Bereajan

Your submission at Articles for creation: John Courter (composer) (July 14)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time.
Please read the comments left by the reviewer on your submission. 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, you can find it at Draft:John Courter (composer).
• To edit the submission, 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.

Thank you for your
contributions to Wikipedia!

• You can also get real-time chat help from experienced editors.

MatthewVanitas (talk) 01:37, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Hello! Bereajan, 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) 01:37, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: John Courter (composer) has been accepted

John Courter (composer), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post 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.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:46, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Draft:Joseph Neisendorfer concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Joseph Neisendorfer, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. 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 at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:32, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Joseph Neisendorfer

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

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 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.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 02:02, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

CS1 error on Berea College

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Berea College, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 07:20, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

Conflict of interest

Hello, Bereajan. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, 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, clients, 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 Wikipedia:Spam#External link spamming);
• 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.SMH2023s (talk) 19:50, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. I have disclosed my COI. The changes I made are factual in nature. Do you recommend they be retracted and then proposed in the talk pages instead? Jan Pearce (talk) 11:01, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

It doesn't matter whether they are factual or not. Facts can be baised. When I added salaries information for Berea College and Eastern Kentucky University, I tried to be as close to the median salary as possible, but your addition of a specific major screwed it toward the higher side. In general, having a higher salary is not an indicator of the quality of instruction of a specific major. It tells more about the market demand. For the quality of instruction, it's more informative to compare with median salaries of the graduates in the industry or other similar nearby colleges. So, to conclude, I chose majors randomly to inform the readers that the "median salaries vary." In any case, it's best not to add anything you may have a COI. For now, I will just leave it at that unless some other editors dispute the information/addition. SMH2023s (talk) 23:50, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

I decided to remove the information because other than COI issues, it's highly variable based on the year you choose. It's only 38,472$ for 1st year after graduation, 40,478$ for second, and reached 65,875$ for fourth. By then the sample size has dropped to only 15, less than half of the original 31. SMH2023s (talk) 15:11, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

That make sense to me. I recommend removing all of the starting salary information from the page because the majors seemed randomly chosen and did not include the highest. Jan Pearce (talk) 17:22, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

As I said, the goal is to have a "general" representation that's closer to the school's median. Your "highest" salary is variable based on the year. For example, nursing is *the* highest for the first, second, and third years after graduation. It's only the "fourth" year, at which point graduates may have taken other degrees, that CS overtakes nursing. It's nothing to boast about as CS is generally high at most colleges. With only 39,226$ during the first year after graduation, Berea's CS salary is about 10% to 20% lower than nearby colleges like Eastern Kentucky University, which has fewer competitive students. To conclude, we can only include three or four without violating WP:INDISCRIMINATE. So, I believe the current representation is fair. SMH2023s (talk) 06:10, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Hum... I am trying to keep an open mind, but I feel that listing a few seemingly randomly selected starting salaries (rather than all or the highest, lowest and middle) or some summary statistics is quite mis-leading. Statisticians typically report key statistics rather than cherry-pick specific examples without clear reasons for the specific choices.

I recommend these sentences about major starting salaries be replaced by a measure of central tendency like mean or median of staring salaries and also a measure of spread like range about starting salaries. 98.23.50.7 (talk) 17:41, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

I am also trying to keep an open mind as well and asumming good faiths, although there are exceptions. You should familiarize yourself with principles and guidelines. We don't work on what you think is "misleading." WP:COI is well established. WP:INDISCRIMINATE does not allow the listing of all salaries, but the salaries themselves are notable and meet inclusion standards. A good summary of a few commonly sought salaries while providing a link to all salaries is a generally accepted practice in situations like this. For example, Polling for United States presidential elections doesn't include all polls. Editors make judgement on which sources are reliable, and how much presentation reflects due weight.

The question is not about "statistics" but how about much presentation is due. Presenting all majors violates WP:INDISCRIMINATE and WP:DUE. Providing no salaries violates WP:DUE and WP:NPOV. Hence, we provide a summary with a link to all salaries (See WP:DETAIL). You seem to be unfamiliar with the data itself. The College Scorecard only provides medians, not ranges or spreads. Adding the "lowest salary" (Fine Art 65,00$) would be shocking and unncessary, as it's not commonly sought. It just doesn't work like that. As I said, the highest salary, nursing, is already included. Computer Science is high for fourth year but generally very low in the first, second, and thrid years. It's not neutral to include the fourth year without including the first few years. SMH2023s (talk) 11:03, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Okay, you make some fair points. Thanks for your time and dedication. 35.0.19.77 (talk) 20:39, 1 August 2023 (UTC)