User talk:J'ai pas vingt ans !
Your GA nomination of Fifty-Sixty
[edit]Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Fifty-Sixty you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. 
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Tbhotch -- Tbhotch (talk) 03:23, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Fifty-Sixty
[edit]The article Fifty-Sixty you nominated as a good article has failed 
; see Talk:Fifty-Sixty for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Tbhotch -- Tbhotch (talk) 05:21, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
An article you recently created, 7e ciel, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Dan arndt (talk) 02:38, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
- I don't know if you read the message in view history... but I clearly stated that I was still working on it. I just wanted to publish it to so I can upload the album image that belongs with it. I have sources and I was planning to use them. Can you please move it back to a normal, viewable article? J'ai pas vingt ans ! (talk) 02:40, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
- HI. We understand, but please bear in mind that all articles must be adequately sourced. Also, reviewers have an extremely heavy workload and may often base their review on the information provided by the reviewing tools. Articles that are not ready for mainspace can be moved to draft by a reviewer after one hour. That should provide normally creators with adequate time to create acceptable articles with the basic requirements. You could consider preparing your articles offline or in your Wikipedia sandbox before posting them in mainspace. Don't hesitate to ask for advice at The Teahouse. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:56, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
AfC notification: Draft:7e ciel has a new comment
[edit]
Your submission at Articles for creation: Toi mon amour (May 14)
[edit]
- If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Toi mon amour 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.
|
Hello, J'ai pas vingt ans !!
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! GoldRomean (talk) 20:40, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
|
I have sent you a note about a page you started
[edit]Hi J'ai pas vingt ans !. Thank you for your work on Dis-moi que l'amour.... Another editor, JSFarman, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:
I did a substantial edit on the article; it was beautifully written but Wikipedia articles are dispassionate and just-the-facts. You may find this guidance helpful. As a writer, you might enjoy this essay about elegant variations.
This isn't a great article but it's a great illustration of how descriptions of songs are sourced on Wikipedia.
Thanks for writing the article! I hope you stick around!
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|JSFarman}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
JSFarman (talk) 05:11, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
- Rather than deleting or editing the content you added to Mes courants électriques, I tagged the article for tone, sourcing, and essay-like content. Please read all the comments that have been left for you here, in addition to the articles linked. Wikipedia articles are not essays; they are factual, and reflect only reliable, independent sources. JSFarman (talk) 00:22, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
- Moi... Lolita also tagged.JSFarman (talk) 03:25, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
May 2025
[edit]
Hello, I'm Nixleovel. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Dis-moi que l'amour... seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Nixleovel (talk) 22:52, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
- It wasn't?????? I wrote it in NPOV. i made sure there wasn't any expressive language. I would prefer if you wouldn't mess with the article's I have created. If you're going to fix something, please at least rewrite if it doesn't fit Wikipedia standards, don't just outright delete my work. J'ai pas vingt ans ! (talk) 22:54, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
- Hi @J'ai pas vingt ans !, a first thing to note is that nobody on Wikipedia owns and article. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to Wikipedia. This means that editors do not own articles, including ones they create, and should respect the work of their fellow contributors. If you create or edit an article, remember that others are free to change its content.
- Addtionally, I have concerns about this section "The music video features a distinctive blend of claymation and photographic elements, creating a unique visual aesthetic. It depicts a narrative in which a male character, rendered in clay with a photographic face, sculpts a female companion from clay during a moment of solitude. The clay figure subsequently comes to life, and the two characters perform a duet, reflecting themes of emotional longing and the transformative nature of love. The video's artistic direction, characterized by its hybrid animation style and symbolic storytelling, has been noted for its originality and emotional resonance. Critics and viewers have highlighted its imaginative approach as a memorable complement to the song’s lyrical content.".
- It may be better to rewrite it without loaded language such as like this, "The music video employs a combination of claymation and photographic techniques to create its visual style. The narrative portrays a male clay figure with a photographic face who sculpts a female companion from clay in a solitary setting. This clay figure then animates, and the two characters are shown performing a duet. The video has been interpreted as exploring themes of emotional longing and the transformative aspects of love. Its hybrid animation style and symbolic narrative have been noted for their originality. Some critics and viewers have found its imaginative approach to be a memorable complement to the song's lyrics." Nixleovel (talk) 23:01, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks for your input, and your example. I didn't mean to sound haughty, its just that I don't like it when others delete my contributions and don't rewrite their own. Again, thanks! J'ai pas vingt ans ! (talk) 23:04, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
Hi J'ai pas vingt ans !! I noticed that you recently made an edit at L'Alizé and marked it as "minor", but it may not have been. "Minor edit" has a specific definition on Wikipedia: it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Adding or removing sources and changing dates both do not qualify as minor edits. Thank you. fifteen thousand two hundred twenty four (talk) 23:35, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
Blocked as a sockpuppet
[edit]
Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice:
{{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.