Greatman012
A belated welcome! edit
Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Greatman012! I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may still benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:
If you don't already know, you should sign your posts on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~) to insert your username and the date.
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Again, welcome! ◊PRAHLADbalaji (M•T•A•C) This message was left at 21:34, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
Hi thanks for creating this article. I’m a New Page Reviewer and I’ve read it several times. A number of reviewers are reading it and discussing what to do with it as it is rather unusual for a Wikipedia article. Would you mind telling g me something about how you came to write it, what prices you followed and how you were able to read all the works you cite as sources? All the best Mccapra (talk) 23:14, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello Mccapra. You asked some funny questions. You are asking an academic scholar, an author, a historian and a corporate marketing scholar, how he wrote this article. I have been researching and writing the article in the past three years. The article is an outcome of a thorough, long-term primary research study. I did not upload all the paper because some parts of the entire work will form another article to be uploaded soon. Which is why I found some of your comments and those of your colleague very disturbing. In one breath, your colleague claimed the article did not have enough sources and citations. In another breath, you are intimidated by the number of the sources that a historian read and cited in the article. If the article did not have enough sources and citations, why are you intrigued by the avalanche of citations that were in the paper? I have read more than 300 sources on this article in the last 3 yearsGreatman012 (talk) 22:22, 14 December 2020 (UTC).
Odo Ere, History moved to draftspace edit
An article you recently created, Odo Ere, History, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It also contains a great deal of original research - see WP:OR. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 04:24, 8 December 2020 (UTC)Greatman012 (talk) 20:50, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi Alexandermcnabb. It is my desire to work with you on this article to as to it published on Wikipedia. However, it has been difficult navigating through your too complex processes to know how to reply to your comment. I am an independent academic researcher and I felt a little insulted by your generalised claim that the article "Odo Ere, History]], does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published". I would have expected you to point out where this thoroughly researched article that I have been working on in the last 3 years did not have enough sources and citations, yet it contained about 155 references. The burden of proof is on who alleges. More importantly, I could not lay my hands on the article in "Draftspace" that you moved my article to. I will be glad if you can show me how to get it.
- Hi Greatman012. Please don’t be discouraged that your article has been moved out of mainspace. It does need some work before it can go back, but I’ll help you with it. Mccapra (User talk:Mccapra talk) 06:34, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello Mccapra. I am not discouraged by the fact that you removed my well-researched article. As I said above, I am an academic research person, so I cannot get discouraged easily by comments or removal of the articles. However, I might feel offended by unsubstantiated claims about some defects in the paper. Therefore, the burden of proof is on who alleges. But, I am willing to work with any of you to ensure the research article is finally published on Wikipedia.
- Hi another question: where the source you’ve cited is “qualitative interview” does this mean that you spoke to these individuals yourself? Thanks Mccapra (talk) 08:28, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello Mccapra. As I said that I am an academic researcher and my strong strength is in the use of the qualitative research methods. I personally employed interview techniques by speaking with some of the interviewees and by asking some of them to respond in writing to some questions. The interviewees were indigenes of Odo Ere and they provided information based on their cultural competence on the subject matter. More importantly, I gathered archival data from one of Nigeria's National Archives based in Kaduna to substantiate this article. I have been researching and writing the article piecemeal for the last 3 years. It was after I concluded it that I began to upload and edit it on Wikipedia in the last few months.Greatman012 (talk) 21:00, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi Greatman012 The draft article is here. What I have done with it so far is 1. Removed some unsourced material 2. Removed non neutral language 3. Removed references to qualitative interviews, which are not acceptable on Wikipedia 4.Begun reformatting the references where you have referred to the same source more than once. I’m happy to continue with this. We can continue working in the draft until it is ready to go back to mainspace. One thing I can’t do that you may be able to do is to add page number references to the books you’ve used as sources. This expected where book references are used. Wikipedia has a number of policies that articles must comply with, and at the moment the article doesn’t meet them, but with work it can be brought into line with requirements. All the best Mccapra (talk) 22:30, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi Mccapra. Thanks for the editing carried so far on this article. I would have loved if you pointed out those areas that you considered not adequately referenced and I would have provided appropriate sources. I will review what you have done and maybe we can mutually agree on adding some of the areas that you deleted if I could reference them. Also, I will attend to some other issues that you raised in due course. May speed may be very slow in treating them due to the fact that I am working on some academic projects with pressing deadlines as the year is coming to an end. I will revert accordingly. Thank you.Greatman012 (talk) 19:09, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
- Hi I see we’re both working on the referencing for this article. I am following the Wikipedia:Citing sources#Citing multiple pages of the same source which uses the format of putting page numbers outside the reference. This is the standard way we use and it means readers don’t have to navigate a gigantic references section with multiple repetitions of the same source. Could you please leave these as I have formatted them abd I will continue to work my way through them. I’ve removed about thirty duplicates refs so far I think. All the best Mccapra (talk) 13:55, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
IOSR Journals edit
Please stop adding references to IOSR journals (they publish multiple titles) as you initially did, and then re-added after I deleted it, at Odo Ere
IOSR journals is on the original Beall's list [1] which largely started the awareness of the predatory publishing problem.
It has long been considered a predatory publisher on WP - I first became aware of it when I had my knuckles rapped by an admin for adding it as a reference to an article.
This is a list of current uses of IOSR journals on en.wikipedia - 59 uses, almost all spam link reports, 2 AFD discussions, one Help desk and one copyvio concern - no uses in any articles as a reference whatsoever.
Best wishes - Arjayay (talk) 19:33, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message edit
 | Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed 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 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |