Davepastor

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (April 21)

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: 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 User:Davepastor/sandbox 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 User:Davepastor/sandbox, 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) 07:03, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Davepastor! 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! Theroadislong (talk) 07:03, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

May 2018

Hello, I'm SQGibbon. I wanted to let you know that one or more external links you added to Alexandra Elizabeth Parker have been removed because they seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page, or take a look at our guidelines about links. Thank you. SQGibbon (talk) 19:19, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

June 2018

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Abbey Road. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include, but are not limited to, links to personal websites, links to websites with which you are affiliated (whether as a link in article text, or a citation in an article), and links that attract visitors to a website or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the page, please discuss it on the associated talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you. SQGibbon (talk) 18:56, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I'm fairly new to Wiki, so wasn't overly clear on the rules. I tried contacting you about the last article that you had raised but couldn't find a contact on your page. Again, probably me not being able to find the right access for you.

I felt like the links I was adding was contributing to the knowledge area of the subject. With reference to my blog where people can find more information should they require.

If this is a violation of the code of Wiki I will simply just not offer contributions as I'm learning this information first hand and wouldn't want to distribute information that has not been achieved by primary research.

Thanks for your feedback in any case and all the best.

Linking to your own blog is very problematic as it makes it look like you are promoting yourself. Please read WP:CITESPAM for more information. Even if your intentions were good and you weren't trying to improve your SEO rank/drive people to your website, it still looks bad when almost all of your edits are links to your blog.

We also require that external links be reliable sources. What constitutes a reliable source is, basically, someone who has been covered extensively by other reliable sources. If you are notable (by Wikipedia standards -- significant coverage by at least two independent and reliable sources) in the field you blog about then that would help, but it would still be a problem that you are citing yourself.

Good luck. SQGibbon (talk) 19:51, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your help, I can't say I'm extensively covered. I was really just trying to distribute first hand information. I appreciate there are guidelines and respect them, but will leave the editing of information to others from now on.

Your draft article, User:Davepastor/sandbox

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

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. JMHamo (talk) 10:52, 22 October 2018 (UTC)