User talk:wiae

This is a Wikipedia user talk page.
This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia. The original talk page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Wiae.

Wiae does not mind criticism. Feel free to let them know if they did something wrong.

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14

This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by when more than 3 sections are present.

November 2021 backlog drive

New Page Patrol \| November 2021 Backlog Drive
On November 1, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Redirect patrolling is not part of the drive. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. (t · c) buidhe 01:59, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Oxford Space Systems

Hello, Wiae. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Oxford Space Systems, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 06:03, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

About article

hello Wiae. thanks for your review. this is about DirectDL article. This article may be deleted . I try to understand you, the references are about the article. in some of Arabic/Persian ones, there is a passing reference to it. but all of them, about this article. please review your vote again. thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by E V I L044 (talk • contribs) 07:04, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi E V I L044, thanks for leaving me this message. Unfortunately Wikipedia articles that cannot be supported by reliable sources with significant coverage of the subject are typically deleted from Wikipedia. (There are some exceptions but they don't really apply in this case.) I would encourage you to review these links, as well as the article about the general notability guideline. the only references I see do not provide significant coverage (i.e., more than a passing mention) from a reliable source, so unfortunately I think the article will likely be deleted, but we will wait to see what the outcome of the deletion discussion may be. /wiae /tlk 13:21, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking the time, I fully understand what you mean, but don't expect too much for a 4-month website. for example about medium, you can see all of platform features. please change your mind to "keep". i add new refrences soon as posibble, but maybe article deleted untel that time. E V I L044 (talk) 17:09, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again E V I L044. I think the critical thing to keep in mind is that if we really shouldn't expect too much for a 4-month website because it hasn't been discussed much by reliable sources, then it is probably too soon for a Wikipedia article about that subject in the first place. Or, to put it another way, we actually should expect significant coverage of a 4-month website if Wikipedia is to contain an article about it. I hope this explains why I believe this subject doesn't yet meet Wikipedia's article inclusion standards (which I linked you to in my previous post) and why I have suggested that the article be deleted at the deletion discussion. /wiae /tlk 20:10, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Whether this article has been deleted or not, I'm glad to meet you. You have very good morals and you speak well. Unlike reviewers who do not even answer. If the article is deleted, I will recreate it with new and better references in the future. Thank you very much <3 E V I L044 (talk) 20:31, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, E V I L044, I try to be helpful. If the article is indeed deleted, I would suggest waiting until it has been written about extensively from reliable sources before attempting recreation. (If, say, TheNextWeb were to write about the site, that would be a useful source.) I wouldn't blame other reviewers; the reality is that their work—reviewing thousands of articles that typically don't meet our inclusion guidelines—is both tough and thankless work. That said, if you are looking for friendly advice, you can always reach out to the Teahouse.

The other thing to remember is that notability, which is basically "the criteria a subject must meet in order to get its own Wikipedia article", can be a bit confusing. It may take some time to fully wrap your head around it. My first article was also deleted (for any admin talk-page-stalkers, it was written on April 4, 2010 😊), but with lots of reading and thinking I developed a better understanding of what "notability" means and why it is so important to Wikipedia. It is not impossible, although it will certainly take some effort up-front. /wiae /tlk 20:49, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

To your knowledge, how much time is left to delete the article? E V I L044 (talk) 05:56, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]