Vortexjourney754
Welcome!
editHello, Vortexjourney754! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place
{{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking  or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. |
|---|
|
|
Happy editing! Peaceray (talk) 16:07, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Nomination of Bias Capital for deletion
edit
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bias Capital 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 until the discussion has finished.Welcome!
editI noticed, after our discussion about Bias Capital, that you have created of a number of drafts related to this company, e.g. Draft:PasciVite
I wanted to gently bring your attention to our rules on editing, specifically that if you have any sort of Conflict of interest you must disclose this, and creating articles on topics that you may struggle to write about neutrally is strongly discouraged. As a new editor, I wanted to let you know that I don't think the drafts you've created are likely to be able to meet the notability (WP:GNG) guildelines for a new article, and I don't want you wasting your time on something that might end up getting deleted!
Writing a whole article from scratch can be quite a task, and not something that many new users are able to pull off, you're very welcome to try, and I'd recommend thoroughly reading Help:Your_first_article and making sure you have at the very least a very good understanding of the rules around WP:Notability before putting too much time into it. My approach is to list out all the sources I can find for a subject first, and make sure I'm able to convince myself the subject meets the notabiltiy requirements BEFORE starting to write the article.
Hope this helps!
JeffUK 16:53, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- There's no conflict of interest. And regarding notability, I guess I'm getting a trial by fire with the Bias page. Also, I though I had setup the drafts to be private and visible by just myself so I must've made a mistake there.
- I assumed, wrongly it would seem, that Bias would be easily accepted. The goal with the other pages is to have a set of living documents that will not be published until ready, which could take months or years. My thought process is that will provide good practice when editing other pages. I speak a few languages and would like to translate pages at some point, and I believe this is an easy to practice for the moments when I'll have to write something from scratch. Sorry if this sounds convoluted, but I'm a bit weird :)
- All in all, it's going to take me some time to get a good feel for qualify something or someone as notable enough. I may never get a new entry published, but I'll at least become a better writer.
- ---
- ps: thanks a lot for the kind comment. I really appreciate it :) Vortexjourney754 (talk) 21:13, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
AFDs
editHello, Vortexjourney754,
Do not move an article being discussed at an open AFD deletion discussion to Draft space. If you want the article moved to Draft spaee, make this argument in the AFD discussion but any page moves will be reverted and they won't end the discussion. Please do not do this again in the future. If you have questions about AFDs or Wikipedia's processes for page deletion, please bring them to the Teahouse. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 19:20, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Sounds good! I was not aware of this.
- My apologies. Vortexjourney754 (talk) 19:46, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
December 2024
edit
Hi Vortexjourney754! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a specific definition on Wikipedia—it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Thank you. Remsense ‥ 论 23:24, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Hey! Thanks a lot for the feedback. Would you pointing me to the specific edit? Vortexjourney754 (talk) 23:28, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, I've had to undo all your edits where you split up paragraphs. One big problem is we generally cite passages by the end of the paragraph, so splitting off a smaller paragraph means it now appears to be unsourced where it was clearly sourced before. It may be your personal preference, but we do not make paragraphs this granular on Wikipedia. Remsense ‥ 论 23:30, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- I see. It wasn't necessarily a matter of preference. Some of the paragraphs include a lot of dates, and depending on the size, it can feel like a run-on. I figured starting a new sentence with each date would improve readability, especially on smaller devices. That was my thought process. Would it have better to re-use the relevant citation with each new paragraph? Asking out of curiosity.
- Either way, I appreciate the feedback, and will be careful with this moving forward. Vortexjourney754 (talk) 23:41, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Well, that would be your preference, though I wanted to make clear it's not a universal one. Cheers! Remsense ‥ 论 23:42, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, I've had to undo all your edits where you split up paragraphs. One big problem is we generally cite passages by the end of the paragraph, so splitting off a smaller paragraph means it now appears to be unsourced where it was clearly sourced before. It may be your personal preference, but we do not make paragraphs this granular on Wikipedia. Remsense ‥ 论 23:30, 18 December 2024 (UTC)