User talk:MatthewVanitas

Ron Rafael Shimshilashvili

Hey Matthew, Can you help me edit it better ? Thank you, Mike

You're talking about Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ron Rafael Shimshilashvili , right? First off, and not saying this to be a jerk, you have to remember this is a busy place, so never assume someone else knows what you're talking about, so make sure to phrase things very clearly, give links, etc.

So far as improving, I'm going to link you a few "suggested reading" policies:

1. First off, read the basics of WP:Referencing for beginners, and that will show you how to make Footnotes. It's pretty easy coding.
2. Next, get your sources together. Look at the links you have now, and figure out which ones are WP:Reliable sources. They have to be sources where you can honestly say "yes, this is a website known for accuracy, and where their success depends on having accurate information." So, for example "http://www.watchfreemovies.ch" is not going to be one; they don't care about journalistic accuracy, they don't have an editor who will fire someone if they get someone's hometown or age wrong. So no blogs (unless they're the blog of some serious organisation, not just a hobbyist), no forums, not Facebook. IMDB is fine to link to at the end, but you can't cite them since they're crowdsourced like Wiki is, and they don't show their sources. If he's covered in Israeli press, feel free to use Hebrew websites as well, as long as they're still WP:Reliable sources.
3. The big one: once you know how to make footnotes, and you have good references, make the footnotes and make sure everything is properly footnoted. For example, where you say They gave hem the nickname "Dubi", which means “ Bear ” in Hebrew , because he was as big and cute like a bear so often as a baby ., you either need to find a news site, media industry site, or something which proves that, or it has to be removed. There's a rule WP:BLP which basically says "if someone is alive, we have to protect their reputation, so absolutely everything in a living person's article has to be verified."

Those are my basic suggestions, let me know if you have any questions. MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:36, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Thank you so much brother !!! here you go it took me 3 days to go over each one and whats not good i removed whats good i left :) Thanks for youre help and patience please check and let me know if there is anything else needed. Youre the best !!! :) The article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Ron_Rafael_Shimshilashvili — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikeedwon (talk • contribs) 11:40, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello Mike, I'm happy to help you here, but you really have to read what I recommend and do it. To be blunt, you did maybe part of #2, it doesn't seem you looked into #1, and you haven't done anything resembling #3. Like I said above every fact must be clearly footnoted. Again, for example, your article says Shimshilashvili has taken various courses in Modeling from Ad Miami, Flair Modeling, and Got What It Takes Modeling. Okay, says who? The reader has zero idea which of the many links at the bottom would verify that this is true. Did an interview he gave mention that? Did a magazine that profiled him mention those courses he took? If a link verifies it, footnote it. If you can't footnote it (it's just something you know personally, read on Twitter or Facebook, etc) then you cannot include it in a published article.

Again, happy to help you, but it's not going to get anywhere if I recommend three basic things and you kinda do one of them and don't even try the rest. Give a shot at footnoting, and then shoot me a line and I can tell you how the footnoting is working out. MatthewVanitas (talk) 04:16, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello Matthew, Again thanks for your kindness help, you’re the best!!! Thanks for your help :)

First, about "article says Shimshilashvili has taken various courses in Modeling from Ad Miami, Flair Modeling, and Got What It Takes Modeling." It says right there in this Magazine: http://nextmodelmen.com/hottestmodel/2009/11/ron-shimshilashvili-at-next-hottest-model.html

Second, regarding "They gave him the nickname "Dubi", which means “Bear” in Hebrew, because he was as big and cute like a bear so often as a baby." it’s also on his Personal Website: http://www.ronrafael.com/about-ron.php

And third, regarding the Interview its right here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEOrNMo2GPw

I’ve added all of them there :)

Hope this works, if not please let me know what else I got to change and if you could give me a hand ill really appreciate it a lot. Have a great day brother.

Sincerely, Mike — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikeedwon (talk • contribs) 17:23, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello Matthew, Take a look at it now :) i footnoted ALL the links :) Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikeedwon (talk • contribs) 17:09, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Mike, your cleanup and check for WP:Reliable sources of the references is a good start, but you're still not understanding what WP:Footnoting is. Please check out that policy: footnoting is when you use the "ref" markings to place a reference right after the fact that it substantiates, and then Wiki automatically turns it into a little number, and those numbers automatically sort and match themselves at the end of the article. So if I want to know where I can verify the story about his nickname, I look at the little number "7" after that sentence, and go to Footnote #7 at the end, and it will be the link to the article that tells me that fact.

I'm going to go turn one of your references into a footnote for you as an example, but you really need to read WP:Referencing for beginners and apply it to your article. MatthewVanitas (talk) 05:38, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello Matthew, First of all i wanna THANK YOU SOOO MUCH for teaching me that, i am glad i learned something new :) here you go, you can check it , I've added 24 footnotes and i cleaned all links. I hope this is it :) so i can start creating and submitting new article :) If there is anything please let me know so i can fix it, it was Ron's birthday so we celebrated he turned 21 and this whole week i worked on this the whole day started from 0 and i hope it will work now and be in Wikipedia. Thank you brother and i am so glad you came on my article a nice person as you teaching me new things, now i even got more jo to make and write more articles in Wikipedia. Thank You, Mike (Mikeedwon (talk) 20:32, 2 December 2012 (UTC))

Santal & Santali...

Hi Mathew Vanitas

What is the wrong with Santali, Santal is neither a caste, Community ,srcipt , Language or culture in Indian or world scenario , so far the works evident from the Modern & traditionals thingkers like Pondit Murmu, Sadhu Ramchand Murmu, Dhanay Kisku and so others. By Bisu Hembram Editor the " THE SENGEL SAAR"" @twitter ID : bisu_drBhonkol (117.197.243.253 (talk) 04:20, 15 November 2012 (UTC))

Greetings, I'm not quite sure what problem you're referring to, can you be a bit clearer? Better still, can you give a basic summary of your concerns and post it at Talk:Santali people? That way a wider number of people interested in the topic can help discuss. MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:50, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Congratulation: I am expecting the same , still the "Santali Language & Literature" has not get any Liberty, Equality & Dignity and discriminated since 14th Sept 1949 in a plan way and was kept in the edge... So let us wait till its equality in this regards so many ethics has already written and scholars has given their opinion in large scale, but its seems the ignoring attitude towards the ideology of Pondit Raghunath Murmu a pioneer of Modern Santali Language, Literature & Culture by developing the modern indict script known as "" OLCHIKI PARSI" .We are eagerly looking ahead the positive respond and action from central Govt of India for its classification , categorization etc like others Language of India i.e. "Aryan & Dravidian" Which was supposed to be done within 2010.. By Bisu(112.133.214.254 (talk) 06:05, 24 November 2012 (UTC))

Revised page for Ali Noorani

Hello,

I've edited the page for Ali Noorani to add several references and remove sections that made the page seem especially CV-like. Have another look? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Ali_Noorani

Thanks, DEG2012 (talk) 21:39, 15 November 2012 (UTC)DEG2012

It's a good bit better now. Still had some formatting errors (bolding titles unnecessarily, external links in the body of the article, etc), so I tweaked some of those for you. It may be enough to get through, but since you'll likely be in the queue at least 5 days or so given how long the current line is, I'd take the opportunity to do a little more polishing.

Primarily, you have some phrasings that fall into what wiki calls WP:WEASEL and WP:PEACOCK; the first being phrasings that are too vague or waffly, the latter being phrases that are too subjective. For example, if you describe something as "the premiere agency for..." you either have to give some indication of who of authoritative opinion has designated them "premier" or else remove that term and instead emphasise their importance through facts, not adjectives. Weasel phrases are things like "many say" or "across the country", while peacock terms are "dynamic", "momentous impact", etc. You want to go through this with a fine-tooth comb and remove anything that isn't either purely fact-based, or clearly cited to a serious media/academic/etc. opinion.

If you do happen to have more sources out there about Noorani, like articles which mention his accomplishments and skills, etc., those would also help make a stronger case, but if this is the max you can get for WP:Independent sourcing, this might do it. I'd like to get a fresh opinion in, so I'll let it work through the queue. Shoot me a line if any other questions come up, or if you get declined again and need help with a last polish. MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:53, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. I've attempted to polish it further and get rid of the weasels and peacocks. DEG2012 (talk) 20:53, 16 November 2012 (UTC)DEG2012

Is there anything else I need to do to get this through the queue? I understand that the queue was "at least 5 days" as of Nov. 15, but after 11 days I am curious about the timeline. Thanks. DEG2012 (talk) 21:43, 26 November 2012 (UTC)DEG2012

MrFantasyFreak page

The MrFantasyFreak page is 100% accurate. Details were directly from the website. Please tell me why this has not been allowed? 99.195.161.188 (talk) 06:30, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

We require sourcing from WP:Independent sources, not just the subject directly. Anyone can make a webpage claiming anything, but we need to see coverage of a topic from WP:Reliable sources like media articles, academic coverage, etc. See also the policy WP:Notability. MatthewVanitas (talk) 12:25, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Articles for creation/Haidakhan Babaji

Hi Matthew, this article attempts to present the "teachings" of Haidakhan Babaji and some "beliefs" of his followers about him. It does not try to prove that whatever he taught was in any way "true." His teachings were recorded in the book "The Teachings of Babaji" or in smaller degree recorded and presented by his followers in other publications. All these statements are precisely referenced in this article and thus verifiable.

These teachings are in my opinion quite interesting and thus I made an effort to present them in Wikipedia. Whether they make sense for some people or not, is beyond the point. Thus, I would like the article to be accepted as it is.

As far as "ibidem" is concerned I believe this word is quite popular in scientific literature. However, if you could suggest an alternative, I will gladly consider it.

Best regards, Piotr Rajski. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prajski (talk • contribs) 06:32, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Greetings, regarding "ibiedm", again I suggest reading the guideline Wikipedia:Ibid. Briefly, since Wikipedia footnotes are numbered automatically, if someone (or yourself) changes the order of the text around, or adds new information, a footnote marked "ibid" could become separated from its parent footnote. If #17 is Book A and #18 says Ibid, and a new sentence is added between the two and cited to Book B, now the reader will mistakenly think that the former #18, now #19, is Ibid of Book B, not Book A. To clear this up, you can use the function WP:REFNAME to unit like footnotes.

So far as the latter, please read the policy WP:Notability and WP:Independent sources: we just need to see some indication that a topic is considered significant to the broader world, so we can't rely entirely on sources related directly to the subject. Take, for example, the claim that this man just appeared in a cave rather than being born. Clearly that's not something that's going to be believed by anyone not involved with that religion, so quoting an academic source that says "but is believed to have been born around 1922 in Bengal" for example would be useful. MatthewVanitas (talk) 12:30, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi Matthew, what kind of "independent sources" you would like me to find for an obscure teacher from a remote village of India? They are impossible to find, similarly as it impossible to verify whether Jesus, Buddha, Muhammed, or others, said what they said. The only source of knowledge in cases like this is what was recorded or remembered by people around them.

Now, the purpose of Wikipedia, as far as I understand it, is not to prove or disprove whether what the followers of these great teachers are saying is true. In other words, this is not Wikipedia's job to prove or disprove, for instance, that Babaji "manifested" himself in a cave in Himalayas. The purpose of Wikipedia is to present, in as neutral and objective manner as possible, what these people "believe" about these teachers and what they "remember" that they said. The neutrality of the article is achieved through the phrases such as: "according to "the Teachings of Babaji"..." or "some of his followers believe that..." etc.

As for the notability of this article: Haidakhan Babaji has thousands of followers around the world and this trend is growing regardless his death almost thirty years ago. A number of books were published about him not only in United States, but also in Great Britain, Germany, Italy, France, Sweden, and Poland. I believe that people are drawn to his teachings thanks to their "universality." Although he spoke to small groups of devotees, it appears his words were directed to all humankind. That is why the all humankind deserves that his words are presented and his story is told in as objective manner as possible. In this respect, Wikipedia can play a significant role.

I removed all the ibidems from the article. I forgot that the article may be edited further and that this could cause confusion. Thank you for your guidance.

Respectfully, Piotr Rajski.(Prajski (talk) 20:55, 19 November 2012 (UTC)).

New Mulben article.

Thanks for tidying up my new article. I went to put in the coordinates as requested but it seems someone beat me to it (possibly you?) Not to worry, I'll try to include a bit more in my next article. I also hope to include a picture when I get up to my 10 posts threshold. That's what I want to do most - I'm an amateur photographer, not an encyclopaedic writer, let along encyclopaedic programmer - I know almost nothing! :-) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ulysses.Hood (talk • contribs) 09:59, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Nope, not I on the coordinates; if you check the "History" tab at the top of the article, you'll see who did what. So far as pictures, that's great, we could always use more of those. Have you seen, for example, Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Scotland? Do note that photo requests are tagged manually, so there are plenty of other needed photos in Scotland, and also sometimes the 'bots miss that a photo has been added, so don't drive 100 miles out to catch a missing photo without first checking to see the photo is indeed still lacking. But if you and your buddies enjoy photography and like having a mission, better-documenting your area through photo might be a fun way to go.

Minor sidenote about your new article about a distillery: travel pages and the like aren't generally preferred, especially for things like history. Not completely verboten, though the more controversial a topic the less usable they are. Have you checked GoogleBooks and GoogleNews Archive to see if there are mentions of this distiller in more formal writings? Those would be even better to cite, and if it's not to daunting, a WP:Footnote is always stronger than a source at the end. Great start so far, and looking forward to seeing more of your work. Feel free to write with any questions, and if you get a moment to say hello at the Talk page of WP:WikiProject Scotland they might like hearing from you, slow-moving though the discussion there is. MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:46, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Ulysses.Hood - —Preceding undated comment added 14:12, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback and suggestions. Whilst articles about geographical places might not be particularly interesting or popular, one can but write what one knows. That's why my sources are not extensive - I have to include some for verification, I understand, but what I write is mostly known local knowledge, either from myself or people who know better than any internet source could. As well as being things I know well, since I live in the area, they are also things well photographed by me – I’ve been here long enough to see some rare good photography weather after all. :-) It's just when I was looking at local pages, not only did I see some gaps I thought would be usefully filled, where articles DID exist I thought the pictures just didn't do the place justice at times. I like photography and would like it all the more if used for the greater cause of Wikipedia - the project to collect all human knowledge in one place. So I'll do what little I can and hopefully see my pictures there soon with a small sense of personal pride. Smug pride perhaps, but whatever keeps us happy, eh? :-) Hope my Strathmill article gets approved as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ulysses.Hood (talk • contribs) 14:10, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Stanley Cloud

"Comment: Dude, it doesn't help your case to make no improvements and resubmit anyway. Trust me here, you need to meet Wikipedia:Notability (authors) to get this article published. Please read that guideline and find the proper supporting references. MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:57, 22 October 2012 (UTC)"

Dude, My second submission (to which the above quote from you refers) was an error on my part. I'm not quite so thick-headed that I thought I could just resubmit the first one with no changes. So immediately after I received your message I sent you a third (correct) submission with footnotes and all sorts of other things that I thought would meet the guidelines' requirements. That was on October 22, 2012. Since then I've heard nothing. Could you update me on the status? Thanks. --Stancloud (talk) 20:04, 19 November 2012 (UTC)Stanley Cloud

Andreas Georgiou Thomas

Hi Matthew, Thanks for clearing the above page. However I am not able to bring it up. Or have I got it wrong? Many thanks amigo, ~~Christos Evangeli~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Christos Evangeli (talk • contribs) 21:46, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

It was still under WP:AFC, so I moved it to the mainspace ("published") it for you: Andreas Georgiou Thomas. All good? MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:49, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Reconsideration Process?

Matthew, thanks for approving the page I created recently: Lake Brownwood State Park. I believe I have corrected the issues you noted regarding sections and categories. I also added several appropriate categories, including one that I believe SHOULD be a NEW category. What is the process for reconsideration of the article so the "issues alerts" at the top can be removed? Thanks in advance.Kem05f (talk) 18:15, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

No worries, nice cleanup so I removed the tags. Also, the category you wished to add doesn't appear to exist in our "category tree" for Texas. Not that such makes it totally verboten, but the ideal is that all the articles on a given topic would have some general similarity of sub-categories. For Texas articles Category:Visitor attractions in Brown County, Texas‎. There are cats like "National Historic Landmarks in Texas", but note that's not "National historic landmarks" generally speaking, but the specific legal designation for NHL buildings. So the "visitor attractions" seems to fit the best for a state park, so I've created that "branch" of the tree for Brown County (as it already exists for many other TX county categories). I hope this meets your intent, and that you might consider taking a photograph of the park next time you're there for upload to Wikipedia. Uploading photos can be a little tricky at first, so feel free to ask me or others for help if the process stymies you. Good luck and thanks for your article! MatthewVanitas (talk) 01:55, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Fraternal Benefit Societies page

Hi Matthew. I haven't received any further messages regarding my page. Can we publish it now please? Thanks.Ninalill (talk) 18:11, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

I've filed to have space cleared up at Fraternal benefit society so we can move your article there. Once the admin comes through and opens up that space, I'll publish your AFC to that title. MatthewVanitas (talk) 14:49, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Las Playas for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Las Playas is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Las Playas until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Peter James (talk) 17:45, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Your Edits on Dilazak Page

Hello Matthew, Thanx that once again you are here. I have tried to keep the page as it was after your last edits. The problem for me is that so many people try to put their own particular thought (Opinions) on the page which have no authority or even relevancy. Some are racially biased and some are religiously. Mine is a little moderate tribe with some unbeatable local history. People can't swallow that. Anyway, Pleas just give me some hints to improve the page and I will do the rest.

Have a nice day and Regards Dilazak1 10:28, 23 November 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dilazak1 (talk • contribs)

Talkback

You have new messages regarding my recent edits here: Talk:Shivaji. -Pareen Singh (talk) 10:01, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Helena Araújo

Hello Matthew. I have continued to work on the page Helena Araújo and would appreciate any new feedback and/or guidance you could give me so that the page become acceptable by Wikipedia. I thank you in advance. Jocelyne1960 (talk) 13:41, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello, I've made some improvements; hit the page's History tab to see them listed, and by clicking the little circle buttons you can compare the changes made from your last edit to my last edit to see how I coded them. You might find that very helpful for getting a feel for how articles are formatted. Looking pretty good so far, but you have a few major assertions that aren't footnoted; technically for Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons every claim about a person should be cited, to ensure that nobody is including false or misleading information that could harm a living person. Not to be paranoid, but that's policy, so that which can't be cited must be removed until it can be. Once you address that, we should be good to publish. MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:50, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello again Matthew. Thank you for your time and help............You left me the feedback to find a citation for Alfonso Araujo Gaviria's involvement/work for the Colombian Government. Most if not all of the information i find online and in English is from the Wikipedia page about him. Isn't that page providing enough citation?

also............when you wrote down that i need a citation for Helena Araujo's education in the various universities, i am sorry but i don't clearly understand what i need to provide there...........

I am working on a page for Helena Araujo in the spanish and french wikipedia.....is there any way to link those pages when they are accepted?

I apologize for my inexperience with wikipedia and its requirements........... Looking forward to your reply and again, with much gratitude. Jocelyne1960 (talk) 17:28, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

No problem, glad to help. In answer to your points: you can't cite Wikipedia on Wikipedia (that would be circular logic), however if her father's page cites a book which mentions that he had a daughter Helena, and she was influenced by his politics, then you can copy that footnote and bring it over to your article. Unforunately, you can't just say "it's covered in the other articles, go read them" anymore than you can just skip footnotes altogether and say "go read some books, it's in some of them." ;)

So far as a citation for the universities, we just need something independent but credible supporting that. Like maybe a Brazilian newspaper (sources can be in any language) that profiled her in an article listed out her schools, so you can cite that. The purpose for the citation is WP:Verifiability. That is, if someone reads "Joe Smith"'s biography, and it says Smith went to Yale, there should be a footnote to a book or article attesting that Smith went to Yale. Without a footnote, we'd have nowhere to check if, for example, the original editor had a faulty memory and wrote "Yale" when it's actually "Harvard". Or if some well-meaning person "corrects" it to Harvard mistakenly, or a vandal changes it "Michigan University" just to be disruptive. With a footnote we know where to go to check, without one all we have is "Someone anonymous on the Internet said so on Wikipedia". Wikipedia is only as strong as its sourcing.

So far as writing articles for other languages, you can to to fr.wikipedia and es.wikipedia and start articles there the same as you do here. To connect them, at the bottom of the article you put the two or three letter code that versions ".wikipedia" starts with, then the title of the article in the other language. For example, if I want to link the English article Dog to Spanish Wikipedia, I put the following code at the bottom: [[es:Perro]]. You can check this out by viewing the code of any article which exists across multiple languages; the code is placed at the very bottom after the Categories, and the list of available language versions will appear in your left margin when you save. If you're writing a translation of one Wiki's article for another Wiki, ensure your Edit Summary clearly states "Taken from the en.wiki article Helena Araújo". This is necessary for copyright purposes so people understand that the new Spanish article is based on the contributions of the people who wrote the English article (even if that's just you).

All good so far? MatthewVanitas (talk) 23:28, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Thank you so much Matthew! I will keep on working on this tri-lingual project and the necessary citations. I trully appreciate your guidance and patience! Jocelyne1960 (talk) 23:33, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

No worries. We are at a point where the article probably wouldn't risk deletion if published, but the more fine-tuning, the stronger it is, and for the general sake of "doing it right the first time", as well as being a great way for you to learn the process, it doesn't hurt to do some fine tuning. I just wanted to be sure you weren't feeling bombarded by "nitpick" changes, so much as we're steadily polishing.

Couple of small comments: footnotes should ideally be written as full WP:Citations, so take a glance at that to see how to clearly indicate Title, Author, Date, etc. in a footnote for max clarity. Secondly, I've added the currently redlinked category Category:Colombian literary critics; it doesn't exist yet because this article will be the first. Once you create the article, we can create the category too. With Categories, the key thing is the "category tree", a very clear structure. When adding a "branch" to the tree, a goal is to make it match the other branches; a good technique is to check a well-intergrated parallel, like Category:Irish literary critics and Category:French literary critics, see what categories those have, and duplicate the Colombian equivalent into the new cat.

I know this is a lot of material, but you've been learning it all very smoothly, and asking good questions. Consider the above, and let me know if you have any other questions, or want to launch this article and start another article when you're ready. MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:47, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

I really appreciate your encouragements! I will work a bit longer on this article before asking for a submission. My time is limited in front of my computer but will keep on doing my best!! Question for you...........Am i allowed to quote Helena's words from a book or from an article? Also, i have a PDF file of one of her articles where her biography talks about her teaching ni the Université Populaire de Lausanne.......How can i link a PDF file? Thank you again Matthew! Jocelyne1960 (talk) 22:11, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Matthew, in regard to translated articles from one wiki to another, you told me to write in the "edit summary" that i had translated my articles, but pardon my ignorance, i just cannot find the "edit summary" tab...........could you please point me to the right direction, since i have the Helena Araújo article in French, Spanish and English.........Thank you in advance!! Jocelyne1960 (talk) 15:15, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Thanx for your dedication to wiki, I believe. Sorry to say that I found few wiki officials contributing on pages not knowing the subject fully. You are NOT like that and more over you seem to be helping people in placing good and authenticated pages on wiki. Your talk page is proof to that. Hats off. Dilazak1 18:44, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Twinkle blip?

Hi, I was a bit bemused to see this at WT:INB yesterday. Was it deliberate or some sort of blip relating to Twinkle etc? - Sitush (talk) 02:36, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Wait, the joke's gone over my head. What am I missing? MatthewVanitas (talk) 02:54, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

PROD notices usually appear on the article page and on the page of the creator. There is nothing wrong with notifying anyone else, of course, but this is a templated notice on a project talk page and that is unusual. You may be setting a trend - I'll have to check the feeds on Twitter! - Sitush (talk) 02:59, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

An aside: that list of castes has gone to AfD. - Sitush (talk) 03:04, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Btw, I was not meaning to suggest in the AfD discussion that I am alone in dealing with the caste-related issues. My apologies if did come across that way - I would have long ago lost the will to do my bit if it were not for the efforts that you, Qwryxian and others put in there. And you were doing that even before my arrival also. - Sitush (talk) 07:55, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Not at all, I do my bit but I'm kind of in and out, and I'm not as involved in the political/policy side of it as you are, so I would certainly count you ahead of myself in the Indic department. I just wanted to draw the distinction between those of us who were familiar with the Subcontinent wiki-drama, and those well-intentioned folks who were dealing with the List in the abstract, but didn't want to sound like I was just me-tooing. Your work is pretty dang key in this area, and I do my bit as life allows.

BTW, I saw your intent to tackle Brahmins at some point; I just never really felt pulled in that direction. I might spend a little time back on Dalits next year, though their POV issues are refreshingly distinct from the Kshatriya crew. Dalit articles just tend a bit more towards an in-your-faceness attacking the caste system (which is fine when properly referenced), a bit of puffing of some of the Dalit activists, and (like the Hazaras you've noticed) a bit too much recentism and granularity when citing oppression, instead of a better-referenced long-view of patterns of violence towards them. At some point too many months down the road I might wander back up to Northeast India, since I really don't ever see them come up much. The articles I've seen aren't anywhere near as bad, but a sweep-through never hearts. I really do need to get some focus for my Shivaji project though, hoping to get that up to GA, though the technicality about the article being "stable" might be hard to achieve what with all the drive-bys it attracts. MatthewVanitas (talk) 08:19, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

I think Fowler has his eye on fettling some Brahmin stuff. According to him, it is incredibly overblown. Articles like Shivaji are always going to have issues related to stability. On the other hand, if things such as India can be gotten there then surely that can. You perhaps need to get a couple of always-around admins involved and maybe the likes of Utcursch and Redtigerxyz. I know this makes it seem like forming a cabal but that is a pretty core article for India-related topics. - Sitush (talk) 08:34, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited St. George Orthodox Church, Chathannoor, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Devalokam (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:32, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Message concerning the term "Concept Development"

Dear Sir, Sorry to bother you. I am trying to solve a problem of misunderstanding:

If someone searches for "Concept Development" on Wikipedia they will end up at a page about a MILITARY PRACTICE called "Concept Development C&E". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concept_Development_and_Experimentation

I see that on LinkedIn, me and other professionals have indicated "Concept Development" but when you hit the link you arrive at the MILITARY PRACTICE page on Wikipedia. We are not military professionals, we are copywriters, designers, etc etc.

This is why I tried to make an entry, only to avoid the confusion. Maybe in it's first version it may have appeared as an advertisement, though the intention is ONLY to avoid the confusion above.

My suggested entry: Concept Development Professional development of ideas. Not to be confused with the military term "Concept Development & Experimentation (CD&E)"

Please let me know how to solve this problem.

Best regards,

Olle Torgny

Sweden — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ot1967se (talk • contribs) 19:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello Olle, you bring up an interesting point, and an important one because it's preventing real people from getting the right information. Can you point out a different Wikipedia article which you think is closer to the Concept Development that you and your colleagues do? If so, I can WP:Redirect the search term "concept development" to that article, and have a small note saying "for the military version, go to CD&E". Unless we genuinely lack an article covering something along the lines of civilian C&D I'd prefer not to start a new article, but if we have an article that more or less shares C&D's definition I'd be happy to set up the Redirects for you. Please advise. MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:10, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your help and guidance. This is my first entry. I suggest the following new version: (definitions taken from the first line on each page)

=

CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT Professional development of ideas or idea based solutions.

See also:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideation_%28idea_generation%29 the process of creating new ideas.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prototyping creation of an early sample or model built to test a concept or process or to act as a thing to be replicated or learned from.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design the creation of a plan or convention for the construction of an object or a system.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concept mental representations and abstract objects.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concept_Development_and_Experimentation the application of the structure and methods of experimental science to the challenge of developing future military capability.

=

Otherwise, an easy way out would be to redirect it to:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideation_%28idea_generation%29

But that will only refer to one side of the subject...

Best regards,

Olle Torgny

User talk:Dsvaisakh

Thank you for your advise.i am in my exam days.i wish i can improve my articles after my exam. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dsvaisakh (talk • contribs) 03:49, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

afd on an article you worked on

Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fraternal benefit society. I brought it there because at this point, I'm rather confused about how to deal with this. DGG ( talk ) 03:31, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello Matthew

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Dermot_McLaughlin/sandbox

has been upgraded with more citations.

However it appears you are offline for a whilte? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.206.240.131 (talk) 10:40, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

afd on List of Indian castes

Matthew just had a quick read on this entry, and you asked for my comments. Quite frankly, I am so busy that I have no time to spare for Wikepedia. My view is if categories exist, then I have no objection in the article being deleted. However, I am not going to get involved in a lengthy debate. I am also tired on the personal attacks being made on me by some editors. You have always been polite and constructive in your criticism, but this can't be said of others. --WALTHAM2 (talk) 19:56, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks WALTHAM, do you mind if I quote you in the AfD debate just so they know the primary recent author doesn't object so long as the catgory structure fills the need (and we are improving the category structure)? Thanks for checking in, hope you're staying relaxed with the busyness in your off-wiki life. MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:12, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Yes go ahead, I have no issue. Categories make much more sense then lists in my view. Even something like list of countries for example creates argument as to what is a country. I suspect there is resistance because a certain editor has been quite aggressive to all those who have contributed to this topic. On categories, my suggestion would be to keep the categories as social groups of a certain state then castes. Anyways that's my two penny's worth. And thanks for asking about stress, I'm a Public Sector manager in the UK, and lots happening!--WALTHAM2 (talk) 08:15, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

HELP!!! Clarification needed on Fraternal Benefit Society page

Hi Matthew,

Ok...need some more help here, please. It appears that DGG accepted my article and printed it in the Fraternal Benefit Society space that you had cleared for it (thank you!); however, it was then deleted or not accepted. Last night (Nov. 26), it looked like it had been posted. This morning when I rechecked the link, the article was there but there was a box at the top noting it was being "considered for deletion."

Is there someone within the administration of Wiki that I can appeal to to address this to avoid new reviewers getting involved with their own new opinions? I would like to avoid having new eyes keep reviewing this and thinking it's a duplicative article and having to start from scratch explaining why you created the space for me.

Thanks again so much for your help on this!

Nina Ninalill (talk) 22:38, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Have you yet read the arguments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fraternal benefit society? I would definitely check that out, and maybe respond to the comments there, in a factual and unemotional way. Part of the issue is trying to sort out the overlap between different articles, and also I believe DGG is concerned that the article was created to promote FBS's rather than simply describe them neutrally. I would check in there, and add that AfD discussion to your Watchlist so you can see how it develops. I would expect that it will take at least a week, if not two, to get a variety of opinions there and come to a consensus, so this isn't like WP:Speedy deletion where it happens in an hour. MatthewVanitas (talk) 02:36, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Dick Anthony - Sacred Musician

Hello. How do I re-submit my article on Dick Anthony - Sacred Musician? I believe it has been edited to meet required standards. Thank you. Norman Borge (talk) 02:05, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Fraternal Benefit Society

Thanks, Matthew. I did read the page on "consideration for deletion" and responded to DGG's concerns. Thanks for your reassurances as I'm learning the Wiki ropes. If there's something more I can do or say at this point to move the process along, please let me know. Ninalill (talk) 15:08, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Category:People in history by country

Category:People in history by country, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:59, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	To Matthew Vanitas for his valiant efforts in helping a Wiki Newbie! Ninalill (talk) 15:41, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Moving the article to Userspace...

Dear MatthewVanitas,

I have seen that a modification was done to my recent article concerning Theresa Wong, and it bore the notice: "This sandbox is in the Wikipedia namespace. Either move this page into your userspace, or remove the template." I tried to do that, but I am not sure if I have done it right. My apologies if I did something wrong... I'm still new to the editing world in the Wikipedia, and learning something new every day. Let me know if I can do anything to fix what I might have done accidentally. - Best regards, ChloeLeChien (talk) 17:50, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your speedy response, MatthewVanitas,

Just before you submitted the message on the message, the article was declined. In fact, I did not know that there was a previous attempt in making the article of Theresa Wong, and that attempt was still available on the Wikipedia. Should I have known this, I would have definitely edited that earlier version. I think that what we need to make this article publishable is to have more reliable sources, and so my associate and I are on the quest to finding more reliable secondary sources. Thank you again for your kind comments and suggestions. All best, ChloeLeChien (talk) 19:00, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Apologies on the Theresa Wong (3) article. That must have been made when I misread the initial instruction which prompted me to write the first post on this talk page. I am not moving articles or creating new ones again, and I am putting the "db-self" mark on the Theresa Wong (3) article to avoid further confusion. Thanks much for your help on this article, as I saw the streamlining of the code for references. Best, ChloeLeChien (talk) 20:32, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Cleveland Buddhist Temple

Matthew,

This page is updated and expanded, is it OK for it to be published?

Also, please describe which photos are acceptable (no copyright issues).

MLS216 (talk) 21:25, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

For photos, the simple answer is that any photo owned by the person uploading is fine. So if you take a photo, you can upload it and select the "my own work" option with no issues; for Public Domain photos, use Wiki Commons as the upload site rather than Wikipedia directly. If it's a photo owned by somebody else (say, the Temple staff), and they are okay releasing it to the whole world (not just "for Wikipedia use only"), you can upload it and file a WP:OTRS form, which basically means you send the Temple staff an email saying "Please confirm that you are releasing the image ClevelandTemple2012.jpg to the Public Domain", and they'll forward it on from an official Temple address to the Wikimedia Foundation saying "yes, we consent to release", and the image will be "stamped" as verified released by the Temple. The former is quite easy, the latter takes a few steps, so if you or a friend live in the area and can take some good basic photos, that's the easiest. Does that answer your question? I'd be happy to clarify further if you hit any confusion. MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:01, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

afc procedure

Just curious. I see as I delete the pages that when finding unacceptable pages in user sandboxes or elsewhere in user space,you first move them to AfC, and then immediately tag them for deletion. Why not simply add the tag immediately to the page where it is? There's probably a very good reason, & when I don't understand something I like to learn DGG ( talk ) 00:08, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

I move all the "User:" pages to AFC en-masse, and then go through them; somehow I find it faster to consistently move things all first rather than single bits out. I would really like some way to avoid that task though, like having the "Review requested" template only work once it's moved to AfC under a proper title, rather than allowing the sandboxes as submissions. It makes it really hard for folks specialising in a topic (like myself with Indian and Middle Eastern topics) to find articles we can review knowledgeably when 20% or better are simply labeled "sandbox". MatthewVanitas (talk) 02:13, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps your idea of having the review requested automatically move it is a good one. I had not thought of that solution, but I'd like something that didn't require the user to do anything special--after all, they're beginners. At least we should be able to get the mechanics going smoothly; and then we can deal with the actually difficult problem: qualified reviewers. I am almost ready to adopt Kudpung's suggestion for NPP--requiring some degree of knowledge-. I don't really want to complicate reviewer until we know if PP will work at all. I wonder if we could combine it with autopatroller ; tho the qualities needed are a little different, still it amounts to "trusted editor". DGG ( talk ) 04:36, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Since AFC has been getting out of hand for months, we either need an influx of human reviewers, some technical solutions, or ideally both; recruiting humans is its own thing. So far as technical, there are some pretty simple ways to reduce workload (and AFC Helper is stellar already, with only some small room for improvement): turning "User/sandbox" submissions into AFC titles with minimal/no hassle on newbies would be key. Also eliminating the blank articles automatically with a "hey, you submitted a blank article, did you mean to do that?" 'bot Talk message, and maybe similar for ultra-stubs and unreferenced with a "Hey, it doesn't appear your article has enough context, and/or is unreferenced". Getting rid of the blanks and obviously too-shorts both allows the noobs to take another crack right away rather than wait weeks for the Decline, and also would clear out a good 10% of the daily inflow. EDIT: also, making potentital AFC reviewers aware of how easy AFC Helper is would be good; I spent a week manually reviewing, coding in the decline codes, etc. before realising that AFCH didn't require a download, was Mac compatible, etc. and started using it. I'm not familiar with this NPP issue you mention, can you link me to the dicussion? MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:54, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

I had the same experience--I did it manually at first. I don't share your satisfaction with the helper--it needs added functionality. The entire process is oriented towards letting people just give a bare statement; in some cases that's all that is warranted,but for a good faith submission that has possibilities, more is needed: It must be possible & encouraged to give multiple reasons like Huggle. I particular am bothered by the tendency to say just "inadequate sources to show notability" when the real problem is that it is never likely to meet notability--people make revision after revision, but it will never get them an article. It must be encouraged to add something, and let you preview what is being added. It shouldn't have an option saying baldly "failure to meet NOT" -- it is necessary to at least say what part of NOT is the problem. It should be possible to see at a glance just what state the sequence of submissions is. I've asked for these many times, and always been told that it isn't worth the trouble of making the changes--apparently one person has assumed the authority to decide this. In contrast, the current NPP was programmed poorly at first, but the programmer attended to the problems, and made the changes. I still find it too slow, but for someone with less experience, it's a great improvement. because the programmer listened to the editors . I'll post the discussion about requiring training for patrollers in a day or two when I find it. DGG ( talk ) 06:03, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Re;Teahouse

Hi! I removed that question due to all the garbage the asker had added, but also due to the rather bitey replies that he was being given. It is my understanding that the Teahouse is to be an upbeat, positive, kind of place; a place that is encouraging and safe for new users to bring their questions. I do not disagree that the fella asking the questions needed a swift kick in the butt; I just feel it better for the new users coming to Teahouse that the kick in the butt be administered on his talk page as so not to frighten off others with questions that may be more receptive to a helping hand. You have been around a whole lot longer than I and of course, I will bow to whatever action you deem appropriate. I just wanted you to know why I did it. Gtwfan52 (talk) 07:13, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

And your approach was much better than mine. Can you direct me to some instruction on how that is done so I will know in the future? Gtwfan52 (talk) 07:32, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

And I found the instructions in your edit summary, so I will now go back to my knitting and leave you alone. Slaps self in face. Good nite. Gtwfan52 (talk) 07:35, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Request for Article to be Reviewed

Matthew, you helped me with a page last month and I'm currently working on another in my Sandbox which isn't finished yet. Meanwhile, I would like your advice on the article for David Gandy. This article was flagged for several issues, primarily the overly-flowery/gushing word usage of a contributor. Over the last couple of months, several editors have neutralized the tone of the article to make it more objective. Most of my contributions have been in improving the sources and making the citation style more consistent. Can you please review the article and offer your recommendations? ThanksKem05f (talk) 18:34, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Question

Matthew, am I close to acceptance with my article Helena Araújo? Thank you!! Jocelyne1960 (talk) 13:33, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Matthew, thank you so much for your feedback and taking care of the article. I will continue to work on it as publications appear and essays or courses get published. It has been an interresting adventure for me and feel fortunate to have received your guidance and encouragements. Merci, gracias, Danke, grazie and thank you ! Jocelyne1960 (talk) 22:01, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Badhan (blood donor organization)

Hi, since we who have worked on the article have not been alerted, I thought I'd better let you know: this article is proposed for deletion, the discussion is taking place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Badhan (blood donor organization). (P.S.: the original creator has been blocked for copyright violations, my guess is that they wrote the material and made the mistake of adding it to wikipedia as well). Perhaps this counts as "canvassing", but since this looks like a lack of due process, it seemed best to solicit your opinion. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 18:00, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Need help with William Bowden article listed in city -- Swifton, Arkansas

Need help with footnotes problem. Not sure how I need to correct problem. Please help. --Thank you sir --