User talk:MatthewVanitas

MatthewVanitas is taking a short wikibreak and will be back on Wikipedia on 1 October

Start a new discussion thread

20:36:59, 18 September 2014 review of submission by Steve.kimberley

Steve.kimberley (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Hugh Heinrick (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Steve.kimberley (talk) 20:36, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Matthew, thanks for your comments on my proposed article about Hugh Heinrick. I take your point about the lack of references but have a couple of questions. How much by way of references is needed - would one be enough or should there be more than one, from different sources? Quite a lot of the information in the piece came from newspaper articles published at the time and the only way I've got hold of them is via archive websites where they claim copyright and levy charges for viewing, so I guess links are not feasible. Would it be enough to add e.g. "The Nation' newspaper, October 19, 1875" or similar?

Thanks for your help!

No worries. The answer to "how many references do I need" would be "how many facts do you have"? Optimally, it should be crystal-clear to the reader exactly where you got these facts. Clearly, you read these in some book or article, so let your readers in on "the secret" and tell them where you got the facts. So far as paid archives, as per WP:PAYWALL, use the best sources you have even if they aren't easy to get to. That said, it'd be nice to have at least a few citations to more accessible books, so check out GoogleBooks and see if you can work in a few more facts and/or supplementary footnotes to back up key points about him.

Basically, for any given chunk of the paper, imagine a "says who?", and that's what you're answering with your footnotes. You needn't footnote every sentence, it's fine if one source generally backs up all the facts in a given paragraph, or two sources together agree on the same facts, broadly. If there's anything uber-contentious, even a small phrase, it should have its own footnote just to clearly indicate what academic made this contentious claim.

Big picture, your guy clearly meets our WP:Notability benchmark, your draft just needs to pass WP:Verifiability, by showing readers from whence you got your facts. See WP:Referencing for beginners for advice.

After the article publishes, it'd be great to add an image of Heinrick to the article. Clearly any image from his lifetime is out-of-copyright, so any image of him at all you can find that's contemporaneous, and has no additional artistic contribution (ie is just the image as it'd appear back then), you can go ahead and upload it to Wikimedia Commons, which will give you the address to display the image in this article.

Thanks for writing in, and I hope once you get this published you'll press forward with improving existing articles and creating new ones. MatthewVanitas (talk) 14:52, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, regarding how to cite things not broadly available online: general rule is as full a citation as you can. Newspaper, date, title of article, journalist if stated, page of newspaper if known. I suggest you use the Citation Templates, which are in a drop-down box at the top of your editing window. If it's totally not on the internet, clearly there's no link, but if it has a link but is paywall, do include the link to the site but also include the coding shown at Template:Subscription required which advises readers of such. MatthewVanitas (talk) 14:56, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Copy-paste incident passed at Articles for Creation

The articles William L. Carlisle and Ernesto "Wild Che" Leche look to be identical, apart from the article titles. I think content from Carlisle was copy-pasted to Leche. The only change appears to be name replacement. This also occurs in the references. All external links discuss Carlisle, even though each is labelled with Leche's name. I think Leche is a fabrication, or at the very least non notable, as search results on Google bring up nothing but the cut and paste Wikipedia article. So, I have listed it at articles for deletion here Vycl1994. (talk) 23:10, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

feedback/ assistance

Hi - I appreciate your feedback as I am trying to create my frst Wiki-article about the author and new CEO of Innovation norway. Please tell me when you are back - and I would like much to get your advice and assistance how to publish the Wikiway comme il faut.

Best regards, Cathrine — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xathrine (talk • contribs) 14:35, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 22

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.

Harfush clan

added links pointing to Mustafa Pasha and Fakhr al-Din

Randa, Mallorca

added a link pointing to Hermitage

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:50, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please review NginAd

Hi Matthew. A link to Yahoo! Finance was added in the citations on the Nginad page and hopefully it now falls within the guidelines for Wikipedia admission. It was re-submitted. Nginad is an open source ad server under GPL v3 and is free to download, modify and use. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.158.206.114 (talk) 21:45, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Waste Atlas edit

Dear Matthew,

Thank you for the review you made on my article about Waste Atlas. I made some changes and additions according to your comments. Could you please let me know if it is ok now?

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dwaccount (talk • contribs) 11:51, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

June Julian Article Editing Advice

Thank you, Matthew, for your help with my article, June Julian. I have been trying to establish notability of Dr. Julian as an Art Educator, not as an artist primarily. I have included many references to her published works. She also has just had a exhibit of her work in Italy in September 2014, sponsored by the U.S. Embassy to Italy.There have been extensive reviews of this in the press. How do I include them in the article? I appreciate your help very much. Lincolnspencer (talk) 13:52, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Re: The Wood Nymph (Sibelius)

Thank you for taking the time to approve the article I have submitted on the Sibelius tone poem, The Wood Nymph! I am curious, however, why it has been assessed as "Start-class," which is for articles that are "developing, but which is quite incomplete and, most notably, lacks adequate reliable sources." I am a bit confused by this designation for two reasons:

(1) because I have scrupulously researched the topic, consulting over 10 sources across books, CD inserts, JSTOR articles, etc. Because the Wood Nymph is relatively rare, it is not a piece for which there is a huge number of sources. I am very confident that I have used reliable sources and a close-to-exhaustive set of sources. The sources I consult are also Sibelian scholars and are the authorities on the subject.

(2) because the material is very thorough, rather than incomplete, and the article follows what appear to be the established guidelines for classical music articles, with sections on on the history, the orchestration, the structure (movements), the reception, and recordings. I even went, I believe, above and beyond with a section on analysis. I also created and linked to the bottom navbox and made a introductory side box with at-a-glance information.

So, again, thank you for your help! But if you could kindly explain your low rating I would be very appreciative. I think Sibelius aficionados will really appreciate this page, as it is far more detailed and well-researched than those for his other pieces (with the exception of the 5th and 8th symphonies). Perhaps, if you are convinced, you could bump up the rating to GA status. Sgvrfjs (talk) 02:57, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, ratings above "Start" generally require an actual checklist review by the Wikiproject covering said topic, where they go through a list of specific attributes they look for. "Start" is not a pejorative assessment, it's just as high as I, a non-expert, can assess on the topic, and is there to make it clear this is not a "Stub" article. So no offense to your research intended, it's just a default score from a generalist. You can check in the WP:WikiProject Classical music or WP:WikiProject Opera if you'd like to have your article assessed by either of them, just post on the Talk page for said project, introduce yourself and your article. Note many WikiProjects have only a small following, so don't expect instant results. But in whatever case, "ratings" are a very, very minor labeling mostly for administrative reasons, not a holistic assessment of the article, which stands on its own merits. Thanks so much for taking the time to write such a thorough article, it was very easy to publish with basically no further work needed! MatthewVanitas (talk) 02:48, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ah! I see. Thanks for explaining the ropes to a first-time editor and thanks for the encouragement in your last line. My goal is to expand this beyond the article I wrote and make more thorough and well-sourced pages for other Sibelius tone poems. You should check out his music! :) Sgvrfjs (talk) 02:57, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Jim Snyder (journalist) Comment

You seemed to have put the wrong link in the decline reason, as the one you linked was a Failed proposal. For future reference the right one is WP:CREATIVE. Just wanted to let you know! Thanks, TheMesquito^buzz 06:43, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Merge discussion for Asramam Maidan

An article that you have been involved in editing, Asramam Maidan , has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Trinidade (talk) 09:53, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 23:35:10, 28 September 2014 for assistance on AfC submission by Mursillis

Mursillis (talk · contribs)
- User:Mursillis (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I am not very experienced as a contributor to Wikipedia and this is the first time I have submitted an original article.

The Scottish elector band "Final program" has an album launch on October 15th and for that reason I wanted to upload a page - but it has been refused

How do I find out what is wrong ?

Mursillis (talk) 23:35, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Did you read the large pink box at the very top of your draft which explains the reason and provides clickable links to the appropriate rules? MatthewVanitas (talk) 00:16, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 29

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Walter Pfeffer Dando, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Palace Theatre. 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:19, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

diplomatic society of st gabriel

Dear Matthew; I would be most thankful if you could just go ahead and create an article on the diplomatic society of st Gabriel. sincerely William Weiss — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amb weiss (talk • contribs) 15:38, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, we have a really clear policy, Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). If your organization meets that benchmark, it can have an article. Your current draft has no WP:Sourcing whatsoever, is not formatted as a Wikipedia article, and does not show clear evidence of meeting Notability. Neither I nor any other reviewer is going to approve an article that's not ready just because someone asks us. You can either bring the article up to standards/format (provided that it does indeed meet Notability), and we're happy to help you with that and provide feedback, or don't. None of the reviewers cares about this organization more than you do, so you have to be the one to polish it, with our feedback. Hope this clears it up, and I strongly suggest you read the Notability policy I linked as it will make our requirements very clear. MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:17, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Mike Murphy bio

Hi Matthew,

I see you declined the bio I wrote for Mike Murphy. The reason I wanted to add a bio for Mike Murphy is that he is listed in a Wikipedia article with no other info about him: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_for_All_Tour.

Please read the above Wikipedia article about the Bee Gee's One for all Tour and then you might think the bio is a good idea. I hope so. I added the wikipedia article as a reference, I rather that the One for all article would refer you to the bio on Mike Murphy, maybe you can fix that, if you agree to allow it.

Thank you and Best regards, Cathy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cjmoran (talk • contribs) 23:49, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Cathy, this will be much clearer if you read the policy Wikipedia:Notability (music). It explains what level of coverage of Murphy the article must include. If Murphy has enough stuff written about him in news articles, books of music history, etc. then he merits an article and we'll happily steadily work you through the process of tuning up your draft. If other people have not written substantively about a person, said person can't have an article. Note other Wikipedia articles are not "references", they are WP:Wikilinks (blue clickable text). Blogs, forums, Facebook, etc. don't count as references. Again, please read Wikipedia:Notability (music) and it will save you and us a ton of time. Thanks! MatthewVanitas (talk) 04:49, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

3D printed firearms

I tried to get images but could find any royalty free ones for 95% of them--Misconceptions2 (talk) 21:14, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, just mentioning, no worries. Hope the new category helps though. MatthewVanitas (talk) 22:29, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Article Rejected

Hi Matthew,

My name is Pat, I was wondering why you rejected Arthur Smirnov's article. Can you please give me advices on what has to be done in order to get it published? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.10.155.38 (talk) 21:57, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Did you read the large pink box at the top of the article? Please read the instructions there first, and then tell me if anything is unclear. You have to read the advice we give you before you ask for advice, but I'm happy to advise after you look at my explanation in the pink box. MatthewVanitas (talk) 22:02, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Rejection: Tearce Kizzo

Hi Matthew --

I will endeavor to get additional sources, but Discogs and AllMusic are both considered to be valid sources for credits, are they not? Also, there is a Wikipedia article regarding one of the many tracks this guy is credited with writing & producing, as referenced in the piece "Can't Stop Me" by Afrojack & Shermanology. I'm a bit new to editing these articles, so any guidance as to what you think constitutes a valid reference would be helpful. Thank you! -- EDIT: I saw the box you posted on my talk page just now, will do that but also leaving this here in case you have any off-the-top advice? thank you again! Loudersoft (talk) 02:34, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

MatthewVanitas,

Would you please take a look at the Draft:The Toy Soldiers page that you declined a couple of weeks ago. I believe I have fixed the notability issue with sources like the LA Times and New York Times among others. Also, I am no longer using IMDB as a source. The draft has been re-submitted.

Thank you very much for all your time!

Chelsea (clr65109)

Clr65109 (talk) 16:53, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]