EDIT: Nvr mind I deleted the page. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Nepte123|Nepte123]] ([[User talk:Nepte123|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Nepte123|contribs]]) 00:50, 31 January 2013 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
EDIT: Nvr mind I deleted the page. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Nepte123|Nepte123]] ([[User talk:Nepte123|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Nepte123|contribs]]) 00:50, 31 January 2013 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
== Article Submission ==
Hey I submitted a blank article by accident, but have since completed it, I'm unsure if the renewed article has been recognised.
The article is titled Reclaim Love. Has it been submitted?
IMPORTANT NOTE - PLEASE READ IF YOU ARE HERE TO ASK A QUESTION REGARDING AN ARTICLE YOU WROTE: I review a lot of new article's, and as of such i receive a fairly large number of questions regarding those. If you have a question, do feel free to ask and rest assured that i will answer it. However, do understand that due the sheer amount of questions it may take a day or two before i can give you a decent reply.
Alternatively, you can ask your question at the help desk or the #wikipedia-en-help chat channel, which may result in a faster response.
I reply to conversations on both my own talk page and yours, to prevent fragmenting the conversation . Please note that i do not monitor other talk pages - please leave me a note that you replied instead.
This page has archives. Sections older than 4 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 8 sections are present.
Marathi Artya
Hi Friend,
I will definitely submit English Article of same data !!
But how can i submit the same into Marathi OR Hindi from English.
This was the message displayed : (The submission appears to be written in Hindi. This is the English Language Wikipedia; we can only accept articles written in the English Language. Please provide a high-quality English Language translation of your submission. Otherwise, you may write it in the Hindi Wikipedia.)
Every language has its own Wikipedia variety, which means that (for example) the English Wikipedia only accepts English submissions and so on. A list of available Wikipedia can be found here. As of writing the Hindi Wikipedia is listed as the 41 largest Wiki, while the Marathi wiki is listed as number 70. An additional note is that each Wikipedia has its own set of rules, submission process and so on. They are often generally familiar with the English variety (Quite a few adopt the English wiki's ruleset as a baseline to build on) though this is not a general rule. Since i am not to acquainted with non-english Wikipedia's i fear i cannot be of too much assistance as far as submitting content to them goes. Excirial (Contact me,Contribs)17:57, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Friend,
Thanks for your help...now, i was able to create the article with native language (hindi/ marathi) etc.
Once again thanks !!! Best Luck & Happy New Year!!
Deleted Page- International Schools Technology Association (IntSTA)
Dear Excirial
Hi I'm Jonathan and my Wikipedia account is jmjjulius. I enjoy taking part in Wkikipedia and I agree that it is very useful. I have submitted my page about the webpage article International Schools Technology Association (IntSTA)and it says that it had been reviewed earlier today. The page is deleted due to the content's notability and referencing, however, the referencing is clearly stated, the source which is intsta.weebly.com is in the list of references. The quote stated in the content is also from the webpage and is also quoted under the association's name. Maybe if you could kindly inform me the materials needed for this, I will be very greatful of appreciation.
I see there have been no edits from your account since the 17th, so for the moment i am assuming you are MIA. If this is not the case just give me a nudge - i'll move this question to the "first question needing a response" location then. Excirial (Contact me,Contribs)18:02, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Excirial
Hello. We're meeting again. First of all I wanna say to you, that I understand the WP policies and guidelines and know how to review. After your message I learnt them and now I'm ready to review articles at AFC. Can I start from there where I was stopped? I mean can I join to the January Backlog elimination drive? Please answer me.--Pratyya(Hello!)06:12, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think there is a grounds policy-wise that allows me to tell you "You cannot review any more article's", at least not without me raising this for consensus on ANI or similar first.
Even so - During my review of your reviews i posted several diffs on the #Wikipedia-en-admins IRC channel, and the reaction for the reviews unanimously echo'ed the earlier message i wrote. In other words, if you are going to review more article's please review them only if you are certain that a criteria applies. Incorrect or invalid decline reasons cause more harm then good and quite frankly i prefer not spending another 1.5 hours going trough 200 or so diffs in order to reopen the worst cases for another review. Besides this i would personally be quite a bit more comfortable with this if you started reviewing again after the backlog drive is over for the simply reason that the competitive element is no longer present at that time (I still blame factor for part of the reviews) - Do note that the last line is an opinion though. Excirial (Contact me,Contribs)19:23, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
For what reason is the Open Media Database not approved?
You disapproved the Open Media Database. I don't understand why. I enjoy contributing to Wikipedia, though often there is not an opportunity that is worth the time. The OMDB page not existing seemed to me like a significant opportunity, and it is a world known database. I have added more references to it, though it has no commercial affiliations, so there is little more than references from search engines and informational articles. If it was more complete and popular, it might possibly have a news article written about it, but you don't even see much more of that for the IMDB.
I don't see notability as an issue with the OMDB (popularity is though), so what then is lacking that would make this page worthy of adding? The IMDB is the biggest competing resource, but it is commecial, so how did they become note-worthy?
I added some more sources, and may add more if necessary (though I doubt more would be helpful to anyone). If it is this hard to add a simple third party, useful information article, I doubt I'm going risk wasting much time with future contributions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frogbudgie (talk • contribs) 00:04, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I see there have been no edits from your account since the 17th, so for the moment i am assuming you are MIA. If this is not the case just give me a nudge - i'll move this question to the "first question needing a response" location then. Excirial (Contact me,Contribs)19:30, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This submission's references do not adequately evidence the subject's notability
when i first submitted the article..my article was declined. It seemed much like an advertisement was what said!! and when i resubmitted it editing evrerything that seemed like an advertisement... now you are saying..This submission's references do not adequately evidence the subject's notability how come??? please clarify. thanks
Naxatrahindi (talk) 08:52, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There are several policies linked in the decline template itself, and those policies generally do a good job explaining their core reason in the first couple of lines. Have you read at least the first two lines in WP:CORP and the "This page in a nutshell" template on the notability page? Since your question doesn't specify anything specific to clarify any response i would give would simply rehash those 5 lines of text. Excirial (Contact me,Contribs)19:38, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Can't blame me for that - if you substitute the AFC submission template it will add the name of the user who substituted it as the name of the submitter for the article. The AFCH script will send the rejection template to the editor in that field. So if your submitting for someone else just update the name to the original editors name afterwards. Excirial (Contact me,Contribs)11:20, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There is no need to post messages in two places. Advice noted in case I ever do the same again. I did realise that the message on my page had been generated automatically. My message was not so much a complaint but a suggestion that you might like to notify the real author as well - not that it matters much since I have blocked them. — RHaworth (talk·contribs) 11:26, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
AfC backlog drive script
Hi Excirial and thanks first of all for developing the script! However, I found two possible bugs. Here's the diff that contains both of these issues.
My name (The Anonymouse) gets turned into "The_Anonymouse" (adds an underscore) every time you run the script. Although the underscore isn't necessary and doesn't harm anything, I prefer my username without it.
Actually, in both cases AFC functions as it should - instead it is the driver that took a wrong turn.
AFCBuddy has an internal hardcoded participants list, so that i don't have to type all the names every time i run it (And i haven't bothered making it somewhat more dynamic). I added your name as The_Anonymouse for some test purpose i don't even recall and never changed it afterwards. Now, since there is really no reason to have an underscore that is now corrected for the next run.
Pratyya Ghosh is somewhat of a special case. There were some serious review quality issues for his reviews, which led to a high amount of "FAIL" re-reviews and some more fun. Back then AFCBuddy's beta version wasn't able to catch everything for the "Place reviewed reviews in a separate section" part of the program so i just removed Pratyya from the users to check list. Now it seems that this had the side effect that it completely ignores Pratyya altogether from the totals and leaderboard list.
That latter part was not exactly intended, but at the time it may not even have been such a bad thing. Still, since he asked for another chance i re-added him to the list. Excirial (Contact me,Contribs)20:10, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Recently you rejected my article about Strivia game.
The reason is that it's non-notable.
1st of all, thank you for reviewing it.
I'm new to writing something on Wikipedia, English isn't my 1st language and even user interface confuses me sometimes.
It will be awesome if you share some additional details about exactly why it was rejected: Strivia doesn't worth to have an article about it, my article isn't good enough (I failed significant coverage, reliable, etc.), my English is too bad, etc?
First off, welcome to Wikipedia! Trust me - the user interface will eventually grow somewhat less confusing though it could definitely use some polish here and there. As for the article: Every article must demonstrate why it is notable - that is, why it is important \ significant enough to be included in an encyclopedia. On Wikipedia the general criteria for this is the so-called general notability guideline, while there are also some more specific guidelines that deal with specific subject (For example, the notability of music related subjects or businesses. At the very basis all there policies can be summarized as "If there are multiple reliable sources of sufficient size covering the subject in detail, it is likely notable for inclusion". For example, if something received lengthy coverage in multiple major newspapers it is likely more likely meet that threshold then a subject that is only covered by a single local newspaper.
If we look specifically at the Strivia article: it details a new game that was just released. The article has no reliable sources that can back it up, and due to it being new it is quite unlikely there had already been sufficient coverage that could be used to pass this criteria. Note that most individual games tend to have a difficult time passing the notability guideline, and the absolute majority never never manages to do so (Only major "hits" such as Draw Something and similar manage to pass in most cases). Excirial (Contact me,Contribs)18:18, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, and thanks for tagging this article for notability. 5 years later, the tag is still there. You may want to consider taking it to the Notability noticeboard or AfD to get it resolved. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 08:32, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Now that is what i call blast-from-the-past! That must be one of the earliest tags i ever placed, since i had been around only 6 months back then. Either way, definitely seems non-notable by todays standards so tagged for PROD. Excirial (Contact me,Contribs)19:14, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Paul Gayler MBE
hi there,
we are trying to submit a page on chef Paul Gayler, however the response we got was that the text has been copied from other sources (I wrote the text and it was not taken from anywhere else). I am now unsure how to get around this. Do i need to rewrite the article? please do let me know. we are keen to get a page on Paul Gayler MBE up on Wikipedia as no information is currently available and he is one of the UK's most famous chefs.
I find it curious that you refer to yourself as "we" - i assume that you are a public relations company or similar who is representing Mr. Gayler? Though honestly that is a rhetorical question since there are several signs that you are an employee of PR firm Luchford APM - seeing that the IP address belongs to that company while they also lists Lanesborough as one of their clients.
Hi Excirial - I'm Alexmcdowell, and recently submitted an article on World Building to Wikipedia.
I'm curious about a decision I think you made to delete the article because it used copyright material. I've cut and pasted the specific response from you below.
Your submission at Articles for creationThank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. The submission has not been accepted because it included copyrighted information, which is not permitted on Wikipedia. You are welcome to write an article on the subject, but please do not use copyrighted work.If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/World Building.To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the reviewer's talk page. Please remember to link to the submission!You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 07:17, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
The material I submitted was written by myself, and as far as I am aware is original. I teach a series of classes at USC Los Angeles on world building based on my design methodology and philosophy, and want to start a wikipage on my subject that the students can use to add research develop their own ideas, and build out the page as an education source. Haven't done this before, so if you can advise on how to resubmit my writing correctly it would be much appreciated.
I marked the page as a copyright violation since its content seems to have been literally copied from [1]. Now seeing the above explanation (Not to mention the signature on that particular page) i think i can conclude with little doubt that you have indeed written these pages. However, copyright technically all written content is considered copyrighted unless specifically stated otherwise. Since there is no specific copyright claim or released on the page in question this defaults to "Copyrighted content" which cannot be used directly on Wikipedia (Only content specifically licenses under the CC-BY-SA / GDFL or compatible copyright licenses can be copied directly). Now even if this would not have been the case the page as is would have read like original research. Since Wikipedia is an encyclopedia it should base its article's on external reliable sources and provide an encyclopedic summary of these. Most times the easiest way to start an article is by collecting reliable sources other people wrote and afterwards summarizing there while quoting the sources for each citation. Having said the above i should mention i noticed is that there is already an article detailing Worldbuilding, which on first glance seems to be detailing the same subject as the world-building article you created. If that is the case it may be more convenient to expand or improve the existing article if possible, since the subject is already covered in a "live" article.
Another point i should comment on is the mention that you may be interested in editing the article as a class project. Now before anything else i would add the warning that editing Wikipedia as a class project is often more complex then the average essay assignment - Wikipedia article's tend to have a different structure than most essays which tends to cause a somewhat steeper learning curve. Additionally there are editors working on Wikipedia article's from around the globe so editing Wikipedia tends to result in a less controlled or stable examining / teaching environment. Now, this does by no means mean that student editing is impossible - there are multiple universities who have one time or periodic curriculum's revolving around editing Wikipedia article's. Note that this is a subject i am not to familiar with, so if you may be interested, the Wikipedia Education Outreach Program may be of interest to you. (And since i happened to have it bookmarked an example: this was what the freshman fifteen page looked like before an university course, and this is what it looked like afterwards. Nowadays (two years afterwards) the core of that article is still based on the writing from that specific course, with some updates / changes / improvements over the years of course.
Hey, how did you create the AFCBuddy? Of course you'll think me as a fool. But seriously I like programing, But don't know how to do them. So please tell me!?--Pratyya(Hello!)15:09, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hiyas there Pratyya,
As with other program AFCBuddy was created using a specific programming language that defines what it should do and what it should look like. There are hundreds if not thousands of different languages, each easier or more difficult to learn and each better or worse suited for a specific task or program. Note that you really only need to know one or a few of these languages, and that (Exceptions not included) programs are mostly written in just a single language.
AFCBuddy itself is developed in VB.net which is fairly easy to learn, commonly used and more then powerful enough to write virtually any desktop application one would create as a hobby. The development IDE i use to program it is the professional edition of Microsoft Visual Studio though this is mostly because i already had that - the free Microsoft Visual Studio Express would work just as well and frankly has little to no difference in use or performance for a simple program as AFCBuddy.
Afterwards using the IDE is mostly a matter of knowing \ learning how to program something that does what you want it to do. There are many books detailing VB.net and other programming languages, and there are large amounts of code examples on the Internet that explain or demonstrate a certain feature. In AFCBuddy's case the program mostly revolves around communication with the Wikimedia API - it asks for various XML outputs listing user edits, deleted contributions and similar, then processes this data (Counting AFC reviews et cetera) and finally it creates creating several containing the leaderboard / user edits et cetera which i then post manually. (It could do this automatically, but i prefer some manual verification at times). Excirial (Contact me,Contribs)21:05, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your recent review of my short article on North Cyprus Page.
May I say that I am pleased that an editor/reviewer has left slightly more telling clues than before. Thank you for your comment.
In reply to your comment, I would have written more about situation, and given more background, but unfortunately, I was knocked back for not having provided evidence/sources to substantiate my version of events.
Therefore, I put together a small number of articles and videos and other sources, and took a sentence from each of them and quoted it in the article, in such a way as to start the article in some form. However, it has obviously not worked as it has this time been knocked back for reading like a news article.
It would be a shame for me to give up, considering, it is a compelling story which affects 3000 lives directly in a serious (life threatening way) and if you include their families and children (mainly back in the UK)the events are having a secondary affect on them.
Please, could you simply drop, one, or mabye 2 more subtle, clues, hints, indications, for me to continue improving the article.
Reading the article once over i cannot help but notice that the "The Kulaksiz Court Cases" page seems to be written a writing style that is similar to a newspaper; The article is specifically focused on a single event without having to much background context. Additionally, a large share of the article is dedicated to quoting people's responses to the case itself. Encyclopedic article's tend to differ in their format - Have a look at the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting article for example. The article starts with a short lead (summary) of the subject, followed by background information and a neutral description of the event it describes.
Having stated that, i feel the article would have difficulty passing the "Wikipedia is not a newspaper" criteria. The court cases as they stand are an extension of a large problem caused Greece's debt right now. There have been multiple media reports regarding this case, but the coverage seems to be very limited to a specific time period. It is quite likely that several newspapers jumped on the case, and will never report on them again. In that case the event would have little lasting notability, which would in turn means it wouldn't pass the mentioned criteria for inclusion. Excirial (Contact me,Contribs)22:45, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Excirial,
You are right about it reading like a newspaper, born out of an inability to put any form of background without it being rejected on the grounds of insufficient evidence or insufficient sources. I'm sure I can do something about this.
However, where I have to disagree with you is on your observation that this has been of notability, for a specific period of time. This is not substantiated by the evidence as a variety of newspapers both in the north and the south and mainland turkey have covered the story continuously between early 2010, and today. In fact, the Kulaksiz Case took time to become established in the minds of the Turkish Cypriot community, until the public auction, when the president himself turned up. (on this point, I have literally in my possession, a number of letters sent back and forth to various parties regarding Kulaksiz, by founding President Rauf Denktas - can I use these to highlight the cases) and slowly but surely, as many other cases emerged on the island, it became apparant to the newspapers, public, and government that Kulaksiz case had become a metaphor for the abuses taking place towards elderly expats who had attempted to retire there.
The kulaksiz has grown definitely, linearly, but more probably exponentially in notariety since Asil Nadir himself ordered his newspaper Kibris, to run front news on it before the auction.
Lastly, although it has taken a long time, the Turkish Cypriot community, has slowly woken up to the realisation that there unbelievable transformation in wealth came about it as a result of over 1 billion in investment, and that slowly, as result of blackmail across builders, lawyers, government (yes government are withholding transfer of deeds until expats pay for their builders/landowners taxes who now refuse to pay them), landowners, and banks. Each one of the aforementioned has blackmailed an entire community of foreign home buyers, expats and visitors alike. Kulaksiz is without a doubt the worse case as the fraud is so apparant, and clear, with evidence of Fraud being available for anyone to see.
Kulaksiz is now a nationally recognised name, and the community are aware that a turn around in the Kulaksiz case, will represent a landmark in the turn around of injustice towards their visitors, which will in turn represent the start of the long road to economic recovery. Whilst everyone is aware that less foreigners including UK citizens can afford to buy abroad in the current climate, many understand that the economic disaster would have taken place anyway as a result of the abuses, simply on a milder scale.
All of this is totally true, all of it I can back up time an time again. The newspapers have written more about the case as it goes along, I have primary evidence of the fraud, and a number of letters between officials regarding the case.
What I suspect is that it is of no interest to anyone who doesn't live in North Cyprus. However, if I went to any single one of the many country pages, and read what was notable and recent in that country it would be news to me. Therefore, I still hold that this case is of immense notability in North Cyprus, linked metaphorically to the economic armageddon there, and should be discussed in the article, or at least in a seperate article.
I just can't find any editor who thinks it's notable, simply because they haven't personally heard of it.
Just a very quick note that i haven't forgotten this one. Problem right now is that t don't have the time to dive into the subject matter and write a decent reply - and i don't want to settle for some half-decent response either. (I hope to have time during the weekend though). Excirial (Contact me,Contribs)20:17, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well, seems this one has been waiting for a decent reply quite a bit longer than by best "estimated time to response" calculated, not even mentioning my preferred "within a few days" response time. Either way, time to write something actually related to the page in question.
I read the entire article, checked each of the supplied references and did a search for more myself but even after doing so i am still fairly pessimistic as to the notability of the event. My own search mainly seems to yield a mountain of links from the "northcyprusfreepress.com", while yielding little to no links created by other news sources. In fact, if i do a search specifically excluding "northcyprusfreepress.com" i almost immediately land in the "Forum and blogs" area, which tends to be a dead-end as far as reliable sourcing goes.
http://www.kkg2011.com/index.php?cID=52 - Same issue as the last source really. The websites home page explicitly identifies itself as a rights group intended to aid property owners. Even i discount the possible conflict of interest in this source the group itself seems to be a very minor join effort, which would pass the size and "importance" requirement for a reliable source.
https://skydrive.live.com/?cid=229f30d9a4dcbec2&id=229F30D9A4DCBEC2!514 - Only details the electricity usage of the buildings, and barely covers the case at all. This is - at most - some slightly related information in tabloid format (This sort of coverage often surrounds events - a war starts, you receive top level coverage, but after a while the coverage seems to change to eyewitness reports and interviews simply because there is nothing new to report.)
The three remaining sources are somewhat more decent since they actually cover the case and offer some background information..
Even so fear the subject would have a hard time meeting the inclusion criteria for events. If we look at the notability policy for events it would only meet 1 criteria: Duration of coverage. There is no lasting effect that i could trace (If this court case were to be the basis of some landmark ruling things would be quite different); the geographic scope is limited to a very specific area (Norther Cyprus); the depth of coverage seems limited to "regular" news articles at most and the diversity of sources seems to be quite limited at 1 or 2 local newspapers.
Now, can the article subject be notable for inclusion? To be honest, i fear it won't meet the criteria no matter what changes are made simply due to the event being minor at best (Based on what i could find that is). Of course i can be wrong and i have been wrong in the past, but in those cases editors often came around with multiple sources that cannot be easily traced online without a specific search (Scientific journals, magazines, print-only newspaper article's and the like). Excirial (Contact me,Contribs)19:04, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Excirial,
Regrding you message on my Talk Page having reviewed the Kulaksiz Cases again,.....what can I say?
You have clearly done a lot of research, a lot of reading, and sure enough you have been through the 'notability' aspect as thoroughly as ever be could expected.
I cannot ask you for any more, nor will I. It is disappointing, because these cases have destroyed the North Cyprus economy which relied on foreign home buying tourism. Nevertheless, not notable enough, is what it is, and I accept your final verdict.
Thank you for your time, and for your explicit and comprehensive review. Again, I can't ask you for any more than the review you gave.
Ok so KUlaksiz is not notable enough to have it's own page - that's fine. However, the economy of North Cyprus section is still grossly misleading and totally inaccurate, and makes no reference to homebuying tourism, or the abuses
Please can you read this section which is the economy section. This is grossly inaccurate, and should make some mention of the huge property boom, the property abuses, the vast number of people who did not obtain title, and the subsequent collapse of the economy due to the re-migration of foreign home-buyers.
I can't seem to understand why I can't get the article reviewed successfully . You mentioned worthwhile reference point but isn't Gramophone magazine good enough as it is the number one classical magazine as well as the Royal Academy of Music and the album release mentioned? As it is reviewed in many other areas and this pianist is already mentioned on the Wikipedia list of classical pianists?
My submission was declined again with the following comment - IMDB and Warner's own press releases are biased and not third party peer reviewed.
I find it absurd that Warner's own press release describing the film's plot is a biased reference. How is the plot of unreleased movies added then?
Hey I submitted a blank article by accident, but have since completed it, I'm unsure if the renewed article has been recognised.
The article is titled Reclaim Love. Has it been submitted?
Thanks
