User talk:RosieClarke

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, RosieClarke, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially what you did for Victoria Art Gallery. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! — Rod ^talk 12:27, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Help resquest

{{helpme}} Hi Rod, thanks for your message! I hope what I'm doing will be useful for Wikipedia. This is all quite new to me and I'm not very clear about HTML code - quite often I can see that something isn't working, but not what I need to tweak to fix it! I've just been trying to edit an old article link in the Manchester University entry, which I don't think has totally worked out.

I'm making several changes as and when I have time - I work for Culture24, a small non-profit online publisher. We publish articles about, and hold details of, over 4000 museums, galleries, libraries, archives and heritage sites. We used to be known as the 24 Hour Museum and there are over 150 links in Wikipedia to articles, now in a new home on Culture24. As soon as we switch off the 24HM website for good, I'm worried all these links will just break, so I'm scurrying around trying to find them and update them so they point to the right place. I hope this is OK, I wouldn't want to seem like I'm spamming the site.

Thanks ever so much, Rosie RosieClarke (talk) 12:38, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rosie,

I've just sorted the reference in the University of Manchester artcile - I think you need to know about the various templates for citing sources - particularly in your case the web based resources one see Template:Cite web.

I have cited Culture24/24 Hour Museum in several articles & appreciate what you are trying to do - at the moment the existing site seems to redirect users without any problems.

If the link already exists I don't think it will be seen as spamming - but you have a potential conflict of interest & it would be useful to declare this on your user page so that everyone is clear that you work for the organisation concerned.— Rod ^talk 12:53, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm tlping your helpme because you have no request accompanying it. Please put in your request and then repost the helpme template. Bejinhan Talk 13:15, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bejinhan, sorry to have bothered you, I put in the helpme link thinking I needed to do that so I could reply to Rodw. I didn't mean to ask everyone for help, just looking for clarification about a couple of points. Is tlping like deleting?

Rodw, thanks for getting back to me - I'll update my user page as you suggested. Thanks also for pointing me to the template page - I wouldn't have known to look for that!

Could I just double check that what I'm doing in terms of changing old links to 24 HM articles to links going directly to those same pages in their new location on culture24, is that called a Snap Double Redirect, or is there a better term for it?

One problem we have is that some of the 24 Hour Museum articles linked to from Wikipedia have still not migrated correctly to a new home on Culture24 - I need to find these and make a list of them so we can sort them out before turning off 24 Hour Museum - otherwise there will be dead-end broken links left behind, which is not helpful for Wikipedia users or for our SEO.

Thanks again for you help, guys, I really appreciate it - before signing up here, all the HTML I'd done was making text bold or italic! All the best, RosieClarke (talk) 14:40, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rosie, I've not heard the term "Snap Double Redirect" before. I would just say something like "updating reference URL" or similar in edit summaries. For general info on citing sources see Wikipedia:Citing sources & then follow the relevant links. To identify some of the relevant/affected articles you want want to explore the category structure starting at Category:Museums in England (or Category:Museums in the United Kingdom if your remit is UK wide). My particular interest is Category:Museums in Somerset which I why I spotted one of your edits.— Rod ^talk 15:08, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rodw That's really useful, thanks - will ask you again if I'm still not clear about anything! I got the term Snap Double Redirect from the Edit Summary Legend page here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Edit_summary_legend, but I agree that "updating reference URL" is easier to understand!

All the best, RosieClarke (talk) 15:26, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Link Spam Warning

Welcome to Wikipedia. Many of the links that you have updated or added to Culture24.org.uk are links that are not appropriate for wikipedia (unless used as a reliable source) per WP:EL. Als, becuase you have a Conflict of interest as you apparently work for Culture24, you should probably avoid adding these links per WP:LINKSPAM. Linkfix2001 (talk) 18:31, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Linkfix2001,

Thanks for getting in touch about the links I've been updating. Could I explain the reason I've been making these changes, and maybe we could talk about how I could do this better?

With the Wikipedia links that I've replaced (most links already existed on the site, rather than me adding lots of new ones), they went to our old website, 24 Hour Museum. The name changed to Culture24 last year, and the URL also changed - most, but not all, links to old articles are currently automatically redirected to their place on the new site. However, we want to turn off 24 Hour Museum completely before long, so I'm trying to rebrand any links to articles on the old site with links to the identical articles in their new home.

Culture24's a non-profit charity, funded by MLA, Renaissance, the DCMS and the Arts Council to promote museums, galleries, libraries, archives and heritage sites. In addition to our trails, reviews and editorial articles, we maintain a database of over 4000 venue records, which the venues themselves log in to update with details of their opening hours, collections, educational resources for , hibitions and events. Here's a link to a page about our history: http://www.culture24.org.uk/sector+info/about+us/who+we+are/art65538 - as you can see we've been around for 10 years now. Is there a process on Wikipedia for getting recognized as an authoritative source?

However, as I've said in my page about myself, and in my talk page, I do work at Culture24. I'm trying to go about this openly and in the right way, and I don't want to upset anyone or seem like I'm spamming. Thanks for any advice you can give me - hope to hear from you soon. RosieClarke (talk) 00:05, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't worry too much if I were you. It really is the underhanded linkspaming we are most worried about (which you, having disclosed your affliation and working to improve wikipedia, are obviously not doing). I just wanted to explain why I deleted quite a few of the links you fixed (i.e., they shouldn't have been there in the first place-not just because you updated the link). I left the one that were properly used as references or otherwise proper. I only noticed you were doing this becuase you added a new cite at Lindow Moss; that is the sort of thing to avoid. In general the Culture24 pages look fine to me as sources where appropiate, it is just the proliferation of external links not used as sources that got my attention. (And I am going to paste your response over on your talk page, too.) Linkfix2001 (talk) 01:54, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for getting back to me to explain that, and I'm glad that Culture24 does count as a reliable source. Also, I'm really relieved that I've been "adopted" by TheArbiter, who's explaining how I can go about changing things the right way.

What I'd like to do on Wikipedia, and it's a big job, is to go through the 148 results that I get when I type 24hourmuseum (all one word) into the search box, and change all the links from 24HM to Culture24. However, if, as you've said, some of these references shouldn't be on Wikipedia in the first place, and once I make the changes someone will go through and take the links out, this doesn't seem like a great use of our time. Could you advise me, is there a place or a person I could approach to ask whether more experienced wikipedians would mind having a look through the 24HM links and deleting those that shouldn't be there, before I start rebranding them? Is this completely cheeky, or is it something that other people might be willing to help with, do you think?

I'm also thinking that the Culture24 entry could use an update, although as I work there this might be incorrect - would the right thing to do here be to make changes and then ask someone to edit it after me, or to put a message in the article discussion page declaring my interest and asking someone else to write it? Sorry I for got to put my name in: RosieClarke (talk) 13:58, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any reason you can't, as part of this project, knock out links that shouldn't be there. That might be even a better use of effort, and I wouldn't think would be a troubling conflict. I would take a look at WP:ELNO and WP:EL generally. I would guess that the vast majority of Culture24 links that are part of specific references are fine and would be worth updating. You could do even better by not only updating the URL, but using the cite web template to inprove the whole reference where the template has not been used--but that would be more work! For links that are just tacked onto the end as an external link, I would bet most of the time those links violate WP:EL, except, of course, on the Culture24 web page where that link is the official site. Linkfix2001 (talk) 17:31, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. For an example of a site that has reference links to your org and uses the cite web template, go to the Royal Academy of Music Museum article. And as for edits to the Culture24 article, I would only make truly not-even-close to debatable changes (like location, website, director). Anything that could be subject to interpretation, I would discuss on the talk page and somebody else could make those changes.Linkfix2001 (talk) 17:35, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for all your tips: I've asked for help in the Culture24 talk page. TheArbiter has also kindly pointed me towards places where I can get help in knocking out inappropriate links - I really appreciate the way everyone here is helping me to do things properly! All the best - have a great week. RosieClarke (talk) 12:26, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Adoption

I am part of the Adopt-a-User scheme, and I would be happy to adopt you. I am constantly on Wikipedia, so I am constantly able to help. Do you accept? The Arbiter^★_★^★ 23:46, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How kind of you! That would be lovely - I could really use some help, as I'm trying to be open about what I'm doing in updating links to articles on our site, but I've just had a spam warning. Can you give me any advice about getting www.culture24.org.uk recognized as an authoritative source - who I should be talking to, and what page of the site I should go to to ask the question? This is all new to me and I really don't want to step on people's toes! Thank you ever so much. RosieClarke (talk) 00:11, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Great, I'll be happy to help! First off, when replying to a message on a talk page, adding a colon before your message indents it under the message you are replying to. This makes it a little more organized. The Arbiter^★_★^★ 00:24, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Or, if you add two colons, it is a farther indent. The Arbiter^★_★^★ 00:24, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Or three. :) The Arbiter^★_★^★ 00:24, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All right, first off I'll take a look at your website. Wikipedia's standards for notability can be found here. Feel free to post on my talk page if you need help! The Arbiter^★_★^★ 00:24, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm

Hello again Rosie (shortened for simplicity)...when putting new messages on a talk page, click the "new section" tab at the top. This automatically creates one. Also, when using the {{talkback}} template, you just need to put {{tb|user talk:RosieClarke}}, not ~~~~, which is what I assumed you did. Cheers, The Arbiter^★_★^★ 00:28, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

reply to your last message

OK, brilliant! Much appreciated. I've put a talk back link to this page on your page as well. I see the standards for Notability, and totally agree with them. I'm not actually adding any new Wikipedia articles from scratch (although I have suggested that one should be written about the artist Luke Jerram, but I'm happy to discuss how notable he is another time).

I think what I'd like to establish is that the Culture24 site is a reliable secondary source, because the information on it about museums is entered and can be edited by the museums themselves.

ooh, I'm also realising that perhaps one reason why the links I changed aren't always ideal could be because they're not all citations within the Wikipedia articles, but just references at the bottom. I was basically just replacing mentions of 24 Hour Museum with Culture24, and in many cases the original mentions were references rather than citations.

Sorry for not doing the code right on your page, I was just manually typing the double brackets with the word Talkback and the 4 tildes inside them - will copy and paste next time.

Anyway, no hurry, am very happy to be guided by you however you think is appropriate!

Well, if you made a citation in the article, I guess it would be slightly more allowed. I agree that some may think that just adding links at the bottom would be spam. By the way, remember to sign your messages with ~~~~. If you could tell me specifically where you are trying to put the citations in what articles, it would be helpful. Cheers, The Arbiter^★_★^★ 00:49, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, good to know about citations - and thanks for letting me know about signing everything as well. Basically, I've just typed 24hourmuseum into the search box, as all one word, and got back 162 results. I'd like to change all of these to links to the same articles where they now sit on Culture24 - again, just presenting exactly the same content from the original link, linked from the same place in the article (or put into a citation rather than a reference so it improves the quality of the article).

Anyway, no hurry on this - I'm going to bed now, but perhaps we could discuss this in more detail over the weekend or next week. I do appreciate your guidance and I don't want to take up too much of your time! All the best, RosieClarke (talk) 01:11, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, no problem. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask me! I always have time to help a fellow Wikipedian in need. The Arbiter^★_★^★ 02:05, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again - i've just had a nice response to the spam discussion further up this page, and in replying to Linkfix2001 I've had a couple more thoughts I'd like to run past you. What I'd like to do on Wikipedia, and it's a big job, is to go through the 148 results (it's gone down since yesterday - yay!) that I get when I type 24hourmuseum (all one word) into the search box, and change all the links from 24HM to Culture24. However, if, as Linkfix2001 told me, some of these references shouldn't be on Wikipedia in the first place, and once I make the changes someone will go through and take the links out, this doesn't seem like a great use of our time. Could you advise me, is there a place or a person I could approach to ask whether more experienced wikipedians would mind having a look through the 24HM links and deleting those that shouldn't be there, before I start rebranding them? Is this completely cheeky, or is it something that other people might be willing to help with, do you think? I'm also thinking that the Culture24 entry could use an update, although as I work there this might be incorrect - would the right thing to do here be to make changes and then ask someone to edit it after me, or to put a message in the article discussion page declaring my interest and asking someone else to write it? Let me know what you reckon - and thanks again! RosieClarke (talk) 14:15, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm...So, Culture 24 is the new name of 24hourmuseum? And, it is sort of a database for the museums all over the UK?The Arbiter^★_★^★ 21:58, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, thanks for getting back to me. Yes, here's some background: we've been going for 10 years, the company name changed back in Nov 2007 http://www.culture24.org.uk/sector+info/about+us/art52199 but the website URL didn't change until Feb 2009 http://www.culture24.org.uk/sector+info/about+us/art65601. Part of what we do is to maintain this massive database of over 4000 museums, galleries, libraries, archives, heritage sites, science centres and architecture centres, which all the venues can update for themselves. they can list any educational resources they offer, and tag them to the National Curriculum to make them easier for teachers to find. They can also list any events or exhibitions they're putting on, and we share these listings with a range of other partners. It's all completely free, this is not a commercial enterprise. The other thing we do is write editorial: sector news, reviews of exhibitions in museums and galleries, interviews with curators, artists, gallery directors, archaeologists etc. We work on partnership projects like www.EngagingPlaces.org.uk (together with CABE and English Heritage), ICONS, Untold London, and our children's site is www.show.me.uk. We also coordinate campaigns across the country - I'm currently working on the Museums at Night 2010 campaign, the UK equivalent of the European Nuit des Musees, which will see hundreds of museums and galleries open their doors in the evening over the weekend of May 14th-16th. I'd also like to update this entry Long Night of Museums to say more about what will be happening in the UK. RosieClarke (talk) 12:49, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've offered a citation here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Fiskerton,_Lincolnshire#Offer_of_citation_re._Fiskerton_Log_Boat but was wondering, is there a Wikipedia convention about adding some kind of code to tell people that I've made this note and would like a response? Like the "help me" code I wrongly pasted in at the top of this page? otherwise, how will other wikipedia users know that I've asked the question? RosieClarke (talk) 12:49, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re. your last point - people "watchlist" articles. If no one responds (unlikely) it's because no one's interested in that article at all. To watchlist an article, click the "watch" button. Then changes come up on "my watchlist" (see link at the top of every page). Ty 09:27, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, he's right...if you watchlist an article you automatically watchlist the talk page too. Those who watchlisted the article would see that. The Arbiter^★_★^★ 02:19, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Some advice

Ok, for help with the searches and removal of links in corresponding articles, you might be able to obtain help from the folks at WikiProject United Kingdom or WikiProject Museum. If that doesn't work, I might be able to assist somewhat. Tell me how it goes! Cheers, The Arbiter^★_★^★ 02:53, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Brilliant, will get in touch with them this afternoon and let you know I get on! Cheers! RosieClarke (talk) 12:50, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GLAM

I'm not sure if you are watching the WP:GLAM talk page, so please note that there are a lot more links than you mentioned, and I have shown how to list them here. If you are not sure about watching, someone will explain. Johnuniq (talk) 02:24, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Johnuniq, you're a star - I'm now watching pages all over the place! Am just beginning to go through all the old links, feeling a bit more confident now. This is also really useful as it's showing up articles that never migrated across from the old site to the new site, so I'm making a list of these to talk to our tech guys about. Thanks again for taking the time to help a newbie out! RosieClarke (talk) 19:53, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieval/Accessed date

This needs to be modified, as the new URL was not retrieved/accessed on the existing date given.[1] Ty 21:48, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, sorry I missed that! I haven't seen a screen looking like that before with the 2 different versions at the top - do I need to click an "accept changes" thing somewhere, or have you made the change so the right access date is saved? Also, it seems that in some citations it says date retrieved, and in others it says date accessed - is it better to use one word than the other, or does it not matter? Thanks again, RosieClarke (talk) 23:41, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The screen is a record of what has been done. Click history tab at the top of the page to view the history. Word doesn't matter (as far as I know). Ty 04:13, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see! OK, cool. Thanks again! RosieClarke (talk) 10:12, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Some comments at Talk:Fiskerton, Lincolnshire. Ty 01:51, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I just came across your edits at Northmoor Road. You might want to use the various "cite" templates for referencing. E.g. have a look at Template:cite web. The reference information such as title, author, publishing and retrieval date are automatically arranged by these templates. Regards, De728631 (talk) 21:57, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I knew there was a page like that somewhere but I couldn't remember what it was called! I've added it to my bookmarks now. Thanks very much! RosieClarke (talk) 23:31, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again

Hey Rosie, great to see you! I took a look at your contributions, and you are doing excellently! The edit you made to that article that apparently hid the external links has been fixed here. To be honest the <<references>> thing you put on I have never seen before. But the {{reflist}} is the thing that you would want to put on. Great to see that you are doing well, and don't hesitate to ask more questions! The Arbiter^★_★^★ 23:24, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

wow, I'm obscurely proud that I've managed to make a completely original mistake! Anyway, it's sorted now, but cheers for checking that out for me. I am getting a bit more confident here, and am really grateful that some other kind editors have been helping to sort out our old 24 Hour Museum links - there are only 194 to change now... In other good news, Culture24 has been named one of the Guardian's 100 Essential Websites! (http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/dec/09/best-websites-internet) Thanks again for adopting me, and have a lovely Christmas! RosieClarke (talk) 23:35, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The same to you! Keep the questions coming! :) The Arbiter^★_★^★ 00:15, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas!

Merry Christmas, RosieClarke!
At this time of year, I would like to extend seasons greetings to the Wikipedians I have interacted with in the past year on Wikipedia. I wish you a wonderful holiday season! The Arbiter^★_★^★

Creating an article

I noticed your recent message at WT:Advice for the cultural sector#Culture 24 (again) and I have a couple of suggestions.

First, while your reply to Johnbod was perfect, the fact is that it could easily be lost because it is in the middle of an old conversation. It's not very old, so I'm not saying the comment will be lost, but it might be. In the future, I would suggest adding to the bottom of the section: leave a blank line and use no indentation (no ':'). If wanted, you can start the message with "@Johnbod: My message here." which is the convention to indicate that you are replying to Johnbod. That's just a thought for the future.

Re Museums at Night (UK): I'm not sure what the problem is. If you just want to create that article, simply click the red link, enter your text, use Preview to check it's ok, then Save. You should be able to do that. Make sure you have enough text to make it look reasonable, otherwise someone will want to delete it because lots of people create pages with inconsequential content everyday, and they are cleaned out frequently. Johnuniq (talk) 11:11, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much, not just for your help but for taking the time to explain how I can do things better - this is all really useful to know. I'd gone to the official WP guidance for moving pages and thought I needed to start in my sandbox article and click Move - which is why I was baffled by the error messages. At least I know what to do now. Will try to add some more content and links. All the best! RosieClarke (talk) 16:12, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Credit

See here Rosie. Search for Witham ... I stole 2 paras that you wrote ... so watch this space. Feel free to edit. Victuallers (talk) 10:46, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

- Hello - I'm no expert and didn't write the Witham Shield article on Culture24, it was my colleague Anra - but I'm glad that it was useful to you! Thanks for tipping me off, and all the best with your Did You Knows! RosieClarke (talk) 14:50, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Witham Shield

On 28 August 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Witham Shield, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi!

Rosie! Hi! So sorry, I haven't been very active on Wikipedia recently, but I noticed you added yourself back to my adoptee list. I'm so sorry, I thought you left Wikipedia. Anyways, if you need anything, don't hesitate to ask! The Arbiter^★_★^★ 19:16, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Testing my signature --RosieClarke (talk) 13:51, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Marjorie Drawbell (December 4)

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

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

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 (see the guidelines on the notability of people). 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.

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:Marjorie Drawbell 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:Marjorie Drawbell, 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, 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.

Whispering^(t) 19:48, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, RosieClarke! 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! Whispering^(t) 19:48, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A bowl of strawberries for you!

Hi I’ve just reviewed Louise Yeoman. Thanks very much for creating such an interesting article and happy editing! Mccapra (talk) 11:12, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Marjorie Drawbell

Hello, RosieClarke. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Marjorie Drawbell, 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. FireflyBot (talk) 20:02, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Marjorie Drawbell

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

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 edit the submission 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.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! --Ferien (talk) 19:48, 4 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:31, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]