
Quite quickly considering volunteer process
Give key reviewers of medical articles free access to journals
yes
very fast
no
yes
No
yes
yes
yes
10 years;Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
no
yes
10s
This article is actually a review of me No just random asdf movie is good
a couple of minutes
Did you find the instructions clear? Yes
How quickly was your submission reviewed? few minitues
Do you have any suggestions to improve the process? No
Pretty fast
No
yes
5 mins
no
no
no
no
This page is an archive. Do not edit the contents of this page. Please direct any additional comments to the current main page. |
The article was quickly declined a few times without effective comments until a senior editor stepped in and told the original reviewer that he/she needed to completely read articles before declining. It's confusing to have work declined by people not following procedures.
Impressively quickly. And the help was very very useful indeed. The editors were extremely well informed and very helpful.
I wonder if there's an easier 'trouble shooting' page that could help first time users? I'm still unsure how to create connections between articles and pages...
Impressively quickly. And the help was very very useful indeed. The editors were extremely well informed and very helpful.
I wonder if there's an easier 'trouble shooting' page that could help first time users? I'm still unsure how to create connections between articles and pages...
Several of us made revisions to improve the article -- addition of many more references (online and print), stylistic improvements, better, tighter organization showing range of contribution in this bio. We feel that it can now be upgraded from a C rating to a B rating (compared to others in that category); how do we go ahead and get it re-evaluated for upgrade January, 29, 2011 Heisler57 ( talk) 06:29, 29 January 2011 (UTC)Heisler57 Heisler57 ( talk) 06:29, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
For example, my article was listed as a C-Class. I see the grading scheme but am unclear if I need to add additional references, have too much supplemental information or not enough, or if my article is expressing bias or opinion. I took a couple approved sample pages and tried to mirror the flow of content from those. Any direction here would be greatly appreciated.
Secondly, there was a not that as I am a logged in user, I can create articles in another way. I did not understand what that was saying. Clarification would be very helpful.
Thank you for your time.
I have some questions as a follow up about how to make the time I can spend on WK most useful. The office in which I worked from 1953--1955 was next door to Macfarlane's, and he spoke to me many times each week. The organizational relationship was informal, and one of my two main activities was assigned and followed closely by him personally. So I was a bit upset to find no article for any member of the "hierarchy" -- Leo Pincherle (my immediate supervisor), George Macfarlane, R.A. Smith, W.J.Richards (the Director who became a Companion of the Order of the Bath) -- who really were notable. I am 82. Likewise, from my days at King's College London, there are several faculty who became FRS without articles, and likewise my wife remembers several of the dons at Girton she thinks merit articles. The tension for us is between cluttering WK with articles that are too flimsy and time running out on us. If it is not anti-social to do articles about as long as what I did today for George Macfarlane, then I will press on with more, and hope I can find some students willing to dig for more using search tools I can advise on. (I don't have any students of my own these days, but I may find a class of article that will find volunteers)
Thanks Michael P. Barnett ( talk) 04:07, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
I still can't see how to change the category of the pictures after they have been uploaded.
Taking into account the fact that your reviewers are all volunteers and that they probably have many other papers to work through, I found that they gave me their assessment very quickly.
Thank you for the comments on my article which I found to be fair and constructive. I am a newcomer to Wikipedia and I have a steep learning curve. I hope to progessively improve the article and to make additions and corrections to the text.
One notable problem that I have is with the title that has been assigned to my contribution. This is 'Stockway North Nature Reserve', but this refers to only one of the items in the article, so it is rather misleading. The title that I gave it on submission was 'The Natural Environment in and around Nailsea' which relates to all of the sections of the article. Is it possible to revert to this title? Is there any way that I, as a user, can do this myself. I would be grateful to have your guidance on this. Veteranoak ( talk) 17:30, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
The editing process was very useful experience. You have great reviewers such as (Armbrust) who did a great job in directing me to useful links and supporting me in a professional friendly way. Thanks for this great place, people, and service. ( Saharnsaleem ( talk) 17:46, 25 March 2011 (UTC))
Could you give me some feedback on why there is a Dead End symbol on our entry for National Families in Action after the article was approved by your editors? What should we do next to have this symbol removed?
Thanks.
I assisted the (relatively) new user Cbrody ( talk · contribs) after he followed the WikiProject Articles for creation process and his article T Peter Brody ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) has since been nominated as a DYK candidate. I call this a good result for your procedure -- Senra ( Talk) 18:43, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for all your help. I would be happy if I get some more help on creating side charts and inserting pictures and graphs.-- Shalini61290 ( talk) 16:37, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Over all very quick and easy. Thanks. 109.155.134.117 ( talk) 09:54, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
medi eval = medical evaluation Please consider the special attention that should be featured for "medieval" the concept, bearing the status quo of file edit "shorthand", suddenly reminded that it (the 'word' is actually a file sorting edit that specifies "medical evaluation", with all of the following 'probing the annuls of personal/personnel files maintained. Big changes, small file name size. I guess size, or length, or character enumerate matter(s) very much.
If you care to respond, my e-mail is at (Redacted). I realize that this is a rather large , hefty, left handed lob from the middle of nowhere (which, by the way, changes to 'now here',simply by spacing the word correctly, at the w), so I don't really expect to make too much of a difference initially, but it would be really very much appreciated if you could let me know what your thoughts or reaction is...
~shade brisance~
The great auk is not extinct
I didn't realize that I wouldn't be able to edit the first section later. I would like to change the wording a little, but is that possible or not? Probably it's a good idea to warn people that that part will not be editable later.
No
Slow
Make easier and more understandable instructions
yes
no
Awsome!
Make it a bit more simpil
Yes I thought the reviewer was firm but fair
Quite quickly considering volunteer process
Give key reviewers of medical articles free access to journals
yes
very fast
no
yes
No
yes
yes
yes
10 years;Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
no
yes
10s
This article is actually a review of me No just random asdf movie is good
a couple of minutes
Did you find the instructions clear? Yes
How quickly was your submission reviewed? few minitues
Do you have any suggestions to improve the process? No
Pretty fast
No
yes
5 mins
no
no
no
no