User talk:Shadowowl: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 136: | Line 136: | ||
Let me if I need any further edits. |
Let me if I need any further edits. |
||
Thanks for your additional note, I mised one. All external links have either been removed or converted to references. |
|||
thanks. |
|||
==AfC== |
==AfC== |
||
Revision as of 01:44, 10 July 2017
Constructive criticism is welcome. Templates are OK, but don't spam me with Guides for Noobs.
02:04:22, 1 July 2017 review of submission by Camera museum
Hi I understand that face book is not a reliable source
How about the below links. Even straits times wrote about us
Thanks please check again
http://www.straitstimes.com/lifestyle/arts/the-big-picture
http://straatosphere.com/vintage-cameras-museum-singapore/
14:29:06, 3 July 2017 review of submission by Holdhard
Tthis is my first attempt at an article andfollowing the first decline I thought I had removed all direct links to externmal web sites. All my references no longer direct web links but references to where they may be found. Could you be so good as to indicate where I have not removed the offending links? I am lost as to what to do next.
Many thanks
Robin
11:32:18, 4 July 2017 review of submission by AmraAB
Thank you very much for your response, i made mistake submitting my work n english wikipedia, i tried to delete it but as i can see you have already reviewed it.
I edited my article, and i wrote it on high quality english, looking forward on re-review and approving of my article.
18:39:36, 4 July 2017 review of submission by 2605:E000:21C3:1900:2595:EEB2:5B2D:3360
Only one secondary source was from Twitter, it has been removed.
When you reviewed this, a scan immediately showed it to be both G11 and G12. SwisterTwister talk 04:47, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
Greetings from Venezuela. This draft is currently awaiting your re-review. Thanks.--Joe Heavy Metal (talk) 05:31, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
13:23:07, 5 July 2017 review of submission by Imbrogliomanifeste
Hello Shadowowl,
First thing first, thanks for the review of the draft concerning TRIAL International. Second, as of now, I am not requesting a re-review, but intend to eventually. I do not contest the qualification you used: I am looking forward to improve the article, so it can be reviewed again. My question goes as follow: If a suppress the vast majority of links that refer to the association's website and the content that is linked to it, do you think it might pass the review? If not, what else could be done?
As stated in my profile, I have a COI. I am working with TRIAL International. But independently of that, I love wikipedia and I do not intent to abuse it, nor to use it as a platform to promote the organisation I am working for today.
Best,
Lukas
- @Imbrogliomanifeste: The article contains external links in the article's body. They should be removed and replaced by 1 external link at the bottom. As I am not an expert in seeing what's wrong to an COI-article, I suggest asking it at WP:AFCHD. Regards, -- » Shadowowl | talk 16:29, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
Greetings from Venezuela. Friend, a question, why when I search Felipe Arcuri in Google, this page don't show me as result the page of Felipe Arcuri in Wikipedia. Thanks for your future answer. I tried with deletes of moves but nothing. And please, help me there. Thanks again.--Joe Heavy Metal (talk) 16:50, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
- It takes some time for search engines to index the page. That can take up to 1 week. -- » Shadowowl | talk 18:18, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
18:27:45, 5 July 2017 review of submission by Hday0134
I'm not sure I am doing this correctly, but I made the change that Shadowowl identified by getting rid of the externals links section which was redundant to a large degree. If there is something else I should do I am assuming I will be notified. Is that right? This is my first entry and am enjoying learning about the process. Thank you for the help and guidance. Hday0134.
- The external links are still in the article, there is no chance I can accept it now. -- » Shadowowl | talk 18:29, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick response. I guess I am confused by external links, I am assuming you are not talking about the footnotes. Maybe I put some into the article itself, I will check that and resubmit in a few minutes. Thanks again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hday0134 (talk • contribs) 18:48, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
19:00:18, 5 July 2017 review of submission by Hday0134
Okay, I think I figured out the external link issue. There were a few for the universities that I thought were linking to other Wikipedia pages but were not. So I think I fixed them all. Thank you for your help and patience on this, I am enjoying this process.
Request on 16:47:22, 6 July 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Sbjumper21
- Sbjumper21 (talk · contribs)
Hi Shadowowl. I'm writing in regards to the reason for denial of this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:18Birdies. You stated that the sources should not be produced by the creator, however all 10 of the sources are from independent top-tier media sources. I have not produced any of them. Also, the writing contains no positive adjectives to convey an endorsement, so I'm not sure why it is being referred to as an advert. Other similar pages have less credible sources listed as well. Please advise.
Thanks
Sbjumper21 (talk) 16:47, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
- The external link in the article's body indicates advertising. -- » Shadowowl | talk 16:56, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
Request on 19:12:01, 8 July 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Dylanchong91
- Dylanchong91 (talk · contribs)
I have recently submitted a draft article to be reviewed, however it has been rejected as it does not qualify the notability test. From my article, i have inserted newspaper stating all the activities and events that this individual was involved in the past. Moreover, i had also included the website for this particular individual showing position or post he held in a political party.
Why is my article being rejected? must this particular individual be a minister or someone very famous for me to write an article on him?
These are the reasons given for my rejected article
"This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of people, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time."
Kindly enlighthen me on how can i improve my article.
Dylanchong91 (talk) 19:12, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
- 3 references is simply not enough to estable notability. -- » Shadowowl | talk 19:13, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
22:30:37, 8 July 2017 review of submission by Jamesrawson79
Hi Shadowowl, thanks for talking the time to review the draft. I have removed all external links and placed them as references. Sorry, as there was an option for external links in the add links tab I didnt realise having these in the actual article body was against guidelines. I hope the new article now meets the apporpriate standards and have resubmitted it for review. Let me if I need any further edits.
Thanks for your additional note, I mised one. All external links have either been removed or converted to references. thanks.
AfC
You declined LaToya Cantrell with the explanation "This article contains external links. They are not permitted in the article's body. Use references instead." Though what you said is perfectly correct, this is not a reason to decline a draft, and I have reverted your review. It's a matter of style, and can be fixed by normal editing. The article is not yet ready for main space, but see the draft for my statement of the actual reason. DGG ( talk ) 03:07, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
Request on 03:37:06, 9 July 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Wally7432
Hi, Shadowowl. You declined the submission of the article "sexspionage," but the only feedback you gave me was that Youtube is not a reliable source. In regard to that, I included Youtube because the Saturday Night Live skit I was discussing was available on Youtube. Alternatively, I tried to find the skit on the Saturday Night Live website, but it did not play. Hence, I would like to keep the Youtube clip cited for the convenience of anyone reading the article. Can you please respond before I resubmit the article for review?
Wally7432 (talk) 03:37, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
- @Wally7432: I looked to the video and again to the article, and came to the conclusion that the youtube link is not a primary source. It's fine to have it in the article. Feel free to resubmit, I will probably accept. -- » Shadowowl | talk 08:23, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
21:33:54, 9 July 2017 review of submission by Rawad00
Dear, thank you for reviewing the wiki page of Draft:Philippe_K_Ziade and your feedback to make sure having the article in the Wikipedia Standards and Guidelines. Accordingly I have edited the article and removed external links and its section.
Can you please have a look and let me know If I can resubmit the article? Your contribution is mostly appreciated. Thank you