User talk:Posen607

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article David William Parry is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David William Parry until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Microchip08 (talk) 15:10, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article David Parry (poet) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Parry (poet) until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Yngvadottir (talk) 16:01, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Fails WP:NEVENT, requires significant coverage in multiple independent reliable secondary sources. TED and TEDxLambert are primary sources.

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 Draft:TEDxLambeth 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 Draft:TEDxLambeth, 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.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Dan arndt (talk) 00:36, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Posen607! 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! Dan arndt (talk) 00:36, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

David William Parry, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 20% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Em-mustapha ^talk 13:22, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article David William Parry is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David William Parry (2nd nomination) 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. scope_creep^Talk 22:18, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Posen607. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the page David William Parry, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

• avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
• propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
• disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
• avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:Spam);
• do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you.--DSQ (talk) 06:36, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dear DSQ , thank you for your message. Firstly, please, let me assure you that I comply with the aforementioned guidelines and regulations, particularly since I restarted my interest in Wikipedia this year. Secondly, however, may I assume this message relates to an accusation found in one of the discussions for the deletion of David William Parry's Wikipedia article? If yes, I must stress immediately that I find this situation unacceptable and disconcerting. Indeed, as a busy doctoral researcher, I simply do not have enough time to contribute to every other article on Wikipedia, and since I aim to maintain quality as opposed to quantity, I am beginning to question whether other current users respect the wider values of this community. Assuredly, perhaps, I should mention certain individuals in the above-mentioned page are actively seeking to undermine my extensive contributions to an article that encompasses my field of expertise, either by removing references and/or content, or making exaggerated and misleading claims. Either way, I only aim to evolve the Wikipedia project by way of – honest – discussion and mutual support throughout, which is why I would greatly appreciate if other members did the same. Obviously, I hope this addresses the circumstance surrounding the issue mentioned and, thereby, clarifies any misunderstanding. If there is anything else, please, do not hesitate to contact me. Regards Posen607 (talk) 01:19, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Good Morning Posen607 and thank you for your response. Yes, I have seen the various discussions around the AfD process for that article - I haven't commented/voted on that and I don't intend doing so. I'm sorry you're feeling disconcerted and it certainly wasn't/isn't my intention to add to that, but I placed the COI template here because your editing history appears to show signs of being a WP:SPA (which can be perfectly legitimate btw). I was drawing your attention to the rules around COI editing - that's all, nothing more than that. Kind regards. DSQ (talk) 08:10, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Posen607. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:TEDxLambeth, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. Bot0612 (talk) 07:37, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Posen607. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "TEDxLambeth".

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 deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:54, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]