User talk:Jrptwins

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by MatthewVanitas was:

You've provided no WP:Sourcing whatsoever. And do note that it is completely not allowed to just source things as "I know this personally". Sources must be formally published ones, not things in your memory, not a bundle of letters of documents at your house, but only published works are accepted. I strongly advise you take a look at the guideline WP:Notability (people) to see what kind of sourcing we require to justify an article.

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:Janinepapin/sandbox and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also get Wikipedia's Live Help real-time chat help from experienced editors.

MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:51, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Janinepapin, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about 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! MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:51, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jrptwins. You have new messages at MatthewVanitas's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, Jrptwins. You have new messages at MatthewVanitas's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:The Patty Hearst Trial.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Marchjuly (talk) 07:54, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jrptwins. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by Marchjuly (talk) 08:02, 29 June 2015 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).[reply]

	Welcome to the Teahouse Badge
	Awarded to editors who have introduced themselves at the Wikipedia Teahouse. Guest editors with this badge show initiative and a great drive to learn how to edit Wikipedia. Earn more badges at: Teahouse Badges
Thank you for introducing yourself and contributing to Wikipedia! If you have any questions feel free to drop me a line at my talk page. Happy Editing! ~ Anastasia [Missionedit] (talk) 18:43, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jrptwins. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by DES ^(talk) 16:13, 3 July 2015 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).[reply]

Hello, Jrptwins. You have new messages at Draft talk:Joseph W. Papin.
Message added 22:14, 3 July 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

some suggestions DES ^(talk) 22:14, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jrptwins,

I mentioned this before in this question you posted at the Teahouse, but no was answer given and it's still not clear. Based upon your original username "Janinepapin"and the fact that you are pretty much only working on the article Joseph W. Papin, it appears that you might be connected to the subject in some way. In addition, the official website for Joseph Papin lists a Janine Papin as the contact person and the Wikipedia article is also featured on the official website. So, if you are the same Janine Papin or are connected to Joseph Papin in any way, then you would have a conflict of interest which means there are limitations placed upon the kinds of edits you are allowed to make. Now, that Joseph W. Papin is in the article space, it would probably be a good idea for you to clarify this so as to avoid any misunderstanding with other editors. People who create or edit articles about subjects they are personally or professionally connected to oftem find out about "Wikipedia's Law of Unexpected Consequences" the hard way when other editors start to work on the article. At least if your upfront about your COI, or lack thereof, other editors will be less suspicious and mroe willing to work with you.

Finally, although there's nothing really wrong with only working on a single article or type of articles, it can occasionally cause other more experienced editors to scrutinize your edits more closely to determine whether you are really here to help build an encyclopedia or here simply to promote your own interests. That's why it might be a good idea for you to try working on other articles, even if it's only small edits, just to see how other editors do things and get more experience editing in accordance with Wikipedia's various policies and guidelines.

Good luck with your editing. - Marchjuly (talk) 05:44, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Marchjuly for your assistance and advice. I actually have taken very seriously the commitment for notability and reliable third party references. In fact I kind of "fell down a rabbit hole" researching old newspaper archives which made me at times at bit obsessive. I would find some evidence and then the next and then it was hard to stop at the end of the day...or night! I am a teacher, and due to some time off, thought it was the perfect time to tackle the history of this particular person. I have no issues with "handing over the reins" to all the editors of the world. But because of my type A personality, I wanted to do all the research I could before leaving it alone. This process of writing an article, and doing it correctly, has been a huge learning curve for me having never done this before. My background is in the arts, some in the visual arts, but mostly in the performing arts. I would love to think that I am ready to assist others with other articles but (as a teacher myself) felt like I needed to prove myself capable of achieving a decent level of adequacy.Jrptwins (talk) 17:17, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. I actually think you did a pretty good job on the article for a first article. Many efforts are not nearly half as good. The AfC reviewer also thought so, which is why they elevated it to article status. I still (sorry to be labor the point) think you need to be careful if you have a COI or it appears you have one because on Wikipedia appearances can mean a lot. We are constantly being evaluated by other editors and the only thing they have to work with is our editing history. It's expected that we will make mistake from time to time, but problems can arise with other editors when they percieve there is some pattern (intent) to our mistakes. Their perception may be wrong, but it can still cause problems.

You should feel free to edit any article you are interested in or think you can improve. Wikipedia wants editors to be bold. All editors are the same and you should be fine as long as you try and edit according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Don't worry about making mistakes. There's nothing you can do that cannot be done by another editor. Articles are not intended to be perfect, so mistakes made in good faith are actually welcomed by other editors. Editing typically only becomes a serious problem when it is disruptive or is vandalism which is designed to intentionally harm the encyclopedia.

I responded to your posts on my talk page. Hopefully, I sufficiently answered your questions. - Marchjuly (talk) 23:03, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Self Portrait sketch.jpeg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 20:40, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:10, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jrptwins. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jrptwins. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Joseph Papin drawing of himself in action.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:00, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]