Your recent article submission to
Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Rusalkii was:
This submission's references do not show that the subject
qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published,
reliable,
secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the
guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see
technical help and learn about
mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
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 when they have been resolved.
If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to
User:Bobpurvey1/sandbox and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to
User:Bobpurvey1/sandbox, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and
may be deleted.
Hello, Bobpurvey1!
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!
Rusalkii (
talk)
01:05, 16 January 2022 (UTC)reply
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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request
here.
Theroadislong (
talk)
08:44, 16 January 2022 (UTC)reply
Hello, Bobpurvey1. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that
Draft:Bob Purvey, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months
may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please
edit it again or
request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can
request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Hello, Bobpurvey1. It has been over six months since you last edited the
Articles for Creation submission or
draft page you started, "
Bob Purvey".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia
mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at
this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Hi, I'm a novice at this and could use some reasonable help editing my draft bio. Anyone interested, please contact me with rates. bobpurvey@aol.com
Bobpurvey1 (
talk)
16:31, 23 July 2022 (UTC)reply
Editing my draft
Hi, I'm a novice at this and could use some reasonable help editing my draft bio. Anyone interested, please contact me with rates. bobpurvey@aol.com
Bobpurvey1 (
talk)
01:30, 20 July 2022 (UTC)reply
Hi, thanks for the tip. Now I know. Nonetheless, do you know how I can get my bio edited so it conforms to Wikipedia's standards and practices. I'm just over my head in tasks and I tried to edit it but it seems there is a lot to digest to understand how to do it properly. Thanks for any advice. Bob
2603:8001:9BF0:430:202B:16AF:D20E:F124 (
talk)
19:49, 23 July 2022 (UTC)reply
Yes, that is typically how an article comes to be written: Someone notices a notable topic that doesn't have an article, and they create it. If a topic is clearly notable it gets created quickly. If it is more bordeline, it takes a bit longer. Wikipedia is fine with that.
valereee (
talk)
23:12, 23 July 2022 (UTC)reply
Autobiography is allowed
However, ALL content needs to be verified by reliable source references, ideally at least three. Not your website. Not social media. Not interviews. Etc., etc. A quickie search suggets you are surfer/actor, but I saw nothing that looked like a credible at-length article about you.
David notMD (
talk)
02:02, 24 July 2022 (UTC)reply
I have lots of magazine articles that refer to me as a champion surfer and actor. Lots of awards too. There's also video and movies, and credits cross referenced on IMDB. Only problem is I do not know how to refer to them in a bio on Wikipedia.
2603:8001:9BF0:430:202B:16AF:D20E:F124 (
talk)
06:31, 24 July 2022 (UTC)reply
When credits are crossed referenced on IMDB, the reference is usually a media sources, and in my case they are major media sources. Wouldn't they be a reliable reference even if they were a major media source on IMDB?
I don't understand. I understand I have to be notable. Ben Marcus had recently submitted a bio of me that was not supported with references and had images of me that were in question about the copyrights. I have since edited the bio to conform to the standards I hope and deleted the images in question. Also, the references are linked in a .PDF version, which I do not know how to upload. Also, I do not know where best to place the .PDF version with the links to the references. Could you please help guide me through the maze you first suggested? Thanks, Bob
2603:8001:9BF0:430:5480:274F:7187:7C39 (
talk)
16:23, 12 August 2022 (UTC)reply
Hello, Bobpurvey1. Thank you for helping to build Wikipedia-- the world's largestfree contentencyclopedia. The page
User:Bobpurvey1/Sandbox has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done under
section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seemed to be unambiguous advertising which only promoted a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to have been fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read
the guidelines on spam and
Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.
Information on content and common pitfalls to avoid can be located here and here, however be aware that this is not an exhaustive list. Pages can sometimes avoid these pitfalls and still be seen as an ad copy or unambiguously promotional, particularly if the editor appears to be a
paid editor or has some other
conflict of interest. Please review these policies, including the
FAQ page on organizations to determine if this applies to you.
Common mistakes or beliefs about promotional editing center on the assumption that promotional editing only applies to promotion for commercial gain. Some tags or G11 nominations are met with confusion by creators, particularly if they spend much time reading or creating corporate documents, mission/vision statements, or similar copy for their organization. The frequent exposure to promotional tone may make it difficult to notice non-neutral phrases or styles, as the editor has grown accustomed to seeing it as everyday writing or speech. This can be difficult, but not impossible, to unlearn.
New article creation can be difficult and frustrating. Sometimes it is better to first gain experience by fixing and helping maintain existing articles.
Wikipedia:Community portal/Opentask contains links to things that badly need doing, if you are so inclined.
How do I replace a biography with an autobiography
Hi, originally, I tried to write my bio but after many machinations, a suggestion was made to have someone else write it for me. Ben Marcus tried but arguments were raised about copyrights of my photos, and after explaining numerous times in various but reasonable ways that I owned the photos, then becoming frustrated, the effort became untenable to keep trying to move forward with it. Also, there were a few references made that were inaccurate. Now, I have an autobiography with numerous viable references but don't understand how to structure the links. I have a PDF version with the links embedded. Could someone look at the PDF version and instruct me?
Bobpurvey1 (
talk)
20:20, 15 August 2022 (UTC)reply
I read your comment. It was brief, without explanation and a complete rejection, showing no encouragement to be productive. Makes me wonder what are the professional standards at Wikipedia? Is Wikipedia a public forum supporting the education of the public, or is it a facade that is a private club pretending to be supportive of public education? I have asked for guidance, over and over again, instead I get a complete rejection. Shame on you.
Bobpurvey1 (
talk)
23:13, 15 August 2022 (UTC)reply
Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia with articles about
notable topics, it is not a "public forum supporting the education of the public". Per
Wikipedia:Autobiography writing autobiographies is strongly discouraged because it is difficult to write a neutral, verifiable autobiography, and there are many pitfalls. If you are genuinely
notable in Wikipedia terms, somebody will write an article about you, please wait, your attempts so far are totally unacceptable. see
WP:CIR.
Theroadislong (
talk)
10:28, 20 August 2022 (UTC)reply
Do not paste your biography or anything else en-masse, anywhere on Wikipedia ever again. Not only is it promotional it's an outright copyright violation which has legal implications.
PRAXIDICAE🌈18:14, 20 August 2022 (UTC)reply
It was placed in the "Teahouse" to get help with editing it. I don't understand why you are referring to it as a publication for speedy deletion. I thought the Teahouse was an internal place to get editing help. I own the product. I produced it. I reserve all rights. Why are you referring to it as a copyright infringement? I clicked on the link for the Teahouse. Did the link take me else wear? Where else should I place it to get editing help?
2603:8001:9BF0:430:801F:821E:A3C7:CA5B (
talk)
18:33, 20 August 2022 (UTC)reply
IP who I assume is Bobpurvey1, the Teahouse is place to ask for help, but it is not a place to drop huge amounts of text for review. You can use a link instead. Also, do not copy/paste text from elsewhere to Wikipedia - even if you wrote the text - unless it has been released under a compatible license. The bio on IMDb is copyrighted - there's a copyright notice at the bottom. It's entirely unsuitable as an article in any case.
You may want to consider using the
Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on
User:Bobpurvey1/Sandbox, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the
criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:
It appears to be an unambiguous
copyright infringement of
https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0701009/bio. (See
section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be
blocked from editing.If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at
Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see
Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at
Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question
here.
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.
PRAXIDICAE🌈18:16, 20 August 2022 (UTC)reply
The Teahouse states to be "Welcoming" and "polite". You are not offering ideas that are welcoming or polite. I suggest you back off being harsh and acting like the bully on the block, but rather be kind, polite, and offer supportive ideas, encouragement to follow the rules, explaining to the novice how one might achieve their purpose/goal. Wikipedia is a maze and very difficult to navigate for anyone new to the site. Obviously I am making numerous attempts to conform to Wikipedia's standards. Encountering harsh critiques such as yours makes the Wikipedia experiences almost intolerable. Try being more considerate. Its professional to take the time to accommodate ignorance. Ignorance is not a fault - we're all born ignorant.
2603:8001:9BF0:430:801F:821E:A3C7:CA5B (
talk)
19:22, 20 August 2022 (UTC)reply
Per
WP:Autobiography if your life and achievements are verifiable and genuinely notable, someone else will probably create an article about you sooner or later, but creating an article about yourself is strongly discouraged: we want biographies here, not autobiographies. Please STOP.
Theroadislong (
talk)
19:26, 20 August 2022 (UTC)reply
Dear Sir, please follow the back and forth. I stopped trying to submit an autobiography a two days ago. The autobiography was re-written into a biography. Now I am encountering another obstacle, which is that I am submitting the bio rather than the preferred way via a neutral writer. So now, since the bio is practically written, I own the copyrights to everything, I m willing to offer a volunteer from the Teahouse to edit it and conform the citations with the URLs that are readily available. If you can encourage a writer in the Teahouse to take on this volunteer, simple task it would be greatly appreciated.
2603:8001:9BF0:430:801F:821E:A3C7:CA5B (
talk)
19:41, 20 August 2022 (UTC)reply
Dear Theroadislong: I have no ego about having the bio on Wikipedia. My purpose is to have a presence on Wikipedia so that I might cut to the quick with executives who are unfamiliar with me when I pitch solutions for environmental fixes to our water concerns.
2603:8001:9BF0:430:801F:821E:A3C7:CA5B (
talk)
19:55, 20 August 2022 (UTC)reply
I will not contest the deletion for I understand the amount is too much to digest. Thank you for leaving the pertinent information. Should you know of a volunteer writer in the Teahouse who can take on the task, encouraging them would be greatly appreciated. Nonetheless, I appreciate it if you don't have the time.
2603:8001:9BF0:430:801F:821E:A3C7:CA5B (
talk)
19:48, 20 August 2022 (UTC)reply
Your reason for wanting an article is incompatible with our guidelines. Your "purpose is to have a presence on Wikipedia so that I might cut to the quick with executives" that is NOT what Wikipedia is for, you have been told many, many, many times.
Theroadislong (
talk)
20:01, 20 August 2022 (UTC)reply
Wikipedia editors are human beings who volunteer their leisure time to improve this encyclopedia. Why send them on a fool's errand to benefit your career, as opposed to adding to the body of world knowledge? It's totally a non-starter. Seriously, who advised you to try this?--
Quisqualis (
talk)
20:29, 20 August 2022 (UTC)reply