User talk:Coin945

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

/Archive 1 /Archive 2 /Archive 3 /Archive 4


TAFI on French Wikipedia[edit]


I've seen your message on French Wikipedia.

We already have a TAFI-like on our Village pump, a short list of articles which should be expanded (or created) which seems to be enough for the moment. You should repost your message on the Village pump itself for a wider audience.

Bests, Trizek from fr: 09:17, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Thankyou for your advice. I will do that.--Coin945 (talk)

Cross-language efforts[edit]

Hello, and thank you for your cross-wiki efforts in improving articles! Saw your efforts here in starting similar pages in other Wikipedias, and I replied in the Chinese column. Anyway, you no longer have to "guess" what was written there. Do contact me if you need more clarification. (talk) 07:32, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

05:52:22, 5 September 2014 review of submission by Onereverse[edit]

Onereverse (talk) 05:52, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

This is the second time we have submitted this page and I am confused as to why it has been declined this time around. The first time it was decined was because it was "too markety" -- which I can understrand... this time, and i am not entirely sure why it was rejected this time around other than possibly the source information was not acceptable? We tried to make sure that we did not link to our website as proof of anything and in fact linked to trade magazines in our space and other credible sources. So as of right now, I am at a total loss as what the next steps should be.

I have done extensive research on the internet, and it appears that sadly your company is not notable enough for Wikipedia. Often people might want to write an article about their business, but if third-party sources have not written about it first, there is not much a Wikipedia article can say because everything inside it must be verifiable in reliable sources. The information in the draft was not very notable. Wait a little until it is covered in newspapers, books etc. Then we will have notable sources.--Coin945 (talk) 05:58, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Onereverse (talk) 05:55, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

and why has the entire article been blanked? You cannot tell me that the entire article was a violation...

I will revert my blank. :)--Coin945 (talk) 06:01, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

If you can find sources from newspapers/books/scholarly journals etc. that talk about the business, then please add them to the article.--Coin945 (talk) 06:05, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Request on 06:39:36, 5 September 2014 for assistance on AfC submission by AlexisMichaud[edit]

Hi Coin945, you reviewed a page I had submitted for creation. I would like to discuss with you on why the "subject appears to be a non-notable person"

Hi, you reviewed a page I had submitted for creation. I have created a few pages on Wikipedia. My profile is:

All the pages I started got tagged for speedy deletion. Then after some exchanges with the reviewers of the pages, and some additions to the pages, they eventually got accepted.

For the latest page I was advised to rework it and resubmit it in the Spring. In the new version, references to publications (including some available online on JSTOR etc) were added. Should the list be made (much) longer to convince the Wikipedia reviewers/editors that this is a "notable person"? There might be a bias here. If to be "notable" is to be online and create "buzz" and be in the news then certainly the "subject" is not "notable", as the "subject" does not do much self-publicity or make great efforts to attract public attention. But that is what one expects of a true scholar: that they do their work quietly and productively and don't run a "rat race" for honours, recognition and public attention. The "subject" has made and continues to make a strong and lasting influence in his field, as evidenced (among other indicators) by the reviews published about his books. A leading scholar in his field certainly deserves to be mentioned.

I realized that someone had written a stub about me and it had not been deleted, although the "fame" is nowhere comparable to that of the characters for whom I have written Wikipedia pages, which had some difficulty being accepted. This time the draft I wrote for a prominent scholar has been "blanked" altogether, which does not look like an encouragement to edit further. I'd love to be in touch to find ways to remedy this.

With appreciation of your work, and of Wikipedia,

AlexisMichaud (talk) 06:39, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

AlexisMichaud (talk) 06:39, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

The reason the submission was blanked is because at AFC there is a massive backlog of unreviewed submissions, and I have been clearing out this backlog. For this reason there is little time to give feedback to every single submission. If people have reviewed Michaud's work in reliable third-party sources, please add it to the article. If you have sources that explain why he is notable/famous, then add them. I can see zero newspaper articles about him/his life/his work. There are few if any books or scholarly articles about him. The article appears to be only sourced by reviews of his papers. And there are no links provided so I cannot see if they are notable.--Coin945 (talk) 07:05, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your answer. I understand the point of view, but find it hard to convince myself that it is reasonable. There are lots of newspaper articles when scholars pass away, so by that standard, acceptability in Wikipedia and "notability" are semi-automatic upon a person's death. But even that does not seem to be applied consistently. Nobody ever wrote newspapers articles about me/my life/my work. I guess the reason why the creation of a stub concerning me was accepted on Wikipedia is because there is a list of publications that was considered solid -- a real contribution to the field of specialization. But when you come to think of it, it's just a few articles: nothing to compare with the publications of the person presented in the submitted draft. A full professor with more than a dozen of highly substantial published books; a former Head of department at Sorbonne (not an insignificant place for studies of French and comparative literature); how does that compare with (online) newspaper articles in terms of "notability"??

Sure, most of my publications are available online but should visibility on the Internet be the touchstone of "notability"?? This is NOT a criticism of your work but intended as constructive criticism of how the selection is made. This is NOT a plea to have the Wikipedia entry about myself deleted, or to have it serve as a benchmark for inclusion of all scholars who have (in my view) stronger claims to being on Wikipedia... But I find it strange that it is so hard to convince you (as a Wikipedia editor) that this person is "notable" enough for people to be curious about the author and glad to find information on Wikipedia. I also think that there are chances that other people will want to add additional references (perhaps including references to newspapers) that I'm not aware of. Not all potential contributors are apt to submit a Wikipedia entry... In the hope that you will accept to re-open the discussion or the draft? Yours sincerely Alexis Michaud AlexisMichaud (talk) 07:58, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Just because a subject has an article on Wikipedia, that does not mean it is notable. Any user can create any article and put it up on Wikipedia. It is the responsibility of editors like me to sift through all the garbage to find the few articles that should be kept. So the fact that Alexis Michaud exists does not mean I would have accepted it if it came through AFC. FYI I do think it should be deleted. I do not advise you do edit articles about subjects you know about because you will subconsciously add biases and make discussion very hard.
Upon your request, I reopened your draft to give you more time to improve the article. But I think it should be deleted. Good luck. :)--Coin945 (talk) 08:25, 5 September 2014 (UTC)


Hello Coin945 Regarding Please you tell me why this page has been blanked? It is related to which is a notatble musician and this page was created because it is about his album which has received good reviews. Please tell me why my content violated copyright and I will do my best to get it corrected. I had permission from the photographer to use his photograph and the content was created by myself. Thank you MarycjamesMarycjames (talk) 07:23, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

The artist appears to be notable, but from the sources you have provided, the album is not. Consider including information about Insight as a subsection of the Maciek Pysz article. Also, remember to not include any blog posts, and ensure every source talks about the album in detail.--Coin945 (talk) 07:45, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

OK thank you, I understand. Is there any way I can access the content of the page so I can include it on the artist's page? Thank you. Marycjames213.143.143.69 (talk) 09:48, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

I have copy/pasted the information from the article in the talk page for Pysz here: [1]. Click the edit tab to access the information. Once you have what you need, copy it, cliek the Article tab, then the Edit tab, and paste it in the article. Remember that the subheading title "Insight" should have these (===) on either end.--Coin945 (talk) 10:06, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Under review; Blanking[edit]

Thanks for your work on the AfC backlog. I've been chipping away at it myself. Being relatively new at reviewing, it takes me much much longer than your 1-2 minutes per article. So when I start reviewing a draft I place it "under review" to avoid duplication of effort by other reviewers.

A couple times tonight I've invested time evaluating a submission only to find, when I go to decline it, that you've nipped in and declined it already. The end result is the same, and it's great that you're so efficient, but to save wasted effort on my part I'd appreciate it if you would also use the blue "under review" feature and skip over any drafts that someone else has under review.

I also have a question about blanking, something you did to both the drafts we collided on. My understanding was that blanking was only to be used in the case of attack, vandalism, nonsense, test, or irreparable copyright violation, the last being a pretty high bar since almost anything can be rewritten to avoid violating copyright. Have I misunderstood the instructions; am I under using blanking? Worldbruce (talk) 09:31, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

From what I understand, articles are only removed from the backlog if they are Blanked. As these articles in particular are so overdue, I believe they should either be added to Wikipedia or removed from the backlog. There is no more time to fix up the articles, as the creators should have had enough time to make them perfect for us.--Coin945 (talk) 10:01, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

I apologise for the edit conflicts that have arisen from my reviews. I will not review for a while so I hope you enjoy clearing out the backlog without worrying I will make your time wasted. --Coin945 (talk) 10:01, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Your work at AfC[edit]

Thanks for your work at AfC keeping on top of the backlog. However, I'm not sure why you're tagging every article as a 'stub', when generally they are well beyond the one or two lines of a typical stub article. Maybe not a good idea. Sionk (talk) 15:49, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

The terms stub/start/C are subjective. To me, a stub could be two lines. But it could also be a 7 paragraph yet unsourced article. In general if it relies more on lists than prose, or if it is not long enough for the scroll to appear on the right-hand side of the screen, it is stubby in my book. But in the end nobody really takes article-classes seriously (besides GA/FA/A) so if in doubt, Stub it.--Coin945 (talk) 15:56, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

There are other clean-up templates for unsourced articles, or articles not written in prose (etc). I'd say if in doubt don't stub it ;) Sionk (talk) 16:07, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
To be fair, none are inside my AFC helper toolkit...and to be able to zoom through the backlog at the pace I am without making any mistakes, I need to be able to quickly decide, tag, then move on. I don't have time to search the specific template that may be relevant. Stubbing at least shows there are still major issues and I have accepted based on article potential rather than current state.--Coin945 (talk) 16:10, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) Coin, you have a point. Even so I feel t to be preferable if it is a borderline decision to make a statement on the article's talk page about the deficiencies that you have chosen to overlook rather than mis-stub them. Sometimes we need to sacrifice convenience for quality. Merley adding {{stub}} actually causes work for the stub sorting gang. Fiddle Faddle 13:27, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Draft:Elaine R Bullard[edit]

Thanks for your review of my draft about Elaine R Bullard. I understand that you do not think the references I have included give adequate evidence of notability, and I should seek reliable secondary sources that are entirely independent of the subject. I'd be willing to see if I can do this, but there is also content that violates Wikipedia policy because you have blanked the page. Could you give me an indication of what this is and how I can see the page again to correct this. MerielGJones (talk) 16:13, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

I apologise. I shouldn't have blanked the page and am reverting it now. Continue to look for reliable sources and fix up the citations. Good luck. :)--Coin945 (talk) 16:39, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 6[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ali Asghar Khodadoust, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Transplantation. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:22, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

something that may help[edit]

I have a set of boilerplate responses that I modify from time to time when declining or explaining an issue at AFC. They are at User:Timtrent/Reviewing, and I use elements from the set, edited as necessary. They are not perfect, and our work is an inexact science, so they fit reasonably well. Fiddle Faddle 13:51, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Draft:Carbohydrate Counting[edit]

Hi there, the redirect that was in the way of the article's move to main space has now been deleted.  Philg88 talk 08:45, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

11:31:13, 7 September 2014 review of submission by Nannadeem[edit]

Nannadeem (talk) 11:31, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Respected reviewer of Draft: Dr Taqi Abedi. I have one question, before I request you to help in improving the draft article under reference. Are you well aware of Urdu Literature?

I have revisited the article, and have decided to pass it. Good luck editing it.--Coin945 (talk) 11:45, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
Thank you respected Reviewer. I will never forget you. Before you I gave delivery of my first..... Thanks again very sincerely Nannadeem (talk) 12:17, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 37, 2014)[edit]

Jvc gz-mg555-02.jpg

A handheld camcorder ia a typical consumer electronics device

Hello, Coin945.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Consumer electronics

Previous selections: Raven Tales • Solar activity

Get involved with the TAFI project! You can...
Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of EuroCarGT (talk) 00:02, 8 September 2014 (UTC) • Opt-out instructions

Commons B.S.[edit]

Hey Coin, Just got on Wikipedia for the first time today and wanted to thank you for trying to stand up for me on Commons. I have made my response yesterday which was quite long and extensive but I feel as though my response adequately covered all points I needed to and have chosen to avoid the conflict rather than succomb to it. I have tried to reach out to higher levels of Wikipedia but the only responses I've gotten thus far are telling me that admins on en.wikipedia can not assist with issues on commons.wikipedia. I've scoured the policieis and help docs on Commons but have not been able to find any method of elevating this issue. Do you know how I could go about doing that? I'm not going to continue arguing any further on my talk page because I think it's quite obvious that's not going to do anything but feed the trolls. I'm actually extremely upset over this whole situation and am hoping to speak with someone somewhere at the highest levels of wikipedia authority to resolve this matter because I really don't see what I did wrong in the first place; and only continue to be subjected to their ridicule and torment. Any rule that I did perhaps break in trying to clean up all the freakin porno on Commons should pale quite significantly in contrast to the responses that are taking place. I just don't have a clue what to do about it.. I spent all day yesterday searching, trying to contact different outlets, to no result. Thanks again! Please | email me directly as I'm staying away from Wikipedia all together until this matter is resolved. It's leaving a bad taste ... David Condrey (talk) 09:20, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

@David Condrey: I feel you brother. :(
When I wrote: "I request that David be unblocked, among other reasons, so he can take part on this discussion. It is vital that he have a chance to represent himself. I am just the messenger so will not argue either side here (though I have stated my personal view on his talk page).", INeverCry replied: "He can speak for himself on his talkpage. He should start by explaining his motivation for commiting a major act of vandalism. I don't think anyone could possibly believe that his reasons for posting that destructive DR were benign and innocent. I would oppose any unblock of him as long as he continues to shirk responsibility for his actions, pretend he did nothing wrong, and falsely accuse others of unfairly targeting him. " (bolding mine)
If you haven't already, a good place to start would be clearly stating that so I can link your explanation to INeverCry.--Coin945 (talk) 13:30, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
Also please see Category:Wikimedia Commons administrators (This is a category for English Wikipedia users who are also Administrators on Wikimedia Commons.). I'm sure you'll find somebody there to help you out.--Coin945 (talk) 13:51, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Draft:The Cinema Snob[edit]

I've made way for the draft to be moved. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 10:46, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

SFB Games[edit]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of SFB Games, and it appears to include material copied directly from

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 17:15, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Disney franchise articles[edit]

I think you have done a great job collecting information related to the many Disney franchises. I suggest you rename all the main articles to something like "List of XX (Disney franchise) media". These can then be put in the category Category:Disney-related lists, and maybe under a sub category like Category:Lists of Disney franchise media or other some similar name, as well as under Category:Disney franchises. This would likely mollify the "notability" issue, since the articles really are lists.Jllm06 (talk) 18:26, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

At the moment they are lists, but the goal is for each of them to be along the lines of Frozen (franchise), The Lion King (franchise), or Toy Story (franchise). I've gone about creating good skeletons for those franchise articles. Just because the sources and prose aren't there atm, it doesn't mean they don't exist.--Coin945 (talk) 18:28, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
In other words, thank you for your logical advice, and for your hard work in copyediting them/putting them into categories etc. But I stand by my view that they should exist as franchise articles.--Coin945 (talk) 18:36, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

You have new message/s Hello. You have a new message at David Condrey's talk page.

A barnstar for you![edit]

WikiDefender Barnstar Hires.png The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
For standing up for Wikipedia guidelines and policy and promoting a civil and collaborative teamwork which are the values that make Wikipedia a community worthy of existing and worth contributing to. Thanks for being a good person and my friend. David Condrey (talk) 04:52, 9 September 2014 (UTC)


Its a Poem not an article...........that's the most insane comment ever. Obviously you need to read the definition what a poem is. Thanks for the constructive comment. Your a popular scholar? My poem is already documented into the history books and really who needs Wikipedia. Happy Editing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bunyanbug (talkcontribs) 17:36, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

@Bunyanbug: I think the article should probably be on Wikipedia. But at the moment it doesn't read like an entry in an encyclopedia. It uses lots of poetic language, and has no sources to back it up.
I found this book that briefly talks about it: [2]. Can you find some other sources that we can add to make this article worthy of Wikipedia?--Coin945 (talk) 17:44, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Request on 12:11:04, 10 September 2014 for assistance on AfC submission by Mikii la[edit]

I have inserted more references in User:Mikii la/sandbox

Mikii la (talk) 12:11, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

12:54:41, 10 September 2014 review of submission by Phild66[edit]

Hi Coin945,

I need your help in understanding your decision to reject this submmission. What is wrong with these links / references?

2011 - 'Made in The Middle', MAC, Birmingham. (Website:

2011, 'Fit for Purpose', The V&A, London. (Book with Exhibition: 'Fit for Purpose: a practical and conceptual exploration of silver', ISBN 978-0-9556345-2-9)

2011, Silverstuck, National Museum Wales. (Book with exhibition; 'Silverstruck by Elizabeth Goring and Bryony Dawkes, ISBN 9781905865338)

Silversmithing a Contemporary Guide to Making by Brian Hill and Andy Putland, ISBN 978-1847976161

Have you read the books mentioned? The last item 'Silversmithing a Contemporary Guide...' has three pages devoted to Kevin Grey's extraordinary and groundbreaking techniques in Silversmithing.

Many thanks, Phil Dickinson Phild66 (talk) 12:54, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Though it is true that sources others than web links are accepted as reliable sources, I am only able to assess the sources that link to websites. This includes tumblr, pinterest, a biography (primary source), a deadlink, facebook, and a blog (Made in the Middle).

[3] and [4] have some potential, but I would still need to see third-party reliable sources talking about this subject. The book to which you refer is here, which is also very good. I would need to see you remove the non-notable sites, and include information from the notable ones.

Good luck. :)--Coin945 (talk) 13:10, 10 September 2014 (UTC)


Request on 14:01:29, 10 September 2014 for assistance on AfC submission by Thomjack[edit]

  • I have had a page deleted because 'it seems to be about a band' but it is actually about an international artist who happens to write songs and play in a band but this is not her main activity. She is a NESTA recipient which is a very prestigious award and has worked and exhibited all over the world and yet I am being told she is not notable. What can I do to show that she is worthy of a Wikipedia entry? Thanks. --Thomjack (talk) 14:01, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Hi Thomjack. thank you for your question. First of all, the page hasn't been deleted. The request was declined, but you are free to edit and improve the article, and I would encourage you to do so. The sources you provided did not adequately demonstrate her notability. There are a few mentions of her in some of the sources you have provided, but the article requires more. In addition to this, the submission was declines because the formatting inn the article has many issues, which would make it very hard to read if it was on Wikipedia. Please fix up those mistakes. Good luck.--Coin945 (talk) 14:13, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
  • It is worth noting that not every single human in the entire world is notable so it is possible that no matter how many sources you add, this particular person won't be able to have an article. Not to worry, there are many other topics to write about! :) --Coin945 (talk) 14:13, 10 September 2014 (UTC)


September 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to SFB Games may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • the brothers have worked with publishers such as [[Son]]y, [[Valve Corporation|Valve]]'s [[Steam (software|Steam]], and [[Adult Swim]], and have also launched a successful [[Kickstarter]] campaign.<

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 14:14, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

14:16:34, 10 September 2014 review of submission by[edit] (talk) 14:16, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I would like assistance and further comments on how to improve the article.

Please add reliable third-party sources to the article. These could be from newspapers, books, scholarly articles etc. Blogs and information Everest Markets has itself published does not make the article notable. Fix up the formatting of the article - there are some bolded bits that should not be bolded. Also consider turning lists into prose. It is worth noting that not every single company in the entire world is notable so don't be shocked to read the words "Everest Markets will never have a Wikipedia page" if that is the case. Good luck finding and adding sources. :)--Coin945 (talk) 14:23, 10 September 2014 (UTC)


14:19:21, 10 September 2014 review of submission by Mgsmith68[edit]

Coin945 the article I submitted was declined due to "not reliable sources" and I am trying to correct the article but could you tell me regarding the reliable sources is it that I don't have any reliable sources in the article? Sorry for being so needy this is relatively new to me. Thanks in advance for your assistance.

Mgsmith68 (talk) 14:19, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

There are many claims made in the article that are not backed up by a source. This is dangerous because it means someone could potentially lie and it would end up on Wikipedia for anybody to read and believe. For this reason we need a reliable third-party source to back up everything that has been said. The notability of this person also needs to be demonstrated - it is unclear why this person should have a Wikipedia article. You can use newspapers, scholarly articles, books etc to help you. Sometimes people are simply not notable enough so if that is the case, don't worry. There are many other topics you can write about. :)--Coin945 (talk) 14:27, 10 September 2014 (UTC)


14:30:04, 10 September 2014 review of submission by Associação +Mar[edit]

Piece of news.png

Hello Coin945, What can we do in order to approve the page? would you be able to specify the text that can't be published for us to rewrite or delete? Thanks a lot. Paulo Associação +Mar (talk) 14:30, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

O Inglês é a sua primeira língua ? Se não, isso pode ser um pouco difícil. Um problema é que há muitas palavras ou frases que uma enciclopédia não deveria ter. Por exemplo , a segunda metade da frase " levado a bordo de um barco por seus pais apenas 15 dias depois que ele nasceu , ' ele nunca foi capaz nem queria deixar de ir ao mar outra vez ' " é muito poético e deve ser reescrito para fatos estado sem o uso de metáforas ou linguagem figurativa . Algumas frases não são escritas em Inglês correto , que eu suponho que é porque você é Português . Faça o seu melhor , e os editores da Wikipedia Inglês pode ser capaz de corrigi-lo depois. Você também precisa de fontes mais confiáveis ​​no artigo. Você pode encontrar artigos de jornais portugueses ou livros etc, que falaram sobre o Sr. Lufinha ? Em geral, todos os fatos no artigo deve ser apoiada por uma fonte confiável. Caso contrário, alguém poderia fazer tudo o que queria , e os leitores da Wikipédia acreditaria ( perigoso ... ). Este deve ser relativamente fácil de fazer, porque parece realmente notável - haverá muitas fontes confiáveis ​​sobre sua vida realizações, prêmios, etc carreira que você pode usar. Boa sorte. :) - Coin945 (talk) 14:58, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
Eu entendo que Francisco Lufinha fundada Associação + Mar , e é presidente da empresa . Porque você tem um conflito de interesses com o tema deste artigo , por favor, lembre-se de manter o artigo neutro.--Coin945 (talk) 14:54, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
Além disso, por favor, explique o que o jornal este é? --Coin945 (talk) 14:54, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

@Associação +Mar:

14:49:12, 10 September 2014 review of submission by[edit]

I am asking for a re-review of the article about the artist Pierre Emile Lelong. It was rejected for lacking adequate citations. I am puzzled, because I drew on four published sources, obtained from a university library, as well as a newspaper article available online. That was all the information I was able to find about this interesting, but less-well-known artist. All but one of the sources are in French (this is a French artist), but they are all reliable, verifiable, and the publication information is cited in footnotes. I did include one website, but that is not essential and can be removed.

If published books from libraries are not considered reliable sources, then what is?

I should add that all my previous articles (all biographies) have been accepted, all created in the same way, with published resources from a university library. (talk) 14:49, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Sources are able to be in any language, so that is not an issue. Having sources that I can not personally inspect leaves considerable doubt in my mind when inspecting the sources. It is possible that some topics won't have internet sources, but at WP:AFC it is not a good sign. But if you can, please at least link to the books you used in Google Books so I can verify they exist. He might notable but I have no way of checking this. If you can find any reliable French sources on the internet, I would advise you to add them because at the moment I don't have any reason to believe this is a notable person.--Coin945 (talk) 15:07, 10 September 2014 (UTC)


Acorn Mobility[edit]

Hi Coin,

I was a little surprised that you accepted this. It is riddled with Acorn itself as a reference, and even has a citation error in it. It still feels very much like an advert to me, and one for a truly unremarkable organisation. I wonder if I might prevail on you to take a closer look at it? I accept that our opinions will differ. There is no reason why we should agree. Fiddle Faddle 17:26, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

I did notice that. And then I scanned the word "The Telegraph" out of the corner of my eye. That was it's saving grace. I realise now it was part of the larger title The Telegraph & Argus (a local newspaper), which means my accept was wrong. You may AFD or speedy delete the article. (I remember that being a particularly rushed decision. I don't usually let such a shoddy article slip through).--Coin945 (talk) 17:35, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
Instead of AfD may I suggest that you as accepting reviewer, simply return it to draft space? We all accept things we ought not to have done, and we decline things we ought not to have done.
I suggest that, when you return it, you leave a comment about your assessment of my tags on it, and them move on with enjoying reviewing. Fiddle Faddle 18:17, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done since you seem to be offline for a well deserved rest I've moved it back, resubmitted it and declined it. I;d still appreciate your additonal AFC comment there for completeness, though it is not mandatory. Again, be unconcerned. I've made more mistakes here than you have! Face-smile.svg Fiddle Faddle 19:11, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

I have a jaundiced view![edit]

Because I spent so many years as the creator of PR pieces, press releases and other bullshit and hype materials, I can spot advertorial at 100 paces and smell a regurgitated PR piece by the reference's title! I suppose I am poacher turned gamekeeper. Fiddle Faddle 18:25, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

18:57:04, 10 September 2014 review of submission by Buttsco[edit]

Re; Orin McCluskey draft. You declined submission due to "inadequately supported by reliable sources". Please indicate which sources you feel are inadequate based on footnotes, and will provide supporting material. Thanks you. Buttsco

Buttsco (talk) 18:57, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

@Buttsco: you have not included any online sources that I can actually read. This is an automatic decline because without the ability to closely examine your sources, I can not work out whether this person is notable or not. You should be able to search for them here for any old newspapers (add any keywords to the search bar), or here for any books. Or on the normal Google search bar for reliable sites etc. Do not include blogs, PR sites, information that Orin McCluskey has written themself etc. Good luck and get back to me when you've finished. :)--Coin945 (talk) 14:32, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

20:41:23, 10 September 2014 review of submission by Phild66[edit]

Hi Coin945,

Please would you help me to understand why this article has been rejected?

Silversmithing a Contemporary Guide to Making by Brian Hill and Andy Putland, ISBN 978-1847976161 Fit for Purpose: a practical and conceptual exploration of silver, ISBN 978-0-9556345-2-9 Silverstruck by Elizabeth Goring and Bryony Dawkes, ISBN 978-1905865338

The book 'Fit for Purpose' was published by the V&A Museum, one of the foremost museums in the world. The museum hosted an exhibition of contemporary silversmithing work and Kevin's work was displayed and is listed in the book.

THe Contemporary Guide has been published very recently and gives over more than three pages to Kevin Grey's unique TIG welding technique.

Have I simply constructed the page incorrectly?

Thanks, Phil Dickinson Phild66 (talk) 20:41, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Phild66 (talk) 20:41, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

@Phild66:. Thankyou for your question. I have actually already relied to you further up on this page. Please read my comments. Essentially this person may be notable but you have no reasonable proof. I am unable to inspect the 3 books cited so please provide online links to them (found through Google Books) - otherwise the books aren't notable enough to be used on Wikipedia. Only 2 out of the 7 external links you provided are possible to use.
The most important thing is this: every single fact you have stated in the article needs to be backed up by a reliable source. If you find it very difficult to do this, that is a sign the person is not notable. Good luck.--Coin945 (talk) 14:32, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
@Coin945:. OK. I'm going to try address your concerns about one reference to see if that meets your requirements. Sorry...this is my first article so I'm learning the 'rules'.

Please search google books using this reference "Silversmithing a Contemporary Guide Kevin" and you will find the pages that describe this artist and his work. I just did and it worked fine. If you concede that this is useful evidence and tell me how many more such proofs you need, I'll know exactly what I need to do to get the article approved.

Thanks, Phil Phild66 (talk) 18:00, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

20:45:41, 10 September 2014 review of submission by Mgsmith68[edit]

Coin945 can you check the changes I've made to the James Kirklin article and see if it is acceptable now and/or tell me what else I need to do? Thanks so much. Mgsmith68 (talk) 20:45, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

@Mgsmith68: if you have noticed, the edits you made hjave made the article look extremely ugly. Please read about how to fix up references. 5 of them have been done correctly do I don't understand why you have left the rest of the article in a total mess. I expect drafts to look nice and enat before being sent to me.
Now that is out of the way, I will take a look at sources. this is about his father's death and doesn't even mention him by name Dr. James Kirklin son of Dr. John Kirklin 2nd paragraph, [ this is just an article he wrote This is from a noted Science journal and is in support of the claim of his contributions, this is another article he wrote This is in support of his title, this is a bioThis is in support of the pioneering of INTERMACS and of him being past president, this is also a bioThis is in support of my prior sentence , simply lists him as a JHLT editorThis is in support of him being the editor, a book he co-wroteThis is in support of him being the PRINCIPAL EDITOR of the Monograph series, another book he co-wroteThis is in support of being the FIRST AUTHOR of this textbook, journal article he co-wroteThis is in support of him having authored over 450 scientific publications., and what appears to be a resumeThis is a BIOSKETCH which supports all of the claims in the article.
Not one... Not Even One of these sources is a reliable third-party source talking *about* his work. Merely co-authoring books and scholarly articles, holding a high position in an organisation, and having a possibly notable father does not make someone notable.The person's research has made significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources.

• See also notes to Criterion 2, some of which apply to Criterion 1 as well. • The most typical way of satisfying Criterion 1 is to show that the academic has been an author of highly cited academic work – either several extremely highly cited scholarly publications or a substantial number of scholarly publications with significant citation rates. Reviews of the person's work, published in selective academic publications, can be considered together with ordinary citations here. Differences in typical citation and publication rates and in publication conventions between different academic disciplines should be taken into account. o To count towards satisfying Criterion 1, citations need to occur in peer-reviewed scholarly publications such as journals or academic books. Bold text Judging by what you have provided, I stand by my decline. I have already invested a lot of my time into looking at your article, so if you wish to continue editing and improving, resubmit it for someone else to look over.I intend to rework this article and have it nice, neat and credible as I told you before, this was my first try at an article and I am sure you did not read the REFERENCES or either you did/do not know what they are. Your tone is quite abrasive and to a newbie uncalled for. I will ask someone else to review my article and take your comments and advice. Thanks. Reliable sources can be found at GoogleBooks or GoogleNews. Good luck.--Coin945 (talk) 14:32, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

@Mgsmith68: Thank you for your reply. I found it quite hard to read it because of the formatting, but I am glad you took the time to respond. I did make a mistake regarding The New York Times article. His name is there in the article. But that article doesn't say anything substantial about him. I apologise if I came off as "abrasive". You have already asked me twice to explain how to fix the article (ignoring my first reply), and so I gave you a frank analysis (twice) of everything you provided. If he is notable, then prove it with reliable third party sources. If he is not notable, then abandon it and work on another article. Good luck. :)--Coin945 (talk) 17:35, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, I will rework it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mgsmith68 (talkcontribs) 17:41, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 10 September[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

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, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:27, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

01:21:42, 11 September 2014 review of submission by Kindlerashod[edit]

Hi, Coin945.

Thanks for taking the time to review my article. I understand you believe that my article should be declined because rhythm and praise does not appear to be an official music genre. In the article itself, I already wrote a few statements that agree with your reason. The statements are written under the heading "Terminology:"

Most music services, music websites, and even entertainment companies do not recognize rhythm & praise as an official music subgenre, leaving people to categorize this music instead as Christian/R&B, Gospel/R&B, Contemporary Christian/Contemporary Rhythm and Blues, Urban Contemporary Gospel, or any variation of these.


However, several sources show that rhythm and praise (or R&P) is a real genre, or at least it is a term that is used within a music subculture. Here are the sources you can check out to prove the validity of the genre:


Source 1: (Talks about the origin of the term "rhythm & praise" and "R&P."


Source 2: (Be sure to look at the banner at the top of the main page. It reads as GroovSpot: R&P's Spot on the Web.)


Source 3: There's another website I want to point you to but it is listed in Wikipedia's blacklist archive, and I am unable to post the link. The link is www dot mixcloud dot com followed by /tag/rhythm-praise/ This particular webpage labels itself as a Rhythm & Praise Cloudcast. The word "Cloudcast" is a play on the word "podcast." Therefore, the page of full of podcasts on rhythm & praise music.


Source 4: (Here is a radio host named Deborah who appears on a radio show called Rhythm & Praise with Deborah Smith Pollard.)


Source 5: (This website is dedicated to information about holy hip-hop (subgenre of rap music; also known as Christian hip-hop, which has its own Wikipedia article) and information about rhythm & praise.)


Source 6: (This DJ has music in various genres. One of those genres is rhythm and praise.)


Source 7: (Here is a Linkedin group dedicated to promoting rhythm and praise musicians. You can visit the main group page at


There are also several gospel CD's with the title Rhythm & Praise. These CD's are full of Christian R&B songs:


Source 8: Rhythm & Praise, Vol. 1 by Jason Clayborn


Source 9: Ultimate Gospel Vol. 1 Rhythm & Praise (Spirit Rising)


Source 10: Rhythm & Praise by Christopher Lewis


Source 11: Rhythm & Praise by Assure


Source 12: More Rhythm & Praise (or R&P) music

Kindlerashod (talk) 01:21, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

@Kindlerashod: None of these sources are notable. Have a good day. :)--Coin945 (talk) 15:24, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

03:12:12, 11 September 2014 review of submission by Cascade1988[edit]

What reliable sources are lacking?Cascade1988 (talk) 03:12, 11 September 2014 (UTC)Cascade1988

Cascade1988 (talk) 03:12, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

@Cascade1988: please see your submission. Fiddle Faddle has already explained that only 1 out of the 4 sources you supplied are usable. Please remove the rest and add reliable third party sources. You can use GoogleBooks or GoogleNews to help you. This is a link to all old newspapers, and it seems to have some sources you can use. Good luck. :)--Coin945 (talk) 15:24, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
Coin945, at the time I posted my question, Fiddle Faddle had not yet posted a response. I took a look at the link you provided, but have not been able to find much about the history of the mall that my article is about. I did, however, find an article talking about the current state of the mall, and have added it to my draft, however, I have not resubmitted the article. It appears that much of the information about the mall is not in online forms. Cascade1988 (talk) 03:57, 12 September 2014 (UTC)Cascade1988

11 September 2014 review of Draft:Roy C Booth[edit]

Thank you for your review. I have added reliable sources but I'm unsure of how much to add as I don't want to overkill it. Can you advise please? Thank you.

BTW I had to create a new username as i forgot my password. WendigoUK (talk) 14:10, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello Template:WendigoUK. imdb and amazon are not notable. He is merely listed here for a minor achievement, this is a bio on a questionably notable website, here, . This is a good interview, but from a non-notable source. Info from here could be used if his notability was demonstrated elsewhere. Same here. This is mostly just a bio from a nonnotable website too. The Bemidji Pioneer is just a local newspaper, so while on the right track and by far the most convincing source you have, it doesn't demonstrates his notability adequately on its own. This is good.

You have a few useable sources, but I am not entirely convinced of this person's notability just yet. Look on GoogleBooks or GoogleNews for help. I will now accept the nomination on the condition that you continue to work on it. :)--Coin945 (talk) 15:24, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. I will continue to work on it. WendigoUK (talk) 18:30, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Slater & Charlie Go Camping[edit]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Slater & Charlie Go Camping, and it appears to include material copied directly from

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 16:03, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

16:51:50, 11 September 2014 review of submission by Kamalika1912[edit]

I am requesting a re-review because I have cited many references for this article from the Indian media. Could you tell me what exactly reliable resources mean? I have already checked the Wikipedia page on it and I feel the resources cited by me are very reliable. Please reconsider the review and help me improve it for acceptance.

Kamalika1912 (talk) 16:51, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

@Kamalika1912: There are many unreliable sources in there as well, but yes you are correct. There are some notable sources to newspaper articles that discuss her in depth. I will accept the submission on the condition that you continue to improve the article. Good luck. :)--Coin945 (talk) 17:00, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

21:59:57, 11 September 2014 review of submission by Kindlerashod[edit]

Hi, Coin945.

Your latest response is "None of these sources are notable." I'd like to know what makes none of the sources I previously listed not notable. The first source I listed is an article by a reputable magazine company called Houston Chronicles ( As you can see, "rhythm & praise" is definitely not some term that I made up, as many of those sources mention the term. Therefore, I guess you're looking for a particular article or book that already have the historical details about rhythm & praise as a subgenre. The problem is that we aren't going to find several sources with full details. Various sources will only have bits and pieces. It would appear that I'd be the first to write about the history of rhythm & praise in greater details.

Moreover, my article is not the first Wikipedia article to write about a subgenre of music that appear to be unofficial. Wikipedia have several articles written about "unofficial" music subgenres that people of particular subcultures recognize. For example, below is a list of Wikipedia articles written about subgenres of hip-hop music. Mainstream businesses such as Best Buy, iTunes, Amazon, and other big retailers do not divide their music sections in such subcategories. These retailers will have a "Rap/Hip-Hop" music section but that section will not be divided in subgenre categories. Nevertheless, these subgenres of hip-hop music are real:


Christian Hip-Hop Conscious Hip-Hop Experimental Hip-Hop Gangsta Rap Horrorcore Rap Nerdcore


Likewise, there are subgenres of R&B music that mainstream retailers do not recognize as official music genres. They will have a music section called "Rhythm and Blues" or "Soul." But the they will not subcategorize that music section. Nevertheless, the subgenres are real. The following is a list of articles that Wikipedia accepted as being written about real R&B subgenres created by music subcultures.


New Orleans Rhythm and Blues PB R&B Neo Soul British R&B Quiet Storm Motown R&B (Motown, as noted in this article, is not just a record label but is also a description of a particular R&B sound) Doo Wop


Just as the above examples of subgenres aren't recognized by big retailers, rhythm & praise is not recognized by retailers either but that doesn't make it any less of a real thing. Music subcultures still recognize these as being real. And Wikipedia accepted articles about them. Likewise, Wikipedia should accept rhythm & praise and should realize that many sources mention such subgenre.


Kindlerashod (talk) 21:59, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi @Kindlerashod:. The first important thing is that just because Wikipedia has an article about a certain topic, that does not mean Wikipedia *should* have an article about it. At the moment Wikipedia is notorious for having many articles on music subgenres that are not notable, but that haven't been deleted yet.
The most important thing to remember with your article is that every single fact you state needs to be backed up by a reliable source. Otherwise you ncould have made things up that naive Wikipedia readers will believe. Now, of course in some cases they may be true. But there is no way we can possibly know this.
You talk about gospel, and you talk about R&B, and you include many unsubstantiated claims, and you include many unreliable sources. But you don't include any third-party reliable sources regarding R&P. How many of your sources actually use the term "Rhythm & Praise" or "R&P"? Show me, and I'll change my opinion.
Most importantly, in the Houston Chronicle article you provided, DJ D-Lite actually explains that R&P is not notable in its own right: "R&P is simply the R&B style or form of gospel music, surrendered to Christ. It, like the other forms you mentioned, is a sub-genre of Christian/gospel music, but much younger than the other two formats". What he means is that it refers to R&B-style music that have religious themes.--Coin945 (talk) 23:19, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

01:31:08, 12 September 2014 review of submission by Kindlerashod[edit]

I see what you're saying. I agree that many of my sources do not specifically mention rhythm & praise, but rather mention gospel and/or R&B. To me, that's not really an issue. Because rhythm & praise is an actual term, and because I noticed no one talked about it on Wikipedia before, I took the opportunity to write this article.

So I guess the real issue here is whether I should write about the history of rhythm & praise VERSUS the history of Christians singing R&B. Based on your responses, it seems like I should rewrite the article so that it talks about the history of Christians singing R&B music as opposed to trying to explain rhythm & praise as a genre. Do you think an article about Christians singing R&B would be appropriate? I'd hate for all this studying and research to be all for naught.

If you believe this is a great idea, can you list the sentences and sources (in the current article) that appear to be unsubstantiated? That way I know what to remove or modify. Thanks.

Kindlerashod (talk) 01:31, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

@Kindlerashod: We already have articles on Christian pop, Christian country music, Christian rock, Christian metal, Christian hardcore, Christian punk, Christian alternative rock, and Christian hip hop. Some of those articles should probably be deleted, but it does support the notion of having a Christian R&B article. You could easily restructure it into that, while noting that a term that has been used to describe this is R&P.--Coin945 (talk) 16:22, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 13[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sleuth 101, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mark Mitchell. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 08:59, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

AFCH script[edit]

2014-09-11T15:26:43 Coin945 (Talk | contribs) moved page Draft:Roy C Booth to Roy C. Booth (Created via Articles for creation (you can help!) (AFCH))

As you're using the old version of the AFCH script, please take a look at this discussion and the question (poll) raised below it. --Gryllida (talk) 11:12, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Phyllis Harmon[edit]

Hey Coin, you're listed as the approving editor for this recent AFC submission, so this is a courtesy head's-up that I've found an awful lot of copying from external sources that I'm in the process of removing. Nikkimaria (talk) 05:18, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 38, 2014)[edit]

Aqueduct of Segovia 08.jpg

Arches were used in Ancient Roman architecture to build aqueducts, such as the Aqueduct of Segovia

Hello, Coin945.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Ancient Roman architecture

Previous selections: Consumer electronics • Raven Tales

Get involved with the TAFI project! You can...
Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of EuroCarGT (talk) 00:03, 15 September 2014 (UTC) • Opt-out instructions

19:40:48, 15 September 2014 review of submission by Doodlesock[edit]

Thank you for taking the time to review the page. I was, however, surprised to learn that it was not accepted due to the sources being unreliable. After all, the majority of the sources are from leading publications, like the WSJ and New York Times. Any further input you could provide would be exceedingly helpful. I'd love to get this page up. Thanks!

Doodlesock (talk) 19:40, 15 September 2014 (UTC)