Before you leave comments or feedback please login! Anonymous comments might be ignored!
Caesarean section photography now in Wikiversity Journal
I want to let you know that the Caesarean section photography is now included in Wikiversity Journal of Medicine, which means that others, when citing Wikipedia, can now use the following reference format:
- Fadhley, Salim (2014). "Caesarean section photography". Wikiversity Journal of Medicine 1 (2). doi:10.15347/wjm/2014.006. ISSN 2001-8762.
- Thanks, please go ahead. I'm delighted that you nominated the image. And here's the baby all grown up  --Salimfadhley (talk) 22:46, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of Snow tha Product discography
Hi, just letting you know that I declined your prod on Snow tha Product discography as the reason you gave was that it was unreferenced when in fact it was partially referenced. Despite this I'm not convinced it is notable (and the referencing it has is not very good at all) but feel it would be better debated through a standard AfD nomination. Peace out. Keresaspa (talk) 00:21, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
Please don't delete Bikini Royale!!
I would advise against deleting the Bikini Royale page because the film happens to be a very good erotic adult film. Also, I saw it once not only on the Cinemax channels, but also on Cinemax On Demand on AT&T U-verse. Please don't delete the page. AdamDeanHall (talk) 21:36, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
- I am not an admin, and therefore do not have the power to delete anything. I have flagged the page as having serious problems - the likely consequence is that other editors will discuss whether this content is appropriate for Wikipedia. --Salimfadhley (talk) 21:38, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
Kevin Healey (autism activist)
I added a ton more articles from verifiable sources like Huffington post, daily mail, autism speaks, radio and tv shows where people can see what I wrote, Kevin spoke about publicly in interviews. Any other suggestions? This man is an amazing spokesman and ambassador, I really want to honor him. --Kittymccaffery (talk) 5:24, 21, August 2014 (UTC)Kitty McCaffery 08/21/14 5:25pm
Dear Salimfadhley, I created a Wikipedia page for Haarlem Model United Nations, see www.hmun.nl. This is an organization run by high school students therefore the level of our article isn´t that high. I myself am a college student and would like to keep the page. I don´t know what´s wrong with it or what I should specifically change about it. I know you have made some changes to it and that you are interested in MUN. It´s highly important to us to have a Wikipedia page: participating students, parents, people who´d like to get to know what this event is can read about it. Sadly, I have no technical skills at all, so I was wondering if you could help me fix the page up a bit (like the citations). I know it´s a lot to ask you, but I´d be very thankful if you could. Thank you! -User: Liedxoxo (I don´t get the wikilanguage that well, so sorry for cluttering your page up)
- Actually it was User:Cjeongbis who tagged the page with concerns about Notability (see WP:N for the applicable regulations). And it seems that the suggestion was to merge the content of the article into the article about the school which hosts the MUN. In general the solution is easy - just add more sources that help explain why this page is independently notable. Typically coverage in local or national newspapers will do. Specialist press (e.g. educational media, or teaching journals) is also acceptable. --Salimfadhley (talk) 19:17, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
I don´t get the source thing: I´ve tried to add website sources (newspaper included) to "references", but it didn´t work out. Could you please help me with that? And do you know how big the chance is of having the page deleted, because I don´t have much time with school, etc. so I´m going to work on it bit by bit. (talk)
- Can you get onto the Wikipedia-EN-Help IRC channel? (Wikipedia:IRC), if not can you take a moment to do one of the basic Wikipedia training packages that explain how sources & referencing works. Afterwards I would be happy to explain anything that does not make complete sense. --Salimfadhley (talk) 20:07, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for your review of Esper_(CPE). The article did indeed not specify why this is notable. I also got feedback from User HighKing (see his talk page).
I am new as an author on Wikipedia, so please forgive errors in communication, this is well intended.
I can refer to e.g.
- http://www.amazon.com/Analysis-Complex-Event-Processing-Esper-ebook/dp/B00CMCRZXO A book about Esper as Complex Event Procesing tool
- http://www.simflow.net/Publications/Papers/Year2008/ZCJ-0806.pdf A "Springer Science" scientific publication about Esper as a Complex Event Processing system
- http://blog.octo.com/en/the-esper-cep-ecosystem/ "... Still, at this time Esper is the leading general-purpose low-cost CEP solution, especially with its open-source engine. ..."
I have no connection with Esper. It's just that is the leading _Open Source_ solution for CEP and it is missing from Wikipedia and from the list of products on Complex Event Processing page.
If I add these references to the Esper_(CPE) page, would it have a chance of being accepted?
Thanks again, Peter Vandenabeele
- In order, the Amazon link is useless for establishing notability and should not be in wikipedia. The other two are borderline. Has this software ever been in the news, even specialist electronics industry news? --Salimfadhley (talk) 07:30, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for continuing your feedback.
- "has it been in the news ?" => This is a news article in the highly ranking InfoQ site : http://www.infoq.com/news/Esper--ESP-CEP
- "Amazon link is not useful" => I used that as first link because I read "Sources of evidence include recognized peer reviewed publications, credible and authoritative _books_". The fact that there is an entire book published about the Esper Open Source software seemed relevant to me.
Thanks, --Peter Vandenabeele
- "highly ranking"? InfoQ does not appear to be a particularly important software news site. As I said before, that article could probably be used to verify details about the subject but is not sufficient to establish notability of the subject. The Amazon link is definitely not useful. In general links to Amazon - and any page that advertises a product is not allowed from Wikipedia. You could link to the book's actual content - that might be more acceptable. Once again we are up against the problem that just because somebody wrote a book it does not automagically qualify as notable in Wikipedia. I'd suggest you familiarize yourself with the Wikipedia notability guidelines instead of arguing points with me! --Salimfadhley (talk) 22:53, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
Senior seminar PROD
Hi there. I saw that you had begun taking care of business over at Senior seminar, which was unilaterally undone without discussion, so I wondered if you were interested in escalating that or if you'd changed your mind. I was kinda learning about your process there, of addressing a subject which is completely common like a dictionary entry. — Smuckola (Email) (Talk) 00:26, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
- Sorry for keeping you waiting. I think the article should be deleted. I don't currently have time to follow up on this matter. --Salimfadhley (talk) 00:04, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
Revertion of Proposed Deletion of Nerf Longshot CS-6
Hi, Salimfadhley! I saw your message about your proposed deletion of Nerf Longshot CS-6 on the 23 August, 2014. In the meantime, I added some references and reverted some deleted sources from Nikkimaria. I wanted to ask you if you could check the page Nerf Longshot CS-6 and if the sources are acceptable by Wikipedia policies can you remove the deletion proposal? Please contact me on my talk page if you have done it. — NerfersUnited (Talk) 3:41, August 26, 2014 (CET)
- You need to find what we call Reliable Secondary Sources, unfortunately everything you have added is either a primary source (e.g. the Hasbro web-site) or user-created content (e.g. some other Wiki). You might want to refer to wikipedia's Notability guidelines which explain the rules behind what kind of content usually gets into Wikipedia. --Salimfadhley (talk) 19:26, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
I'm not familiar with the Wikipedia format for communicating with other users but I assume I just write to you directly on your page. You have suggested that the Trudy Harris page be deleted, and have asked for sources. I thought I had provided sources in the initial article so I could us a little more info on why you think it should be deleted and how I can best work with you on this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DirectorJones (talk • contribs) 19:54, 3 September 2014 (UTC)