User talk:ProfessorKaiFlai

Hi ProfessorKaiFlai! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like TheAafi (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:03, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

I've been doing some clean-up on your drafts, but no guarantee either will be accepted. More refs needed, especially for quotes. If you get a "Denied" try do address the reviewer's comments before resubmitting. And you still need to declare COI. David notMD (talk) 11:57, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I appreciate your help! I will work on finding more references for both drafts this weekend. ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 12:39, 3 July 2021 (UTC)ProfessorKaiFlai[reply]

Hello, ProfessorKaiFlai. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Draft:Robert Waldo Brunelle Jr., you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

• avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
• propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
• disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
• avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:Spam);
• do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Longhair\^talk 12:53, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for allowing me to place this clarification. I am also a

The following Wikipedia contributor may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this draft. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view. [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] · [[Special:Contribs/{{{1}}}|contribs]])

for the Dr. Cyril O. Spann Medical Office. I noticed that it is listed on the National Register of Historic Places in South Carolina but has no page, so I am endeavoring to create one. I am heavily involved in the ongoing preservation of the site, but work for myself and only receive compensation when grants are received to launch the next stage of the preservation work. I am not being paid to submit this contribution. ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 13:04, 3 July 2021 (UTC)ProfessorKaiFlai[reply]

WP:PAID applies if you are receiving any form of compensation relating to a project, even if you decided to work on an article on your own and are not being paid specifically for that. The declaration belongs on your User page. A second point - paid editors are allowed to create drafts and submit those for review to become articles, but once the article exists, paid editors are limited to using the article Talk pages to propose subsequent changes, leaving the decision to implement the proposed changes to a non-involved editor. So, get everything in, in the draft stage. David notMD (talk) 15:50, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My editing of your drafts is with the intent of improving their chances of being accepted by a reviewer. This is format and referencing stuff. I know nothing about the topics themselves. I wish you well in your endeavors. David notMD (talk) 16:08, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you - your help and guidance through this 'foreign country' are greatly appreciated! ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 16:10, 3 July 2021 (UTC)ProfessorKaiFlai[reply]

Both images will be deleted because the source is described as Brunelle but you uploaded them, and in doing so, you claimed that you are the copyright holder. For the cartoon strip, Brunelle would have to create an account and upload it himself. For the photo of Brunelle, the photographer (not Brunelle) would have to create an account and upload. David notMD (talk) 11:18, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed the COI on your User page and added one for the other article David notMD (talk) 11:23, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again for your assistance!

I have sent the permission template to Brunelle so that he can email that in, rather than him uploading the images himself, as recommended on wikipedia copyright pages.

ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 13:22, 4 July 2021 (UTC)ProfessorKaiFlai[reply]

David,

RE: Permission for images on Robert Waldo Brunelle Jr page I saw the warning about images on my draft Robert Waldo Brunelle Jr page and on my talk page, and noted that I had seven days to correct. Mr. Brunelle sent an email to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org this morning (7-4-21) giving his permission, and so I attached a tag to the Brunelle page. The response posted to my page refers to a 40-day backlog. Due to notice about that 40 day backlog, I posted this note to VRT to draw attention to the permission that has been sent within the seven day window, in order to keep the images and/or page from being deleted.

I do not have ticket number, or OTRS assigned agent yet. There is a message now posted to my draft Brunelle page

ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 15:34, 4 July 2021 (UTC)ProfessorKaiFlai[reply]

Robert Waldo Brunelle Jr., 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 Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. 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!

Devonian Wombat (talk) 13:49, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The accepting reviewer is the same person who put the "Neutrality is disputed" tag on the article, so ask that person. COI and neutrality issues are not the same thing, so questioning the degree of your COI (and yes, you qualify) does not address the issue. My opinion is that laudatory quotations from minor publications such as Uncle Jam should be removed. David notMD (talk) 10:22, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and I pruned that Uncle Jam quote. ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 10:40, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dr. Cyril O. Spann Medical Office, 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 Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. 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!

Devonian Wombat (talk) 04:08, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kudos for all the improvements made between the early drafts and the approved article. David notMD (talk) 10:34, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Grateful for all the help and guidance from so many, resulting in approval. Very happy today! ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 10:37, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Heather Bauer, 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 Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. 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!

Jamiebuba (talk) 16:06, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 07:24, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Catherine Fleming Bruce 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/Catherine Fleming Bruce 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.

Bearcat (talk) 13:14, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, thanks for your recent edits to those articles. It's much better to link to a C-SPAN *person* page rather than an individual video; linking to an individual video with a link titled "Appearances" is highly misleading. As I've discovered myself, the {{C-SPAN}} template is strongly recommended for this. Also, the external links section comes after the references section, is entitled "External links" with a lower-case second word, per the layout guideline and the Manual of Style about heading capitalisation, and always contains a bulleted list of links, even if there is only one. I've fixed up all your recent edits accordingly. I don't know much about the subject but I know a little about C-SPAN and I trust the links you added are OK. Graham87 04:44, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the comments and the corrections! I have been here a while but there is still plenty to learn. Especially around making templates, boxes and so on. The C-SPAN links I added included a number of South Carolina politicians talking about a single issue - probably the only time many of them appeared on the network. I appreciate the guidance, and continue to improve thanks to good folks in here! ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 05:53, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The page Harriet F. Johnson has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appeared to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appeared to be a direct copy from https://dc.statelibrary.sc.gov/bitstream/handle/10827/9941/HOUSE_Legislative_Update_1992-4-28.pdf?isAllowed=y&sequence=1. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition has been be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, you may contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you may open a discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion Review. — Diannaa (talk) 16:32, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note of explanation.

For background: I reviewed the category Women State Legislators in South Carolina and noticed that many women legislators were missing from the list. I had taken up the task of adding more women, to make the list as complete as possible. Some had pages that I was able to connect by adding the category to their page, but many others had no page.

I noted that especially when going back several decades, that there is very little information about some of those early women legislators. While some of them have been well documented, others, as in the Harriet F. Johnson case, have little to no sources. The statelibrary.sc.gov page provided the ONLY source that I could find. So I will keep trying to build more pages to add to this list, but just wanted you to know the context of the Harriet F. Johnson created page, and what I am up against in doing so. ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 18:27, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's not that you only used one source; it's that you copied text from the source, which is a violation of our copyright policy. Please don't add copyright material to Wikipedia. — Diannaa (talk) 01:07, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I understand - it won't be repeated. ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 01:14, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello ProfessorKaiFlai,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Creighton Waters for deletion in response to your request.

If you didn't intend to make such a request and don't want the article to be deleted, you can edit the page and remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Umakant Bhalerao (talk) 07:09, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 08:04, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, ProfessorKaiFlai. Thank you for your work on Mike Reichenbach (South Carolina politician). User:MPGuy2824, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

please add the appropriate infobox

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|MPGuy2824}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

-MPGuy2824 (talk) 05:58, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

{{Re|MPGuy2824}} - thank you so much, I appreciate that!

I am not very skilled at making info boxes - I have had some success copying source codes onto a page, and sometimes that has worked. So I will give that a try! ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 19:26, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Thomas Val Guest, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Russell Fry. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:07, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

DPL bot Thanks for the heads up! I got the link fixed - a bit clumsy but it works properly now

ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 06:19, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Since you recently participated in the Charles III requested move discussion, I thought you might like to know that there are two other discussions currently going on about other British monarch article titles here and here. Cheers. Rreagan007 (talk) 22:19, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 01:20, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ProfessorKaiFlai! 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. DrKay (talk) 10:01, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for this comment DrKay - I have read the Minor edit article and will conduct myself accordingly going forward.

I so appreciate all the good help and guidance that editors give one another here. This is a great community - working to get things right! ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 18:38, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to 2020 United States redistricting cycle has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. — Diannaa (talk) 14:36, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies - I thought I did enough editing for it to pass. Will take another stab at it later. Thanks for the explanation. ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 21:03, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Thomas Broadwater, 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. Dan arndt (talk) 02:21, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas Broadwater, 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.

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!

DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:53, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 22:36, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page List of programs broadcast by HGTV, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 03:11, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, PKF! Just a note, this does not represent adding an wp:external link. External links are those from outside of Wikipedia. (The reason I stumbled over this is that your edit summary mentioned external links, so I went to check.) Links to other wikipedia articles are just links, or sometimes internal links or wikilinks. This is not in any way an indication your edit was incorrect (and thank you for leaving edit summaries),just an FYI to help prevent other editors from feeling they need to go check an edit of yours. :) Valereee (talk) 16:46, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for this helpful note! ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 17:05, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Before adding a category to an article, please make sure that the subject of the article really belongs in the category that you specified according to Wikipedia's categorization guidelines. The category being added must already exist, and must be supported by the article's verifiable content. Categories may be removed if they are deemed incorrect for the subject matter. Please see WP:CATDEF. The categories should be the defining aspect of the article. Thus, articles on an individual should not be categorized as a "historic marker" for example. glman (talk) 17:05, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Glman, thanks for the support and advice, I really appreciate it!

I know that typically "historic marker" categories would be appropriate for historic sites. However, I have come across a number of historic markers that are connected to individuals, referencing the site related to that person such as a childhood home, but the historic building itself may no longer exist. This could be addressed by placing a citation about the historic marker as an 'honors and recognitions' item, rather than as a category. That makes sense. But doing so as a citation rather than a category will mean that some historical markers will be omitted from the list. But I think the citation is a perfectly acceptable and possibly less confusing placement for information about the marker in these cases. Thanks again! ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 21:19, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Glman. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, 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. glman (talk) 17:05, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - I didn't see which article the changed content was in, but it didn't have the right sourcing, I appreciate your removing it. I'll look over these reference, source and citation links, thank you! ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 21:28, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

[if it didn't] ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 21:28, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give a page a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Drew McKissick. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases for registered users, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:54, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there - thanks for this note. I was not apparent to me that there was another Drew McKissick page, so I created one. In the midst of doing so, there were several responses and actions. I think the page has been published now, but I always appreciate the feedback, support and help from other editors. You all do a great job! ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 16:23, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to Drew McKissick. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because Would not meet WP:NPOL and does not appear to meet WP:GNG. Also doesn't look ready for mainspace (no reflist?). Sending to Draft as an WP:ATD. Also, if this was PAID, please make the appropriate disclosure. . I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, 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 OR move the page back. CNMall41 (talk) 08:01, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK - DEFINITELY not paid lol! I will look it over and re-submit thank you ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 08:16, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Drew McKissick, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Matt Moore.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:10, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for catching that - I made those corrections to the Matt Moore entry on the Drew McKissick page ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 10:44, 21 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) 00:56, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You placed template:inuse on Quinndom on 27 Dec, but have only made two edits since. That template is not intended to lock out other editors long-term. If you feel the article needs a qualification, try template:under construction instead. Schazjmd (talk) 23:55, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there - I have been working on this today - almost ready to take the template off. It will be down within 30 minutes ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 00:32, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, ProfessorKaiFlai. Thank you for your work on Quinndom. SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Hello my friend! Good day to you. Thanks for creating the article, I have marked it as reviewed. Have a blessed day!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 11:54, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@SunDawn:Thank you so much for the review and the kind words - Wikipedia is blessed with a great community of editors! ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 16:20, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to Historic Preservation Book Prize. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources and it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, 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 OR move the page back. BoyTheKingCanDance (talk) 16:01, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK thanks ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 16:02, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have reformatted, added citations, and resubmitted. Let me know if all the standards are met or if more is needed ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 23:49, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, ProfessorKaiFlai. I glanced at Draft:Historic Preservation Book Prize. The problem I see is that there are sources documenting specific books being awarded the prize, but there are no sources about the prize itself. Take a look at the general notability guideline. Article topics need significant coverage in independent reliable sources to show that the topic meets Wikipedia's inclusion criteria. The prize sponsor doesn't even appear to be notable, or I would suggest merging the content to there. Hope that helps you look for more sources! Schazjmd (talk) 00:17, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I modeled my article after several of the other history award pages. I think many of the genre book awards have a challenge because they play to a smaller audience, but I'd say they are filling a niche and are important and notable within those communities. Many of them don't have as many sources as I had, I was surprised to note lol!

Category:History awards ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 01:01, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft deleted - not enough notability ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 01:21, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detectedthat when you recently edited 2014 United States Senate election in South Carolina, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Richard Cash.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 17:50, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that heads up - I have made the correction ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 18:46, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, ProfessorKaiFlai. Thank you for your work on Harry R. Askins. MPGuy2824, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

he didn't die in 1985

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|MPGuy2824}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

-MPGuy2824 (talk) 04:38, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

{{Re|MPGuy2824}} thanks for catching that! It was his father who died - they both have the same name! ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 05:21, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Boyd Brown, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Creighton Coleman.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 18:04, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Corrected, thanks! ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 19:13, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, ProfessorKaiFlai,

Thank you for creating Larry Francis Lebby.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Hello! Thank you so much for this page highlighting an African-American artist. I have marked this as reviewed as sourcing, structure, relevant category inclusion, notability, and most formatting guidelines have been followed, but please create an "artist infobox" to make this page consistent with our usual layout guidelines. Thank you.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Trainsskyscrapers}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Trainsskyscrapers (talk) 18:44, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much! I have added an info box and made a few layout updates. I will continue to add more content as I find it.

I could not figure out how to make the images fall into a nice neat line, so if someone can fix that, I'd appreciate the help! ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 22:19, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for making the images look great! ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 21:30, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Don Burgess (cinematographer)

added a link pointing to Contact

Larry Francis Lebby

added a link pointing to Dixiana

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 17:52, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Corrected links, thank you! ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 22:44, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, ProfessorKaiFlai. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Drew McKissick, 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) 14:08, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This draft may be deleted - thank you! ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 06:47, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ProfessorKaiFlai. Thank you for your work on Max Friedersdorf. Another editor, Skynxnex, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thanks for the article.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Skynxnex}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Skynxnex (talk) 16:07, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Skynxnex: Thanks for the shout-out! I enjoy filling in the gaps when I can. ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 19:13, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, ProfessorKaiFlai. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by Unexpectedlydian^♯4talk^‽ 08:23, 6 June 2024 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).[reply]

Hello, ProfessorKaiFlai. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Historic Preservation Book Prize, 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) 03:06, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I have edited the page and request that it be reviewed. ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 17:44, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ProfessorKaiFlai. Thank you for your work on South Carolina Workers Party. Another editor, SunDawn, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thank you for creating the article! I have marked the article as reviewed. Have a blessed day!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 07:47, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@SunDawn: Thank you! I always enjoy filling in knowledge gaps, and Wikipedia gives me the opportunity to do just that. Thanks for taking the time to leave a positive comment! ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 23:12, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ProfessorKaiFlai, I'm working on updates for Scott Bessent's page regarding his political views and related events. I see that you are a member of WP:BLP and that you are interested in people from South Carolina, so I hope will you consider reviewing my suggestions on the Talk page. I would greatly appreciate your assistance. Thank you! MG for Scott Bessent (talk) 13:26, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi MG - I'll be happy to review your suggestions and see if I can do the update. I may do a little additional research, but will try to get this updated in the next few days. ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 14:50, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much. A different editor implemented some of the edits we suggested. For clarity, I went back to the edit request and crossed out the information that has been added to the page. I hope you will still take a look at the request to see if there is anything else that can be added. I appreciate your help. MG for Scott Bessent (talk) 14:47, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I'm letting you know that I removed Black women in American politics from the list of Good Article Nominations. Nominations need someone familiar with the sourcing and content of an article so they can respond to reviewer concerns, so it's usually expected that the nominator is one of the main contributors to the article. Also, it still needs a lot of work before it can be a good article, as it suffers greatly from scope issues and needs more citations. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 22:41, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thank you - I will encourage other editors to continue working on the article and improving it.ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 21:22, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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) 00:45, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]