Jump to content

User talk:Theroadislong

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Przybylop (talk | contribs) at 20:55, 10 September 2022 (→Draft: Noah Zuhdi: Reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Welcome to my talk page. Click here to leave me a message .


Your draft article, Draft:Berlin Brands Group

H

U.S. Civil Rights Trail

Thank you for your comments and interest in this unpublished Wikipedia page. Agreed, it's a long list, although not "gigantic" in my opinion compared to many others of equal or lesser importance. The fight for civil rights in the United States must be considered one of the most important in human history, should it not? Granted, The Crusades (List of later historians of the Crusades - Wikipedia) are fascinating, but were they more important or notable than the fight for racial equality in the 20th century? The goal here is to flesh out the landmark sites with minimum detail and credible citations, which I'm working on diligently. It is no less encyclopedic than countless other related published entries, many of which I'm finding numerous (often comical) errors, and correcting, as I proceed. I would hope that a venue such as Wikipedia would enthusiastically rally around such a worthy entry, rather than criticize and, in one case, borderline harass during the creation process. Thanks again for your comments. Danceswithedits (talk) 20:19, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The fight for civil rights in the United States is indeed a very important topic but your topic is the "trail". You are duplicating and copying content that is already available on Wikipedia. You are being paid to edit whilst most of us labour thousands of hours here voluntarily. I have seen no harassment either? Theroadislong (talk) 20:25, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This is false. I am absolutely NOT "duplicating" content for Wikipedia or elsewhere. If you're going to make that accusation, please point to specific instances of duplication and I will quickly revise. My edits and original content in the current unpublished draft are a complete reversal of the original draft which I did not create or participate in creating. It does not read like a travel brochure at this point, as it presents brief statements of pure historical fact. Again, I ask that you point to specific instance to show otherwise. The "Trail" is a live representation of the Civil Rights movement, hence the page contains the landmarks that comprise the trail. It is dead-on on topic. I am under no obligation to "dispel" that I'm paid for my services, as I have fulfilled my disclosure obligation. Regarding harassment, if you will kindly re-read my comment which states quite clearly "borderline harass" which in my opinion is now coming from you. I firmly stand behind my efforts and will enthusiastically defend this project regardless of your opinions. I've labored countless hours voluntarily, so please spare me the entitled sanctimony. The fact that I'm open about being paid for this worthy and lengthy project does not in any way diminish my work or contribution to Wikipedia. Thanks again.Danceswithedits (talk) 13:37, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The draft is a list of locations on the United States Civil Rights Trail we already have articles for them, that is duplication of content. Theroadislong (talk) 14:25, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
So, which is it: "edits are doing nothing to dispel the impression that you are being paid to write a travel guide or tourist brochure for the trail" or "at least 120 of these sources do not mention the trail." You have contradicted yourself quite clearly here. Regarding the locations, the heading specifically states "U.S. Civil Rights Trail Historical Landmarks" followed by a list of each landmark with original content. I will stand by this draft upon re-submission and not give into this sort of criticism and virtual bullying. Thanks again. Danceswithedits (talk) 21:36, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have not contradicted myself at all, you are quite clearly being paid to promote the trail, and your draft will likely fail, because the vast majority of your sources do not mention the trail at all. Theroadislong (talk) 21:44, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Belligerent? YOU attacked me. It's in plain black and white above, with a clear personal attack based on the fact that I choose to be a paid professional. And it appears that you're stalking me on other drafts as well. If you continue to bully and/or harass me, I will not hesitate to report this activity. It seems fairly clear from other comments that I am not the only Wikipedia editor with similar concerns. I suggest you simply move on to others who will submit to your entitled bullying. Best wishes. Danceswithedits (talk) 19:32, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Again, the entry does NOT promote the trail and you did in fact contradict yourself. Your bias is crystal clear. Danceswithedits (talk) 19:33, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Feel free to report me, paid editing is allowed but that doesn't mean it is welcome. Theroadislong (talk) 20:32, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draft: Cristina Jacob

Hi! My draft about 'Cristina Jacob - film director' was declined based on the reason that the subject is not qualified for a Wikipedia article. I used many reliable sources that are independent of the subject. On the other hand, Cristina Jacob is a well-known film director, with several box office records of her films, so the subject qualifies for Wikipedia. I would like this dispute to be solved and the article to be published, as it respects Wikipedia guidelines. I would appreciate a third opinion or review on my article. Thank you! Followyoursoul (talk) 15:00, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like your draft has been declined again "submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources". Theroadislong (talk) 17:15, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel Larze

If you see any page about Daniel Larze dont even bother to review it, just G5 it (and send the user who sumitted it to SPI as well if you feel like it), as it will have been made by this blocked user:

Daniel Larze (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Plus, it will save you the frustration of having to endlessly re-add the AfC templates to their draft. Cheerio!

Mako001 (C)  (T)  🇺🇦 08:39, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draft: Stefania de Kenessey

Thank you for the useful comment on my draft! I appreciate it. First time writing on Wiki, so I am trying to conquer the learning curve...


-TM Teresa Motherway (talk) 21:26, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Need your suggestion please

Hi!

I am new on Wikipedia and I need some guidance.

I have come across a profile where it states that the subject “leads street photography workshops”.

Example - Matt Stuart (photographer)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matt_Stuart_(photographer)

Is that not promotional? Isn't that similar to selling a product on Wikipedia?

Does leading photography workshops comes under notability?

Can you shed some light on this please?

Thanks, David 

David curator (talk) 15:10, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It is sourced to a very reliable source so probably acceptable if it was sourced to their own website it would be a different matter. Theroadislong (talk) 15:14, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Noted that both the sources are very reliable. Thank you so much. David curator (talk) 15:19, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red in September 2022

Women in Red September 2022, Vol 8, Issue 9, Nos 214, 217, 240, 241


Online events:


Request for help:


Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 15:38, 31 August 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Draft rejected

Hello !

I wrote on the "ask for advice" and made some modifications after the response, but was told that as it was rejected nothing can be done anymore ? So the article won't ever exist ? Philippe Martin Art (talk) 10:58, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Is another review possible ? Would love an insight if some things need to be perfected. Philippe Martin Art (talk) 18:56, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Philippe Martin Art Your draft has been deleted because of a copyright violation, you will need to start again, please read WP:YFA first and declare any conflict of interest. Theroadislong (talk) 20:50, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Theroadislong May I please know what copyright violation ? I went to read that article, I have no conflict of interest to declare. I saw in that article "Seek out a sponsor" from a close field and saw that you created many artists pages. Would you be able to help with that page please ? Philippe Martin Art (talk) 13:01, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Philippe Martin Art I am not an admin so cannot see the deleted draft Draft:Galerie Philia it does not appear to be a notable topic so I would not be interested in helping, sorry. Theroadislong (talk) 13:37, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Namburi Paripurna draft

Hi, can you please take a look at the Wikipage for Namburi Paripurna which you relegated to a "Draft" earlier? I worked with others to gather some independent references to add to the article. I guess it meets the Wiki requirements now (although I still think there is a blatant bias here, as there are 100s of articles with no content or hardly any references except news of death reported in newspapers, just continuing without deletion.). Asooryampasya (talk) 15:29, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but their own books and interviews are not reliable independent sources, and please don't accuse me of bias, that is a personal attack, there are indeed many other poor quality articles, see other stuff exists. Theroadislong (talk) 15:34, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
7 out of 12 references right now are news articles and encyclopedia articles about the author. Of course, there is always a scope for improvement and more references, but isn't that continuous improvement the whole purpose of a Wikipedia article? If the first version should contain each and every reference available, what is the point of claiming Wikipedia needs more representation of women writers and stuff? Bias comment is not about you. It is about Wikipedia's well known bias against women, which is documented. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_bias_on_Wikipedia - this is a Wikipedia article. I took your feedback, asked around, and asked others too to edit the draft and improve it. I have nothing to gain or lose in this. I am not the author nor am I related to her. I am just another reader who thinks her work deserves a Wikipedia page. So, the only take home message for me is that Wikipedia is primarily for non-colored, male people. It will take a while before I can attempt to change or create any edit on Wikipedia again about Telugu people - male or female. Asooryampasya (talk) 17:23, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have not reviewed the article again, I merely commented that they would need to pass the criteria at WP:NWRITER and that their own books and interviews are not independent sources. Theroadislong (talk) 17:46, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Please look at the below list I have given. These 5 independent sources talk about her works and life.- Ravichandra (talk) 17:50, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I am listing the independent references cited in the article.
  • Article from Andhrabhoomi, a reliable Telugu news paper published an article on her.
  • A book mentioned her contributions towards Dalit literature. It is not a passing mention, almost 1.5 pages of information is given.
  • Andhra Jyoti another notable Telugu news paper published independent article about her life and works
  • BBC Telugu published article includes her work
  • Hans India, Another Indian news paper talked about her writings.
May I know why these sources are not considered for notability of the subject? Ravichandra (talk) 17:36, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have accepted the draft. Theroadislong (talk) 17:51, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. - Ravichandra (talk) 18:17, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draft: Linda Adler-Kassner

Hello, thank you for your review comments. I have made another attempt at removing / editing out the inappropriate promotional language in the "professional work" section. Any additional guidance or comments are greatly appreciated. Bcernst (talk) 19:56, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why Did You Leave A Bad Comment On My Draft?

Now This Is Serious. Draft:Zone Of Oceania Excludes Samoan Countries And Adds 2 Untalked Sections. This Article Is About The Location Of Oceania Itself And Not The Continent, As Well As About The Part Of Indonesia In The Guinea Island. SpyridisioAnnis (talk) 07:19, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't a bad comment? Your draft is completely unsourced and it's not clear why the content can't be included in Oceania. Theroadislong (talk) 07:23, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Marta Romashina

Hello, @Theroadislong

I have read your comment on my draft and have made changes accordingly, added few other realiable references and changed the layout. Please let me know if you can add any other suggestions for this page. Thank you. Cheekystore (talk) 13:15, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draft: Forge Theological Seminary

Regarding your comment, "not remotely clear why this is a notable topic? Theroadislong (talk) 15:18, 3 September 2022 (UTC):" The institution is just as notable as other established entries (e.g., The North American Reformed Seminary; Whitefield Theological Seminary; Greenville Presbyterian Theological Seminary), fitting within the list of Reformed seminaries in the United States (see template) and the List of Calvinist educational institutions in North America. According to the Notability Policy regarding organizations and companies, "notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject." There are at least two sources cited in the draft article. IRGRand (talk) 15:38, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

See other stuff exists and you have zero independent reliable sources I'm afraid and the three articles you mention are all tagged for poor referencing and lack of notability.Theroadislong (talk) 15:43, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I cited both a book and article that are both independent. My comment was not "This article exists, therefore this one should too." Rather, my reference to the other articles was regarding their notability and to the subjects inclusion in longstanding wiki lists. IRGRand (talk) 15:55, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
In order to demonstrate notability, you need to provide multiple references to in-depth articles with significant content written about the seminary in unrelated, independent journals, magazines, books or online. Theroadislong (talk) 16:01, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The palpable inconsistency is tiring. Your claim that the draft reads like an advertisement is unfounded. IRGRand (talk) 16:22, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Please visit Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk for other opinions, there is absolutely no inconsistency, that other poor quality articles exist is irrelevant, they need fixing, we don't need to add even more. Theroadislong (talk) 16:25, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Danville Mass Transit

I must disagree with your decision to decline the article. I don't see how it could possibly be understood as an advertisement, considering the language used and the fact that this is about a public transit agency, not just some random company. The fact that hundreds of thousands of people rely on the service, yet there is no article about it is a problem. Additionally, there are 9 sources cited, 2 of which are from the agency's website regarding the timetables/routes and transit center. Timetables/routes cannot be found anywhere else so the claim that the article relies too much on that agency's website is frankly absurd. Znns (talk) 18:55, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draft: Bebras Competition

Dear Teroadislong,

I improved the Draft:Bebras Competition and resubmitted it. Is there anything that still needs improvement or should this be sufficient to be published as per the current version?

Thank you

Editor1278 (talk) 11:42, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draft: Noah Zuhdi

Hello, I see that you made an edit on my draft about Noah Zuhdi, but I cannot tell where the edit was. It has been about seven weeks since my review submission and then your subsequent edit a day later. I didn't know if you were the one to review it or not. I am just afraid of the status of my draft, especially since the last review went sideways with feedback about an article needing to be mainly about my subject when all articles were mainly about the subject and had his name in the article title/headline. If you can provide any advice on my draft or are able to review it, I'd appreciate it. Thank you for your time and consideration. Przybylop (talk) 16:56, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I did some minor editing for style per WP:MOS here [1] Sports are not really my speciality so I will leave it for another reviewer. Theroadislong (talk) 17:08, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the response. I appreciate it. Przybylop (talk) 20:55, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draft: Xsoundbeatz

Hello

I have read your comment on my draft and have made changes accordingly, added few other realiable references and changed the layout. Please let me know if you can add any other suggestions for this page. Thank you. Timial13 (talk) 17:40, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Board of Trustees election

Thank you for supporting the NPP initiative to improve WMF support of the Page Curation tools. Another way you can help is by voting in the Board of Trustees election. The next Board composition might be giving attention to software development. The election closes on 6 September at 23:59 UTC. View candidate statement videos and Vote Here. MB 04:10, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My Article Was Rejected For Useless Reasons!

Capitalization Doesn’t Matter For An Article, And Wikipedia Does Not List It As A Policy, But Also, The Article Is Pretty Realiable That Not Even A Single Thing About This Is Forgotten In Blogs. Sources Are Mostly Some You Heard Of, So I Did Not Add Them. So The Next Time You Review Draft:Zone Of Oceania, I Hope You Accept It, And It Is Something Way Too Important For Wikipedia. That’s Not All, IT IS NOT ORIGINAL RESEARCH! It Is Also Notable. SpyridisioAnnis (talk) 09:11, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

Hello. I just want to ask why some other Wikipedia articles got accepted even though most of their sources come from social media websites? For example, this article;

Jonaxx - Wikipedia

I was just confused why the article got accepted but some of the writers' drafts got declined just because they have social media as their reference even though it was already processed through the WayBack Machine? Kaizen the Great (talk) 10:16, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

See other stuff exists, I have tagged it for the issues. Theroadislong (talk) 10:20, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Vladimír Geršl

You Commented my article: "This is blatantly promotional."

Well it is not. I Am not paid by the person, nor I know that person on some friend level. I am just interested in Czech developers and this one did not have an article on Wikipedia even though his career is quite important in our country.

Every biography is a promotion of the person it writes about, so I don't know what you want from me? Petr.michael (talk) 11:16, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That was NOT my comment but I do agree with it. You say "Every biography is a promotion of the person it writes about" no that is absolutely incorrect, we only report (good and bad) content that has been written by reliable sources, promotion has no part to play in Wikipedia. Theroadislong (talk) 11:21, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, what I wrote there is my summary of things I read about Vladimír Geršl. It is not some copy paste promotion material. You will not find it anywhere else written like this. So I don't know what to do about the article so it will meet your criteria. Do I have to "find some dirt" on him, so it would not be so positive?
By the way .. when we only report as you wrote. We still do a promotion of the person by it. If you wouldn't report on something it will be forgotten by time. So I think what I wrote isn't "absolutely incorrect" , it is just another view on the same thing. Petr.michael (talk) 14:42, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draft: Zowey Rens

Hello! I just want to ask if is this draft okay? What other things do I need to improve in order for it to get accepted? I already cited reliable websites especially Google News and the subject is notable in India as well as in the Philippines for their contribution in different international anthologies. She was also the youngest Wattpad author who established her own publishing house in India, but no one has still made an article about that.


Draft:Zowey Rens - Wikipedia Kaizen the Great (talk) 12:31, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Her, being the youngest Wattpad author to establish a publishing house, was just posted on Facebook pages. Hopefully, someone will write an article soon about it. Kaizen the Great (talk) 12:32, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Glen_Melville_Reservoir

Hello,

I am currently teaching a group of students on how to edit Wikipedia. One of them wrote this article which you reviewed to mainspace. Another wrote this article but it got drafted. Both articles are from here which we used as a working list.

I have now made some input into the draft and resubmitted. I was wondering if you can take a look/review.

Cheers! OWilsn (talk) 14:50, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

editing of page mushtaq ahmad veeri

this page is still under process. there are many references which i can mention on time. i need time to complete this page. Toperthebest (talk) 05:15, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draft

Hello, I have 3 Draft pages that need a review, I hope you will review it, have a nice day. Ahmedadeljaff (talk) 19:46, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Inviation to comment on AfD

Hello, as you are a very experienced editor and very fair, I would like to ask you to comment on AfD for Andrew Aziz and comment on Wikipedia:AUTHOR and Wikipedia:Notability (books).

Thanks. Bestwaytoedit (talk) 16:40, 7 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure why you have asked me to comment on this/ I tend to agree one of the other users who said "Non-notable, a stock broker doing his job". Theroadislong (talk) 17:01, 7 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry that was a mistake here. I wanted to ask for an opposing editor to comment (against what I am voting, not votestacking) somehow messed up here. My apologies but thanks for the feedback. Bestwaytoedit (talk) 17:01, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Yesterday Today Tomorrow

Hello, in case you weren't already aware, Draft:Yesterday Today Tomorrow is meant to be proposed changes to the existing article Yesterday/Today/Tomorrow, by an editor who has disclosed their COI at their talk page. Storchy (talk) 17:42, 7 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up, I have tagged the draft for deletion as a copyright violation of https://www.yttassociation.org/ytt-approach they would be better off requesting edits on the article talk page AFC is not required. Theroadislong (talk) 17:45, 7 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, the COI editor is trying (if a bit grudgingly) to comply, but has struggled a bit with how to propose COI edits: see their user talk page for the thread.
I've removed what I think is all of the copyrighted text from that draft, though the rest of it looks like it was copied from someplace that I haven't found yet. Did you want to withdraw the speedy tag for now, since we haven't got a URL for the rest? Storchy (talk) 17:49, 7 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
 Done thanks. Theroadislong (talk) 17:51, 7 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed issues with Jackson Premium Outlets

Hi @Theroadislong, I fixed the issues that you brought to my attention. The article is framed neutrally, I removed any sources that didn't mention the outlets and/or Simon Property Group, and I removed the reference to Disney's Animal Kingdom (related to the Six Flags being the second biggest theme park). Would you please review again? Freeholdman12 (talk) 18:27, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Theroadislong&oldid=1109602851"