User talk:ErnestBaum

Your submission at Articles for creation: Foppington's Law (January 28)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by AngusWOOF were:  The comment the reviewer left 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 when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Foppington's Law 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:Foppington's Law, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 20:23, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

Hello, ErnestBaum! 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! AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 20:23, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Foppington's Law (January 28)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Theroadislong was:  The comment the reviewer left 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 when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Foppington's Law 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:Foppington's Law, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Theroadislong (talk) 21:32, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

Ernest Hemingway

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed you recent contribution to the Hemingway article. I thought it best, for several reasons, to revert your edits.

1. Wikipedia is a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedia. There is no central board of editors. An enormous corpus of pilliars, policies, guidelines, essays, and precedents substitute.
2. Ernest Hemingway is a featured article; one of fewer than 2000 such among the more than 5,000,000 in the English Wikipedia. Any large changes should be discussed on the article talk page before rather than after. Collaboration based on talk page discussion is how high quality, stable articles arise here.
3. Among the Manual of Style requirements used here are a consistent style of citation. No mixtures.
4. Sources for Wikipedia articles must be independent, reliable, and have been through fact-checking: secondary sources. Primary sources are used only in special cases, i.e. direct quotes. An email from a grandson of Ernest Hemingway is not even primary because the source is not verifiable.

I will leave a guide in the following section. — Neonorange (Phil) 19:58, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

On your decision to delete my edit on the Ernest Hemingway page (your reply at my talk page moved to your talk page so as to keep the exchange in one location) — Neonorange (Phil) 00:04, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi Phil,

I appreciate that you provided feedback on your decision to delete my work. However, I do very much wish you had considered more closely what you were deleting. For instance, you tell me that I used a primary source, which you insist was an email from Hemingway's grandson. I did no such thing, John Hemingway published a peer-reviewed article in 2012, titled " Ernest Hemingway, the False Macho" in the academic journal, Men and Masculinities. Had you checked my citation, you would have noticed that I cited this article using proper formatting, and quoted from it verbatim. In fact, all of the information I used was from academically published material, so I must say I rather resent both that you did not take the time to check this, and that you felt comfortable accusing me of using improper sourcing and citation which indeed I did not. unsigned reply by ErnestBaum ErnestBaum 00:04, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

I have moved your reply from my talk page to your talk page. The purpose is to keep the exchange in one location and in logical sequence. Whenever I post to a talk page, I watchlist that page (actually, that is automatically done by the system.) I will not miss any reply or other expansion to the thread. Each successive addition within a section can be indicated by placing a colon as the first character of a new line, adding an additional colon to step-wise indent each new addition.

When the [Enter] or [Return] key is used, the following line must start with the same number of colons so as to maintain the proper indent.

Each message added to a talk page should be signed. Since you already have a user name, simply sign with a string of four tildes ( ~~~~ ) which the system will replace with your user name, talk page name, and time/date stamp.

As to your exceptions:

• I did read the material you added. I considered better placement and integration to be necessary.

• I did attempt some investigation, including a read of some of the sources you cited and some of your contributions to Wikipedia. One of the cites linked to a very short email via a Gmail account. It also seemed that you had not been properly welcomed as a Wikipedia editor—I added a welcome template with pointers to startup references.

• Please compare the form of the citations you used. The Wikipedia Manual of Style expresses this point much better than I.

• Please evaluate the quality of the sources.

• Please scan the talk page archives at Talk:Ernest Hemingway for indications of how important changes come about.

I'd like to suggest that a Wikipedia Featured Article is not the best way to learn the norms here. You have raised political considerations several times. This is the encyclopedia anyone can edit. This is a collaborative project among editors who rarely meet face-to-face. The project is successful. Discuss, discuss, discuss. Assume good faith. Assume good faith. Assume good faith. Avoid undue weight, apply neutral point of view, be civil and assume good faith, recognize that Wikipedia is the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit and freely use, and that Wikipedia has no firm rules. — Neonorange (Phil) 00:04, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello ErnestBaum! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Neonorange (Phil) 20:04, 13 March 2019 (UTC) Getting Started Wikipedia Tutorial • The five pillars of Wikipedia How to: edit a page • upload an image Getting Help Frequently Asked Questions Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Policies and Guidelines Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Fair use • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The Community Build consensus • Resolving disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Things to do Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Pages needing attention • Peer review Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism Miscellaneous Useful templates • Categories • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Tools • User scripts

Your submission at Articles for creation: Gaetano Sciolari has been accepted

Gaetano Sciolari, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-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. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can 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.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

scope_creep^Talk 22:26, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Foppington's Law

Hello, ErnestBaum. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Foppington's Law".

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. Mjs1991 (talk) 09:37, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

List of polyamorists

Hi. Thanks for your additions, but they had to be removed. For this list, the source must explicity use the words polyamorous or polyamory to describe the subject or their relationship. Polyamory is different than open marriage, and we are not permitted to do original research or simply present our own opinion as to whether the relationship was polyamorous. This has been a longstanding requirement on this article to meet Wikipedia sourcing requirement. If you have or can find a source which is explicit about this, feel free to add them back. And by the way, lists of people are supposed to be in alphabetical order by last name. Thanks! Skyerise (talk) 20:00, 5 September 2020 (UTC)