User talk:Rankersbo

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

This user is trying to not spend too much time on wikipedia..


Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Po[edit]

Dear Rankersbo: You declined the above article as a test edit. I just wanted to make sure that you were aware of this article: Yang Yang (Atlanta giant panda). (It's not much of an article, even so.) —Anne Delong (talk) 22:36, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi Anne, I'm back from Upper Silesia. I'll have a look at the article and back at the one I declined and see what I can do- if I can knock it into shape myself I will do. Generally I see test edit as "needs a bit more work", not "go away and don't bother us with your rubbish". Rankersbo (talk) 09:17, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
My understanding if test editing is more "I've typed four words now and I'm getting bored ... I wonder what will happen if I click on this submit button..." (see WP:Test edit). I just thought that if I hadn't known about the pandas, the submissions would have sounded pretty nonsensical to me. In any case, if you have been away, you may not have heard that we are having a backlog drive in October. I hope you will sign up. (Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/October 2013 Backlog Elimination Drive and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation/October 2013 Backlog Elimination Drive}
I don't know. I get a bit down with the bickering over differences in practice, and my wife has told me off for quickening my step about the place (a sign I'm upset). I'll probably sit this one out. Rankersbo (talk) 18:53, 30 September 2013 (UTC)


A proposal has been made to create a Live Feed to enhance the processing of Articles for Creation and Drafts. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/RfC to create a 'Special:NewDraftsFeed' system. Your comments are welcome. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:20, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Vero Precision Engineering Ltd[edit]

Hello Rankersbo - I note that you did the decline on my effort to create this Article [with no content!]

I wonder if you could kindly look at my new submission and make comment as this is my first attempt at this task and at age 86 I like things to happen sooner than later!

Yours Tfitzp 15:33, 5 February 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tfitzp (talkcontribs)

I don't generally go into such detail, usually I just take care of maintenance which stretches as far as declining blank articles. As an Electronic Engineering graduate of the 90s the name vero lept out at me- vero being a name much like hoover and ipad.
Vero is notable, but unfortunately it seems we have articles on Vero at Vero Technologies Ltd and British Insulated Callender's Cables, so I'm not sure how your submission fits as a distinct article in its own right. We don't approve new versions of articles, we generally advise people to go ahead and improve the existing one. Rankersbo (talk) 10:03, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Many thanks for your kind reply. I apologise for intruding on your time.
I have resubmitted my Vero Precision Engineering Ltd article complete with text - and also another article titled Vero Electronics Ltd.
A further article titled Veroboard is nearly ready. I am aware of the Vero Technologies article which I intend to edit to link with my articles - this company took over the business in 2003.
My overall intention is to rationalise the various references to Veroboard and present a definitive coverage of the history of its development.
If this discussion should be transferred to someone else I would be grateful if you could give direction.
PS I also am an [ex]Electronics Engineer - and the originator and joint patentee of Veroboard.
PPS search for 'Vero' on BICC article gives not found Tfitzp (talk) 12:25, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
Taking up my time is not a problem, I'm just not very good at figuring out what people actually want. Rankersbo (talk) 09:16, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Cheers Elephant[edit]

Dear Rankersbo,

Per the Cheers Elephant article(, I am curious as to why it was rejected. I recall the rejection asking for notable sources, but I'm having trouble seeing what's inadequate as 6 independent sources were used.

Myself and AndrewRLM have taken time to put together all of the article's information with clear citations as I'm wondering what we could be doing better.

Could you please review the article and specifically cite areas needing improvement so we can meet Wikipedia's standards of publishing?

Thank you, Alex — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 05:32, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't do the review on that one (I just did a clean-up and initial check before the review) so am not familiar with the article. For a band to be featured in wikipedia it needs to meet the criteria in this guide: Wikipedia:Notability_(music), perhaps despite the refs the reviewer felt notability was not proved. Perhaps the reviewer felt the music blogs featured were not reliable sources, and did not count for inclusion under section 1. Rankersbo (talk) 07:56, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

You may be interested in this[edit]

[1]. (talk) 06:03, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Street Planz Tv concern[edit]

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Street Planz Tv, a page you created, has not been edited in 6 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 02:03, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Hey the bot should have notified User:Curtisarron13 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:57, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
I moved the original version to AfC space (as per policy) and then the creator blanked the redirect and worked on that- so I look like the creator. Rankersbo (talk) 16:10, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Wasn't me![edit]

I submitted no article. You have me confused with someone else. Strangely this is the 2nd time this has happened today. (talk) 22:03, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Review waiting[edit]

Hi, I not sure what this diff means or why those changes were made, but the stuff in that sandbox was not intended for WP:AFC; It was just stuff I was practicing on. For some reason a "review waiting" template has been added and I would like to get it removed. If you did it by mistake, then that's OK. Just please remove it or tell me how to remove it. If it's nothing that you did, and you know where I screwed up (which is highly probable), then I'd appreciate if you can tell me how to fix the mess I've created. Thanks in advance. Face-smile.svg - Marchjuly (talk) 10:49, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

It just dawned on me why that template is there. I believe it's because the template I submitted for approval is still under review. Sorry for any misunderstanding. - Marchjuly (talk) 11:07, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
You can't just submit part of a sandbox for review- the sandbox must contain one article or template when you add the AfC submission header. The article(s) on the page desperately need a lead section- as they stand a casual reader who stumbles over them will not understand what they are about. Rankersbo (talk) 16:19, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
I didn't intentionally submit that for submission. None of the stuff in that sandbox is intended to be an article for submission, I was just practicing on using this template that I had later submitted for approval. The "review waiting" template was automatically added to it, which then got indirectly added to the stuff that was using that template in my sandbox. Just an honest misunderstanding. I should've removed the template from my sandbox after it had been submitted for approval. Sorry for any confusion. Face-smile.svg - Marchjuly (talk) 21:26, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Keeping Sandbox[edit]

is it alright to delete all material in this "sandbox" ( in order to start a draft of an article I am currently working on? Please advise. Thank you! Human 10:55, 12 May 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hubertus Maria (talkcontribs)

Looks like someone else got there before me. Yes it is OK, but it's best to put the code {{db-user}} on the page and get an admin to delete it completely so you can start over. Rankersbo (talk) 11:29, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Draft:Dune water[edit]

Hi Rankersbo, my problem with this submission is the strong focus on just one country and the lack of discussion from an international point of view. Just sharing. Best, gidonb (talk)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Rosalie Muller Wright Pakenham[edit]

I've restored this AfC which you deleted as G8,as subsidiary to the main page Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Rosalie Muller Wright Pakenham, which you (properly) deleted as G13. It seems not to have been subsidiary, but rather the attempt to write the material in the proper place, and had a very recent edit. (to be sure, that edit was a decline on the basis of lacking inline citations, but it did have inline citations, just in a nonstandard but clear format, which is acceptable.) I think there's a high enough chance of notability that I will probably check, improve, and then accept the article. DGG ( talk ) 01:05, 17 May 2014 (UTC)


Hi Rankersbo!

As you may be aware, for the past few months I've been working on a complete rewrite of the Articles for creation helper script. I've now reached a point where the new script is relatively stable. Since you're a highly active AfC reviewer (in fact, the most active user of the old helper script by my counts), I figured I'd reach out to you before further publicizing the script to ask you to give the new script a whirl in your day to day reviewing. Complete installation instructions are here (don't worry, it's not hard :) ), and I'll be happy to hear any and all feedback you have to offer! There's a "Give feedback" link visible on the main script panel, which you can click to easily give feedback without having to leave the page you're reviewing.

Thank you so much for taking time to look at this and help shape the future of AFCH and AfC! Theopolisme (talk) 22:17, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

That is scary [User:Theopolisme|Theopolisme]]- but probably because I mostly do clean ups and prep and very few actual reviews. I hope anyway! I'll take a look soon. Rankersbo (talk) 06:11, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Clarification regarding Julian drafts[edit]

Please see comment at Julian article. If you were reviewing a draft with three citations, you were not reviewing the draft most recently completed and submitted. The draft in question has 16 citations, an infobox, and sections (TOC). It is at the same location that you left your comment re: three citations (except at the Draft tab). I am not an Admin, or competent mover of wiki items. I am a content matter expert. I do not know how you were sent the wrong draft. Can you look to the actual Draft in question, and review your decision? Thank you. Le Prof Leprof 7272 (talk) 22:39, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

I am not an admin either, I just help out with small tasks. I have some idea how this mix-up occured, and will explain on Monday, as I have a trip out with my family arranged today. In the mean time the best I can do is reverse the decline, which does not relate to the version you intended to submit.Rankersbo (talk) 05:18, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
OK, I think there were two versions of the article, one on at Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Paul Julian (Meteorologist), which you substantially improved, the other at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Paul Julian (Meteorologist). These submitions have now been merged. When you were working I think you treated the version at Wikipedia talk as the talk page of the article you were working on, and placed the submission template there, so it was that version that was submitted for review. Rankersbo (talk) 06:16, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. I inherited the mess, and just came in to move the matter that had been pending too long, along. Appreciate your quick response to this, and helping getting it on the right track. I will see to having it submitted again. Have a look at this (esp. references)—it is one reason why I could not understand how the 16 refs and improvements to PRJ could not be enough [2]. Cheers, and thanks again. Le Prof Leprof 7272 (talk) 20:18, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Your draft article, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Street Planz Tv[edit]

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Street Planz Tv}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save page", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 17:20, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

thank you[edit]

Hi and thank you for taking notice of an article I am currently working with(ernst kaps pianoforte). I am finding dedicating time to updating and improving/ learning how to manipulate this programme(wikipedia) a little trying. I have an further reasonable amount of history on this brand and images too. I did not yet want to become too involved, time wise, until I knew it was in an acceptable format/ layout and published. Once this is established, then the motivation to attention to detail will become a pleasure. I had tried to establish the way in which you tag an image but I appear to have failed? Anyones assistance here would be most welcomed.

Once again, thank you

Kind Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phil Shayer (talkcontribs) 07:11, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Just to let you know[edit]

The "Epigenetics of partner preference" draft may or may not fly. I got involved when RHaworth was browbeating a professor at a university (see [3]) and I crossly intervened, telling RH to be more civil. My editing at the article was simply to give the uninitiated academic and his graduate students some guidance in how to proceed. But it may be that he/they have departed, as is often the case with content experts who get beaten up on, for not understanding the system. And I haven't time or expertise to turn this into a solid article integrating into the already existing epigenetics material here. (Alright, perhaps I do have the expertise, but I do not have time or commitment to the article.) It may have to go by the wayside. I would prefer, if it did, a means were found so the text was not lost to my access. All on this. Just wanted you to appreciate it is not "my article". (For one of mine, see [4]). Cheers, LeProf Leprof 7272 (talk) 21:12, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Draft:European Academy of Bozen[edit]

Dear Rankersbo, you moved the page European Academy of Bozen from “Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation” to draft space. Draft:European_Academy_of_Bozen. Why this, and what i have to do to finally publish the page? thanks Niuwörldorder (talk) 06:58, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

I was doing some admin Niuwörldorder- pending AfC submissions are now stored at the Draft location instead of Wikipedia talk. I'm sorry I am not an expert in this sort of article, and while (to me)it looks very presentable in the formatting I cannot comment on the content. The problem now is there are perhaps too many refs for a reviewer to go through so it needs to wait until someone has time to look at such a detailed article. Rankersbo (talk) 07:14, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
Thank You Rankersbo. After my draft was rejected because there were too little independent sources, i added some more, and now there are too many... Do you know who i could ask for help? i'm working on this article since february... Thanks Niuwörldorder (talk) 07:36, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
I have put an invite to the teahouse on your talk page. Rankersbo (talk) 07:46, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

TY R'bo[edit]

See here, [5], Cheers. Le Prof Leprof 7272 (talk) 08:43, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

UK Data Service[edit]

The majority of the article's sources are from the service itself. While it probably is notable, the sourcing didn't guarantee that. Was there some other reason? Zach Vega (talk to me) 18:25, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

I would have let a decline on sourcing ("v") go, but "corp"- no way. I should have dealt with this at the time, but let it slip, sorry. Rankersbo (talk) 19:32, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Article rejection[edit]

Hi there,

I don't know why my article was rejected on Wikipedia. Kindly revert me with full description on my email — Preceding unsigned comment added by Piyushjoshi cp (talkcontribs) 10:58, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Unfortunately I don't know which article you are talking about unless you tell me. I won't use private email to discuss this, sorry. Rankersbo (talk) 11:13, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Articles for creation/Fay Bella Goldstep[edit]

In process of editing. Please don't delete.

Mshannon1 (talk) 13:46, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done Tag removed, you have six months further. Rankersbo (talk) 20:50, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: User:Knowledge1192/Isha Sharma[edit]

Hello Rankersbo. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of User:Knowledge1192/Isha Sharma, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not vandalism. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 16:16, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Lisa Dalton (Lisa Loving) Speedy Deletion/Undeletion Request[edit]

Dear Rankersbo, I submitted a request for undeletion for an article titled Lisa Dalton (Lisa Loving) in hopes that I could continue developing the information so that it can later be accepted. I attempted to follow the format of another living person's page, Marjo-Riikka Makela, in creating Lisa Dalton (Lisa Loving), but feel I must have strayed from the more simplified format of Marjo's. I would like to workshop the page in the special:mypage sandbox. I hope that I submitted for undeletion properly and that you might provide a few quick tips as to why Marjo's page is acceptable while Lisa's current submission is not. Thank you for your time and consideration. --Josheard (talk) 16:50, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

There were two versions of this page, one in "mainspace" that I tagged for deletion, and one in draft space here: Draft:Lisa_Dalton. You are welcome to contribute to getting the draft one into shape, which will be moved to the encyclopaedia when it is ready. You can work on this in your user area if you like but it's best if you keep the efforts in one place. Rankersbo (talk) 18:32, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

12:20:03, 25 July 2014 review of submission by Webcraft IT[edit]

Webcraft IT (talk) 12:20, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Can you please help how to write it and how to give links again...

Look at other articles. Your article needs to be very flatly and maturely written, at present it sort of "sings" and that's bad. See the links in the pink box for pointers. Rankersbo (talk) 14:44, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Re:Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Code Black (DJ)[edit]

It was kinda hard to get a few more sources in order to submit it, and it doesn't help considering there's not much info from them considering he is known to be an "underground artist". I might have to wait a while till I get more detail but that will have to wait till someday that it will happen. Anyway, just letting you know. Thanks for the tip by the way, I'll keep that in mind. (talk) 11:22, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

20:41:35, 1 August 2014 review of submission by AxelForrester[edit]

AxelForrester (talk) 20:41, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

I can't see how to "fix" the article. I need some help. I'm not getting a clear answer as to what was wrong with it.

Hi AxelForrester there is an answer to your question on the AfC help desk. I'm not sure what more I can say. Rankersbo (talk) 21:37, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
I've also written on your talk page. Rankersbo (talk) 17:22, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Fredrik Thomander edits[edit]

Hi, I've updated references, discography etc for the Fredrik Thomander-page you deleted. ( Let me know if I'm on the right track! Thanks /D — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dragonflyerz (talkcontribs) 16:49, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

A minor case[edit]

Hey I am here to tell you that here you have mistakenly identified the language as Japanese. It should be Chinese. Thanks. --Good afternoon (talk) 08:36, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Good afternoon- I rely on google translate for identifying langauges. One of us was probably half asleep. Thank you for the fix. Rankersbo (talk) 09:41, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Altered speedy deletion rationale: Madison McKinley Garton[edit]

Hello Rankersbo, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I deleted Madison McKinley Garton, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided. The speedy deletion criteria are extremely narrow and specific, and the process is more effective if the correct criterion is used. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. the panda ₯’ 09:20, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi Panda, I did check out R2, but I thought it didn't apply because it was a redirect to WT. Rankersbo (talk) 09:22, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/1934 Seattle Longshoremen Strike[edit]

Hi, Rankersbo. I see that you've been checking out the above page. I just wanted you to know that I had posted this query: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United States History#Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/1934 Seattle Longshoremen Strike. The track record of replies from that project isn't very good, though. —Anne Delong (talk) 11:48, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Aimee Fuller[edit]

Hello, Rankersbo. I noticed that you were fixing up the above draft, but at the same time someone else made a mainspace article about this topic. I was going to delete the draft, but I thought that I would check first to see if there is anything that you want to transfer to the main article before the draft disappears. —Anne Delong (talk) 16:32, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Request on 22:39:22, 26 October 2014 for assistance on AfC submission by Dennis Dicker[edit]

Hi Rankersbo. the page I've created for dylan barnes has been refused, other actors have been accepted with IMDB as this provides enough evidence that dylan barnes is a notable actor. Would you Kindly explain what I have done wrong. Kind Regards


Read the pointers in the box on the article. Sorry, I'm not sure where your info came from but IMDB is not a reliable source for wikipedia articles. Articles need multiple, reliable sources. Rankersbo (talk) 22:59, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
I have amended my decline reason. We don't usually review drafts when there is already an article in the encyclopaedia.Rankersbo (talk) 23:13, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Dennis Dicker (talk) 22:39, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

RCP Singh[edit]

You declined this as "This submission provides insufficient context ". But the context seems perfectly clear, and the refs show the position, and the position is notable, so I accepted it. DGG ( talk ) 05:24, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

OK, I respect your opinion. Rankersbo (talk) 08:45, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

22:48:13, 27 October 2014 review of submission by Alastair jb[edit]

Hiya, I'm really confused by the reasoning for this- perhaps I'm not looking at the right place for why it's being rejected but can't see a detailed reasoning? Genuinely not being hostile, probably am being an idiot, a prospective parliamentary candidate in a relatively safe Labour seat (ie should be an MP early next year) so should fit notability criteria- she's also referenced (I wanted to create this article in order to link to) within the Gower Constituency article as being the selected Labour member (her Tory opposite number has a page).

Kindest regards,


Alastair jb (talk) 22:48, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi, you are lucky that you got a British reviewer as there are things you are taking as read that might not translate to a wider audience. The reasoning is given in the purple box inside the pink one, with further comments below. I gave you a reasoning that is tailored to the case, as well as the stock one. Basically, my understanding of the guidelines are that candidates are not notable under WP:POLITICIAN until elected. No matter how safe the seat is. Your argument is that Evans is likely to become notable, which I don't dispute, but you need to show press coverage to prove notability now. Being the selected candidate is not enough for that this far out. Rankersbo (talk) 06:44, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Draft:John Boyd (Milliner).)[edit]

I wrote the article "A Milliners Dream" as a creative piece. This contained all the biographical information required to compile the entry for Wikipedia. For Wikipedia I have stripped out all the flowery text and presented the basic facts with citations from trusted 3rd party sources such as major British newspapers and the V&A museum London. I have read the articles on the milliners Stephen Jones and Philip Treacy and followed a similar format. I have removed the citation to my article "A Milliner's Dream" as this may have appeared too biased. I retained some of the quotes from John Boyd as they seemed pertinent. Regards Garry Rigby Indigojones666 (talk) 14:53, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

OK Rankersbo (talk) 16:12, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Amazon Associates draft[edit]

Hey, you rejected my Amazon Associates AfC draft with this message:

"Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Amazon Associates instead."

A fine reason. However that page got deleted on the grounds that it was an AfC draft - catch 22! You can resolve this as you think best :)

Thomas Ash (talk) 10:26, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

OK Thomas, I've reset the review I did and or better or worse it's no more catch 22 and back to square one. Rankersbo (talk) 10:42, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

15:28:22, 31 October 2014 review of submission by IgScira[edit]

IgScira (talk) 15:28, 31 October 2014 (UTC) Hallo Mathew I have made some changes in the article, and have contacted your collegues from Wiki today by phone and there should be now all OK to publish thuis ARTICLE. Please help me and put this article online. I can made addtional changeslater on as I will be keep working on this artyicle how it develops during the next time. Please publish this now, and I will be here to assist anytime I am online on Wiki

Hi I'm not Matthew, but wikipedia staff have no influence over these matters. If there were such staff they would have left a message on the submission. The link you have proves the copyright office exists, not that the organisation is notable. Rankersbo (talk) 05:24, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Rankersbo For Cleaning Up Submission Aadhaar Project Of India[edit]

Thanks Rankersbo for sparing your valuable time to visit the submission and cleaning it up.

I am not a coder or programmer but i liked the afch-rewrite script very much.

Just curious to know upto what extent the script has helped the reviewers in their tedious and wonderful work?

Thanks again. (talk) 02:35, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Request on 05:04:15, 4 November 2014 for assistance on AfC submission by Evateleperformance[edit]

Hi, I submitted an article about Mr. Sanjay Mehta yesterday and it was immediately submitted for speedy deletion. On my part I would like to say, that Mr. Sanjay Mehta is the Managing Director of Teleperformance India (a part of the Teleperformance Group USA, Teleperformance offices are present over 62 countries across the globe, please refer- and he has asked me to get his profile submitted on Wikipedia. The data which I submitted yesterday was on another site which we only submitted on behalf of Mr. Sanjay as he was a keynote speaker over there. It is definitely not for promotion, and I very well understand that Wikipedia is not for promotion. Keeping that in mind, I've only included FACTUAL DATA in the article and those cannot be changed, for example, his education, his career etc. If you suggest that re-wording it would help, please let me know, but like I said, the factual data would remain the same. The links that are given as References are the articles where he has given an interview or his article has been published in a leading newspaper. I also read and refered to Wikipedia pages of some other famous & influential personalities. Nonetheless, the article about Mr. Sanjay Mehta would keep getting updated/edited. I would request you to please remove it from speedy deletion if possible and some valuable feedback would be much appreciated on how we can avoid speedy deletion of the article the next time I publish something. We can also connect over a phone call/email if you prefer and we could talk it out (if that works for you?). Awaiting your kind revert. Thanks! Have a nice day.

Evateleperformance (talk) 05:04, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

The draft copy is still there, but the tone is definately written to impress, not just inform. It's not things like operating in 62 countries that gets a wikipedia article, but whether the person has gained coverage in significant sources. Rankersbo (talk) 06:54, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

19:48:32, 4 November 2014 review of submission by Megan.curtis28[edit]

What am I supposed to do to fix this so you can accept it?

The previous reviewer said :

Symbol opinion vote.svg Comment: Articles for duct tape as well as Avon,_Ohio exist. It is unclear what this article is attempting to address. Portions may be incorporated into existing articles. Becky Sayles (talk) 18:14, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi Megan I don't have an answer, you just submitted without changing anything and my decline was based on that. We don't understand what niche this article is supposed to fit into, it appears to duplciate two other articles. It reads like a quirky magazine article not a flat encyclopaedia entry. Rankersbo (talk) 20:30, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

03:27:35, 5 November 2014 review of submission by Dr Dinosaur IV[edit]

I don't see how the sources cited are not suitable. Do you have reason to believe they are inaccurate? Dr Dinosaur IV (talk) 03:27, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I assessed the article based on the changes since the last review, and the review that person gave. I noted that the previous reviewer had questioned all the references. Rankersbo (talk) 07:23, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

PERICLES EU Project Wikipedia Page[edit]

Hello, actually some of the content of the page was indeed taken from the website or from the paper you cited. I'm with the technical staff of the consortium and have the authority to post such content, I've got everyone's permission to do so. Is that alright? Do I need to do anything else for the page to go live? thanks! Papajimis32 (talk) 08:40, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

I suspected as much Papajimis32, that's why I didn't nominate it for deletion. The problem is that anything on wikipedia is open source. Look at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials and it explains what's involved. Possibly best to cut the article down and summarise summarise summarise and use the standard text as sparingly as possible. Rankersbo (talk) 08:47, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick feedback! ok, so I will paraphrase, summarize as much as possible and resubmit. One other question, we publish our deliverables, publications, website content, etc. under CC-BY 2.0 (, wouldn't that make it ok to also publish it on Wikipedia? Is there a way to somewhere state this so that Wikipedia does not get into any kind of copyright troubles? Thanks again! Papajimis32 (talk) 09:07, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Actually yes, sorry. I couldn't see the license on that file. The review isn't stopped, it will be reviewed when it gets to the head of the queue. Rankersbo (talk) 09:12, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

ok no problem. Just to confirm, should I still summarize and paraphrase or is it fine as it is now? How will the reviewers know that what we publish is under CC-BY 2.0 and therefore ok to post on Wikipedia? Thanks again!Papajimis32 (talk) 13:05, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Request on 11:41:00, 6 November 2014 for assistance on AfC submission by Jane Rodell[edit]

Dear Rankersbo

I have edited the wiki page about Albert Gjedde and first submitted the article for a review. I was told, that I should edit in the exiting wiki page directly, instead of creating a new article, which I then did. Now there is a notice on top of the wiki page about Albert Gjedde, that I as an editor may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article and there is a link to relevant guidelines include Conflict of interest, Autobiography, and Neutral point of view.

I am workning for Albert Gjedde, what can I do to get the wiki page brought up to date, if I'm not supposed to do it?

Best regards Jane Rodell

Jane Rodell (talk) 11:41, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Just continue- the notice is a call for others to moderate your contributions and make sure that the article doesn't sing his praises too much (or trash him ;) ) Or make suggestions on the article's talk page (i.e. fact X is untrue)Rankersbo (talk) 12:13, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Rejection - Article on James Addison Bushnell[edit]

The reason given makes perfect sense. I was not sure if my original article titles "James A. Bushnell" had been created or not. Thanks for quickly checking and resolving the confusion.

Tbergquist (talk) 21:37, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Ah OK. Can I mark the duplicate for deletion? Rankersbo (talk) 21:38, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

09:01:57, 7 November 2014 review of submission by Mischief7[edit]

Mischief7 (talk) 09:01, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

OK I get why it was declined but in a situation where there's no references to site because this thing-a-mijigy (aether) was only created for the Marvel Cinematic Universe (meaning only in Marvel movies) how do I get a reference other than other sites? In need of advice. Mischief7 (talk) 09:01, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

If there are no references, then no article. Rankersbo (talk) 18:14, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Draft:LICHEN Arts & Letters Preview[edit]

As a note, since Draft:LICHEN Arts & Letters Preview was a single-revision redirect before you tagged it, you could have reverted the move yourself without needing an admin's help. Jackmcbarn (talk) 17:02, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Actually, I tried and it didn't work. Rankersbo (talk) 18:13, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
It's not a simple thing to do, just found out how to do it. Rankersbo (talk) 18:46, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Volkmar Gessner[edit]

Dear Rankersbo, the main references for a scholar are his publications. I have updated them in the German as well as in the English version. The latter is not not a translation but a rewrite. In order to fulfill the requirement of further references, I have now added the only major (320 page) publication on the Onati institute. I plan to add necrologues as soon as they are available (the man died last Saturday). Hope you agree.Johannes (talk) 14:22, 11 November 2014 (UTC) Update: I am done now. More referencing seems unnecessary to me. Kind regards: Johannes (talk) 12:32, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Request on 17:40:00, 11 November 2014 for assistance on AfC submission by Wrestlepro112[edit]

I i'm having problems finding the episodes names because this is a show that airs on the WWE Network which is not on a tv channel but it is a stream service and i i'm having trouble finding a good sourceWrestlepro112 (talk) 17:40, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

If no-one is writing about this aspect of the WWE, then maybe it's not notable. Rankersbo (talk) 06:49, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Wrestlepro112 (talk) 17:40, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

22:59:46, 11 November 2014 review of submission by Tomcalwriter[edit]

Not asking for a re-review. But apparently, newspaper articles are not evidence or at least not strong enough evidence of notability? What more are you looking for -- articles in literary journals? The fact that the author is a recognized author of books about the Underground Railroad -- is that enough. The link to the website showing that was provided. Tomcalwriter (talk) 22:59, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

@Tomcalwriter: Have a look at WP:REFB- the article appears to have no references and is not written like an encyclopaedia entry. While you are not looking for a re-review it deserves another look. I'll reformat and resubmit. Rankersbo (talk) 06:48, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Blacklane article edited 6 days ago[edit]

Hi Rankersbo, Thank you for taking a look at and editing my article on the company Blacklane a few days ago. I decided to take on the article as a response to a request in the "Requested articles" section Wikipedia:Requested_articles/Business_and_economics/Companies and am determined not to give up! What were the changes that you made (you wrote "cleaning up the submission") and are there any comments you might have on the article based on the responses I got from Cerebellum and DangerousPanda? Also, do you have any "authority" to approve the article and, if so, would you consider taking another look at it to see if you would consider it ready to be approved? It'd be great if you could help me out! Thank you! All the best, -- Reconnamon (talk) 07:00, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Basically what I did was run an automated process that puts all the templates in the right place, comments out the main-space categories and removes stuff like sandbox headings. I'm not going to be much help, I just tinker round the edges at WP:AfC and tidy most days, and do the really obvious fails and passes.Rankersbo (talk) 07:52, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Draft:The St Anne's on the Sea Land and Building Company[edit]

Hi Rankersbo,

Thanks for the comment about a lead paragraph to this article. I've added a very brief paragraph. How does it read to you?

Best Regards


Andrewwalmsley2010 (talk) 09:25, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Nucleus Software has a new comment[edit]


This is regarding your comment on our page Draft:Nucleus Software "Comment: This is heavily referenced to the company's own website. Rankersbo (talk) 09:18, 13 November 2014 (UTC)"

This article is under process, we just wanted to remove the 'Draft' tag so that it starts appearing in the search results. We would be working on this further, trying to get as many references (internal to company website as well as external links). Also, the reference links currently added are from most reputed sites (bseindia, nseindia, moneycontrol, economictimes) which ensures the validation of content.

Is there any immediate action we need to take to fasten up the approval process for our page? BTW: Is there any guidelines about ratio for internal vs external reference links?

Regards, vishal soni (talk)

I could see there were other references, vishal soni, but my impression was that the number of self-references were overwhelming and would make reviewing difficult. It will get reviewed in due course. Rankersbo (talk) 07:05, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
Ok. Thanks Rankersbo. Will it be feasible if i keep making changes to improve the document now (After submitting it for review). Maybe i could add more reliable references by the time it gets reviewed. Will that be possible?
You can keep editing it while it waits in the queue for a full review, yes. Rankersbo (talk) 11:06, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
Thanks (talk) for creating the Talk page for Nucleus Software. By when can I expect approval/further activity on this page? Is there anything i could do to fasten up the process (like running some scripts/automated-checkers etc.). Vishal0soni (talk) 05:08, 1 December 2014 (UTC)


Hi! Why did you restore the copyright violation at Draft:Yukio_Utada after I had removed it? Do you think you could perhaps leave an wp:edit summary when editing? - it might help others to understand what you are trying to do. For your reference, the edit summary I left was "text cleared, copyright violation of [6]"; was that in some way not completely clear? Would you like to reconsider, or shall I blank it and list it at WP:CP (where, to be honest, we already have quite enough to do)? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:13, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

You applied the AfC cleared template without declining the article, so I reverted it and hoped to decline as a copyvio properly. And when I did the check I found it wasn't a clear copy-paste that would warrent a blanking, unfortunately life intervened at that point, sorry. Rankersbo (talk) 22:21, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
OK, NP, I'm totally at sea in that AfC business, sorry if I screwed up. But, please ... do take care not to add copyvio material back into the project - it's enough work trying to take it out once! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 23:21, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
If you did, we both did this time. Rankersbo (talk) 12:37, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

18:16:14, 16 November 2014 review of submission by[edit] (talk) 18:16, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Could you please point out which particular information needs more verifiable evidence? Thanks in advance.

The article needs better sourcing in general.Rankersbo (talk) 12:38, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

20:27:23, 16 November 2014 review of submission by Robert Brassett[edit]

Hi I have made some changes to my page, can you advise if I am going in the right direction Robert

Robert Brassett (talk) 20:27, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Tone is better. Rankersbo (talk) 06:31, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Copyright checks when performing AfC reviews[edit]

Hello Rankersbo. This message is part of a mass mailing to people who appear active in reviewing articles for creation submissions. First of all, thank you for taking part in this important work! I'm sorry this message is a form letter – it really was the only way I could think of to covey the issue economically. Of course, this also means that I have not looked to see whether the matter is applicable to you in particular.

The issue is in rather large numbers of copyright violations ("copyvios") making their way through AfC reviews without being detected (even when easy to check, and even when hallmarks of copyvios in the text that should have invited a check, were glaring). A second issue is the correct method of dealing with them when discovered.

If you don't do so already, I'd like to ask for your to help with this problem by taking on the practice of performing a copyvio check as the first step in any AfC review. The most basic method is to simply copy a unique but small portion of text from the draft body and run it through a search engine in quotation marks. Trying this from two different paragraphs is recommended. (If you have any question about whether the text was copied from the draft, rather than the other way around (a "backwards copyvio"), the Wayback Machine is very useful for sussing that out.)

If you do find a copyright violation, please do not decline the draft on that basis. Copyright violations need to be dealt with immediately as they may harm those whose content is being used and expose Wikipedia to potential legal liability. If the draft is substantially a copyvio, and there's no non-infringing version to revert to, please mark the page for speedy deletion right away using {{db-g12|url=URL of source}}. If there is an assertion of permission, please replace the draft article's content with {{subst:copyvio|url=URL of source}}.

Some of the more obvious indicia of a copyvio are use of the first person ("we/our/us..."), phrases like "this site", or apparent artifacts of content written for somewhere else ("top", "go to top", "next page", "click here", use of smartquotes, etc.); inappropriate tone of voice, such as an overly informal tone or a very slanted marketing voice with weasel words; including intellectual property symbols (™,®); and blocks of text being added all at once in a finished form with no misspellings or other errors.

I hope this message finds you well and thanks again you for your efforts in this area. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC).

       Sent via--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi thanks for your concern. I'm already on the case, there were a large number of copyvios caught yesterday. Don't know if it was Monday or if it's always like that. Rankersbo (talk) 06:31, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Stub vs start[edit]

I'd suggest assessing articles like Talk:Tenement at Gdanska Street 9, Bydgoszcz as stub. Prose check script gives "Prose size (text only): 997 B (170 words)" and I support the rule of thumb of 250 words as dividing stubs from start. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:59, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

If you wish to disagree and reclassify it, fine, but I am happy with my original assessment. Rankersbo (talk) 07:03, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Request on 09:42:49, 18 November 2014 for assistance on AfC submission by Zee Baron[edit]

Thank you sir for the review on the Cokodeal draft.

Please sir, the organization is a start-up organization and does not yet have enough review in independent reliable sources. With time, i hope that there would be reviews in independent journals and articles. Is there a way to get around this for now, and still make the article accepted? Zee Baron (talk) 09:42, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Sadly, Zee Baron the answer is no, until a company has gained a reputation and notice, it isn't notable. Sorry, about that. Rankersbo (talk) 10:02, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Regarding Draft:J Alexander (Alex) Thier[edit]

The work was taken from a US federal government website. Content created by the US federal government is public domain according to Template:PD-USGov-AID. Jesse Viviano (talk) 15:38, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Request on 18:23:03, 18 November 2014 for assistance on AfC submission by Palisades1[edit]

HI I made changes as suggested to Eoin McNamee - I removed the name of the German agent that he allegedly met with and correted some spelling errors. Because of the way Ive written this article I dont think any references are necessary. Do you agree? Thanks.Palisades1 18:23, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Palisades1 18:23, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Your article needs sources to back it up. That was my main concern. Rankersbo (talk) 07:38, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

trimax mowing systems[edit]

Hi! I'm new to wiki and hope you could give me some comment on my draft page: Since my draft page was denied I added some reliable sources to the page. I would appreciate if you could help me with some advice on how to improve the page. Thank you and have a nice day Yuckfou2 (talk) 15:44, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Things seem to have moved on even more and before I could look at it your article was accepted. Well done! Rankersbo (talk) 11:17, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Draft: Centre of Excellence for Operations in Confined and Shallow Waters[edit]

Rankersbo, I edited the article and removed the parts that where the same as on the website. The new paragraphs are also shorter. If you find time I would appreciate if you could review my (very first :-)) article again and accept it for publication. Thank you for your commitment to Wikipedia seabas57 Seabas57 (talk) 07:31, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for the new info & helping out about the duplicate Raphael RJ2 page![edit]

You are right about my duplicate page about music producer Raphael RJ2 and everything is accurate. I even have pictures but don't know how to post them!

This is the correct page

I have more info about Raphael RJ2's production team Beats How U Want Em winning a grammy with Lil Wayne but don't know how to add it or write it, I just have the proof sources. His production team is on Lil Wayne's Carter 3 album. Song titled Don't get it aka Misunderstood which has Raphael RJ2's group member Rodney "Rodnae" Young of Beats How U Want Em Credited.

Rodney "Rodnae" Young Jr also needs a wikipedia page being he is a grammy award winning producer. I know all the facts & sources about him but don't know how to write it in a factual way that wikipedia accepts. RaphaelJohnson2 (talk) 03:18, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

I mostly deal with the technical aspects of page creation- formatting and duplicates, so there isn't much I can do to push this further.Rankersbo (talk) 06:45, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
Thanks for the information. I took your advice and carried on one of the two options that you mentioned: I rewrote the article in English. Luz Gelida (talk) 09:38, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Draft:Negative Energy[edit]

Hi, I reverted your cleanup to Draft:Negative Energy because it muddled up the comments made on the currently submitted version, with comments made on the previously-submitted and very different version. This led to a false presentation of comments relevant to the current version. Would you be willing to explaining the rationale behind your cleanup, so that we can agree a cleanup that does not introduce confusion? — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 09:38, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

I just ran the automatic clean up tool. It puts templates in date order at the top, and then comments. Rankersbo (talk) 14:23, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for the explanation. I have done a manual cleanup of the comments, preserving the inline subheadings. Hope that is OK. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 16:52, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
I'm going to report it to the tool developers, I don't understand what the tool did to the comments.Rankersbo (talk) 17:28, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
As far as I can tell it ordered the comments in reverse chronological order, presumably as it was supposed to. But it stripped out any paras that were not templated as comments (i.e. two inline entries being used as sub-headings) and slung them in at the end. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 23:20, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

20:27:42, 29 November 2014 review of submission by TonyCuo Ha[edit]

My Appreciation I appreciate the commitment - not-for-profit - of Wikipedia, of Wikipedia Foundation. I appreciate efforts of so-far contributors, volunteer editors, organizers. i am not frustrated because of the first time rejected. i am following your instruction To read more about Wikipedia then making necessary corrections. TonyCuo Ha (talk) 20:27, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Submitted Article : Under Review[edit]

Hello Rankersbo, I very much appreciate the speedy review (in-process) of the article I drafted for Mr. Ed DeCosta. as suggested on the submission page, I am continually checking the article for improvements and edit minor content details if I am seeing any statement that is not on a neutral point of view. I really would appreciate if you could share some points and feedback - if you have the time as I understand you have a lot of articles to go through. Thank you again.Pmanz2014 (talk) 02:35, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Request on 08:12:25, 1 December 2014 for assistance on AfC submission by Grrober[edit]

Elder Rankersbo, You just refused my article for WS-POE as not having enough secondary links to validate this reference. I suppose that I can give some additional links to IEEE for 802.3af. Sorry I'm a newbe to this would love all the assistance you can offer.

Grrober (talk) 08:12, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

I'm not some sort of Elder, more a janitor Grrober. The page isn't clear to me to me what the focus is. There needs to be a little more context. Rankersbo (talk) 08:16, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
Elder Rankersbo, Sorry if my reference to you as a missionary is out of place. But your page indicates that you are a missionary for the Church of Jesus Christ of Later day Saints. With I happen be a member of and know that all missionaries are Elders. Sorry for the side conversation but The WS-POE is simply a wireless configuration and addition to the POE specification. I'm simply trying to assist the next user that is looking into what WS-POE is. I was thinking that the link to the POE page would suffice. If you think I need to duplicate that information on this page that sounds counter productive and feels like a waste of space.
Thanks (Grrober (talk) 08:30, 1 December 2014 (UTC))

I'm sorry about the confusion, but someone else had written their profile on my page. Rankersbo (talk) 08:37, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Draft:Aliki Barnstone[edit]

The author Uranoz (talk) has made a "helpme" asking about this draft. It went through a complicated series of page moves on 10 November which I fear may have dropped it out of the AfC review queue - I don't see it there, but I am not very familiar with the inner workings of AfC. Could you check on its status? Thanks, JohnCD (talk) 12:26, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Sure, JohnCD. I just checked and it is still in the queue, such as it is, in the last 700. I looked at it and it doesn't look promising, the referencing isn't great, but the fact it's still there is down to it not being an obvious fail either.

16:13:37, 1 December 2014 review of submission by N.KUNJAMMAL[edit]

"This does not give enough context to frame the information" is not understood. I have created the article "Dustanas in astrology" only to be included under the section "Astrology".The article is not intended to be a comprehensive review but whatever is written is according to well-known works on the subject based on Vedic astrology. Please review again.

N.KUNJAMMAL (talk) 16:13, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, all articles need a clear lead section to introduce them and the lead section of this article is not clear to me. Even if you don't define these terms you need to wikilink them. Rankersbo (talk) 16:38, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

16:28:33, 1 December 2014 review of submission by Madhuyadav503[edit]

My article was rejected which i have submitted today evening,can i know why it was declined? and suggest me what improvements i can do for an article i have published.

Madhuyadav503 (talk) 16:28, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi Madhuyadav503 have a look at the article, the rejection reasons are given on the article. It was rejected because there were no sources. All articles need supporting by sources. Rankersbo (talk) 16:33, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

A bit more dull?[edit]

I am so confused. I did that as a test run. So, no humor, no fun? This needs to be written like it was made by Ben Stein? I will try and edit this more. I cannot figure out what you mean by more encyclopedic.

Kc2015 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kc2015 (talkcontribs) 23:41, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Kc2015, If you're just practicing you don't need to submit for review. Rankersbo (talk) 11:16, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Request on 20:58:54, 3 December 2014 for assistance on AfC submission by Mrjdavethor[edit]

This is Mrjdavethor responding to feedback about my two contributions to the wemen in science list. I was told that I had not highlighted the "notability" of the individual scientist. I understand your desire to highlight the notability factor; however, it seems to me that Wikipedia could make a contribution to women in science by simply notifying readers about current women scientists and the work that they are doing. I went to the "women in science" entry and notice that the attention seems to be on past award winners. That is very important indeed, however, there is no reference at all to all of the women who are presently engaged in scientific work. Your request for contributions to women in science, with its list of names, is a very good idea; but I don't think that you should limit contributions to only those who are "notable". Surely any woman who has fought their way into the position of a research professoriate should get notice for that fact alone. Young women who are aspiring to such positions would benefit greatly from a list of such women and their specialty research (awards or not), organized by research domain or by university. Such a compendium would inspire them and would provide guidance as to career paths in research. Also, of course it would provide recognition for all of those women who are presently laboring in science in obscurity relative to their male counterparts.


Mrjdavethor (talk) 20:58, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Unfortunately wikipedia is behind the curve on everything. It is not a campaigning website, nor is it a place to promote anything. Your two articles were almost completely unsourced. Rankersbo (talk) 22:07, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Draft: International Rafting Federation[edit]

Comment: You need sources independent of the association itself to back the article up. Rankersbo (talk) 10:24, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for reviewing this draft on Dec 1. You suggested that sources other than the organization needed to be cited. I have since added several additional citations. At your earliest convenience, I would appreciate you having another look. If you think the submission requires any other improvements, please let me know and I will attempt to implement them immediately. ~~Joe~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:40, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Gosh from famine to feast. Maybe a bit overdone now. Rankersbo (talk) 22:10, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

I'm new at this. This is a large international sports federation so citations are not a problem. If you now think it is overdone, it would be helpful if you could give me an idea of how many citations I should delete? I would like to avoid wasting your time with a repeat. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:33, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Request on 06:44:26, 5 December 2014 for assistance on AfC submission by Madhuyadav503[edit]

I have added reliable sources as required for verification and i am waiting for the response on my submission.I kindly request you to review my article and respond to it.I hope article is verified on my submission of enough reliable sources and it would be accepted.

Madhuyadav503 (talk) 06:44, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Same essay[edit]

Hold on now, I think I am getting it. Give me some time. Read it too!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kc2015 (talkcontribs) 01:19, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

All the time you need, as long as there is no urgent reason to delete (copyright) and you are continuing to work on the draft you can take as long as you like. It's about 6 months without an edit that makes us think you've given up. Rankersbo (talk) 22:30, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
I just checked Kc2015 and it still seems to be your perspective. Read WP:SOAP and WP:OR which explain what I mean. Rankersbo (talk)

Request on 06:33:27, 10 December 2014 for assistance on AfC submission by Masterproject[edit]

Sir, I want to know the complete working of Wikipedia and how you detect these sockpuppet cases. Masterproject (talk) 06:33, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

08:26:18, 10 December 2014 review of submission by[edit]

I would like to know the reason for the rejection of the article please. Is it a referencing issue so I can improve on it? Thanks77.69.219.43 (talk) 08:26, 10 December 2014 (UTC) (talk) 08:26, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Please check the article where the reason was given. Rankersbo (talk) 13:29, 10 December 2014 (UTC)


Trophy.png chess
Thankyou for all your help Chansonjay (talk) 13:39, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

07:51:42, 11 December 2014 review of submission by Heymossman[edit]

Hi, thanks for the feedback. Hopefully things have been clarified with the elimination of IMDB links and the addition of other references. On a separate note, kudos for the sustainable energy study. My son works in Phoenix with Environment America and is spearheading the push to create a 25% solar community in the next decade. I still don't understand how Germany apparently makes it work so well in its cloudy state, while we struggle even in sunny states.Heymossman (talk) 07:51, 11 December 2014 (UTC) Heymossman (talk) 07:51, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

A Barnstar For You[edit]

AfC-barnstar-remake.png The Articles for Creation barnstar
Thank you for your contributions towards AFC Submissions.You deserve this Barnstar. Param Mudgal talk? 11:13, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

09:24:20, 15 December 2014 review of submission by[edit]

Sorry for entering a so poor article, but as non native English speaker I thought that someone else could do a better work in translating the Spanish page. How much have I to improve the article to make it acceptable? (talk) 09:24, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

You don't actually have to write the article, there is a route for what you want to do, which is suggest there should be an article on the topic. That is to go to WP:Requested articles. Rankersbo (talk) 09:29, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
Thank you, I just have made an improvement addig more informations to start the page, maybe now the minimal standard is now satisfied? If not, I added a Requested article entry as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 09:35, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Request on 21:00:04, 15 December 2014 for assistance on AfC submission by Alihashemi40[edit]

Dear Sir

Thank you for you reply.

The information which I have written is about myself. Information regarding to this can be found on the IranianParliment 6th Round website.

Please let me know about the results


Ali Hashemi

OK, I don't think I can do this by myself, but maybe at requested articles.Rankersbo (talk) 07:32, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Alihashemi40 (talk) 21:00, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

A kitten for you![edit]

Kitten (06) by Ron.jpg

looks like my cat!

reesehanyon 21:11, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Layburn article[edit]

Hi Rankersbo,

Thanks for reviewing my article- wasn't expecting it to be done so quick so apologies for the late reply.

I'm new to this article writing so thanks for the feedback and I'll look to add some more citations to give more notability to the article. I can add more content to the article too but thought I'd get it approved first before-hand. Is that the right approach?

If you can give me any other tips to improve the page then please let me know.

Cheers. Damian avatar (talk) 00:51, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

It's usually best to start small and build up once published, yes. But to be reviewed the reviewer needs to have some idea the company is notable so there needs to be enough context to judge the company, and some independent, reliable sources showing that significant coverage is out there. The article doesn't need to be perfect, but it needs to cover WP:42 and WP:CORP. Rankersbo (talk) 09:51, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

18:02:28, 20 December 2014 review of submission by Harold Foppele[edit]

Hello Rankersbo,

We don't know each other, but you reviewed my page and concluded that my page lacked a clear opening line. Without asking you to write my page for me, it would help me a lot, if you gave me some ideas as of how to do it. Also I tried to create an intro box, but miserably failed, even when taking the http out of other pages. Is it possible for you to do some guiding here as well ? Best Regards, Harold Foppele Harold Foppele (talk) 18:02, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Harold Foppele (talk) 18:02, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

15:29:05, 23 December 2014 review of submission by RAKGRS[edit]

RAKGRS (talk) 15:29, 23 December 2014 (UTC)Hi, I have submitted an article on RAKGRS but it was rejected, I need help why it is rejected and where I made the mistakes.kindly help me regarding this problem.

RAKGRS (talk) 15:29, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi, have you read the advice on the article? Rankersbo (talk) 16:34, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Happy Holidays![edit]

Wikipedia Happy New Year.png Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2015!!!

Hello Rankersbo, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2015.
Happy editing,
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:01, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of {{U|Technical 13}} to all registered users whom have commented on his talk page. To prevent receiving future messages, please follow the opt-out instructions on User:Technical 13/Holiday list

Hello! I resubmitted the article about dr Fassina, thank you for explaining the issues. I hope that it is ok for now (as a start, I just translated the French version, but some things can be added in the future) I don't understand how to add images, but hopefully somebody alse will do it since there is a wiki image already Thank you! Happy New Year! Barbara — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:19, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

21:58:41, 31 December 2014 review of submission by Grrober[edit]

Please help me understand why you rejected a redirect on the WS-POE page? The purpose of the redirect is to help people to who are looking for Wireless Power over Ethernet WS-POE. I think that it is a subject that is related to Power over Ethernet (POE) or is covewred in the POE article. As such it should just a redirect to the main POE article. It will help a user to understand that the two techniques are related or that the WS-POE is a configuration change to the POE systems.

Grrober (talk) 21:58, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

A different kind of pope[edit]

Template:Talkback RankersboErica Blatt Harkins

Hello and thank you very much for your kind message. However, somewhere it is a mistake. I never submitted the article "A Different kind of Pope" to create a page, I was simply practicing in the sand box as I did with other small writings. When I finished I pushed the save bottom that writing was supposed to disappear but it did not. I would never submit an article in that condition and without a lot of editing. Please be so kind to delete the article entitled "A Different kind of Pope". Thank you and Happy New Year.

Erica Blatt Harkins

Interview for The Signpost[edit]

This is being sent to you as a member of WikiProject Articles for creation

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Articles for creation for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Thanks, Rcsprinter123 (relate) @ 10:30, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

02:49:44, 12 January 2015 review of submission by Lui Ng[edit]

lui (talk) 02:49, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Please review again Huawei Corporation is different with Huawei technologies co. ltd. and this is why i post it to let people understand the difference. And Huawei corporation is a battery manufacturer with the known brand name call OUTDO market worldwide.

lui as I said in the review, the article you wrote does not establish this. You need sources to show this company is notable, and the article needs to make it clear what the company is and does and that it is a different company. Rankersbo (talk) 06:48, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Skip Kelly[edit]

Thank you so much for your incredibly speedy review of the article that I wrote about Skip Kelly! I do have his permission to use the biographical information from LinkedIn. A copy of that permission letter can be found here: I'm not terribly fluent in Wikipedia procedures, so if there is a submission process for sending in that letter, please let me know! Paulinaperez82 (talk) 21:06, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

You're the Best![edit]

Happy New Year... I just want to say a big thank you for help with my first article when I was struggling. Because of you, many people have now edited it and it looking really great. Thank you so much for that opportunity to learn how an "encyclopaedic" article is written. Thanks a whole lot! — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 08:04, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

RfC - Helper Script access[edit]

An RfC has been opened at RfC to physically restrict access to the Helper Script. You are invited to comment. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:20, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on WP:AN#Closure review: Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/RfC to physically restrict access to the Helper Script[edit]

Hello! You have been selected to receive an invitation to participate in the closure review for the recent RfC regarding the AfC Helper script. You've been chosen because you participated in the original RfC. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. This message is automated. Replies will not be noticed. --QEDKTC 14:25, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

04:32:23, 25 February 2015 review of submission by Chandan vermarxl[edit]

Chandan vermarxl (talk) 04:32, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

I submitted article about author and activist Kundan Srivastava. Earlier same article was submitted by username: bihngo but message by reviewer was we don't accept article from organization, company, NGO so I submitted again. Please approved the Article and please research about Kundan Srivastava. Thanks

23:32:23, 26 February 2015 review of submission by Mugozi[edit]

Mugozi (talk) 23:32, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Please, help me,


Speedy deletion declined: User:Gabban232/sandbox[edit]

Hello Rankersbo. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of User:Gabban232/sandbox, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: I don't think blanking a user sandbox should be taken as a request for deletion - I blank mine frequently before re-using it. Thank you. JohnCD (talk) 17:49, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

19:10:21, 7 March 2015 review of submission by Phatboy12345[edit]

Hi -- thanks for the information and help in understanding why my submission was denied. It was my first Wiki submission, so I'm trying to learn more. Can you please help compare and contrast my submission to the current "For Dummies" Wiki page? Here's the link to the "For Dummies" Wiki page...

That compare-and-contrast information will help me understand how I can edit my submission to be published like the "For Dummies" is currently published.

Thanks again!

Phatboy12345 (talk) 19:10, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

OK Phatboy12345, I can't do too much.
  • Your page is 90% the blurb of the books, with only a short sentence setting context, the For dummies article discusses the context of those books, their impact.
  • The books listed in the for dummies article are done briefly in 7 or 8 bullet points.
  • Thirdly the For Dummies article has multiple independent sources.

A barnstar for you![edit]

Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
hello world Takingnotes21 (talk) 03:57, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Request on 07:52:12, 6 May 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by[edit] (talk) 07:52, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi what article are you talking about and what is your question? Rankersbo (talk) 17:30, 6 May 2015 (UTC)