AndreaTheoJohn

November 2022

Welcome to Wikipedia. Because we have a policy against usernames which give the impression that the account represents a group, club, organization, company, or website, I have blocked this account from editing. You are welcome to continue editing after you have chosen a new username that complies with Wikipedia's username policy.

You should also read our conflict of interest guideline and be aware that promotional editing is not acceptable, regardless of the username that you choose. Additionally, if your contributions to Wikipedia form all or part of work for which you are, or expect to be, paid or compensated in any way, you must disclose who is paying you to edit here.

Please take a moment to either create a new account, or request a username change of your current account here. The new username that you choose must represent you as an individual person, and it must comply with Wikipedia's username policy.

• To create a new account with a different username, simply log out of this account and then click here to make a new one.
• If you prefer to change the username on this account, you may do so by adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page here: {{unblock-un|new username|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Please note that the new username you choose cannot already be taken or in use by another account. You can go here to search and see if the username you'd like to choose is available. If the search returns that no global account with that username exists, that means it is available to be taken.

Please also note that you are permitted to use a username that contains the name of a company or organization if it also identifies you individually, such as "Sara Smith at XYZ Company", "Mark at WidgetsUSA", or "FoobarFan87", but not "SEO Manager at XYZ Company".

Appeals: If your username does not represent a group, organization, website, or other entity described above, and if you believe that this block was incorrect or made in error, you may appeal this block by adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page here: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. 

Thank you.

Cullen328 (talk) 18:02, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi Jim - thanks for educating me on that! I've updated my name now to just my personal name if that's OK? Could you please check it and then will you be able to lift my block on my account for me? Many thanks and Happy New Year! AndreaTheoJohn (talk) 15:40, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

• Renamed, unblocked, courtesy ping to Cullen328 - Cabayi (talk) 10:33, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Monica Rhodes (June 11)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by CurryTime7-24 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:Monica Rhodes 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.

CurryTime7-24 (talk) 00:20, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for these helpful edits. I will revise the article to reflect a neutral point of view. In terms of notability, Monica is the first African American woman to be presidentially appointed to the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation and is one of the very few African American academically trained preservationists in the country. Could you provide a bit more context for the notability requirement? Much appreciated. AndreaTheoJohn (talk) 13:19, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

Hello, AndreaTheoJohn! 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! CurryTime7-24 (talk) 00:20, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

Your email

Hello, Andrea. I received your email, but I prefer to communicate in Wikipedia, not in email. I see you found the archived discussion (at WP:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1191#Notoriety Issue): there is so much traffic at the Teahouse that articles get automatically archived prtty quickly. If you should want to continue the discussion at the Teahouse, please don't edit that archive, but start a new item on the current teahouse, and link to the original - you can see how I have created a Wikilink to it by looking at the source of this comment.

I'm afraid that new editors often experience Wikipedia as less friendly than they expected, especially if they leap straight into the very challenging task of creating a new article, and even more so if they do so on a subject where they have a conflict of interest. It is indeed really difficult to get an article published - though less so if you go about it the Wikipedia way (as explained in WP:YFA), rather than BACKWARD, as most newbies do. Those links are the best resources I can offer, along with WP:NPOV; but informally, I would say that what you need to do, after finding the sources that meet the golden rule for reliability, independence, and substantialness, is to forget absolutely everything you know about Rhodes, and write a summary of what those independent sources say. There is always some editorial discretion about what is appropriate to include (WEIGHT and TRIVIA give some guidance); but your personal view on the information absolutely should not figure. If the sources say something you strongly agree with, and it is clearly significant, put it in; but if they something significant that you strongly disagree with, put it in. (This may be hard, and is why COI editing is discouraged). When you have an article, you can add a small amount of uncontroversial factual data from non-independent (but still reliable) sources: see PRIMARY.

I hope this helps. My advice to you as a Wikipedia editor would be to leave Rhodes aside completely for several months, and learn more about Wikipedia by improving articles completely unrelated to her. I understand that that probably does not meet your purposes; but frankly, if it doesn't then I'm not sure your purposes are congruent with those of Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 15:44, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Monica Rhodes

Hello, AndreaTheoJohn. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Monica Rhodes, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 19:05, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Monica Rhodes (December 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 CurryTime7-24 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 after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Monica Rhodes 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.

CurryTime7-24 (talk) 21:05, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi CurryTime - would you say that any of these links count as substantial enough (i.e. more than what would be considered a passing mention)?:

[ ESSENCE ] https://www.essence.com/news/saving-our-landmarks-phylicia-rashad/

[ NEW ] ACHP LINK: https://www.achp.gov/about/council-members/monica-rhodes

[ EXISTING ] ACHP LINK: https://www.achp.gov/news/new-members-appointed-president-biden-sworn-achp - has a paragraph about her, photo in heading AndreaTheoJohn (talk) 19:22, 19 December 2023 (UTC)