User talk:A412

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The International Man

Hello, A412. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.— Crispy Beef (talk) 17:42, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Responded at your talk page. User:A412 (Talk * C) 23:37, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Giuseppe D.

I've moved this article back into AfC space, it's not ready to go live yet. Pol430 talk to me 00:09, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, thought it was. A412 (talk) 00:11, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

I have serious reservations about the quality of the sources, the excessive number of external links listed and external links in the body text. Based on the referencing I'm not convinced the subject is notable enough. I see you're quite new to editing Wikipedia. Firstly, welcome! :) Secondly, thanks for volunteering to help out AfC we are always backlogged there. I've checked the articles you have created and in general you are doing a great job, but it might be an idea to look for some mentoring from a more experienced editor in 'the ways of AfC'. Just until you know your way around all the policies and guidelines a bit better. I'd be happy to help you if you would like? Pol430 talk to me 00:27, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I was wondering a bit about that one. I have a few questions about AfC:

1) Generally, are the guidelines for notability similar to those for keeping at AfD?

2) If a submission is declined, can I help the user edit the page a bit to make it conform to WP:V and WP:N? A412 (talk) 00:40, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

1) The notability guideline applies to the whole of Wikipedia. It includes the general notability guideline or WP:GNG which is the basic standard articles should conform to. We also have additional notability guidelines for various different subjects, there is a box on the right hand side of the main notability page that links to the various different ones. Everything written in an article should be verifiable; verifiability is achieved by placing inline citations that link to reliable sources. WP:VRS is a good page to point new editors to, in order to give them a basic understanding of what constitutes a reliable source. The full guide to reliable sources can be found at WP:RS. 2) Absolutely, nobody WP:OWNs Wikipedia pages, anyone can edit them (although it is generally considered bad form to randomly edit of peoples user pages--unless its their talk page). Sometimes when you are reviewing a submission at AfC the content and sources are good but the layout or styling is not quite right, in these cases it's always a good idea just to fix it yourself and then publish it--if it's up to scratch. Obviously, if the submission needs a mountain of work then it's best to decline it and tell the author what the problems are. A submission can be resubmitted as many times as it needs to be to get it right.

So there is a bit of Wikipedia 101, I need to get some sleep now, but if you have any more questions or want advice just ask away. I'm monitoring this page so i'll see any messages you leave when I'm back tomorrow evening. Pol430 talk to me 01:03, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

I accepted the page Regina Louise from AfC. I thought it was okay before noticing it was copied from her website, so I fixed the copyvio. My question though, is, how is it on notability? There are quite a few news sources which I added inline cites to. A412 (talk) 03:05, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

I have made a few changes, you can see what in the edit history. In terms of notability, she just about makes it as she has been featured in two major regional newspapers. The blue link to her book goes to the wrong place so I have de-linked it. All in all a good job :) Pol430 talk to me 18:24, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Jaap van Ginneken

Hello, The article Jaap van Ginneken was declined, i understand because of lack of notability. Maybe you can give me some details how i can improve the article in that point, maybe by removing some parts.--Joost26 (talk) 08:24, 4 January 2012 (UTC) You ask to provide more information on why the subject is worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia:

• It is true that a majority of those links is in Dutch or links to Dutch sites. I have refrained from including these in the proposed English Wikipedia item, as they may only be of limited use for an Anglophone searching information.
• But i have chosen to propose an English-language rather than a Dutch-language item. Dutch speakers can easily find the information. For Anglophones, it is much more complicated to find the basic facts.
• Studies and books by the person in question have been published by a number of noteworthy Anglophone publishers: Avon/ Hearst, Cambridge University Press, Erlbaum, Pelican/ Penguin, Rowman & Littlefield, Sage (as well as in Japanese, Chinese, Italian, etc. next to Dutch), chapters by Blackwell, Springer etc.

My question is: Do i have to look for more Anglophone sources and should i mention the Anglophone publishers next to the isbn numbers?--Joost26 (talk) 08:50, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

The problem with some of these sources is that they are what he writes, rather than about him. If you want to prove notability (also see Guidelines on biographies and Guidelines on notability). Generally what we want is third-party, substantial media coverage. For example, coverage in newspapers is usually a pretty good criterion. If most of the sources are in Dutch, can you point them out so that it can be shown that there is substantial media coverage? Thanks! A412 (talk) 15:34, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your comment--Joost26 (talk) 16:24, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sexposition

Hi, can you explain why you consider the sources used in the article are not "substantial use and press coverage". I did not add any "Links to sites specifically intended to promote the neologism itself", so I have no idea why you said so. Could you please reply here? My IP keeps changing so I will never notice if you reply on the IP talkpage.131.180.34.199 (talk) 12:17, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Generally, neologisms are not included in Wikipedia unless they have substantial use and media coverage of them. (See WP:NEO#Neologisms) That article has only 2 references of its use, which is generally not enough to be mainstream. Could it fit better at wiktionary:sexposition? (Wiktionary usually has less strict criteria on these definitions) A412 (talk) 15:34, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Chris Tomic

Hello,

This person has been on german tv www.voxnow.de and www.bild.de and is the inventor of the first mobile content. The clicks are premium content and cannot be posted. I posted links of the german vanity fair article and hi society magazine.

let me know if anything else is needed, Maik Rekon — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maik Rekon (talk • contribs) 13:07, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

After looking at the submission again, the references are not about him, but about his company. To show that he is notable, there must be media coverage about him specifically. Secondly, if a source cannot be posted, unfortunately Wikipedia cannot accept it as verifiable, per the verifiability policy. See the verifiable sources policy and the notability policy. User:A412 (Talk * C) 15:35, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Hello,

Here I send you 2 more sources http://vanityfairhomme.wordpress.com/ and www.christomic.com please let me know if this is enough.

regards, Maik Rekon — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maik Rekon (talk • contribs) 18:19, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Unfortunately, neither of those are reliable third-party sources. They seem to be personal sites or blogs, which are not reliable as per WP:VRS. User:A412 (Talk * C) 23:34, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Data Visualization (Software)

Dear reviewer,

the article rejection reason for the "Data Visualization (Software)" is not really clear to me.

Important topics:

• the tool is not made by an organization, but by a group of friends spread in more than one country and all driven by the same intention of realizing a free tool which might be useful for everybody;
• the tool described is free and public as it can be read from the article itself and from all the mentioned public "External links";
• the tool has been downloaded for free more than 6000 times and rated by over 200 users (as it can be read from the Softpedia page mentioned in the "External links" section).

Where's the issue in this article? How can I improve it?

Please let me know, thanks in advance.

Tervonen (talk) 15:12, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

After rereading your submission, one of the main problems is that it is less of an article about the software and more about what it does. According to WP:NOT, Wikipedia is not an instruction manual. If you could edit the article to include your reasons above as to why it is notable, that would be great, and you could resubmit it. Also take a quick look at WP:GNG. Thanks! User:A412 (Talk * C) 15:26, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Dear A412,

if I have properly understood this article can be accepted to be published if specific parts of the article itself are changed in a specific way. Would it be possible for you to review it now that I have done some changes and let me know if it's fine now?

Thank you very much in adavance, Tervonen (talk) 16:33, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you

		The Rosetta Barnstar
		For your translation work in the Dimitrios Vergos article. Northamerica1000(talk) 13:02, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Delcan

Delcan Corportion is a large firm has been mentioned in connection with the inspection of the Champlain Bridge in Montreal and the Johnson Street Bridge in Victoria, British Columbia so some digging in the "archives" of the Montreal Gazette and the Victoria Times Colonist should give the needed info. It also designed a number of large bridges, please see what is linked to it. Besides I called it a {{stub}} Peter Horn User talk 02:22, 10 January 2012 (UTC) Peter Horn User talk 02:23, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Please actually mention/cite these in these article. In its current form, it unfortunately fails to explain why it is notable. Additionally, the designing of bridges is not quoted in the article. If you could include these and resubmit, that would be great! Also see WP:CORP User:A412 (Talk * C) 02:26, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Please see User talk:Peter Horn#Your article has been moved to AfC space from User:Peter Horn/Delcan. User:ArticlesForCreationBot did us no favour by moving this from my user space. Lets just move it back to where I started it originally and where it should have stayed. That way I can work on it and in due time resubmit it. In fact I'll attempt the move myself. Peter Horn User talk 02:49, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Actually, you can edit the article in AfC space too, the same way you can in your userspace. But I know that you have a personal preference for this, and that's fine too. User:A412 (Talk * C) 02:52, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Ah yes, but in my user space it is less likely to be deleted and it gives me the time I need to find the third party references etc. The problem with the The Gazette (Montreal) is that it deletes its on line editions after 30 days. Peter Horn User talk 03:02, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

It doesn't matter where the submission is! If you don't do any bad copyright violation (copy 'n paste texts from other sites) then your draft won't be deleted normally. And since you submitted your draft for a review - so how should we/the bot guess that you didn't wanted the submission moved? mabdul 00:42, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Xiangqi in English

Thank you for reviewing my article about a website "Xiangqi in English". You challenged notability of the subject.

I agree with you, that the notability is not obvious for people, who aren't associated with the mindsport of Chinese Chess. At least Xiangqi itself is notable and included in Wikipedia.

The website under question grants for the first time access to many chinese sources in a western language. That's its importance. The amount of material presented is encyclopedia like. That's its significance. And it's unique in the topic. What else is required to be notable?

Maybe you can give me some details how I can improve the article further, because these facts are included in the article already. Thank you.

Kiebitz21 (talk) 17:11, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

While the subject may be notable, Wikipedia is based on verifiability. Thus, you need substantial, third-party, non-trivial coverage of the subject. See the guideline on sourcing. You might want to look at the existing articles for other websites to see the outside references they should have. Try searching Google News to find sources, and read WP:WEB.

User:A412 (Talk * C) 23:40, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I will work on it. Kiebitz21 (talk) 11:53, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

There is a 3rd party coverage of the site in German. I added it to the reference list. Kiebitz21 (talk) 17:15, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Callum Driver

Hi, I see that you tagged Callum Driver for speedy deletion per WP:CSD#G4. G4 states "A sufficiently identical and unimproved copy ... of a page deleted via its most recent deletion discussion. This excludes pages that are not substantially identical to the deleted version, pages to which the reason for the deletion no longer applies ...". In this case the article was both improved (substantial additional content, with references) and one of the reasons for deletion certainly no longer applied: his appearance for Burton Albion F.C. on 6 January 2012, mentioned in the article, is sufficient to satisfy WP:NFOOTY no. 2. This is because Burton Albion play in Football League Two, which is listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Fully professional leagues#List of fully professional leagues under "England". As to whether WP:GNG still applies, that is a much more subjective matter. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:25, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

You may also wish to comment at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2012 January 12#Callum Driver. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:41, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Sorry about that. I think what happened was that I had the page open for a while, and in the meantime it was being updated, and then I didn't look at the updated version before nominating. A412 (Talk * C) 15:32, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

The article had no edits in the 24 hours prior to your {{db-repost}}. The version as recreated at 20:14, 6 January 2012 by Egghead06 (talk · contribs) had the professional debut with Burton Albion, and was reliably referenced (BBC Sport). Your {{db-repost}} was over five days later, 23:58, 11 January 2012. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:09, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Was probably an honest mistake on my part then. Sorry for the trouble with the deletion. A412 (Talk * C) 23:30, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Articles for Creation Appeal

Articles for Creation urgently needs your help! Articles for Creation is desperately short of reviewers! We are looking for urgent help, from experienced editors, in reviewing submissions in the pending submissions queue. Currently the are 1697 submissions waiting to be reviewed. Do you have what it takes? Are you familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines? Do you know what Wikipedia is and is not? Do you have a working knowledge of the Manual of Style, particularly article naming conventions? Are you autoconfirmed? Can you review submissions based on their individual merits? If the answer to these questions is yes, then please read the reviewing instructions and donate a little of your time to helping tackle the backlog.

Talkback

Hello, A412. You have new messages at Pol430's talk page.
Message added 17:42, 16 January 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Pol430 talk to me 17:42, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

some WP:AFC problems

So finally I'm able to talk to you. Please use the JS helper tool you can find at User:Timotheus Canens/afchelper4.js. (You have to add this to your JS file under the preferences - if you need help, leave a talkback at my talkpage)

Why to use that? This is rather simply to explain: the submitter gets a notification, it adds our project template if you accept it, it updates the recent page if you accept it, it blanks the submissions and mark it for deletion if you decline it as a copyvio, etc. All automated with a simple click!

I also reverted your decline at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Daydreaming With... James Lavelle after a discussion our IRC chat with the submitter: If you check the duplication detector, then you will notice that there are really small overlapping text passages with the proposed link: http://toolserver.org/~dcoetzee/duplicationdetector/compare.php?url1=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FWikipedia_talk%3AArticles_for_creation%2FDaydreaming_With..._James_Lavelle&url2=http%3A%2F%2Fartczar.wordpress.com%2F2011%2F02 The helpee in the wikipedia IRC help channel (#wikipedia-en-help ^connect) explained also that this page copy and pasted their press release. I understand that this submission is way not ready for mainspace, but it is not OK to decline a submission with a wrong reason - how should the submitter then improve the draft if he doesn't know what to improve? mabdul 11:06, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the comment, I'm sorry, I never saw that tool before, I'll use it from now on for AFC.

As for the decline, sorry about that, it looked a bit like the blog post, and the other commenter had mentioned CV, so I didn't look terribly thoroughly. Why the "finally able to talk to you" though? A412 (Talk * C) 15:02, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Two questions/concerns though-

1) That tool isn't linked/or it's extremely difficult to find from the AFC project page. It should be easier to find so that people newer to AFC know that it exists.

2) What exactly does "If you check the duplication detector, then you will notice that there are really small overlapping text passages with the proposed link:" and then "The helpee in the wikipedia IRC help channel (#wikipedia-en-help ^connect) explained also that this page copy and pasted their press release." mean? A412 (Talk * C) 15:36, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

I wanted to tell you about the helper tool earlier (I have your talk page open in a separated tab since a week or maybe even longer - I'm "stalking" sometimes the AFC related edits in the AFC IRC channel (#wikipedia-en-afc-feed ^connect) and because of your edit summary I saw that you don't use the helper tool.

Yes, the tool is not that easy to find, but there is a complete section in the reviewing instructions Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Reviewing_instructions#Script and thus should be easy to find...

Check the link above: the text is not a really copyright violation since there is only a small sentence which is identical - too less to delete the draft. Better remove this one and explain the situation in an additional comment!

You found a blog post which is a copyright violation - "they" (the blogger) posted (copied and pasted) a published press release (not online accessible). Hope it is now clearer.

mabdul 21:21, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Throop Higby Richardson - Marin County Pioneer.

Thank you for the review(s)! these are my first tries, I appreciate your patience and helpful responses. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gkewin (talk • contribs) 20:43, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	For your awesome work in WP:AFC.(I wish I got one too. I did review a lot lately.) Ankit Maity Talk | contribs 16:25, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/SABIO-Reaction_Kinetics_Database

I understand that the article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/SABIO-Reaction_Kinetics_Database was declined because of the lack of reliable, third-party sources in the article.
In order to address this obstacle

• I added 8 third-party references, all of them citable by doi and / or PMID (references 4-11)
• the SABIOR-RK database is already cited by several articles in WP including

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enzyme_kinetics

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_information_required_in_the_annotation_of_models

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BioPAX

• of course there are additional publications citing SABIO-RK e.g.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3261705/?tool=pubmed

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21824972

• in the meantime, the German version of this article passed the review process:

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/SABIO-Reaction_Kinetics_Database

Please let me know if anything else is needed. HITSter SabioRK (talk) 15:09, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Looks good; are all the refs from the German version on the English version? I'll accept it if they are. A412 (Talk * C) 20:58, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Actually, in contrast to the English version there are only 3 references provided in the German version.

• the first German ref corresponds to the English version ref [1]
• the second German ref corresponds to the English version ref [3]
• the third German ref is now newly added to the English version as ref [4]. This ref was not included before because the publication is written in German in contrast to all the other cited references

Thank you for your comments. I hope that the article is now ready for acceptance, HITSter SabioRK (talk) 10:48, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Created at SABIO-Reaction Kinetics Database! A412 (Talk * C) 21:06, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

Thanks for touching up my submissions Amazonas Philharmonic and Rusty Malinoski.  Never checked that before, but I will now. :- ) DCS 00:13, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Edward Ulloa (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Attorney, Orange County and Pandering

Browning Double Automatic Shotgun (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Choke

Forced Rayleigh scattering (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Thermal diffusion

Orange County Employees Association (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Orange County

Sofa.com (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Sofa

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:37, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Article Rescue Barnstar
		In honor of your rewriting of Seawater desalination in Australia, saving it from possible deletion. Paris1127 (talk) 04:28, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Type1DiabetesAwareness.org

Hello, for my article I have listed reliable sources. One is the JDRF, one is the American Diabetes Association, and one is the CDC which is a .gov page. These are all reliable sources and not blogs. They can all be verified. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Type1DiabetesAwareness.org — Preceding unsigned comment added by Toneda (talk • contribs) 15:38, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

The problem with the article is that these articles talk about diabetes, not the website. To establish notability, there need to be reliable sources about the site itself.A412 (Talk * C) 23:26, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Hello again, I read the comments but what I don't understand is the site itself IS about diabetes but you are saying that the site must reference diabetes? I'm confused, can you please give me an example? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.17.99.76 (talk) 04:07, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Does this mean that other website must reference type1diabetesawareness.org? Toneda (talk) 04:17, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Okay, so your article is about type1diabetesawareness.org . To show that this website needs an article, there needs to be a source about type1diabetesawareness.org . Understand? A412 (Talk * C) 04:20, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Here is a source, the website address is listed near the bottom. http://www.facebook.com/Type1DiabetesAwareness Toneda (talk) 07:17, 9 February 2012 (UTC)