User talk:Ringbang

Wiki Loves Pride 2016

As a participant of WikiProject LGBT studies, you are invited to participate in the third annual Wiki Loves Pride campaign, which runs through the month of June. The purpose of the campaign is to create and improve content related to LGBT culture and history. How can you help?

1. Create or improve LGBT-related Wikipedia pages and showcase the results of your work here
2. Document local LGBT culture and history by taking pictures at pride events and uploading your images to Wikimedia Commons
3. Contribute to an LGBT-related task force at another Wikimedia project (Wikidata, Wikimedia Commons, Wikivoyage, etc.)

Looking for topics? The Tasks page, which you are welcome to update, offers some ideas and wanted articles.

This campaign is supported by the Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group, an officially recognized affiliate of the Wikimedia Foundation. The group's mission is to develop LGBT-related content across all Wikimedia projects, in all languages. Visit the affiliate's page at Meta-Wiki for more information, or follow Wikimedia LGBT+ on Facebook. Remember, Wiki Loves Pride is about creating and improving LGBT-related content at Wikimedia projects, and content should have a neutral point of view. One does not need to identify as LGBT or any other gender or sexual minority to participate. This campaign is about adding accurate, reliable information to Wikipedia, plain and simple, and all are welcome! If you have any questions, please leave a message on the campaign's talk page.

Thanks, and happy editing! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 20:42, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

2016 Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Community Survey

The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.

• Survey, (hosted by Qualtrics)

Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:49, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

14:14:54, 2 June 2016 review of submission by Ahuang8

• Ahuang8 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:OriGene Technologies (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I thought there are already quite a lot of external links. OriGene Technologies has close to 70M revenue and lots of offices over the world.

I read through the Wikipedia:Notability section and feel like OriGene Technologies page meets the guideline. There are quite a lot of guidelines given. Can you please let me know which part I need to improve? Thanks a lot.

Request on 11:23:35, 10 June 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Saragigante02

• Saragigante02 (talk · contribs)
  • User:Saragigante02/sandbox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I have a question. You rejected my Wikipedia page and I want to know what I did wrong so I can edit to improve it. Because I really want to publish this page about the group on Wikipedia.Saragigante02 (talk) 11:23, 10 June 2016 (UTC)Saragigante02 Saragigante02 (talk) 11:23, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

@Saragigante02: Hi, the problem is that the sources provided don't help to establish notability. Have you read Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources? The kind of sources described there must evidence that the subject meets the general notability guideline.

Best wishes,
Ringbang (talk) 16:07, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

05:03:38, 13 June 2016 review of submission by Landschaftsmaler

• Landschaftsmaler (talk · contribs)
  • User:Landschaftsmaler/sandbox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi Ringbang, Thanks for reviewing my Charles Harris page. I will go and look for more material to verify the relevance of this article. Would it help if I linked to newspaper cuttings published on Charles Harris´ own website? All the best Pat

Hi, I have now added some material by referencing some of Charles´ exhibitions to photographs shown on his personal website. Does that help or do we need scans of newspaper articles? There are also links to books which Charles has had published. All the best Pat — Preceding unsigned comment added by Landschaftsmaler (talk • contribs) 13:37, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

@Landschaftsmaler: Hello Pat, citations to newspaper articles would be welcome! We are looking for coverage that is about Harris, rather than by Harris. The sources should be unconnected to the artist, and they should discuss him directly and in depth. The most reputable sources should discuss his accomplishments and contributions to the art world.

You can cite newspaper articles by filling-in a Cite news template like this one:

<ref>{{cite news |last= |first= |date= |title= |pages= |url= |newspaper= |location= |access-date= }}</ref>

Scans of the articles would indeed help us to verify information. However, I don't know whether a scan linked by a citation qualifies as fair use (cf. Wikipedia:Non-free content#Sourcing). I recommend that you ask about this at the Teahouse. Of course, one might find some of the articles online, either in the archives of the periodical's website or on Google Books.

Material on the artist's website does not help to establish notability. WP:PRIMARY explains the limitations on citing such sources.

—Ringbang (talk) 16:00, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Thanks a lot for the information. I´ll try and get as much data as possible. I´ve got scanned articles and I´ll contact Teahouse about how to make use of them.

All the best
Pat
--Landschaftsmaler (talk) 08:04, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I have added external links to newspaper cuttings and website links to international coverage of Charles´activities. Do we need more or would it be alright to resubmit the article?

All the best
Pat
--Landschaftsmaler (talk) 12:33, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

@Landschaftsmaler: Hi, I've posted a reply to the draft page. —Ringbang (talk) 16:36, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Thanks for your advice on the draft page. Can I add a second external link to a specific page of Charles´website? After receiving some feedback from Teahouse I will edit the article now.--Landschaftsmaler (talk) 05:06, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

@Landschaftsmaler: That depends: What do you want to link and why? —Ringbang (talk) 16:37, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

There are jpg files on Charles´ and other websites showing newspaper cuttings of the important events in his life. I could link to them if that was permissible giving full details of the paper it appeared in, the author and when it was published. Unfortunately some of those events happened so long ago they have not been made available on the web by the printers.--Landschaftsmaler (talk) 12:03, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

21:06:06, 13 June 2016 review of submission by Richard F Morris

• Richard F Morris (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Walter Noetico (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Dear Ringbang, Thank you for reviewing my submission for Italian Artist Walter Noetico, which is greatly appreciated. Sadly, you have declined it, after I have actually made numerous corrections and additions to the citation materials and external links. I am sorry, but I think that you have made a mistake in declining the page for this Artist.

I have cross-checked the Rules of “Verifiability” of sources, and considering the requirements of the Wikipedia for the content to qualify as an “encyclopaedic” one, I think that there is a big error, not to consider Walter Noetico as “encyclopaedic” Artist. This is because with the quantity of sources (citations) which Walter Noetico already has, his profile already greatly exceeds the minimum requirements asked by Wikipedia rule.

For example: in the “Context Matters” section, it says that the sources should directly support the information as it is presented in the Wikipedia article. And I have prepared the “External links” where every single paragraph finds its supporting source (i.e. exhibition catalogues, TV broadcasting of RAI2 and France 3 Tèlèvisions).

The Section “Definition of a source” has also been adhered to largely widely satisfied, for example including in the case of the book which he wrote, the Publishing House also is cited as source and external links provided in support.

Furthermore, for an Artist is determinant (very important) for his encyclopaedic importance, a support of Art Critic, and Walter Noetico has had the support of the three greatest Art Critics on a international level, such as: Alexandre Cirici (the President of the International Art Critics Association 1978-1981), Gillo Dorfles (the friend of Cirici and important International Art Critic), Raffaele de Grada who has also been a Commissioner of the Venice Biennial, and also it was Raffaele de Grade who invited Walter Noetico to the Venice Biennial, and also it was the same Art Critic who had presented the Neoilluminist Movement of Noetico in 1989 Exhibition Catalogue).

The sources are abundant and of enviable quality, considering that the summit of Noetico’s artistic career was hit about 30 years ago, when there was no internet support for information, and the sources in my possession are enviably of good quality, and are on paper material also (exhibition art catalogues, articles etc). In addition, if I may also add please, Walter Noetico who is a rare Artist, as he is an Innovator of Art, whose art innovations had been backed by the best Art Critics of that time, and who merits to be open to the World. If Walter Noetico is not "encyclopaedic" - then none of the Artists are.

I noticed a very beautiful citation on your page, dear Ringbang, by Ian Maclaren, saying: “Be pitiful, for every man is fighting a hard battle.” – and perhaps you will find in your heart to review my submission please, and assist positively and justly.

If you do require the original hard paper material documentation in support, I am at your complete disposal to provide it.

Thank you very much in anticipation for your time and attention. With very best regards and wishes, Richard Morris

@Richard F Morris: Hi, if the 'Bibliography' section is where you put your sources, please rename this to "References", add pages numbers, and move the contents to inline citations. Exhibition catalogues are permissible sources, but these are insufficient to establish notability. —Ringbang (talk) 21:47, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

00:25:11, 14 June 2016 review of submission by Richard F Morris

• Richard F Morris (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Walter Noetico (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Dear Ringbang, I just wanted to request if you could be so kind to look at the "References" and also at the "External Links" sections. Thank you very much for all your assistance and time. Unfortunately, the system that Wikipedia uses today, is a bit inadequate, because many Artists are no longer young and had their activity in a time when there was no internet, and thus everything is mainly on a "paper", and I have been handed over a whole bundle of those newspapers/magazines etc. material. For Artists usually - in the past - was very important to have an major Art Critic's comment, and Walter Noetico has got those from the major ones. I cannot quite understand that those alone are not sufficient to testify of his notability. Many thanks once again for all your valuable help, Ringbang. Best wishes, Richard Morris

@Richard F Morris: Thanks for renaming the Bibliography section. The reason we need inline citations is so that editors and readers can verify the information in the article. You can cite printed material; the sources do not have to be from the Internet; they also don't have to be in English. However, the more accessible the sources are, the faster reviewers can evaluate them. To cite printed sources, you can use Template:Cite book, Template:Cite journal, or Template:Cite news as appropriate. For websites, use Template:Cite web. The article cannot be properly reviewed—let alone accepted—without inline citations. —Ringbang (talk) 00:59, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Request on 08:10:14, 14 June 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Saragigante02

• Saragigante02 (talk · contribs)
  • User:Saragigante02/sandbox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Thank you! I will have a look at it.Saragigante02 (talk) 08:10, 14 June 2016 (UTC)Saragigante02

Saragigante02 (talk) 08:10, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Request on 18:24:38, 15 June 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Devonwells

• Devonwells (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Wenco International Mining Systems (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi Ringbang!

Thanks for reviewing the article I proposed (even though it doesn't meet the requirements yet). I'm wondering if you could help clarify the current issue with its sources: Are there not enough of them (therefore, it doesn't meet the significance requirement)? Are the current ones not relevant enough (so it's a reliability problem)? Or, is it another problem I'm not clear on? I'm currently trying to source more reliable, independent supporting information and I'll submit a new draft when I've found some, but it'd be helpful to know which specific issues are the major stumbling block.

Again, I really appreciate your time and assistance with this. Cheers! Devonwells (talk) 18:24, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Devonwells (talk) 18:24, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

My edit on Transgender Studies Quarterly

I removed it, as per the documentation at Template:Infobox_journal "Put "no" if journal is not peer-reviewed (in which case {{Infobox magazine}} is most likely more appropriate), otherwise leave blank."

--Auric talk 21:08, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

@Auric: Thanks for the explanation. I revised the documentation for Template:Infobox journal. I've noticed this quoted material before, and the problem is that it fails to document the use case for a "yes" setting. When you removed the value, you also removed the "Peer-reviewed" line from the rendered infobox, and I'm not sure that such a change is ideal here.

In any event, when you want a field to have the default value, please delete the entire attribute–value pair and comment the change in your edit summary. When you just delete the value, it makes it look like you're intention is to set the value to "unknown"; when you do that with a blank edit summary, it can read like vandalism. —Ringbang (talk) 22:52, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice. Also, you should know that adding any yes/no value also puts the page into Category:TEMP Infobox journal with para 'peer-reviewed'.--Auric talk 23:39, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

13:16:11, 17 June 2016 review of submission by Richard F Morris

• Richard F Morris (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Walter Noetico (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Dear Ringbang, good day! Thank you very much for your prompt reply on 14 June. I am sorry I could not reply straight away because I had no internet connections here. I really appreciate the valuable directions you had given re: templates for citations, and once I have managed to do those, I shall notify you at once, so that you can see whether I have done the right thing. Hopefully, all will be well! Very many thanks once again for everything! Best wishes, Richard F Morris

15:59:14, 17 June 2016 review of submission by Tigraan

• Tigraan (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Helen Molyneux (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Doesn't this pass WP:ANYBIO, by the Welsh Woman of the Year award? There is also a fair bit of media coverage, though "local" (restricted to Wales). I have seen far worse survive AfD (yes, I know). I am not saying I am 100% sure (that's why I went through the AfC after all), but a bit more explanation than the boilerplate template would not hurt. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 15:59, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

@Tigraan: The trouble with policies like WP:ANYBIO is they fail to define essential criteria—in this case, what constitutes a "well-known and significant" honour (compare criteria 2 and 3 of WP:NACADEMICS). At present, Draft:Helen Molyneux only lists accolades without any detail about what she actually accomplished. I would pass a more substantial, well-supported article about about a Welsh Woman of the Year. —Ringbang (talk) 16:16, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

I agree with the vagueness of WP:ANYBIO. Is your argument that WWotY is not a "well-known and significant" award (and neither is the Law Society one)? Or is it that the walesonline.com source is not enough for the WWotY claim? The only other meaning I can see in your comment is that being a stub is a reason to decline the article (but it certainly is not a reason to delete). Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 16:26, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

@Tigraan: I'm saying I find it difficult to pass on the strength of WWotY alone without even knowing why she received this or any other award. Regardless of whether one has to fall back on the WP:GNG, the article should provide some information about why Molyneux is notable beyond her status as an award-recipient. She was officially recognised, but why? —Ringbang (talk) 16:37, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of My Transsexual Summer

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article My Transsexual Summer you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Carbrera -- Carbrera (talk) 13:21, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

00:36:07, 19 June 2016 review of submission by Wilton96

• Wilton96 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Man vs Snake: The Long and Twisted Tale of Nibbler (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Multiple, non-primary references and external links have been added to the article.