DZ
DefZone.Net

Kien thuc cong nghe & giai tri

Wiki Article

User talk:Helper2022

Nguồn dữ liệu từ Wikipedia, hiển thị bởi DefZone.Net

Xem trên WikipediaBài ngẫu nhiên khác

Welcome

[edit]

Hello, Helper2022, 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) 22:21, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Archbold Magistrates' Courts Criminal Practice (June 2)

[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 KylieTastic 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. 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.
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.
KylieTastic (talk) 22:21, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, Helper2022! 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! KylieTastic (talk) 22:21, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Archbold Magistrates' Courts Criminal Practice (June 5)

[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 Timtrent were:
That a thing is patently useful does not mean it is notable. Your job is to find suitabel references for it. Wikipedia is not a directory of books that have been published
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. 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.
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.
🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 11:00, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Archbold Magistrates' Courts Criminal Practice (June 13)

[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 Gusfriend were:
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.
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. 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:
Only references are item itself.
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.
Gusfriend (talk) 07:51, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Archbold Magistrates' Courts Criminal Practice has a new comment

[edit]
I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Archbold Magistrates' Courts Criminal Practice. Thanks! 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 12:40, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Archbold Magistrates' Courts Criminal Practice (October 28)

[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 Onel5969 was:
This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:
Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. 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:
Simply not enough in-depth coverage to meet WP:GNG.
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.
Onel5969 TT me 13:24, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Archbold Magistrates' Courts Criminal Practice

[edit]

Information icon Hello, Helper2022. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Archbold Magistrates' Courts Criminal Practice, 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) 14:02, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Main criminal law texts in England and Wales (November 2)

[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 Qcne was:
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:
See WP:NLIST. We'd need sourcing that discusses this list as a whole.
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.
qcne (talk) 17:02, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Smith, Hogan and Ormerod's Criminal Law, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Matthew Gibson. 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.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 07:54, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ashworth's Principles of Criminal Law moved to draftspace

[edit]

Thanks for your contributions to Ashworth's Principles of Criminal Law. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit the draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 05:39, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And I have just moved it back because it obviously satisfies WP:GNG and WP:NBOOK. The pair of you need to stop this right now. Don't create articles without adequate sources and don't draftify articles without doing an adequate search for sources. James500 (talk) 06:30, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

About your message

[edit]

Hello. I have read the message you put on my talk page. I think the solution is probably to put a paragraph at the top of the article that says something like "It has been repeatedly said that the pre-eminent practitioner texts are one or more of Archbold, Blackstone and Stone (and formerly Russell); and the courts themselves keep copies of Archbold/Blackstone; and the leading academic/student texts are [whatever they are]." In the case of the practitioner works, I can cite that quite easily with the list of sources I have been compiling in the articles such as [1] [2] [3] [4] etc. In the case of academic or student books, I really don't know what the pre-eminent books are, so a search for sources will have to be made, though I do suspect your right about Smith and Hogan. I should emphasise that any statement about pre-eminence etc must be cited to independent sources, and we need to determine how widely accepted the views in those sources are. Best regards. James500 (talk) 00:26, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edit reversion

[edit]

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) 11:40, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

November 2025

[edit]

Copyright problem icon Your edit to J. W. Cecil Turner has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for information on how to contribute your work appropriately. For legal reasons, Wikipedia strictly cannot host copyrighted text or images from print media or digital platforms without an appropriate and verifiable license. Contributions infringing on copyright will be removed. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:41, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited J. W. Cecil Turner, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gallantry.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 22:17, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on Hannah Quirk (legal academic)

[edit]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Hannah Quirk (legal academic), may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

  • A missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 00:02, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Richard Buxton (judge), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Exeter College.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:54, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

December 2025

[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm TonySt. I noticed that you recently removed content from J. W. Cecil Turner without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. tony 22:10, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited J. W. Cecil Turner, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Farnborough.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:59, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

[edit]

Hi Helper2022. Thank you for your work on Peter Morrish (barrister). Another editor, Klbrain, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thanks for creating a biography for this barrister, best known as a legal author. Notability is likely given the Times biography. I've added some subheadings, which helpful to distinguish the lede, and to guide readers to content they might be interested in. Note that in lists of published works, a link to the work itself doesn't justify the notability of the work in question; I hence suggest just listing them directly, rather than via a citation.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Klbrain}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Klbrain (talk) 00:13, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

[edit]

Hi Helper2022. Thank you for your work on Ian McLean (judge). Another editor, Klbrain, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thanks for another helpful biography. I've linked him through Wikidata, and added 'authority control' here, which I think is a helpful whenever you create biographies for figures with a significant publication output.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Klbrain}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Klbrain (talk) 01:39, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Courtney Kenny (British politician), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages JP and FBA.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:53, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Hannah Quirk

[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Hannah Quirk, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Randykitty (talk) 22:55, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm Deb. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles should be written objectively, using independent sources, and from a neutral perspective. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you.

You appear to have a close connection to a subject about which you have written on Wikipedia that raises concerns about a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged.

Anyone with a conflict of interest must avoid or exercise great caution when:

  1. editing articles related to you, your family or colleagues, your organization or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with,
  2. participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors,
  3. linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam);
    and you must always:
  4. avoid breaching relevant policies and guidelines, especially neutral point of view, verifiability, and autobiography.

Note that you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure. Even if you are not being paid, you are expected to disclose any close connection with the subject of the article, using the connected contributor template.

For more details about what constitutes a conflict of interest, please see Wikipedia:Conflict of Interest. Thank you.

Deb (talk) 13:12, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]