User talk:Robert444444

An article you recently created, Robert Scurlock, is not suitable 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. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 15:42, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think there is an issue with WP:BIO1E. You might want to make an article on the 42 martyrs instead, listing each one on that article. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 15:43, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article Cainnear (name) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

DAB with only one extant article

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 18:25, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Cainnear (name) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cainnear (name) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 23:43, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have added lots of sources and references throughout the article as well as used lots of links. How else could the article be improved? I do not think it's fair that it should be deleted. Many of the sources used are from reputable online sources. Robert444444 (talk) 23:00, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Nemglan (Gaelic God) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nemglan (Gaelic God) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

 // Timothy :: talk  01:39, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. A couple of notes in relation to WP:RS, WP:VER, WP:SYNTH and the difference between history and folklore.

In this edit you stated that many sources attest that a certain house in the vicinity of Hacketstown had an evil spirit which terrified the locals. The only source provided is a link to an entry titled "A Story" in the dúchas.ie 'Schools Collection'. The Schools Collection is a series of folkloric stories compiled by children in the 1930s. Not only is a single piece of folklore, written by a primary school child, not "many sources", it is also not a reliable source. And shouldn't be presented as such. And frankly, irrespective of the reliability of the source, what is clearly a made-up ghost story shouldn't be presented (in the same context as the 1798 rebellion) as if history and folklore are equivalent or indistinguishable. Please don't blur the line between the two.

In this edit you stated that Her [St. Cainnear of Cill Chainre] feast day is 6 November. The only source provided is a link to this webpage. Which doesn't mention Cainnear of Cill Chainre or any subject of even a remotely similar name. If you are taking "all Irish saints" to include someone of this name, then that is an example of WP:OR and WP:SYNTH. And a significant issue relative to WP:VER. I note that you did the same thing here. Stating that [Cainnear's] feast day [..] was instituted in 1921 by Pope Benedict XV. When the source doesn't state was much. Please don't interpret or misrepresent sources like this.

Thanks. Guliolopez (talk) 04:29, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your feedback. I will not use the schools folklore collection as a primary source without stating first that the information is folklore or adding it to an appropriate drop down menu. In my defence I did not reference any nontruths, everything I used had some reference or source somewhere but I understand the issues raised about verifiability and original research and sythetisizing as you have pointed out. Robert444444 (talk) 07:02, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

FYI. You mentioned that you would, but can you try a little harder with refs/OR/SYNTH? In this edit you added text:

• not supported by the linked reference (the linked reference doesn't state "virgin" or "niece of St. Patrick or "mother being St. Darerca". It says/said "sister of St. Mel, (disciple of St. Patrick)". And that is all.
• not related to the titular subject (the linked reference (a webpage associated with Lenamore National School in Legan, County Longford) is about the parish of Kilglass in Longford. Not the townland in Sligo. Which is nearly 140km away.)

Thanks. Guliolopez (talk) 15:27, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oh my bad 😅 thanks for that. I thought it was in Sligo. Yes, those words may not have been mentioned in that particular source - but they are in fact correct. They just needed another reference. Robert444444 (talk) 15:34, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. A reminder that Facebook posts (and other forms of WP:UGC) are not reliable sources. Please do not use them to support text/changes/additions. Thanks. Guliolopez (talk) 21:54, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article Watt Henry (folk saint) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable deceased person. WP:NBIO and WP:SIGCOV are not met. Only coverage available is seemingly that linked from the article. A single YouTube video and a "local interest" story from The Irish Mirror...

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Guliolopez (talk) 15:15, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there! I wanted to reach out to you because I noticed that you created the article Nemglan. I think it's a great start, but I was wondering if you had plans to expand it with more information from books or other sources. I recently helped save your article from AfD and would love to see it continue to grow. Thank you for your efforts and keep up the good work! 49.237.13.190 (talk) 20:44, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya. Me again. A couple of quick notes on:

• MOS:IMAGERELEVANCE. Please only add images that are relevant/illustrative of the subject. For example, per the Saint Lappan article, there were at least three people with this name. Including a "Lappan of Cork" and a "Lappan of Carlow". An image, purporting to represent "Lappan of Carlow" (Bagnalstown) has no relevance in an article (broadly) related to "Lappan of Cork". (Please review MOS:IMAGERELEVANCE. Images should be relevant to and ideally illustrative of the subject. Not only vaguely related or tangentially related or entirely unrelated. And certainly should not be purely "decorative".)
• COM:LICENSE. Please ensure that images uploaded to Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons have the correct authorship/licence tags. For example, you uploaded an image, purporting to be "own work / CC", when it was previously published elsewhere on the internet with authorship assigned to a (different?) Flickr user and a different licence. (Please review COM:LICENSE. Images should be tagged correctly and uploaders shouldn't claim authorship/ownership of images created by other people.)
• WP:NOTGALLERY. Please consider whether every image you upload/copy to Commons necessarily needs to be added to an article on Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not Commons or a similar repo of images. In many cases an article (for example that on Saint Joseph) may already have plenty of high quality images to support it. (Including several works, representing Joseph, painted by various Renaissance masters.) An additional generic image, found and uploaded from elsewhere on the internet, may not aid or add to a reader's understanding of the subject. And could actually hinder or distract. (Please review MOS:IMAGES. Including the bits about how images are intended to be an "illustrative aid to understanding" and that "too many can be distracting".)

Thanks. Guliolopez (talk) 00:55, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your assistance/advice. I will try to resolves all these issues but it will take time. Robert444444 (talk) 06:26, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to Saints of County Wicklow. Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing because it has no sources. Your article is now a draft where you can improve it undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:35, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to Saints of County Carlow. Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing because it has no sources. Your article is now a draft where you can improve it undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:55, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. With thanks for creating the Saint Caoimhe stub, unfortunately the sources (both self-published unreliable sources) do not establish notability or even reliably support the text. our article is now a draft where you can improve it undisturbed for a while. Thanks. Guliolopez (talk) 22:48, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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:

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 after they have been resolved.

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

Theroadislong (talk) 10:34, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Robert444444! 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! Theroadislong (talk) 10:34, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya. Two quick thoughts (if of interest):

1. As noted by Sungodtemple a few months ago, it seems unlikely that this subject meets the community's notability guidelines for people. Generally speaking, per WP:1E and WP:VICTIM, where someone's notability derives from a single event (including their own death), we would typically cover the topic on an article on the event. Like a broader article on the event (an article on the trials/executions of Scurlock, Eustace, Fitzgerald, Sutton, etc in Nov 1581). Or the group (a separate/split article of the Irish_Catholic_Martyrs#The_42_Irish_Martyrs).
2. As covered in WP:SELFCITE and WP:COI, if you have a connection to the Robert Kavanagh who has created those artworks and that YouTube channel, you should consider whether it is appropriate for you to be adding it as a source on multiple articles. Especially in the context of WP:UGC.

Thanks. Guliolopez (talk) 15:52, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I undersrand. I will try to expand the article to cover the event and include other individuals aswell Thanks for your feedback. Robert Robert444444 (talk) 19:12, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Robert444444! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia—it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Please see Help:Minor edit for more information. Thank you. Kj cheetham (talk) 10:49, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. Thanks for your feedback. Robert444444 (talk) 11:03, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Ww2censor. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Baltinglass, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. ww2censor (talk) 21:04, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Peter the Sinner is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter the Sinner until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Fram (talk) 15:32, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Robert444444. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Saints of County Carlow, 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) 16:09, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Robert444444. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Saint Caeltigern, 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) 09:05, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:54, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Robert444444. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Saints of County Wicklow, 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) 02:05, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Robert444444. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Saint Caoimhe, 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) 14:06, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Robert444444. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Saints of County Carlow".

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. When 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!} 17:07, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Robert444444. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Saint Caeltigern".

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! CptViraj (talk) 09:04, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Robert444444. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Robert Scurlock, 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) 23:07, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Robert444444. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Saints of County Wicklow".

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. When 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!} 01:44, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Please do not use unreliable sources such as blogs, internet forums, social media sites, image hosting services, wikis and other collaboratively created websites, Facebook, Reddit, Tumblr, YouTube videos (including your own) and Wikipedia articles (including your own edits). One of Wikipedia's core policies is that contributions must be verifiable through reliable and independent sources. Wikipedia cannot (cyclically) reference itself. Thanks. Guliolopez (talk) 13:18, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Robert444444. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Robert Scurlock".

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. When 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!} 22:39, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think you'll want to know that there is a problem with a source you used recently. https://www.hellenicaworld.com/Greece/Mythology/en/Kalamos.html Has a notice at the bottom of the page reading "Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org" All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License". It appears that it is a mirror of an older version of Wikipedia pages and so should not be used as a source for information. This is a problem I've run into when trying to cite a source for a fact on a page about plants, particularly an interesting obscure fact. For this reason I tend to search the book collection at https://archive.org/ first. It is not guarantee that it is not made up, but it is usually less likely to be sourced from us here at Wikipedia. 🌿MtBotany (talk) 02:56, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]