Jump to content

User talk:Onel5969: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user is a WikiGnome.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
SineBot (talk | contribs)
Bots
2,553,283 edits
m Signing comment by Plummer - "→Abbott and Costello: new section"
Aarvig (talk | contribs)
124 edits
mNo edit summary
Line 2,052: Line 2,052:
Best,
Best,
plummer <small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Plummer|Plummer]] ([[User talk:Plummer|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Plummer|contribs]]) 04:28, 28 September 2015 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
plummer <small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Plummer|Plummer]] ([[User talk:Plummer|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Plummer|contribs]]) 04:28, 28 September 2015 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Dr JS Rajkumar ==

Hi Onel. Can you please elaborate what do you mean to say in your reply,I did not get your point. And also can you guide me what to do next for this draft article page. If the said article is fine then who will patrol it and how it will be published. [[User:Aarvig|Aarvig]] ([[User talk:Aarvig|talk]]) 07:31, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Revision as of 07:31, 28 September 2015

Onel5969's Talk
Phoenix ... It's a dry heat ...
Born
New York city
NationalityAmerican

Edit count

Hi! You might find these handy:

Cheers! — | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| — 22:35, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Gyrus Systems company page

Hello,

I understand https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Gyrus_Systems submission was declined due to not non-objective language and/or opinion.

I reviewed the site and all the references for non-objective language and/or opinion so it would be very helpful if you can give me specific examples.

Last week we won the Training Industry Top 20 Learning Management Systems watch list award https://www.trainingindustry.com/learning-technologies/top-companies-listings/2015/2015-learning-portal-companies-watch-list.aspx — Preceding unsigned comment added by Virenkapadia (talk • contribs) 15:43, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help in advance.

Viren Kapadia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Virenkapadia (talk • contribs) 15:37, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Virenkapadia - First off, please always remember to sign your comments, using the 4 ~'s (that automatically signs and puts a time stamp on your comment). Second, there is a conflict of interest issue with the article. Wikipedia frowns on, but does not prohibit, COI contributors. The reason being that it is very difficult for such editors to remain objective. Look at the COI guidelines, you need to place a COI statement on the article. Third, I actually did not decline it for a lack of objectivity. I didn't get that far. In its current state, the article does not meet the notability criteria as per WP:GNG or WP:NCORP. Much of the article is based on a single article from a Richmond newspaper. There is another article from the same source. And the article from HR magazine, which is mostly about one of their pieces of software. That's it. The rest are brief mentions, or simple listings, or non-independent sources. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 13:34, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Gyrus draft FYI

Someone happened to come in and ask about this on IRC while I was there. The editor is clearly associated with the company, and while I don't know who it is, I'd venture a guess that it was whomever is the main/most recent contributor to the draft. I see no need to open a COI on a draft article that was declined, but it should be noted therein that it is a distinct possibility. MSJapan (talk) 16:32, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi MSJapan - another editor has tagged the article with the COI tag. See the comment right above this one regarding the article. Thanks for the heads up though! Onel5969 TT me 13:35, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

21:06:03, 31 August 2015 review of submission by RFreeman5713


I just wanted to ask the reviewer if any of the citations in this draft article meet the criteria and, if so, which ones. Also, how many approved citations there need to be.

Thank you,

21:06, 31 August 2015 (UTC)~Robin Freeman

RFreeman5713 (talk) 21:06, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi RFreeman5713 - There are two types of references/citations: those which are good to verify facts in the article, and those which are used to show notability. First of all, technically, you don't have any citations in this article. You have a list of "See also". But that's just semantics. If you had titled that section "References", then they would be references. But regarding them as valid references, let's call those which are good for verifying facts "A", those which are good for notability purposes "B" (which can also be used to verify), and those which aren't good for either, "C". You have 10 listed. In the "A" category are: 1, 2 (a very weak one), 3, 5, 6, 7, 8 & 10; in the "B" category - none; and in the "C" category: 4.
The book may or may not be useful. There is no page cited, so I have no idea. When a source can be used for verifying, it should be used as a footnote, not a general reference. If not, then your impulse to put it in a "See also" section is the right direction, although "See also" means that it points to another Wikipedia article. You'd want to create an "External links" section, and put them there. You should also learn how to format references. You can find out about citations at WP:CITE, and about formatting them at WP:CIT. You can also learn about what constitutes notability at WP:GNG, in general, citations should be in-depth from non-related sources. Typically those are newspapers, magazines, etc. (but not press releases). I hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 13:49, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

21:22:04, 31 August 2015 review of submission by Wills473


Dear One15969:

I'm not requesting a re-review at this time, but I have some questions for the reviewer.

I see that the response paragraph outlining your reason for declining my submission is boilerplate, so I’m not sure if all of the violations enumerated are actually a problem in my submission. For example, I don’t see an example of a peacock term, and also don’t understand the problem with my references.

Respectfully, I would appreciate it if you could point to examples of what you have in mind as violations of encyclopedic style. Also, the reviewer of the previous submission of the article cited length as a problem, but this version is much shorter. Can I assume the article’s current length is acceptable?

Best regards,

wills473

Wills473 (talk) 21:22, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]



Wills473 (talk) 21:22, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Wills473 - You're absolutely right, it is a canned response. To be more specific, peacock terms are those which build up the subject in a subjective way. Sometimes they are not grandiose terms, but are more simple, such as saying "major New York newspapers". Drop the major, it's subjective, and mean to puff up the comment. But I don't see a lot of peacock terminology. In your case, it's more of a style issue, phrases like "Edson’s father was educated, and driven to become wealthy", "the dream of a socialist paradise", "furnishing it on Edson’s modest salary was proving difficult", "He immersed himself in primitive backwoods life, fishing, raising corn, smoking his own meat, and cutting railroad ties for cash." "arrived in possession of the inside story of the Appeal to Reason debacle", "But Edson was not destined to remain long in this job either". These are examples of informal writing, not of an encyclopedia article. Your article is chock full of them.
In addition, you have quite a few statements in your article which make declarative statements, without any sourcing, such as: "a staple of newspapers at the time", "In the wake of a scandal Edson was dismissed, although he had nothing to do with the false reporting.", "But Brentano's, his publisher, felt that the book might stimulate more interest if promoted with a teaser advertising campaign." These are just a few.
Overall, there is way too much detail about his personal motivations, too much detail about each of the books. When you become overly detailed, that in and of itself is form of "puffing" up the subject. I hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 14:11, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Antoni Koper

Thank you for reviewing and accepting Antoni Koper. I realize that I could have created the article without submitting it for review by AFC, but I am eager to become a better editor, and hoped to learn how to improve my contributions based on the feedback. I have to admit, as I review the examples of other start class and c class articles, I am a bit disappointed and confused by the start class designation. Please don't misunderstand me: I don't mean to challenge or question that determination in any way. I just want to better understand it. I know this is a lot to ask, but would you be so kind as to offer me some specific advice about how I might improve the article to a c-class article?( Due to the limited verifiable encyclopedic content available on the topic, I doubt it will ever qualify for b-class.) I know the article needs an image; I'm expecting one to be available in the commons by the end of the week. But otherwise, I'm unsure how to proceed. Thank you in advance for any assistance or advice you might offer. Malcom Gregory Scott (talk) 21:45, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Malcom Gregory Scott - No worries. It was a borderline call, I relooked and moved it to a C. The difference is depth. I don't think anyone will argue with a C designation. Pictures are nice, but not required. There are C articles with no picture. No B articles, but C. Overall, nice job. Keep it up. And don't be afraid to ask questions. Onel5969 TT me 14:30, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for taking the time to reconsider. Your decision and your message are both very encouraging. Malcom Gregory Scott (talk) 21:03, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

22:15:35, 31 August 2015 review of submission by 108.222.145.105


Hi Onel5969, thank you for reviewing my article.

When writing this article, I made sure to follow Golden Rule and to use verifiable, independent sources (such as: Diario ABC Color and Primera Edicion Newspaper).

As far as the notoriety of the artist, if you simple Google "Pato Garcia" you can see pages and pages of results, including photos and videos. This is the biggest artist out for Missiones, Posadas and very well known not only in Norther Argentina, but in Paraguay, Italy and in the latin folk music world.

Please kindly re-review or provide me with suggestions as to how to improve this article. But it is a true shame that such an artist does not have his own wikipedia page.

Thanks!

108.222.145.105 (talk) 22:15, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - you simply need to add more independent sources, if they are that big, that shouldn't be an issue. You should have at least 4. Onel5969 TT me 14:35, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

review of submission of Tanveer Alam

please allow to create this page, u may find that he is have so many link on wikipedai and is notable person, please allow to creat this page,

Hi Mywhitefox - please see WP:GNG about how to show notability, and WP:RS as to what constitutes a valid reliable source (for example, imdb is not). And also take a look at WP:CIT about how to format citations. Onel5969 TT me 14:42, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi let me know please Mr. Tanveer Alam notable or not for wikipedia.... i found he is notable — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mywhitefox (talk • contribs) 08:23, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Re-review Crime & Punishment Brewing Co

Hi, Please could you take a second look at a draft page now that I've updated it:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Crime_%26_Punishment_Brewing&redirect=no

I've included external references from Travel + Leisure (Time Magazine's leisure edition) and Philly.com (the online wing of the Philadelphia Inquirer). Let me know if you need any further supporting evidence of notability. Manc1234 (talk) 10:10, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I recently tried to post a page explaining what CoalFace Capital is and you kindly edited it for me - I understand it may read like an advertisement but we are a new start-up and wanted to explain to people what it is about - I guess we are bound to be enthusiastic about our own pet-project! Could you suggest or make some changes that would help us to get the page published please? Many thanks in advance! Regards, Declan McEvoy (my email is declan.mcevoy@coalfacecapital.com - we are based in Dublin, Ireland) — Preceding unsigned comment added by CoalFace Capital (talk • contribs) 11:06, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi CoalFace Capital - Those are good citations, but the requirement for notability says, "substantial coverage". While those mention the brewery in quite favorable fashion, T&L is just a mention, not in-depth coverage. The Newsworks article is nice, as is the Philly.com you just added. If you could come up with another 2 like the Newsworks I think you'd meet the notability requirement. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 14:54, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 16:39:01, 1 September 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Paul Berkowitz


I received a declination notice for my submitted article on Leonard Berkowitz (1919-2007), indicating insufficient "notability."

I will attempt to locate additional references, such as newspaper articles, etc., and will also attempt to add further supporting narrative. However, I would think the already cited references in three books, along with cited references from universities, etc. would be sufficient. I'd welcome any specific suggestions you can offer.

Also, let me explain the initial motivation for submitting my article.

Previously, in your article on the Sierra Club's Ansel Adams Award for Conservation Photography, my dad's name (Leonard Berkowitz) was correctly listed as the 1973 recipient. However, the hyperlink w/ his name went to the incorrect person ... another "Leonard Berkowitz" born in the 1920s." One of the reasons for creating this new article is to correct that error, and assure the link goes to the right person. That apparently required the creation of a new Wiki article on my dad, Leonard Berkowitz (1919-2007), who was the actual recipient of that national award.

In the process, it seemed appropriate to address my dad's other accomplishments in music (along with photography). The result was the submitted article.

I will make edits/additions the article ... but, again, would welcome any specific suggestions you can offer.

Thanks,

____Paul Berkowitz https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Onel5969&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template%3AAfc_decline%2FHD_preload&preloadparams%5B0%5D=User%3APaul_Berkowitz%2FLeonard_Berkowitz_%281919-2007%29#____


Paul Berkowitz (talk) 16:39, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Paul Berkowitz - Your father might be notable, but there are two main issues with the current article. The first I did not know about until you contacted me, and that is you have a conflict of interest. These are not prohibited, but they are discouraged. You need to post a message on the article letting editors know about this. Second, the references currently provided do not meet the notability requirements. Take a look at WP:GNG and WP:RS regarding references. In a nutshell, they should be from independent reliable sources, and have in-depth coverage. In other words, your mother's book is out (for notability purposes). Other wiki articles are also useless. Take a look at WP:CIT about how to format citations. When you are using books as sources, you must ALWAYS give page numbers. If they have a link on something like google books, that's good too. I hope this helps. Don't be afraid to ask questions. Onel5969 TT me 16:57, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message

Hello, Onel5969! Thank you so much for your message regarding my article creation (Draft:HeliotropeBooks) that was declined. I will certainly be rewriting the article to comply better with Wikipedia's standards. Really appreciate your taking the time to reach out to me; I will be in touch at some point at the Teahouse. --Vitebella (talk)Vitebella —Preceding undated comment added 01:14, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Liu Bingzhang

Hi Onel5969, Can you please kindly enough to explain why this submission is rejected? Thank you. Irene — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ireneeng (talk • contribs) 03:15, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ireneeng - Hi. As the reason on the declination stated: the references don't meet the notability criteria. Please read WP:GNG as to what denotes notability. Also, please look at WP:CIT on how to format citations. When referencing newspapers, mags or books, page numbers are always needed, to allow reviewers to verify the information. This person might be notable, but I can't tell with the current references. They might also be a case of WP:BIO1E. I've posted this at the draft space as well, so that comments can be read there by other editors. Good luck. Onel5969 TT me 17:04, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

With 2 NYT, John Fairbank and DHofQ, you still think not enough references?! May I suggest you to brush up on Chinese history, just a little? Have a great weekend Irene Eng 00:42, 12 September 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Irene Eng (talk • contribs)

06:31:46, 2 September 2015 review of submission by JasmineJLM7


JasmineJLM7 (talk) 06:31, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, May I ask for a review of the article? I'm the same author of the similar draft, which was actually deleted by Wikipedia. Therefore, this is the update. Please review it soon, thank you:)

JasmineJLM7 (talk) 06:31, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi JasmineJLM7 - Don't see where it was deleted, only that it has been declined numerous times. Draft:BRAND’S is the version you should be working on. Onel5969 TT me 17:09, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Acadamics impact

Dear Onel,

with your last cleanup you accidentally deleted my last comment - I have added our conversation again below - thank you for your time and attention.

—————————

Thank you for re-rewiewing my article:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Wilhelm_Schneider


I have gone through the notability rules now for the third time and asking myself what else to do to comply with them: I found the following: "4. The person's academic work has made a significant impact in the area of higher education, affecting a substantial number of academic institutions.

Criterion 4 may be satisfied, for example, if the person has authored several books that are widely used as textbooks (or as a basis for a course) at multiple institutions of higher education.

->> I thought that this could be proved by accessing the kvk (German university meta search engine - see the references) and showing the circulation of a textbook within German university libraries. This information should be reliable - or do you see any doubts?

5. Criterion 5 can be applied reliably only for persons who are tenured at the full professor level, and not for junior faculty members with endowed appointments.-->> I tried to prove this by the official website of the university - why should a german state institution give false information on its website? Logically wiki states in its rules: "Many scientists, researchers, philosophers and other scholars (collectively referred to as "academics" for convenience) are notably influential in the world of ideas without their biographies being the subject of secondary sources." So what else can I do? I have referenced the article, given numerous publications, researched the circulation of textbooks - what else could be done? Thank you so much!

− 89.0.28.28 (talk) 10:47, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

− − : Hi. Check out a google scholar search. While you can't cite the search directly, it can help reviewers determine the notability of scholars (based on how often their works are cited. When it gets to that level, I usually let another editor who has more expertise in academics review. Here's a link. I hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 03:55, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

− − : Thank you for you nice comment. As I would base the notability as suggested in the rules by the circulation of the textbook that is just what I did. The kvk (http://www.ubka.uni-karlsruhe.de/kvk.html) is a german meta seaech engine powered by one of the leading technical universities in Germany. I just searched one textbook in the latest edition (there are two which have reached 4 and 5 editions respectively) and according to the kvk are circulated quite widely. With "wilhelm schneider" and google scholar (thank you!) you also find several articles and citations. With "wilhelm schneider" and jahresabschluss also some citations. Hope this helps 89.0.34.251 (talk) 12:12, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

12:18:46, 2 September 2015 review of submission by Rockefellerbm


Rockefellerbm (talk) 12:18, 2 September 2015 (UTC) Hi Onel5969,[reply]

I'm not necessarily requesting a re-review, I'd just like a better understanding of why it is that you declined my article.

You say that the page reads like an advertisement when I use hardly any subjective language. I simply outline the company's purpose, their history, and a few other pertinent items. I can't think of any portion of the article that portrays the company in a positive or negative light. So, if you could point to a specific paragraph or sentence that you take issue with, I would appreciate it.

You also mention that I do not include enough reliable independent sources. I recognize that on the first submission this was true, but I amended this issue prior to the second submission. I list: Reuters, yahoo finance, bloomberg, thebaltimoresun, and the company's website. I would say that all of those sources are both independent and reliable; certainly enough to establish notability.

So if you could just show me what it is that I'm missing in these areas, that would be great.

Rockefellerbm

HiRockefellerbm - anytime an article has a "services" section, it's pretty much an advertisement. In the history section, who cares what its sources of income was during inactivity, or what the opening price was - those are things investors/customers look at. Regarding sourcing, take a look at WP:GNG. There are two types of sources: those for verifying facts, and those to show notability. All of your current references are of the former type. To verify notability there must be "significant coverage" in independent sources. In other words, from sources not affiliated with the subject of the article, there must be several in-depth articles about the subject. Not mere mentions, or listings, or stuff from the company website. And press releases are not acceptable (not that you have them, but thought I'd mention it). Anyway, hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 17:48, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Nick_Wickham

Hi there. I have been receiving decline notices for an article I am trying to write (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Nick_Wickham) regarding notability. I am not sure where else to add, all of the references relating to him are directorial credits for work he has accomplished, including Grammy nominations and large big-screen films for some of the world's most famous musical artists. I'm not sure what to add if these credits are not enough, since to me this level of achievement equates to notability... Please let me know if you have any suggestions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PG1598 (talk • contribs) 13:14, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Not sure this guy will meet the notability requirements, which say that coverage must be "substantial". Most of the stuff I'm seeing is "mentions" of him: he did this, he did that, but nothing in-depth. Take a look at this news search, you might be able to find some articles which go into him in-depth. Usually, you need three or four. Also, please take a look at WP:CIT on how to properly format citations. If he had won the Latin Grammy, that would be a slam dunk. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 17:55, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Submission:Royal_Industries_Indonesia

Hi, Greetings, as a new article contributor I would like you to re-review the article I have resubmitted and suggest if I need to address anything. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Aabbsshhiisshh/Royal_Industries_Indonesia Aabbsshhiisshh (talk) 13:24, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Editor's Barnstar
Thank you very much for the time you spend reviewing submissions like mine. It is truly appreciated. Timoluege (talk) 16:18, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks so much for that, Timoluege! Keep up the good work. And don't be afraid to ask questions. I see one of your interests is in emergency response, have you ever taken a look at the article Emergency management? Could really use a knowledgeable editor in that field. Onel5969 TT me 17:59, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Article rejection

Hi Onel5969, Thanks for reviewing Dalal Times draft. However you rejected it on the grounds of it sounding like an ad. Could you please point out to the lines that sound like an ad so that i can edit them accordingly. Thanks, RahilRahil.sk (talk) 18:54, 2 September 2015 (UTC)rahil.sk[reply]

Already resubmitted. Onel5969 TT me 16:16, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

21:17:40, 2 September 2015 review of submission by Ewert333


Ewert333 (talk) 21:17, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Hello and greetings,

I received the message that our Clearfield Draft does not have a neutral point of view. I am unsure of what I could remove to make it read less like an ad and more like an encyclopedia entry, my thoughts are to possibly remove two of the CEO awards as they don't particularily pertain to the company, and removing Their "start to finish" fiber... because despite its truth, it could sound like an ad. I absolutely want to work with you and I am happy to change whatever stood out to you as not neutral, just let me know and I'll resubmit with the edits. Thank you for reviewing this article and letting me know. Regards, --Ewert333 (talk) 21:17, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ewert333 - That would help. But there are two issues. First, is the NPOV. Articles tell us about a company, ads try to sell us that company. The history section is fine, but the lead reads like an advertisement. Its fine to tell us what they produce, but when you begin to sell that stuff to us by explaining its benefits, and who the potential customers are, it becomes promotional. The second issue is notability. The Bizjournal article is good, but the rest are just mentions. Notability is established by "significant coverage". You'll need another 2 or more articles like the Bizjournal one to meet the notability criteria. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 16:34, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew Hastie

Hi,

I've made the changes you recommended to the references. Is there anything else it needs?

Thanks,

Klobfour.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Andrew_Hastie_%28politician%29#See_also — Preceding unsigned comment added by Klobfour (talk • contribs) 04:52, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

15:03:14, 3 September 2015 review of submission by Dj992


Hi,

I noticed you declined my article on grounds of 'notability'. I just wondered if you could go into some detail about what exactly you are looking for in order for an organisation to be considered 'notable', as I'm finding it a little difficult to know from the Wikipedia guidelines. Many thanks.

Dj992 (talk) 15:03, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dj992 - Notability requires "substantial coverage" from independent sources. This means a subject should be able to provide 3-4 in-depth articles from non-affiliated sources, usually books, magazines or newspapers. They shouldn't be listings, brief mentions, or PR. The first article is brief, and appears to be a PR piece. The second is an interview, and therefore not independent. Third appears to be another PR piece, same with #4. #5 is a bad link. #6 is not independent. #7 and #8 are mere listings. #9 is not independent, #10, 11 and 12 are simple announcements. I hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 16:46, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dr. Js Rajkumar

Hi onel5969.. Thanks for informing us that there is some copyright issue with the posted content. It made me surprised to see that wordpress link which has the exact content. We would like to get one more chance to edit the content of the wiki page "Dr. Js Rajkumar". We are not sure how the content had been copied. The wordpress link we are not aware of. This might be any trick done by somebody to create issue. But still we accept your point but request you to give us one more chance to edit the content for page creation and help us in resolving this concern.

Looking forward to your reply and suggestions. Thanks for informing us that there is some copyright issue with the content. Aarvig — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aarvig (talk • contribs) 05:32, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Aarvig - I've asked an admin to look into this. Sometimes there are "mirror" copyvio issues, which is what you are describing. Since the article has been scrubbed, I can't take a look at its history to see when it was created and compare that to when the Wordpress article came into being. As soon as I find anything out, I'll let you know. Onel5969 TT me 16:53, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again Aarvig. Here's the response I got, "The draft was created on 3 September, but the reviews on the wordpress page go back to May. The wordpress page may have been copied, but if it was, that just means that the text had been posted somewhere else before the first reviews in May. I can't see an earlier version here, but if the title was different in any degree I wouldn't find it." So, the text is copyrighted elsewhere, quite a few months before your article creation, so the copyvio assessment was correct. Sorry. Onel5969 TT me 21:40, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

14:26:54, 4 September 2015 review of submission by Roy Bateman


Roy Bateman (talk) 14:26, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello - I have just added more content and intend to add more over the next few days. However, it would be useful to do this in conjunction with the specific example of Cat Tien National Park: in a new section on flora which I propose to set up. Please also note that there has been a long standing suggestion that a new page be created for type of forest under Tropical and subtropical moist broadleaf forests: either with this title (my suggestion) or as 'semi-evergreen seasonal forests'. Creating this new page would help us to move forward. Roy Bateman (talk) 14:26, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Roy Bateman - Okay, I'll leave it up to folks who are more active in that area. I see you've resubmitted. Do you have any more references you can add? Maybe one or two, at least? Onel5969 TT me 16:58, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 15:03:27, 4 September 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by MaeDarla


Greetings, Onel5969 -

Thank you for your response and clarification. I realize I have a conflict of interest, and I'd declared it on my User page. My next iteration of the ID Wholesaler article will contain this in the page summary; my apologies for misunderstanding that.

Our industry is small, and we cater to a very niche B2B market segment. The reason we felt our organization was notable is two-fold. First, we've earned industry recognition for our exceptionally high standards and expertise. Secondly, we've also received many industry awards throughout the 11 years we've been in business. In addition to being named on Internet Retailer's Top 500 list for the past consecutive six years (pretty remarkable when Amazon, Target, and Apple are also recipients of this prestigious annual award), we hold esteemed recognition from the Online Trust Alliance and the Web Marketing Association, with an A+ rating from the Better Business Bureau and a 5-star rating on Trustpilot.


We have also authored two articles on behalf of our company -- one on Security Today and the other on Christian School Products. If these are not acceptable or citable sources, Onel5969, I understand.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

MaeDarla (talk) 15:03, 4 September 2015 (UTC)MaeDarla I have created this account to produce an article about ID Wholesaler. Pursuant to the guidelines established by Wikipedia for Conflict of Interest Declaration, this is a formal decree of my affiliation with and full-time employment at ID Wholesaler. I have produced the content for this article and believe that it adheres to the stipulations surrounding neutral POV, a context of non-promotional nature, and COI guidelines. I would be wholly grateful for editor assistance for the questions I will have. Thank you. MaeDarla (talk) 15:03, 4 September 2015 (UTC)MaeDarla MaeDarla (talk) 15:03, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi MaeDarla - Yes, please place that COI tag. Regarding notability, I understand the issue with it being a small market. However, WP:GNG and WP:NCORP are not tailored for different levels. If you can come up with another couple of articles like the Internet Retailer piece, that should put you over the hump. And any articles used should be independent, which would preclude you using those two written by the company. Sorry I can't be more positive, but I hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 17:50, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Decline of User:EmperorEric/Peter Ndu Iwegbu

Hello

I saw that User:EmperorEric/Peter Ndu Iwegbu was declined. I would like to understand better the reason for that in order to guide me better

thank you https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Onel5969&action=edit&section=new# — Preceding unsigned comment added by EmperorEric (talk • contribs) 16:00, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi EmperorEric - the article is currently simply a CV for this person, not an encyclopedia article. It also only as a single, non-independent source, so it doesn't meet notability requirements. Onel5969 TT me 18:01, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 18:26:21, 4 September 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Blippincott


Requesting Assistance on Approval for Article Submitted for Civility


Hello Onel5969,

Thank you for reviewing the recent article submitted for Civility ~ I saw the notice for the reason why it was not approved "The proposed article does not have sufficient content to require an article of its own, but it could be merged into the existing article at Incivility."

Was hoping that you could help point me in the right direction of what's missing, so that I can amend and resubmit the article. I've spent over a month working and gathering resources, and i've come this far ~ figured I'd work to finish the job!

Really appreciate any assistance you can offer on this! Thanks for your help.

Best regards,

Blippincott


Blippincott (talk) 18:26, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Blippincott - You know, you're right. After taking a second look, I think it could be moved to the mainspace. Resubmit and let me know here, and I'll move it. Onel5969 TT me 21:42, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Hi Onel5969 - Thank you so much for taking a second look ~ I really appreciate your consideration. I have resubmitted the page. If there is anything that stands out that needs improvement, I am happy to contribute my time to make things better. Thanks so much!

Best regards, Blippincott

Blippincott (talk) 09:05, 14 September 2015 (PDT)


Hi Onel5969 - Resubmitted the page earlier today as requested. However it was already declined by Racer Omega. Should I resubmit it?

Thanks, Blippincott

Blippincott (talk) 19:35, 14 September 2015 (PDT)

Yes Blippincott - I've put it on my watchlist. Onel5969 TT me 02:39, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Onel5969 - Thanks for the quick reply ~ just resubmitted it. Really appreciate your help on this ~

Thanks, Blippincott 

19:43, 14 September 2015 (PDT)
Hi Onel5969 - Noticed that when I resubmitted that it might have kicked it back.. got this message. Really appreciate your help on this!

Submission declined on 14 September 2015 by Racer Omega (talk). The proposed article does not have sufficient content to require an article of its own, but it could be merged into the existing article at Incivility. Since anyone can edit Wikipedia, you are welcome to add that information yourself. Thank you. You are encouraged to make improvements by clicking on the "Edit" tab at the top of this page. If you require extra help, please ask a question on the Articles for creation help desk, ask the reviewer that declined your submission, or get help at our live help chat from experienced editors. Find sources: "Civility" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR · free images · wikipedia library. Declined by Racer Omega 3 seconds ago.Last edited by Racer Omega 2 seconds ago. Reviewer: Inform author.

Thanks, Blippincott 

20:30, 16 September 2015 (PDT)

My article was declined

Username: 800Usability Link to article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Anthony_David_%22Tony%22_Andre

Hello,

This is my first time submitting to Wikipedia, so I would appreciate it if you could please provide me with more guidance on how to edit the article for resubmission. The more detail you can provide me with, the better. Two questions I have are: -How are the sources not verifiable? -What information in the article (not already cited) requires a citation?

Dr. Andre fits the following criteria for Nobility (academics): 1. The person's research has made significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources. 2. The person has received a highly prestigious academic award or honor at a national or international level. 3. The person is or has been an elected member of a highly selective and prestigious scholarly society or association (e.g., a National Academy of Sciences or the Royal Society) or a fellow of a major scholarly society for which that is a highly selective honor (e.g., the IEEE). 4. The person's academic work has made a significant impact in the area of higher education, affecting a substantial number of academic institutions. 5. The person holds or has held a named chair appointment or distinguished professor appointment at a major institution of higher education and research (or an equivalent position in countries where named chairs are uncommon). 6. The person has held a highest-level elected or appointed academic post at a major academic institution or major academic society. 7. The person has made substantial impact outside academia in their academic capacity.

This demonstrates Dr. Andre's notability.

Thank you so much! 800Usability (talk) 19:13, 4 September 2015 (UTC)800Usability[reply]

Hi. 800Usability - Not seeing those conditions met in the article. His scholarship (#1) is the closest, but a search on scholar does not return an impressive # of citations of his work, which is the key indicator for that. But it is borderline. Don't see him receiving an international award of any significance. He's not an elected member of a highly selective society, nor a fellow of a major scholarly society (the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society doesn't qualify). Don't see a chair or distinguished professor appointment. Nor do I see either 6 or 7 fulfilled.
In addition, the article has an npov issue. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 21:52, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

22:11:44, 4 September 2015 review of submission by Ryanbenyo


Hi There,

Thank you for taking the time to review the article I wrote. I was just wondering why you found the organization to be not notable? Other similar organizations like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Kids_Rock as well as the band of the organizations founder https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trapezoid_(band) both have wikipedia pages.

There are also many other wikipedia articles that reference the organization. So wouldn't it be useful for a page to exist for it?

If it had to do with the sources I used, all of them were 3rd party newspapers or official non-profit regulation sites/orgs, etc., and every line in that article was cited.

The organization has been around for 15 years and has won many awards (all of which have their own wikipedia pages) and released albums on record labels which also have wikipedia pages.

I am more than happy to make any revisions necessary but would it be possible to elaborate specifically on what needs to be changed in the article?

Thank you kindly for your time and consideration.


Ryanbenyo (talk) 22:11, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ryanbenyo - First off because other articles exist which perhaps shouldn't, doesn't mean that this one should. That's an argument called "Other Stuff Exists". To show notability, there has to be "substantial coverage", and the sources must be independent. Cites 2,6,7,8 are not independent; #1,4,5 cites are not in-depth; cite 3, is a bad link. And in regards to the other articles, I looked at one of them, and while borderline, it has several good citations to show the group's notability. Currently, none of the 8 you have go to notability. I hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 22:07, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew Hastie (politician)

Hi, I've just re-converted this article to a redirect per the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Australian politics#Andrew Hastie (politician). I think that you erred in approving this article given that WP:BLP isn't met (especially due to WP:ONEEVENT - Mr Hastie is only known for his political candidacy, with his Army career actually being a state secret until he resigned a few weeks ago to stand for election given that he was a member of the secretive Special Air Service Regiment), and the text of the article was massively promotional and frequently not supported by the sources given. The consensus of editors who have discussed this article at WikiProject Australian politics is that this isn't a viable topic for an article at present given previous precedents (unless someone is notable prior to standing for parliament, they're not considered notable until they're actually elected), and I'd encourage you to join that discussion rather than restore the article - your judgement at AfC doesn't override that of other editors in subsequent forums. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 22:58, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nick-D - Perhaps I did err. But I don't think 3 editors discussing a contested redirect (which was never brought up in the discussion) is the way to go. The article was created. The redirect is contested. If you feel strongly, put it through the AfD process. In my opinion, based upon the breadth of coverage, this individual clearly meets WP:GNG. Take care. Onel5969 TT me 03:31, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I think that I disagree with you about the process here, but that now seems moot given its at AfD. As a bit of feedback, it's worth spot-checking facts in articles such as this - the version which was approved included several politically motivated claims about living people which weren't supported by the references provided (for instance, that the news report about Mr Hastie's unit in Afghanistan was "controversial"), and read like it was written by Mr Hastie's campaign staff. There a bit of a history of Australian politicians suddenly developing biography articles such as this ;) Regards, Nick-D (talk) 04:04, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Nick-D. I agree that the article needed clean-up, and you did a nice job of it. The AfC process is not to put perfect articles onto the mainspace, but to approve articles which meet the notability criteria. For instance, there are articles which have nothing but bare url's as references, that's not grounds per the AfC process to prevent them from being approved. If an article is simply an advertisement, than that would be grounds for declining. But while this article had some stuff which didn't belong, the vast majority was cited and pertinent. Even one thing you deleted (about the importance of the election, I think it was), probably could have remained in the article, since it went to notability about the importance of this particular election. Regardless, I appreciate it you and I working in a cordial fashion to getting this resolved. All the best. Onel5969 TT me 04:22, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your Undid about badis baids

Dear Onel5969 I don't know you. Any way you are welcome and always. Okay, I am not a fisheries expert but have a great curiosity about fisheries. Information I added may not be constructed but correct. You could correct those information; But Why did you delete?

B. Regards Md. Abdul Latife, Sabuz Abdul.latife@msn.com Cell: +8801199209140 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abdullatifesabuz (talk • contribs) 05:30, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(visitor to this page) You added the word 'dferterger' which appears to be meaningless. The only way of editing that was to remove it. Peridon (talk) 17:19, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Onel5969. You have new messages at Peridon's talk page.
Message added 17:08, 5 September 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Peridon (talk) 17:08, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Decline of article on a historical Jewish civil rights organization

I started an article at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Board_of_Delegates_of_American_Israelites which has been declined, but I don't see why. The reasons given cite that "secondary sources" are needed, but the article is built from 9 unique sources (1 primary and 8 secondary); that it is not encyclopaedic, though it passes no judgment on the actions of the organization, uses no laudatory language, etc. If you are looking for content from (Neo-)Nazi organizations, none such is extant, as Neo-Nazis do not tend to target historic organizations which have since been absorbed into other entities in their anti-Semitic assaults. Do you have any specific reasons why the secondary sources used would not be acceptable or why the neutral presentation of the piece is anathema? SHLAMA (talk) 15:28, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Beautiful Liar (VIXX LR album)

I see that you have flagged the article as copy paste. I can assure you that I have not copy pasted anything from that blog into the Beautiful Liar (VIXX LR album) wiki page, I haven't even seen that blog before. Not to mention, as this is the first time I see that blog post it looks as if the content was copy and pasted straight from that page if you see the reference citation tag [1] in it, it's clear they that have copy and pasted it from Wikipedia.Alicia leo86 (talk) 17:26, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Alicia leo86 - you are absolutely correct, when I checked to see it is was a mirror copyvio issue (which is what you describe above), for some reason I picked up the August 17 date in the article, rather than the August 24 date which the blog was published, which was after you published the Wikipedia article. I've removed the tag. Thanks for alerting me. Onel5969 TT me 13:30, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

barnstar

The Feather Barnstar
For both creation, and review, of Good Articles. LavaBaron (talk) 17:57, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

17:54:55, 6 September 2015 review of submission by RFreeman5713


Just responding; not a request for a re-review. Thanks. RFreeman5713 (talk) 17:54, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your helpful comments. I will work on improving the citations. It may take me some time. Is there a deadline?

Hi RFreeman5713 - No, there's no deadline. If a draft sits untouched for 6 months, a warning is sent out saying that it could be deleted if you don't respond, but that's all. Good luck with it. Onel5969 TT me 13:31, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Message from Sharktrager442

Sharktrager442 (talk) 20:01, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there Onel5969,

Many thanks for reviewing my article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Ari_Norman

I was actually pleased that your rejection was based on tone (I thought I might need to work on that) as I have spent quite some time on the citations. I am now going to give it a more suitable tone edit and see what happens!

Best

Shark

Hi Sharktrager442 - cool. Good luck! Onel5969 TT me 13:35, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV - how to improve

Hello Onel5969, thank you for reviewing one of my contributions, Center for International Environment and Resource Policy. You have tagged it as disputing its NPOV. Please let me know how can the article can be improved. I am always eager to make the best contributions possible, and if there is something that you think is sub-par, I'd appreciate if you could let me know. Thank you. (talk) user:Al83tito 21:08, 06 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Arttalk1984 Please advise me how to make the tone neutral as I thought I had done it. Also re: citations. Have I enough or are they in an incorrect format? I had clicked on the Reference tab, icon on the toolbar and put them in there. Should some be as Footnotes? Arttalk1984 (talk) 10:12, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Arttalk1984 - it's a very well structured and written article. The citations look fine, and footnotes are unnecessary, but you can always feel free to add them if you feel they are pertinent. I only see two issues with the article, both relatively minor. The first is the most minor, and that's a formatting issue. Section headers only have the first word capitalized (obviously except when there is some sort of title or proper name in the section header). The second is the POV/advertising issue. Although structured well, the lengthy publication section, and the in-depth profiles of the leadership section give the article a promotional feel, almost like it's a CV for the organization. The other portion of the POV is that it only puts a positive face on the organization. Is there any negative stuff from valid sources out there? If so, it should be included to balance the article. It's good that you put the comment on the talk page, perhaps other editors will get back to you as well. Anyway, I hope this helps, and I hope you understand what I mean above. Take care and happy editing! Onel5969 TT me 13:45, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Onel, thank you for your feedback. Following your advice I have addressed your first point: Section headers only have the first word capitalized.(talk) user:Al83tito 16:38, 06 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding the second part of your feedback:
    • I will look into the possibility of any critical commentary in media about the organization. However, this is an academic institution with a primary activity being producing research. It is possible that such organization does not have any notable/published criticism. It is true that the bios of the leaders may look flattering, but I guess that it is also normal that reputable scholars are also members of other institutions like being part of a group of White House advisors, and recipient to awards, like being a co-recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize. So if no criticism exists, what do we do in such case? Many other wiki articles of academic institutions do not have a "controversies" section...
    • As a related point to this just above, you point out that the personal biographies are too long, while you also seem to hint that other content is missing. Maybe we could reduce the length of those profiles, I think that would make the article feel more "dry", and get closer to NPOV. After this adjustment, we could change the tag from a NPOV, to maybe one that indicates that the article, or some sections of it, could be expanded. What do you think?(talk) user:Al83tito 16:55, 06 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Onel, could you please weigh in these proposed changes? Before embarking into doing them, I'd like to know whether in your view they are worth doing.Thank you. (talk) user:Al83tito 14:29, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Arttalk1984 Neutral and Citations

Arttalk1984 Please advise me how to make the tone neutral as I thought I had done it. Also re: citations. Have I enough or are they in an incorrect format? I had clicked on the Reference tab, icon on the toolbar and put them in there. Should some be as Footnotes? Arttalk1984 (talk) 10:13, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Arttalk1984 - Another editor, JSFarman - gave you some insight to this already on the draft page. But I'll see if I can expand. Don't make observations, don't add commentary, don't use glowing adjectives. Simply report about the subject. Observations/commentary are statements like: "From student days in Manchester he was determined to become a professional painter"; "confirmed Shoa's egalitarian commitment"; "From 2013 Shoa's painting evolved into a brighter imaginary world — very different from the dire events documented in his previous period"; and "Artistically it measures up". Also avoid phrases like "Shoa's objective behind his four 2004 shows" - don't tell us about objectives. Simply tell us about the show.
Regarding citations. At the draft I gave you a link to WP:CIT, which gives you examples of how to properly format citations. I've redone the first citation, so that you have a concrete example of one way to properly format. Be sure that you use the actual title of the underlying cite, not the subject of the article. And if there is an author, you must include them by adding " | last=last name | first=first name " inside the brackets as well. I hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 14:03, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

12:12:16, 7 September 2015 review of submission by Gritsva


I'm still editing, but is citation 9 the format you're looking for? This is my first full submission, so I would appreciate time to adapt to the style before you delete weeks of work! I'm going to continue editing assuming that is the style for the time being. Gritsva (talk) 12:12, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gritsva - First of all, editors don't delete work on drafts (unless it's a copyright violation). You have as much time as you need to work on it. Second, yup, that's the correct format. Hope this helps, and good luck! Onel5969 TT me 14:09, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Art Nalls

Hi Onel5969. I've made some changes to make the Art Nalls article more neutral and would appreciate your review if you have time. Thanks. Skeet Shooter (talk) 13:25, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Skeet Shooter - I'll take a look at it today, and let you know. Onel5969 TT me 14:42, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

I have seen you edited before Copa del Rey, maybe you can help me with this unique articles about Spanish Cup if you are interested : Copa del Rey Topscorers and Copa del Rey Topscorers by Season. Improve them a beat to be accepted, thank you.Alexiulian25 (talk) 20:19, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Aquarian Family Festival undelete request

Xb2u7Zjzc32 (talk) 04:02, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Xb2u7Zjzc32 - That's not how it works. You don't "undelete" an article that's gone through the AfD process. You can recreate it, but based on those additional links you provided above, not seeing the notability. Onel5969 TT me 14:44, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

08:10:30, 8 September 2015 review of submission by Zohaib248


Zohaib248 (talk) 08:10, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I have edited my page keeping in view your feedback, you previously stated that the article seems advertorial and needed improvements. Please review the new edited version and let me know if it eliminates the flaws identified in the previous submission.

Awaiting your response

Sincerely,

Zohaib

Hi Zohaib248 - The tone is definitely better. Beware of using PR pieces masquerading as magazine articles. Anytime an article gives the company website, or pricing, it's pretty much a pr piece. e.g. the GQ piece or the pastemagazine spot. The Vogue and Forbes are nice mentions, but they don't go in-depth into the company. The Wired article is perfect. If you have 3-4 like that, you show the notability. The ZdNet is a nice piece (although it could have been more in-depth).
Beware of simply listing stuff, like "Shwood was mentioned in GQ..." (probably all those cites are pr pieces). Incorporate the content of the articles (not press releases), into the prose, and then use the cite. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 15:05, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Adicts Page Correction

Onel5969, you undid my recent contribuitions to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Adicts, but it was a mistake. I correct the european label of Punk and Psychobilly "I Used To Fuck People Like You In Prison" name, in the page named "People Like You". It is a real german label.

Hi. Not finding it. Every instance I can see for that label (and there are quite a few), has it simply as People Like You Records. In fact, their website supports this. Onel5969 TT me 15:09, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ryan Skyy article

Hello. My username is Anthonywgibson and I'm writing to follow-up on the Ryan Skyy article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryan_Skyy) you reviewed or declined. The reason for decline was that the article did not prove notability for Ryan Skyy. Can you kindly explain how we might improve this and/or reconsider? We included a source to Billboard.com that show Ryan as a Billboard-charting artist. We read that if an artist charts on a national chart such as Billboard Wikipedia considers that as proof of notability. We also included articles from national print and online publications including CBS, Huffington Post and OUT Magazine which all wrote on Ryan and his music. Charting on Billboard and receiving coverage by major publications we felt established notability. We appreciate your input on this. 

 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anthonywgibson (talk • contribs) 21:51, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Anthonywgibson: Well, considering Ryan Skyy has now been locked because it was started too many times, that draft will need better coverage to able to survive any criticism and would to at least meet WP:GNG. Please take your time and improve the article whenever you can (if better coverage exists if not, simply wait) before resubmitting. Cheers! SwisterTwister talk 07:41, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@SwisterTwister: Thank you for the info. What would be considered as "better coverage"? I thought that articles in CBS, Huffington Post, Out Magazine, and charting on Billboard's Dance Club Songs charts was better coverage. I don't understand why he's not being considered notable in these circumstances. Thank you for your help.

Thanks

Thanks Onel5969 for reviewing and accepting our Article entitled: "Polypurine Reverse Hoogsteen hairpins:PPRH" My username is: Cjciudad The link to the article is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polypurine_Reverse-Hoogsteen_hairpins Now, we would like to improve the article. Do you have any suggestions. We would like to get at least to the level of Good Article (A,B or C) Thanks a lot Cjciudad — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cjciudad (talk • contribs) 11:07, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cjciudad - My best advice is to take a look at the classification guidelines. You can find those here. Normally, I would also say that you could ask questions on the talk page of the project which is most closely aligned with the article, which is Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Molecular and Cellular Biology, but you could also ask on the genetics project talkpage, which is Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Genetics. I hope this helps, good luck, and welcome to Wikipedia. And don't be afraid to ask questions. Onel5969 TT me 13:43, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A brownie for you!

Thanks for your time Cjciudad (talk) 11:12, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

16:41:38, 9 September 2015 review of submission by Arrt75012


Good evening, I am trying to create a Wikipedia page on Philippe Adrien, who is a well-known theatre director in France. My draft has been declined twice because there are not enough "reliable sources". I don't understand this rejection, because i have inserted almost 20 references and sources in the article. I personally work for his own theatre company, ARRT/Philippe Adrien, so i have access to many reliable sources. The only explanation which comes to mind would be that all the sources i cite are in French ; but there are no sources in English about Philippe Adrien's life and work, which is exactly why i am trying to create this Wikipedia page. He is currently creating for the theatre a theatrical adaptation of Mark Haddon's best seller The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time, by Simon Stephens, and i would like English speaking people to be able to document themselves on Philippe Adrien, as i think they might be interested. Thank you in advance for your answer. --Arrt75012 (talk) 16:41, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Arrt75012 (talk) 16:41, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Arrt75012 - the language of the source is irrelevant. But here is the issue: there are 2 basic types of references, those for verifiability and those for notability. Those for notability have to be from independent secondary sources, and they should be in-depth. All the citations from Théâtre de la Tempête are not independent, since Adrien is associated with it. YouTube is not a reliable source. Interviews are not secondary sources. Videos from sources like theatre-video.net are like YouTube, and not considered a reliable source for notability purposes. Several sources don't appear to be about the subject such as the encyclopedia article on KANTOR TADEUSZ, and using other Wikipedia pages don't count. There also don't appear to be 20, but approximately 10, with most duplicated. Of those, all are covered in the above explanations, with the exception of the book by Cramesnil, but there are no page #'s to ascertain whether it is a mere mention or in-depth. I hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 20:25, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Charles Garland

Thanks for the advice. I am a little bit green on how to use Teahouse, so I thought I would leave you a message first. The background is that I am working with a guy called Charles Garland on a project for The Rolling Stones' new global exhibition which launches in London next year. As you will probably appreciate, Wikipedia is becoming increasingly the gold standard for business related enquiries and I wanted to ensure that anyone checking out Charles can find an accurate reference to his background in entertainment.

As far as I can see, he is the only person in history who has been CEO at different times for both Simon Cowell (X Factor) and Simon Fuller (American Idol). My first attempts were shown up as being too much PR puff - so I cut this out and found references to Charles in 2 separate books - one about Simon Cowell and the latest one about "Consigliere - great number 2s". One of the instrinsic problems is that Powerful Media types don't tend to employ Number 2s who are high profile.

His background is very stella - having worked on the Beckhams, X Factor, American Idol, The Spice Girls and One Direction, so there is no shortage of evidence of his work, but it relates more to news stories drawn from press releases rather than independent references apart from the 2 books which I have now used as references.

A good comparative point is a man called Chase Carey, who runs News Corporation for Rupert Murdoch. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chase_Carey His career structure is not dissimiliar to Charles - and looking at his entry - it reads like a resume.

Also for comparison - here is an entry for a UK media executive which is a reconstructed CV - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaun_Gregory - how is this permitted when my entries keep being rejected?

What am i doing wrong?

Really keen to get advice as to how I can create an entry for Charles which fulfils the necessary criteria.

Thank you in advance.

Lee Lee Roberts 1968 (talk) 16:54, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Lee Roberts 1968 - I agree that the article on Gregory reads a bit like a CV, and it also has some other issues, which I've tagged the article for. However, I wouldn't put the article for deletion, because there are good sources out there which verify his notability (WSJ, City AM, Media Week, The Drum, and others). There's no comparison between Carey and your article. Carey's does not read as a CV, and it is well sourced by independent sources (LA Times, Reuters, Newscorp, and BusinessWeek). There's no arguing the article is week, and could use improvement.
Your draft, on the other hand, has just 2 sources. The second book gives no indication of what pages he appears on. Is it just a mention, or is there a chapter on him? If it's simple mentions, it doesn't help for notability purposes, since notability isn't transferable (in this case from Cowell to him). And the book isn't even only about Cowell, so it most likely won't help. Cowell's autobiography - the same issues. We need references which come from independent, reliable sources, and are in-depth about Garland. They may be out there. Take a look at a Google News Search. On the first page, I found 2: this from Billboard, and this one from the Hollywood Reporter]. Neither are ideal, since they are so short, but if you come up with 5 or 6 like that, notability would be pretty much assured. If others are more in-depth that would be better. Anyway, take a look at that search, and see what you can come up with. More than happy to take another look after you had references. Oh, one last thing, take a look at WP:CIT on how to format citations. Good luck. Onel5969 TT me 20:56, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence & more questions

My username: 800Usability Article: Draft:Anthony David "Tony" Andre

Hello Onel5969, I have elaborated on 3 criteria for nobility in academics for which Dr. Andre meets, although the requirement is that only 1 of the 9 listed criteria is met. Please review and let me know what else you need for evidence that Dr. Andre has made a substantial impact in his discipline.

Additionally, Criteria #3 offers IEEE as a major scholarly society, so why doesn’t the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society quality? Both are major scholarly societies and Dr. Andre has had journal articles published in IEEE, SAE, AIAA, and HFES, just to name a few.

Listed under Criteria #1 (below), I have offered the first three pages of search results when searching for “anthony d andre.” This result yielded only a small fraction of all his publications. How many search results or citations are required to be considered “an impressive # of citations of his work?” How do I list evidence for Criteria #2 without it looking a CV?

Criteria #1. The person's research has made significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources.

Searched Google Scholar for: anthony d andre

Google Scholar Results pg1

Wickens, C.D. and Andre, A.D. (1990). Proximity compatibility and information display: effects of color, space, and objectness on information integration. The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 32(1), 61-77. doi: 10.1177/001872089003200105 -Cited by 228 Andre, A.D. and Wickens, C.D. (1995). When users want what’s not best for them. Ergonomics in Design: The Quarterly of Human Factors Application, 3(4), 10-14. doi: 10.1177/106480469500300403 -Cited by 163 Andre, A.D., Wickens, C.D., and Moorman, L. (2009). Display formatting techniques for improving situation awareness in the aircraft cockpit. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 1(3), 205-218. doi: 10.1207/s15327108ijap0103_2 -Cited by 91 Foyle, D.C., Andre, A.D., McCann, R.S., Wenzel, E.M., Begault, D.R., and Battiste, V. (1996). Taxiway navigation and situation awareness (T-NASA) system: problem, design philosophy, and description of an integrated display suite for low-visibility airport surface operations. Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) Technical Paper 965551. doi: 10.4271/965551 -Cited by 90 Andre, A.D. and Cutler, H.A. (1998). Displaying uncertainty in advanced navigation systems. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 42(1), 31-35. doi: 10.1177/154193129804200108 -Cited by 44

Google Scholar Results pg2

Andre, A.D. and Wickens, C.D. (1992). Compatibility and consistency in display-control systems: implications for aircraft decision aid design. Human Factors. -Cited by 39 Hooey, B.L., Foyle, D.C., and Andre, A.D. (2000). Integration of cockpit displays for surface operations: the final stage of a human-centered design approach. Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) Transactions 109, 1(2000), 1053-1065. -Cited by 38 Andre, A.D. (1995). Information requirements for low-visibility taxi operations: What pilots say. In R.S. Jensen & L.A. Rakovan (Eds.), Proceedings of the Eighth International Symposium on Aviation Psychology, 484-488. Columbus: Ohio State University. -Cited by 31 McCann, R. S., Foyle, D. C., Andre, A. D., & Battiste, V. (1996). Advanced navigation aids in the flight deck: Effects on ground taxi performance under low visibility conditions (No. 965552). Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) Technical Paper. -Cited by 32

Google Scholar Results pg3

McCarm, R. S., Andre, A. D., Begault, D., Foyle, D. C., & Wenzel, E. (1997, October). Enhancing taxi performance under low visibility: Are moving maps enough?. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (Vol. 41, No. 1, pp. 37-41). SAGE Publications. -Cited by 28 McCann, R. S., Hooey, B. L., Parke, B., Foyle, D. C., Andre, A. D., & Kanki, B. (1998). An evaluation of the Taxiway Navigation and Situation Awareness (T-NASA) system in high-fidelity simulation. SAE transactions, 107, 1612-1625. -Cited by 27 Andre, A. D., Hooey, B. L., Foyle, D. C., & McCann, R. S. (1998). Field evaluation of T-NASA: Taxi navigation and situation awareness system. InDigital Avionics Systems Conference, 1998. Proceedings., 17th DASC. The AIAA/IEEE/SAE (Vol. 2, pp. F23-1). IEEE. -Cited by 25 Krozel, J., Capozzi, B., Andre, A. D., & Smith, P. (2003, August). The future National Airspace System: Design requirements imposed by weather constraints. In AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conf. -Cited by 24 Mei, S., Blakeslee, J. P., Côté, P., Tonry, J. L., West, M. J., Ferrarese, L., Jordan, A., Peng, E.W., Andre, A. & Merritt, D. (2007). The ACS Virgo cluster survey. XIII. SBF distance catalog and the three-dimensional structure of the Virgo cluster. The Astrophysical Journal, 655(1), 144. -Cited by 361

Criteria #2. The person has received a highly prestigious academic award or honor at a national or international level.


Criteria #6. The person has held a highest-level elected or appointed academic post at a major academic institution or major academic society.

2010- President Elect of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society


800Usability (talk) 17:38, 9 September 2015 (UTC)800Usability[reply]

Hi 800Usability, sorry but the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society isn't anywhere near the stature of the other societies. None of his awards are also notable enough. The citations are quite low, and don't meet the notability requirements either. We'd expect to see citations in the high hundreds at least, and that if they had several at that level. But another editor may see it differently. I won't review it again, and see if another editor has a different view. Onel5969 TT me 21:06, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 18:14:09, 9 September 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Woodrowwilson1912


I'm not sure why this article was declined? There are multiple, verifiable, secondary sources throughout the article. Other law firms in New Jersey have wiki pages with less, secondary sources (see Wilentz Goldman Spitzer and McCarter & English and Hoagland, Longo, Moran, Dunst & Doukas). What is the issue? Thanks.

Woodrowwilson1912 (talk) 18:14, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Woodrowwilson1912. First, 15 of the 18 citations are not from independent sources. Of the other 3, is a listing, another is from politicker.com, which isn't a reliable website, since it exists for promotional purposes. That leaves the NY Times piece, which I can't view because it's behind a pay firewall. But even if it is an in-depth piece, which I doubt from the title, that alone wouldn't qualify for notability. Second, you have a COI issue which was disclosed, and needs to be on the talk page of the draft. Third, regarding other law firms, that's an other stuff exists argument, which isn't valid. We need sources from independent secondary sources (usually newspapers, magazines or books), which are in-depth about the firm. Onel5969 TT me 21:19, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 21:05:34, 9 September 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Bonnie13000


I am curious to know the specific reasons why you felt read like an ad. Could you tell me which part you have problem with so that we can improve? Is that relevant to the language of our references since many of them are not English? We are eager to know and improve as soon as possible.

Thanks! Bonnie

Bonnie13000 (talk) 21:05, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bonnie13000 - Articles tell us about the subject, advertisements attempt to sell us the subject. When an article has lists of products, lists of trademarks and patents, and frames things like you do in the philanthropy, innovation, training & initiative, Sustainability and Organic Textiles, are all highly promotional. Also, you need to drop any TM, R, or copyright symbols. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 21:28, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Getting another editor to review

Username: 800Usability Article: Draft:Anthony David "Tony" Andre

Okay, so how do I find another editor to review my article? 800Usability (talk) 21:21, 9 September 2015 (UTC)800Usability[reply]

you resubmit and wait. Onel5969 TT me 21:28, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Ekhanei.com

I think you are wrong on several counts.

  1. Subjects need to be notable only for an article inclusion. Notability is defined by coverage in mainstream. You declining the article is a violation of Wikipedia notability policies.
  2. Every single information (apart from one that was directly attributed to the source) was from third party reliable sources. Either you have not understood WP:V/WP:RS or you have not checked any of the sources before making a decision.
  3. Facts without superlatives are neutral. If you think otherwise then I advice that we check WP:NPOV.

Now that all of your reasons for the rejection are quite suspect, can you please be a little more specific about your reasons? Where exactly did it violate WP:V or WP:NPOV? How exactly is this non-notable? And which part reads like advertisement?

After creating dozens and dozens of articles over decades, getting several of them to featured and good article status, I try the AfC. And, if this is a regular example of how things are done there, may be the system is not just working. Prods and AfDs work much better. Regards. Aditya(talk • contribs) 03:19, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Vicars' Close, Wells/GA1

Thanks for your comments at Talk:Vicars' Close, Wells/GA1. I have attempted to address them and explain on the GA review page but would appreciate if you would take another look.— Rod talk 08:10, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Rodw - Good job on the edits so far. I left my new comments on the GA talk page. Only one or two more changes, and it's good to go. Let me know when you finish, and I'll take another look. Onel5969 TT me 12:44, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

List of accolades received by Dookudu

This, is my first attempt at the FLC. If interested, please leave your comments here. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 08:51, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Richard Gasquet

Why did you erase my edit on Richard Gasquet ??? M. Héry — Preceding unsigned comment added by M.Héry (talk • contribs) 10:17, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi M.Héry - same reason I reverted it a second time - it is very poorly written, with bad grammar and construction, to the point where it is barely comprehensible. Finally, it is an uncited entry in a blp, which even if it was well-written, would get it deleted. Onel5969 TT me 12:15, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

13:20:57, 10 September 2015 review of submission by Peterkortvel


Hello, do you think I should try to rewrite? Is the problem of the article the copy or it is more about the resources? Thanks Peterkortvel (talk) 13:20, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Peterkortvel - Not sure. The current references don't show the notability of the company. You need 3-4 references from independent, secondary sources (usually mags, books or newspapers), which are in-depth about the company. If you can find those references, then by all means, re-write to get rid of the promotional tone. Google has an option for "News" search, that is a great place to start. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 13:34, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

14:12:06, 10 September 2015 review of submission by Essl Foundation


We have now tried to make it work formally, and we do hope that this is what you asked for. If the reason for declining us the second time is also a lack of trustworthy quotations, which is not clear from your statement, we do not fully understand this: the Zero Project is quoted and cited by various UN organizations, by the European Union and by dozens of respectable NGOs and businesses, as shown by our list of references. Why is that not good enough or not notable enough? 99 % of Wikipedia-entries have not been covered and explained by the New York Times or similar trusted sources, and still have made it. Please explain the problem better so that we can solve it. Thank you.


Essl at the Essl Foundation 14:12, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi Essl Foundation - I declined it because there are no references which support notability. All the current references are non-independent. To show notability, you need 3-4 references from independent, reliable sources (usually mags, books, or newspapers), which go in-depth about the subject (not merely mention it). A Google News search is a good place to start for those types of sources. Also, please look at WP:CIT on how to format citations, that helps the reviewer. The article, albeit brief, still has a slight pov issue. Beware of stating opinions, only state cited facts, (e.g. "With the website, reports and conferences, the Zero Project disseminates and promotes its research.", "It provides a platform to share the most innovative and effective solutions to problems that persons with disabilities face."). Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 13:40, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Arrt75012

Good afternoon, this is Arrt75012 again, about the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Philippe_Adrien_(English)

Thank you very much for your answer, it really helped me understand how this works. I improved the layout and format of the page, and added some links within the text, about the authors and the books I quote. If I understand correctly, the only two sources considered reliable in the article were the one from the BNF (Bibliothèque Nationale de France), http://data.bnf.fr/14653242/philippe_adrien/ ; and the book about the Cartoucherie written by Joël Cramesnil. I added the page numbers that were missing to the quotes from this book, so that people who wish to document themselves some more could effectively see that the linked information is indeed in-depth. I added many links, from newspapers, official and non-official websites, which are reliable because Philippe Adrien is not linked with them in any way.

Please tell me if the corrections and adjustments I made are not sufficient, and if you see a part of the article that still needs improvement.

Thank you for your attention and follow-up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arrt75012 (talk • contribs) 14:28, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Arrt75012 - I think it passes the notability test at this point. However, I think the issue becomes one of POV. Even though you've resubmitted it, you can continue to work on it. Might I suggest you get rid of any commentary. Just state facts. Sentences such as "It would be impossible to separate Philippe Adrien’s artistic journey ...", "a dramatic repertoire such as this could not ignore the anxiety and the curiosity", need to go away. They are not encyclopedic. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 01:16, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

13:13:31, 11 September 2015 review of submission by Molamolax


Hello, I have edited the article to include external references both from external websites as well as internal wikipedia pages that reference this article. How can I improve it?

Thank you

Molamolax (talk) 13:13, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Molamolax - In regards to the article, remember it's an encyclopedia. So, doing this like having a list, ending in an elipse are a no-no. Also, don't use other Wikipedia articles as references. It's okay to wikilink to them in the text like you did with Barbershop Harmony Society, but not as a reference. The big issue is the notability. You need 3-4 citations which come from independent, reliable references (such as magazines, newspapers or books), and which cover this society in-depth. References such as the group's own website, barbershop websites or organizations, don't go to notability. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 01:24, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 14:04:41, 11 September 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Sethjohnson1987


Sorry, I am confused on why Allmusic.com, one of the largest music guide services is not a good enough reference to show this person's notoriety? - Josh Hoge - songwriter

Sethjohnson1987 (talk) 14:04, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sethjohnson1987. It's okay for verifying facts (e.g. they wrote this song), But not for notability purposes. To establish notability you need 3-4 citations which come from independent, secondary sources, and which are in-depth about the subject. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 19:41, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Article Revisions

Hi-thanks for the feedback. I've revised to make the tone more neutral. One thing I had hoped was the article name could just be the person's first and last name, instead of including the middle name like the draft currently does. Looking at other athlete's articles I think it just looks cleaner. Is that possible? Thanks.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Charlotte_Frances_Drury

Username: Cizzlewizzle

Cizzlewizzle (talk) 15:07, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cizzlewizzle - Nice job. I've moved it to the mainspace. The early life section still could use a bit of work, it is very informally written. Anyway, congrats! Onel5969 TT me 01:35, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ekoa Article

Hello.

For the recently declined Ekoa Article at the below link, I have two questions. First, what would be required for sufficient content for the article to be approved? Second, if I incorporate this article into the Blackbird Guitars article, then it would be odd in that the second application listed in the Ekoa article draft is for sports equipment produced by another company, which is partly why I submitted a second article. What would you recommend that I do to address these other applications of Ekoa that are unrelated to Blackbird Guitars?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Ekoa

Thank you for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.124.145.254 (talk) 20:54, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 205.124.145.254 - Right now, you could add 3-4 sentences to the Blackbird article, and cover all the pertinent information included in this article. You've structured and sourced your article very well, it is simply a case that this substance has been developed so recently, that there is not enough about it to warrant a new article at this point in time. Another editor might feel differently, feel free to resubmit, and I won't comment on it, and see. If you could expand it with pertinent information, that would help. The History section also needs a reference. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 12:05, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Kuah Jenhan article draft

Hi there,

Thanks for editing our article - appreciate the time. Just wanted to ask what you meant by saying that YouTube wasn't a reliable source. For Kuah Jenhan (the article in question), most of his work is backed up by videos by notable corporations and magazine titles (for example: Smirnoff Ice Malaysia and Esquire Magazine Malaysia).

Is there a way where we can improve our article and ensure that it won't be declined again?

Also, noted on the citation guidelines. We will improve them but just wanted to make sure that everything is in line before it's declined again as waiting for resubmission takes a while.

Appreciate the time!

The link is at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Kuah_Jenhan Teamkjh (talk) 08:37, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Teamkjh - YouTube has no editorial oversight, therefore does not meet the standard of a RS. In other words, Kuah Jenhan could be posting videos of themselves. Posting about yourself doesn't make you notable. Similarly, sites like Facebook, Twitter, LinkIn, other social media venues are also not reliable. Sites connected with the artist (their webpage, label webpages, venue webpages) are also not RS for notability purposes (although those can be used to verify underlying facts in the article). For notability purposes, you need 3-4 references from independent, reliable, secondary sources, which are in-depth about the subject (in other words, not just short mentions, listings, or brief paragraphs). Also, be aware of maintaining a neutral POV, as well as an encyclopedic tone. Avoid phrases like "His third and most poignant ...", " same show (but with 20% more material) 6 months ", "into the realms of the ", etc. Finally, this is a blp (bio of a living person), so if you state a fact, it needs a ref, and it needs to be from a reliable source. If you can't reference something, leave it out, for example, the stage, television and solo shows are almost completely without references. Lots of this article could be cut, since it's trivial, but what remains, needs sources. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 12:19, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your comment on my proposed page "Casa Coraggio" in Bordighera

Dear Onel5969, I was a little surprised by the unfavourable review of the page I drafted on “Casa Coraggio”. First of all because my article is the translation of a 6 month old article on wikipedia.it, which is also present on wikipedia.fr. I took the initiative of translating and editing this and other buildings pages of Bordighera for the many English visiting Bordighera – as this small village became a touristic place because of the Brits as you can see at Bordighera.

I am a regular user of Wikipedia and feel “Casa Coraggio” satisfies many of the “notability” criteria you mention. It has indeed received Significant coverage in three independent books on Bordighera or George McDonald as well as three websites on Bordighera, George McDonald and Clarence Bicknell – all appear to be reliable and are independent of each other and of the city of Bordighera. I checked only these 6 which appear to me the most relevant, because Google gives hundreds of results for “Casa Coraggio” and tens more for the different versions under which the building is known (i.e. “Bravery House” in English).

George McDonald appears to be a major British author and Casa coraggio played a big role in his life. He lived there for 16 years and produced much of his writings such as The day boy and the night girl (1882), The princess and curdie (1883), The flight of the shadow (1891) and his most famous one Lilith (1895).

The building is Historic as identified by city plates and touristic tours. Having a page has indeed an encyclopaedic vocation as the local library still maintains first editions of all McDonald’s books – linking Casa Coraggio to its most prestigious host. When it became a hotel, his former presence drew many writers to the place, including Edmondo De Amicis who wrote there his most famous book, Heart, so famous that it even has its EN facebook page.

Trusting that the elements given above will help us design a better page, I remain waiting for your advice.

Frederico07 (talk) 11:17, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Frederico07 - Each Wikipedia has its own standards for notability. English wiki, the largest, has the highest requirements for notability. There needs to be 3-4 citations from reliable, independent sources which are in-depth about the subject, in order to show notability. See WP:RS as to what constitutes a reliable source (usually newspapers, magazines and books), and WP:NOTABILITY as to what constitutes notability. I hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 12:25, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
(visitor's comment) Having a Facebook page is not an indication of notability here - every man and his hamster can have a page there. (I don't - unless someone's created one about me that I haven't seen...) Peridon (talk) 20:57, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dr JS Rajkumar

OK - would you like to have a look at this one? Linked on my talk page. I think he's probably notable, but I'm not so sure about the refs. The IJCP one looks like a profile, but the other two don't look bad. Knowing CPR isn't particularly unusual - I'm trained in it, and know a lot of others who are too. But none of us have had occasion to do it for real. (Cleaning abrasions, dressing wounds, first response to fractured skulls and other fractures, yes, been there but didn't get a T shirt.) Doing it on a surgeon on an aeroplane is unusual. If you choose to take this assignment, this message won't self-destruct (through any doing of mine anyway - I don't know your computer...). Peridon (talk) 20:50, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No problem Peridon - I'm not seeing the notability with the current references. Of the 6, only one goes to notability - the account of his CPR - and even that's weak, since he is simply mentioned in the article. Having said that, a quick look at Google News, and it's pretty clear this guy is notable. There's at least 5 good citations on the first page. You want me to answer on your talk page? Or do you want to respond? Onel5969 TT me 21:05, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You can explain if you like. And add any refs you think are suitable. That's what this is all about - I delete 'em or take 'em to AfD, and other people rebuild 'em. Probably against the rules, somewhere... Peridon (talk) 21:27, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I responded on the draft. I think there's an article there. Onel5969 TT me 12:51, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Jennings Novels

Can you explain why you deleted my summary of a Jennings novel? I can't see the logic of it. I've just read the book and surely an (admittedly rudimentary) summary is better than no summary at all.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jennings_%28novels%29#List_of_novels — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.212.129.24 (talk) 08:12, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - Simple, because it wasn't a summary. It was a teaser, and therefore un-encyclopedic. Summaries don't question the reader. Onel5969 TT me 12:36, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I am going to respectfully disagree with you on this. In the case of that particular subject and seeing that all the other summaries are similarly short, I think it was a perfectly adequate way of refreshing the memory of anyone wanting to know which Jennings novel it was (which is I think the whole point of that section). But I don't care enough to discuss this any further. I'll just say it doesn't do Wikipedia a lot of good to see "good faith edits" summarily removed for that flimsy a reason. Maybe you should have tried to edit my contribution instead of simply removing it. Oh well!
You can disagree. You'd be wrong, but you can disagree. WP has a style guide which explains this. Onel5969 TT me 15:08, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Glenn Charles Andrew Alexander

Hi Onel5969,

Thanks for your review for the Glenn Charles Andrew Alexander page. You declined the submission, because it included material that did not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. After reviewing the page, I have added one citation, and removed an improper citation. Please advise if this is not sufficient and let me know if there are more improvements I could make.

Additionally, you mentioned that the tone was promotional, so I have removed two phrases, which I concur were promotional. Please point out any remaining sections you would deem promotional in tone.

Thanks for your help!

All the best :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chinese Teddy (talk • contribs) 18:49, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Chinese Teddy - Almost there. The promotional tone is gone (it wasn't much, but in such a short article, it stood out). The info about the first book still needs an inline cite, as does the stuff in the early life section. This is a blp (bio of a living person), so it needs to be well-sourced. Also, even though the sources are in Chinese, the titles in the references should be translated into English. Make those corrections and you're good to go. Let me know when you have and I'll take another look at it. Onel5969 TT me 13:52, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi onel5969 - I have added a citation for the first book and removed the early life section. I have also translated the reference titles into English. Please let me know if the article requires any further amendments.Chinese Teddy TT me 14:23, 26 September 2015 (EST)
Hi Chinese Teddy - Nice job. Moved it to the mainspace. Onel5969 TT me 12:06, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Charlotte Drury

Hi there. Regarding your edit to the above article, I'm wondering if you noticed my original edit's summary. And if so, is it somehow insufficient? Cheers.--173.35.178.65 (talk) 23:14, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

So if there's no objection I'll revert to my version?--173.35.178.65 (talk) 22:06, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dato' Sri Lee Ee Hoe, JP

Hi Onel5969,

Thank you for your advise on: No citations in some places and WP:CITEKILL in others.

I have edited and amended where necessary. Thank you.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Dato%27_Sri_Lee_Ee_Hoe,_JP

Best Rdgs, Wendy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wendyapplenian (talk • contribs) 03:37, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Wendyapplenian - Nice job on the citations. You'll need citations for each of the awards (if you've already mentioned the awards in the text, and used a citation there, that's okay). The International business ventures section is almost wholly unreferenced still. I say Dato meets the notability standards, but the entire article is way too promotional. Just give facts about the man, don't embellish with peacock words and descriptions. And also don't include "intentions", just state facts. Hope this helps. One other thing, even though a citation is in a foreign language, the reference in the article should be translated into English (in other words, the footnote should be in English). Onel5969 TT me 16:24, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Onel5969,

Thank you again for your kind advise. I have revised and amended the article and kept it simple and precise.
Thanks again. Wendy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wendyapplenian (talk • contribs) 04:42, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nice job Wendyapplenian - still a little informal (phrases like "his love of travel"), but I've moved it to the mainspace. Onel5969 TT me 15:13, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much again for the invaluable advise Onel5969. Greatly appreciate it!

Paul Dean (Jerusalem)

I would humbly suggest your research has been totally inadequate. This guy has 100's of thousands of followers, fans and friends on Social Media Worldwide. He wasn't just a member of Jerusalem, he was 'Jerusalem', which everyone in Rock music knows. An album which was remastered and reissued on CD and vinyl in the last few years. Both are now on their 4th pressings. Ask any 'Star' or 'Music Business professional' from the 70's who Paul Dean is and they will tell you. One of the founders of Metal, Doom, Stoner years before it became commercial Worldwide. Very disappointed how Wikipedia now seems to have lost the plot. I and others will certainly never bother to create articles again, a total waste of time as they can be rejected by people who have no idea whatsoever about the subject. It should be horses for courses! — Preceding unsigned comment added by MetalmanUK (talk • contribs) 06:06, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi MetalmanUK - My "research" is your research. It is not the job of the reviewer to research, but simply to evaluate what the article creator has done. So if the research is inadequate, what does that tell you? Onel5969 TT me 16:26, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GrapeSEED article

Hello Onel5969! Thank you so much for your review of the GrapeSEED article! I think I may have figured out what I was doing wrong. I have now added references to verify what is explained. If you have the time, would you please take a look at the updated article? Please let me know if I am still not understanding what needs to be done. Any specific examples of issues would be extremely helpful. And if I need to provide a certain number of references for approval, please let me know. Any help you can provide is greatly appreciated. This is obviously my first article and a great learning experience, but I am having trouble moving forward. Thank you!! --Duch0404 (talk) 14:46, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Duch0404 - Looked it over briefly, and now, in terms of citing for verifiability purposes, it looks okay. The problem at this point I think is one of notability. Notability is different than verifiability. Notability requires that the subject be covered in independent sources in-depth. Independent sources are usually mags, books or newspapers. The mags can include trade journals. Currently, I'm not seeing that in this article. For example, the refs you provide to show that Grapeseed is in different countries, are fine to show that, but they are all dependent sources, since they are now affiliated with the organization. Same with the WASA pdf. I couldn't open the TESOL link, but if that one is what I believe it to be, that would be a good source. You'll need 2-3 good articles, along with your other cites, to establish notability. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 13:20, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Onel5969, Thank you for the excellent feedback! This is very helpful. One more question, two other references I included are news articles: 1. WNDU news (ref #13) is not associated/independent with GrapeSEED, but they wrote an article on the program. 2. SouthBendTribune newspaper (ref #10) is not affiliated and is independent of GrapeSEED, but they also wrote an article on the program. Can you help me understand why these don’t count as independent sources? In the meantime, I will look for more articles. Thanks again for your help! --Duch0404 (talk) 14:43, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 16:30:08, 14 September 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Springbank1


I received a notice that my article on Carl Holsoe was rejected because it included unattributed quotes from copyrighted sources. In my original article, I quoted from other sources and was careful to put the quoted materials in quotation marks with a footnote to the source of the quote. Apparently in the transmission to Wikipedia that footnotes were lost.

I am writing to ask for assistance in transmitted my original article to you with the quotations, footnotes and some photographs of Holsoe's paintings which I was also not able to transmit.

As you can see, I am having difficulty with the format you to received proposed artile.


Springbank1 (talk) 16:30, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Springbank1 - It goes beyond the lack of footnotes for the quotes (which are definitely necessary). There are large swaths of the opening, the Life section, and the second paragraph of the Artistic career section which are basically copied from the source I noted. Beware of copyright violations, and even of paraphrasing. Take a look at WP:CITE and WP:CIT to see how to properly add citations, and to format those citations. I hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 01:41, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

banks

Billion-dollar banks are often notable, and it's at least a claim to significance. DGG ( talk ) 06:04, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi DGG - but these are virtually completely unsourced. Where there was one, I clicked on the bank's page in either French or German wiki, and the articles there are also stubs and virtually unsourced. Others were better sourced, and so I left them alone. Onel5969 TT me 12:40, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Unsourced is not a reason for deletion, much less speedy deletion; unsourceable is a reason for deletion at AfD and Prod, but not speedy. I would expect sources in swiss newspapers and trade magazines, many of them probably not online. If some are sourced , the others are almost certainly sourceable. The practical results at AfD go 1/2 the time according to the GNG, and 1/2 the time according to what people think reasonable. DGG ( talk ) 14:45, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
DGG - I wasn't saying that I prodded it or CSD'd any article because it wasn't properly sourced. I prodded it because I didn't think it was notable, and didn't think there would be any objection to it. I don't think the size of an organization should be the sole arbiter of notability. Some of the foreign articles have been there since 2007 with no citations. My initial google search didn't show enough about the bank to make me feel it would pass an AfD. Anyway, take it easy. Onel5969 TT me 01:49, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

08:11:26, 15 September 2015 review of submission by Sbrissaud


Sbrissaud (talk) 08:11, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The article your are linking to in your refusal is unaccessible without a subscription to autonews. I can't access it.

Hi Sbrissaud - I have no subscription, and have no trouble opening it. Don't know what to tell you. Onel5969 TT me 12:42, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

13:14:24, 15 September 2015 review of submission by Jzsj

I have added several additional references, including the most complete history of Catholicism in Belize and the leading newspaper in Belize. As to the prominence issue, I hope that we don't accord more prominence to politicians who serve just a few years with no notable achievements than we do to people who serve the country, as Stochl did for over 60 years, as headmaster of the country's most prestigious high school for 9 years, founder of the high school equivalency program at this college while director of its Extension School, Director of Catholic Radio programming for 10 years and commentator on Radio Belize for 34 years, Secretary of the Belize Prison Fellowship, and therefore well-deserving recipient of Belize's Meritorious Service Award.Jzsj (talk) 13:14, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Jzsj (talk) 13:14, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jzsj - It has nothing to do with according anyone more or less prominence. It has to do with notability guidelines. Those require that there be substantial coverage of a subject. The bare minimum is 3-4 in-depth articles on the subject from independent sources, usually books, magazines and newspapers. Right now you only have one which meets those qualifications (the Woods book). If he was that prominent, surely there have been articles written about him. Onel5969 TT me 01:56, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Please check my last draft. Why do you discount Amandala which is the largest circulation newspaper in Belize? And why not credit National Jesuit News and the website of the National Garifuna Council? PLease understand that there are very few books published in Belize: these are laid-back people and what books are published are generally at one's own expense. They're not money-making ventures where only a tiny percentage of the people speak English as their first language, though it's taught in the schools. Generally speaking, Kriol is the home language around Belize City, Spanish in the North, Garifuna in the South, and Mayan in the West. I ask that you consider more realistic criteria for notability in a country that is very unlike the United States, and accept that the array of 8 different sources is indeed impressive for this country, including the very substantial history book referenced four times.

19:24:16, 15 September 2015 review of submission by Dx Rep


Hi There! I hope you can help. I am going to edit this submission again and hope to successfully submit it. Can you give me a little more detail as to why it continues to be declined when there are other mattress companies that are very similar? Essentially, this was modeled after them - so we are concerned why there's are published and ours keeps getting declined. The main difference that I see is number of references. Examples include -- Hastens, Casper, Vi-Spring -- even Sleepy's. Please advise.

Thank you

Dx Rep (talk) 19:24, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dx Rep (talk) 19:24, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dx Rep - Just because there are other bad articles isn't a valid argument to add more bad articles. Your article suffers from three issues. First, it has an informal tone, an example would be "Efraim Ljung was so fascinated by the comfort of a hotel bed that with a small pocket knife, he cut open the mattress to discover a flexible spring system". Second, while it doesn't read as much like an ad, it still has elements, such as "The Duxiana brand encourages consumers to customize their bed support using the Pascal System. The Pascal System is a patented bedding system that allows the consumer to adjust the firmness of their bed based on their needs" - Even though it's cited, it's definitely promotional. The third, and perhaps most major is the sourcing. Duxiana is a major brand, there are better sources out there (right now the only really good one you have is the Crain's article). Here's a WSJ article. I hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 02:15, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

resubmission of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Jacques_Habra

Hello Sir/Madam,

Would you please be so kind as to advise me on your rejection of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Jacques_Habra

I made edits on the last rejection based on a lack of notability and some of the TALK advisors told me it should be accepted this time - but it was not.

Could you give me some specific items to adjust and re-visit.

This man, Jacques Habra, has been a pioneer in the field of Web technology and entrepreneurship since the mid 1990s and continues to lead some very notable initiatives. I do hope we can add him into the Wikipedia database.

Thank you,

Jackie Nishimoura Jnishimoura (talk) 22:49, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jnishimoura - I was pretty specific, albeit brief, in the comment I left when I declined the article, but I'll go into more detail. Please take a look at WP:CIT on how to correctly format citations. Of the ones I could verify, most did not go to notability. Some are interviews (such as #1), which are primary sources, so therefore can't be used to show notability. Others are mere mentions of Habra (such as #3, 15, 17, 18), while others don't mention Habra at all (such as #27), and some are simply PR pieces (such as #23). Of all the ones I looked at, only #20 was a decent article about Habra. I think there may be other ones there, but in their current state I couldn't verify. Hope this helps.Onel5969 TT me 12:15, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Re, John Burgess record producer article

Frankum62


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:John_Burgess_(record_producer)

Hi I recently submitted an article which has again been rejected I am new to this so would appreciate any help you can givve me on getting the article published. I am not sure how I can show notability. Are you able to help me add some thoings to show this before re-submission. I would greatly appreciate it as feel like giving up, after spending days collating all the information He was certainly notable in the industry as was part of the British invasion of music in to the USA in the 60s, producing some of the most famous British bands of the time with his business partner Sir George Martin, and he was also the co founder of Air studios I have added 2 additional references today

I would really appreciate any help you can give me in my quest to have the article accepted Thank you Best wishes Laura mckay London, England — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frankum62 (talk • contribs) 17:44, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Frankum62 - He very well might meet the notability criteria, but the current sources don't show it. The Obit helps, but it would be nice to have 2-3 more articles about this person which go into depth about him like that. If you could come up with another 2, I think you're definitely there. Also, I formatted a couple of the references, so that you can see a correct way to do it. I hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 12:33, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Anniyan

Hey Onel. It's been quite a while. How are you? Do let me know if you would like to give this article a copyedit by pinging me. Thank you. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 01:34, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ssven2 - If you can wait until this weekend, I could get to it then... Onel5969 TT me 12:35, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
User:Corinne said she would take up the copyedit. Maybe you can do the c/e before its FA. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 12:42, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

02:23:59, 16 September 2015 review of submission by ResearchAssistant952


To Whom It May Concern:

The message is in response to your comment that Brenda Elaine Stevenson does not meet the WP:PROF standards. According to the Wikipedia:Notability (academics) page, Stevenson must meet one of the following conditions. I have briefly addressed how she is qualified in at least six of those categories below:


1. The person's research has made significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources. She has contributed to the field of slave studies and racial conflict studies. For example, she was the first scholar who contested that slave families were of a nuclear and male-headed structure within American slavery. She also was the first historian to publish a book about the lesser-known gendered influence that initiated of the 1992 riots of Los Angeles.

2. The person has received a highly prestigious academic award or honor at a national or international level. Stevenson has been distinguished for awards on both national and international levels. For example, she has received the Berlin Prize from the American Academy in Berlin; the Ida B. Wells Award for Bravery in Journalism from Women’s Enews; the UCLA Gold Shield Faculty Award; the Organization of American Historians, James A. Rawley Prize, Best Book on the History of Race Relations in the U.S; Gustavus Myers Outstanding Book Prize, amongst many other fellowships.

3. The person is or has been an elected member of a highly selective and prestigious scholarly society or association (e.g., a National Academy of Sciences or the Royal Society) or a fellow of a major scholarly society for which that is a highly selective honor (e.g., the IEEE).

She is a fellow of Gilder Lehrman, National Humanities Center, Center for Advanced Study and Behavioral Sciences, the Smithsonian Institute, Virginia Foundation for the Humanities and Public Policy, and UCLA.

4. The person's academic work has made a significant impact in the area of higher education, affecting a substantial number of academic institutions. 5. The person holds or has held a named chair appointment or distinguished professor appointment at a major institution of higher education and research (or an equivalent position in countries where named chairs are uncommon). She has been chair of both the History Department and Afro-American Studies at UCLA.

6. The person has held a highest-level elected or appointed academic post at a major academic institution or major academic society. 7. The person has made substantial impact outside academia in their academic capacity. She has been on numerous public radio stations, such as KCRW (Los Angeles), and feminist blogs, such as UnitedWomen.org and Cross-Generational Dialogues in Black Women's History, as an interviewee for her expertise in race relations and American history.

8. The person is or has been the head or chief editor of a major, well-established academic journal in their subject area. She is an editor of the Black Studies Journal and The Journal of African American History.

9. The person is in a field of literature (e.g., writer or poet) or the fine arts (e.g., musician, composer, artist), and meets the standards for notability in that art, such as WP:CREATIVE or WP:MUSIC.

I ask that you please reconsider publishing the article on Brenda Elaine Stevenson. If not, can you please provide me with feedback as to why she does not qualify, or give me some specific suggestions on how the article can be rewritten to meet the notability standards.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely, ResearchAssistant952

ResearchAssistant952 (talk) 02:23, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

09:33:01, 16 September 2015 review of submission by Ifr ko


Hello,

I would like to understand why the draft was declined. The article was written with many sources and it is not promoting the brand. It is giving general description of the company and then talks about the licenses which is required to prove regulatory authorizations. Later on it gives bried history and thus I do not see any promotions in here.

Can you please review the article again and if you still feel like it is not appropriate then please give guidance on how to fix it. Your help is much appreciated. Thanks.

Ifr ko (talk) 09:33, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ifr ko - In essence, an advertisement sells, an article tells. Your article is designed to sell the services of this company. Listing services and licensing, and then listing what the licenses allow the company to do, is promotional. I haven't checked it for notability, but please also format citations as per WP:CIT, that will help in the review process, once the advertising aspect is finished with. Beware of press releases, and of press releases disguised as articles (like #12). Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 17:27, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

13:31:43, 16 September 2015 review of submission by Doctor Mellifluus


Thank you for reviewing the article. I have made changes with regard to sources and tone as well as working on deleting peacock terminology. Would you kindly look at the article and let me know if further changes need to be made before resubmitting?

Thank you!

Doctor Mellifluus (talk) 13:31, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Doctor Mellifluus - Tone is much better! It would be nice to have 1-2 articles about the group from mainstream sources, but you might get it passed as is. Onel5969 TT me 15:04, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Urgent - Tom Cridland Draft

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Tom_Cridland

Hi there,

I'm writing in reference to the article above which you've just rejected as it "reads like an advertisement". I've edited this a lot and it is now just a series of factual statements, backed up by articles in very notable international newspapers and news broadcasters, none of which were "written by the topic, paid for by the topic, their website, or press releases".

I am, therefore, not sure how it can be corrected to comply more with the Wikipedia guidelines, or how many more extremely noteworthy independent sources would be required for the article to be approved.

I hate to be a pain, but could you point to areas in the article that you do not think are facts backed up by notable sources and, rather, "read like an advertisement"? I really want to get this sorted and make any changes you feel are necessary asap.

Thanks very much in advance,

Tom — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tpjcridland (talk • contribs) 16:14, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tpjcridland - stuff like "his trousers are owned...", "30 year guarantee", and the heavy reliance on quotes from Cridland are the issues. For example, the quote about T-Shirt campaign is okay, but you should talk more about the campaign as outlined in the Telegraph article. Or simply get rid of the quote, and still talk more about the campaign. Make sense? Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 15:19, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there,

Thanks very much for your feedback. I've removed all the direct quotes. The 30 Year Guarantee was what made the campaign noteworthy and was mentioned in by almost all the notable news sources I've listed, so it would seem odd to not include. Would you be able to read over the corrections that I've made and let me know whether you think the article would be ok to resubmit please?

Thanks so much again,

Tom — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tpjcridland (talk • contribs) 17:12, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again Tpjcridland - I cleaned it up a bit, removed the last promotional stuff. I also formatted the first reference correctly, so you can see how it's done. Format the rest, then resubmit and I'll move it to the mainspace. Would be nice to learn a little bit more about the trouser company (stuff like that can be sourced from the company's website). Onel5969 TT me 20:11, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again,

Have corrected the references. What more would you add from the website, which is tomcridland.co.uk? Would there be any way one could add the company logo as a photo on the page? I'm not sure how to add one of those sidebars. Anyway, I've resubmitted it, so do let me know if anything still needs changing!

Look forward to hearing from you.

Thanks very much,

Tom — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tpjcridland (talk • contribs) 21:21, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Tpjcridland - Hi, it looks good. Obviously another editor, Gparyani did not feel that it had enough sources. I thought that articles in the Times, the Telegraph, Huffpo, the Independent, the Guardian, and This is Money satisfied the requirement. Hopefully they'll chime in here. Onel5969 TT me 13:16, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I rejected it on notability grounds for lacking a credible claim of significance. This article is about a company, so if it does not contain a credible claim as to why it may be notable, it will be speedily deleted under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion if moved to article space. Plus, the creator appeared to have a conflict of interest, as the username appears to match the name of the company and its founder. The decline reason for notability is rather awkwardly worded in my opinion. Gparyani (talk) 16:33, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Gparyani, and thanks for your input. But significance according to the link you provided above is a lower standard than notability. Since the company would appear to meet the notability requirements of WP:GNG, due to the sourcing above, why would it not then clear the lower standard? It would also appear that this company meets both WP:NCORP and WP:CORPDEPTH. I had not noticed the similarity in the name, so you're right, potentially a COI notice should go on the talk page, but that doesn't preclude the article from going forward, now that the advertising issues have been resolved. Thoughts? Onel5969 TT me 20:13, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I understand what you're saying, but even though a subject may actually be notable, and there are many sources to demonstrate so, if it lacks a credible claim of significance, it meets criterion A7. A claim is another word for a statement, and the article contains no statement as to why it's notable. Due to this, though I use both sources and content to evaluate notability, I use only content to see if there is a credible indication of significance. (I've done this for a long time as a new-page patroller - no one has objected with me, and almost every article that is like that that I tag with A7 later gets deleted by an admin under that criterion.) Gparyani (talk) 21:28, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gparyani & onel5969,

I'm really confused as to why the article hasn't been accepted. Could you give me an example as to "statement as to why it's notable"?

I've never tried to hide the COI and always signed off Tom! Quite frankly, at least I'm being honest and not getting another employee to do this for me. The brand has achieved notability, as demonstrated through countless noteworthy news and broadcasting sources and references, through our sustainable fashion campaign, The 30 Year Sweatshirt, which is described in the article (or the "content").

Could you please clarify what can be done to rectify this situation? I do not feel it is very fair that a single Editor can decide whether he or she feels our our "content" has a "credible indication of significance", even if the BBC, Telegraph, CNBC etc etc disagree with them.

Tom — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tpjcridland (talk • contribs) 23:05, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Tpjcridland: As I said earlier, only article content is used to determine if there is a credible statement as to why it's significant (though sources are indeed used to establish notability, which is a different, but similar, thing). An example of such a claim is one that says that the company has made millions of dollars in revenue, and another is one that says that the company has sold many thousands of shirts. The reason why your article lacks such a statement is that there isn't a sentence anywhere that states anything about its significance.
If you want more help, I suggest you go to our forum for new users, the Teahouse. User talk pages like these are usually only watched by the owner of the page, talk page stalkers, and those that have been pinged here (like me).
As for the "preceding unsigned comment added by" showing up next to your post, that's added by an automated script, not by an individual editor. The reason why we require posts to be signed with ~~~~ is so that we can quickly access the user and user talk pages of editors, and see when something was posted, without having to dig through the edit history. Gparyani (talk) 03:31, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Vadim Lashkaryov

Thank you very much for your comment. I included references to Lashkaryov' paper to "Solar cell" and "p-n-junction" sections.2601:19B:200:D462:6161:DC10:2BE3:8820 (talk) 13:26, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Coventry and Warwickshire Reinvestment Trust

Hi , would you be kind enough to help me understand the edits required on the cwrt page? Is the 'advertising' feedback about the awards and detail of the services perhaps? I thought those things were relevant because of the specific focus of cwrt in regeneration- tbh I'm a bit stuck on what needs changing so any help you can provide would be very welcome! Thanks. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Coventry_and_Warwickshire_Reinvestment_Trust WhatWouldBilboDo (talk) 13:52, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Jassy pal: - It's really in the aims and awards sections. You've already covered the aims with the brief statement in the History section, to repeat it again is simply promotional, as is the additional info in the aims section. In the awards section, drop the mention of awards won by other companies. That should cover it. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 19:35, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

15:48:33, 17 September 2015 review of submission by Eskipper


Hi, thanks for reviewing my article! I think I addressed the issues in the Products section, but if not, please let me know what specific words are raising red flags and I'll give it another try. I ended up removing the Partnerships section because I couldn't find a way to make it neutral, and the article is still useful without it.

I also added a company info block. I saw one on another company article and I thought it would be helpful here.

This is my first article, so I appreciate your patience. Thanks!

Eskipper (talk) 15:48, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Eskipper - looks good. Inofbox is definitely a good thing. Resubmit. Onel5969 TT me 19:40, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Jeff_Teravainen

RE https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Jeff_Teravainen

Hello Onel5969,

Sorry to bother you, but I am out of ideas. I completely redid this page. I viewed multiple actor pages to make sure I did not miss anything. I provided more references then many I used for reference!?

References like a CBC instudio news interview with Jeff, actually showing some of his work? Newspaper articles interviewing him.The Dark Matter creator's own popular blog talking about him and showing pictures etc. An interview on Sirius Satellite Radio and many others.

Again, I am not trying to whine here, but every single comment on the page has a real source. CBC is Canada's national Broadcaster for example.

Anyhow help would be appreciated.

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Namarow (talk • contribs) 16:10, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Namarow If there aren't any better sources, it's unlikely the article wouldbe able to hold and without someone questioning its depth of sourcing. The other alternative would be to mention him at the closest article but it seems he is not mentioned at his besy known TV show. SwisterTwister talk
Hi Namarow - SwisterTwister nails it on the head. The sources are not there for this article. Wordpress references are, for the most part, unreliable (since they are self-published with no editorial oversight). YouTube, wikia (and facebook, linkedin, etc., for that matter) are also non-reliable. Same thing for bios like the I'm Just Saying. The Inside Toronto is a nice article. 3 more like that, and you'd definitely meet the notability requirements. The Dark MAtters recap isn't really about him, and the Our Windsor is really just a copy of the Inside Toronto article. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 19:46, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Draft: Félix Aubert

Hi,

thanks for your comments on Draft:Félix Aubert. Unfortunately WikiProject: Visual Arts doesn't have a set of style guidelines for articles, and I presume the main problem was that the article wasn't divided into sections. (If it wasn't, please do tell me.) I'm thinking of therefore breaking it down into the lede, a section on his artistic career, one on his career as a teacher and then famous works, or where you can see them. I'm not sure if that's too many sections for such a short article though? Any advice is gratefully received. Red Fiona (talk) 17:55, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Redfiona99 - Looks good. You probably could have left the teaching and artistic careers combined, but separating them isn't an issue either. If the teaching section was even slightly shorter, you shouldn't have broken it out. When you format headers, only the first word (unless it's a title), is capitalized (like I did with the first section). Resubmit and I'll move it to the mainspace. Onel5969 TT me 19:49, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, will do. And thanks for all your help. Red Fiona (talk) 20:42, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Just resubmitted. I wanted to say thank you again for all your help. Red Fiona (talk) 16:26, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thank you for accepting my page and cleaning it up. JimmyPiersall (talk) 20:13, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi JimmyPiersall - no worries. Happy editing. Onel5969 TT me 19:50, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi JimmyPiersall - I moved your article to the mainspace, because you did a wonderful job of citing each entry. But now I see that you're beginning to add stuff to the page without citations. Pages like this can very "crufty" (full of stuff and nonsense), and requiring citations for each entry cuts that way down. I'll put a notice at the top of the page saying that any entries without citations will automatically be deleted. I'm sure you want the page to look as good as possible. Could you provide citations for your additions? That will help a lot. Onel5969 TT me 14:22, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

21:50:30, 17 September 2015 review of submission by Nova5282


I don't understand why this article was denied. The article which you cite as being copied from...I wrote that article! I gave plenty of links to outside information and resources, that show that my article is noteworthy, including releases that Xander has played on, his signature guitar, awards and more. Can you please tell me what I'm doing wrong?

Nova5282 (talk) 21:50, 17 September 2015 (UTC)nova5282[reply]

Nova5282 (talk) 21:50, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nova5282 The article could use better third-party sources. SwisterTwister talk 03:52, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Female Peshmerga KIA & taken prisoner

Hey Mate,

Wondering why Female Peshmerga KIA, POW addition of mine you thought not good?

Cheers, T — Preceding unsigned comment added by TangoAlphaJuliet.Oscar.Papa-Foxtrot (talk • contribs) 02:55, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, just wondering how to improve the article I submitted. Does it mostly need citations? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hostagecow381 (talk • contribs) 03:35, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hostagecow Yes and to learn how to appropriately format references to the information, see WP:REFB. SwisterTwister talk 03:52, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If IMDb and AVN are not reliable sources, what are reliable sources for citing filmographies?

Hi Onel5969,

Nice to see a fellow New Yorker on here. I moved to the West Coast some time ago, but I am always a New Yorker in my heart; died in the wool.

I've joined wikipedia to help document the history of the BDSM community and industry. We have a rich and vital history which, unfortunately is not reflected on wikipedia. If you look, you will see there is not one Dominatrix here, while there are many Porn Stars. Their is not one Dungeon on here, but there are many night clubs. There is not one BDSM activist on here yet, there are many Gay activists on here.

BDSM is a sexual orientation, just like being gay or straight. And, even if you don't believe that, it can be denied that there is a large BDSM community that has existed as long as people have been having sex. Yet, there is seems to be no record or history of the BDSM community or industry on wiki at all.

Tara Indiana is one of the best known Dominatrixes in the world. I thought due to the lengthy film credits she'd be easier to cite then others, as a start. When I look at the pages of mainstream Hollywood actors and porn stars, I see IMDb and AVN cited. So why isn't the citation valid for a Dominatrix and what would be a valid citation for filmographies if IMDb and AVN are not acceptable?

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Tara_Indiana&redirect=no

Any help would be greatly appreciated. Many in our community find it really invalidating to not be represented on wikipedia.

Thanks in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nona Urbiznez (talk • contribs) 05:54, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nona Urbiznez - I fully understand the concept of the bdsm lifestyle, although personally it's not my bent. Be careful speaking with other editors and claiming that bdsm is the same as being gay, you'll find that many would take offense at that (I am not one of them), but simply a word of caution. AVN and IMDB are not reliable sources and therefore cannot be used for notability purposes. You'll also find a bias against porn actors as well, who have a much higher standard they have to meet than regular actors. You'll see some links to imdb on regular actors pages, but usually not too much. AVN is almost totally discounted, since it is mostly an advertising medium. People who are out of the mainstream, like a dominatrix, are sometimes difficult to show the notability, since you need 3-4 nice articles about the subject in order to show that notability. Because you bombarded the article, it makes editors not want to take the time to evaluate it.
I think the first thing you need to do is get rid of all the AVN sources. Keep one (if it shows her overall filmography), and get rid of the rest. When citing a book (like your #2), always put page numbers. Your #4 would be good if it was about Tara, and not Seva. Many of the other articles, which appear good at first glance (Village Voice, Phoenix New Times, etc.) aren't about Tara. But because you have so many not valid citations that a reviewer has to wade through, it's possible to miss valid ones.
Third, and this is just personal advice, you shouldn't look for validation from others, especially Wikipedia. Live your life, enjoy what you enjoy.
I'll help you clean up the article if I can. If you want to run references by me to see whether or not they'd pass muster, I'll be happy to do that. Onel5969 TT me 02:45, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Philippe Adrien

Hello, This is Arrt75012, writing you about the article on Philippe Adrien https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Philippe_Adrien_(English)

Thank you for your last comment, I think I got rid of all non-objective comments in my draft.

Could you tell me if it's okay or if I need to rewrite some other sentences ?

Thanks again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arrt75012 (talk • contribs) 15:41, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Arrt75012 - I think SwisterTwister's comment on the draft fits best... another 1 or 2 solid sources from a magazine or newspaper and you've got enough references to show notability. There are still some promotional/informal sentences which need work (e.g. "made a name for himself"). Also, once you've used his full name once, only use his last name throughout the rest of the article. Do those things and I think your set. Onel5969 TT me 02:53, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Faizal Ismail

Thanks for finding that source for Faizal Ismail. I have added a bunch more at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Faizal Ismail, if you'd like to take a look. --Bejnar (talk) 16:06, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding article ApartmentADDA

This was rejected stating it reads like an advertisement. Can you please point me out which portion looks like an advertisement?

Can you help me write a portion of this article? Also, which references are not credible? All the references are from major Indian publications.

Please help me out here.

Krishanuthe13th — Preceding unsigned comment added by Krishanuthe13th (talk • contribs) 05:01, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Krishanuthe13th - Hi. My apologies, I hit the wrong key when I declined. Should have been for notability, for which SwisterTwister has already given you direction on the draft page. Having said that, the last paragraph is pretty promotional, because it's selling the service to us, giving us its features and target market. Onel5969 TT me 13:49, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi onel5969 - Hi. I will include more citations. But, regarding the last paragraph, there has to be some content which talks about what the product does, isn't it? Whom it serves? All software products' articles in wikipedia has such descriptions. I have not listed its features anywhere, which can be promotional. People who reads this page should understand what the product does. I have just written a few lines to explain the functionality of the product. How else do I do that? Some guidance please.

Krishanuthe13th (talk) 03:44, 22 September 2015 (UTC)Krishanuthe13th[reply]

Can you review Draft:Akhtar Raza Khan

It seems that wikipedia has been polluted with biased editors and admins.I have been striving to get this article accepted for 2 months but biased people reject my draft quoting that the subject matter is not notable which is completely wrong.Can you please review my draft? Dont forget to see the talk page of the draft.

Ejaz92 (talk) 07:33, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ejaz92 - making angry accusations is usually not a good way to endear you to someone. Especially when you follow that up with asking them to do something for you. Flat Out, Sulfurboy, and SwisterTwister are all very experienced editors in the AfC process, and while I've never seen a hint of bias in their decisions. And it was just declined by Swister, who has a really good sense of when an article is ready for the mainspace. Because your article was deleted once, there will be a heightened scrutiny about its sourcing. At this point I won't review it, but if you fix the formatting on your sources I'll take a look. At first glance I completely agree with Swister. I only looked at the first two sources (and the first source is your most used), and the first one is not an independent source, so therefore cannot be used for notability purposes, while the second simply mentions the subject in passing. To show notability, articles must be from independent sources (like the Times of India), but be in-depth about the subject, not just simple passing mentions, or inclusion in lists. I know sometimes Wikipedia can seem frustrating, but the best thing to do sometimes is step away from the computer and calm down. Then go back and ask for help. And I do hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 14:13, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

David Baise article

Hi One15969--

This is artistdatausa, and I am addressing your comments re the article I have been trying to have published: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:David_Baise

In your comments, you (and the others before you) have noted that the articles cited must be 3rd party independent articles, not written by the author or subject of the article. However, all of the articles cited in the references were written by independent sources--newspapers such as the Santa Barbara News Press, Tuscaloosa News, Palm Beach Post, Franklin Star, Washington Post, and by independent 3rd parties not connected with the artist: Stanford Research Institute, Grand Central Art Galleries (1957!), and New York Art Resources Consortium. Express links to the sources are provided in many cases. Perhaps you didn't see the footnotes?

The subject, David Baise, was an important artist in the late 1950s, per the above independent, reliable, published sources. If it would help to delete the reference to his being alive today, I could do it, but please note that there are many, many living artists, musicians and authors whose published Wikipedia bios could be read like an advertisement, and with far fewer references than those provided by me, which are all verifiable. Any of the very few references in my article that do not contain a link in the submitted footnotes can be provided to you by e-mail by myself, so that you can verify that it was an independent source.

Respectfully, please take into account this information when reconsidering the article. Thanks! Artistdatausa (talk) 21:42, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Artistdatausa It looks good but could still use some more sources. SwisterTwister talk 04:21, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Suresh Prasad Sarbadhikari

Hi Onel5969,

This is regarding the following draft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Suresh_Prasad_Sarbadhikari

I have understood that I need get rid of what are known as peacock terms, and write in a formal neutral tone.

I am 72 years old, writing about my maternal grandfather, and so my lack of understanding Wikipedia rules may please be excused. I am trying my best to learn, and will revise the page.

However, I need your help on one aspect. Will you please identify the specific citation/reference numbers that are unacceptable?

Thank you.

Goborgunk (talk) 00:15, 20 September 2015 (UTC)Goborgunk[reply]

Hi Goborgunk - I'm not that far behind you! I'll do a re-write on this at some point in the coming week. Regarding the references, it's not that they are unacceptable, but for notability purposes Wikipedia requires articles to be in-depth about the subject. While he certainly led an interesting life, I'm not sure it meets Wikipedia's notability requirements. After I work on it, I'll let you know. Onel5969 TT me 14:07, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Rod Steiger

Hey Onel, this article on an actor who has worked in films like On the Waterfront, The Pawnbroker and In the Heat of the Night needs a good copyedit before it's taken to FAC. Do let me know if you'd like to copyedit the article. Thanks. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 12:00, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sure Ssven2 - I'll do it over this weekend. Onel5969 TT me 15:21, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 15:28, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A gentle reminder. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 00:42, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bwveelde

Hi Onel5969,

I noticed you declined my article about Edward Barrett and I would like to discuss your decision. The reason is that Barrett spend his entire life in a seclusion (Jesuit community) from which he wrote many books. A Jesuit is not allowed to marry. So there's no offspring. This author wrote a very important book 'The Jesuit Enigma' which opens up significantly about the Jesuits, exposing the evil side of them. As of this, the Jesuits expelled him from the community and removed almost anything he wrote from archives, libraries and such. That is the reason why I can't find much about him. The publishers he wrote for do not exist anymore or broke down as of bankruptcy. Is there something to do about this most unusual situation?

Please inform me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bvweelde (talk • contribs) 12:56, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Moodu Pani

This will be my next GAN. I have listed it at the GOCE. Would you like to give it an edit? Kailash29792 (talk) 12:57, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kailash29792 - I won't be able to get to until later this week. Onel5969 TT me 15:46, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Just a gentle reminder . Kailash29792 (talk) 15:30, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 15:23:40, 20 September 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Amrutkowski


Please take a look at the revised article which has been completely stripped of any "peacock" terms and the sections made completely encyclopedic. The introduction section is also significantly shortened. Amrutkowski (talk) 15:23, 20 September 2015 (UTC) Amrutkowski (talk) 15:23, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Amrutkowski - Looks much better. I'd delete the volumnious Congressional testimony list. It really serves no purpose. A single line within the prose of the Life and career section (with the current citation), should suffice. I'd also cut down on the Articles section. Choose 4-5 of the most significant ones. Let me know when you make those changes. Onel5969 TT me 15:52, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Onel5969, I think this now implements your good suggestions. There are few more than 4-5 articles but it's a much smaller number. Given the diversity of Lukasik's expertise, he arguably deserves a few more than the norm.

best, 70.106.196.128 (talk) 18:49, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

06:16:42, 21 September 2015 review of submission by 158.132.104.122



Hi, I am confused about the reasons for rejection. The references incldued are from academic journal papers that have gone through the refereeing processs. They are verifiable.

Plus, I do not udnerstand other comments. We have followed the format used for other associations that have had their entyries approved.

Pelase cpmmetn and add guidance 

158.132.104.122 (talk) 06:16, 21 September 2015 (UTC) Bob McKercher.[reply]

10:24:24, 21 September 2015 review of submission by Kieronch1


Hi Onel5969. Are you able to provide some feedback on the Apperio page I submitted please? The previous reviewer said that it was rejected because of a reference referring to the website home page and another that the CEO wrote (which have both since been removed and more suitable sources included.) Would appreciate any further feedback you are able to provide. Thanks

Hi Kieronch1 - Absolutely. In a nutshell: articles tell us about a subject; ads sell us that subject. Phrases such as "The platform connects directly into a law firm's time-recording system, providing visibility for the client on project expenditure, analytics and performance metrics", "giving them exposure to a network of startups, mentors and investors", and "which seeks to reduce the tension in client-law firm relationships", are all worded promotionally, as the only folks interested in that would be potential clients. Just give facts. Tell us about it, don't tell us about how it will help us. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 17:02, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Academics Impact - gentle reminder

Thank you for you nice comment. As I would base the notability as suggested in the rules by the circulation of the textbook that is just what I did. The kvk (http://www.ubka.uni-karlsruhe.de/kvk.html) is a german meta seaech engine powered by one of the leading technical universities in Germany. I just searched one textbook in the latest edition (there are two which have reached 4 and 5 editions respectively) and according to the kvk are circulated quite widely. With "wilhelm schneider" and google scholar (thank you!) you also find several articles and citations. With "wilhelm schneider" and jahresabschluss also some citations. Hope this helps 89.0.34.251 (talk) 12:12, 1 September 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.0.13.111 (talk)

(talk page stalker) No "accident"—merely routine archiving—it was a month ago, for goodness sake! [1] — | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| — 13:55, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Gareth. Also, back then I had mentioned that when an article reaches this type of level regarding a scholar, I let a different editor review it. Onel5969 TT me 20:39, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

National Benefit Authority Page

Hi Onel, thanks for reviewing, i am just trying to understand. There are plenty of news stories about them please see here: in google news .

Does that not make them notable?

Ntb613 (talk) 14:21, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ntb613 - I'm not saying it isn't notable, all the declination says is that the current references don't show the notability. The references should be in the article, and formatted as per WP:CIT. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 20:42, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your reply @ Onel5969 - I have improved the references (at least imho :) ), would you mind to take a look please, and let me know if that is good now or is more required. If more is required would you mind to give some more direction as to what specifically? Thank you! I really appreciate you looking into this. --Ntb613 (talk) 00:19, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Onel5969 , Should i resubmit?
Hi Ntb613 - The CBC article is nice (although negative in context). The other two don't speak to notability. The other is simply a governmental statement, while the other is from a promotional website. If you find 2 more articles with the depth of the CBC piece (preferably not about potential misconduct), you'll pass notability. Onel5969 TT me 15:34, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Onel5969 - There are the following articles that talk about them, but they are all negative:
Should i just cite 2 more of those? -- Ntb613 (talk) 02:32, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Onel5969 - I have added two of the above articles as references. And will monitor if there are new less negative articles on google news in the future, i will add those.
I used the tool suggested by the Wikipedia called Highbeam and found this: http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-424504958.html should i add it somewhere? Ntb613 (talk) 15:22, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you!!! :) Ntb613 (talk) 20:08, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Question about my article submission

This is 15tinybirds, in reference to my submission: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Schnitzel_Records_Ltd.

I'm new here, have read the rules a bunch of times, and am requesting a little guidance. Would it be possible for you to point out which parts of this brief article read more like sales copy or "an ad"? Like do a quick copy-paste here, or on the article's Talk page? Alternately, could you suggest more "neutral" words for me to include in the draft? For example, I used the phrase "high quality" - because other aspects of the releases are deemed to meet a high marketplace standard (other then the records' sound) and it's less "jargon" ish - which Wiki requires - they want common speech. I could use the more neutral "high fidelity" if you require.

If you say it can be done, then it can be done.

Thank you!

15tinybirds (talk) 15:37, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 15tinybirds, and welcome to the whacky world of Wikipedia. In a nutshell, articles tell us about the subject, while ads attempt to sell the subject. Phrases like "The label serves as an international platform for several high-profile artists", "represented the label's first 'major' signing", "across traditional digital sales platforms such as ...", "While Schnitzel has never run a marketing or news campaign about the label itself, the label has found widespread press coverage and critical acclaim of artists on its roster through record reviews, interviews, and for specialty releases through the Record Store Day event", "Artists who have toured Schnitzel releases include Ragazzi, The Waxwings, Peasant, Ween, and The Moons." Just state facts, without embellishments or promotional sales talk. For example, after the Ragazzi signing, in the same paragraph, say something like "This was followed in _____ by Schnitzel signing the Pennsylvania-based band, Ween, for which they licensed and re-issued Ween's material for pan-European and Japanese territory release.
See the difference? Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 01:46, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

16:01:29, 21 September 2015 review of submission by Charliejameswyatt


Hey there

I was asked by a friend of mine to submit an article on her and her father, she isn't very tech savvy andasked if I could help her out, It's my first time using wikipedia to write articles and was wondering what can be done to get these pages up and running. I have relevant links and materials ready to send.

Hi Charliejameswyatt - First off, the article's title is about a person, yet the article is more about a company. Decide on which it is. Notability requires "significant coverage" from independent reliable sources. Usually that means newspapers, books, or magazines. Stuff from the company's website can be used to verify facts in the article, but not for notability purposes. Google News is a good engine to find articles. But don't use press releases (that's a common error). A good resource is Wikipedia:Your first article, also, WP:MOS to learn about style issues and MOS:LAYOUT to learn about how to structure the article. To learn what constitutes a reliable source, see WP:RS. To see what constitutes notability see WP:NCORP for a company and WP:BIO for a person.
Be patient, and ask questions, if you need help. I hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 01:54, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Keith_A._Schooley

Hello there fellow native New Yorker,

I see that you have declined my article on Keith Schooley citing notability. Please help me understand what needs to be done in order for me to fix the article to Wiki's standards.

Keith Schooley has been written about extensively in many independent newspapers over 11 years, although I did include one reference that you might have found questionable: PR Newswire, which was just a reference to Merrill Lynch's downfall and not necessary since most people know that Merrill suffered a downfall. That fact could be cited from any number of other independent news sources. If there were other objections you had as to the notability of my subject please list them so I can properly remedy the situation.

Schooley as a notable whistlebower and his long court battle against Merrill Lynch has been used in classrooms and panel discussion at colleges and universities-- for example at Baruch College's Zicklin Center for Corporate Integrity of the Zicklin School of Business, as well as others. I first became familiar with Schooley's case through his book while at the Quinnipiac Law Library. His book was also translated into Chinese and republished by the Shanghai University of Finance and Economics Press (SUFEP), The World Classics of Investment series, ISBN 978-7-5642-0658-1/F.0658. Schooley was noted by Murdock Global Advisers as one of seven other very notable whistleblowers. Writer Chandra Niles Folsom has written a screenplay based on Schooley's story and has discussed his case on Lisa Wexler's New York radio show. So there is much evidence that Schooley is a notable subject.

I do understand that Wiki needs to verify each subject and source and appreciate that as a researcher. So with your help I'd like to make Keith Schooley part of Wikipedia.

Thanks so much for your help ~ Hillary Chase https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Hillary_Chase#Your_submission_at_Articles_for_creation:_Keith_A._Schooley_.28September_17.29 67.86.10.117 (talk) 17:14, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Hillary. The issue is going to be the guideline I cited in the declination: WP:BLP1E. In a nutshell, he's only notable for the whistleblower activity. His writing of the book and subsequent actions show that he didn't intend to remain low-profile, but the lack of coverage of the book doesn't indicate notability. I think in order to make your case you have to meet the 3rd criteria and show that the event was significant. Looking at the Merrill Lynch article, that article cites a different broker, Henry Blodget as instrumental to the 2002 issue, but not as a whistleblower. The Merrill article then goes on to lay their takeover by BofA as due to economic conditions, not the actions of a whistleblower. Is there any way you can show how significant the incident was, and that it was based on his role in it? Onel5969 TT me 02:15, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Perry Rosenthal

Hi, Your message requests removal of honorifics from the Perry Rosenthal profile, but I am not clear what you mean by that. "Dr." before names? That's all I can find in the current draft. Thanks. CSinacolaCsinacola (talk) 19:13, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Csinacola - that's exactly what I was speaking about. LaMona made some nice edits to the piece, and their note on the draft page is spot on. Onel5969 TT me 02:17, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ref message 106

Recommended actions completed. thanks, tonyAmrutkowski (talk) 22:00, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

02:52:50, 22 September 2015 review of submission by Boatswi


Hi, I believe Dr. Vincent Cryns meets the notability guidelines for academics as listed at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_%28academics%29

Specifically, Dr. Cryns meets point 5 of the Notability guidelines: 5. The person holds or has held a named chair appointment or distinguished professor appointment at a major institution of higher education and research (or an equivalent position in countries where named chairs are uncommon).

As noted in the article, Dr. Cryns holds the Marian A. and Rodney P. Burgenske Chair in Diabetes Research at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. I included both a link to UW and an external research foundation noting his holding of this position.

Thanks for the reconsideration!

Hi, just checking if you've had a chance to reconsider this. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boatswi (talk • contribs) 02:08, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Boatswi - Yes. Don't know how I missed that. Especially since it's in the lead. Please resubmit. Onel5969 TT me 12:09, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Onel5969, resubmitted! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boatswi (talk • contribs) 17:59, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

04:41:52, 22 September 2015 review of submission by GeekPhotog


Hi -- I'm a bit at a loss here. I did a major overhaul of the article based on the feedback of the initial reviewer, at which point they were quite pleased and helped me make some more minor changes and suggested I resubmit. The article now cites entirely known third party sources (including the Wall Street Journal, and some of the largest tech sites like dpreview, Mashable, Verge, etc.). Vendor-provided information is only in the External Links. I don't see anything non-neutral about the wording, and there are pros and cons mentioned.

I'm all ears for any specific feedback. Thanks!--GeekPhotog (talk) 04:41, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi GeekPhotog - There's a difference between telling us about something, and selling us something. When you describe benefits, and why something's better, those are sales pitches. Same when you make comparisons with other products. For example, in the lead the first sentence is okay. The second sentence is so detailed that it could be promotional, depending on the context. The next three sentences are promotional (the second being a comparison). The last sentence is not promotional, because it is an award from an independent body. The features section is wholly promotional. I hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 16:04, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again -- Thanks for the feedback. I can definitely work on the sentence wording, but I am way confused about your point on Features. I have patterned the article after other camera articles, and from what I can tell, essentially all of them have a bulleted list of features, so that people know the specs on the camera (I could call the section specs, but used Features to be consistent with other camera pages). For example, ones I looked at are Nikon D4, Canon 5D, Canon 1D, Sony RX100, Canon PowerShot S120, and so on. I'm not sure how readers can know much about a camera without knowing its specs. I noticed that the Leica M6 article uses the term Specs for that section. I can certainly make that change and ensure that all the underlying points are worded as such, if that would address your concern. Thanks!GeekPhotog (talk) 18:24, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Need Help!!!

Hi Onel5969,

I have been trying to get my article registered with Wikipedia. I have been declined 3rd time now. Keeping in view your review on my article, I shall update the citation accordingly. However, I am still not able to avoid peacock words (as per the review). Would you be kind enough in helping me on how to avoid such words and improve my article. It would be good if you can write a few instances on how to change the terms and what else to include in it?

I have given below the link:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Walid_Mushtaq

I really look forward to your response.

Thank you

Username: FarhanRoots1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by FarhanRoots1 (talk • contribs) 05:36, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi FarhanRoots1 - Right off the bat there are two things which you could correct easily. First, is the use of Walid, rather than Mushtaq. After the first use of the full name of the subject, only the last name should be used. Second, watch the tenses. He is an entrepreneur; he was the recipient of an award. Sentences and phrases like "award was presented by the President of Pakistan His Excellency Mr. Mamnoon Hussain", "during this time he has added more than 40 new branches to the network", "who has built the foundation" are promotional (and in one instance, uncited). Finally, the list of awards is gratuitous. Consider changing it into a parapraph, which says that he has won several awards, among which are ... and then include the 3 or 4 most prominent. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 16:32, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

08:16:04, 22 September 2015 review of submission by Thaibinh 1989


Hi Onel5969,

Thank you for your review the TBS Group page. We do try the best to make sure that the content is not like an advertisement but still keep the formal tone & neutral point of view. However, it is declined; as we have gone through it again, but still we cannot see any part that sounds like an advertisement. All of the information is the truth and has references. Please kindly show us what part that need to fix and how to fix them. We will really appreciate your support to get the submission accepted.

Thank you and best regard, Thai Binh

Hi Thaibinh 1989 - When you put in things which are promotional, such as "in women shoes, sports shoes, canvas shoes and children’s shoes in different categories", "TBS has 20 years of experience in partnership with international brands including Reebok, Decathlon, Skechers and Quiksilver..", those are promotional; as is the Industries section. The leadership section, while not promotional, is unnecessary. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 19:00, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Hello man, you declined all of my articles, but what do you know about romanian football ? Are good articles with referencias, but there are no more information about these teams, and if you check other wikipedias also have short articles about them, I just want English wikipedia to have them, short how they are, because is no more information available about them, many referencias are in romanian, I already edit them a few times, what can I do more to get them accepted ?Alexiulian25 (talk) 10:01, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Alexiulian25 - sorry, not sure which articles you're talking about. Onel5969 TT me 19:20, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Mihai Viteazul Chișinău Societatea Gimnastică Sibiu Colțea București Dermata Cluj You should accept them all. Thank you !Alexiulian25 (talk) 19:36, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 10:39:50, 22 September 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Feralpearl


As I’m sure you can see this is my first attempt at a Wikipedia article. There were some problems with my first draft, but I rewrote the passages that were too close to the NY Times article. The second draft bears no resemblance to the Times piece, but does include a third party quotation from the article. I wonder if that is why it is reading as cut and paste. Please advise. Thanks! Feralpearl (talk) 10:39, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 10:42:13, 22 September 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Feralpearl


As I’m sure you can see this is my first attempt at a Wikipedia article. There were some problems with my first draft, but I rewrote the passages that were too close to the NY Times article. The second draft bears no resemblance to the Times piece, but does include a third party quotation from the article. I wonder if that is why it is reading as cut and paste. Please advise. Thanks! Feralpearl (talk) 10:42, 22 September 2015 (UTC) Feralpearl (talk) 10:42, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Re-submitted article

This is 15tinybirds. My article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Schnitzel_Records_Ltd.

Thank you for your helpful and specific advice. I really appreciate it. I've rewritten the article to be much more neutral or bland, and have also included a bunch of new references. The main issue that I'm aware of now is very minor: I'll reformat the "additional resources" list to look more like the "references" list later. (I hurt my back, and cannot sit down for more then an hour every 12!)

I was also wondering if maybe the issue's just the article's tone, that maybe it's better the article be approved and then let someone in Wiki-general-land rewrite it? Anyone can edit these pages. It might be better if the whole world can see it - that way, you draw from the entire pool of editors, not just me. Although I do love the learning experience.

Please check it over and let me know if you think it's up to par.

15tinybirds (talk) 11:55, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Lexie_Kamerman

Hi, I'm Skipperdee22 and the url for the article I'm asking about is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Lexie_Kamerman

The article was denied by you with your explanation that this person isn't "notable" enough for an article but then it encourages me to edit the article by citing additional references. I could potentially site over 100 references of reputable publications from around the world that covered, specifically, Lexie Kamerman's murder in this terrorist attack. In fact the colleague that was dining with her when the restaurant was attacked and murdered also has a Wikipedia page. My question -- how many references do I need to illustrate that she is in fact "notable". Thank you in advance for your help. Skipperdee22 (talk) 14:31, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Skipperdee22 - you're right, her companion shouldn't have an article either. When a person is only notable for a single event, unless that person had a significant enough involvement in the event, and the event itself was very significant, then they don't meet the notability standards as per WP:BIO1E. It doesn't matter how many times or in how many papers they get mentioned in. Sorry. Looked over the article, and I don't see anything else which makes her notable (from a Wikipedia viewpoint), she seems like a great person. Onel5969 TT me 19:51, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Rejected Lawsuit Abuse Reduction Act page guidance

Hi,

My user name is legaleagle00 and I am relatively new to editing and creating wikipedia pages. You recently rejected the page I created on the Lawsuit Abuse Reduction Act (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Lawsuit_Abuse_Reduction_Act_(LARA)_of_2015). I am not sure why it was rejected and was wondering if you could give me more guidance. I resubmitted it after the legislation passed last week, as was recommended by the last reviewer. I also included citations about the bills passage. In addition, I checked that it meets the other criteria for notability, which I believe it does.

I thought this would be a good topic to write about because of its national importance and because it is actually an update and more detailed explanation of a current wikipedia page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawsuit_Abuse_Reduction_Act_of_2013) written by another user. Could you please send me any information/links that would be helpful in making sure that my pages meet the wikipedia criteria?

I appreciate your help.

Thank you, legaleagle00 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Legaleagle00 (talk • contribs) 16:51, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Template:ULegaleagle00 - I missed that it was passed, since so much of the article is still speaking in the future tense. You might want to edit the article so that the tense is correct, and resubmit. Onel5969 TT me 20:16, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Hi User:onel5969,

Thank you for helping me to understand why my article was rejected again. I edited the article to reflect the proper tenses and will be resubmitting. I appreciate your guidance with 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Lawsuit_Abuse_Reduction_Act_(LARA)_of_2015

Best, LegalEagle00

Legaleagle00 (talk) 15:20, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Legaleagle00 - No worries. Nice job, I see another editor has already moved it to the mainspace. Congrats. Onel5969 TT me 15:05, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Csinacola

Hi, I removed one or two additional honorifics, as well as most of the personal data, info on birth, family, etc., as suggested. Sought additional sources for each statement made. Tried to eliminate anything smacking of peacock language, such as "fundamentally new" in front of theory. Rosenthal is tending to a Creative Commons license for the purposes of the photo so it can be undeleted. I have tried to address all the points raised by all editors and believe this is ready for resubmission. CSinacolaCsinacola (talk) 18:27, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Skoda Auto

Hi, you reverted my change in article Skoda Auto. I changed income, profit and revenue and I am pretty sure. I will link original source from their annual report. Skoda is doing really good now and it doesnt make sense for carmaker that sell over 1 million car to profit 100k dollars. Even the revenue is 12 million in that article, they really dont sell cars per 12 $. It just annoys me, compare them to other carmakers, revenue is 1000x smaller, profit and income are even worse, dont know who make up this numbers. They dont use comma as decimal mark just for information. Thanks for answer, I just wanna contribute to wiki, I have good intentions.

Hi Orofini - the only reason I reverted was that you simply changed the numbers without changing the source. As long as you source a change, and it's from a verifiable reference, and in this instance, the company's website would be a reliable source, you'll be okay.

Ok thanks for answer, I didnt link source, because the source is actually same, someone just misread it, I agree it can be confusing and I changed million to billion etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Orofini (talk • contribs) 20:17, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[1]

References

  1. ^ http://www.skoda-auto.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/company/investors/annual-reports/en/skoda-annual-report-2014.pdf

Matt O' Ree

How do I add a photo.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Matt_O%27Ree

Matt is a very reputable guitarist and should have a page on here. Please approve. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Musixfandom (talk • contribs) 21:50, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Musixfandom See WP:Upload. SwisterTwister talk 04:08, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Musixfandom - He may be. Current sources don't show this notability however. Oo7565's assessment on the draft hits the nail on the head: only the first citation helps with notability. Onel5969 TT me 15:39, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 04:25:24, 23 September 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Kevin Turner RSA


Hi,

Thanks for reviewing my draft. I have added further citations and am researching more.

I wonder if you could have a look at what I have done, and give me some guidance, please? I'd like to know if the citations I have added are sufficient and appropriate and whether I should remove all the information that does not yet have citations?

Thanks. regards Kevin


Kevin Turner RSA (talk) 04:25, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Kevin Turner RSA The article looks good and I'm willing to accept if he satisfies WP:NPOL and the article has a few more sources. I would also suggest removing the Wikipedia links as Wikipedia does not actually cite itself in articles and we rather use "see also". SwisterTwister talk 17:33, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kevin Turner RSA - I think you've got enough for notability. Be aware, other wikipedia articles (or other wikis) are not valid sources and should be removed. You can link to those pages like I'm linking to your draft, Draft:Graham McIntosh, but don't use them as references. And yes, since this is a blp (bio of a living person), if you don't have a reference, I'd remove it. Also, please format your cites correctly, you can find out how at WP:CIT. Onel5969 TT me 19:10, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Need help on revised article

Dear Onel5969,

As per your comments and suggestions, I have revised my article link given below:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Walid_Mushtaq

Please review it. I have changed the tone of sentences. Amended the name from Walid to surname Mushtaq. And also, reformatted the citations. Please check and provide your valuable feedback so that I can resubmit my article.

Many thanks, — Preceding unsigned comment added by FarhanRoots1 (talk • contribs) 09:36, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The article could use better sources about his career and accomplishments. SwisterTwister talk 17:33, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Message from Ottcla

Hi Onel5969

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:J%C3%B8rn_Martin_Steenhold&redirect=no

Thank you very much for your feedback. It was great that you saw the dead reference - That ref is Copenhagen Institute for Futures Studies and they erased that site after my last submisson and was in Danish. Duing my current editing I noticed Copenhagen Institute for Futures Studies made a new site for the researcher in Danish and more important in English which is great and is now implemented.

Futhermore I have looked through the article with a loop and have removed so much content that was impossible to ref to. So now it has been cut all the way in to the bone and can now hopefully be approved.

Best regards Ottcla — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ottcla (talk • contribs) 10:12, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ottcla - The issue is going to be notability. None of the references you currently have go to notability, which requires in-depth coverage from independent reliable sources. None of your sources are either independent or have in-depth coverage. This type of coverage usually comes from newspapers, magazines, journals, or books. Onel5969 TT me 22:43, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the quick feedback. Only content I removed in this submission are the things that was irrelevant and could not be referenced,; f.x his homeschooling as a child in the 1950´and 1960´ etc and had no or little relevance to the article. Furthermore I have actually used some of his books as referenced which I hadn´t before. Hope this brough the light over the changes as it sounded like you slightly misunderstood what I removed. Best regards Ottcla — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ottcla (talk • contribs) 09:54, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Draft: Tamas Bartfai

Thank your for your interpretation of the objection from Oo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Tamas_Bartfai — Preceding unsigned comment added by Badspice (talk • contribs) 14:34, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank your for your interpretation of the objection from Oo7565 on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Tamas_Bartfai The first sections do not have references, just links. I wrote this based on my extensive knowledge of Dr. Bartfai. I checked similar entries, and they do have links, but they are often not to peer-reviewed sources. I'll add some and ask you to take another look. Badspice (talk) 14:44, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

WalletHub Deletion

Hi, thanks for your feedback on my previous attempt at posting this entry. I have edited the post to make it neutral in tone and to ensure that sources are independent and reliable. Would you mind taking a look? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:WalletHub) In a couple of places I link to WalletHub itself because a primary source is more appropriate given the context - is that ok as long as the vast majority of sources are news outlets? Thanks in advance!Surfjk (talk) 19:15, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, I want to say yes but I can imagine this will still be questioned for its independent notability so I'm inviting DGG for comment. SwisterTwister talk 20:05, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
contribs) 02:05, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Surfjk, Considering your major contributions are on this firm, its associated firms, and their executives, there is every reason to think you have a WP:Conflict of interest. I remind you of our rule: If you are associated with the organization, either directly or as a paid editor, you must declare this. See our Terms of Use, particularly with respect to paid contributions without disclosure . The most important advice Ican give you, is that you must declare it if it is the case. Otherwise, you and any other account you may use are very likely to be banned for violation of the terms of use.
On the other matters, see my decline of the draft. DGG ( talk ) 03:58, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Krystin Goodwin

Hello,

I saw you reviewed my article about on-air personality Krystin Goodwin (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Krystin_Goodwin) and rejected it because of the sources. I was told that the sources just had to be items that were written about the subject, which I've included. Can I please know why these sources don't count as valid?

Thanks.

RGunz (talk) 02:07, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

RGunz The article needs better sources about her career and accomplishments to at least satisfy general notability guidelines. SwisterTwister talk 03:16, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Halp? I messed up an edit

Hello Onel, My project page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Schnitzel_Records_Ltd.

I was copying the Wiki source to my hard drive, then re-pasting it into the edit window, and removed 2 lines at the top (along with a bunch of formatting, which I was able to restore). I found the error when I went to hit resubmit, because this mistake caused the resubmit box to disappear. Your 'decline' at the top was the only one left salvageable, so you're the only one I can contact. I'm a noob and nuked my project by accident :(. Is there a way an admin with rollback permissions can help? Thank you, 15tinybirds (talk) 07:10, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

13:43:55, 24 September 2015 review of submission by Tony Thornburn



Please would you be able to assist me by copying the article and highlighting which bits you feel need to be re-written/amended and emailing to me thornburn927@btinternet.com. I have tried to write objectively, in the third person as per other Wikipedia articles. I am not an artist, have no direct connections, or vested interests, with the individual concerned. I came across his work whilst attending a Choral Workshop in his Centre in 2014 and then 2015. Many thanks. TonyTony Thornburn (talk) 13:43, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Draft Sandbox Submission on Nigel Konstam - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Nigel_Konstam

Notwithstanding your comment "In addition, the citations need to be formatted properly as per WP:CIT. The YouTube and Wikipedia references need to go away. In its current state it is difficult to ascertain whether he meets the notability criteria, please would you be able to assist me by copying the article and highlighting which bits you feel need to be re-written/amended and emailing to me at thornburn927@btinternet.com. I have tried to write objectively, in the third person as per other Wikipedia articles.

Moreover, whilst you note that "the article is deluged with sources, I have done this where I have placed a comment/assertion which I felt needed 'evidence' to back up. Otherwise I was afraid it would be criticised for a lack of references. So again, it would be most helpful to know which ones you feel are irrelevant.

Many thanks.

Tony ThornburnTony Thornburn (talk) 13:57, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tony Thornburn - get rid of stuff like "he described as "the development ...", "in parallel forging a career to ...", "Konstam could be categorized as a modestly ...", "Thus Konstam has offered a revised way to ...", and so forth. In general, get rid of observations, commentary, surmises, etc. Just report facts. You're right about using citations to back up facts, but more than 2 citations anywhere is usually WP:CITEKILL. YouTube should almost never be used, and Wikipedia and other wikis should never be used. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 22:56, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Question on my draft article at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Canoe_Journey_to_Renew_the_Two_Row_Wampum_Treaty

Hello, thanks for reviewing my article on Sept 2. Your comment mentions the need for reliable, independent, secondary sources... could you indicate any that aren't appropriate? I think they all fall into those categories, and I've given sources for every paragraph, so I hope there are enough of them. If you could point out any statement that appears not to be neutral, I'd appreciate that insight as well. I am currently looking at how to rewrite it to be less like an essay -- the last editor just advised me to add headings, which I did. I realize the form of the article is a chronological recounting of the journey, but don't see another good way to describe the journey except by describing its path and the events that took place. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gorgenkor (talk • contribs) 17:11, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gorgenkor - That's a canned response. I declined it because of the tone of the article, which reads very informally. There's a lot of trivia, and some NPOV stuff. Onel5969 TT me 15:33, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for feedback re https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Per_Magnus_Johansson

Dear Onel5969, Thanks for the feedback regarding https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Per_Magnus_Johansson . I've rewritten parts of the article and added more references, which I hope will meet your requests. I would be most kind of you to review the article again, and please let me know if any other adjustments should be made. Best wishes, Jonas Gilbert — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonasgilbert (talk • contribs) 17:54, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jonasgilbert - Using a Google Scholar search, it appears that he meets the notability requirements under WP:SCHOLAR, that along with the current references should be enough to pass it to the mainspace. Before I do that (another editor may see it differently), there are a couple of things which would need to happen. First, this is a blp (bio of a living person), has such it has a high requirement for facts to have citations. So any statement of fact, like "Johansson's psychoanalytical training took place in Paris, where he completed a training analysis with Pierre Legendre", would need to have a reference. There are a couple of those in the article. If you can't find a reference, delete it, else it is original research. The second thing isn't really necessary to move it to the mainspace, but it would be nice. Take a look at MOS:LAYOUT. It can give you an idea on structuring the article, which should have a lead, and then the main body of the article (which could be further broken down into subsections, if they make sense). But definitely make those citation adds, and let me know and I'll take another look. Onel5969 TT me 15:42, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Rejection of Draft:Kaminwurz

Hi, thank you for your review of my translation. I've left a request for assistance the Articles for creation help desk as you suggested. I would appreciate hearing your views there as to why the article was rejected for lack of notability. Thanks!

11:55:57, 25 September 2015 review of submission by Nunesdea



Greetings!

I would like to clear all the references that are not considered to be valid, and if you could please provide examples of where I can find more accurate ones.

Our company operates in several countries since its foundation and we have been involved in research projects that led to advances in decision-making theory and also toward the digital revolution that took place in the education sector in Spain.

Would a statement or e-mail from any of our academic partners be useful to reinforce our notability?

Nunesdea (talk) 11:55, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi Nunesdea - No, statements from interested parties are not independent, and therefore don't meet the notability guidelines. A good place to search is on Google News, Google Books, Google Scholar. The types of references which go to notability are usually reputable magazines, peer-cited journals, books and newspapers. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 16:11, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Inequality

Hi, could you explain what was wrong with my edit of the page on inequality that you reverted? Pfftallofthemaretaken (talk) 13:43, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. It has an NPOV issue, being only one interpretation of the term. Onel5969 TT me 15:07, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
What other interpretations of the term "marriage inequality" could there be? Pfftallofthemaretaken (talk) 15:37, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Or, if you're struggling to come up with a rivaling interpretation, is it possible that there was no NPOV issue with my edit at all? Pfftallofthemaretaken (talk) 18:02, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nope, not struggling at all. Simply didn't see the need to respond. Should be readily apparent. Onel5969 TT me 18:21, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

Hello O. I hope that you are well. I saw you edit summary on the Rod Steiger article. You might be interested in this boxed set from the Criterion Collection. Along with the programs listed there are commentaries and interviews with many of those involved. For the Marty episode they describe that there was slightly more to the situation than simply replacing Stieger with Borgnine. They do give high praise for RS's performance. I know that it might not be of interest or it might not fit your budget but I did want you to be aware of it. Have a delightful weekend. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 20:14, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi MarnetteD - Thanks for thinking of me. Not a huge Steiger fan. I think the quality of his acting is highly erratic (sometimes great, sometimes mediocre, sometimes poor). Another editor asked me to do a c/e of the article prior to him taking it to F/A, so I'm slogging through it. Have a great weekend. Onel5969 TT me 21:09, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again. Your comment could be used to sum up the careers of those from the "method" school of acting :-) When it works it really works and when it doesn't - meh. HeeHee MarnetteD|Talk 21:44, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Neutral point of view noticeboard discussion

Hello, Onel5969. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Pfftallofthemaretaken (talk) 22:53, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unknown question

Hi,

Thank you for letting me know that you deleted my correction since you did not find it constructive. Here is why I made correction.

I though it would be OK to clarify the origin of that car. It is very widespread that some cars manufactured in developing countries are just lisenced copies of other cars.

So I found it perfectly normal to clarify the origin of Force One SUV.

Here are the examples that it is OK to report origin of the car on WikiPedia:

1) Please note that on the same page where you erased my comments about the Chinese origin of Force One it is stated beneath that Tempo Bajaj Matador is a Hanomag / Mercedes-Benz License of Harburger Transporter. It is also mentioned that Force Traveller (LCV) is A modified Mercedes-Benz T1. For some reason you found that information constructive and did not delete it...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercedes-Benz_TN#The_OM616_.26_Mercedes-Benz_T1_.28Tempo_Traveller.29_in_India

2) Here it is reported that Indian-made Mahindra Verito is a licensed copy of the previous generation of Renault Logan. And that (for instance) Nissan Aprio on the Mexican market is also a local badge-engineered Logan of the previous generation.

I hope you find this information constructive and will not delete it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dacia_Logan

3) This wiki page clearly says that once Soviet-made VAZ-2101 was nothing else than "re-engineered version of the Fiat 124 tailored for the nations of the Eastern Bloc". Somehow this information is still there...

Please compare the appearances of these cars.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat_124 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VAZ-2101

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VAZ-2101#/media/File:1975_VAZ_2101.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat_124#/media/File:Fiat_124-Sedan_Front-view.JPG

4) Iranian-made Paykan was a former British Hillman Hunter

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paykan

5) Famous Indian automobile icon Hindustan Ambassador is based on Morris Oxford series III model...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindustan_Ambassador

And so on, and so forth... I can mention a few more Indian cars that were/are licensed copies of other brand cars.

I hope it explains why I made those corrections and you will return what I posted there.

Please let me know what you think

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.89.123.4 (talk) 06:24, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Need Suggestions for Dr JS Rajkumar article

Hello Onel5969 According to your previous reply I added more credible and notable links on the draft page. Can you please once go through it. Since the person is notable and is doing certain things that we can bring it for the readers as a genuine information. I have asked Peridon also to look into the draft page. If you review the said draft article, then with your support I would be able to contribute to the wiki. Waiting for your reply.Aarvig (talk) 11:28, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Aarvig - much better. I think you have the notability issue licked. Onel5969 TT me 13:30, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Lexie Kamerman

I'm Skipperdee22 and the url for the article I'm asking about is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Lexie_Kamerman In response to your response to me, the event was considered highly notable as it was the largest terrorist attack (number of innocent civilians killed in one attack) in Afghanistan since the beginning of the war. You claimed that Lexie Kamerman's role in the event wasn't notable enough. She was one of three Americans murdered during this "event." Aside from being one of the three attackers I don't know how her role could be any more notable. Reputable press around the world found her murder, specifically, to be notable enough to mention her by name while most of the 21 others were not mentioned by name in any media. Is there another editor that this article can be submitted to? Skipperdee22 (talk) 15:27, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Skipperdee22, the article looks informative but will still need further coverage to at least suggest local notability and otherwise better coverage. Cheers! SwisterTwister talk 18:23, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

stub tags

Please take care not to add {{stub}} to an article which already has a specific stub tag, as you did in this edit. Thanks. PamD 21:53, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi PamD - Hi. Yeah, I try not to do that, somehow I missed the stub tag on that one. My apologies. Onel5969 TT me 12:13, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Calais1984 footnotes question

Calais1984 username

Putting the footnotes/references in the required format is very confusing. I don't understand the "language". Not user-friendly. Too complex. Happy to delete surplus footnotes but did notice that some wikipedia pages exceed such numbers. Citing news articles and press releases that are no longer available online is the next problem to overcome. Some news articles were ordered they be removed from Google search by the District Court during a criminal trial. They haven't gone back on. What do you suggest? Calais1984 (talk) 07:29, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Calais1984 - I responded on the Help Page at AfC. Take care. Onel5969 TT me 12:29, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Abbott and Costello

Hey Onel5969

I respect your Wiki credentials, but please respect mine as an authority on Abbott and Costello. I have written 2 books about them, liner notes for official DVD releases, and founded the official fan club. The Costello family and their attorney refer all questions about their careers to me. The edits I made correct misstatements (even if they are cited), and eliminate things that wander off the point. Also, vaudeville is not the same as burlesque; in fact, they never appeared in vaudeville, which died in the 1920s.

Best Plummer — Preceding unsigned comment added by Plummer (talk • contribs) 22:55, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Plummer - It's got nothing to do with respect or lack thereof. I'm a huge A&C fan. Grew up watching them on the 11:30 movie on Sunday mornings back in New York. Probably seen every film they've ever made (as a team or individually) at least a dozen times. Simply following wiki guidelines. As I said in my edit summary, many of your edits were stylistically good, however, you deleted cited material. What A&C's estate says about that cited material is irrelevant. It's cited material. Feel free to add cited material to offer an alternative view. Also, several of your statements were uncited. That's pretty much going to get reverted.
Completely understand the difference between vaudeville and burlesque, when I referred to your good edits, that's what I was speaking about. Btw, if you ever get to Scottsdale, would love to buy you a drink and just talk about the duo for a few hours. Onel5969 TT me 23:32, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

23:11:51, 27 September 2015 review of submission by 45.36.175.156


I am not exactly asking for a re-review quite yet, I was just hoping to get a little more direction as to how to get approved. I am reading over some of the suggested articles and FAQ type information but I feel it's always the most helpful to hear things directly from another person. I have never submitted to Wikipedia before so I am new to all of this, any help would be appreciated. Thanks so much!

Request on 00:53:47, 28 September 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Geodisa


I need help editing my entry. I do not know exactly what I need to fix. The subject is a notable journalist whose work is worth publishing in Wikipedia. I am open to your feedback to help address the issues that were deemed not suitable. Thank you

Geodisa (talk) 00:53, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Draft:Jean-Marc Soboth Edit

Username: Geosadi

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Jean-Marc_Soboth&action=edit&redlink=1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Geodisa (talk • contribs) 00:57, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

03:53:27, 28 September 2015 review of submission by 154.20.94.55


Abbott and Costello

Hi Onel5969

I'll take you up on that drink someday, thanks. I'm still in the NYC area. But cited material gets a pass, even if it's incorrect? This has been a major issue with Bud's year of birth; it's actually 1897, but many "reliable" sources over the years copied 1895 in an endless loop. I continually tried to correct it on Wikipedia (it seems to have stuck now, at least temporarily) -- but someone always reverts back to the 1895 date, citing every erroneous source. Also, Lou did not start his burlesque career in an Ann Corio show. Short of repeatedly citing my own works (and sounding self-serving), what to do?

Best, plummer — Preceding unsigned comment added by Plummer (talk • contribs) 04:28, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dr JS Rajkumar

Hi Onel. Can you please elaborate what do you mean to say in your reply,I did not get your point. And also can you guide me what to do next for this draft article page. If the said article is fine then who will patrol it and how it will be published. Aarvig (talk) 07:31, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Onel5969&oldid=683118658"