User talk:Caryplace7

This is Caryplace7's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

A new version has been submitted with new references and updated information

AfC notification: Draft:Mike Greenhaus has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Mike Greenhaus. Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 01:01, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you please let me know if there is anything else I can do to help get the article approved

Also now that I made the changes how do I resubmit?

Your submission at Articles for creation: Mike Greenhaus (April 16)

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

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.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Many of the sources are unreliable. IMDB is not a reliable source. Relix is not an independent source. Amazon is not a reliable source.

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:Mike Greenhaus 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:Mike Greenhaus, 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.

Robert McClenon (talk) 22:00, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Caryplace7! 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! Robert McClenon (talk) 22:00, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. 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 the submission 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 the submission, 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.

1292simon (talk) 12:18, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Mike Greenhaus (May 31)

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

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.

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.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Looks like a case of WP:REFBOMB The three best sources don't demonstrate notability and wading through the rest is daunting. Most don't look to have anything to even do with the subject.

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:Mike Greenhaus 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:Mike Greenhaus, 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.

Sulfurboy (talk) 06:20, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Mike Greenhaus (June 1)

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

The comment the reviewer left was:

This draft is everything wrong with promotional editing: it name-drops as if that means anything, it refbombs overflowing with blogs, mere mentions, stuff the subject wrote, and other unreliable sources. There's no claim of notability because the author doesn't understand the difference between WP:V and WP:N. If ever we take up undeclared paid editing, this mess is what it would look like.

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:Mike Greenhaus 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:Mike Greenhaus, 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.

Chris Troutman (talk) 19:25, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you once again for taking a look at my biography of Journalist Mike Greenhaus, Editor-in-Chief of Relix Magazine (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Mike_Greenhaus) This is my first bio, though I have added references and edit over 100 other articles, so I am still learning how to do this properly. Your comments suggested that a majority of the references I cited were by the subject I was writing about when in fact NONE of the links are by him, nor from the magazine he edits (expect the masthead as proof of his current position) The four articles I cited as best references had all been cleared as OK by another editor (1292simon last week( and are focused specifically on the subject of my bio. In addition, the other articles cite him as an expert reference which according to my research is the type of articles that should be included as proof of notability. I understood I have perhaps too many references; I was trying to balance a mix of articles focused solely on Mr. Greenhaus with citations on his work from larger references. Please let me know how I can improve. Thank you so much Caryplace7 (talk) 01:23, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Caryplace7. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the page Draft:Mike Greenhaus, 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. Chris Troutman (talk) 19:25, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your note I do not have a Conflict of Interest. I am just a fan of the magazine, Relix, he writes for and have an interest in the jamband scene and Jewish culture worlds he covers. I have already been vetted by another editor who determined that I did not have a conflict of interest. I am willing to rework my article anyway needed though Caryplace7 (talk) 12:07, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

Hi Caryplace7! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Mike Greenhaus, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days (usually at least two days, and sometimes four or more). You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please feel free to create a new thread.

The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} here on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:00, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

June 2020

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Draft:Mike Greenhaus. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges.

Please stop removing reviewer comments and notices about declined/rejected submissions – as it says in the notices themselves, "Please do not remove reviewer comments or this notice until the submission is accepted." bonadea contributions talk 08:13, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mike Greenhaus moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Mike Greenhaus, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. 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. bonadea contributions talk 20:54, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. The specific section is Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard#Relix magazine and its staff. Thank you. bonadea contributions talk 12:00, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have made several edits related to Relix. As I mentioned, I am a fan of the magazine but not involved (also a fan of the music it covers, like David Goldflies; you suggested I work on other bios in our talk so I did). As you mentioned, I am new to Wikipedia and clearly not doing this right. I am happy to delete the Mike Greenhaus draft and, if you like, will not edit anything directly related to Relix or the people you mentioned. But please don't block or blacklist the Relix wiki bio or other subjects involved as I don't want to hurt them. I came to you in good faith--we first connected on the Teahouse as I was trying to learn about this process--and have been in communication with you. I respect that you are being a diligent editor but can we leave this as I won't go near those pages and, if you think I am not being faithful, you can flag me. I have not resubmitted the draft for review by the way Caryplace7 (talk) 15:01, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

Hi Caryplace7! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Help Getting Bio Approved, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days (usually at least two days, and sometimes four or more). You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please feel free to create a new thread.

The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} here on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:00, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Mike Greenhaus

Hello, Caryplace7. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Mike Greenhaus".

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 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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:57, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Mike Greenhaus

Hello, Caryplace7. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Mike Greenhaus".

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!} 22:48, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]