User talk:MatthewVanitas

Start a new discussion thread

Ron Rafael Shimshilashvili

Hey Matthew, Can you help me edit it better ? Thank you, Mike

You're talking about Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ron Rafael Shimshilashvili , right? First off, and not saying this to be a jerk, you have to remember this is a busy place, so never assume someone else knows what you're talking about, so make sure to phrase things very clearly, give links, etc.

So far as improving, I'm going to link you a few "suggested reading" policies:

First off, read the basics of WP:Referencing for beginners, and that will show you how to make Footnotes. It's pretty easy coding.
Next, get your sources together. Look at the links you have now, and figure out which ones are WP:Reliable sources. They have to be sources where you can honestly say "yes, this is a website known for accuracy, and where their success depends on having accurate information." So, for example "http://www.watchfreemovies.ch" is not going to be one; they don't care about journalistic accuracy, they don't have an editor who will fire someone if they get someone's hometown or age wrong. So no blogs (unless they're the blog of some serious organisation, not just a hobbyist), no forums, not Facebook. IMDB is fine to link to at the end, but you can't cite them since they're crowdsourced like Wiki is, and they don't show their sources. If he's covered in Israeli press, feel free to use Hebrew websites as well, as long as they're still WP:Reliable sources.
The big one: once you know how to make footnotes, and you have good references, make the footnotes and make sure everything is properly footnoted. For example, where you say They gave hem the nickname "Dubi", which means “ Bear ” in Hebrew , because he was as big and cute like a bear so often as a baby ., you either need to find a news site, media industry site, or something which proves that, or it has to be removed. There's a rule WP:BLP which basically says "if someone is alive, we have to protect their reputation, so absolutely everything in a living person's article has to be verified."

Those are my basic suggestions, let me know if you have any questions. MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:36, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much brother !!! here you go it took me 3 days to go over each one and whats not good i removed whats good i left :) Thanks for youre help and patience please check and let me know if there is anything else needed. Youre the best !!! :) The article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Ron_Rafael_Shimshilashvili — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikeedwon (talk • contribs) 11:40, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Mike, I'm happy to help you here, but you really have to read what I recommend and do it. To be blunt, you did maybe part of #2, it doesn't seem you looked into #1, and you haven't done anything resembling #3. Like I said above every fact must be clearly footnoted. Again, for example, your article says Shimshilashvili has taken various courses in Modeling from Ad Miami, Flair Modeling, and Got What It Takes Modeling. Okay, says who? The reader has zero idea which of the many links at the bottom would verify that this is true. Did an interview he gave mention that? Did a magazine that profiled him mention those courses he took? If a link verifies it, footnote it. If you can't footnote it (it's just something you know personally, read on Twitter or Facebook, etc) then you cannot include it in a published article.

Again, happy to help you, but it's not going to get anywhere if I recommend three basic things and you kinda do one of them and don't even try the rest. Give a shot at footnoting, and then shoot me a line and I can tell you how the footnoting is working out. MatthewVanitas (talk) 04:16, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Matthew, Again thanks for your kindness help, you’re the best!!! Thanks for your help :)

First, about "article says Shimshilashvili has taken various courses in Modeling from Ad Miami, Flair Modeling, and Got What It Takes Modeling." It says right there in this Magazine: http://nextmodelmen.com/hottestmodel/2009/11/ron-shimshilashvili-at-next-hottest-model.html

Second, regarding "They gave him the nickname "Dubi", which means “Bear” in Hebrew, because he was as big and cute like a bear so often as a baby." it’s also on his Personal Website: http://www.ronrafael.com/about-ron.php

And third, regarding the Interview its right here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEOrNMo2GPw

I’ve added all of them there :)

Hope this works, if not please let me know what else I got to change and if you could give me a hand ill really appreciate it a lot. Have a great day brother.

Sincerely, Mike — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikeedwon (talk • contribs) 17:23, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Matthew, Take a look at it now :) i footnoted ALL the links :) Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikeedwon (talk • contribs) 17:09, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mike, your cleanup and check for WP:Reliable sources of the references is a good start, but you're still not understanding what WP:Footnoting is. Please check out that policy: footnoting is when you use the "ref" markings to place a reference right after the fact that it substantiates, and then Wiki automatically turns it into a little number, and those numbers automatically sort and match themselves at the end of the article. So if I want to know where I can verify the story about his nickname, I look at the little number "7" after that sentence, and go to Footnote #7 at the end, and it will be the link to the article that tells me that fact.

I'm going to go turn one of your references into a footnote for you as an example, but you really need to read WP:Referencing for beginners and apply it to your article. MatthewVanitas (talk) 05:38, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Matthew, First of all i wanna THANK YOU SOOO MUCH for teaching me that, i am glad i learned something new :) here you go, you can check it , I've added 24 footnotes and i cleaned all links. I hope this is it :) so i can start creating and submitting new article :) If there is anything please let me know so i can fix it, it was Ron's birthday so we celebrated he turned 21 and this whole week i worked on this the whole day started from 0 and i hope it will work now and be in Wikipedia. Thank you brother and i am so glad you came on my article a nice person as you teaching me new things, now i even got more jo to make and write more articles in Wikipedia. Thank You, Mike (Mikeedwon (talk) 20:32, 2 December 2012 (UTC))[reply]

Just for reference: Past action of the article on this same subject, A recent deletion discussion regarding an article for "Ron shimshilashvili" that was an attempt to avoid the salting of the original name, and an earlier log from an early attempt to force this article titled "Ron Rafael Shimshilashvili". Any new article on this subject should be checked carefully. Thanks. --| Uncle Milty | talk | 23:40, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also, for some reason there is a duplicate of the Ron Rafael Shimshilashvili AFC located at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ron Shimshilashvili--| Uncle Milty | talk | 04:40, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Revised page for Ali Noorani

Hello,

I've edited the page for Ali Noorani to add several references and remove sections that made the page seem especially CV-like. Have another look? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Ali_Noorani

Thanks, DEG2012 (talk) 21:39, 15 November 2012 (UTC)DEG2012[reply]

It's a good bit better now. Still had some formatting errors (bolding titles unnecessarily, external links in the body of the article, etc), so I tweaked some of those for you. It may be enough to get through, but since you'll likely be in the queue at least 5 days or so given how long the current line is, I'd take the opportunity to do a little more polishing.

Primarily, you have some phrasings that fall into what wiki calls WP:WEASEL and WP:PEACOCK; the first being phrasings that are too vague or waffly, the latter being phrases that are too subjective. For example, if you describe something as "the premiere agency for..." you either have to give some indication of who of authoritative opinion has designated them "premier" or else remove that term and instead emphasise their importance through facts, not adjectives. Weasel phrases are things like "many say" or "across the country", while peacock terms are "dynamic", "momentous impact", etc. You want to go through this with a fine-tooth comb and remove anything that isn't either purely fact-based, or clearly cited to a serious media/academic/etc. opinion.

If you do happen to have more sources out there about Noorani, like articles which mention his accomplishments and skills, etc., those would also help make a stronger case, but if this is the max you can get for WP:Independent sourcing, this might do it. I'd like to get a fresh opinion in, so I'll let it work through the queue. Shoot me a line if any other questions come up, or if you get declined again and need help with a last polish. MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:53, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I've attempted to polish it further and get rid of the weasels and peacocks. DEG2012 (talk) 20:53, 16 November 2012 (UTC)DEG2012[reply]

Is there anything else I need to do to get this through the queue? I understand that the queue was "at least 5 days" as of Nov. 15, but after 11 days I am curious about the timeline. Thanks. DEG2012 (talk) 21:43, 26 November 2012 (UTC)DEG2012[reply]

Helena Araújo

Hello Matthew. I have continued to work on the page Helena Araújo and would appreciate any new feedback and/or guidance you could give me so that the page become acceptable by Wikipedia. I thank you in advance. Jocelyne1960 (talk) 13:41, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I've made some improvements; hit the page's History tab to see them listed, and by clicking the little circle buttons you can compare the changes made from your last edit to my last edit to see how I coded them. You might find that very helpful for getting a feel for how articles are formatted. Looking pretty good so far, but you have a few major assertions that aren't footnoted; technically for Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons every claim about a person should be cited, to ensure that nobody is including false or misleading information that could harm a living person. Not to be paranoid, but that's policy, so that which can't be cited must be removed until it can be. Once you address that, we should be good to publish. MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:50, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again Matthew. Thank you for your time and help............You left me the feedback to find a citation for Alfonso Araujo Gaviria's involvement/work for the Colombian Government. Most if not all of the information i find online and in English is from the Wikipedia page about him. Isn't that page providing enough citation?

also............when you wrote down that i need a citation for Helena Araujo's education in the various universities, i am sorry but i don't clearly understand what i need to provide there...........

I am working on a page for Helena Araujo in the spanish and french wikipedia.....is there any way to link those pages when they are accepted?

I apologize for my inexperience with wikipedia and its requirements........... Looking forward to your reply and again, with much gratitude. Jocelyne1960 (talk) 17:28, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, glad to help. In answer to your points: you can't cite Wikipedia on Wikipedia (that would be circular logic), however if her father's page cites a book which mentions that he had a daughter Helena, and she was influenced by his politics, then you can copy that footnote and bring it over to your article. Unforunately, you can't just say "it's covered in the other articles, go read them" anymore than you can just skip footnotes altogether and say "go read some books, it's in some of them." ;)

So far as a citation for the universities, we just need something independent but credible supporting that. Like maybe a Brazilian newspaper (sources can be in any language) that profiled her in an article listed out her schools, so you can cite that. The purpose for the citation is WP:Verifiability. That is, if someone reads "Joe Smith"'s biography, and it says Smith went to Yale, there should be a footnote to a book or article attesting that Smith went to Yale. Without a footnote, we'd have nowhere to check if, for example, the original editor had a faulty memory and wrote "Yale" when it's actually "Harvard". Or if some well-meaning person "corrects" it to Harvard mistakenly, or a vandal changes it "Michigan University" just to be disruptive. With a footnote we know where to go to check, without one all we have is "Someone anonymous on the Internet said so on Wikipedia". Wikipedia is only as strong as its sourcing.

So far as writing articles for other languages, you can to to fr.wikipedia and es.wikipedia and start articles there the same as you do here. To connect them, at the bottom of the article you put the two or three letter code that versions ".wikipedia" starts with, then the title of the article in the other language. For example, if I want to link the English article Dog to Spanish Wikipedia, I put the following code at the bottom: [[es:Perro]]. You can check this out by viewing the code of any article which exists across multiple languages; the code is placed at the very bottom after the Categories, and the list of available language versions will appear in your left margin when you save. If you're writing a translation of one Wiki's article for another Wiki, ensure your Edit Summary clearly states "Taken from the en.wiki article Helena Araújo". This is necessary for copyright purposes so people understand that the new Spanish article is based on the contributions of the people who wrote the English article (even if that's just you).

All good so far? MatthewVanitas (talk) 23:28, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much Matthew! I will keep on working on this tri-lingual project and the necessary citations. I trully appreciate your guidance and patience! Jocelyne1960 (talk) 23:33, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. We are at a point where the article probably wouldn't risk deletion if published, but the more fine-tuning, the stronger it is, and for the general sake of "doing it right the first time", as well as being a great way for you to learn the process, it doesn't hurt to do some fine tuning. I just wanted to be sure you weren't feeling bombarded by "nitpick" changes, so much as we're steadily polishing.

Couple of small comments: footnotes should ideally be written as full WP:Citations, so take a glance at that to see how to clearly indicate Title, Author, Date, etc. in a footnote for max clarity. Secondly, I've added the currently redlinked category Category:Colombian literary critics; it doesn't exist yet because this article will be the first. Once you create the article, we can create the category too. With Categories, the key thing is the "category tree", a very clear structure. When adding a "branch" to the tree, a goal is to make it match the other branches; a good technique is to check a well-intergrated parallel, like Category:Irish literary critics and Category:French literary critics, see what categories those have, and duplicate the Colombian equivalent into the new cat.

I know this is a lot of material, but you've been learning it all very smoothly, and asking good questions. Consider the above, and let me know if you have any other questions, or want to launch this article and start another article when you're ready. MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:47, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I really appreciate your encouragements! I will work a bit longer on this article before asking for a submission. My time is limited in front of my computer but will keep on doing my best!! Question for you...........Am i allowed to quote Helena's words from a book or from an article? Also, i have a PDF file of one of her articles where her biography talks about her teaching ni the Université Populaire de Lausanne.......How can i link a PDF file? Thank you again Matthew! Jocelyne1960 (talk) 22:11, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Matthew, in regard to translated articles from one wiki to another, you told me to write in the "edit summary" that i had translated my articles, but pardon my ignorance, i just cannot find the "edit summary" tab...........could you please point me to the right direction, since i have the Helena Araújo article in French, Spanish and English.........Thank you in advance!! Jocelyne1960 (talk) 15:15, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Message concerning the term "Concept Development"

Dear Sir, Sorry to bother you. I am trying to solve a problem of misunderstanding:

If someone searches for "Concept Development" on Wikipedia they will end up at a page about a MILITARY PRACTICE called "Concept Development C&E". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concept_Development_and_Experimentation

I see that on LinkedIn, me and other professionals have indicated "Concept Development" but when you hit the link you arrive at the MILITARY PRACTICE page on Wikipedia. We are not military professionals, we are copywriters, designers, etc etc.

This is why I tried to make an entry, only to avoid the confusion. Maybe in it's first version it may have appeared as an advertisement, though the intention is ONLY to avoid the confusion above.

My suggested entry: Concept Development Professional development of ideas. Not to be confused with the military term "Concept Development & Experimentation (CD&E)"

Please let me know how to solve this problem.

Best regards,

Olle Torgny

Sweden — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ot1967se (talk • contribs) 19:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Olle, you bring up an interesting point, and an important one because it's preventing real people from getting the right information. Can you point out a different Wikipedia article which you think is closer to the Concept Development that you and your colleagues do? If so, I can WP:Redirect the search term "concept development" to that article, and have a small note saying "for the military version, go to CD&E". Unless we genuinely lack an article covering something along the lines of civilian C&D I'd prefer not to start a new article, but if we have an article that more or less shares C&D's definition I'd be happy to set up the Redirects for you. Please advise. MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:10, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help and guidance. This is my first entry. I suggest the following new version: (definitions taken from the first line on each page)

=

CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT Professional development of ideas or idea based solutions.

=

Otherwise, an easy way out would be to redirect it to:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideation_%28idea_generation%29

But that will only refer to one side of the subject...

Best regards,

Olle Torgny

User talk:Dsvaisakh

Thank you for your advise.i am in my exam days.i wish i can improve my articles after my exam. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dsvaisakh (talk • contribs) 03:49, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

afd on an article you worked on

Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fraternal benefit society. I brought it there because at this point, I'm rather confused about how to deal with this. DGG ( talk ) 03:31, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Matthew

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Dermot_McLaughlin/sandbox

has been upgraded with more citations.

However it appears you are offline for a whilte? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.206.240.131 (talk) 10:40, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

afd on List of Indian castes

Matthew just had a quick read on this entry, and you asked for my comments. Quite frankly, I am so busy that I have no time to spare for Wikepedia. My view is if categories exist, then I have no objection in the article being deleted. However, I am not going to get involved in a lengthy debate. I am also tired on the personal attacks being made on me by some editors. You have always been polite and constructive in your criticism, but this can't be said of others. --WALTHAM2 (talk) 19:56, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks WALTHAM, do you mind if I quote you in the AfD debate just so they know the primary recent author doesn't object so long as the catgory structure fills the need (and we are improving the category structure)? Thanks for checking in, hope you're staying relaxed with the busyness in your off-wiki life. MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:12, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes go ahead, I have no issue. Categories make much more sense then lists in my view. Even something like list of countries for example creates argument as to what is a country. I suspect there is resistance because a certain editor has been quite aggressive to all those who have contributed to this topic. On categories, my suggestion would be to keep the categories as social groups of a certain state then castes. Anyways that's my two penny's worth. And thanks for asking about stress, I'm a Public Sector manager in the UK, and lots happening!--WALTHAM2 (talk) 08:15, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

HELP!!! Clarification needed on Fraternal Benefit Society page

Hi Matthew,

Ok...need some more help here, please. It appears that DGG accepted my article and printed it in the Fraternal Benefit Society space that you had cleared for it (thank you!); however, it was then deleted or not accepted. Last night (Nov. 26), it looked like it had been posted. This morning when I rechecked the link, the article was there but there was a box at the top noting it was being "considered for deletion."

Is there someone within the administration of Wiki that I can appeal to to address this to avoid new reviewers getting involved with their own new opinions? I would like to avoid having new eyes keep reviewing this and thinking it's a duplicative article and having to start from scratch explaining why you created the space for me.

Thanks again so much for your help on this!

Nina Ninalill (talk) 22:38, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Have you yet read the arguments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fraternal benefit society? I would definitely check that out, and maybe respond to the comments there, in a factual and unemotional way. Part of the issue is trying to sort out the overlap between different articles, and also I believe DGG is concerned that the article was created to promote FBS's rather than simply describe them neutrally. I would check in there, and add that AfD discussion to your Watchlist so you can see how it develops. I would expect that it will take at least a week, if not two, to get a variety of opinions there and come to a consensus, so this isn't like WP:Speedy deletion where it happens in an hour. MatthewVanitas (talk) 02:36, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dick Anthony - Sacred Musician

Hello. How do I re-submit my article on Dick Anthony - Sacred Musician? I believe it has been edited to meet required standards. Thank you. Norman Borge (talk) 02:05, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fraternal Benefit Society

Thanks, Matthew. I did read the page on "consideration for deletion" and responded to DGG's concerns. Thanks for your reassurances as I'm learning the Wiki ropes. If there's something more I can do or say at this point to move the process along, please let me know. Ninalill (talk) 15:08, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People in history by country

Category:People in history by country, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:59, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	To Matthew Vanitas for his valiant efforts in helping a Wiki Newbie! Ninalill (talk) 15:41, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Moving the article to Userspace...

Dear MatthewVanitas,

I have seen that a modification was done to my recent article concerning Theresa Wong, and it bore the notice: "This sandbox is in the Wikipedia namespace. Either move this page into your userspace, or remove the This sandbox is in the User talk namespace. Either move this page into your userspace, or remove the {{User sandbox}} template. template." I tried to do that, but I am not sure if I have done it right. My apologies if I did something wrong... I'm still new to the editing world in the Wikipedia, and learning something new every day. Let me know if I can do anything to fix what I might have done accidentally. - Best regards, ChloeLeChien (talk) 17:50, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your speedy response, MatthewVanitas,

Just before you submitted the message on the message, the article was declined. In fact, I did not know that there was a previous attempt in making the article of Theresa Wong, and that attempt was still available on the Wikipedia. Should I have known this, I would have definitely edited that earlier version. I think that what we need to make this article publishable is to have more reliable sources, and so my associate and I are on the quest to finding more reliable secondary sources. Thank you again for your kind comments and suggestions. All best, ChloeLeChien (talk) 19:00, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies on the Theresa Wong (3) article. That must have been made when I misread the initial instruction which prompted me to write the first post on this talk page. I am not moving articles or creating new ones again, and I am putting the "db-self" mark on the Theresa Wong (3) article to avoid further confusion. Thanks much for your help on this article, as I saw the streamlining of the code for references. Best, ChloeLeChien (talk) 20:32, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cleveland Buddhist Temple

Matthew,

This page is updated and expanded, is it OK for it to be published?

Also, please describe which photos are acceptable (no copyright issues).

MLS216 (talk) 21:25, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

For photos, the simple answer is that any photo owned by the person uploading is fine. So if you take a photo, you can upload it and select the "my own work" option with no issues; for Public Domain photos, use Wiki Commons as the upload site rather than Wikipedia directly. If it's a photo owned by somebody else (say, the Temple staff), and they are okay releasing it to the whole world (not just "for Wikipedia use only"), you can upload it and file a WP:OTRS form, which basically means you send the Temple staff an email saying "Please confirm that you are releasing the image ClevelandTemple2012.jpg to the Public Domain", and they'll forward it on from an official Temple address to the Wikimedia Foundation saying "yes, we consent to release", and the image will be "stamped" as verified released by the Temple. The former is quite easy, the latter takes a few steps, so if you or a friend live in the area and can take some good basic photos, that's the easiest. Does that answer your question? I'd be happy to clarify further if you hit any confusion. MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:01, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

afc procedure

Just curious. I see as I delete the pages that when finding unacceptable pages in user sandboxes or elsewhere in user space,you first move them to AfC, and then immediately tag them for deletion. Why not simply add the tag immediately to the page where it is? There's probably a very good reason, & when I don't understand something I like to learn DGG ( talk ) 00:08, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I move all the "User:" pages to AFC en-masse, and then go through them; somehow I find it faster to consistently move things all first rather than single bits out. I would really like some way to avoid that task though, like having the "Review requested" template only work once it's moved to AfC under a proper title, rather than allowing the sandboxes as submissions. It makes it really hard for folks specialising in a topic (like myself with Indian and Middle Eastern topics) to find articles we can review knowledgeably when 20% or better are simply labeled "sandbox". MatthewVanitas (talk) 02:13, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps your idea of having the review requested automatically move it is a good one. I had not thought of that solution, but I'd like something that didn't require the user to do anything special--after all, they're beginners. At least we should be able to get the mechanics going smoothly; and then we can deal with the actually difficult problem: qualified reviewers. I am almost ready to adopt Kudpung's suggestion for NPP--requiring some degree of knowledge-. I don't really want to complicate reviewer until we know if PP will work at all. I wonder if we could combine it with autopatroller ; tho the qualities needed are a little different, still it amounts to "trusted editor". DGG ( talk ) 04:36, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Since AFC has been getting out of hand for months, we either need an influx of human reviewers, some technical solutions, or ideally both; recruiting humans is its own thing. So far as technical, there are some pretty simple ways to reduce workload (and AFC Helper is stellar already, with only some small room for improvement): turning "User/sandbox" submissions into AFC titles with minimal/no hassle on newbies would be key. Also eliminating the blank articles automatically with a "hey, you submitted a blank article, did you mean to do that?" 'bot Talk message, and maybe similar for ultra-stubs and unreferenced with a "Hey, it doesn't appear your article has enough context, and/or is unreferenced". Getting rid of the blanks and obviously too-shorts both allows the noobs to take another crack right away rather than wait weeks for the Decline, and also would clear out a good 10% of the daily inflow. EDIT: also, making potentital AFC reviewers aware of how easy AFC Helper is would be good; I spent a week manually reviewing, coding in the decline codes, etc. before realising that AFCH didn't require a download, was Mac compatible, etc. and started using it. I'm not familiar with this NPP issue you mention, can you link me to the dicussion? MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:54, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I had the same experience--I did it manually at first. I don't share your satisfaction with the helper--it needs added functionality. The entire process is oriented towards letting people just give a bare statement; in some cases that's all that is warranted,but for a good faith submission that has possibilities, more is needed: It must be possible & encouraged to give multiple reasons like Huggle. I particular am bothered by the tendency to say just "inadequate sources to show notability" when the real problem is that it is never likely to meet notability--people make revision after revision, but it will never get them an article. It must be encouraged to add something, and let you preview what is being added. It shouldn't have an option saying baldly "failure to meet NOT" -- it is necessary to at least say what part of NOT is the problem. It should be possible to see at a glance just what state the sequence of submissions is. I've asked for these many times, and always been told that it isn't worth the trouble of making the changes--apparently one person has assumed the authority to decide this. In contrast, the current NPP was programmed poorly at first, but the programmer attended to the problems, and made the changes. I still find it too slow, but for someone with less experience, it's a great improvement. because the programmer listened to the editors . I'll post the discussion about requiring training for patrollers in a day or two when I find it. DGG ( talk ) 06:03, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re;Teahouse

Hi! I removed that question due to all the garbage the asker had added, but also due to the rather bitey replies that he was being given. It is my understanding that the Teahouse is to be an upbeat, positive, kind of place; a place that is encouraging and safe for new users to bring their questions. I do not disagree that the fella asking the questions needed a swift kick in the butt; I just feel it better for the new users coming to Teahouse that the kick in the butt be administered on his talk page as so not to frighten off others with questions that may be more receptive to a helping hand. You have been around a whole lot longer than I and of course, I will bow to whatever action you deem appropriate. I just wanted you to know why I did it. Gtwfan52 (talk) 07:13, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And your approach was much better than mine. Can you direct me to some instruction on how that is done so I will know in the future? Gtwfan52 (talk) 07:32, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And I found the instructions in your edit summary, so I will now go back to my knitting and leave you alone. Slaps self in face. Good nite. Gtwfan52 (talk) 07:35, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Article to be Reviewed

Matthew, you helped me with a page last month and I'm currently working on another in my Sandbox which isn't finished yet. Meanwhile, I would like your advice on the article for David Gandy. This article was flagged for several issues, primarily the overly-flowery/gushing word usage of a contributor. Over the last couple of months, several editors have neutralized the tone of the article to make it more objective. Most of my contributions have been in improving the sources and making the citation style more consistent. Can you please review the article and offer your recommendations? ThanksKem05f (talk) 18:34, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Update: it appears another editor has worked on the article and done some clean-up. He/she has removed a couple of the alerts at the top. I would still welcome your perspective on the article, if/when you have the time. Thx. Kem05f (talk) 17:44, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Matthew, am I close to acceptance with my article Helena Araújo? Thank you!! Jocelyne1960 (talk) 13:33, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Matthew, thank you so much for your feedback and taking care of the article. I will continue to work on it as publications appear and essays or courses get published. It has been an interresting adventure for me and feel fortunate to have received your guidance and encouragements. Merci, gracias, Danke, grazie and thank you ! Jocelyne1960 (talk) 22:01, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Badhan (blood donor organization)

Hi, since we who have worked on the article have not been alerted, I thought I'd better let you know: this article is proposed for deletion, the discussion is taking place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Badhan (blood donor organization). (P.S.: the original creator has been blocked for copyright violations, my guess is that they wrote the material and made the mistake of adding it to wikipedia as well). Perhaps this counts as "canvassing", but since this looks like a lack of due process, it seemed best to solicit your opinion. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 18:00, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Need help with William Bowden article listed in city -- Swifton, Arkansas

Need help with footnotes problem. Not sure how I need to correct problem. Please help. --Thank you sir -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Swiftonguy (talk • contribs) 22:22, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that 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.

Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Indian

Wake-Carolina rivalry (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Atlantic Division

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:12, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have tried to update the article as you specified

I have tried to update the article as you specified. Thankyou for all your suggestions. Please check the article for further modifications — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cheeran.prasad (talk • contribs) 12:02, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, in order to get a wider body of advice, could you please post at The Teahouse so that a group of volunteer mentors can check out your article and offer advice? Remember, Wikipedia is a big place, so if you just say "the article" they may have no idea which of millions you're referring to. So I suggest you be very clear in your post there, and offer them the link [[Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Joseph Cheeran]]. Please let me know if you have any trouble getting information from the helpers at The Teahouse (link below). MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:56, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! MatthewVanitas, you are invited to join other new editors and friendly hosts in the Teahouse. An awesome place to meet people, ask questions and learn more about Wikipedia. Please join us! MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:56, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My submission has been declined

Hello Matthew,

I hope you are well

Here my first article on wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Diva_Avari

But unfortunatly my submission has been declined and I don't know why exactly

Thank you in advance for your help

Samy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samykdj (talk • contribs) 00:38, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks MatthewVanitas

Thanks a ton for your help. I am working on adding some more references. A big thank you from me. Amrik singh111 (talk) 04:18, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

capitalisation

Hi Matthew fixed the capitalisation in the article, thanks for the tip. --Musicfan1812 (talk) 20:35, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

An Barnstar for You!

	The AFC Backlog Buster Barnstar
	Congratulations, MatthewVanitas! You're receiving The Silver Wiki Award because you reviewed 779 articles during the recent AFC Backlog elimination drive! Thank you for you contributions to Wikipedia at-large and helping to keep the backlog down. We hope you continue reviewing submissions and stay in touch at the talk page. Thank you and keep up the good work! Mdann52 (talk) 13:12, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Connie Suttle page

Thank you for your email. I have to learn how to use Wikipedia editing facilities, never done this before. I expect to work on this very slowly, hope to have it up and running in about 6 months. Sandra SandraBT (talk) 13:35, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, glad to help. The policy Wikipedia:Notability (authors) is definitely a must-read for any author biographies. There is a certain level of sourcing required, and sourcing that must be neutral and independent (so not just promo pieces from publishers). If Suttle meets that bar, by all means work on the article as the time is available to you. If she doesn't meet the bar yet, the article can wait until she's garnered more media/academic coverage. In the meantime, feel free to check out other articles on authors, maybe even hit the "Edit" button on them just so you can see how the material is coded in to the article. If you have any questions, Wikipedia:Teahouse is a place to talk to volunteer mentors, so swing by there whenever! MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:20, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cheeran question

Respected Madam,

Hope you remember me. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Joseph_Cheeran) As you suggested i have invited for Correction in Wikipedia Tea House. But I have not yet received any comments. It may be because of my ignorance of way of communication.

I just introduced myself to Tea house and invited for correction with the link. but nobody responded till now. Can you help me? to upload my article in proper link?Cheeran.prasad (talk) 16:49, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Cheeran (and I'm a man, not woman, just for reference). I checked your Contributions tab to see why you weren't getting an answer yet, and it turns out it's because you posted your question along with your simple introduction, so people might have overlooked it. What I would recommend is going to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions, hit the "New questions" button, and perhaps choose a title like "Help on biography of Indian Orthodox priest?", and briefly explain that you'd like help, and provide the link for your article, like so: [[Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Joseph Cheeran]]. That should get you some good advice. Let me know if you run into any difficulties. MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:57, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Zhongweikeji non-article

Any you find like that - don't bother moving them. Just tag them spam where they are. Those things that don't really make sense but have loads of links in the middle of sentences are just real spam - possibly bot generated and/or posted. I delete them on site and block as advertising only account, with an IP block built in. They come back with new names, but the IP block might slow them down. Peridon (talk) 21:32, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Amrik Singh- article for Hardeep Tauo Toganwalia

Thanks a lot for correcting my article. I am trying to find the right citations which will suit the complete content. His personal life articles will soon be published in news papers then I will add the rest of the citations. Thanks once again. Amrik singh111 (talk) 05:52, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ANI mention

You've been mentioned at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Doncram_on_Indic_communities. - Sitush (talk) 09:23, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	Many thanks for your help with the article Helena Araujo! Much gratitude for your guidance! Jocelyne1960 (talk) 12:57, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

David Lubin Memorial Library

I was about to reject it for inclusion of extensive material inappropriate to an encyclopedia when you accepted it . You'll see what I mean by the extensive cuts I am making. DGG ( talk ) 10:15, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Plastered Human Skull

I'm not sure what you were trying to do with the above article, but I assume that you did not intend to leave it in the trashed state that you left it. - TexasAndroid (talk) 16:30, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads-up; "my" last edit was an automated one via the AFC Helper, and either I missed a bracket or somehow else had a formatting error which the Helper misread and blanked the article. I've gone in and restored it, so thanks for bringing it to my attention. MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:33, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. When I find an article that appears to have been accidentally trashed by an established editor, I first try to figure out what the intended/desired result was, and then fix it myself. This time, I could not figure out at all what you were trying to do, so I threw up my hands and left the above note to just let you fix it yourself. :) - TexasAndroid (talk) 16:36, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I can't figure out how that happened either; I'm loathe to blame AFC script error out of hand, but I thought I did pretty standard tagging and hit Approve. So either script error or I missed some small thing that the script read very literally and used to blank the article. In any case, all's well that ends well, thanks for the ping. MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:03, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Elevational Diversity Gradient

Hello! Your submission of Elevational Diversity Gradient at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:06, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's not mine, actually. It was at WP:AFC and I approved it as a reviewer; the originator is User:Mike.stansel. MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:07, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And I have messaged him too, but you may be in a good position to pick a better hook, since you picked the one in the nom! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:29, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Again, not me. I did not nominate this for DYK, that'd be someone else. MatthewVanitas (talk) 01:01, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]