User talk:Modussiccandi

Request on 02:34:41, 6 February 2023 for assistance on AfC submission by Uwhoff

• Uwhoff (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Bruno Gouery (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I was disappointed to read the comment you wrote when you reject the submission of Bruno Gouery. It spoke of major roles, sustained coverage and good sources. None of those terms appear in the criteria for notability. They appear to me to that they imply a higher standard than the Wikipedia guidelines for notability.

The basic criteria for notability is "People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject."

Bruno has been the subject of articles on

uproxx.com gettotext.com yourtango.com

Those may not be good sources but they certainly meet the criteria for reliability.

In addition the context specific criteria for notability says "People are likely to be notable if they meet any of the following standards. Actors...

had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions."

Bruno has had significant roles in Emily in Paris and The White Lotus. For the latter the Screen Actors Guild deemed his role significant enough to include him on the nomination for the Best Ensemble Cast Award. While that may not be a major role it certainly seems to meet any reasonable definition of significant.

Uwhoff (talk) 02:34, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

@Uwhoff: thank you for reaching out. As you rightly point out, coverage must be significant (i.e. in-depth), reliable and independent. Remember that all three criteria must be met at the same time. When I reviewed your draft, the requirement for significance coverage was not met. In this case, reliability and independence do not make up for a lack of depth. Concerning the subject's film roles: his role in The White Lotus was as a recurring cast member in Season 2. A role of that kind is not normally considered significant. Since you've resubmitted your draft, I would recommend waiting for the next reviewer who might take a different view than I. Best wishes, Modussiccandi (talk) 08:01, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Request on re-review Draft:8XR

Slava Ukraini! I was re-write anD cleanup the page. Looks fine now. I'd like create a few about another frameworks if this format OK. Let me know. Thx for advice!

@Common Frameworks: thank you for reaching out! As it stands, I'd recommend focussing more on detailed, third-party coverage of 8XR and not the technical details. For example, the 'History' section could use some references. Best, Modussiccandi (talk) 18:43, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

@Modussiccandi and Modussiccandi: now draft nominated to speedy deletion because of advertisement. Thats error, cause I cleanup the page from adv content (check difference between versions). If this draft does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, or you intend to fix it, please remove this notice. Let me know, thx. Btw, many articles in List of game engines & List of WebGL frameworks has problems on weak history or lack of references, but they not nominated to speedy deletion.

Someone has (correctly) declined the speedy deletion nomination. I realise that some articles that have been published on here have deficits in the sourcing department. But I would still encourage you to improve the sourcing of your draft as that will increase its chances to get a favourable review. Best, Modussiccandi (talk) 10:12, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

I politely waiting on re-review by someone from patrol page reviewers, it will be kind if you find a few minutes to look on that. You are first reviewer, who decline submission on 9 january, your review is important. Let me know by draft decision if the format I use for game engine's related articles is OK. If yes, I have plans to start building a few similar ones. I did not expect to get such a difficulty. I deleted history serction to avoid any violation, because of article class is "Stub". Thx, Common Frameworks (talk) 08:12, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

Appeal to move the draft to Mainspace.

The previous article Draft Ankur Verma was edited and was created with authentic references. I would request the admins to move the draft to article. Qpms (talk) 17:19, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

@Qpms: you didn't react to my last message, which was: [s]ince you're a friend of the subject, you have what we call a conflict of interest. Before we can talk about your new draft, I need you to declare this conflict of interest by following the instructions at WP:DISCLOSE. Feel free to reach out again once you've done that. I will not act on your request unless you follow the instructions provided. Modussiccandi (talk) 17:24, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. Can you send me again? Qpms (talk) 17:10, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Can you send me again?What I need to be done? Qpms (talk) 17:11, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

@Qpms: it's right there in the green letters. Best, Modussiccandi (talk) 17:22, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for the letting me know. I am making edits for good faith and expanding Wikipedia page and nothing else. Qpms (talk) 18:19, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

@Qpms: I don't think there's a point in continuing this conversation. You've stated that you're a friend of the subject, an obvious conflict of interest. Since you refuse to declare this openly on your user page or the article's talk page, I can't offer you any further help. You may nonetheless, submit your article for review at AfC. Best, Modussiccandi (talk) 19:23, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Panagiotis Kavvadias - peer review

Hi Modussicandi,

I went ahead and put that article up for peer review, with a view to looking at an FA nomination. I appreciate that you're probably sick of reading it, but if not, any comments or assistance would be greatly appreciated: it would be my first FA nom and, quite honestly, I don't really know what I'm doing here!

The peer review page is here.

Thanks,

UndercoverClassicist (talk) 09:02, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

@UndercoverClassicist: I will have some comments for you at some point. I might also ask some of the people who have helped me along the FA journey to chip in. In the meantime, I'd encourage you to have a look at my three FAs: they're all academic bios and could give you some pointers as to how an FA in your field looks. Best, Modussiccandi (talk) 09:13, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

That's really helpful - thank you. I'll start there! UndercoverClassicist (talk) 09:17, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of countries by GDP (PPP) in the nineteenth century

Good closing decision on this, I think. I wasn't quite brave enough to jump in and deal with that one. Joyous! | Talk 22:00, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

@Joyous!: thank you! In cases like this, I try to force myself to weigh the arguments regardless of !vote count or who the !voters were. I guess what complicated this one was that even the opposers had some approbation for the topic. Happy editing, Modussiccandi (talk) 08:42, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 February 2023

• News and notes: Terms of Use update, Steward elections, and Wikipedia back in Pakistan

• In the media: Arbitrators open case after article alleges Wikipedia "intentionally distorts" Holocaust coverage

• Disinformation report: The "largest con in corporate history"?

• Essay: Machine-written articles: a new challenge for Wikipedia

• Tips and tricks: All about writing at DYK

• Featured content: Eden, lost.

• Gallery: Love is in the air

• Traffic report: Superbowl? Pfft. Give me some Bollywood! Yours sincerely, the world

• From the archives: 5, 10, and 15 years ago: Let's (not) delete the Main Page!

• Cobwebs: Editorial: The loss of the moral high ground

• Humour: The RfA Candidate's Song

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:02, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2023).

Administrator changes

The Wordsmith

• Fuhghettaboutit
• Spinningspark (deceased)

CheckUser changes

Callanecc

Oversighter changes

Callanecc

Guideline and policy news

• Following a request for comment, F10 (useless non-media files) has been deprecated.
• Following a request for comment, the Portal CSD criteria (P1 (portal subject to CSD as an article) and P2 (underpopulated portal)) have been deprecated.
• A request for comment is open to discuss making the closing instructions for the requested moves process a guideline.

Technical news

• The results of the 2023 Community Wishlist Survey have been posted.

Arbitration

• Remedy 11 ("Request for Comment") of the Conduct in deletion-related editing case has been rescinded.
• The proposed decision for the Armenia-Azerbaijan 3 case is expected 7 March 2023.
• A case related to the Holocaust in Poland is expected to be opened soon.

Miscellaneous

• The 2023 appointees for the Ombuds commission are AGK, Ameisenigel, Bennylin, Daniuu, Emufarmers, Faendalimas, JJMC89, MdsShakil, Minorax and Renvoy as regular members and Zabe as advisory members.
• Following the 2023 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: Mykola7, Superpes15, and Xaosflux.
• The Terms of Use update cycle has started, which includes a [p]roposal for better addressing undisclosed paid editing. Feedback is being accepted until 24 April 2023.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:19, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

WikiCup 2023 March newsletter

So ends the first round of the 2023 WikiCup. Everyone with a positive score moved on to Round 2, with 54 contestants qualifying. The top scorers in Round 1 were:

• Unlimitedlead with 1205 points, a WikiCup newcomer, led the field with two featured articles on historical figures and several featured article candidate reviews.
• Epicgenius was in second place with 789 points; a seasoned WikiCup competitor he specialises in buildings and locations in New York.
• FrB.TG was in third place with 625 points, garnered from a featured article on a filmmaker which qualified for an impressive number of bonus points.
• TheJoebro64, another WikiCup newcomer, came next with 600 points gained from two featured articles on video games.
• Iazyges was in fifth place with 532 points, from two featured articles on classical history.

The top sixteen contestants at the end of Round 1 had all scored over 300 points; these included LunaEatsTuna, Thebiguglyalien, Sammi Brie, Trainsandotherthings, Lee Vilenski, Juxlos, Unexpectedlydian, SounderBruce, Kosack, BennyOnTheLoose and PCN02WPS. It was a high-scoring start to the competition.

These contestants, like all the others, now have to start again from scratch. The first round finished on February 26. Remember that any content promoted after that date but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Some contestants made claims before the new submissions pages were set up, and they will need to resubmit them. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed.

If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:36, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 9 March 2023

• News and notes: What's going on with the Wikimedia Endowment?

• Technology report: Second flight of the Soviet space bears: Testing ChatGPT's accuracy

• In the media: What should Wikipedia do? Publish Russian propaganda? Be less woke? Cover the Holocaust in Poland differently?

• Featured content: In which over two-thirds of the featured articles section needs to be copied over to WikiProject Military History's newsletter

• Recent research: "Wikipedia's Intentional Distortion of the Holocaust" in Poland and "self-focus bias" in coverage of global events

• From the archives: Five, ten, and fifteen years ago

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:42, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 March 2023

• News and notes: Wikimania submissions deadline looms, Russian government after our lucky charms, AI woes nix CNET from RS slate

• Eyewitness: Three more stories from Ukrainian Wikimedians

• In the media: Paid editing, plagiarism payouts, proponents of a ploy, and people peeved at perceived preferences

• Featured content: Way too many featured articles

• Interview: 228/2/1: the inside scoop on Aoidh's RfA

• Traffic report: Who died? Who won? Who lost?

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:17, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Kindly review and request approval of the following page - on WILDLIFE PHOTOGRAPHER - RAMACHANDIRAN GOVINDARAJ

Ramachandiran Govindaraj - Page link

Dear Wikipedia Author,

I am writing to inquire about the recent deletion of a page I created on Wikipedia for the wildlife photographer Ramachandiran Govindaraj. The page was created to provide information about his work and achievements in the field of wildlife photography.

I was surprised and disappointed to learn that the page has been deleted. As the creator of the page, I would like to understand the reasons for its deletion. I would appreciate it if you could provide me with an explanation for the decision to delete the page.

If there were any issues with the content or sources used in the page, I would be happy to work with you to address them and make any necessary changes. I believe that Ramachandiran Govindaraj's work as a wildlife photographer is notable and deserves to be recognized on Wikipedia.

Thank you for your attention to this matter. I look forward to hearing from you soon.

Sincerely,

Mouli Moulie666 (talk) 11:05, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

@Moulie666: thank you for reaching out. Your article was deleted because it portrayed its subject in a way that was indistinguishable from promotion. Wikipedia aims to write in a neutral fashion, which makes statements like "who has been breaking boundaries in the field of wildlife photography" and "[his] passion for nature photography has made him a notable figure in the world of wildlife photography, inspiring other photographers to explore the wonders of nature" contrary to the purpose of the project. Modussiccandi (talk) 11:17, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your feedback regarding the deletion of the page I created. I would like to respectfully disagree with your assessment that my article portrayed its subject in a way that was indistinguishable from promotion.

As a writer, my goal was to provide accurate and verifiable information about the subject of the page, who is a notable figure in the field of wildlife photography. The statements you mentioned were intended to highlight his achievements and contributions to the field, and were based on reliable sources.

Furthermore, while Wikipedia aims to write in a neutral fashion, this does not mean that we cannot acknowledge the accomplishments and impact of notable individuals. In fact, providing context and background information about the subject is essential in order to provide a comprehensive understanding of their work and its significance.

I understand that Wikipedia has strict guidelines for ensuring neutrality and avoiding promotion, and I assure you that I made my very best my knowledge, to adhere to these guidelines when creating the page. If there are specific areas of concern that need to be addressed, I would be happy to work with you to make the necessary revisions.

In conclusion, I believe that the page I created provided valuable information about a notable figure in the field of wildlife photography, and I respectfully request that it be restored. Thank you for your time and consideration. Moulie666 (talk) 12:26, 21 March 2023 (UTC)