User talk:Xyzbio

Your submission at Articles for creation: Matilda Wallace (January 19)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Utopes 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 does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

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:Matilda Wallace 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.

Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 05:57, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Xyzbio! 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! Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 05:57, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Matilda Wallace a pioneer woman (January 21)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Utopes 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 reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Submissions should summarise information in secondary, reliable sources and not contain opinions or original research. Please write about the topic from a neutral point of view in an encyclopedic manner.

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:Matilda Wallace a pioneer woman 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.

Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 06:49, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Matilda Wallace a pioneer woman (January 22)

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

This appears to be a duplicate of another submission, Matilda Wallace, which is also waiting to be reviewed. To save time we will consider the other submission and not this one.

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:Matilda Wallace a pioneer woman 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.

Dan arndt (talk) 04:06, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Matilda Wallace a pioneer woman (January 23)

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

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

This appears to be a duplicate of another submission, Matilda Wallace, which is also waiting to be reviewed. To save time we will consider the other submission and not this one.

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:Matilda Wallace a pioneer woman 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.

Dan arndt (talk) 03:37, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Matilda Wallace a pioneer woman (January 23)

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

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

This appears to be a duplicate of another submission, Matilda Wallace a pioneer woman, which is also waiting to be reviewed. To save time we will consider the other submission and not this one.

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:Matilda Wallace a pioneer woman 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.

Dan arndt (talk) 07:00, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Matilda Wallace a pioneer woman (January 23)

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

This appears to be a duplicate of another submission, Matilda Wallace, which is also waiting to be reviewed. To save time we will consider the other submission and not this one.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Seems like you started the Draft:Matilda Wallace which you abandoned after it was declined, instead of improving it and resubmit it again, you started this draft with the same content as the first draft which doesn't indicate why 'Miss Matilda Wallace' might be notable.

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:Matilda Wallace a pioneer woman 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.

ANU^writes 07:38, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Matilda Wallace: pioneer pastoralist (January 24)

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

This appears to be a duplicate of another submission, Matilda Wallace, which is also waiting to be reviewed. To save time we will consider the other submission and not this one.

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:Matilda Wallace: pioneer pastoralist 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.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:36, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple drafts + user page content

Hi, you seem to have created three drafts on the same subject: Draft:Matilda Wallace, Draft:Matilda Wallace a pioneer woman, and Draft:Matilda Wallace: pioneer pastoralist. Please don't do that. We can only consider one draft on any given subject; creating more is just a waste of your time, and ours. It also doesn't in any way increase the chances of any of them being accepted. Let me know which of those drafts you want to keep, so that the other two can be deleted.

What's more, you have similar content on your user page User:Xyzbio as well as on this page. Your user page is not meant for content development, it is intended to host information about your Wikipedia editing career etc. See WP:UP for what is, and isn't, allowed on your user page. As for this page, this is for communicating with other users, not for posting your content either. Please delete the draft content from both these pages, or let me know and I can do it for you.

Thanks, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:43, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the content from your User page and Talk page, as it is now in drafts. (If there was content there that was not in the drafts it can be recovered using View history.) The recommendation is that you focus on only one draft going forward. David notMD (talk) 06:07, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, David. I will do as you suggest.

DOUG Xyzbio (talk) 06:32, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Which draft do you want to use, going forward? I can help put it in proper Wikipedia format and you can abandon the other two. If no edits are made to those they will be deleted at six months. The much bigger problem is that in all of the drafts, you have far too much information that is not about her. And if that is removed, not clear if there is enough content and references to qualify for an article. David notMD (talk) 12:46, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks David, the edited version is great. I'm grateful as my mind is not always on the task as I begin cancer treatment again on 7th February. Xyzbio (talk) 19:31, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I wish you the best of luck for then 🤞. Regards, Sushidude21! (talk) 22:19, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For just one example, none of this is about her: "By 1876 Sturt’s Meadows Station was 40,469 ha in area and by 1882 the station shore 32,000 sheep.[12] By 1883 £24,080 had been spent on improvements.[13] Wallace secured a lease for Elsey River Station in the Northern Territory in late 1878. He travelled there in 1880. On the way, he acquired cattle for his run. [14] After arriving in June 1881, he appointed a manager and returned to Sturt's Meadows. [15] After retiring in 1884, Wallace re-joined his wife and bought a home at Reynella. [16] Shortly after, he died by his own hand after an accident. [17]"

A. T. Saunders

Your edits on A. T. Saunders need citations. Sushidude21! (talk) 11:24, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A T Saunders identified Mrs Abraham Wallace as author "with the help of John Lewis who met her in Mingary in 1867". This information is included in reference 9. It appears Lewis was a significant source. He was a pastoralist with interests in NT, SA, QLD and NSW. He travelled with Sturt and was familiar with the region which the Wallaces settled - see for example https://adb.anu.edu.au/biography/lewis-john-599 Xyzbio (talk) 19:50, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well you need to insert a citation for that in the page Sushidude21! (talk) 21:39, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Use visual edit, yhen press the button that is a "

Then, paste that link into the cutation generator and press insert or whatever it says. Sushidude21! (talk) 21:42, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

Hello Xyzbio! The thread you created at the Teahouse, Draft:Matilda Wallace a pioneer woman, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days.

You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please create a new thread.

See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by KiranBOT, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=KiranBOT}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). —KiranBOT (talk) 03:29, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Matilda Wallace: pioneer pastoralist (January 30)

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

This appears to be a duplicate of another submission, Matilda Wallace, which is also waiting to be reviewed. To save time we will consider the other submission and not this one.

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:Matilda Wallace: pioneer pastoralist 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.

Dan arndt (talk) 08:10, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dan,

I'm totally confused and frustrated. David on 25/1/2025, wrote Which draft do you want to use, going forward? I can help put it in proper Wikipedia format and you can abandon the other two.

I believed that, as David put it into the proper format, that version would be the one considered. It was submitted today after a further edit. Please remove all previous drafts or, failing that, help me to remove all drafts other than the one submitted to day.

Doug Xyzbio (talk) 09:55, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Xyzbio, I believe another editor somehow missed David's comment. I have accepted this article after some copy editing. Recon rabbit 16:58, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dan,

I have read this report https://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/-/media/OEH/Corporate-Site/Documents/Parks-reserves-and-protected-areas/Parks-historic-heritage/women-and-landscape-nsw-western-parks-project-2003.pdf, which describes how women such as Matilda Wallace are almost invisible in accounts of early settlement. That is why I decided to submit something to Wikipedia. Elsewhere it is her husband, Abraham, that is central.I have not done a good job. Sorry to make so many mistakes. Perhaps the best thing I can do is wait for six months and start again.

Doug Xyzbio (talk) 10:30, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Matilda Wallace has been accepted

Matilda Wallace, 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 C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 21% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! 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!

Recon rabbit 16:56, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reconrabbit,

Thank you for the final edit. It now looks presentable.Thanks also for the positive comment.

There are also Wikipedia articles on Sturt's Meadows and A T Saunders that I have edited to bring then in line with research conducted by family members.

Kind regards

Doug Xyzbio (talk) 20:52, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for File:Abraham Wallace.jpeg

Thanks for uploading File:Abraham Wallace.jpeg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 06:30, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Public domain

This image was created in Australia and is now classified as being in the public domain because its term of copyright has now expired. According to the Information Sheet G023v17 (Duration of copyright) (Aug 2014), generally copyright has expired as follows: In 2015, 70-year copyrights under the AUSFTA start expiring.^{[needs update]}

Type of material		Copyright has expired in Australia if ...	As of URAA date material was PD in US if...
A1	Works published anonymously, under a pseudonym or the creator is unknown: (not photos)	published prior to 1 January 1955	Published prior to 1 January 1946
B1	Photographs (except B2 below):	taken prior to 1 January 1955	taken prior to 1 January 1946
B2	Photos published anonymously, under a pseudonym or the creator is unknown:	taken prior to 1 January 1955	Published prior to 1 January 1946
C	Artistic works (except A & B):	the creator died before 1 January 1955	the creator died before 1 January 1946
D	Published editions¹ (except A & B):	first published prior to 1980	first published prior to 1971
E1	Commonwealth or State government held² photographs or engravings:	first published more than 50 years ago, or if made before 1 May 1969, first made more than 50 years ago	Made before 1 January 1946 The government has declared that expiration of Crown Copyrights applies worldwide; use {{PD-AustraliaGov}}
E2	Commonwealth or State government artistic works (such as drawings)	first made more than 50 years ago	Made before 1 January 1946 The government has declared that expiration of Crown Copyrights applies worldwide; use {{PD-AustraliaGov}}

¹means the typographical arrangement and layout of a published work. eg. newsprint.
²held means where a government is the copyright holder as well as would have held copyright but reached some other agreement with the creator.

Australia

This file is NOT necessarily in the public domain in the United States because a non-simple image can only be in the public domain in the U.S.:

if it entered the public domain in Australia prior to 1996, or
when, after that date, its copyright term expires in accordance with U.S. law.

Information about the creation date and creator should be provided.

If the image is not in the public domain in the United States, in addition to the license tag for its status in Australia an appropriate fair use license and rationale should be provided, or the image should be proposed for deletion.

If the media is in the public domain in both Australia and the United States, it may be transferred to the Wikimedia Commons.

Note: If this image is in the public domain in the U.S., modify the end of the copyright tag from }} to |commons}}.
This will replace the preceding U.S. copyright notification with a nomination for this image to be moved to the Wikimedia Commons.

Because Australia has long-standing copyright relations with the United States, some Australian works might have a subsisting U.S. copyright. In such a case, the works in question are not in the public domain in the U.S. even if they meet the above conditions.

Xyzbio (talk) 06:46, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:Abraham Wallace.jpeg

Thank you for uploading File:Abraham Wallace.jpeg. However, it is currently missing information on its copyright and licensing status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can verify that it has an acceptable license status and a verifiable source. Please add this information by editing the image description page. You may refer to the image use policy to learn what files you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. The page on copyright tags may help you to find the correct tag to use for your file. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please also check any other files you may have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:23, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's not clear why you uploaded this file to Commons as File:Abraham 1875.jpg and then again to Wikipedia as File:Abraham 1875 2.jpeg, but only one of these files is needed. As I posted at c:User talk:Xyzbio, the file you uploaded to Wikimedia Commons is probably OK, but it needs a copyright license for the US in addition to the one you're using for Australia. My suggestion to you is to focus on resolving that issue since that's really where the file should be hosted if this photo is no longer eligible for copyright protection under the copyright laws of both Australia and the US. The other file will be deleted as redundant file per WP:F1, and you should request that this one be deleted per WP:G7. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:35, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Abraham 1875 2.jpeg

A tag has been placed on File:Abraham 1875 2.jpeg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused duplicate or lower-quality copy of another file on Wikipedia having the same file format, and all inward links have been updated.

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. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:25, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead and delete.

Thanks Xyzbio (talk) 21:33, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]