User talk:DocZach/Archive 1

Archive 1

Welcome!

Welcome!

Hello, DocZach, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Below are some pages you might find helpful. For a user-friendly interactive help forum see the Wikipedia Teahouse.

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Simplified Manual of Style
• Your first article
• Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community
• Feel free to make test edits in the sandbox
• and check out the Task Center, for ideas about what to work on.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome! Prairie Astronomer ^{Contributions} 00:08, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

November 2023

Hello, I'm AntiDionysius. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Treneé McGee, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. AntiDionysius (talk) 18:36, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! I just added a citation. DocZach (talk) 18:42, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Progressive Anti-Abortion Uprising (November 22)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Suitskvarts were: 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 after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Progressive Anti-Abortion Uprising and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, 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.

Suitskvarts (talk) 19:57, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

Hello, DocZach! Having an article draft 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! Suitskvarts (talk) 19:57, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Progressive Anti-Abortion Uprising (November 23)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by MaxnaCarta was: 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 after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Progressive Anti-Abortion Uprising and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, 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.

— MaxnaCarta  ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:33, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to abortion, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

EvergreenFir (talk) 07:20, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Megan McCarthy King has been accepted

Megan McCarthy King, 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 Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. 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 .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Bkissin (talk) 00:47, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

February 2024

Hello, I'm Peaceray. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Margaret Sanger seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Please read & heed our MOS:LEAD guideline.

• MOS:LEADSENTENCE states The first sentence should introduce the topic, and tell the nonspecialist reader what or who the subject is.
• MOS:LEADCLUTTER states Do not overload the first sentence by describing everything notable about the subject; instead, spread the relevant information out over the entire lead.
• The lead of MOS:LEAD itself states:

The lead is the first thing most people will read upon arriving at an article, and may be the only portion of the article that they read. It gives the basics in a nutshell and cultivates interest in reading on—though not by teasing the reader or hinting at what follows. It should be written in a clear, accessible style with a neutral point of view. The lead should stand on its own as a concise overview of the article's topic. It should identify the topic, establish context, explain why the topic is notable, and summarize the most important points, including any prominent controversies.

• Information about Sanger's eugenist views has already been covered in the second paragraph of the article's lead. Sanger is not primarily known for her eugenist views. By attempting to shoehorn it into the lead sentence, you have given it undue attention, which is a violation of English Wikipedia's neutrality policy. Please also see the Wikipedia is written from a neutral point of view pillar.

Peaceray (talk) 17:21, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Notes

Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors. Thank you. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 00:13, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

Also, please be careful when reverting at the Sanger article. It's under a 1RR remedy, meaning that no one is permitted to revert more than once per 24 hour period (with some limited exceptions). See WP:1RR and the notice at the talk page. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 00:18, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

Chicken at GAN

Hi, many thanks for taking on this review. It's very kind of you to say everything's great, but the GA folks like to see that at least some of the sources have been spot-checked to see that they support the claims made in the article, and that the images are properly licensed, or they may undo the review. To that end, I'd appreciate it if you could add some remarks about these matters to the GAN! Many thanks, Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:33, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

I have a similar concern about another recent review, Talk:NAFO (group)/GA1. We need more GA reviewers, so it's exciting to see someone get engaged with the process. You may want to observe some of the more experienced reviewers, read or re-read the criteria and review guide, and ask questions at the GA talk page if there are parts you're uncertain about. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:14, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

@Firefangledfeathers I understand, I apologize, I am new. Later today, I'll read over the article again and try to provide more detail in my review. DocZach (talk) 19:13, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

@Chiswick Chap Hello, I have added more detail to the review. Can you let me know if it's good? DocZach (talk) 19:12, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

It's certainly in the right direction. I guess the "meme" for GA reviews is a list of items, questions, or comments by the reviewer, with a matching set of answers by the nominator:

• In "History", you say that Lincoln always dyed his beard red, but it seems to be black in all the photos. Is the source "Fuzzpuddle.com" suitable for this sort of claim?
  • Ah, you're right, it's probably unsuitable. Claim removed.

Then, everyone can see that the review has involved some thought, careful checks, and dialogue, giving some kind of assurance that the facts have been checked, and that the sources have been considered individually. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:19, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Additionally, you must be logged-in, have 500 edits and an account age of 30 days, and are not allowed to make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on a page within this topic.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

== Welcome! ==

Hi DocZach! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

I've noticed that you've expressed an interest in the Palestine/Israel conflict. Unfortunately, due to a history of conflict and disruptive editing it has been designated a contentious topic and is subject to some strict rules.

The rule that affects you most as new or IP editor is the prohibition on making any edit related to Palestine/Israel conflict unless you are logged into an account and that account is at least 30 days old and has made at least 500 edits.

This prohibition is broadly construed, so it includes edits such as adding the reaction of a public figure concerning the conflict to their article or noting the position of a company or organization as it relates to the conflict.

The exception to this rule is that you may request a specific change to an article on the talk page of that article or at this page. Please ensure that your requested edit complies with our neutral point of view and reliable sourcing policies, and if the edit is about a living person our policies on biographies of living people as well.

Any edits you make contrary to these rules are likely to be reverted, and repeated violations can lead to your being blocked from editing.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! Selfstudier (talk) 10:25, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Um all I did was add my opinion on a deletion proposal in a talk page... DocZach (talk) 10:29, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

I have removed another improper edit just now. Please read WP:ARBECR, you are only permitted to make edit requests, nothing more. Selfstudier (talk) 22:54, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

Then why are there numerous people who are saying SUPPORT or OPPOSE? It is a talk-page discussion about whether to rename the article or not. DocZach (talk) 22:59, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

You are not permitted to do anything in this topic area other than make edit requests until you have 500 edits, I have explained this more than once above. Selfstudier (talk) 23:05, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

Can you link the policy for that? DocZach (talk) 23:10, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

WP:ARBECR as linked above already, please read it. Selfstudier (talk) 23:11, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, I just read it, thank you. DocZach (talk) 23:12, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

Yw, best thing is to get your 500 edits and then there is no problem after that. Selfstudier (talk) 23:13, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

Got it, thanks. DocZach (talk) 23:15, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

Invitation

I noticed you have been working on some health-related subjects, so I wanted to invite you to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine. You're welcome to join us if it's a subject area that interests you. It's a good place to ask questions about finding good sources for medical content or writing style. Feel free to put the group's page on your watchlist, or stop by to say hello some time. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:23, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

How do I join it? DocZach (talk) 07:29, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

To officially sign up, go to Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine and look on the right side for a box that says "Meet the participants". It lists a few names, and then has a blue "Participate" button. Click that to fill out the short form. (I think all the questions are optional, so it doesn't have to take very long.)

Lots of people participate in the discussion on the talk page without officially signing up. That's 100% okay. We don't make a distinction between who is signed up and who isn't. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:36, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

Nomination of Anne E. Lazarus for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Anne E. Lazarus 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/Anne E. Lazarus 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.

Spinixster (chat!) 12:59, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Anne E. Lazarus

The article Anne E. Lazarus you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Anne E. Lazarus for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Mokadoshi -- Mokadoshi (talk) 02:43, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thanks for being the first person to support my viewpoint in that incredibly fragile wikipedia page. If you could, please see the latest edit history (an edit and revert by GeneralRelative) and check, if my contribution was good. TruthseekerW (talk) 19:53, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thanks for being the first person to support my viewpoint in that incredibly fragile wikipedia page. If you could, please see the latest edit history (an edit and revert by GeneralRelative) and check, if my contribution was good. TruthseekerW (talk) 19:53, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

April 2024

Hello, I'm KyleJoan. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to The View (talk show) seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. How do you go from writing this summary to doing the exact opposite of what you asked another user to do with your very next edit? KyleJoan^talk 16:19, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

March 2024

You have recently made edits related to Falun Gong. This is a standard message to inform you that Falun Gong is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Isi96 (talk • contribs) 19:50, 22 March 2024 (UTC)