User talk:DigitalPhantoms

Welcome!

Hello, DigitalPhantoms, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially your edits to WFFF-TV. 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! Mvcg66b3r (talk) 16:11, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

Hi DigitalPhantoms! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

Mission 1	Mission 2	Mission 3	Mission 4	Mission 5	Mission 6	Mission 7
Say Hello to the World	An Invitation to Earth	Small Changes, Big Impact	The Neutral Point of View	The Veil of Verifiability	The Civility Code	Looking Good Together

Get Help

About The Wikipedia Adventure | Hang out in the Interstellar Lounge

-- 16:15, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Brenda Delgado (November 16)

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

the texas monthly source is very good but the FBI sources don't help notability and so that's the only helpful one - this is weak because being on the Top 10 most wanted list may itself be a claim to notability, but I don't think that's common opinion. Any other 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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Brenda Delgado 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.

PARAKANYAA (talk) 15:53, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have added more sources as there are multiple covering her fugitive status, arrest, trial, and appeals from local NBC, ABC, FOX, and Dallas news stations as well as nationally on Snapped, NBC Dateline, CNN and international coverage by the BBC and Independent. I do believe being in the FBI Top Ten Most Wanted List in its self is notable since second criteria to be added "Second, it must be believed that the nationwide publicity afforded by the program can be of assistance in apprehending the fugitive, who, in turn, should not already be notorious due to other publicity." This is also supported by the FBI stating in multiple cases, but on Dateline about this case specifically, how much publicity this generated internationally for her to be arrested in Mexico. That's being said, it is most likely common opinion that being on the list makes you notable since you have otherwise would not be and the list is to make a person notable for capture. Some others sources by Heavy, and Cinemaholic that may be in the same vein as the Texas Monthly article. DigitalPhantoms (talk) 20:08, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Brenda Delgado has been accepted

Brenda Delgado, 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!

CoconutOctopus talk 20:30, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edit reversion

In this edit here, I reverted some information that appears to be a violation of our copyright policy.

I provided a brief summary of the problem in the edit summary, which should be visible just below my name. You can also click on the "view history" tab in the article to see the recent history of the article. This should be an edit with my name, and a parenthetical comment explaining why your edit was reverted. If that information is not sufficient to explain the situation, please ask.

I do occasionally make mistakes. We get hundreds of reports of potential copyright violations every week, and sometimes there are false positives, for a variety of reasons. (Perhaps the material was moved from another Wikipedia article, or the material was properly licensed but the license information was not obvious, or the material is in the public domain but I didn't realize it was public domain, and there can be other situations generating a report to our Copy Patrol tool that turn out not to be actual copyright violations.) If you think my edit was mistaken, please politely let me know and I will investigate. ~~~~ S Philbrick (Talk) 18:16, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is possible that what I wrote is too similar to the vice article which is difficult when trying to summarize a summary. There's only so much you can remove or change without losing the facts. However, some of the other edits I made having nothing to do with the Vice article. The FBI infobox and his listing as #339 in the lead section, all comes from info on the FBI website. The first paragraph of the winter hill gang was already there and i just added another citation that backed it up. Also his arrested on the personal life section cannot be changed. He was found with three machine pistols attached with silencers. There isn't another way to write that fact. If the Vice article summaries are too close to how they wrote it I will try and rewrite another way. DigitalPhantoms (talk) 18:28, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]