User talk:Cosycoin

Welcome!

Hello, Cosycoin, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially your edits to Leptaxis wollastoni. 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.

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! — LeoFrank ^Talk 10:03, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nice to meet you! - Some users hate infoboxes, - if you want to avoid conflict, only put them on your own articles. You will edit happier doing so ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:56, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't listen ;) - Going on the talk page of one who hates infoboxes won't make life happier for you, nor her. See? Consider to just let go, or even revert that question. - General advice: when you see a blank talk page, you can almost feel that something is wrong. Tread with greatest care, - we don't want to hurt people, right? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:20, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That isn’t the talk page of someone who hates infoboxes as far as I know. It’s just the creator of the article and I was asking them for permission to add the infobox to their article as that was something that the person ~~who hates infoboxes~~ recommended me to do. You seem to have got the two people confused. Thanks anyway for your help it’s greatly appreciated, Cosycoin (talk) 16:48, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No. Please listen, repeating: add infoboxes to your "own" articles, only. If you add elsewhere, and are reverted, go away. Saves time. I wrote that in 2017, did you know? (Look up my talk archive if you don't believe me.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:56, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I see. I’m a bit confused about the whole situation with Sagaciousphil but I understand that I should just add infoboxes to my own articles. Thanks and sorry for the confusion, Cosycoin (talk) 17:03, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The whole thing remains a mystery to me. I learned in 2012 that there are infobox wars since 2005, and managed to get the reputation of an "infoboxen warrior" just because I find them useful. When I wrote "Some users hate infoboxes" I didn't mean SchroCat but how could you know? Look, and then leave the topic ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:07, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the information. :) I’ll definitely just stick to infoboxing my own articles now. I didn’t realise until today that infobox wars were a thing. Cosycoin (talk) 22:17, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Pixman (May 7)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Theroadislong was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject—see the general guideline on notability, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

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:Pixman 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:Pixman, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Theroadislong (talk) 10:59, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Cosycoin! 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! Theroadislong (talk) 10:59, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Pixman (May 7)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by KylieTastic was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject—see the general guideline on notability, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

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:Pixman 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:Pixman, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

KylieTastic (talk) 15:49, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Earl Crag (May 9)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Gene93k was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject—see the general guideline on notability, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Needs non-trivial coverage by reliable published sources.

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:Earl Crag 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:Earl Crag, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

• Gene93k (talk) 05:05, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.)

Precordium (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Body and Examination

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 23:00, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 18

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Drystone Radio, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Refurbishment and Gala (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:13, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: East Coast FM (Scotland) (May 28)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Siddiqsazzad001 was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Not notable yet.

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:East Coast FM (Scotland) 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:East Coast FM (Scotland), click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Siddiqsazzad001 <Talk/> 09:48, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Wainman's Pinnacle has been accepted

Wainman's Pinnacle, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can 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.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Espresso Addict (talk) 14:38, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Earl Crag has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Earl Crag. Thanks! Espresso Addict (talk) 15:37, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'd encourage you to either resubmit it and ping me, or move it to mainspace yourself as you are autoconfirmed. Espresso Addict (talk) 15:49, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Earl Crag has been accepted

Earl Crag, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can 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.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Espresso Addict (talk) 18:46, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Soulbury Stone

The Soulbury Stone is already covered in more detail at Soulbury#Glacial erratic rock so I've redirected the title to the existing text. However the reference you cited isn't used there. I don't want to steal credit for your research, so could you add your ref to the Soulbury article please? Cabayi (talk) 20:05, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please read

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding discussions about infoboxes and to edits adding, deleting, collapsing, or removing verifiable information from infoboxes, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

—SerialNumber54129^{paranoia /cheap sh*t room} 15:38, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Cosycoin. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Cosycoin. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:East Coast FM (Scotland)

Hello, Cosycoin. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "East Coast FM".

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 edit the submission 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.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. JMHamo (talk) 10:55, 29 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]