User talk:Mbaugher

  1. Home
  2. Wiki

Welcome!

[edit]

Hello, Mbaugher, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially your edits to Socialist Workers Party (United States). I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help. Need some ideas about what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! JesseRafe (talk) 16:21, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On your false attribution of the paragraph in Alessandro Algardi

[edit]

You erroneously attribute the paragraph in Algardi to some quizlet site; the paragraph reads:

The subject was apt for a papal state seeking to increase its power, since it depicts the historical legend wherein Saint Leo the Great, the first pope to receive the epithet, with supernatural aid, deterred the Huns from looting Rome. From a baroque standpoint it is a moment of divine intervention in the affairs of man. Algardi's patron's message through the relief would be that all viewers should be sternly reminded of the papal capacity to invoke divine retribution against enemies.

That is false. It was not plagiarized. I wrote it. Quizlet, whatever that site is, took it from here and from me. That site freely quotes wikipedia. You need to be more careful in your assertions. I wrote the paragraph to reflect various assessments on the topic. The work itself had a large influence in baroque relief sculpture. It is the frontispiece of Bruce Boucher's monograph of "Italian Baroque Sculpture", and he aptly points out in pages 152-153 how the topic was already influentially depicted by Raphael in the stanza. However, for most Wikipedia readers the reason for utilizing this topic for a prominent St Peter's altar needs elucidation. I am replacing the paragraph. Citations for the paragraph can be attributed to Boucher and other authors.Rococo1700 (talk) 03:01, 2 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies. You might consider adding the citation that was requested for your work instead of leaving it to the likes of me. Mbaugher (talk) 03:16, 2 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Deanna Martin

[edit]

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

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. ✗plicit 06:50, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Deanna Martin (January 23)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Spinster300 were:
This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.
This submission reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Submissions should summarise information in secondary, reliable sources and not contain opinions or original research. Please write about the topic from a neutral point of view in an encyclopedic manner.
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.
Spinster300 (talk) 12:48, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, Mbaugher! 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! Spinster300 (talk) 12:48, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Deanna Martin (August 25)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Ldm1954 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.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
You have to do a major rewrite or this will never be approved.
  • Read other articles to understand what should go in.
  • Read the notability criteria. You describe her, but you don't prove notability.
  • Any major awards? These matter as they prove peer recognition.
  • Remove fluff. Receiving $7000 impresses nobody.
  • Remove the quotes unless they are specifically about her. I noticed that you added many to Supplemental instruction which should similarly be removed.
  • Remove her pubs. It is a short list and hurts the case.
  • Get help
You have to prove notability beyond reasonable doubt. You have a lot of testing to do.
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.
Ldm1954 (talk) 14:25, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]