User talk:Chzz

I'm sorry; I can't help any more, because some people think they can control Wikipedia; they believe they are above 'consensus'. You can scream at them here - it probably won't help. You can leave messages, and I'll try to answer. But you might be best asking on help desk.

Mail Dear Chzz, I just resubmitted my request for an update to the "Muhammad Ali" section again as you suggested. I hope the change can be made. I believe I've now done everything you've asked. Thank you very much for your assistance. Please do let me know if there is anything else that would need to be done. Best, Creed81 Hi. Sorry I have not responded; I've not been actively editing. If you need advice, I suggest you try the help desk. Best of luck,  Chzz  ►  14:05, 28 January 2012 (UTC) Hello, Chzz. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. Update: new user warning test results available Hi WP:UWTEST member, we wanted to share a quick update on the status of the project. Here's the skinny: We're happy to say we have a new round of testing results available! Since there are tests on several Wikipedias, we're collecting all results at the project page on Meta. We've also now got some help from Wikimedia Foundation data analyst Ryan Faulkner, and should have more test results in the coming weeks. Last but not least, check out the four tests currently running at the documentation page. Thanks for your interest, and don't hesitate to drop by the talk page if you have a suggestion or question. Maryana (WMF) (talk) 19:22, 20 January 2012 (UTC) thanks Yizoubi (talk) 14:00, 21 January 2012 (UTC) amir of bheemunipatnam family tree i have document by visakha museum which is run by indian government as a reference. my user name is altaf shaik. you can communicate with me in that user name — Preceding unsigned comment added by Altaf shaik (talk • contribs) 12:41, 22 January 2012 (UTC) Hi. Sorry I have not responded; I've not been actively editing. If you need advice, I suggest you try the help desk. Best of luck,  Chzz  ►  14:05, 28 January 2012 (UTC) Judgement day: The true story of Ellie Nesler I was told my submission had no inline references, what does this mean and how do I fix it. Also how do I make my submission better so that it will be accepted?4.225.90.119 (talk) 07:40, 24 January 2012 (UTC) Hi. Please see WP:REFB for help with that. If you need advice, I suggest you try the help desk. Best of luck,  Chzz  ►  14:05, 28 January 2012 (UTC) Adapting your sandbox-cleaning bot for Commons? Hi, per this discussion, would it be feasible for you to set up your bot to clean the Commons sandbox? Thanks! It Is Me Here t / c 17:55, 24 January 2012 (UTC) I've responded over there. Cheers,  Chzz  ►  14:05, 28 January 2012 (UTC) Article for creation Thanks for the response last month on the two pages I created about TV writer/producers. The credits come from IMDB. What else do I need to do for verifiability? I've seen other TV writer/producer pages and want to make mine like theirs. Thank you. Julie Hurwitz (talk) 23:05, 25 January 2012 (UTC)Julie Hi. Sorry I have not responded; I've not been actively editing. If you need advice, I suggest you try the help desk. Best of luck,  Chzz  ►  14:05, 28 January 2012 (UTC) Jonathan Clour The article about Jonathan Clour now contains sources and is ready for review/acceptance.3816buster (talk) 00:45, 28 January 2012 (UTC) Hi. Sorry I have not responded; I've not been actively editing. If you need advice, I suggest you try the help desk. Best of luck,  Chzz  ►  14:05, 28 January 2012 (UTC) Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Fæ A request for comments has been opened on administrator User:Fæ. You are being notified due to your prior participation in ANI, RfA, or RfC discussions regarding this user. Thank you, MadmanBot (talk) 19:45, 28 January 2012 (UTC) inserting references When I try to insert a reference using the dropdown box, the <ref...> is placed at the top of the page instead of at the cursor location. Can you help me with this? Serena SerenaLaVine (talk) 00:00, 30 January 2012 (UTC) I suggest you ask on the help desk. Please tell them which browser you are using (internet explorer, firefox, safari) and if the problem is the same whether logged in or logged out. Best of luck.  Chzz  ►  12:51, 30 January 2012 (UTC) Something tasty for you! Something tasty for you! "Ear of sow and gut of boar, All the stuff which fell on t'floor, Snout of gilt, and one black rat Which drowned on falling in the vat, Butcher's thumb untimely chop'd And down into the mincer drop'd, Piglet's hide and youngling's pizzle In the sausage spit and sizzle. Pizzle, fizzle, spit and sizzle Barbie, if it doesn't drizzle!" Ketchup, anyone? [exit stage left, cackling] Pesky (talk …stalk!) 10:23, 30 January 2012 (UTC) I made these on MF's page a little while ago, and thought you'd like to share in the enchantment, given your penchant for the product ;P Pesky (talk …stalk!) 10:25, 30 January 2012 (UTC) Sounds great; it's good to use everything but the squeak. But yes...like most things on Wikipedia, they'd definitely need more sourcessauces. Thanks!  Chzz  ►  12:22, 1 February 2012 (UTC) Photos Hi, Thanks for your helpful reference recommendations and links to useful pages [i.e. Cheatsheet]. Next, we would like to add photos, but want to wait, so as not to lose our place in line for the approval process. How many photos would you recommend? Which link best describes how to add photos? Best regards, ccjjproCcjjpro (talk) 14:48, 30 January 2012 (UTC) I'm worried by your saying "we" - and by your user name, because company / group names are not permitted. As described there, you should almost certainly stop using the name "Ccjjpro" and get a new user name. You would not "lose your place" - you can freely edit the draft at any time; it will not affect the time it takes for review. And if you change your username, you can still edit it. It's at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Craig Curtis. There is no specific limit on number of pictures, but of course they should not be excessive, and should add real value to encyclopaedic understanding. Any number of pictures could be stored on Commons, and linked to from the article. The important thing about pictures is, they should be appropriately licenced for anyone to use them. Probably the best link explaining it is Wikipedia:Uploading images Please also read our business FAQ -As I am not currently very active, if you have further questions, I suggest you ask on the help desk. Best of luck,  Chzz  ►  12:30, 1 February 2012 (UTC) Welcome back Good to see your sig at the help desk!! I understand about "taking a break," but it's good to know you're still checking in occasionally. 69.171.178.16 (talk) 02:28, 31 January 2012 (UTC), the user formerly known as the Ragityman will check Trash files: should have thought of that myself. I'm afraid, though, that I changed my designated mailbox, but never responded to the "verify" email. If true, though, wouldn't the old email address still be in place? I'll check, and get back to you. R69.171.187.86 (talk) 21:27, 1 February 2012 (UTC) The Signpost: 30 January 2012 News and notes: Update on Global Development, Wikipedia Day NYC is a success, JFK audio on Commons In the news: Zambian wiki-assassins, Foundation über alles, editor engagement and the innovation plateau Recent research: Language analyses examine power structure and political slant; Wikipedia compared to commercial databases WikiProject report: Digging Up WikiProject Palaeontology Featured content: Featured content soaring this week Arbitration report: Five open cases, voting on proposed decisions in two cases Technology report: Why "Lua" is on everybody's lips, and when to expect MediaWiki 1.19 Read this Signpost in full Single-page Unsubscribe EdwardsBot (talk) 03:01, 31 January 2012 (UTC) SerenaLaVine--Article on Amateur Classical Musicians Association The proposed articla on the Amateur Classical Musicians Association has been updated with proper references. Please see the updated article in User:SerenaLaVine/sandbox. Thank you. Serena SerenaLaVine (talk) 16:16, 31 January 2012 (UTC) Hi. It wasn't submitted it for review, so I've done so [1]. I'm not very active on Wikipedia at the moment, so if you have questions, please use the help desk. Best,  Chzz  ►  12:36, 1 February 2012 (UTC) Heads up Watch out for these sorts of things when you're moving articles. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 20:33, 1 February 2012 (UTC) Mmm, I missed the name of that one. Just trying to rush a bit too much, trying to get through some. Ta.  Chzz  ►  20:36, 1 February 2012 (UTC) Also, if you could at least add project classes, that would be swell. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 21:59, 1 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Seichim Hi I just saw that my article was declined. Is there anything specific that is not in a neutral tone that I can fix. I have done a few revisions and even had some help with it in re-writting it to take out much of the non neutral tone words. If you give me some examples or part that are a problem it will be a big help. Thanks PatrickSeichim (talk) 20:43, 1 February 2012 (UTC) Much of the tone makes the article appear to be "original research" - ie opinion, not facts-with-references. For example, The main difference between Sekhem and other energies is that Sekhem has a very strong connection to many of the Gods and Goddesses of Egypt. - according to who? It is also used as a suffix to many names of people in a position of power in ancient Egypt. - according to who? (where can this be verified?) Because the original Seichim was taught without a manual, the classes all followed the oral tradition of teaching. - reference? Consequently, each teacher taught in their own way. - reference? In "origins", the wording makes it sound as though it is the opinion of Wikipedia. For example, He was able to learn more about the vibrating energy he felt in his hands and began to share this energy with others. - he might indeed think or believe that, but I doubt very much that it is actual hard-fact. I hope that gives some ideas. See also WP:TONE, and maybe look at some featured articles or good articles on similar topics. Best,  Chzz  ►  20:52, 1 February 2012 (UTC) CHEN Hello Chzz, I am the author of the article entitled "Council for Higher Education in Newark". I am a novice at this so bear with me. I understand my article has been accepted, which is great, but the article is still identified as having a "close paraphrasing" issue. Will paraphrasing box disappear at some point or does it mean that I need to do more re-writing? Thanks Wrrsimone (talk) 22:01, 1 February 2012 (UTC) Hi. I can't see a 'close paraphrasing' tag on Council for Higher Education in Newark, (CHEN)?  Chzz  ►  22:02, 1 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Teens for Jeans Hi Chzz, I was hoping you could give me a little more detail about why my article was not approved. What sorts of things would show the importance of the subject / encyclopedic worthiness? Is there something more specific I should include, like a paragraph dedicated to arguing its importance? Or should I include more links showing its large media coverage? I'm just wary of being declined for seeming biased about the subject if I argue to strongly for its importance. Thanks! 50.74.11.221 (talk) 22:14, 1 February 2012 (UTC)Allison Several independent reliable sources - such as, some newspaper articles which are substantially about the organization. Not blogs, not listings of events, not PR. It may also help to read the business FAQ.  Chzz  ►  22:27, 1 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Dave McGillivray, Race Director Hi Chzz - I am not sure why Dave McGillivray's bio was declined. He is an author and the race director for the Boston Marathon since 1980s - and he made history when he ran across the US in 1978. He has been profiled in the Boston Globe, the Boston Herald, and countless other bpulications if you Google him, which I cited a few. Can you explain why the bio we submitted was turned down? I followed the guideliness so any advice would be good. Thanks so much. BARwolfe - Beryl Wolfe, owner of Wolfe News Wire and Wolfe PR (I have worked with Dave McGillivray and Olympic Gold Medalist Joan Benoit Samuelson on the TD Bank Beach to Beacon 10K since the year 2000.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Barwolfe (talk • contribs) 22:08, 1 February 2012 (UTC) Beryl Wolfe Hi again - I took out the Wiki references - someone had told me to cross link him so you see he is mentioned on the Boston Marathon page but I took that ot now - there are tons more articles about him out there since he ran across the US - twice - and has organized so many road races - I can add probably 25 more articles about him, if you want. But hopefully the wiki ones are gone now and that will help? thanks so much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Barwolfe (talk • contribs) 22:33, 1 February 2012 (UTC) It needs direct, inline references so that we can see where the facts can be checked. For example, it says, In 1978, McGillivray ran across the U.S. from Medford, Oregon to his hometown of Medford, Mass., covering a total distance of 3,452 miles and ending to a standing ovation - where could I make sure that is correct? Please see WP:REFB for help with it. Cheers,  Chzz  ►  00:42, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Blackburner Hello Chzz, I'm a bit confused. What is the issue that prevents this from being submitted for review? Thanks Fanoflife27 (talk) 22:59, 1 February 2012 (UTC) As it says, "This suggestion doesn't sufficiently explain the importance or significance of the subject. See the speedy deletion criteria A7 and/or guidelines on music-related topics. Please provide more information on why this musical artist or musical recording is worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. Thank you." - and it refers to Wikipedia:Notability (music). Listings at "lastfm" and "allmusic" and similar are not appropriate to show that 'notability'. Nor is iTunes, where it is sold. The others don't seem to be reliable sources, and/or son't show "significant coverage". It would require, for example, several newspaper/magazine articles that are about the band. See also WP:VRS, WP:IRS.  Chzz  ►  23:05, 1 February 2012 (UTC) Not a problem. I'm still learning. I guess selling 50,000 downloaded songs isn't worthy. Neilsen Soundscan is not reliable source nor the fact every band Skyla Talon has been in..not to mention the man himself is recognized & consider worthy musician. But to suggest to delete that which is already alive and breathing and recognized is confusing. So if I get that Spin Magazine review would that make this a worthy enough for you to judge it? How many is sufficient for you? Which by there are thousand of artist who only have myspace pages. How did they get included. One can guess Thank you but I had three other volunteers from the chat help. I asked in this was good enough. If you wont help me Chzz I'll go back to the HELP chat & find someone not so judgmental to not let their baise opinion what music is or not. Fanoflife27 (talk) 23:37, 1 February 2012 (UTC)23:26, 1 February 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fanoflife27 (talk • contribs) OK, sure; best of luck with it.  Chzz  ►  00:42, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The Zeyn paradox i do think this article of importance, it provides a new insight into economics — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.54.29.40 (talk) 23:39, 1 February 2012 (UTC) All articles need references; please see WP:FIRST.  Chzz  ►  00:43, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The Tea Club (Band) hi so besides "remarkable drummer" is that the only issue? -Jon Jpyarger (talk) 00:31, 2 February 2012 (UTC) No; my main concern was the referencing. The neutrality is a side-issue, really. As I said, "=Please remove anything that cannot be verified in reliable sources. All the facts should be referenced - and in particular, when it's about living people.". For example, it says, The band consists of Patrick McGowan (Guitars & Vocals), Dan McGowan (Guitars & Vocals), Becky Osenenko (Keyboards), Charles Batdorf (Bass), and Joe Rizzolo (Drums). - are those names published in a reliable source? Are they well-known? See WP:NPF / WP:BLPNAME. It says, They are known for writing songs of an epic nature - according to who? The information needs to be verifiable. For help with the formatting, please see WP:REFB. Cheers,  Chzz  ►  00:46, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Copyediting I posted this on the AFC discussion page, but since most of my concerns are from your accepts, I'll put it here. A bit of a concern here. If you accept a submission, at least make sure that it complies with the WP:MOS and doesn't have some common errors. Many of these fixes are trivial- I've fixed quite a few. Bold the title the first time it appears in text. Correct the headline hierarchy. (2 equal signs, then 3, etc.) Make sure headlines are not double-bolded. etc. Would help everybody out a lot! A412 (Talk * C) 00:36, 2 February 2012 (UTC) I know. However, over the past few hours, I have personally reduced the AFC backlog from around 650 to around 150; thus, I did not have the time to do all the editing I'd like. I'd like to add categories, to assess the article, to format and add details to references, and many other things; however, if I had been doing so, I would have been unable to clear the backlog. Fixing poor formatting is easy enough, and usually does happen as natural editing - so to be honest, I'd rather work through the huge backlog that is clogging up the system, and not worry too much about formatting. But sure, thanks for letting me know; I do know all the formatting stuff; I've worked on lots of GA/FA articles too.  Chzz  ►  00:40, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Okay, was just letting you know. :) A412 (Talk * C) 00:46, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Renal Denervation Hello - thank you for the comments on the submission. Please forgive me also - I am not a regular submittor of materials. Some advice please: Renal devervation is predicted by some thought leaders in the cardiovascular medicine world to be possibley the single fastest growing surgical procedure in medicine in the coming decade - more prevalent that heart bypass or even drug eluding stents. Considering the many billions spent by healthcare each year on hypertension drugs, the emergence of this simple procedure to lower blood pressure could mean a great deal to both patients and the healthcare system - savings in the $billions each year and growing with the aging of society. Would it be helpful to cite some of these things at the outset of the article. Thanks for the advice 98.189.10.100 (talk) 00:49, 2 February 2012 (UTC) I'm sure it has the potential to become significant, but at the moment I don't believe the article shows "significant coverage" - that's the issue. Wikipedia, as an encyclopaedia, does not provide innovative information; we only publish articles about things that others have already written about (reasonably extensively) - we don't permit original research or any kind of speculation. If/when there are several articles that are specifically about "Renal denervation" then we could accommodate an article about it.  Chzz  ►  01:04, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Thanks chzz - this is good news - thewre have been dozens of artiocles published - including both peerr-reviewed and non-peer reviewed pieces. I will include those citations and resubmit the article. Thank you very much.98.189.10.100 (talk) 16:34, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Gateway Arts District Good evening, this article is written in a neutral point of view, providing the facts as they are to this community. Please provide suggestions so I may improve this listing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crazyartsyguy (talk • contribs) 01:49, 2 February 2012 (UTC) It is not neutral; for example, safe, vital, and attractive mixed-use environment that celebrates the diversity of art, well-known businesses. Please check the over-use of the word "several"; see also WP:TONE. Stick to facts, supported by appropriate reliable sources. It says it is a focal point for art activities of all types - according to who? Ditto for This growing region is known for socializing, entertaining, dining, shopping, arts, crafts and safe, vital, and attractive. Hope that helps,  Chzz  ►  01:59, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Bob Mirams Hi there, thanks for your help. I'm new to wikipedia but couldn't believe there was no article about Bob Mirams. Now that I've tried to start one, I can see why - there is very little information available about him online. Not sure what else I can do to have this article accepted - I can add some of his art (with his signature) Thats about it. Suggestions? regards theescapegoat — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theescapegoat (talk • contribs) 02:02, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Unfortunately, it's a case of showing "significant coverage" (WP:VRS) - which may not be possible in this case. We'd need to see several published articles that are about this person, otherwise a live article would be liable for deletion.  Chzz  ►  02:05, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/D'Andre Siggers Hey Chzz I would like to inform that i got matreil from his Video the Real Siggas on Youtube, check it out and you'll see — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robert Kniola (talk • contribs) 02:21, 2 February 2012 (UTC) You'd need reliable sources, such as newspaper articles.  Chzz  ►  02:23, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Amateur Classical Musicians Association The following summary accompanied the rejection of the article on The Amateur Classical Musicians Association: Your article does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of published material. If you still feel that this subject is appropriate for Wikipedia, please rewrite your proposed article in the form of an encyclopedia entry, and make sure to avoid certain terms meant to show off the subject. I don't see any specific areas of the submission highlighted; however, I have some idea of what you mean. For example, in the Mission portion, the following sentence appears: With this aim firmly in mind, ACMA recognizes the talent and dedication of its members, and is committed to helping each one discover the joy of public performance Would this be considered more a statement of opinion or evaluation rather than fact? Your help would be appreciated here. Thanks. Serena SerenaLaVine (talk) 02:27, 2 February 2012 (UTC) That type of thing, yes. For example, at the moment, it begins by saying ACMA "provides opportunities for nonprofessional (but dedicated) classical musicians to play solo and ensemble works in front of an appreciative audience - a) the phrase 'provides opportunities' sounds like a marketing brochure, not an encyclopaedia, b) who says they are dedicated (that's opinion, not fact) and c) the audience are appreciative according to who? Instead, it should simply state facts, in an encyclopaedia manner - something like, "ACMA is a non-profit music organization based in New York." Instead of ...performing in an intimate yet formal concert-like setting, just put "performing concerts" or something. And remove things like, ACMA emphasizes the need for meaningful, inspired performances that are mutually satisfying for audience and performer alike - because, again, that sounds like an advert. Hope that helps.  Chzz  ►  02:46, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Bobby Sheng dude, sorry you don't read chinese but that doesn't mean this is a non-notable person. i'm filling in an empty link in an article that already existed. so for you to not accept the submission is actually pretty stupid. some info is better than none. it was a link that already existed. stop being a dumb ass and get a life. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rockpapersilver (talk • contribs) 02:38, 2 February 2012 (UTC) You're more likely to succeed if you do not insult people who are trying to help you. The version of the article that I reviewed [2] had only one reference; regardless of what language it is in, that is not enough to show notability.  Chzz  ►  04:03, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Informatics Undergraduate Association I've recreated the page with more detail and notes about some of the concerns I'm sure will be brought up at some point. Let me know what you think. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrDerperson (talk • contribs) 03:07, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Hi. I'm not sure which version of the page you meant, because it looks like you blanked it, and then it was restored to an older version? (see history). But... in order to be considered notable, it'd need some coverage outside of the University of Washington - such as, newspapers. Hope that helps; resubmit it any time.  Chzz  ►  04:01, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Jaselyn Blanchard Chzz, Thanks for your review and feedback. I had received comments from a previous reviewer that I had not included enough inline citations. I listed a number of External Links that should have been included as References since they are all verifiable third-party citations that go to the heart of why the subject is noteworthy. I have made all of his suggested changes, which made resolve some of your issues as well. The subject has completed the narration of two audiobooks that were published by AudioGO, the audiobook publishing division of BBC. Both of her audionbooks are linked to Wiki's ISBN search page and reference the pulication information on the books. Additionally, she has two additional audiobooks in various stages of final production. In connection with her first audiobook, her work was referenced and praised by Michele Cobb, the president of the Audio Publishers Association, in an article in the School Library Journal. All of her audio books are marketed and sold through every major audiobook publishing portal (AudioGo, Audible.com. theaudiobookstore, Amazon...and on and on). She is also an accomplished actor and vocal performer, with numerous verifiable credits and reviews in national publications. She is a noteworthy scholar, although neither National Merit Scholarship Corporation nor New York University publish lists of National Merit Scholars or Magna Cum Laude graduates, respectively. I guess I could scan her award certificates and have them notarized...? I have chaged a lot and would greatly appreciate your taking another look and giving me some feedback. Jpbfcgsat (talk) 03:51, 2 February 2012 (UTC) The problem is, the referenced links are not about the person - they're about plays, or companies - they're not independent, and don't show "significant coverage" about that person. What's needed is, for example, two or three newspaper articles that are about her; if that is available, that'd show notability. The fact that a person has published things, or participated in things, or written things, does not necessarily mean that they are "notable". If people have written about the things they've done, then they are. I hope that helps.  Chzz  ►  03:57, 2 February 2012 (UTC) That page is now at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Jaselyn Blanchard.   — Jeff G. ツ (talk) 23:59, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Lumines Electronic Symphony Hello, I have resubmitted it, and have added more content. If you approve it, can I kindly ask you to add a photo of the cover to the infobox? Thanks in advance! Dokidash (talk) 04:27, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Looks like someone else already did. B.wilson (talk · contribs) accepted it, and Jeff G. (talk · contribs) added the image.  Chzz  ►  13:43, 2 February 2012 (UTC) online ambassador Hi there, I was wondering if you wouldn't mind helping me with two classes here in the US (the time difference may actually work out for the best), given the experience you have as an editor. I am the current campus ambassador for Michael Mandiberg's Interactive Technology and Pedagogy class at CUNY Graduate center and Evan Hill-Ries' Copyright Commerce and Culture assignment at NYU. Would you be interested in serving as an online ambassador? Cheers, (MalikaZ (talk) 05:28, 2 February 2012 (UTC)) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Nerd Wars! Thanks for reviewing my article about Nerd Wars! I checked the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:IRS page and still have questions. You mention: "Inappropriate references; please see WP:IRS. Many/all these references are not reliable sources." Are these 5 links considered reliable? I thought they were, so I want to be sure: (reference #1) http://voices.yahoo.com/sag-media-contract-fosters-creative-growth-in-10306231.html (reference #9) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_End_of_Love (reference #11)http://www.anthonysfilmreview.com/Other/Nerd_Wars.htm (reference #12)http://www.nospoilers.net/movietitle/n/nerdwars2011.htm (reference #13)http://coolawesomemovies.com/2012/01/nerd-wars/ Should I remove the other links? Could you please help me, it is the first article I write here and I thought I was doing an okay job, this wikipedia writing stuff it's really complicated. If you will like to help and make any edits, I really, really will appreciate it. Thanks, Ozisrelease (talk) 05:53, 2 February 2012 (UTC)Ozisrelease We all have to assess references, and the basic question is, "do I trust the information?". For the above, I'd say, Probably No; Wikipedia is not a reliable source I doubt it. Does it have "editorial control" and a "reputation for fact-checking and accuracy"? As above The link does not work. But given the name of it, I doubt it Good sources include published, respected newspapers/magazines, books, and major news-websites. Small/independent websites are not usually acceptable. However, if you want to check if a specific link can be considered reliable or not, please ask on WP:RSN. I am not convinced that the film is notable. If there were, for example, 3 newspaper articles that were about the film, I'd say yes. When we're struggling to find references, and having to use non-authoritative websites, it indicates that something may not meet the notability guideline and thus, if made live, might be deleted - in such cases, I don't like to 'accept' an AFC, because I don't want it to simply be deleted later. However, if you are able to find better sources - at any time - you can always resubmit the page (as explained at the top of it). Best,  Chzz  ►  13:52, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Calderbank v Calderbank this is my first wiki article so i would appreciate any help you can give. if u could tell me just what statements need reference to, would be appreciated. I have allready attached the proper case law reference details, although i supect these proceedings are legally suppressed (family court). Also, the first paragraph is confirmed already in wiki article of "without prejudice" - can i use that as a reference? If the last paragraph is an issue still can I resubmit with out it? and failing that can this case be at least submitted as a stub? Thanks, K.S. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kiwisheriff (talk • contribs) 06:02, 2 February 2012 (UTC) All articles must show "significant coverage in independent, reliable sources". Currently, it does not have any. Court proceedings might be acceptable, but be careful because it might be considered a primary source. Unless the case has been reported in publications such as newspapers, magazines, books or news-websites, then it would not meet the notability requirements. In other words - have other people already written about it? -Wikipedia, as an encyclopaedia, only has articles on things that are already reported elsewhere. Re. "without prejudice" - no, sorry; Wikipedia itself is not a reliable source, and cannot be used as a reference. Re. 'stub' - all articles must have references to show why the subject is notable, no matter how long/short they are, otherwise they're likely to be deleted. For help with how to add references, see WP:REFB. For a general guide, see WP:FIRST. For formatting help, see WP:CHEATSHEET. Best,  Chzz  ►  13:56, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Tony Canaves Hi, Tony is well known in Venezuela. He contributes to the people of Venezuela. We plan to extend the article about him/ Please approve the article. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.166.44.200 (talk) 06:11, 2 February 2012 (UTC) I'm sorry, but as explained, articles cannot be accepted if they do not meet the basic notability requirements. It does not matter how well-known a person is; their notability must be demonstrated, through references to publications such as newspapers. The references do not have to be in English. But the information must be verifiable.  Chzz  ►  13:57, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Element 9 (music) Not sure why we don't meet criteria for submission. We are mentioned, without a proper link, on at least 5 articles that have been published on Wikipedia including the following: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strong_Arm_Steady http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blacksmith_Records http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habits_of_the_Heart http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_%26_Hammers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stu_Pflaum We are a record label and thoroughly explain our history and releases, in greater detail than many other record label pages on Wikipedia. While we may be a fairly new company, we have provided plenty of references from credited sources such as Billboard & Mashable that explain our work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.187.204.229 (talk) 07:09, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Other existing articles are not relevent, when considering a new one. There are many articles on Wikipedia which are "bad" - they need fixing, or deleting. That does not excuse other new articles not meeting the requirements. "CoolBusinessIdeas.com" sounds like it's a promotional site - self-published? I'm not sure about "Hudson Times" - that one is probably OK. "All access" looks like a press release? "Strong Arm Steady" is just a listing, and not an independent reference; and the "billboard.biz" article doesn't actually seem to be about Element 9. So, I didn't consider it met the general notability requirements, sorry; I wouldn't want to 'accept' it just to have it deleted. I suggest you try to add more independent reliable sources, if possible, and resubmit it. Maybe another editor will have different views. I'm concerned at your use of "we" - Wikipedia accounts are for individuals, not companies. Please take the time to read the business FAQ. Wikipedia absolutely cannot be used for promotion, and great care is required when one has a conflict of interest. Best of luck.  Chzz  ►  14:05, 2 February 2012 (UTC) 1) Coolbusinessideas.com - no clue who runs the site. You'll see the info there refers to an article that was originally posted in The Post, the student newspaper of Ohio University. For some reason, when The Post rebuilt their website a few years ago, some of the archives were not updated, therefore an electronic link was not possible. I still have a hardcopy of the article: http://www.e9hh.com/e9_article.jpg. 2) "Hudson Times" is actually Hudson Hub Times. A small town paper, but still a verifiable source: http://www.hudsonhubtimes.com/. 3) The Billboard article is specifically about an Element 9 album release & focuses on a newsworthy decision made by Element 9 principles. The article is just as much about the label as it is any subject in the article. It's a bit insulting that you've insinuated there is "promotion" contained in this entry. Every statement is backed by verifiable references & there is no conjecture used. I feel sufficient evidence has been presented to justify approval of this article. Please reconsider. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Element9hiphop (talk • contribs) 21:01, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Ongoing - input from others welcome. I'll get back to this when I can; as you can see, it's been quite busy here. Of course, if you're not only here to promote, please help out with other articles for creation here. Thanks,  Chzz  ►  21:07, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Hi there Element. Just in case no one else has told you, I'd advise you to change your username voluntarily before you are forced too. You can see instruction at WP:CHU, and usernames that seem promotional (or are just business names, like yours) are prohibited. Regardless, I agree with Chzz that your topic does not quite meet the WP:GNG. First, there's a common misconception that all sources need to be online. I agree that coolbusinessideas doesn't seem like a reliable source, so skip that and use the newspaper article directly. A useful template for that is {{cite newspaper}}. Husdon Times seems, well, decent, but billboard.biz is not. For a source to be useful, it needs to discuss the subject in depth, and I definitely don't see that with just a brief mention of the company. Nolelover Talk·Contribs 21:19, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/TechBazaar - BITS Pilani Our event is well known in Indian academic circles and our chief purpose of creating a wikipage is to provide crystal clear information about the event to anyone who is yet unknown to it. Please specify what all changes are needed to be made explicitly since a delay can prove detrimental to our event.I have also posted the necessary refernce for confirmation. . — Preceding unsigned comment added by GOURA29 (talk • contribs) 07:50, 2 February 2012 (UTC) "Significant coverage in independent, reliable sources" - such as, several newspaper / magazine / book / news-website articles about it. Note, "independent" - not their own website(s). Please also read WP:BFAQ.  Chzz  ►  14:09, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Bushman (Insect Repellent) Hi Chzz, Thaks for taking the time to read and comment on the Bushman (Insect Repellent) summary, I'm sorry but i don't understand the issue with the references, i used very similar references to the RiD insect repellent page on here, Please help advise the difference so that I can amend, Kind regards, Ben — Preceding unsigned comment added by BenAnthonyMolloy (talk • contribs) 08:40, 2 February 2012 (UTC) The refs you gave are; http://www.who.int/en/ I suppose this is for background information; it doesn't seem to say anything about Bushman. http://www.smarttraveller.gov.au/ Where on that site is there anything about "Bushman"? I couldn't find anything http://www.bushman-repellent.com/index.htm This is of course a primary source, so it doesn't show why the product is 'notable' http://www.backpackgeartest.org/reviews/Health%20&%20Safety/Insect%20Repellents/BushMan%20Insect%20Repellent/Owner%20Review%20by%20Ray%20Estrella/ Advert - not an independent reliable source http://www.backpackgeartest.org/reviews/Health%20&%20Safety/Insect%20Repellents/BushMan%20Insect%20Repellent/Owner%20Review%20by%20Ralph%20Ditton/ Does not seem to be a reliable source Please see WP:VRS. It would need to be based on facts from sources such as newspaper articles / magazines / news-websites. For help with formatting the references, see WP:REFB. The article RiD Insect Repellent is not a good example; it needs fixing or deleting - that doesn't help us with adding a new article. Best,  Chzz  ►  14:14, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Interpeace Thank you so much for taking the time to review my draft article. I appreciate your comments and I'll get right onto it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Interpeace (talk • contribs) 08:46, 2 February 2012 (UTC) OK then; you can 'resubmit' it at any time. Best,  Chzz  ►  14:15, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Grammarly Hi, just a quick question, you had a good look at Grammarly, right? I'm asking because I have some concerns about previous incarnations of that article, and the users who created them with regards to socking and paid editing. This current editor looks unrelated to me, but I'm a bit suspicious that he too may have had a motivation to promote the product. Thanks, Amalthea 09:36, 2 February 2012 (UTC) To be honest, no, I didn't have a particularly good look. There was a backlog of 650 'article for creation' pages, which I reviewed yesterday. I considered it was unlikely to be deleted in the immediate future. If there's any problems with neutrality, of course it can be edited, like anything else. And if the user/s are here to promote, then that can be dealt with appropriately too. But as far as AFC goes, all we can do is think, "does it meet the basic requirements?" - it seemed to, so I accepted it. Feel absolutely free to 'tag' it, to speak to the user, to edit it, or even to list it for deletion (if you think necessary) - of course. Best,  Chzz  ►  14:18, 2 February 2012 (UTC) OK thanks, I'll try to have another look tomorrow. Cheers, Amalthea 21:06, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/STEERING CONTROLLED POWER DISTRIBUTION (SCPD) Hi there. The intentions for my submission to Wikipedia is to make other designers aware of my concept and build and improve upon this concept. So awareness of this concept to the many designers out there is my intention and goal. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mehdidehghani (talk • contribs) 10:40, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Wikipedia is not the right place for original research; as an encyclopaedia, we only have articles about things that other publishers have already written about. Sorry.  Chzz  ►  14:19, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Manjul Bhardwaj Hi Chzz, Thanks for reviewing the page created by me. I would like to understand what process i should follow? as i have used the Article wizard only while creating it. So can you please guide me how i should go about creating a Page of "Manjul Bhardwaj" as feel it should be available to all the people about him and his activities and a mission. So lookforward for your kind guidance. Regards, Dhananjay Borase — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dborase (talk • contribs) 10:54, 2 February 2012 (UTC) First, you'd need to find references in independent reliable sources, such as newspapers - see WP:FIRST. Cheers,  Chzz  ►  17:08, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Karibe con K Hello Chzz! I hope you're doing fine. The reason why I created this article is because there are TONS of Uruguayans living abroad, especially in the United States. Many of them are also living in Europe, but since I don't know any other languages besides Spanish and English, with English being the most widely spoken language in the world, I thought the article had to exist in that language; that's why I made the effort of translating it so they can share it with their companions. "Karibe con K" actually did achieve gold status in some of their records, but there is little-to-non information online since it's so badly organized that there are barely any web links to certify that. I am deeply sorry for being unable to fix that at the moment. I wish this article does get published, since I'm sure it will be highly resourceful for all Uruguayans abroad. I want to take this opportunity to thank you for taking your time in revising the article and replying to me. Have a terrific day! Cheers, G — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gerosilvapereira (talk • contribs) 11:28, 2 February 2012 (UTC) The references do not have to be online. However, they need to be reliable sources. The first link you used is http://www.sondor.com/sondores/historia/historia.htm - and that doesn't seem to work. The second is "El-Hacker.com" which doesn't seem to be a reliable source. Unfortunately, if there is little-to-no information available, then we can't add it to Wikipedia - we only publish information that has already been published elsewhere.  Chzz  ►  17:11, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Bernadette Davis Hi Chzz - I think the reason that Bernadette Davis is important/signficant is that she co-wrote one of the most popular sitcoms of the 90s. She worked with Andrew Davies on a number of tv shows as well as this one and he is definitely significant and important. All of the shows she has authored were previously on Wikipedia in their own right, so if they are important/significant, surely the writer of the programs is! Yours 212.95.227.74 (talk) 12:51, 2 February 2012 (UTC)PaukiPKK Hi. IMDB isn't a reliable source - see WP:IMDB. The question is not what you or I consider to be important or significant, but whether there is "significant coverage in reliable sources' - see WP:VRS. It'd require published reliable sources with significant information about that person - because notability is not inherited.  Chzz  ►  17:21, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Oh My! Hi Chzz, I wonder. What is needed for it to be important enough? I have already explained that Oh My! is a band that meet several of the criterias for music pages and the band is of relevance, got a fanbase worldwide that will enjoy this and alot of more information coming. The instructions is: "A musician or ensemble (note that this includes a band, singer, rapper, orchestra, DJ, musical theatre group, etc.) may be notable if it meets at least one of the following criteria" 1. Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable and are independent from the musician or ensemble itself. -- I have even refered one. 2. Has had a single or album on any country's national music chart. -- The Four last singles has been on Swedish national music charts. 10. Has performed music for a work of media that is notable, e.g. a theme for a network television show, performance in a television show or notable film, inclusion on a notable compilation album, etc. (But if this is the only claim, it is probably more appropriate to have a mention in the main article and redirect to that article. Read WP:BLP1E and WP:BIO1E for further clarifications) --- Information is on homepage, but I can post the link to MTV.com and the tv-series Ninas Mal. 11. Has been placed in rotation nationally by any major radio or music television network. -- Clearly stated in the texts. Should I refer swedish national radio for this? I find it hard to find the straight line between overposting links (and thereby get the feeling of marketing) and underposting links so you feel unhappy about the result. Kind Regards Jonas — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mavav (talk • contribs) 13:07, 2 February 2012 (UTC) The most important of those is #1 - the 'general notability guideline' - which refers to WP:N - which also says, "In order to meet Wikipedia's standards for verifiability and notability, the article in question must actually document that the criterion is true. It is not enough to make vague claims in the article or assert a band's importance on a talk page or AfD page – the article itself must document notability." In other words, you need to give references to independent, reliable sources. When I reviewed it, it had three references - but two of them were primary sources. st.nu looks OK, but one reference was not enough. You've now added another, which is ourstage.com - the problem is, that's a listing entry, not 'significant coverage'. Can you find any articles in newspaper/magazine or a reputable website (with 'editorial control' and a 'reputation for fact-checking')? Also, it would help a lot if you added inline references, to show where the facts can be checked. For example, it says they come "from Sundsvall, Sweden" and "was formed in 2008" - where can those specific facts be checked? There should be a reference directly after each fact. For help on how to do that, please see WP:REFB. I'll also add help on your own talk page.  Chzz  ►  19:00, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Delano Seiveright Please give me more details as to how to improve this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.252.36.122 (talk) 13:47, 2 February 2012 (UTC) As I said, it has problems with neutrality. For example, "the Standing Committee and the Central Executive, the two most powerful decision making bodies of the Jamaica Labour Party" - who says that they are the most powerful? The reference is to their own website. That's a primary source, and should not be used for non-neutral claims. "Jamaica Speaks, a very popular radio weekday morning news and commentary program" - who says it is very popular? "Delano was widely credited for his lead role" - credited by who? "Other accomplishments include he going to the People’s Republic of China on two special visits" - why are these 'accomplishments'? Why are the visits special? "a leading member of Jamaica’s delegation" - where can we verify that he is a leading member? "Delano has been involved in a number of controversial issues that have attracted significant media attention" - how many is 'a number'? How significant was the attention? Who says it was significant? The over all problem is, that it depends too much on "g2kjamaica.org" - which of course is not an independent reference. Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable, published secondary sources and, to a lesser extent, on tertiary sources. Secondary or tertiary sources are needed to establish the topic's notability and to avoid novel interpretations of primary sources, though primary sources are permitted if used carefully. Material based purely on primary sources should be avoided. All interpretive claims, analyses, or synthetic claims about primary sources must be referenced to a secondary source (from WP:PRIMARY, with my added bold). I hope that helps.  Chzz  ►  19:10, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Jamillah Knowles Greetings Chzz ... As you are aware, this is my first Wikipedia submission and have a lot to learn about the proper procedure. I have entered four links to support the requirement for evidence and hope that this meets the regulations. Thanks for your support. Cheers - Daybydaiboy Daybydaiboy (talk) 14:06, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Please see WP:VRS - I don't think it shows significant coverage in independent reliable sources. Also, please add inline references; see WP:REFB. Where can I check that she was born in 1977, that her journalistic career started in 1993, and that she trained as a young photographer? If it's made live, anyone can and will edit it. If people change those details, how will we know which is correct? If someone edits it, and says she was e.g. born in 1954, and trained as a juggler - how can I know if it is true? It needs to be verifiable. Cheers,  Chzz  ►  19:17, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/2009 IPL Players Auction May I know the reason why the proposed article '2009 IPL Players Auction' got rejected? We have pages like 2010 IPL Player Auction, 2011 IPL Players Auction and also 2012 IPL Players Auction. I created the article 2009 IPL Players Auction to complete the series of articles on the stated topic. The only references are to "espncricinfo.com". Apart from that single website, who else has written about the event? What makes it notable? See WP:VRS. The existence of other articles doesn't really help - maybe they should be deleted. Cheers,  Chzz  ►  19:23, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Safway Services, LLC Thank you for your suggestions. The article Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Safway_Services,_LLC was written to provide correct information and relevant content on the company. Our objective is not for promotion or advertising, but to help those who may be looking for info on the company. I can attempt to rewrite, however I'm not sure how I would go about doing that, since that was not the intention. Any additional insights would be helpful. If you could list out some specific changes that I can make to get the approved that would be helpful. Thank you for your assistance. Theweldingguy (talk) 15:29, 2 February 2012 (UTC) It's clearly not written from a neutral point-of-view. It begins, Safway Services, LLC, headquartered in Waukesha, Wis., has been a leader in scaffolding and innovative access solutions since 1936.[2] With an extensive in-house engineering department, award-winning safety excellence [3], a powerful project management system and a new insulation facility, Safway delivers exceptional services and premier products throughout North America via a network of more than 85 branches. Offering sales, rental, assembly, disassembly, training, labor and project management, Safway’s experience and expertise is used throughout the commercial construction, bridge, industrial (offshore, petrochemical and power) and special events markets. Who says they're a leader? The reference (Hoovers) is clearly not a neutral source. Who says it is powerful/exceptional/premier? Who says they have experience and expertise? It is highly promotional, it isn't encyclopaedic, and thus if accepted, it'd be likely to be deleted as spam. Please refer to the business FAQ; it's hard to be neutral when you have a conflict of interest, so really the best advice is, to write about something else. If the company is indeed notable, someone else will write about it. Sorry.  Chzz  ►  19:29, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Parkview Center School Hi CHzz, I would like to find out what additional information you think is needed to make the article on Parkiew Center School noteworthy. I think winning an Emmy (I can add a picture of it sitting in the school office), being a National Blue Ribbon School (indicating high test scores), and having an urban Forest (one of 116 rural and urban forests out of 2,637 public schools) sanctioned by the state of Minnesota are pretty significant events for a public school. We are also a K-8 school, not just an elementary school or a middle school. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Parkview_Center_School I would like to know what specific events or activities you would suggest to make the school more noteworthy. I am really puzzled as to what type of information you are looking for? We are at our enrollment capacity every year because people choose (and participate in a lottery) to come to our school - we do not have a built in neighborhood student population. We had a teacher who was part of a Fulbright exchange with a teacher in England last year. Would that tip the scales in our favor if I added that information? I realize a school cannot jump through hoops, but I would be happy to send you a picture of me jumping through a hoop. I live chatted with several people earlier this week and one or two of them thought our accomplishments were noteworthy and thought I should re-submit the article after tightening it up a little. I appreciate any personal insight you can give me. Thank you for your help. Sincerely, Janice Jsankot (talk) 16:52, 2 February 2012 (UTC) It is not neutral - for example, it says, Families living in the district, as well as in surrounding communities, choose to enroll their children at Parkview where innovation, high achievement and global education are at the heart of the school. - that's opinion, not objective fact; it's not verifiable. You shouldn't make non-neutral claims based on the school website - for example, that it "Respects diversity" and "Encourages active learning" - that's only according to the school. See WP:PRIMARY. "The school's unique choice program attracts students" - who says it is unique? Who says that that is the thing which attracts students? There's a lot of similar problems throughout. Stick to facts that can be referenced to independent reliable sources. Be neutral and objective. Do not include any non-neutral claims that can only be verified via the school itself - for example, the "Web Presence" section. Hope that helps.  Chzz  ►  19:34, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Chzz, I really appreciate your feedback. The words I used to describe the school were part of Parkview's application to the US Department of Education's Blue Ribbon program. In order to be verified, the application had to be approved by the School District Superintendent, the School Board, and the United States Department of Education. If I include a link to the Blue Ribbon web site and provide a copy of the application as a file on wikipedia, would that be enough to answer the questions you have about the neutrality of the article? (www2.ed.gov/programs/nclbbrs/2010/.../mn08-parkview-center.pdf - Parkview Center School Application: download files Word | PDF - http://www2.ed.gov/programs/nclbbrs/2010/applications/index.html#mn) As far as the web presence goes, the only verification is from the waybackmachine showing what other schools in the district had a visible presence when the Parkview web site joined the district web site. I will add the link for the district web site from the wayback machine. I will also look for newspaper articles from that time to see if I can find anything. Hindsite is 20/20 when it comes to keeping copies of things. I can then edit that section appropriately. Thank you again for your help. janice Jsankot (talk) 18:04, 3 February 2012 (UTC) As the school submission to USDoE programme is a primary source, it cannot be used to make non-neutral claims. It could possibly be quoted, but be careful not to give undue weight. In other words, consider the difference between; a) This K-8 public school was established in 1989 and Respects diversity, Encourages active learning, Promotes communication between school and family, and Fosters interage connections. b) The school states that it "Respects diversity" and "Encourages active learning". (with ref, of course) The first makes it sound like it is a fact; the second makes it clear who is making the claim, without offering opinion. The main issue is, sticking to simple "cold hard facts"; keeping it neutral. Hope that helps.  Chzz  ►  18:09, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The Witness: From the Balcony of Room 306 Hi Chzz, thank you for reviewing the proposed article, my first submittal on Wikipedia. Based on studying the guidelines for assessing the importance of topics generally and films in particular, the worthiness of this film is its quality (original and award-winning) contribution to the body of work on Dr. Martin Luther King and the Civil Rights Movement. I have added the following paragraph to the draft: "Although numerous films have been made on Dr. Martin Luther King and the Civil Rights Movement, "The Witness" looks at King's work from the intimate perspective of a friend and one of the last surviving eyewitnesses (Rev. Kyles). The film contributes both original personal interviews and geographical perspective. Shot on-location in Memphis at several historic sites, its focus is less national than local, providing a more in-depth account of Dr. King's efforts to improve physical safety and financial conditions of the sanitation workers in the city where he ultimately met his untimely death." Another indicator of importance is that the film won multiple awards in its category (Documentary Short), and was nominated for an Academy award for "Best Documentary Short". It was of sufficient note to be aired on HBO (February 18, 2009) and was shown at numerous film festivals (domestic and international), winning multiple awards in its category. (I have added an independent citation for the Oscar nomination and a review in the Los Angeles Times.) Taking these factors together and benchmarking against comparable encyclopedic articles on short documentaries (some of which did not go beyond film festival awards and an Oscar nomination), one could reasonably deem this film of adequate importance for inclusion in Wikipedia. Added references were: "The 81st Academy Awards (2009) Nominees and Winners" page in the Oscars archive: http://www.oscars.org/awards/81academyawards/nomineesByPicture.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/81st_Academy_Awards A review dated February 18, 2009 by LA Times television critic Robert Lloyd: http://articles.latimes.com/2009/feb/18/entertainment/et-the-witness18 Thank you again for your time in reviewing the article, and guidance for my first submittal. Spacebender — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spacebender (talk • contribs) 17:16, 2 February 2012 (UTC) IMDB is not a reliable source. Some parts have references, but a lot of things don't. For example, "Directed by filmmaker Adam Pertofsky and produced by Margaret Hyde" - where can I check that? "an intimate portrayal" and "a compelling introduction" - according to who? That's not neutral. 2008 Palm Springs International ShortFest, it won the Audience "Favorite" Award for "Best Documentary" along with the Jury award for Best Documentary - citation required. 2009 Nashville Film Festival it received "Best Documentary Short" - citation required. 2008 Cinema St. Louis Film Festival in the category of "Best Documentary Short"." - citation required. Hope that helps.  Chzz  ►  19:39, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Charlie's scars I would like to just delete my article. I understand that a better one has been written. What do I need to do? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bethsowell7 (talk • contribs) 17:56, 2 February 2012 (UTC) There's really no need, but if you want, just edit it and blank it. Cheers,  Chzz  ►  19:40, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Shelly Colvin Thanks very much for reviewing the Shelly Colvin page for me Chzz. Just a quick question re: reliable resources. Is it ok to cite her official web page ? I will remove the twitter references and other self published items. Thanks very much — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drdrstudio (talk • contribs) 17:57, 2 February 2012 (UTC) It's OK to use a reference to a primary source (such as her webpage) with two important conditions - a) It may only be used for totally neutral, simple facts, and not for any kind of claim. For example, "Chzzco is based in London <ref>Chzzco website</ref>" is OK. "Chzzco has a turnover of $9M<ref>Chzzco website</ref>" is not OK. b) It doesn't help show notability, because that requires independent reliable sources. Cheers,  Chzz  ►  19:43, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Colorado Student Space Weather Experiment CSSWE is just as significant as RAX or KySat-1 or any other CubeSat mission. I believe every artificial satellite deserves its own encyclopedia page - each one is a testament to science and what mankind can do. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dtgerhardt (talk • contribs) 18:26, 2 February 2012 (UTC) What you or I believe doesn't matter; Wikipedia policies and guidelines mean that all articles need to show significant coverage in independent reliable sources.  Chzz  ►  19:44, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Emmett Kelly (musician) Hi Chzz- Thank you for reviewing our recent page creation submission. I see that the Emmett Kelly (musician) page was not accepted for submission. Based on the criteria for submission, here's why he is deserving of an article: 1) He has been part of the personnel and/or composer of well over 20 critically acclaimed albums (lists and example reviews below): - http://www.allmusic.com/artist/emmett-kelly-p771287/credits - http://www.discogs.com/artist/Emmett+Kelly - http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/9171-the-cairo-gang/ - http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/14088-the-wonder-show-of-the-world/ - http://www.avclub.com/articles/bonnie-prince-billy-the-cairo-gang-the-wonder-show,39421/ - http://blogs.villagevoice.com/music/2010/12/live_bonnie_pri.php - http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/15163-island-brothers/ - http://www.bbc.co.uk/music/reviews/d4gw 2) He is referenced in the following pre-existing wikipedia articles: - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beware_(album) - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolfroy_Goes_to_Town - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Letting_Go - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lie_Down_in_the_Light - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narnack_Records 3) He has releases on important indie labels such as Drag City, Domino, Polyvinyl, and Narnack (all of which are represented in Wikipedia). 4) He has toured extensively both in the United States and Europe 5) His albums and performances have been featured in prominent publications such as BBC, The Village Voice, Pitchfork, The Chicago Reader, The Onion, and The New York Times (a couple examples below see also the albums section above): http://www.chicagoreader.com/chicago/box-tortoise-record-time-for-plush-the-continuing-adventures-of-emmett-kelly/Content?oid=922012 http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/10/arts/music/10bonnie.html 6) He has played in ensembles with notable musicians/bands such as: - Will Oldham (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Will_Oldham) - Baby Dee (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baby_Dee) - Terry Reid (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_Reid) - Beth Orton (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beth_Orton) - Azita (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azita) - Scott Tuma (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Tuma) - Joan of Arc (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joan_of_arc_(band)) - Edith Frost (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edith_Frost) 7) There exists a wikipedia page for an album composed my Emmett Kelly (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wonder_Show_of_the_World). Thank you for your time. We would appreciate any feedback you might have to help our cause given the information provided above. Thanks, Endlessnest (talk) 18:39, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Allmusic, discogs, blogs, and similar websites are not reliable sources. Nor is Wikipedia - so links to other articles are irrelevent. All that matters is, it must show "significant coverage in independent reliable sources" - such as newspapers, books, magazines, news-websites, and so on. WP:VRS. Notability is not inherited, and the existence of other articles does not help. Best,  Chzz  ►  19:47, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Great, understood... so this artist has been covered in a variety of local and national independent reliable sources including: Pitchfork, New York Times, BBC, The Village Voice, The Chicago Reader, Dusted Magazine, the onion etc. He also has released several albums on important independent labels such as Drag City, Narnack, Domino etc. and collaborated extensively with internationally renown artists. Should we provide more links to sources? Thanks- Endlessnest (talk) 23:56, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Absolutely. If in doubt, always err on the side of too many sources, rather then not enough. If the bank has been covered buy the NYT, the BBC, Chicago Reader, etc, then he's probably notable. Add those sources and we'll go from there. Nolelover Talk·Contribs 00:31, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Great thanks! Will do this in the next 24 hours. Endlessnest (talk) 01:19, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Re: Review of Submission for International Dialogue Education Associates, Inc. Hello, I appreciate your time and feedback for the submitted article. Can you please provide some guidance or direction as to what should be pared down, and what level of detail to avoid? It is very appreciated. Best, Carolyn — Preceding unsigned comment added by Woolffan (talk • contribs) 18:51, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Re. Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/International Dialogue Education Associates, Inc. It's very difficult to write when you have a conflict of interest, so it is not recommended. However, if you choose to do so... Stick to facts that other people - independent of the organization - have written. Respected publications with editorial control and a reputation for fact-checking. Add inline references, to show where the facts can be checked - see WP:REFB. Do not present things as 'fact' when they are, really, opinion - e.g. "Internals are more successful in school, in work, gather more information, exhibit more initiative" etc. Avoid peacock terms and weasel-words. As this is an encyclopaedia, we only report on things that other people - independently - have already published information about. So do not write about things like "Dr. Laborde began by handing out a stack of brightly colored papers" unless it's supported by a published reference such as a newspaper.  Chzz  ►  19:53, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Paul Heroux Hi, Chzz, Thank you for taking the time to review my article submission. My reason for including Paul Heroux as an encyclopedia article is that he is running as a Congressional candidate in the 4th District in Massachusetts. Joseph P Kennedy III is also running as a candidate and he has a page that was recently created as a result of running in this race. They are both candidates and both equally deserving of a page on Wikipedia, one no more or less than the other. Concerning Mr Heroux's background, I included the following links and I would also refer you to the signed letters of recommendation on company letterhead found on his website. http://attleboro.patch.com/articles/attleboro-democrat-paul-heroux-seeks-4th-congressional-seat-to-be-vacated-by-representative-barney-frank http://bostonherald.com/news/us_politics/view.bg?articleid=1396517 http://articles.boston.com/2012-01-17/metro/30632744_1_consulting-firm-fund-raising-drive-cost-benefit-analyses http://www.thesunchronicle.com/articles/2012/01/17/news/10823465.txt http://www2.turnto10.com/news/10_news_conference/ I have updated the page including these links were appropriate. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shineroo (talk • contribs) 19:42, 2 February 2012‎ Hi. When you leave messages, please remember to "sign" your name, by putting ~~~~ (four tilde signs) at the end. This will add your name, and the date and time. You can also do this by clicking the 'sign' button, pictured to the right. Thanks for adding those references. I have one remaining concern, which is: has anyone written anything about this person outside of his candidacy? We have a policy to not have articles about people known for just one thing, and I'm concerned about WP:POLITICIAN. Forgive me if I've missed something; I have not checked through all the refs in detail - as you can see on this page, I've been somewhat busy with questions about other articles-for-creation. Please let me know what, apart from reports on candidacy, makes the person notable. The 'letters of recommendation' don't help; we're looking for "significant coverage in independent reliable sources".  Chzz  ►  19:58, 2 February 2012 (UTC) CHEN again Hello Chzz, This is the author of the article entitles "Council for Higher Education in Newark,(CHEN)". I hate to bother you but I discovered that there are two versions the article, the older one of which is entitled "Council for Higher Education in Newark" - which is to say it lacks the characters:, (CHEN). This older version is still flagged as having the "close paraphrasing" issues. But more importantly, it seems to me the older article should be deleted entirely. I seem to recall reading somewhere that this is not to be done lightly. So I'm wondering if you have any suggestions. Thanks Wrrsimone (talk) 19:42, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Ah, OK. We had (1) "Council for Higher Education in Newark" and (2) "Council for Higher Education in Newark, (CHEN)". Although (2) was 'better', (1) was actually the correct title. So, I copied (2) over (1), putting the attribution details in the edit summary, and changed (2) to be a redirect to (1). I think that resolves things. The article is Council for Higher Education in Newark. And Council for Higher Education in Newark, (CHEN) just redirects to it. OK?  Chzz  ►  20:08, 2 February 2012 (UTC) See also Talk:Council for Higher Education in Newark#Copy/paste of rewrite  Chzz  ►  20:08, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Your assistance again, please The folks with an agenda are editing Kinetic Sculpture Race again. Here's the latest diff: [3] Plus they're making very nasty comments on Facebook, claiming that you, me and User:Nytasi are the same person. I still don't see that her boyfriend's name has any relevance to wikipedia and I'm really sorry they feel a need to take this personal. However, I don't feel I'm the one to make this change due to their comments and again request your assistance. Thank you. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:48, 2 February 2012 (UTC) a) I don't care one iota what anyone says about me on Facebook, b) I've removed the name again, for reasons stated in my edit summary, see [4].  Chzz  ►  20:11, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Morris E. Goodman Hi, Chzz! Thanks for reviewing my submission. I've added some more independent references - I hope this is enough to pass the sniff test! Thanks, Brian — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brianjude (talk • contribs) 20:08, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Looking through the refs as of the current version, Refs 1 thru 5 are primary sources, so they do not help show notability 6 IMDB is not a reliable source, and should not be used (per WP:IMDB) 7 indiewire is probably an OK reference, but does not have detailed coverage about the film 8 Facebook is not an RS, should not be used 9,10,11,12 'thesecret.tv' and 'theopusmovie.com' are not independent reference Thus I don't think it shows "significant coverage in independent reliable sources" (WP:VRS, WP:NFILM). Sorry.  Chzz  ►  20:17, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Thanks for that explanation. I see what I need to do is create external links with some of those references that don't count, and find more that do. I'm curious as to why 'thesecret.tv' and 'theopusmovie.com' are not independent references? Thanks, Brian — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brianjude (talk • contribs) 20:05, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Bill Baldini I'm not really sure what could be different. It gives the highlights of his career in a timeline format and gives some personal information about the man. I reviewed "John Bolaris", who was a weatherman in Philly, and his entry is very similar. In Philadelphia, Bill Baldini is a legend... he had a Day named after him, by the City of Philadelphia. There's really no dirt on him. Please let me know, specifically, what I can do for approval. -I could get into his background and parents, but I do not think it is relevant -I could speak more specifically about the major stories he has worked on Please let me know. Thanks, Wjbbilly (talk) 20:26, 2 February 2012 (UTC)Billy The only two references that have any degree of information about him are "catholicschools" and "broadcastpioneers.com". "preservepennhurst.org" is by him, not about him. And BAC is his son's website. I'm not seeing "significant coverage in independent reliable sources" here. The article states facts, for example "born January 23, 1943" - where can that be verified? Similar for all the facts. They should all have inline references to reliable sources - please see WP:REFB. Also, it is not neutral; for example, has shown versatility handling the most serious of stories, to dangerous stories, to the absurd. His personality, unique voice and notable laugh made Bill Baldini a cornerstone in Philadelphia TV-News, and one of the regions favorite personalities. - according to who?  Chzz  ►  20:41, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ian Cuttler - photographer Thank you for your comments. I did further research on my subject and would like to ask you if any of the following links would make the references stronger. This is my first Wikipedia article so it's a learning experience, so thank you for your time. This are some of the references i found that thought might be relevant. Best, Kenneth Media coverage of Grammy Award winning - Official Mexican government publication: http://fox.presidencia.gob.mx/buenasnoticias/?contenido=23355&pagina=126 El Universal - News - http://www2.eluniversal.com.mx/pls/impreso/noticia.html?id_nota=67377&tabla=espectaculos Images from MSN - Entertainment [5] [6] Terranoticias - News from Spain: http://terranoticias.terra.es/articulo/html/av2765897.htm Other sources I found (Grammy): http://rockpopgallery.com/events.asp Winner of "The Great Design Show" from Graphics magazine. http://www.graphics.com/modules.php?name=News&file=print&sid=3227 http://mediadesigner.digitalmedianet.com/article/Cash-Wins-Cash-in-The-Great-Design-Show-39663 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Escartifuge (talk • contribs) 20:30, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Absolutely. You've actually got come great sources here. Go ahead and add all of them (maybe except the images...those aren't as useful) to the article as sources, and resubmit. I'll accept it when you're done. Nolelover Talk·Contribs 20:44, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/9 Evenings: Theatre and Engineering Hello, is seems as though I am having some trouble understanding what qualifies as a reliable source for my article. The Daniel Langlois Foundation, where a majority of the information for this article comes from, is an established charitable organisation who has received much of the materials related to this event. Much of the information from this event are not digitized, but rather physical books/notes which are housed in various locations across the country. What suggestions would you give to someone new to wikipedia article writing in order to fix this situation? Thanks. Robinsonm5 (talk) 21:12, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Hi there Robinsonm5. I don't quite understand the relationship between 9 Evenings and the Daniel Langlois Foundation, but it doesn't sound (from what you're saying) that the DLF is a third-party source. While they may be reliable, you need independent sources to establish notability. Now, there's a somewhat common misperception that all sources need to be online to be good. That's incorrect. If you have sources in newspapers, books or magazines, it's perfectly fine to use them as sources. Just make sure you include all the relevant info in the citation: author, publisher, date, etc. Feel free to add those and re-submit. Hope this helped, Nolelover Talk·Contribs 21:41, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Thanks Nolelover for the info. Just to clarify, the DLF is an organisation that physically acquired the materials related to this event (video footage, audio recordings, papers, notes, etc.) Since, more or less, what I am trying to do with this article is bring to light the fact that this event occurred and who was involved, which are cut and dry pieces of information, one of which (the artist/engineer list) is cited directly from the event program. Are there any guidelines I could look at in regards to writing an article about an "event" that occurred? Without physically going and tracking down materials, I can't think of any other way to cite this information, or is that something you suggest I do? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robinsonm5 (talk • contribs) 22:00, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Yes...writing a good article is much harder than it first looks. =/ Well, I'm sure you've realized that you could just add some of the content to the article Experiments in Art and Technology and if it already isn't, redirect 9 Evenings to EAT. Anyway, if you are unable to find the needed sources, then there really isn't much you can do; articles absolutely will not be accepted without other sources, as you can understand. Remember, we're not looking for evidence the event exists. We're looking for evidence it is notable. Nolelover Talk·Contribs 22:11, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Blackbird Group, Inc. Specifically, what in the article appeared other than neutral? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paulhebner (talk • contribs) 21:13, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Hi there. In this case, this article needs a complete and fundamental rewrite to be accepted. I won't even look at the sources because Wikipedia cannot accept articles that purely consist of contact info. Wikipedia is not a directory, so you needs to explain why this company is notable. Removing your address and phone would be a good start. Nolelover Talk·Contribs 21:29, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Your article was deleted for being advertising.   — Jeff G. ツ (talk) 00:08, 4 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Andy Wagner What can I do to make this article acceptable? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Awagawags (talk • contribs) 21:13, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Hi there Awagawags. Wikipedia requires all of its articles to be WP:verifiable, so we ask that you provide reliable, third-party sources for all of your information. Now, you have three sources (The House Theatre Chicago, Theresa Andersson and World Leader Pretend) but there's not very much specific info on the sources. Just like in an academic paper, you need to provide enough detail so that another interested party could find the same stuff you used. What is "The House Theatre Chicago"? Is it a website? If so, show the URL. Is it a book or magazine? Then give the author, publisher and chapter/page. Just saying that you got material from "World Leader Pretend" doesn't help much. I hope that helps. Nolelover Talk·Contribs 21:26, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/SlimCado avocado Hi True, SlimCados are a brand name. I get a lot of questions about them and thought a Wikipedia article would be nice. Can you suggest how the article can be neutralized. As for references will this url do? http://www.brookstropicals.com/slimcado/index.shtml thanks Mary — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mostlund (talk • contribs) 21:18, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Hi there Mostlund. Whether or not SlimCado is a brand name, you need to prove the company it is notable with reliable, third-party sources. That source really isn't a reliable source (its basically an advertisement from the company) and it certainly doesn't talk about the company brand in-depth, as we require. Note that Wikipedia is not a directory or the yellow pages, so articles are not created just because they would be "nice to have". Nolelover Talk·Contribs 21:33, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Sorry to butt in here, but if the article is about the brand, then the notability of the brand needs to be proven. If the company is notable then the article should be about the company instead. Sionk (talk) 23:08, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Ahh, you're right. I mixed the two up; the article is about the brand, and the only source (and the link above) goes to the company's website. I have edited my first comment to clarify. Nolelover Talk·Contribs 23:14, 2 February 2012 (UTC) As u helping me so much, A kitten for you! Dear Chzz, I'm very happy that you r guiding n helping me out fr creation of AnokhelalJi's page. Appreciate your work and guide very much.. thanx... hopefully the article is now a matter to submit after i made changes according to your suggestions and recommendations. ~+BlueBlack+~ 21:24, 2 February 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Packmania (talk • contribs) 21:24, 2 February 2012‎ thanx fr helping me Creating article on Anokhelel Mishra ^_^ Dear Chzz, I'm very happy that you r guiding n helping me out fr creation of AnokhelalJi's page. Appreciate your work and guide very much.. thanx... hopefully the article is now a matter to submit after i made changes according to your suggestions and recommendations... ... ~Packmania~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Packmania (talk • contribs) 21:29, 2 February 2012‎ Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Lauren Lyster I'm unclear why this hasn't been approved. Is it because it needs more citations? Or because she, a host of a national news/opinion program, is not deemed significant enough? A fellow anchor on the same network has an entry. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alyona_Minkovski VeloVol (talk) 21:29, 2 February 2012 (UTC) The main problem is the lack of sources, yes. We don't make judgements on the notability of a topic based on what it is or whether there are articles on similar topics, but purely on what independent, reliable sources have to say about it (so in this case a page published by RT itself doesn't count). Obviously we can't assess that if you don't link to any sources! There's lots (and lots and lots and lots...) more information in the pages Chzz linked to in his comment. joe•roet•c 21:35, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Isa Vandi Dear Chzz May you kindly tell me which parts I shall exactly edit or improve? I have added both refrences and external links,I do not know what else I can add. Best Regards M.Kafi — Preceding unsigned comment added by M.Kafi (talk • contribs) 21:38, 2 February 2012 (UTC) --M.Kafi (talk) 21:43, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Hi there M.Kafi. You've got a decent article, but Wikipedia needs its content to be verifiable so we require reliable, independant sources. You have some very basic ones, but only one source there (http://svt.se/2.61757/1.792631/sa_fjarran_anda_sa_nara) really talks about the man in any sort of depth. Please add more sources that go into his life a bit more, and not just database entries (which you have many of). Hope this helps. Nolelover Talk·Contribs 21:46, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Prostate - Rectum Spacers Hi Chzz - thanks for reviewing. This is my first wiki submission. Could you let me know if there are specific sentences or areas that give you concern? That will help me to modify prior to resubmitting. Thanks Pkcemail (talk) 22:18, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Hi there Pkcemail. This is an interesting one...one problem you've got is that the focus of the article really makes a hard change halfway through. I would advise you to cut all that stuff about prostate cancer and write more in the format of "Prostate - Rectum Spacers are such and such which do such and such." A brief explanation of the disease may be nessecary, but not the whole paragraph you have. As to the tone, note that the last paragraph, in which you make various claims as to the efficiency of the spacers, is completely unsourced. Adding references there (or just removing it wholesale) would do a lot. Nolelover Talk·Contribs 22:25, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Thanks for the feedback. I just resubmitted with your comments incorporated. Best, Pkcemail (talk) 17:55, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/2009 IPL Players Auction As you had asked for references from different websites, I have added a few links of the related topic from some top websites. Hope that helps. I can post more links if you want me to. Please check them out. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.198.96.98 (talk) 22:15, 2 February 2012 (UTC) I have created the page. Nolelover Talk·Contribs 22:49, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Tanner Patrick sir well i had to edit and add a little bit of stuff and i have got that this musician had some some in billiboard 200 now can my article be permitted — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arafatkhan283 (talk • contribs) 23:07, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Remove references to facebook, myspace and youtube. They are not reliable sources. Add references to appropriate reliable sources - such as newspapers, magazines, books, news-websites. Show where the information can be verified. For example, it says he was "born Tanner Patrick Howe May 24, 1991" - where can I check that is correct? The same applies for all facts throughout the article. Hope that helps.  Chzz  ►  00:44, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Good job! The Articles for Creation barnstar It's not much but it's the least you deserve for clearing that backlog! Nice to see you back as well :) Pol430 talk to me 23:40, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Thanks.  Chzz  ►  02:19, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/San Diego AfterShocks Hello, Thank you for reviewing my proposed article on the San Diego AfterShocks sports team. My understanding is that you wanted clarification about why this team was notable enough to warrant inclusion on Wikipedia. I would greatly appreciate any feedback that you might have. You may be aware that men's roller derby is a fast-growing and fairly popular sport in the US nowadays. And, the San Diego team, while new, has generated national and regional notice, becoming more well known in the roller derby world than many other teams that have Wikipedia pages. For example, please see the following pages for other, similarly-situated men's roller derby teams. New York : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Shock_Exchange St. Louis: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St_Louis_GateKeepers. I have added a sentence noting that the San Diego AfterShocks are co-coached by John Hall, a legendary roller derby skater from the 1960's and 1970's. He may be known to readers from his time with the Los Angeles Thunderbirds. I'll also add a sentence noting that the AfterShocks are captained Brett Stang, widely considered one of the best players in the country. I hope these additions might help to establish the notability of this team, and I welcome any suggestions you have. Sincerely, Tom Tomgriff2222 (talk) 00:26, 3 February 2012 (UTC) First of all, please note that each Wikipedia article is judged on its own merits, so articles about similar teams are irrelevant. Anyways, if you want this article to be accepted, you need to add more third-party sources. You have numerous sources that go back to the team or league; those are primary sources and hence don't help in establishing notability. This source (http://www.kpbs.org/news/2011/dec/16/video-mens-roller-derby-san-diego/) is great, but you only have one of its caliber. Please add more source like that, and resubmit. Nolelover Talk·Contribs 00:48, 3 February 2012 (UTC) "Facebook" is not a reliable source, and should not be used as a reference. Is there a real reliable source (e.g. newspaper/news website) where we can check that San Diego Roller Derby formed in 2008? If so, add that reference. If not, remove the claim. "The AfterShocks have received national and local notoriety" - that isn't a neutral fact; it's opinion; remove that part. "They are coached by roller derby legend John Hall, formerly of the Los Angeles Thunderbirds, among others. The team is captained by Brett Stang, considered one of the best players in the United States." - unless this can be referenced, it should be removed. "The AfterShocks will play a full schedule in 2012, including games against NorCal, Phoenix, Los Angeles and Slick City." - same. Are there any other reliable sources that give information about the team?  Chzz  ►  00:53, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Peter Hedgehog Figures My entry was not an adbvertisement. It concerns items which have not been made since the 1970s, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jchesley (talk • contribs) 00:40, 3 February 2012 (UTC) The submission is unreferenced and therefore the content cannot be verified. It also appears to be a random collection of information. Pol430 talk to me 00:44, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Articles need references. See WP:FIRST.  Chzz  ►  00:54, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Alex Krebs Can you give some suggestions as to how I can help meet the criteria. Alex Krebs is one of the most famous tango dancers in the United States. He has taught all over the world and commands international acclaim. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tangomike85 (talk • contribs) 01:35, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Add references to reliable sources, such as newspapers/books/magazines/news websites.  Chzz  ►  01:40, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Bizarre Foods America I'm not quite sure what else I need to put in. It's much like the other pages of TV shows that I've found. The rejection tells me to look at the speedy deletion criteria for an organization and company, but I'm not quite sure if this is about a company or an organization. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zach8270 (talk • contribs) 01:56, 3 February 2012 (UTC) After re-checking it, I agree it seems to meet the notability requirements - just about. So, I've accepted it; it's live, as Bizarre Foods America.  Chzz  ►  02:00, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/LGBT Veterans Memorial Hello - Obviously no one really is concerned what LGBT Veterans went thru with regards to civil rights while serving our country. Please remove my proposed page for the LGBT Veterans Memorial. 'Bigotry' is far more indexed on Google and we'll appear better there than on the Wiki. Enjoy your First Amendment rights... after all, we served to protect them. Semper Fi, Dogtags Dogtags (talk) 03:42, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Dogtags (talk) 03:46, 3 February 2012 (UTC) I'm not American. However, the subject matter isn't relevant here; all that matters is, that all articles need appropriate references. I'm sorry if that seems unfair; that's the Wikipedia policies; it's nothing whatsoever to do with any kind of opinion regarding the subject.  Chzz  ►  15:48, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/A Chicago Punk Rock Collaboration For The Kids, Vol 1 Could you tell me what you need to approve this article? The Band's Page is worthy of an article, why not the album they made? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Black_Sheep_Band Jauma2368 (talk) 03:42, 3 February 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jauma2368 (talk • contribs) 03:36, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Lack of references. It has some now, so I've accepted it.  Chzz  ►  04:32, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/GeForce 700 Series the 600 series was notably incorrect, referring to itself as the Kepler generation. Nvidia has listed the 600 series internally as an OEM refresh of the Fermi generation and released parts as such based on that series. the 700 series is the Kepler generation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.168.4.115 (talk) 05:29, 3 February 2012 (UTC) You need to provide sources for that and all other unsourced info. How does the reader know you are telling the truth? Without more reliable, independent sources your submission won't be accepted. Nolelover Talk·Contribs 14:11, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/MLB MANAGER ONLINE so wat is the problem huh, u tell me — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tzhang0 (talk • contribs) 06:25, 3 February 2012 (UTC) The subject of the submission fails to meet our notability policy and it has no reliable references. Pol430 talk to me 10:38, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/European Scientific Journal Dear sir/madam, creating a new article about ESJ is very important since this journal is one of the most influential in the southeast Europe. Can you please make the corrections? — Preceding unsigned comment added by VSadowski (talk • contribs) 10:14, 3 February 2012 (UTC) According to whom? The references provided do not give "significant coverage in independent reliable sources", which is what we require in order for the submission to meet our notability policy. It's not the reviewers job to write the submission for you or establish its notability. Please read WP:VRS. Thank you Pol430 talk to me 10:42, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Independent Pilots Association - UK Pilot Union Hi Being new to Wikipedia could you please expand on why you declined to publish the Independent Pilots Association - UK Pilot Union entry to Wikipedia when there is a similar page for a different pilot union with the same name within Wikipedia at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_Pilots_Association and also another British pilot union also within Wikipedia at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BALPA and an Australian pilot union at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_and_International_Pilots_Association This appears to be a lack of consistency in the publishing policy and I would be grateful for your opinions and a way forward. Kind Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by AviationExpertUK (talk • contribs) 11:03, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Sorry, but each article is judged on its own merits, so the existence of similar articles is irrelevant. If you do want your article accepted, please add more reliable, independent sources discussing the group. Every article on Wikipedia must be verifiable, and citations are the tool we use. At present, you only have one. Feel free to take your time - the submission won't be deleted - and resubmit once more sources have been added. Nolelover Talk·Contribs 14:18, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Wikipedia page "User talk:Wduch" >Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Unfortunately, the commercial links/content you added were inappropriate, as Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and should not be used for advertising or a collection of external links. See the welcome page if you'd like to learn more about contributing to the encyclopedia. Thanks! I have removed the link but scientific organizations (such as the ENNS) are non-profit and have nothing to do with commercial content. Reference was added. Thank you for your work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wduch (talk • contribs) 12:48, 3 February 2012‎ Hi. That first message on your user talk page, about external links, was not from me - it was from a user called Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk · contribs) - and, the message is dated 23 September 2007, so I doubt it is relevant now :-) The second message (under "Your submission at Articles for creation") was from my 'bot' - that is, an automated program - which helps people who create 'article for creation' pages with no references. I had a look at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/International Conference on Artificial Neural Networks and, unfortunately, it needs more references to be considered "notable" enough; see WP:VRS. Best,  Chzz  ►  15:16, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Blazeman Foundation I have added citations that, as specified in the wikipedia criteria you mention, demonstrate significant worldwide interest and participation in this organization. I should mention that I have no personal interest in it other than as a curious reader who stumbled upon a curious picture of a superstar triathlete rolling across the finish line of an Ironman competition. I've now devoted numerous hours to this because it clearly is a subject of widespread passion internationally and potentially great significance for the funding of a brutal disease for which there currently is no cure. If you still feel the urge to make a quick deletion of my article, I would invite you instead just to slap a "STUB" designation on it or to attach it to the Jon Blais or ALS page. Thanks, Celia, another VOLUNTEER — Preceding unsigned comment added by Celiakozlowski (talk • contribs) 14:06, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Hi there Celia. First of all, we don't delete AfC submissions. It will stay there as long as you want it to. Now, if you would like to add material to Jon Blais's page, you can. Anyone can edit, remember? :) As to the Blazeman Foundation...well, here the problem: Wikipedia requires sources for its articles to be reliably source by independent organizations, and a lot of your source are a little iffy on the independent part. Has this organization been covered in newspapers, books, or magazines? Those are the kinds of sources you need to add. Also note that Wikipedia is not the place to tell the world about your noble cause. Hope this helped, Nolelover Talk·Contribs 14:28, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Chzz, nolelover or whoever is going to take the next potshot:: From Wikipedia is not the place to tell the world about your noble cause: A caution for Wikipedia editors not involved with the cause]]: " Experienced editors not involved with the cause in question may suspect the new user of having a close connection with it. Such editors should respond carefully, to ensure that by alleging or deciding that the group is not "notable" by Wikipedia's standards, they do not suggest to the new user that the cause for which the group works is unimportant." I repeat, I have NO personal connection with this organization or cause WHATSOEVER. I had never heard of it before a couple of days ago and have no personal interest in sports, Jon Blais, his family and only mild professional interest in motor neurone disease. But clearly many other people around the world are extremely interested in these subjects and I will admit that I was personally touched and motivated by that, convinced by what I read that this was a subject others might likewise benefit from reading about. I read and now include a variety of online sources, which I don't find "iffy" -- including university websites, wikipedia pages, local news sites and athletes' magazines in response to your changing view (now it's sources, not importance) of why my article should not be used. I won't trouble you further, except to note that I've found making contributions to wikipedia increasingly distressing and discouraging -- worse than a waste of time -- due to interactions such as I have had here. Celia Kozlowski (talk) 15:32, 3 February 2012 (UTC) My sincerest apologies for not adding some context with that link. I am not in any way, shape or form accusing you of having any affiliation with the group. I should have specifically pointed you to to the section entitled "Writing about a non-profit organization", and said that you just need to be careful; your statement "...clearly is a subject of widespread passion internationally and potentially great significance for the funding of a brutal disease for which there currently is no cure" worried me. Nolelover Talk·Contribs 15:51, 3 February 2012 (UTC) I'm sorry you feel that way. I also think it is increasingly hard to edit Wikipedia, and I do my best to make it easier. But, if you no longer wish to discuss it, I can't help. If you do want to, either let me know, or you could seek help from others on WP:HELPDESK. Whatever you decide, I wish you all the best. Once again, I'm sorry you seem to have been distressed by attempts to help build the article.  Chzz  ►  15:53, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/ÅBÄKE Dear Chzz Can you please tell me exactly what about the article is non-neutral, what information lacks references, what references are unreliable an how I can make the tone of the article more encyclopedic? I was very careful to be factual and site references so any help would be very much appreciated. I read the page links you gave me; WP:NPOV, WP:V and WP:NOT but I am still unsure on how to fix the article. Kind regards, Manjula-Jayne — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.6.249.120 (talk) 14:15, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Hi. I'm sorry, I don't have time right now to check through every single line and reference; as you can see, this page is quite busy! But what I'll do is, give some examples; perhaps they will give you enough pointers, and you can edit it and resubmit. Examples of non-neutral wording: "known for an unusual and avant garde design" - according to who? That sounds like opinion, not fact "the legendary fashion house Maison Martin Margiela." - who says it is legendary? "A parasitical magazine, that only exists inside other magazines (this project shows that there can be alternative economy and distribution)" - the part in brackets; that may be the aim of the project, but we can't simply state it does do that "The restaurant turned dining into an event with an open kitchen and seasonal ingredients that celebrated food and east London early 2000. One of the first of its kind" "It is a collection based on personal curiosity, an interest for mistakes and tautological anomalies" Lacking references; "The founders of ÅBÄKE all studied "Communication art & design" at the Royal College of Art. They first worked together on their architectural magazine Sexymachinery which was initially produced at the college, as well as at the Architectural Association. After leaving the RCA they set up a studio in Hackney, east London." (the reference given does not show any of that information) "Åbäke's work combines an interest in typography, representation and the social aspect of it. Åbäke was visiting lecturers at the Royal College of Art, London from 2004 to 2010" The 'Current & Past Collaborators' section has no references Unreliable sources; As mentioned previously, "sexymachinery.com" doesn't look like a reliable source. I suppose it is a primary source? "Tubmbl" is not. "moussemagazine.it" does not seem an independent source, because the comments look like advertising of the product. WP:NOT There's a lot of information making claims, which are only referenced to primary sources. Wikipedia, as an encyclopaedia, only reports things that other (independent) people have already written about elsewhere. For example, the "I am still alive" lists all the places it has appeared in, based on a reference to "abake.fr". If others have not written about where it has appeared, then that information shouldn't be included. "The Slow Alphabet" seems similar. "One of the main interest of Åbäke is representation, therefore the idea of aliases is a reoccurring subject in use. Inspired by people like...<names>" - again, unless other people have explained these connections and inspirations, it's not appropriate for inclusion. Hope that helps,  Chzz  ►  15:39, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Delano Seiveright Made some adjustments let me know if improved. If not i guess i will bring it down to a simple one liner — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jelawwq (talk • contribs) 14:44, 3 February 2012 (UTC) I see it's now been reviewed by someone else, so you'd be better asking Someguy1221 (talk · contribs).  Chzz  ►  15:43, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/SMACK 2012 Dear, Kindly guide me as to what more information are you expecting regarding this article as I really wish to add it to the encyclopedia as early as possible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Usama1993 (talk • contribs) 15:20, 3 February 2012 (UTC) It needs to be based on independent references - other people writing about it, in e.g. newspapers/magazines/news-webites. Please see WP:VRS and WP:FIRST.  Chzz  ►  15:41, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Marinho Nobre IMDB and Discogs are just additional sources I have sent on the artist. There are two international articles ( Fabrika Magazine ) and two US articles, and in addition I have added two more which you all probably didn t even look at. I have spoken to a reviewer via chat and he mentioned that he disagreed with the rejection and asked me to resubmit. What good is it to resubmit if you guys aren t even bother to read ? please advise. MANOMMG — Preceding unsigned comment added by MANOMMG (talk • contribs) 15:59, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Don't use references if they're not reliable sources. Remove them - and, remove information that can't be verified. It can, of course, be re-submitted and thus re-assessed at any time.  Chzz  ►  16:07, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/SafeMart Thank you for the feedback. I'm a college student and this is my first post. I relied on the SafeMart website for information and then found 3rd party sources to corroborate their information. I made edits to my original post and removed anything that came from the SafeMart website directly leaving only 3rd party information. If there are other edits that you'd suggest, or if you can contribute something, I'd really appreciate your help as I'm a novice! You've still got non-neutral claims based on the primary source - e.g. This approach was different than the way that most consumers viewed home security delivery. SafeMart eliminated the need to pay an installer for those with enough expertise. As technology in the home security industry advanced, and consumers began using the Internet to make other purchase. Sections on "Products" etc do not belong on wikipedia, unless other people - independently - have written about them in reliable sources. Hope that helps.  Chzz  ►  16:09, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Preactor In which specific area does the article read as an 'advertisement' ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Williamparky16:30, 3 February 2012‎ (talk • contribs) When you leave messages, please remember to "sign" your name, by putting ~~~~ (four tilde signs) at the end. This will add your name, and the date and time. You can also do this by clicking the 'sign' button, pictured to the right. It has unreferenced, promotional claims - for example, Integrated with ERP, MES and Supply Chain Management solutions, Preactor's technology is used by more than 3,500 small, medium and large multinational companies located in over 67 countries and over 30 languages. Preactor works with each business individually to ensure to tailor the product to their specific needs And has focussed its attention on the Asian market and provides additional resources for non-core software development as well as implementation support around the world. "Products" is a pure advert. Articles must be based on independent references. Please see WP:BFAQ.  Chzz  ►  17:18, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Arbutus Ridge Retirement Community Thank you for your constructive feedback. Can you please offer an example or two of things that require alteration? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.67.47.42 (talk) 16:31, 3 February 2012 (UTC) I'm sorry - I actually did write examples on the 'decline', but for some reason they weren't saved. Sorry about that. I'll add some examples below; "a master-planned seaside community, created solely for adults". Note, primary sources cannot be used to make claims. "includes many of the same kind of services expected in any conventional community " - opinion, not verifiable fact "Early History and Industrial Uses" has no references "CRC began house construction immediately and the first phase, including the Village Centre, Golf Course and utilities was completed nine months later." unreferenced "creative approach to blending with the natural environment and emphasis on architectural compatibility" not neutral "Additionally, the Arbutus Ridge Ratepayers Association (ARRA), monitors and represents home owners in external matters such as health, transportation, public utilities, community growth and development, environmental protection and social amenities." unreferenced claims "Characteristics of Community Life" section reads like a brochure, not an encyclopaedia. Hope that helps,  Chzz  ►  17:24, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Deadest Rapper Alive: The Rise of Lil' Wayne and the Fall of Urban Youth (Book) Hello Chaz I recently submitted the article for the Book, Deadest Rapper Alive: The Rise of Lil' Wayne and the Fall of Urban Youth. The article was rejected for the reason, "Not worth of inclusion." I wanted to seek consideration, seeing that this book obtains 6 million search results, has been followed by major news magazines, and is used by Ministers, Jails, and Parents. This book is one of a kind because it is a Christian Polemic that deal with pop-culture. I humbly ask that you reconsider the decision. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jomo1980 (talk • contribs) 16:59, 3 February 2012 (UTC) It does not show "significant coverage in independent reliable sourceS". That's all. See WP:VRS.  Chzz  ►  17:25, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/9 Evenings: Theatre and Engineering 2 Does this include an omission of the table as well? And/or just the last column of the table? I will convert the lists to paragraphs as it might be easier to digest. Thanks for the suggestions! Robinsonm5 (talk) 17:13, 3 February 2012 (UTC) I think the table is OK, except the 'possibly non-public' folks in the R column; so maybe remove that column, and possibly for the one blue-link, put it in brackets? vis, Performance Name Artist ... ... Bandoneon! (A Combine) David Tudor (Performance engineer Fred Waldhauer) Two Holes of Water - 3 Robert Whitman Thanks for understanding the problem/suggestion. It's just that naming individuals who are not "well known/public" on a wiki page is a substantial problem, and we want to respect their 'presumption in favour of privacy'. Not everyone wants to be mentioned on the web; of course, if they are "famous", they don't necessarily get a choice... Thanks again. Feel free to ask questions, any time. And if you disagree with me about anything, that's fine too; I can only proffer opinion (based on some experience though...)  Chzz  ►  17:29, 3 February 2012 (UTC) P.S. For referencing format; instead of... <ref>["http://coe.berkeley.edu/labnotes/0204/history.html"]</ref> ...which appears as; ["http://coe.berkeley.edu/labnotes/0204/history.html"] ...instead, put e.g. ... <ref>[http://coe.berkeley.edu/labnotes/0204/history.html 1957: Billy Kluver, the father of electronic art, earns his PhD], David Pescovitz, Lab Notes, UC Berkeley College of Engineering</ref> ...which will come out in the ref as ... ^ 1957: Billy Kluver, the father of electronic art, earns his PhD, David Pescovitz, Lab Notes, UC Berkeley College of Engineering ...Explanation: If you put http://www.example.com it appears as http://www.example.com If you put [http://www.example.com[ it appears as [7] But, if you put [http://www.example.com Example website] it appears as Example website That applies within refs, so using that format makes them much more readable - link on the title, don't show the URL. Note, that is a tip; it's not essential. It just improves the article.  Chzz  ►  17:34, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Run dmt I do not understand your comment — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.172.71.186 (talk) 17:17, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Please see WP:VRS, and see if that helps explains. It needs to show why the artist is "notable", by showing significant coverage, by using references to several independent, reliable sources. Listings (like "beatport", "discogs") do not show that. And "windishagency.com", as an agent, isn't independent. "subversiveinc.com" doesn't seem to have any significant coverage of the artist (and I'm not sure it's a reliable source) Good sources are newspapers, magazines, news-websites; respected publishers, with editorial control and a 'reputation for fact-checking'. Typically, an article like that might show 3 newspaper articles, which are about the artist, but written by people totally unconnected to them. See also WP:IRS. Hope that helps explain?  Chzz  ►  17:40, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/afranet Hello What are the problems with my submission for afranet. I have reffered Business week and tehran stock exchange for external references. Aren't those considered "external resources"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.96.178.33 (talk) 17:36, 3 February 2012 (UTC) The stock exchange is just a listing-entry; it doesn't show "significant coverage" about the organization. "Business week" is also a listing; it has a little information, but is not enough. The article needs to be based on independent reliable sources (WP:IRS - the information must be verifiable. For example - "Founded in 1998 and current CEO is DR. Fereidoun Ghasemzadeh." - where can we check that? "the first Iranian internet connection provider(ICP) in the private sector with over 100 employees" is a strong claim; it needs a good reference. Hope that helps.  Chzz  ►  17:43, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Thank you for the comments. The fact that it is public with can be proven by having a listing on the stock exchange. The fact that it is founded in 1998 and the current CEO is fereidoun Ghasemzadeh is verified by businessweek. I understand that I do not have an english news website confirming that it is indeed the first one but if you check the other Iranina ISP on wikipedia you will not see any before 1998. Although I understand that a stock exchange and businessweek reference are "only listings" but I would assume that it would not be easy for a company to be listed on a stock exchange(!) and be referenced by business week. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.96.178.33 (talk) 17:50, 3 February 2012 (UTC) No, listings are not enough; articles must demonstrate notability, through signif. coverage in indie RS; Wikipedia:Notability.  Chzz  ►  18:00, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Arbutus Ridge Retirement Community 2 Thank you so much for your constructive input. I've made a number of alterations to address what I believe to be your point of concern. Before I proceed to resubmit, could I ask you for one or two examples of your concerns, to ensure I've addressed them? Thank you again. Please look up on this page a few sections, in #Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Arbutus Ridge Retirement Community. Thanks.  Chzz  ►  18:01, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Questions on article Hello Chzz. Thank you for taking the time to review my article. Could you possibly provide me with a little more information as to why the New York Mustangs article requires more notable information? The annual fundraising events as well as media coverage meets the guidelines of what should be classified as notable. Thanks again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikeford5 (talk • contribs) 18:25, 3 February 2012‎ Hmm? I accepted it; it's live; New York Mustangs. P.S. When you leave messages, please remember to "sign" your name, by putting ~~~~ (four tilde signs) at the end. This will add your name, and the date and time. You can also do this by clicking the 'sign' button, pictured to the right.  Chzz  ►  18:28, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Ahh yes, I'm sorry, I see that now. Thank you very much for your time and advice. I look forward to more contributions. --Mikeford5 (talk) 18:44, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Arbutus Ridge Retirement Community Thanks for your very helpful feedback. I will resubmit in 6-8 hours. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RTBoughner (talk • contribs) 18:26, 3 February 2012 (UTC) No hurry.  Chzz  ►  18:28, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Champion Records i noticed the champion records article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Champion_Records and saw that there was only 1 reference for the entire article, and it was one of the labels website, and thought that by providing more then 1 reference my article would be on an even playing field as the champion records one. Could you explain why the Champion Records article is ok, but the Champions Records one is not? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.56.56.218 (talk • contribs) 18:33, 3 February 2012‎ It's not OK. Maybe you could fix it; or feel free to list it for deletion. See WP:OTHERSTUFF.  Chzz  ►  18:36, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Interleaf (Quicksilver) Conversion Chzz, Rejection of this article is quite disappointing. I am a 72 yr. old retired former academic person, and I know of the struggle that a small number of people face finding a say to convert their work from an antiquated file format to a modern usable format. I was speaking to a mathematician today who has a book in Interleaf and could find no way to get it into a modern format--especially the equations. I am hoping my article will be helpful to people like him. My point is, this article is not a user manual or a technical guide. It is a review of a problem. It is true that few people face the problem, but there are still many worldwide who can benefit from an informative background article. Please review it again. Thank you. Lantern23 (talk) 18:34, 3 February 2012 (UTC) I'm sorry, but Wikipedia is simply not the place for original research / synthesis. As an encyclopaedia, we write about things that other people have written about elsewhere. Apologies.  Chzz  ►  18:38, 3 February 2012 (UTC) See also [8]  Chzz  ►  19:41, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/SpringAhead Hey, thanks for the advice. I'm assuming I just need better/more-reliable sources to make it notable enough. I'll be working on that for now, I probably won't re-submit it until that happens. Thanks again, Justin — Preceding unsigned comment added by Justinmyla (talk • contribs) 19:10, 3 February 2012 (UTC) That's correct. Reliable sources would greatly increase the chances of its acceptance. Do note though that Wikipedia is not a business directory, so you need to show more then just existence. That award is a good start, but won't do it alone. Nolelover Talk·Contribs 19:17, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Nations Park (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. GeraldKlein (talk) 18:57, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Hi there Gerald. If you want to request page protection, WP:RPP is the place to do it. Chzz isn't an admin, so he can't. Nolelover Talk·Contribs 19:20, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Also, I don't actually see any IP vandalism... Nolelover Talk·Contribs 19:22, 3 February 2012 (UTC) GeraldKlein, that's not a high level of IP vandalism. If someone makes an edit you don't agree with, post on Talk:Nations Park, and then ask the user/ip to discuss it there. See WP:DISCUSS. If 10 IP's repeatedly add something like "THIS PARK SUCKS LOL", then you can ask for protection. Please note WP:OWN; gotta let "anyone edit". Cheers,  Chzz  ►  19:25, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/International Conference on Artificial Neural Networks > This suggestion doesn't sufficiently explain the importance or significance of the subject. Why should information about the most important series of conferences on neural networks be questionable? For scientists, and their grad students this is an important piece of information. It has several inline references and one external reference. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wduch (talk • contribs) 19:39, 3 February 2012 (UTC) I don't see the "several inline references and one external reference". In fact, I only see one reference at all. Please read WP:VRS, and remember just being an important bit of information to grad students is not enough. It must be written about by reliable, third-party sources. Nolelover Talk·Contribs 19:56, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/West Indies Management Company (WIMCO) I was curious as to what types of sources would be considered independent. I believe that I understand what types of print sources are acceptable, but when it comes to the internet, obviously I am lost. Could you perhaps give me an example when you have some spare time? Thank you for your time and input, James Independent is pretty easy: anyone not affiliated with the company, advertising the company or making money from the company. Wikipedia:Independent sources gives a slightly more technical, although still pretty short, definition. Note that just because a source is print doesn't mean it's independent. However, what you are probably thinking of when you say print sources (newspaper, books, magazines) are generally independent. Those can be used; not everything need to be online. Nolelover Talk·Contribs 19:53, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Thomas J Herzfeld Thank you so much for reviewing my article and sending your feedbacks promptly. I have incorporated all your requirements in the revised article. I just wanted to thank you and also let you know that I have submitted the article. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Thomas_J_Herzfeld#Thomas_J_Herzfeld thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rrijal (talk • contribs) 19:45, 3 February 2012 (UTC) I will review the submission. Alpha_Quadrant (talk) 20:12, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/School-Based Health Centers Hi Chzz, You rejected my post the other day suggesting that it was not sufficiently neutral. i have since made significant changes, following the guidelines of one of the other editors, and you have rejected it again. would you please give me more specific feedback so I can understand what i need to change to get this published? Thanks, Oliviabuckwheat — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oliviabuckwheat (talk • contribs) 20:24, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Several statements in the article lack sources. The sentences tagged [citation needed] contain claims that need to be sourced. Can you provide one? If none can be found, it is better if they are removed. In addition, please do not use subjective wording. Words like "nationwide" are meaningless and misleading to a reader from the UK for example. Wikipedia is a global encyclopedia, not restricted to the United States alone. Too much detail is also undesirable. You should also link unfamiliar words (particularly acronyms) when possible.-- OBSIDIAN†SOUL 20:59, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Andy Dominianni Thanks for your comments. I'm just not sure how else to edit this article. Would you mind looking at similar wikipedia articles on tv news anchors and please advise how I could improve mine? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrea_Cambern http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julie_Nelson_(TV_anchor) Vosotter (talk) 21:14, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Hi there Vosotter. First of all, each article is judged on its own merits, so the other articles about anchors really don't make a difference to this one. Now, I can tell you what you are lacking though: independent sources. ATM, you have his employer, his publisher, and a book seller, besides numerous social media sites. The only site that would be considered reliable and independent would be http://michiganmediacenter.com/tag/andy-dominianni/, so you only have one really good reference in there. Please add more reliable, third-party citations that discuss Andy in depth, and resubmit. Hope this helped, Nolelover Talk·Contribs 21:20, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Vosetter - If you're looking for articles to use as examples, maybe take a look at some Wikipedia Good Articles about media newspersons like John Stossel, Ivar Hippe or Jay Barbree. Using examples always helps me! Cheers, Shearonink (talk) 21:37, 3 February 2012 (UTC) For sharing knowledge, with everyone, everywhere The Planetary Award Somehow, you manage to be everywhere at once. This is considered a superpower in some places. Are you sure your parents weren't aliens? Ocaasi t | c 22:20, 3 February 2012 (UTC) They are. With an inordinate fondness for sausages. :D -- OBSIDIAN†SOUL 00:21, 4 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Koshiki Karatedo Dear Sir! The article "Koshiki Karatedo" has been corrected according Wikipedia Rules. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koshiki_Karatedo Would you be so kind to review this article one more time? Thank you in advance!ShogunTokugawa (talk) 22:24, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Please use inline references. Links attached at the end of articles, particularly very large articles like this one are of no use to a reader who wants to verify information included in it. See WP:Referencing for beginners on how to add references correctly. Do not wikilink every other word, especially words which are readily understood in everyday English. It is confusing when you link words like "grade", "result", "work", "place" as all of these are unimportant to the article. See the relevant guideline at WP:Overlinking. Generally unfamiliar words should only be linked once, on their first occurence. And lastly please keep the tone of the article neutral. In other words describe it as dispassionately as possible. See WP:Neutral point-of-view. Avoid self-aggrandizement and overly praising wording like "famous".-- OBSIDIAN†SOUL 00:29, 4 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/National Asian Pacific Center on Aging Thank you for your comments. I attempted to re-write the article with as neutral a voice as I could. If any part of the article still sounds like a promotion, please send back comments referring to the specific sections that pose a problem. Thank you again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NAPCA (talk • contribs) 22:32, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Paul Heroux Can you please tell me why Joseph Kennedy III gets a Wikipedia page and Paul Heroux does not? They are both an equal candidate for Congress in the 4th District in Massachusetts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shineroo (talk • contribs) 23:50, 3 February 2012 (UTC) Please see WP:OTHERSTUFF. Notability, the primary criteria for whether someone should have an article or not, is proven independently. The existence or non-existence of other articles has no bearing on proving the notability of your subject. Being a candidate does not automatically make your subject notable as well. See the criteria at WP:POLITICIAN. Instead of comparing it with existing articles, ensuring that you can show significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article will be more helpful. -- OBSIDIAN†SOUL 00:38, 4 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Bill Baldini I made improvements, more neutral , more verifiable references... what can i do? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wjbbilly (talk • contribs) 01:59, 4 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Kolkata Hospital Fire May i know the reasons why my article "Kolkata Hospital Fire" wasn't accepted as a article?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Work2win (talk • contribs) 04:41, 4 February 2012 (UTC) The content you created is probably more suitable to Wikinews/Wikinews multilingual portal. The fire is covered at AMRI hospital fire#Fire incident. I suggest you see if you can add anything to that section or investigate if the incident is covered at any of the various language-editions of Wikinews and perhaps contribute to Wikinews. (And please remember to sign your posts with four tildes ~, then the Wikipedia system will sign your Wikipedia user name for you and also include a link to your talkpage.) Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 05:32, 4 February 2012 (UTC) Orphaned non-free image File:Bollywood and beyond film festival logo.jpg ⚠ Thanks for uploading File:Bollywood and beyond film festival logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media). Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 05:32, 4 February 2012 (UTC) Grazie! Hard to tell sometimes vandalism vs. good intent ;0Skier Dude (talk) 05:49, 4 February 2012 (UTC) Whoa Hey Chzz, I don't hardly know how AfC works, and I really don't even what IRC is--can't teach an old dog too many new tricks; I've barely managed to close AfDs. I tried to read the comments on your call, but since I am blissfully unaware of the technicalities I can't comment on them. Just this: don't be leaving, please. I see your stuff all the time and this place is a better place because of you. After close to a hundred thousand edits I can say that about maybe two dozen people. Whatever's bugging you, I hope it can be resolved (it's probably well above my paygrade). I could say more, but I might make an ass of myself since I've had some really, really good beers tonight. I'll light up one more in your honor, and hope that this too may pass (remember reading Deor?) Oh, also, I beg for indulgence for typos, haha. Take care, and let me know if I can help. I could, you know, arbitrarily block someone, or kick the dog, if that helps. Drmies (talk) 06:32, 4 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Complex Adaptive Leadership Have removed all the pirmary research, started with the historical use of the term, shown the roots and then more modern usage with secondary references. Hope this now reads more like an encyclopedia and less like an essay! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nickobolensky (talk • contribs) 10:10, 4 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Independent Pilots Association - UK Pilot Union Hi. I have added more references that confirm the existence and background to this organisation as requested — Preceding unsigned comment added by AviationExpertUK (talk • contribs) 11:10, 4 February 2012 (UTC) AviationExpertUK - Please see the Reviewer's comments left by Mrmatiko at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Independent Pilots Association - UK Pilot Union. Also, please remember to sign your posts on Wikipedia talk pages with four/4 tildes...they're these squiggly things on the key to the left of the 1 key that look like this... ~, doing so will automatically add your signature to your posts. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 16:15, 4 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/JECRC Jaipur Hi, can you please kindly elaborate as what I need to do or include specifically in the article to make it notable. Kindly be specific as what is the problem with the article. thanks shakti — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shaktisira (talk • contribs) 14:15, 4 February 2012 (UTC) Shaktisira - Please see this link on your talkpage: here. Also, please remember to sign your posts on talkpages with four tildes ~. Signing with 4 tildes will automatically add your Wikipedia signature to your posts. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 16:08, 4 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/TROY The Real Story Thanks for your help with this, hopefully the suggested corrections are good enough. Sorry I was too enthusiastic about the subject. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WelshHistorian (talk • contribs) 17:11, 4 February 2012 (UTC) Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Bucharest Symphony Orchesrta Hello Chzz, Thank you for reviewing Bucharest Symphony Orchestra. I added press refferences in the article's footer, so I may ask for another review? Thank you! Alex