User talk:JoaoPillon

Hello, JoaoPillon, and welcome to WikiProject European Union! Thank you for your generous offer to help contribute. I'm sure your input will be much appreciated. I hope you enjoy contributing here and being a European Union Project Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to discuss anything on the project talk page, or to leave a message on my own talk page. Please remember to sign all your comments, and be bold with your edits. Again, welcome, and happy editing!

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Capital Markets Union. Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 18:26, 24 March 2020 (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 Sulfurboy was:

As requested by Robert, please first build consensus on the applicable talk page before spinning off a new article.

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:Capital Markets Union 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:Capital Markets Union, 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) 21:33, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, JoaoPillon! 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! Sulfurboy (talk) 21:33, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It would be reasonable to leave a brief note in neutral terms at the talk pages of the EEMU and EBU pages inviting comment (at Talk:Economy of the European Union/Archive 2#Capital Markets Union for and against your proposal. --Red King (talk) 18:32, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Red King I thank you for your support and comment. I will do it. --JoaoPillon (talk) 18:37, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Capital Markets Union, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 21% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now 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. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Robert McClenon (talk) 19:46, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Joao, I can't find it now but I am certain that somewhere there is a guidance that says that named references of the style <ref name =":0"> are nowadays considered poor practice. I know we all follow existing examples and it looks like you have found an old one.

The preference now is to use reasonably meaningful names, so that other editors can read the raw text and see fairly easily which reference is which. If it is a long article, then it needs to anticipate the need for uniquenes. A short article might use <ref name = NYTimes> but a longer one would need <ref name = NYT033020> (quotes are only needed if the name contains a space or other special character). --Red King (talk) 21:50, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from European Union law into Draft:Freedom of Establishment and Freedom to Provide Services in the European Union. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was copied, attribution is not required. — Diannaa (talk) 14:47, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:59, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]