Jump to content

User talk:Wiae: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Supdiop (talk | contribs)
7,749 edits
Line 145: Line 145:


:As for the books, it's a bit tougher to assess those. While it is true that they are reliable sources, it is unclear whether they discuss Flora in significant detail. Perhaps you could add some quotes in the references directly from those sources? [[User:Wikiisawesome|wia]] ([[User talk:Wikiisawesome#top|talk]]) 00:13, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
:As for the books, it's a bit tougher to assess those. While it is true that they are reliable sources, it is unclear whether they discuss Flora in significant detail. Perhaps you could add some quotes in the references directly from those sources? [[User:Wikiisawesome|wia]] ([[User talk:Wikiisawesome#top|talk]]) 00:13, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Dear Wia,

Thank you. I will add the quotes.
Best
I.


== 12:18:04, 8 May 2015 review of submission by Vicky.ballance ==
== 12:18:04, 8 May 2015 review of submission by Vicky.ballance ==

Revision as of 09:33, 12 May 2015

Template:Useronline

Peter Azur

Thank you for your well-reasoned and helpful response. I think we both realize that Azur's contribution to cinematic history ranks somewhat short of stellar. I tend to agree with you on all points you raised, particularly the notability requirement. We'll simply abandon this mini-project unless you can locate an interested third-party.

==


Request on 13:06:16, 5 May 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Saimonofclub


Thank you for your revision! If I find suitable information on the subject's notability I will update the article and resubmit.

Best regards,

Saimon

Saimonofclub (talk) 13:06, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Meritnation (May 5)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by BenLinus1214 was:
This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
BenLinus1214talk 16:43, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker)

@BenLinus1214: I think there is some problem with the tool you are using because Wikiisawesome did not create the article. Supdiop (talk) 17:28, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Supdiop: I believe the tool automatically notifies the last submitter. I seem to recall resubmitting the Meritnation article for someone, since I haven't worked on it at all. That would explain the notification. wia (talk) 17:55, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Alright. I read that the tool is experiencing some problems nowadays. I thought this notification was result of malfunctioning tool. :) Supdiop (talk) 18:08, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) it depends on how you submit it. The AFCH script allows you to choose who is noted as the submitter. Submitting manually does not. If there is a choice, use the script. If no choice go back in and edit the template after it is placed. Fiddle Faddle 15:30, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Timtrent: I'll be sure to choose that option next time I submit an article for another editor! Incidentally, I regret that I haven't been very active at AfC lately. I know there's quite a backlog but I have just moved and started a new job, so "real life" (whatever that is) is taking up far too much of my time. I hope things will settle down in the coming weeks so I can devote more time to Wikipedia. /wia /talk 01:50, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

09:21:03, 6 May 2015 review of submission by 78.150.117.145


The vast majority of the article was written by The Deco themselves hence why it relates so closely to the page on the website. If they complete this form https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Declaration_of_consent_for_all_enquiries does that resolve the issue for wikipedia?

Also you seem to have blanked the entire page if this resolves the copyright issue am I ok to restore to my previous version. I have various other sources/references to add as well

http://cinematreasures.org/theaters/22658 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ABC_Cinemas http://www.bbc.co.uk/northamptonshire/content/articles/2005/08/19/cinema_is_born_again_as_a_theatre_feature.shtml http://www.beatlesbible.com/1963/03/27/live-abc-cinema-northampton/ http://www.theatrestrust.org.uk/resources/theatres/show/476-abc-northampton

Thanks

78.150.117.145 (talk) 09:21, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@78.150.117.145: Hi, yes if the website's content owners follow the steps in that link carefully, then they can license the text to Wikipedia. Once the text has been licensed, then you can go ahead and unblank the page! You'd then be free to add other links and references. wia (talk) 09:46, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

14:05, 06 May 2015 (UTC+2) review of submission Comidor

Draft:Comidor
Dear Wikiiawesome, after making the proper arrangements in my article according to the valuable tips and info by you and some fellow wikipedia reviewers of yours, I would appreciate it if you could give another look at my draft and let me know about your thoughts. Thank you very much for your time! Yours sincerely, Tony (talk)

@Antpetsas: Hi, no problem! I'm not sold on 100% of the references, as many of the additions seem to be to websites with crowdsourced reviews. It's my understanding that those sorts of websites don't do much in the way of asserting notability, since they are user-generated. I would lean more heavily on independent reviews published on a website with an editorial policy. However, I'm not a total expert in these matters, and so I suggest that you keep working on the article until someone else reviews the article and gives you a more concrete answer. (I'm still relatively new at AfC and so I leave the more complicated cases to the experienced reviewers!) I'm afraid there's a bit of a backlog at the moment, but there's no deadline for your article.
I'd also suggest working a bit on the tone. Some sentences strike me as a little wishy-washy. For example, "In general, it seems that this platform exploits its collaboration features for business process automation in task management, cost calculation and requirements fulfillment" is a bit vague. I think you should just state exactly what the platform does. (You say something similar later on: "The general idea is that Comidor".) I'd also consider chopping out familiar phrasings like "Last but not least".
I hope this is helpful; as always, feel free to ask here or at the AfC Help Desk if you have further questions! wia (talk) 20:21, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Wikiisawesome: Thanks a lot for your concise and prompt response! Your feedback is always valuable! I will try to work a bit on the tone as suggested. But unfortunately, as you can imagine, it is quite difficult to find other resources than software review websites when it comes to such products. At least I found an academic article talking about the platform on which this product was developed. Cheers! Tony (talk) 9:54, 7 May 2015 (UTC+2)

Request on 17:09:39, 6 May 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Wisdom of Ages


In regard to the rejection of the article on Arturo D Hernandez I have several questions: 1. If the copyright owner Quaestor Press agrees to put its page under license using the Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported license and the article gives proper attribution to Quaestor Press in the credit sources would the article be acceptable? 2. Where and how would Quaestor Press file or otherwise accept this license? I have the language of the license, but there is no signature line or indication of how to accept it.

Wisdom of Ages

Wisdom of Ages (talk) 17:09, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Wisdom of Ages: Hi, thanks for inquiring on my talk page. Yes, if Quaestor Press agrees to license its text, then you would be able to use it on the Wikipedia page. The easiest way to do this is to follow the rules in WP:PERMISSION: email Quaestor and ask them to license the text. There are sample emails you can send them on that page. Then, send proof of their consent to the Wikimedia email address listed (the one for text, not images). It usually takes a bit of time, so you can busy yourself with other Wikipedia work in the meantime. Let me know if you have any other questions! Best, wia (talk) 20:07, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

L235 has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

--L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 03:58, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@L235: Thank you for the cookie! I was just starting to get hungry. wia (talk) 10:02, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Green Mango chutney

Please review.--C E (talk) 11:10, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@CosmicEmperor: Someone beat me to the reviewing punch, but I did a little cleanup. (I just started a new job so I am not on Wikipedia as much as I used to be.) I also moved the article to Green mango chutney without the capital "M" in mango to comply Wikipedia's article capitalization policy. Thanks for your contributions! wia (talk) 20:12, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 22:43:32, 7 May 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Irabarbanel


Dear Wia,

I refer to my article on Flora MacDonnell that you reviewed. The article was deleted due to notability concerns. I was advised to find third party, reliable, and verifiable citations, but I already have references to two reputable and well-reviewed academic books by two different authors and to a website of one of Ireland's leading theatres. Can you please explain why these are not acceptable. I am genuinely curious, and I would be grateful for your reply. Best wishes irabarbanel


Irabarbanel (talk) 22:43, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Irabarbanel: Hi, thanks for asking! The issue with the online source is that the link doesn't discuss Flora MacDonnell in significant detail. Remember that references for notability's sake should generally require significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic.
As for the books, it's a bit tougher to assess those. While it is true that they are reliable sources, it is unclear whether they discuss Flora in significant detail. Perhaps you could add some quotes in the references directly from those sources? wia (talk) 00:13, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Wia,

Thank you. I will add the quotes. Best I.

12:18:04, 8 May 2015 review of submission by Vicky.ballance


Good Afternoon Wikiisawesome

I hope you are well.

Sorry I am a little confused why the page has been rejected. Would it please be possible for you to tell me what areas I need to change and why as I cannot work it out?

I'm very new to Wiki and I thought I had followed the referencing guidelines.

Many Thanks

Vicky

Vicky.ballance (talk) 12:18, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Vicky.ballance: Hi, thanks for inquiring here! The issue with the article is that it isn't supported by sufficient inline citations. We need inline citations in articles about living people after every statement that is likely to be challenged or that is contentious. For example, when you say "The writings of the postmodern philosophers; Baudrillard, Lacan, and Laporte have had a major influence on his practice, but of key importance, is the work of Slavoj Zizek. Lloyd’s work generally takes the form of large mixed media paintings, but his work has also manifested in photography, printmaking, drawing, installation art, sculpture and digital imagery", there is no inline citation. A reader who reads this article will have no idea how to verify this claim. What you can do is go through the article very carefully and make sure you have added an inline citation wherever you make a bold statement about Mark David Lloyd that is contentious or likely to be challenged. Let me know if you have any further questions. Thanks, wia (talk) 20:13, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

16:27:09, 8 May 2015 review of submission by PalmerWolf


Revisions were made to this entry about Onissim Goldovsky on April 21. We have not heard anything. Did the revisions go through? What do we need to do to move to the next step? PalmerWolf (talk) 16:27, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@PalmerWorf: Hey, just hang tight for a bit longer. There's a rather large backlog at the moment (over 1000 articles waiting to be reviewed), and so we'll get to it as soon as we can. In the meantime, keep working on the article. There's always plenty to do on Wikipedia. Let me know if you're looking for something to do! wia (talk) 20:10, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

disambiguation page

I have a small doubt about disambiguation pages. An anonymous user asked me a question that "can't we have a product in disambiguation page if it does not have an article?" I answered "No, you can't"(in short). I think I gave a wrong answer because I see many things in dab pages that don't have an article about them. Is it acceptable to have anything in dab page that don't have an article about it? I don't know much about what goes into dab page. Can you please clarify my doubt? — Supdiop talk 04:35, 12 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Wiae&oldid=661973764"