User talk:Bernhard.rulla

This is Bernhard.rulla's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Hello, Bernhard.rulla, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask at the help desk, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to help you get started. Happy editing! KylieTastic (talk) 15:48, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started

Finding your way around

Editing articles

Getting help

Frequently asked questions
Cheatsheet
Our help forum for new editors, the Teahouse
The Help Desk, for more advanced questions
Help pages
Article Wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles

How you can help

Community Portal
Join a WikiProject
Follow Wikipedia etiquette
Practice civility
Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community

Your submission at Articles for creation: Sandra Mae Frank (November 26)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by 0xDeadbeef was:

The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you.

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:Sandra Mae Frank 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.

0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 11:24, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Bernhard.rulla! 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! 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 11:24, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Problems with upload of File:Sandra Mae Frank.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Sandra Mae Frank.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from, who created it, or what the copyright status is. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 12:30, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have uploaded a new version of the photo with source and author. Is that enough? Please re-evaluate. Bernhard.rulla (talk) 11:32, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Sandra Mae Frank (November 26)

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

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.

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Also see WP:NACTOR

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:Sandra Mae Frank 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.

KylieTastic (talk) 15:48, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

thank you very much for reviewing my article draft. This is my very first article. I understand the words of the remarks.

Would it be possible to explain with an example from my article where...

... the references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. The woman is an actress like the other thousands of actresses with articles on Wikipedia, so why would the article not qualify in the same way?
... they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions). How do I distinguish a passing mention from a non passing mention?
... WP:NACTOR, "significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions". How do I assess/document the notability of this actress' films, TV shows etc ?

I experience the referenced explanations are very generic and vague and I am unsure how to improve here.

Would it be possible to give me some more detailed guidance? Bernhard.rulla (talk) 16:43, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bernhard.rulla luckily I spotted this but note that not everyone watches user talk pages so it's best to 'ping' someone by linking to the username such as [[User:KylieTastic|]] or {{u|KylieTastic}}, also it's often better to ask at a more open forum like the Wikipedia:Teahouse where you can get input from lots of experience editors. As for the article, yes there are many articles for other actresses but still only a small number of all those that exist. In general all new articles on Wikipedia have to show the subject is notable (See WP:N) which in most cases requires significant coverage (WP:SIGCOV) in multiple independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS). Your submission currently has large amounts of unsourced content which is one issue the other is showing notability. The first source is dubious as are many such bio sites - it has no indication who writes these, some are paid for promotion, but the non Neutral point of view is a clear sign of probably unreliable: "exceptional acting abilities", "she is a pretty girl with an amazing and cool personality", "This stunning actress", "according to rumors" reads like a fan page. The broadwayworld.com is not only fairly basic but the "Edit" button shows it is user-generated content (or some is) so not a reliable source. The emmys.com is ok, reliable and has depth but much is quotes which is not independent. Then a video by her and another mostly about what she says, so not independent. Please note I am not saying she is not notable enough for an article just that the sources do not yet show it. Hope that help explain things a bit, Regards KylieTastic (talk) 17:21, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
KylieTastic

Hello,

thank you very much for the informative reply. Yes, you helped me understanding a bit better the requirements for a Wikipedia article and how to evaluate sources before using them. Especially the comparison of broadwayworld.com and emmy.com was very informative.

I will work on that topic further and do more reasearch.

Best regards,

--Bernhard.rulla (talk) 18:43, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of File:Sandra Mae Frank.jpg

The page File:Sandra Mae Frank.jpg has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the file appeared to be a blatant copyright infringement of https://www.emmys.com/news/online-originals/sandra-mae-frank. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition has been deleted. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use it — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, you may contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you may open a discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion Review. Primefac (talk) 13:15, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Sandra Mae Frank (December 27)

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 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:

Still not clear how they pass WP:NACTOR?

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:Sandra Mae Frank 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.

Theroadislong (talk) 17:18, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Theroadislong Hello, thanks a lot for helping me with your review of my draft. I am new to Wikipedia and still searching my way through the many rules. The article for "notability of an actor" is quite short, so I quote it here:

Actors, voice actors, comedians, opinion makers, pornographic actors,[12] models, and celebrities:

* Has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions;

or

* Has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment.

Do I understand correctly, that a film, tv show or stage performance is notable when it already has a published Wikipedia article? If not, how should I evaluate? This all seems so fuzzy to me, can you help or should I address the Teahouse about this?

Regards,

Bernhard.rulla (talk) 17:39, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes a film, tv show or stage performance is notable when it already has a published Wikipedia article, but appearing in one doesn't necessarily make somebody notable. Theroadislong (talk) 22:06, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Teahouse

People sometimes make an entry at Teahouse and then change their mind. As long as no other editor has replied, the creators are within their rights to delete what was added. Not true once there has been a reply. David notMD (talk) 12:28, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @David notMD thanks for that reply!

I looked for a "delete" or "discard" button or something comparable that would delete the question which I posted before. I could not find anything, so I either did not search enough or it does not exist. I appreciate your advice in either case. Best regards, 2001:9E8:4E80:5600:D028:31A1:2FF9:1203 (talk) 13:46, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I wrote this. ;) Bernhard.rulla (talk) 13:50, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Sandra Mae Frank

Hello, Bernhard.rulla. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Sandra Mae Frank, 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) 13:02, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Sandra Mae Frank has been accepted

Sandra Mae Frank, 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!

gobonobo ⁺ ^c 18:38, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed 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 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:37, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed 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 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:48, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]