User talk:Mewloading
Welcome Mewloading!
I'm Galendalia, one of the other editors here, and I hope you decide to stay and help contribute to this amazing repository of knowledge.
| Some pages of helpful information to get you started: | Some common sense Dos and Don'ts:
|
| If you need further help, you can: | or you can: | or even: |
Alternatively, leave me a message at my talk page or type {{helpme}} here on your talk page and someone will try to help.
There are many ways you can contribute to Wikipedia. Here are a few ideas:
|
|
To get some practice editing you can use a sandbox. You can create your own personal sandbox for use any time. It's perfect for working on bigger projects. Then for easy access in the future, you can put {{My sandbox}} on your user page. By the way, seeing as you haven't created a user page yet, simply click here to start it.
Please remember to:
- Always sign your posts on talk pages. You can do this either by clicking on the
button on the edit toolbar or by typing four tildes ~~~~at the end of your post. This will automatically insert your signature, a link to your talk page, and a timestamp. - Leave descriptive edit summaries for your edits. Doing so helps other editors understand what changes you have made and why you made them.
Sincerely, Galendalia CVU Member \ Chat Me Up 18:17, 13 May 2020 (UTC) (Leave me a message)
Galendalia CVU Member \ Chat Me Up 18:17, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!
[edit]
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by Galendalia CVU Member \ Chat Me Up 18:16, 13 May 2020 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).
Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!
[edit]Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 18:44, 13 May 2020 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).
AfC notification: Draft:Mamma Angola has a new comment
[edit]
Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!
[edit]Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by Theroadislong (talk) 19:00, 13 May 2020 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).
May 2020
[edit]
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Draft:Mamma Angola, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. Theroadislong (talk) 19:34, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
Excuse me, but I have a reason for the removal of observation above. I have a solid academic background, I am a professor, with PhD at a renowned institution, I lost my time trying to do a good contribution here, I wrote an article full of sources and with well elaborated sections - so much so that the article was accepted and published in another language without question - and this Wikipedia contributor (above), roughly speaking, without foundation, without justification, and simply classifies my contribution as without sources, without foundation, without structure (???). Please, prove it, show your sources to justify what you are saying. Or are you only use the power you have because you volunteer and know the rules of Wikipedia? Please, who should we turn to for people of common sense to serve us? One perceives a bad intention implicit in this intervention made by this person. This is my justification and I would like it to be published, in the name of the correct academic procedure in terms of sources and references. Who is the person who judges himself/herself above others and has been intervening in the text in a destructive and disrespectful way? Just because he is a Wikipedia volunteer? I can also volunteer!
I am sorry, I do not need this. I am loosing my time trying to do my first contribution here and I face something crazy, someone who decide attack me? For what reason? I do not need you threaten me of "not publishing" my article, saying I am protesting because I want my article published. Please, use your power (as are you doing now) and DO NOT PUBLISH IT. I appreciate. It is a proof there is something wrong here. I have more what to do. I am leaving this. Thank you very much. I hope someone of common sense take care of this situation. I am out! (NOTE; WIKIPEDIA NEEDS PEOPLE LIKE ME, WHO HAS STRONG BACKGROUND, TO CONTRIBUTE. IT IS A PITY MY FIRST TIME HERE I HAVE THIS BAD SITUATION, WITH SOMEONE THIN HE/SE IS EMPOWERED TO HUMILIATE, WITHOUT REASON. I DO NOT NEED THIS. MY GOOGLE SCHOLAR IS FULL OF PUBLICATION AND CITATION. I AM OUT! I WISH SOMEONE MORE RESPONSIBLE COULD READ THIS AND CAME IN MY ASSISTANCE).
personal attacks
[edit]Please don't make personal attacks as you did at Draft:Mamma Angola my comments were put there to help you get your draft published. The English Wikipedia is different to the Portuguese Wikipedia. You have NOT submitted your draft for review, it will not be published until you do. Theroadislong (talk) 19:56, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
I am sorry, I do not need this. I am loosing my time trying to do my first contribution here and I face something crazy, someone who decide attack me? For what reason? I do not need you threaten me of "not publishing" my article, saying I am protesting because I want my article published. Please, use your power (as are you doing now) and DO NOT PUBLISH IT. I appreciate. It is a proof there is something wrong here. I have more what to do. I am leaving this. Thank you very much. I hope someone of common sense take care of this situation. I am out! (NOTE; WIKIPEDIA NEEDS PEOPLE LIKE ME, WHO HAS STRONG BACKGROUND, TO CONTRIBUTE. IT IS A PITY MY FIRST TIME HERE I HAVE THIS BAD SITUATION, WITH SOMEONE THIN HE/SE IS EMPOWERED TO HUMILIATE, WITHOUT REASON. I DO NOT NEED THIS. MY GOOGLE SCHOLAR IS FULL OF PUBLICATION AND CITATION. I AM OUT! I WISH SOMEONE MORE RESPONSIBLE COULD READ THIS AND CAME IN MY ASSISTANCE).
- You have entirely miss-understood the situation, you need to click the large blue "submit" button in order to submit your draft! My comments were merely to help you get the draft accepted. Theroadislong (talk) 20:06, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
- I would point out, Theroadislong, that Draft:Mamma Angola was never placed under WP:AFC and thus using the AfC mechanism was not approprsite in my view. Not all drafts go through AfC, and drafts can indeed be published to the main article space without going through an AfC review.
- That being said, Mewloading, Theroadislong is a very experienced editor here, and the comments were indeed likely to be helpful, and to help the draft conform to the style here on en.Wikipedia. The draft as it stands is not as clear as it might be in regard to the extent that it is an article about the book Mamma Angola and the extent to which it is about the issues dealt with in that book. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 20:07, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
- I urge calm on all. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 20:07, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
- But DESiegel Draft:Mamma Angola WAS placed under WP:AFC otherwise I would not have commented? Theroadislong (talk) 20:14, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
- Really, Theroadislong? I don't see any AfC Templates on the draft before this edit where you left a comment. In what edit was this draft placed under AfC. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 20:28, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
- Did User:UnitedStatesian move it to AFC here [1] ? My comment was left using the yellow comment box at the top of the draft. I have reviewed many, many, thousands of drafts, my comment was constructive and aimed to help the user get his draft published. I fail to see how removing it is helping? And indeed if it was submitted for review I would accept it although it does need some editing for clarity that is not a reason for it be declined.Theroadislong (talk) 20:34, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
- Really, Theroadislong? I don't see any AfC Templates on the draft before this edit where you left a comment. In what edit was this draft placed under AfC. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 20:28, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
- But DESiegel Draft:Mamma Angola WAS placed under WP:AFC otherwise I would not have commented? Theroadislong (talk) 20:14, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) No, that edit did not place the draft under AfC, Theroadislong. The comment feature is available on any page in draft space, but should not be used unless an AfC template has already been place, with some indication that the original drafter wanted this, as a rule. As AfC-style comments were never requested there, and this one seems only to be inflaming emotions, I think it better to remove it. I am well aware of your long and productive history of doing AfC reviews. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 20:51, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you for the clarification DESiegel I had not realised the distinction between a draft and an AFC draft. Can we just move the draft to article space and work on improving it there? Or otherwise it's going to sit there doing nothing if it's not submitted for review. Theroadislong (talk) 21:02, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) No, that edit did not place the draft under AfC, Theroadislong. The comment feature is available on any page in draft space, but should not be used unless an AfC template has already been place, with some indication that the original drafter wanted this, as a rule. As AfC-style comments were never requested there, and this one seems only to be inflaming emotions, I think it better to remove it. I am well aware of your long and productive history of doing AfC reviews. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 20:51, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
- I see that there are people with common sense who can understand what is happening. Thank you DES. Most likely I still don't know how to use the codes and modes of intervention here at Wikipedia, which made me make mistakes, have doubts and respond in inappropriate places. See what I wrote below (I don't know if in the right space), to say goodbauy to Wikipedia. I am very hurt and I intend to leave and never give my contribution to Wikipedia again (Note: in Portuguese, everytime an editor put a note, he or she say grateful words, welcoming the contributors. Here, the first person did it..and DESiesel seems to be this kind of perdon. Thank you): I am sorry, I don't intend to create any kind of problem (or war...whatever!). You can imagine that when I decided to write this article I lost lots of hours from my students, my obligations at university, just to give a good contribution to Wikipedia (and considering my article was accepted at Portuguese Wikipedia there is a good chance to have this ready to readers in English too - the book is good. It is in the Library of Congress and it has helped many students from poor countries in Africa - some who do not speak Portuguese and can read in English - that's my intent writing the article). I think many people who does contributions also lost time doing that. I am an academic, a respected person and all I need (once I am new here) was some guidance about how to make my article goes from "draft" to publishing. Maybe I had put my article in a wrong place. Suddenly, however, my post was inundated with opinions - and I never get information about how to do to have my work placed in the principal area of Wikipedia. I understand I have to make it better. I also did it in the case of Portuguese Wikipedia. The worst was seeing someone (without base, without "source" - please, proof, with sources, what you are saying, that there are more sources to be mentioned in the article about the book than I did), in a destructive way, putting a huge note in the beginning of my article, disqualifying it. This person is acting disrespectfully towards a new Wikipedia contributor (instead to incentive to continue - as others did). This is harassment and a disproportionate use of power, without foundation, without meaning. He or she accused me of responding to him/her with unsubstantiated comments saying that I am "making personal attacks to see my article published". I'm not!. Please DO NOT PUBLISH IT. This was my first and last time here. A great pity, because I'm sure that Wikipedia needs people with my skills. Thank you very much. I regret the time I lost writing this article.
Going Forward
[edit]Mewloading, I hope that you will reconsider. I would like to work with you on this article draft. You should b e aware that once something has been posted to Wikipedia, it is irrevocably released under the CC-BY-SA license and may be edited and reused by anyone,. including to make a Wikipedia article out of, as long as proper attribution is given. I do urge you to consider that the comment by editor Theroadislong was not intend to attack you or your work, merely to identify areas which that editor thought in need of improvement. Ihaave had my7 work here far more sharply critizied, and spent much time on edits which were eventually undone, but i still find it worth while. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 20:59, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
- Dear DESiegel, I appreciate that you spent your time following my case. And thanks for your words and guidance. I know that Wikipedia is made by people who contribute with articles (as I have done for the first time) and, above all, by the work of volunteer and dedicated contributors. I am grateful to these people for this - and many years ago, when many university professors wrinkled their noses at Wikipedia - they still do - I understood Wikipedia's greater purpose - which is to help a lot of people all over the word. Yes, I can reconsider my position (thanks to your words) and see how my contribution can be improved and eventually published. My first question is this: did I happen to post my article in the wrong place? I followed the recommendations and someone, at one point, called my article "draft". I would like to know how to submit my article to a serious editor (or several) who could give me suggestions for improving the work, so that it serves its main purpose which is to help people (in this case, people - especially in Africa - who do not read Portuguese but read in English and who would like to use the theoretical foundations in the book for their academic work, most of them doctoral theses and master's dissertations). If you consult official websites that control citations, you will see that the work has deserved citations and there are countless theses that were made in large part based on the innovative theoretical foundations that the book brought to, so to speak, the "African side". I would like (with the article) to serve these people. I will be grateful to receive your guidance (or from someone who can do this). I am sorry to bother you, but I confess that I have not yet mastered the codes, letters, and signs that must be used on Wikipedia for communication to prosper. Perhaps I am getting old or have little time to consider how to proceed. Thank you very much. I will be very grateful to receive an answer.
- Mewloading, No, you did not put my0our article in the wrong place, and none of the problems that occurred had anything to do with the exact place that was chosen. hen a text is a start on an article, but seems not ready to be exposed to readers, it is placed in "draft space". This simply means that its name starts with "Draft:" form the moment. Rules are somewhat relaxed in draft space, so that many texts which would have been deleted in article space merely get a note on how to fix things in draft sp0ace. Once a draft is judged ready for the main article, space, it is "moved" there (this really just means changing the article, title so, it no longer starts with 'draft:") Drafts are notm indexed by Google, and articles do not link to drafts. The normal standard is that when a draft would not,be likely to be deleted if someone nominated it for deletion, it may be moved to article space, but many editors prefer to polish in draft state a bit more than that.
- Many drafts, including most by editors new to Wikipedia, are under the Articles for creation project. This encourages experienced editors to comment on drafts, and uses a system where comments are placed at the top of the draft, so a new editor will not overlook them. These comments are normally removed when the draft is moved to article space -- they are somewhat like copy-edit notes on an early draft of a manuscript, what used tom be called blue-penciling. However, not all drafts use the AfC system, and I think we will keep the Mamma Angola draft out of it.
- I will be happy to do all that I can to help turn this draft into a valid Wikipedia article, of the highest wuality I can help achieve, within the limits of Wikipedia policy, guideline, and style. I will do a thorough review as soon as possible, i hope within 24 hours, although it might be longer. In that im will discuss what changes I think should be made. I wil make direct edits, particularly for style issues. As you are probably already aware, all versions of a page are saved, nd any change can be undone with a single click at any time, nor will I be offended if some ofm my suggestions are rejected by you.
- If you reply here, please ping me by including the character sequence
{{U|DESiegel}}as part of a signed comment. This will automatically send me a notice of the comment the next time I log in or edit or view a page here. Note that the ping dopes not work unless it mis signed in the same edit where the {{U}} template is added.- If you ahve any questions, you can ask them by making such a comment at any time. I am not retired, and am working from home during the present situation, as so many are, so there may be some delay in my responses. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 14:18, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
- Dear DESiegel,
- If you ahve any questions, you can ask them by making such a comment at any time. I am not retired, and am working from home during the present situation, as so many are, so there may be some delay in my responses. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 14:18, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
I appreciate so much your comment and, of course, I accept your contribution so that the article can finally be published on Wikipedia. When it is published, we will achieve its primary objective, which is to serve people interested in the topic, especially students from African countries. I imagined that my approach to Wikipedia could have surprises. One was to see, for example, one of the editors questioning the size of the article and saying that articles about books authored by famous authors are smaller than Mamma Angola’s. And? What if the person who wrote the famous author's article did not have time or decided do not go down to details that, perhaps, might even be important to the reader (as is often the case)? Or another editor who commented on the fact that the book Mamma Angola has become a “hit” among graduate students in Africa. This is a verifiable finding due to the number of citations in doctoral theses and master's dissertations with whom we are familiar here at the academy (not to mention the countless works done by undergraduates students). The editor thought that "hit" should not appear in an encyclopedia. This shows a complete narrowness of view on the subject. I respect the opinion, but I cannot agree. I confess that I am sad, because I imagine that Wikipedia could be the starting point of a future connection between the brains of all people, sharing knowledge, as Elon Musk wishes, for example. My intention in writing this article has no particular, promotional, or whatever purpose. I have seen on Wikipedia clearly promotional works by models, beginning athletes and actors, and even academics and entrepreneurs. This contribution is only intended to help some African students with whom I have contact here in the United States, who do not understand Portuguese. Many are able to translate part of the book, but an article that summarizes some ideas about the book - including the experience of the author writing the book - can be very useful for researchers who are starting the academic life (the average age of doctoral student has dropped greatly in the countries of Africa and Latin America in recent years). This book was one of the first to show up in Africa using a well-structured analysis of a theory that was also a hit (also verifiable!) among scholars in the 1960s onwards. And the economic policies that were influenced by the theory after that allowed to forge the global system that we have today (very imperfect, of course, but, so walks humanity). Yes, modestly I accept your and other contributions that can help the text go to the main area of Wikipedia. I am sorry to have little time to dedicate myself to this. I am also working from home, but we end up being very alone and doing a lot of things that others could do to help. Time becomes scarce. And I regret not knowing these rules of editing, contact, communication used in the Wikipedia system (these little symbols, I suffer a lot with this). I will use the symbol you recommended so that my communication about the article can connect with you. Thank you very much and enjoy your day. MewloadingMewloading (talk) 20:02, 14 May 2020 (UTC) DESiegel code>{{U|DESiegel}}
May 2020
[edit]
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Draft:Mamma Angola; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
- Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
- Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Nithintalk 20:07, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
I am sorry, I don't intend to create any kind of problem (or war...whatever!). You can imagine that when I decided to write this article I lost lots of hours from my students, my obligations at university, just to give a good contribution to Wikipedia (and considering my article was accepted at Portuguese Wikipedia there is a good chance to have this ready to readers in English too - the book is good. It is in the Library of Congress and it has helped many students from poor countries in Africa - some who do not speak Portuguese and can read in English - that's my intent writing the article). I think many people who does contributions also lost time doing that. I am an academic, a respected person and all I need (once I am new here) was some guidance about how to make my article goes from "draft" to publishing. Maybe I had put my article in a wrong place. Suddenly, however, my post was inundated with opinions - and I never get information about how to do to have my work placed in the principal area of Wikipedia. I understand I have to make it better. I also did it in the case of Portuguese Wikipedia. The worst was seeing someone (without base, without "source" - please, proof, with sources, what you are saying, that there are more sources to be mentioned in the article about the book than I did), in a destructive way, putting a huge note in the beginning of my article, disqualifying it. This person is acting disrespectfully towards a new Wikipedia contributor (instead to incentive to continue - as others did). This is harassment and a disproportionate use of power, without foundation, without meaning. He or she accused me of responding to him/her with unsubstantiated comments saying that I am "making personal attacks to see my article published". I'm not!. Please DO NOT PUBLISH IT. This was my first and last time here. A great pity, because I'm sure that Wikipedia needs people with my skills. Thank you very much. I regret the time I lost writing this article.
- CIVILIZED SOLUTION: DESiegel (Wikipedia contributor) used the white flag and is trying to help. I answered to him (after decided to abandon my contribution) with this message: Dear DESiegel, I appreciate that you spent your time following my case. And thanks for your words and guidance. I know that Wikipedia is made by people who contribute with articles (as I have done for the first time) and, above all, by the work of volunteer and dedicated contributors. I am grateful to these people for this - and many years ago, when many university professors wrinkled their noses at Wikipedia - they still do - I understood Wikipedia's greater purpose - which is to help a lot of people all over the word. Yes, I can reconsider my position (thanks to your words) and see how my contribution can be improved and eventually published. My first question is this: did I happen to post my article in the wrong place? I followed the recommendations and someone, at one point, called my article "draft". I would like to know how to submit my article to a serious editor (or several) who could give me suggestions for improving the work, so that it serves its main purpose which is to help people (in this case, people - especially in Africa - who do not read Portuguese but read in English and who would like to use the theoretical foundations in the book for their academic work, most of them doctoral theses and master's dissertations). If you consult official websites that control citations, you will see that the work has deserved citations and there are countless theses that were made in large part based on the innovative theoretical foundations that the book brought to, so to speak, the "African side". I would like (with the article) to serve these people. I will be grateful to receive your guidance (or from someone who can do this). I am sorry to bother you, but I confess that I have not yet mastered the codes, letters, and signs that must be used on Wikipedia for communication to prosper. Perhaps I am getting old or have little time to consider how to proceed. Thank you very much. I will be very grateful to receive an answer.
Your thread has been archived
[edit]
|
Hi Mewloading! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse,
|
DESiegel Hello DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs I very much appreciate your encouraging communications (some days ago). I am here to say that I have not forgotten my article (Mamma Angola). I'm just a little busy, with my students. I will come back. As soon as possible, I will examine the text, making corrections, following its recommendations and the Wikipedia rules. Thank you very much. DESiegel I am sorry: I am not familiarized with these codes at Wikipedia.Mewloading (talk) 19:53, 1 June 2020 (UTC)Mewloading.
Your draft article, Draft:Mamma Angola
[edit]
Hello, Mewloading. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Mamma Angola".
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.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 18:33, 13 December 2020 (UTC)