Jump to content

User talk:Curb Safe Charmer: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary
Line 39: Line 39:
::::I basically agree with [[User:Cordless Larry]], but also with [[User:Primefac]] that it is a borderline case. I would have declined it on the grounds that it contains [[WP:PEACOCK|peacock]] language in the voice of Wikipedia to let the author rework it. (Unlike some reviewers, I very seldom fix drafts that need fixing.) Also, I would have renamed it by removing the disambiguation, but I see that has already been done. [[User:Robert McClenon|Robert McClenon]] ([[User talk:Robert McClenon|talk]]) 17:54, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
::::I basically agree with [[User:Cordless Larry]], but also with [[User:Primefac]] that it is a borderline case. I would have declined it on the grounds that it contains [[WP:PEACOCK|peacock]] language in the voice of Wikipedia to let the author rework it. (Unlike some reviewers, I very seldom fix drafts that need fixing.) Also, I would have renamed it by removing the disambiguation, but I see that has already been done. [[User:Robert McClenon|Robert McClenon]] ([[User talk:Robert McClenon|talk]]) 17:54, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
:::::This is borderline acceptance here, but I would have declined the draft for questionable sources and tone issues. [[User:KGirlTrucker81|<span style="background-color:pink; color: purple">'''KGirlTrucker81'''</span>]]<sup> [[User talk:KGirlTrucker81|<span style= "color:purple">huh?</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/KGirlTrucker81|what I've been doing]]</sup> 18:50, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
:::::This is borderline acceptance here, but I would have declined the draft for questionable sources and tone issues. [[User:KGirlTrucker81|<span style="background-color:pink; color: purple">'''KGirlTrucker81'''</span>]]<sup> [[User talk:KGirlTrucker81|<span style= "color:purple">huh?</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/KGirlTrucker81|what I've been doing]]</sup> 18:50, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

== Mighty Oaks Review ==

Thank you for your feedback, it is truly very helpful! My goal was not to make a promotional page for the program. As many of the links are interviews with the founder I built the [[Chad Robichaux]] page but am having some issue with it as well. I would greatly appreciate your feedback on that page and any pointers you might have to help me out. The page has been accepted, however it was immediately tagged for deletion and is in debate now. I'm continuing to edit it, but need your insight. Thank you again.

Revision as of 10:36, 5 May 2017

Welcome!

Hello, Curb Safe Charmer, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!  --soum (0_o) 19:25, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Would you help ?

I can see what you have done on the Talk:List of people from Jersey and was wondering whether you could help with regard to another Channel Island page I have a problem with, Royal Guernsey Light Infantry. The individual keeps insisting upon his edits and despite posting a note to the talk page and reverting numerous times, with comments, he seems to want his name and all details of a trust in the article, even though it is not very relevant to the article. I am unsure how to proceed and would like support in any action taken. Ânes-pur-sàng (talk) 09:32, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Noted that your comments are to assist in getting multiple people to change real facts on this page with real references, the information to which multiple people have asked. Our intent is to report you for conspiring with another in an edit war to remove accurate data posted to the site. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChrisOliver (talkcontribs) 07:30, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

09:54:51, 24 April 2017 review of submission by Nwach


African traditions are at a cross roads, the intercession between being ossified in the past and catching up with the changing times. Prof Munoz' life work was on tradition especially Nigerian civilizations like Yoruba and Efik. He is thus notable not only because of his work but for the fact that being originially Spanish, he lived in Nigeria for more than 40 years and died here. Thus was his love for African tradition, though being a Catholic priest, yet he took up Nigerian nationality and was further given a national honour for his life time work.

Munoz, together with [F. Ade Ajayi] (both were tight friends) worked assiduously in reinventing Nigerian cultures. If Munoz cannot be considered a 'notable' Nigerian intellectual, I really wonder who will?

Therefore, I respectfully seek a reconsideration. Thank you.

Jersey highest temperature

Hello,

the original problem was that the August highest temperature was higher than the yearly highest temperature. If 36.0 °C is the highest ever temperature in August then it is also the highest ever yearly temperature : this is why it needed to be changed.Carlo Colussi (talk) 19:47, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Simon Cohen AfC review

Hi there. I was a bit surprised to see Draft:Simon Cohen (communication expert) accepted without any changes required to the draft from the author. The article includes text such as "Cohen was involved in shaping the conversation on faith and tolerance after 9/11", which is not supported by an independent source. In general, the article is written rather too much like an advert for the subject for my liking. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:27, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am following the flowchart and guidance in the reviewing instructions and didn't find the article to violate copyright (checked with Earwig), the topic was encyclopedic, notable and sourced, including inline sources. I was satisfied that the subject had indeed been involved in influencing religious tolerance after 9/11 (eg. event at Georgetown University) but I agree it should be worded differently according to WP:BLPSTYLE. After reading the article several times I didn't find anything (else) that stood out as puffery, though. On reflection I think 'accept' was still the right outcome, but I should have tagged the article for improvement, as you've now done. If you think it should have been a decline, please do let me know, as I am still in my first month of AfC and open to coaching! Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 16:34, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for replying. I'm not that familiar with the formal standards for AfC. My sense from the questions we get about declined drafts at the Teahouse is that the standard applied in most cases is quite high (i.e. higher than the requirements you mention above), but perhaps that's just some reviewers being more rigorous that they are required to be. Pinging experienced reviewers Robert McClenon, KGirlTrucker81 and Primefac, who might be able to give a view or advice here. Cordless Larry (talk) 16:43, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say it's a borderline case. If I were feeling uncharitable I might decline as essay and/or containing too many trivial details, but I can see why Curb Safe Charmer accepted it. It looks reasonably well sourced (I haven't actually checked them all) and doesn't contain any obvious copyvios. If I had accepted it, I probably would have trimmed down some of the excessive detail, but small stuff like that isn't the end of the world. Primefac (talk) 17:09, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I basically agree with User:Cordless Larry, but also with User:Primefac that it is a borderline case. I would have declined it on the grounds that it contains peacock language in the voice of Wikipedia to let the author rework it. (Unlike some reviewers, I very seldom fix drafts that need fixing.) Also, I would have renamed it by removing the disambiguation, but I see that has already been done. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:54, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
This is borderline acceptance here, but I would have declined the draft for questionable sources and tone issues. KGirlTrucker81 huh? what I've been doing 18:50, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mighty Oaks Review

Thank you for your feedback, it is truly very helpful! My goal was not to make a promotional page for the program. As many of the links are interviews with the founder I built the Chad Robichaux page but am having some issue with it as well. I would greatly appreciate your feedback on that page and any pointers you might have to help me out. The page has been accepted, however it was immediately tagged for deletion and is in debate now. I'm continuing to edit it, but need your insight. Thank you again.