Dee

Cite error: The named reference FECase was invoked but never defined >>> see https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Family_Survival_Trust&diff=527331236&oldid=464362217 Please take a look. --Frze ^{> talk} 12:23, 10 October 2013 (UTC)Reply

  Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Planned Parenthood. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Your use of the word "supposedly" is a gross error of neutrality. Binksternet (talk) 20:58, 31 December 2014 (UTC)Reply

I did not add any personal analysis. Information is self published by Planned Parenthood and therefore it is not a trusted information. Article should not hide it and present it as a fact. NPOV style (who says what) should be used. But the sentence is OK even without any word you mentioned could be supposedly gross error of neutrality, so therefore word i gone, but the fact is presented as is according to the source, not as simple fact. There are different historical sources showing that Margaret Sanger believed differently. NPOV is not a matter of word filters, whole sentences and meaning should be evaluated. --DeeMusil (talk) 22:02, 31 December 2014 (UTC)Reply

Hi Dee. Over at the ANI discussion, I see you said someone "Then speculated on my UC membership and COI instead of asking me." I'll take that as an invitation to ask. So, do you have any connection with the Unification Church that might fall under WP:COI policy? Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:34, 6 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

Already answered, but no --Dee (talk) 10:11, 6 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

Do you seriously consider being (at least formerly) the official press spokesman for the Unification Church in the Czech Republic to not be a COI? Really? Hemiauchenia (talk) 17:16, 6 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

This is far, far away in history in a small country in the middle of Europe, with an issue occurring once per year if frequent... my situation changed a long time ago. So I feel not to be in COI or biased in any way. --Dee (talk) 21:20, 6 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

Your "feeling" in incorrect. You have an obvious COI. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:35, 8 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

An article you recently created, Xray (Test Management), is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more in-depth coverage about the subject itself, with citations from reliable, independent sources in order to show it meets WP:GNG. It should have at least three, to be safe. And please remember that interviews, as primary sources, do not count towards GNG.(?) 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.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:35, 29 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

User:Onel5969 You are actually not right and present the information incorrectly when you state that at least 3 are necessary to be safe: rules see that differently: "There is no fixed number of sources required since sources vary in quality and depth of coverage, but multiple sources are generally expected". Misinformation is not a good start... If we see "multiple", then 2 is enough as an absolute minimum to prove notability. The article already has 2 sources, Medium.com and TestManagement.com; the sources are independent reviews of the testing tool on media targeted to QA and testing community and, therefore are ok, to prove notability. There is, by the way, a definition of x-ray ticket types, which s complete and correct on their page for descriptive purposes. It could be removed if you have issues with that, but there would be a link to the dev company if I use an infobox, anyway... If you want to extend the article by other sources, feel free to use the template to find others... but overuse of the Draft templating is not helping Wikipedia in any way. --Dee (talk) 22:54, 29 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

Medium (website) is not a reliable source. It is a blog hosting platform. Cullen328 (talk) 23:15, 29 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

The first source is little more than a blog, and not reliable. Test management is a paid review, and the third is a primary source. Your additional source is a student thesis, so again, does not go towards notability. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 23:30, 29 April 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 Onel5969 was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

• in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
• reliable
• secondary
• independent of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

The first source is little more than a blog, and not reliable. Test management is a paid review, and the third is a primary source. Your additional source is a student thesis, so again, does not go towards notability.

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:Xray (Test Management) 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.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 23:29, 29 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hello, Dee! 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! Onel5969 TT me 23:29, 29 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

You have to missing something. ... 1) the designation as a new editor offends me 2) you have no proof of paid review on testmanagement.com, they do reviews of different test tools overtime, including directly compeptetive to Xray, as is Zephyr. Anyway, added 2 independent about dev company driving its flagship Xray acquisition... it should be enough for notability. --Dee (talk) 23:56, 30 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

  Hello, Dee. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Xray (Test Management), 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) 01:03, 1 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

 

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

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!} 01:00, 1 November 2023 (UTC)Reply