User talk:Aggie80

Hooray! You created your Teahouse profile!

Congratulations! You have earned the

	Welcome to the Teahouse Badge
	Awarded to editors who have introduced themselves at the Wikipedia Teahouse. Guest editors with this badge show initiative and a great drive to learn how to edit Wikipedia. Earn more badges at: Teahouse Badges

Thank you for introducing yourself and contributing to Wikipedia! If you have any questions feel free to drop me a line at my talk page.
Happy Editing! ~ Anastasia (talk) 18:37, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello Aggie80. I am new to Wikipedia, and still learning. Please bear with me, in case some comments are not displayed as they should. I submitted an article on Antoni Peretiatkowicz a while ago. Today, I noticed your comment about formatting, and in line citations. I would love to improve the text, but need you guidance. Can you let me know what exactly you are looking for. Anna Peretiatkowicz (talk) 20:39, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Badgeometer

Hey Aggie :)

I replaced your badgeometer with the full version. It works the same just has an extra level. I hope you don't mind. Also, I'm curious how you like (or don't like) the centered formatting? Would you prefer it on the left? Best, Ocaasi ^{t | c} 21:09, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Lyle Ritz

Definitely meets notability, one of those 'glad someone made an article about him' pages!

I added the appropriate infobox (Used Jake Shimabukuro as a guide, love that guy) but you need to add the album names.

Re-wrote lead.

Suggestions - write more as a timeline, less like an interview. Replace "Lyle" with "Ritz" (saw maybe one or two of those.) Wikilink to x-reference other musicians. See if you can get a free-use picture (he might upload one with proper release if asked). -EBY (talk) 02:04, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Did you use this? http://www.ne.jp/asahi/matt/uke/jam/vicg60452e.html

- EBY (talk) 03:56, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

I know I used that reference on the Sakuma article. I've gone through and worked on the pronoun/first names on all three. I haven't got the hang of the lead yet. Thanks for all your help!Aggie80 (talk) 11:30, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

I finished making edits to this article & unfortunately created a save conflict. You may need to check the versions. I don't think I've got anything else to add - though you may want to change my spelling of Hawai'i to remove the accent. Outdented sections. Added main article link. Feel free to use this as template now, other editors will make changes (nothing on Wikipedia is ever done.) Let me know if you need anything else.

Good work. Good luck. EBY (talk) 17:33, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the help! I've learned a great deal watching your changes. Nice rearrangement. I was trying to get there in my head and realized that there needed to be a bit more bass in the mix! re: Jake Shimabukuro-> Yeah, he is great! I've seen him live 3 times with a 4th time coming up in August. Even had my picture taken with him! Jake and I I'm going to see if I can get some photos, I have had correspondence with Jim Beloff and I'll bet he has photos that can be used.Aggie80 (talk) 17:59, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

• Re: JS - Fun picture. We've seen him live, as well, and it was a really good show.

Glad to be of help, excited for your articles. You've got a knack for finding reliable sources and using them which is the bigger half the BIO:LP battle. EBY (talk) 18:52, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Roy Sakuma & May Singhi Breen

Hi, another editor confirmed Sakuma's notability and I think Breen will pass, too, but both need similar treatment to Ritz: add infobox, re-write lede sentence according to the template (name, birth, nationality, instrument, high points of notability), use last name or pronoun, write along a timeline, keep personal information minimal, wikilink associated articles. Does this make sense? EBY (talk) 04:04, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

I've been wikilinking like crazy on these! But how often do I wikilink something? How many times in one article should I wikilink ukulele for example? Once various pages are approved, I can go back and link the new pages to them. Ritz/Sakuma/Beloff/Hill are all interrelated. I'll work on the info boxes and think I've gotten most of the pronouns taken care of. Nice to know that Sakuma is good.

On a related note -> does it make sense for me to reply here, or should I put it on your Talk page? Aggie80 (talk) 11:36, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Went to your page and learned about the Talkback function! Aggie80 (talk) 16:15, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Talkbalk works great. Remember when you like something, steal the template.

The rule of thumb is to wikilink something once per article. Not everything needs to be wikilinked, but anything with a proper name should be as well as key concepts or material in an article. (e.g. The Wrecking Crew, ukulele, Chicago, jazz, US Army Band). EBY (talk) 16:48, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

I've re-written all the leads and done some re-arranging, as well as general clean up. There are lots of wikilinks I can add, but I'll putz along at that for the next few days, I suspect it will be next week before they get officially reviewed. Aggie80 (talk) 16:55, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

J. Chalmers Doane, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

—Anne Delong (talk) 00:02, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

—Mikemoral♪♫ 00:23, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

Lyle Ritz, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Falkirks^Talk 04:46, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

May Singhi Breen, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Falkirks^Talk 14:31, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

Jim Beloff, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

SarahStierch (talk) 18:44, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

Roy Sakuma, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

SarahStierch (talk) 19:54, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Award for you

The Dive Right In Award I award this Dive Right In Award to you as a newcomer who has shown real enthusiasm in helping with administrative tasks at Wikipedia. It's sometimes hard to get your balance, and there's a lot to learn, but keep on trying. Many, many thanks, TheOneSean [ U | T | C ] 21:32, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Hey, Aggie, I just wanted to welcome you to AfC and the Teahouse. It's always awesome to see a new user jumping right in to really valuable tasks on Wikipedia. Keep up the good work! TheOneSean ^{[ U | T | C ]} 21:32, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much, Theonesean! I'm not sure what got me started, other than I found a terrible lack of articles on some of the most important people in the ukulele world and set out to remedy it. So I'm slowly fixing the situation and have already added six articles! The Teahouse has been very helpful, as well as the reviewing committee! The Ukulele Guy - Aggie80 (talk) 21:44, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

I'm always willing to recognize a good editor. And that's interesting! I never really looked at the ukulele articles on WP. Perhaps you could start a Wikiproject or a task force with that purpose. I would be more than willing to help you out with that. My only advice to you is to do as much as you can, and then do some more. Thanks, TheOneSean ^{[ U | T | C ]} 22:02, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Notability on submission - Conflicting information

Hi Aggie, I just wanted to get some information from you and try and figure out this process a little better. I am trying to craft my ability to create articles on Wikipedia. The version that you reviewed was created after a discussion with Gtwfan52. Gtwfan52 told me that Smoke Magazine was an acceptable source to show notability because it has been used as a primary source for other cigar production companies on Wikipedia. The only concerns after the last discussion we had seemed to be language that did not sound neutral (which I removed). If you could give me some suggestions on how to produce an acceptable article that shows notability I would appreciate it. If you are curious about the conversations I had with Gtwfan52, you can visit his talk page to see where we ended up at. Thank you for any advice you can give me. Prpiranha (talk) 16:33, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

I also did just add an additional source from Fox 2 News. This is a television interview discussing the recent growth of the label. Let me know what else I can do to get you what you need. Prpiranha (talk) 16:44, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

I have several concerns, so I'll lay them out. Note that we can only use one of about 12 reasons for declining an article at any one time, and the notability is considered the most critical, so takes priority. The Fox 2 new blurb is not likely to remain for any length of time, and it adds so little to the overall knowledge, though it does help. The first two sentences seem to disagree with each other. One says they manufacture cigars. Later in the article it says they don't own any manufacturing facilities. The next sentence says they sell high end cigars and accessories. Do they sell other brands? Do they make the accessories?

It is also a bit of a turn off to discover that almost half the length of the article is dedicated to cigars they no longer make. There is so much more that could be added to the article, such as the bow tie shaped banding. Why don't they make them anymore? (Reading between the lines, because they are launching the new Metallic lines.) I'd create a sub-category under Cigars for Discontinued and Current types.

Try these for some more resources [Smarta - Personal Branding] Sort of a rehash of the Entrepreneur article, which is by far your strongest reference, but adds an additional voice. go ahead and add some of the review blogs such as . The production section starts off with a negative sentence. People don't care what a company isn't, they want to know what it is.

At best this might classify as a 'stub.' It would be better if we can get it to at least start level. (I'm usually okay with getting a "Start" on an article I begin, happy with a C and downright ecstatic to get a B!) Give us some more info on the company itself. Is it privately held? A partnership? Sole proprietorship? What have their revenues or sales been like? (I see that another editor didn't like the idea about saying much about the founder. I wouldn't go overboard on it, but a bit more about it would be appropriate) Another area that could be expanded would be about the founder. He has some great quotes out there! His success in branding is evident and worthy of a few sentences, just avoid the Puffery/Peacock/Advertising language unless you have the documentation to back it up. The Ukulele Guy - Aggie80 (talk) 17:27, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi Aggie, I think I took care of the concerns you brought up, but I'll never know until you check it out. If you take a look at the article and it appears to need more work, just leave me a message here and I'll keep working on it. I appreciate you taking the time to outline your concerns and assist me in developing my Wikipedia content creation skills. I already feel as though this article is better, and can only assume my skill level on Wikipedia in general is growing as well. Prpiranha (talk) 16:40, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

I do like it much better! So, three things I would work on:

1. Replace the use of Bow Tie Cigar Company in places with an appropriate pronoun in some places.
2. Make sure your capitalization is correct (the Copper Line) is mixed.
3. Formatting challenge. I think the discontinued section would be improved by using some columns to shrink the page space.
4. Add some wikilinks. The obvious one would be one or two of the uses of cigar. You get them by putting double square brackets on each side of the word, phrase or name.

The Ukulele Guy - Aggie80 (talk) 16:55, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi Aggie, thanks again for the help and providing more feedback. I went through the new revisions that you suggested and I think I got what you are looking for. The article is ready for you to take another look when you have a chance. Let me know what you think and I'll keep working with you! Prpiranha (talk) 15:21, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Made some edits.

Hi Aggie80, I'm trying to get this cleaned up. Josef Kote is a pretty remarkable artist, this seams like a good place to start my contributions. I hope to learn from this process. The page is getting better. Any help would be greatly appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LeCorbu1987 (talk • contribs) 18:25, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

A good starting place would be to get the references set up correctly. Right now there is no clear listing. WP:REF provides a good overview of how to place them inline and with the items they are supporting. Clean up some of the essay type phrases, such as "Slowly but surely" and "Always looking to widen his scope," there are a lot more. Remember that this is factual, no fluff, no advertising, nothing that can't be backed up with a reference. You should take care of those two things before you re-submit for review. Thanks for asking and for moving forward!The Ukulele Guy - Aggie80 (talk) 18:34, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

If you get a chance check out the revised Articles for creation/Josef Kote. Still working on some images. Reading up on them now. I have about 10 more sources to review and add. Thanks for your help, mate! — Preceding unsigned comment added by LeCorbu1987 (talk • contribs) 19:38, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

AFC Helper Script flubbed your decline

You may want to move the contents of this edit to User talk:Peterzapp where the now-renamed user will see it. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 23:37, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Programmer notified, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Helper script/Development page#User talk pages that are redirects. It would help the programmers a lot if they knew if you were using the beta script or the production script (the "gadget" in the preferences). davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 23:51, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Telluride Bluegrass Festival

Dear Aggie80: Thanks for improving the Telluride Bluegrass Festival page. Blog posts aren't considered to be very reliable information sources, but at least it's a start! There are so many articles about great bluegrass festivals, bands and musicians that need work. —Anne Delong (talk) 21:41, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I know, but I've been trying to find anything that lists the band contest winners! I've been working on an article for Run Boy Run and they won in 2011, and have been going non-stop ever since! Love to have your feedback on it Run Boy Run before I send it for review. They are sending me a picture that we can use, with appropriate release. Is it appropriate to add them to the Bluegrass Band list or is it only for bands that already have a page?The Ukulele Guy - Aggie80 (talk) 22:48, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

You can add them to the band list if you add a citation next to the band name demonstrating that they are a known band - one of the ones from the article will do. Or, you can wait until you get the article approved and then just add them with a link to the article.

About the article: I filled out a few of the references for you. I think you have enough to get the article approved for notability. You may have a little trouble with the reviewers about some promotional comments - maybe leave out the first and third sentences about gaining attention; they don't really add any info, since the following sentences make that obvious anyway. The Prairie Home Companion remarks need a reference - but you should be able to use the broadcast itself as a reference for Garrison's comments if you can find out the broadcast date and station. The OFAM reference appears to be a dead link. You've got some good information there; maybe try to make it a little more neutral and formal. You can submit it any time now; remember that if it is declined you can always continue to improve it and submit it again. Good luck! —Anne Delong (talk) 05:11, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

Mighty Uke (movie), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Jamesx12345 (talk) 22:54, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Burger Bakar/Submission declined on 22 June 2013 by Aggie80

Dear Anggie80,

Please help me. I dont understand. Tried to follow but seems cant figure it out on that 'Citations' part.

ref > This submission's references do not adequately evidence the subject's notability—see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing, so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. What you can do: Add citations (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners) to secondary reliable sources that are entirely independent of the subject. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pandamuse (talk • contribs) 16:01, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

The citations are only one part of the problem. There is not much content here, just a few sentences. There doesn't seem to be any evidence that this burger joint is notable in any way to deserve an article in Wikipedia. The English grammar is poor. There appears to be a single reference, other than the company web site itself. It is full of puffery/peacock words without any evidence to support them. ("created a burger revolution" "new phenomenon"} Read some of the other articles on Wikipedia and compare them to what you have written. There is a big difference. The Ukulele Guy - Aggie80 (talk) 17:42, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Dear Aggie80, Thanks for the reply. Will improve it and resubmit soon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pandamuse (talk • contribs) 01:36, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Charles_Harris_MA_BA

Dear Aggie80 Thank you for your email review and your helpful observations. Regarding the career of the artist Charles Harris MA BA it is difficult to appreciate what more one could say about him, as he does not like attention seeking and he does not seek attention for himself. However, he holds the Freedom of the City of London for his work and whilst a student he was awarded two scholarships at the Royal Academy of Arts in London, England. He was only one of a handful to be given the opportunity to study there for six years instead of the standard three years. He won every prize he ever entered for as a student, including the prestigious Royal Academy Bronze Medal for Drawing and the Royal Academy Silver Medal for Drawing. The famous British Art critic Brian Sewell named him as ‘one of the six best British painters for the future’. He has staged exhibitions across the globe, and received a Commission from the Queen of Swaziland. One of his paintings was selected as ‘Best Picture in the Biggest Art Show in the World’ at Artexpo in New York. As an authority on classical Italian Renaissance Art he was invited three times to deliver talks at the Viva Italia Exhibitions at both Earls Court and Olympia Exhibition Centres in London. This was followed by his largest ever exhibition at Pescara Italy for the entire summer of 2008. (Pescara is Italy’s largest Adriatic seaside resort.)-+` +++++ Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II holds two of his pictures and so does HRH the Prince of Wales. Last year his work was purchased by the famous art collector Mr Hans Astrup for the ‘Astrup Fearnley Museet’, in Oslo, Norway, a huge museum of contemporary art in a new building designed by the architect Renzo Piano. Here in Scotland, Charles was invited by John Swinney MSP, the Scottish Government Finance Secretary, to stage an exhibition at the opening of the Scottish Parliament in Edinburgh. He was photographed with Amanda Catto, Chairperson of the Scottish Arts Council. Scotland’s No1 poet Walter Perrie described Charles as an unacknowledged genius. And Lesley Riddoch of the BBC described him as ‘The Lone Voice in the Wilderness for Traditional Art’. I think a misunderstanding here is not so much that Charles is not famous but that he pursues the lost and forgotten language of Classical painting in today’s world of more common abstract art. As an example of this, an accomplished professional family man with two children, working for a large company and living in the village near Charles told me recently that he was not used to seeing real three-dimensional images that required no interpretation. He said “they were so real they made me feel itchy round the neck and uncomfortable” but he did not mean by this that the pictures were ugly, but thought rather that they were beautiful.

This anecdote reminded me of a conversation with Charles who was talking about his friend the Rev. Prof. Dr. Douglas Kelly in America. Before a major sermon, Douglas said, “A problem with the impact of a modern media today is that people can no longer be guaranteed to be able to tell truth from lies”.

Charles is not a media attention seeker, preferring to employ actions instead of words, and is therefore concerned with the need to restore memories of sight and inspiration from the Great Tradition of Art. I hope therefore this goes some way to fulfilling your notability criteria for inclusion of Charles Harris in Wikipedia whilst allowing a man to choose to have some measure of discretion and privacy in both his personal life and his career. As a ‘learner’ at Wikipedia I will therefore re-edit my piece about Charles Harris accordingly with more attention to the references and ask for your continued assistance in putting up the short article to begin with and to allow me to provide you with the information you require. For further and full information on Charles Harris you can find extensive details regarding Charles and his career on both his websites as follows. www.charlesharris.co.uk www.charlesharrisinternational.com (this site has video clips included) With many thanks again John Bain (Bainjoh7) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.165.134.38 (talk) 11:18, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

John, The biggest problem with the submission is that someone has written an essay on the individual and not provided a single reference from an independent source to verify any of the information. My suggestion would be to read some of the other biographies on Wikipedia and look at the format, the layout, and most importantly, the citations. Starting a short article with proper sourcing is very appropriate. Here is an example of a properly supported short piece that actually got a B rating on acceptance. May Singhi Breen. The Ukulele Guy - Aggie80 (talk) 11:39, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Adam Zemke

How did Adam Zemke not get an article, yet Henry Yanez and Martin Howrylak have one? That seems totally inconsistent. Additionally, Zemke is a congressman who could play a key role in Michigan legalizing same-sex marriage, which would make him a somewhat historic figure. The other two have no claims like that. Wikipedian77 (talk) 13:17, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

I agree, I don't believe they meet the notability criteria either, and have flagged them as such. The Ukulele Guy - Aggie80 (talk) 14:13, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

I happened to see your notice at Wikipedian77's talk page about this proposed article. I believe you have made a mistake here. The subject is a member of the state legislature and is thus automatically notable per WP:POLITICIAN. I am willing to work with the author to improve the article, but "not notable" appears to be an incorrect interpretation here; please reconsider. Thanks. --MelanieN (talk) 14:48, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Being an elected official does not automatically make someone notable. They have to meet WP:BASIC first. It is a secondary criteria and I don't believe any of them have enough written on them to independently show notability. You want to accept it, go for it, but I don't believe they meet it. The Ukulele Guy - Aggie80 (talk) 14:54, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

I will definitely improve upon the article. There is a lot written about Zemke, as you can see by Googling his name. Wikipedian77 (talk) 15:04, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Great! That's what is needed, the additional references. The Ukulele Guy - Aggie80 (talk) 15:30, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Being an elected official does not automatically make someone notable. At the national or sub-national (state) level, yes it does. Please see WP:POLITICIAN and also Wikipedia:Common outcomes#Politicians - which says "Elected and appointed political figures at the national cabinet level are generally regarded as notable, as are usually those at the major sub-national level (US state, Canadian province, Japanese prefecture, etc.)" Even if an article is dreadful, like the unreferenced stubs you tagged above (I will go deal with those articles later), it is long-accepted consensus that elected members of state legislatures are regarded as notable. --MelanieN (talk) 15:08, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Note 12 indicates that people who meet this criteria usually meet the primary criteria. In this case, from what is/was provided, they did not meet the primary criteria. If they can provide additional resources to show notability, great. But all 7,382 state legislators currently in office aren't going to meet it. I don't see having 100,000 (conservative estimate) stub articles on state legislatures being what Wikipedia has in mind. I think we should get some input from others on the interpretation, there may even have already been a discussion on it. The Ukulele Guy - Aggie80 (talk) 15:30, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Note 12 goes on to say "Biographers and historians will usually have already written about the past and present holders of major political offices. However, this criterion ensures that our coverage of major political offices, incorporating all of the present and past holders of that office, will be complete regardless." In other words, REGARDLESS of coverage, the intent is that coverage of major political offices should be COMPLETE; the policy really does want coverage on all 7,382 state legislators and 100,000 ever-been-a-state-legislator.
What we have here is a difference of interpretation. At AfD discussions I have often seen people cite as gospel that "state legislators are presumed notable per WP:POLITICIAN;" the rationale is that you can ALWAYS find significant coverage of someone at that level if you look. You disagree with this interpretation (I get the feeling this is the first time you have heard of it); you believe that state legislators must explicitly meet WP:GNG within the article. You are an experienced editor; so am I; clearly we need some more input on this. Please ask some experienced editor whose opinions you trust to weigh in here. --MelanieN (talk) 17:05, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
Oh, I see that you have already posted at Wikipedia talk:Notability. That's even better. --MelanieN (talk) 17:13, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

(I get the feeling this is the first time you have heard of it) Ouch! The Notability guidelines are the first thing I read. And I suppose being an attorney I'll argue the interpretation. You are an experienced editor Thanks, but not that experienced. While it is true I've been registered for many years, 99% of my input is in the last month. Oh, I see that you have already posted at Wikipedia talk:Notability. That's even better. Figured to go directly to the main area. It appears they agree there is a presumption, but that it can be challenged, as I did on the other two articles. I hate the presumption, it should be done right the first time, that's the purpose of the review process, to get an article in decent shape so that it doesn't get challenged. And a complete listing can be created on the appropriate state legislature pages. On the other hand, I can create articles for a dozen of my ancestors that served at one time or another. All it takes is their name and when they served and it is presumed valid.The Ukulele Guy - Aggie80 (talk) 17:54, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

I didn't mean to say you had never heard of Notability; I meant you had never heard of the "all state legislators are presumed notable" consensus. You are not the only one who disagrees with that interpretation, and it has been challenged in the past - most recently last April [1] - but never to the point of rewording the consensus-based guideline at WP:N or the "usual outcomes" result at WP:COMMONOUTCOMES). And MASEM's opinion that the articles can be challenged later is not necessarily universally held either; such articles would almost always get Kept at AfD if they had verification of the office they held. That can be one of the frustrating things about Wikipedia: it operates by consensus, not necessarily by what we individual editors think is the best way to go.

As for your ancestors, go for it! All they need is verification. I have "rescued" dozens of articles about state legislators at Unsourced biographies of living persons just by adding a couple of sources for verification.

As for This noob is sufficiently chastised and will go away, please don't go away! (I understand; you just meant from that discussion, but I mean don't let this discourage you.) It is great that you are reviewing Articles For Submission, they have a terrible backlog there and they need all the help they can get. I would just suggest that (as a relative newcomer to the process) you be a little more open to input from more experienced users; sometimes there will be a consensus tradition that doesn't make sense to you but that you still need to follow as a Reviewer.

Will you now go back to Wikipedian's article and release it, or what happens next? --MelanieN (talk) 18:51, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

I won't release it until the creator does what they said, add some more references and resubmit. I've had enough of my articles accepted, some as high as B level, that I know what it takes and these aren't even close to being good submissions, I don't feel they even meet stub level, but because they are elected state officials, they 'have' to be accepted, regardless of quality and it can't be questioned, though there it is. So I can create stubs, too. And I foresee a few thousand stubs coming into the system, and I won't bother taking them through the AfC process, as that is evidently considered a joke. The Ukulele Guy - Aggie80 (talk) 19:08, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

RE: Your recent creations of stub articles

Hey, I understand what you are doing here - you are making a point - but would you at least mind adding a category to those stubs? It isn't hard, I went ahead and added the appropriate category Category:Members of the California State Assembly to several of them, but if you do it at creation it makes one less flag on the article that somebody else has to deal with later. --MelanieN (talk) 20:18, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

I've added it, but it isn't supposed to matter. Isn't that what they are saying? Don't care about the quality or review, if it is an elected official, the article has to stay regardless of how bad it is in the hopes that someone will do something with it. I'm sorry, but in 50 years most of these people will not be considered notable for anything. Most big city mayors are more notable than these part time politicians. Well, there are the first 50 submitted. Stubs, but they are there with reference. A few, the real notable ones, are even linked to from other pages already. And a handful I was able to pull in a bit more info from Wiki articles. Don't suppose the ones that pushed their agenda down my throat will care. There seems to be this "Don't care about anyone else's opinions, we're right and we aren't changing anything. Obviously they would rather have stubs in great quantity rather than quality articles. I can do that. The Ukulele Guy - Aggie80 (talk) 21:40, 25 June 2013 (UTC)