Jump to content

User talk:kikichugirl

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by JennaSys (talk | contribs) at 08:16, 24 February 2015 (→‎06:29:45, 21 February 2015 review of submission by JennaSys: Thanks). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Beware! This user's talk page is monitored by talk page watchers. Some of them even talk back.
This friendly hippo tries not to bite or charge and apologizes if that happens. However, this hippo bites back. Visitors beware. ;)
The Signpost
4 July 2024
 

Request on 12:17:27, 10 February 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by DeanoJD


My initial article was rejected as it needed to be written in a more neutral tone - I'm really hoping I have now done this and attach a link to the piece for your learned eye, before I re-submit it. Thanks a lot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Lincoln_Townley

DeanoJD (talk) 12:17, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

DeanoJD (talk) 12:17, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

HI, DeanoJD, and I apologize for the delayed reply. Your article looks better right now, although more sources could be better. Hopefully someone else with more time can come along and accept it soon? — kikichugirl speak up! 04:26, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 14:42:23, 11 February 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Telletech


Hi Kikichugirl, thank you for reviewing my page a few days ago. Before I edit my draft and resubmit, I just wanted some clarification on exactly what I need to change for it to sound less like an advertisement. I'm thinking of removing all links directly to the company's website, removing the awards section and removing all adjectives. Is that enough to get it approved, or is there something else I need to change? Thanks again for your help, and I'm looking forward to your feedback. Telletech (talk) 14:42, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Telletech (talk) 14:42, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Hi Telletech, could you provide a link to the draft? I've reviewed many drafts lately. Thanks! — kikichugirl speak up! 04:29, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi kikichugirl, the link to the draft is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:CentriLogic. I've gone ahead and made changes to it removing what I felt sounded too much like an advertisement. Please let me know if you have any other suggestions. Thanks! Telletech (talk) 17:03, 17 February 2015 (UTC

@Telletech: Draft:CentriLogic still reads like an advertisement. Specifically, it shouldn't have the list of products be the focus of the article. It also relies too heavily on primary sources when it should rely on reliable third-party sources that are independent of the subject - specifically, news mentions or the like from someone other than the company's website or someone involved with the company. Good luck! If you want more help, stop by the Teahouse, the IRC channel, or the help desk to ask someone for assistance. — kikichugirl speak up! 03:06, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Last Well

Hi, I'm submitting for the first time and there were comments regarding my article for submission. Can you please help me better understand your comments?


Here is my question: All of the biographical information in my submission was included in the article in the news publication Blue Ribbon News (http://blueribbonnews.com/2014/11/the-last-well-answering-a-threat-more-deadly-than-ebola/) Basically I tried to work from only biographical info sourced from this article. Does this news reference not help with the information included ? Thanks in advance for your help.--Vgrgrr (talk) 05:51, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Vgrgrr. First, your article reads more like an advertisement than an encyclopedia article. This is not a "life and times" place, but rather a dry discussion about The Last Well itself. Also, you should use sections to break up your article. I hope this helps. If you want more help, stop by the Teahouse, the IRC channel, or the help desk to ask someone for assistance. — kikichugirl speak up! 04:46, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cirex

Hi!. Can you help me with the references, clean up, and as you suggest put them at the end of the sentences on the Cirex article please? This is the draft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Cirex Thanks in advance, much appreciate Bnotepr (talk) 14:46, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bnotepr, just move the <ref></ref> tags to the end of each sentence and it'll look good. If you want more help, stop by the Teahouse, the IRC channel, or the help desk to ask someone for assistance. — kikichugirl speak up! 04:43, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

00:37:14, 13 February 2015 review of submission by UComm2015


Hello! I'm just inquiring into why Bob Kuhn's page was rejected. He's the president of an institution embroiled in one of Canada's top legal cases (http://ablawg.ca/2015/01/02/the-top-ten-canadian-legal-ethics-stories-2014/, and http://www.straight.com/news/799076/reasonable-doubt-top-five-canadian-legal-stories-2014). How can it be improved?

Thanks.

UComm2015 (talk) 00:37, 13 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

// ADDITION:

Today I worked to add a variety of sources, including Canada's largest newspaper (The Globe and Mail) and BC's biggest tabloid (The Province). I also deleted some adjectives that may have implied value (therefore hopefully making it less "advertise"-y).

I'm genuinely surprised that the president of a University doesn't have a Wikipedia page, so please let me know how else I can improve it.

Thanks!

UComm2015 (talk) 21:35, 13 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

HI, UComm2015. Your draft reads strongly like an advertisement. While you have sufficient sources, I think you need to write more neutrally. See WP:NPOV for the guidelines on that. if Bob Kuhn is so awesome, then you gotta prove it. Wikipedia isn't a place to talk about how awesome someone is - it's a place to neutrally discuss someone's achievements if they exist, and if you can prove that they exist. Good luck! If you want more help, stop by the Teahouse, the IRC channel, or the help desk to ask someone for assistance. — kikichugirl speak up! 04:23, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Claude_Montal

"This submission reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Submissions should summarise information in secondary, reliable sources and not contain opinions or original research. Please write about the topic from a neutral point of view in an encyclopedic manner." I guess this is one of the standard comments when rejecting a submission, as it is in identical wording to the comments I had from reviewer Onel5969 a day ago. He gave me some specifics. I paid attention and made substantive changes. As far as I can see, I met the criteria: the article definitely does summarize information in secondary, reliable sources, as far as I can tell, and is written from a neutral point of view, reflecting all of those secondary sources. Would you please point me to specific points in the article that you believe do not meet the criteria you have stated? Fssturm (talk) 04:20, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker)@Fssturm: Hi Fssturm, I'm Lixxx235. Yeah, that decline rationale is one of several standards, and I fully agree with kikichugirl that that rationale applies. Here are the answers to your questions:
  • By far, the main reason to decline is that you wrote it like an essay, not an entry in an encyclopedia. Can you imagine the Britannica having an entry starting "Born in 1800, Claude Montal was left completely blind at the age of five by typhoid fever ..."? Have you ever seen any Wikipedia article starting in a way that does not convey most of why the subject is significant in the first sentence? The first sentence is not a "hook" like you might find in some academic essays. Take a look at our best articles and base your article on the structure of those.
  • The draft is definitely not from a neutral point of view; rather, it looks like selected excerpts from an autobiography. Again, take a look at our best articles for ideas.
I hope this answers some of your questions. If you have any further questions, please feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. Cheers, --L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 04:38, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

AfD

Hi. Thank you for doing delsort. The fact that you do this does not mean that you cannot also vote on those articles. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:35, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I thought I saw someone do it before. Thanks for removing my comment. — kikichugirl speak up! 22:58, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Kudpung: This would be an example of where I've seen it done. — kikichugirl speak up! 06:01, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 21:30:09, 15 February 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Teamwesley


Hi there, I had submitted a page for review entitled August Wesley (wrestler). I have received your feedback stating that additional references need to be cited. I clicked on your link to edit the page and go forward with citing additional references and the page states that it has been deleted. I am unable to edit the page and I am concerned about how I can cite additional references if the page no longer exists. This page was formed after weeks of hard work and research so I am hoping that this is not the case. Any assistance would be greatly appreciated as I am new to this. Thank you!

Teamwesley (talk) 21:30, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Teamwesley. The page was deleted for being too promotional. When I declined it, it was basically a page talking about how awesome he was. Let me ping User:Mike V who deleted the page, and see if he has anything to say. — kikichugirl speak up! 01:52, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:François E. Matthes

You are the first to refuse a submission and I found your instructions confusing. But, I have edited the page for Draft:François E. Matthes and believe I have removed the peacock terms.

As to more sources, I found only one biographer. Wikipedia does not condone new research which would be available at Bancroft Library. So, I have instead linked to supporting sources within Wikipedia.

Seblake (talk) 17:02, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Seblak. I noticed your changes, and the article still reads like an essay. Articles must be written in a formal, encyclopedic tone. See WP:NPOV. If you want more help, stop by the Teahouse, the IRC channel, or the help desk to ask someone for assistance. — kikichugirl speak up! 04:55, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

AfC vs NPP

Hi. I'll leave you to guess why it's probably not best for editors not suitable for AfC to try NPP instead. If you can't find the answer don't hesitate to drop me an email. Keep up the excellent work! --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:25, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Kudpung: I thought of NPP because I spent a fair amount of time there through trial and error figuring out what is and isn't an acceptable article. But suggesting they go !vote in AfDs is okay then? And suggesting they start with vandal patrol? I'm trying not to be bitey because at this person's talk page I was told off harshly for all the stuff I did. As someone who started with vandal patrol, then NPP (I skipped all the ones I wasn't too sure about) I sometimes get confused on what is and isn't supposed to be done. — kikichugirl speak up! 01:50, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Take no notice of it, your're doing a grand job and perhaps even being a tiny bit too kind rather than bitey! - an editor like that who disagrees to that extent and/or argues with DGG probably shouldn't be reviewing or patrolling anything at all. Still, if you can't readily identify the subtle difference between AfC and NPP, it's not a criticism, but I can explain it better by email. BTW, that's a lovely place where you are studying. A friend of mine who has a chair at Carleton once taught there. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:52, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
As I see it, the difference is that the actions at NPP are visible and reviewed: speedy deletion noms are reviewed by the admins, everything else by the entire editing community. I therefore consider it safer, to the extent that I would move everything into that channel. And, yes, keep up the good work.We need you. Good work in reviewing will inevitably attract negative comment from those doing poor work--see my extensive talk page archives for examples. My technique for dealing with such comment is to think carefully whether the other party might indeed be right; if you still think that you are, explain once, and then ignore further comments without taking them personally. DGG ( talk ) 04:54, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@DGG: Thanks for the advice. :) — kikichugirl speak up! 04:55, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Article Rejected: Draft:AnthonyDiMoro

I recently made an article and used all online citations to qualify the article. However it was rejected on the premiss of improper use of citations. My intent was to qualify the individual the article was written about via links to reputable websites (Per WikiPedia's guidelines)and did not find any proper citation places in my content.

So my confusion is regarding how to edit this to make it acceptable. I have seen other articles where links are listed to qualify that individual but citations were not used.

Jamesparticular (talk) 17:12, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Jamesparticular, you've managed to work out the citations issue, now you need to work on notability. At the moment you have very little in the way of reliable sources, the majority being primary sources (interviews, his own websites) or simply name drops (no major information included). You also have a TON of external links that should either be turned into references or removed entirely. Find some good sources, include them in the text, and you'll be a lot closer to getting this draft approved. If you want more help, stop by the Teahouse, the IRC channel, or the help desk to ask someone for assistance. Primefac (talk) 19:48, 17 February 2015 (UTC) (talk page stalker)[reply]


I am confused as what is considered to be reliable. I have proven consistent acknowledgement from national media. I will correct the link volume and remove the excess. I just want to be sure I am clear on the difference between what is or isnt considered to be a reliable source. I can certainly trim it up where needed.

Jamesparticular (talk) 21:15, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the double message, but the article has been edited and re-submitted. It seems someone else made a lot of the necessary corrections, which is great. I just wanted to understand how I would insert the picture for the INFO part of the article (where the age, location, full name appears). Clarification on that would be helpful for this and future WikiPedia articles. Thank you

Jamesparticular (talk) 21:24, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

HI, Jamesparticular. In particular, reliable sources do not have to be online, but they do need to be reliable - newspapers, magazines, non-self-published books, etc. are all reliable if they are published by reputable organizations. The Dailymail source looks good. Try finding more of those. As for the photo, you need to use a free photo and upload it on Wikipedia first; Commons might be a better place to upload it if I'm not mistaken. Here's a quick guide to uploading images. Good luck! — kikichugirl speak up! 04:55, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your advice on my first article

Hi Kikichugirl,

I am new to the Wikipedia community but have been editing some pages and adding updates to others so I can learn. I also recently attempted to write my first article, which you reviewed. After getting your helpful comments and doing more research, I completely rewrote it in the hopes that it meets Wikipedia's standards better. It's about a media company that has been in the news due to its ties to Ashton Kutcher and viral media content. I conducted more research, found more sources, and rewrote it to be more neutral, and I would love to get your thoughts on the article before I submit it again! It's currently residing in my sandbox at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Chief8/sandbox

I look forward to hearing what you think! Chief8 (talk) 20:27, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Chief8. Your draft is a little bit on the flowery side, but otherwise, it's better than a lot of the drafts lately. I'd recommend submitting it for review now, so that fellow volunteers can take a look (and that you'll get an opinion from someone other than me). There's no harm in being declined several times - asking for a review before a review doesn't really change much, in my opinion. Keep up the good work! — kikichugirl speak up! 09:11, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Benjamin Milliken revised

I sent you the updated page with references page numbers etc provided Upper Canada was a small society the 1837 rebellion was one of the most important fights in English Canada's history This man was important in that dispute and the society rewarded him for his military service with a justice of the peace an important role in colonial Upper Canada He is documented in more than 3 books that are available text on line He has an historical structure named after him that was designated by the provincial government 130 years after his death Can you assist me for the rejection Unionville — Preceding unsigned comment added by Unionville (talk • contribs) 21:58, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Unionville: I am unable to help you if you do not provide any sort of link to the article. Best, — kikichugirl speak up! 09:12, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

TINA article edited

Draft:TINA (program) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:TINA_(program)

Dear Kikchugirl

Thanks for reviewing my article. I tried to improve the wording, substantially abbreviated the history and documented by references. I have also added more references to the text. Note that although most references I listed are well known and independent sources for a few newer features (e.g. HDL) of the program I could not find independent references so I referred to TINA website [11]. I found a similar solution at other software for example ORCAD https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OrCAD If this is not acceptable I can edit the related 2nd paragraph and limit to features mentioned in independent references.

Could you look at the revised draft and tell if it is good enough to Resubmit?

I look forward to your reply and suggestions if more changes are needed.

Best regards

Tengelic

--Tengelic (talk) 23:12, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Tengelic. I've looked at your article and while it doesn't seem to look as bad as it used to be, there's definitely some room for improvement. Specifically, don't use {{infobox}} - find a more specific infobox template would definitely be better (see {{infobox software}}. More reliable sources couldn't really hurt either, to expand the article now that is a little short on the context side. Good luck! — kikichugirl speak up! 09:17, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on WP:AN#Closure review: Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/RfC to physically restrict access to the Helper Script

Hello! You have been selected to receive an invitation to participate in the closure review for the recent RfC regarding the AfC Helper script. You've been chosen because you participated in the original RfC. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. This message is automated. Replies will not be noticed. --QEDK ♠ T ♥ C 14:24, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Astrophysics Source Code Library edits

Hi! I totally get having standards, and if there is a wiki page for something that should be linked, I will use it. If there is no wiki page for something that should be linked, there isn't, and better an external link than none at all. ("Too many" is subjective; if you don't use the ASCL/are not its target audience, you might not know what links are useful to those who do.) The suggestion to add a section for Externals links is exactly what I had done, but that entire section was deleted. I had -- in fairness to other resources -- included links to these other similar resources; they do not have wiki pages. Listing these other similar resources is helpful to ASCL users.

Because of the recent undos by you and another, the edits I was making -- updating affiliations, clarifying language, adding other personnel, adding references for information currently without citation -- are in conflict with the page, which as it stands is inaccurate/out-of-date. I know you and the other editor mean well, but I'm out of time, alas, and the inaccuracies stand.

Owlice1 (talk) 19:00, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Owlice1, linking to relevant pages as external links is perfectly acceptable, but the key word here is "relevant." Peter Teuben may be on the advisory committee, but we do not need to have an external link to his biography (or any of the other committee members). The edits made by kikichugirl and Samwalton9 are perfectly justified. If an external link is directly relevant to the Library, then it can be included in the External links section. Otherwise, it will be removed. If you want more help, stop by the Teahouse, the IRC channel, or the help desk to ask someone for assistance. Primefac (talk) 19:16, 18 February 2015 (UTC) (talk page stalker)[reply]
kikichugirl, as a note, the conversation continues on my talk page. Primefac (talk) 21:30, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Owlice1: I think the change you have made are acceptable. The external links that aren't in refs should go at the end, so that it reads less like an advertisement. Thank you for updating the page and making Wikipedia better. On your talk page, you mentioned that it's "not normally" but WP:IAR in my opinion shouldn't be used here in my opinion. Also, just because the links were there when it was approved, doesn't mean that they should be there permanently. Good luck! — kikichugirl speak up! 04:18, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Jay H. Shidler Article

Aloha Kikichugirl!

Our submission article for Jay H. Shidler got denied. We are working on fixing references to Shidler regarding "well-known national leader" and such. Are there any further recommendations for us so the article can get approved. This is our first Wikipedia entry and are still learning.

Hope to hear from you soon! Mahalo!Shere'e Young 01:07, 19 February 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jayshidler (talk • contribs)

@Jayshidler:Pinging for sysop attention: @Huon, DGG, and Kudpung: "Our" submission? Are you aware that it is against Wikipedia policy to allow different people ever to edit using the same Wikipedia account, and that you must disclose if you are editing Wikipedia as part of your job? Cheers, --L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 22:51, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the confusion. I am trying to submit this article about Jay H. Shidler and have opened an account under his name since I thought that is how you start submitting articles to Wikipedia. Unfortunately, I was wrong. Now, I apologize for writing "Our" submission as it is just myself trying to get something posted. That is it. There was no intention of anything else. Now, I am asking, after I fix the information and references that sound like advertisements, is there anything else you recommend I fix to get this submission approved?Shere'e Young 03:35, 21 February 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jayshidler (talk • contribs)

ja right

That is why i will not give another cent to wikipedia - wikipedia is a law unto themselves. The person is note worthy, why dont you look it up and add the info? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dunavista (talk • contribs) 06:53, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Dunavista: I hope you've read everything I said, because 1) you would have put a link to your article and 2) you would have signed your post. If you think the person is noteworthy, then prove it - you want the article to be on Wikipedia, not me. One source only proves that the person exists, not that the person is important. See WP:BURDEN. — kikichugirl speak up! 06:58, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Dunavista if this is Draft:Jennifer Borg, I see no reason why this person would conceivably be notable enough for an article in WP DGG ( talk ) 03:07, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
DGG sorry and you are who? who asked for your opinion. How many Doctors of law do you know? If you had bothered to to see who her father is, do you think she may be an Heir to a multi billion dollar corp - cast your eyes onto North Jersey Media Group.
kikichugirl I dont want her on WP, WP wants her on WP. How is it up to you to decide? If you have WP at heart you would find info on her in the INTERESTS of WP. If you have foresight other than the reject button, you will understand who this lady is. So what you saying is a doctor of law is not noteworthy? Jimmy Wales might just know her. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dunavista (talk • contribs) 09:35, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Dunavista, you're not doing yourself any favours by being uncivil. First off, notability is not inherited, so it does not matter who is her father (or if she knows Jimmy); she must be notable of her own right. Second, you have given no indication of what makes her notable; other than being the chief legal council for a company her family owns what has she done? What media sources have written about how amazing she is? If you cannot answer these questions (on the draft, not here; this is not a space to argue), then she does not meet the criteria for inclusion. Find some more sources and flesh out the draft, don't complain about Wikipedia's own rules to three people who know them well. Primefac (talk) 10:53, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Guidance for the page "Sujok Therapy"

Kc0293 (talk) 08:23, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Respected mam

You just marked one of the page ie "Sujok Therapy" under quick deletion. Please kindly guide me on what not to write on wiki page.

I will be really thankful to you for this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kc0293 (talk • contribs) 07:50, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Kc0293: Please see the links in the welcome message on your talk page. Cheers, --L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 22:54, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

what would u have me do??

Hi, This is renesha the marketing head at DSK Green Ice Games.

I request that you not delete the DSK GIG page beacuse the text used here in NOT copyright. We have used the same text everywhere for uniform promotion.

The indieDB.com reference link has been updated by me and its the same text that was used.

Please DO NOT DELETE the page. Can someone from your team please connect with me urgently on this????

DSK GREEN ICE GAMES is the page is submitted the article for!

DSKGIG (talk) 08:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've already said this, DSKGIG. Not only did you not read the notice at the top of my talk page about providing a link, you also need to read WP:COI and most importantly, WP:NOTADVERTISING. Wikipedia is not for promoting something, and really, really, REALLY hates being treated as such. Imagine if your house were turned into a billboard overnight for no reason. You would be pretty angry too. I think you're in the wrong place - you might be better off at a business directory. — kikichugirl speak up! 08:03, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

WHAT??

Dude are you crazy??

You're not even helping me.....merely posting links..... get ur basics right!!!! im not promoting nor advertising!! Im just creating a page for my brand - indiedb text was also posted by mean hence the similarity!

Is there anyone else APART from you who can maybe HELP!!!!

DSKGIG (talk) 08:07, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

DSKGIG, Instead of starting a new section, please reply under the previous section. I am trying to help you, but you are not listening. WP:ICANTHEARYOU isn't going to work. If you had read my edit notice, at the top of the page when you click edit, instead of blindly scrolling down to type, you would know that I cannot, and did not delete your page. If you are creating a page for your brand, you are going against conflict of interest which is strongly discouraged. It appears as if you are creating your page so other people know about your brand - that is what promotion is. Wikipedia is not for advertising and the fact that you used the same text on other sites to promote it shows that you are promoting something here. — kikichugirl speak up! 08:12, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@DSKGIG: Wikipedia is not LinkedIn. It's not a business directory, nor is it a free space for someone to write advertisements. It is an encyclopedia. Think of it as a library of articles about general knowledge written in a neutral tone. Advertising on Wikipedia would be like placing banner ads all over your library. Now, we all know that is not allowed and is shameful advertising. It is probably not your intention and you may be unaware of the true purpose of Wikipedia, to do such a thing that is blatantly inappropriate and advertising at the wrong place. The fact that a business or organization exists is not grounds for having an article. Please see Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not LinkedIn. Darylgolden(talk) Ping when replying 08:20, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@DSKGIG: There is no 'team', Wikipedia is edited by volunteers who want to build a free-content encyclopedia with neutral, unbiased content, that is free for anyone to use for any purpose whatsoever. You are quite misguided about copyright....anything that a person writes is copyrighted, and the text that employees of your company have written to promote it is under copyright (it belong to either the employee or the company), and CANNOT be used on Wikipedia unless it is 'explicitly' licensed under the Creative Commons license, with a formal authorization from someone able to make binding legal commitments. Even if that was done, text written by the subject of an article (or people with a direct connection to it) is still unsuitable content, as it you have a conflict of interest with the purpose of Wikipedia. Wikipedia is an ENCYCLOPEDIA, not a marketing tool. Reventtalk 08:16, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No, we will not help you advertise on Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not free adspace and using it as such is abuse of its service. Your rude behavior to us is unacceptable and is blockable. Darylgolden(talk) Ping when replying 08:18, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]


This is going ballistic! so the problem is with the "tone" of the article?? is that what you are suggesting? DSKGIG (talk) 08:23, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@DSKGIG: Your article (which is DSK Green Ice Games for the sake of others) it not even remotely formatted like a Wikipedia article, and references are 'independent, reliable sources' that support statements made in the text of the article, not promotional links that you hope people will click on. You have obviously not bothered to read any of the guidance given for new editors, and are not here for the purpose of 'building an encylopedia', but instead attempting to use Wikipedia for promotional purposes (and poorly). This tend to annoy people who volunteer their time to work on an encyclopedia. Having a Wikipedia article is not a promotional tool... we are not interested in what the 'marketing department' on a company has written about it, but instead in summarizing what reputable third parties have said about a subject. Having an article on Wikipedia will not help in your marketing. Really, it won't. You have a conflict of interest that is incompatible with the purpose of Wikipedia. Become notable, and someone else will write an article about you. You are better off not having an article (as it will be higher in search results than your own webpage) until you have become notable, as shown by you being written about by third parties. Wikipedia is NOT a marketing tool. Reventtalk 08:38, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewing of page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kc0293/Sujok_Therapy

Dear Mam

Recently my article regarding "Sujok therapy" was marked under speedy deletion by you and has been deleted deleted.

I have created another article with link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kc0293/Sujok_Therapy

Can you please kindly suggest me the changes that have to be applied to this article so as it doesn't get deleted again.

I will be really thankful to you for this

Smile RegardsKc0293 (talk) 08:33, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Kc0293, and thank you for providing a link to the article in question. You can also provide a link by putting brackets ([[ and ]] around the page's title. You can call me Kiki, not ma'am, I'm not that old! Specifically, the article was recommended for deletion because it didn't seem to fit into the guidelines on what Wikipedia is not. It was also written like an advertisement. Articles should be written in a neutral point of view and analyze the facts in a dry manner. I'd recommend going through WP:AfC with that, so that other people can guide you through the process. To submit an article at Articles for Creation for review, type {{subst:submit}} at the top of the page and click the [Save page] button. If you want more help, stop by the Teahouse, the IRC channel, or the help desk to ask someone for assistance. — kikichugirl speak up! 08:40, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Smile Thanks for your Guidance and Support.Kc0293 (talk) 08:50, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

10:15:22, 19 February 2015 review of submission by LPFairley


First, thank you for reviewing the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Europa_Donna_%E2%80%93_The_European_Breast_Cancer_Coalition. I am interested in making any adjustments required for resubmission so that it can be accepted for publication, but would appreciate some more specific feedback on what to change. Is there a particular section that sounds like advertising? The references in the article contain well-recognized outside sources (eg, the European Commission, World Health Organisation, European Journal of Cancer) and do not include links from the subject of the article itself. The entry is very similar to that for other non-profit breast cancer organisations (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breast_Cancer_Care; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susan_G._Komen_for_the_Cure), and Europa Donna (The European Breast Cancer Coalition) in comparison to many of them is a much larger organization. I would gladly make any changes, but want them to be the right ones so as not to take up more of your time. LPFairley (talk) 10:19, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

LPFairley (talk) 10:15, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, LPFairley. The thing with it is that it reads too much non-neutrally like it's promoting a cause. Entries should be written in a formal, encyclopedic tone; dryly, pretty much. Avoid flowery language or language that would imply you are soapboxing. Additionally, for examples of actually good articles to follow, take a look at some WP:FAs. Generally the existence of other articles, while may set a precedent, does not necessarily mean yours is also suitable - see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. (We didn't catch all the bad people yet - being a bad person must be okay! ) — kikichugirl speak up! 09:27, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Draft: Somerset Trust Company

Hi Kikichugirl,

I recently submitted a draft for my bank, Somerset Trust Company, and you rejected it because it sounded too much like advertising. I was wondering if you could help me fix this. I thought I entered in just facts that could be found out anywhere about the bank. I didn't think a history of the bank could be advertising, is it perhaps the community service? I thought they were important from a neutral perspective because of the contributions to 9/11 and the restoration of a train station on the National Historical Register, which already has a Wikipedia page.

Could you please help me fix this? I would really like to get my bank a page, especially when I see many other banks have pages.

Thank you for your help!

Jmorange (talk) 13:20, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Jmorange, I've looked at you new version. Teharticle still contains such statements as " This community-oriented mentality enables the bank .... to promote growth and prosperity for both Somerset Trust and the community it serves." and This decision stands as an example of Somerset Trust’s financial integrity and soundness." . This sort of writing is pure advertisement and does not belong in an encycopedia. The material for some minor community initiatives e.g.. " Somerset Trust hosted the gathering in one of their historic buildings" -- and contributed the trivial sum of $50,000, which hardly justifies calling it "an important role in post-September 11, 2001 efforts".
We discourage people writing about their own businesses--it is extremely difficult to escape the WP:Conflict of Interest. If your bank is notable, someone else will write an article about it. DGG ( talk ) 03:16, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]


DGG, I'm sorry, but I don't work for the bank...I keep my money there. I am writing a page about it because I believe the bank I belong to deserves one. You say $50,000 is trivial, but that is your subjective opinion. I modeled my page after many banks that already have pages. I have also looked at banks that are half the size of Somerset Trust Company and have Wikipedia pages, such as Citizens National Bank (Eastern Kentucky) . I am looking here for help writing an article because I believe it deserves a page on Wikipedia. Many people believe the bank is significant, and to set any monetary number and say it's "significant" is arbitrary. As far as the "community initiatives" section goes, I looked at PNC's page and they have a community initiatives page. I am not using it for advertising in the slightest, rather I am using it to show the national notability of the bank. Flight 93 crashed in Somerset, Pennsylvania, and although $50,000 might seem like pocket change to someone living in New York, if you look at the cost of living in Western PA, specifically Somerset County, where the crash occurred, it is one of the lowest costs of living in the nation. Perhaps if I change it from playing an "important role in post-September 11, 2001 efforts," to post-Flight 93 recovery efforts?" The Flight 93 National Memorial could not have been built without Somerset Trust. I do appreciate your help, but I didn't come here to be told I couldn't write the article. I came here to get help on how to write the article. You are more than welcome to edit it, and please help. I do not believe by simply belonging to the financial institution it disqualifies me from writing an article for Wikipedia on it. I am looking for help. Citizens National Bank (Eastern Kentucky) has a Section called "Donations" in which one bullet point says, notes a $50,000 donation to a college. My question for you is how can you distinguish between my page, and Citizens National Bank. It would seem to me if I am using my community initiatives for advertising citizens national bank, and all small financial institutions on Wikipedia, are simply using it for advertising. Again, I thank you for your help. I do not mean to seem rude in writing this response, but this whole process has been very frustrating when I cannot even use examples of other Wikipedia pages similar to model Somerset Trust Company after. Please, I really would like help on getting this article on Wikipedia. If you could please help me do that, I would really appreciate it. Thank you again. Jmorange (talk) 13:31, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Draft: Andrew Robert Taylor (Drug Smuggler)

Did you read my note on the talk page before declining the CSD on Draft: Andrew Robert Taylor (Drug Smuggler)? This article is an exact duplicate of David McMillan (smuggler), you can even tell that it is a bad find-and-replace job by the places in the draft where half of the paragraph says "Taylor" and the other half says "McMillian". We don't know who "Andrew Robert Taylor" is. It could be the page author, in which case I assume the draft is a test page. It could be someone else, which would make the draft a personal attack, calling someone an escaped felon. Please look over the draft carefully and reconsider the situation. Thanks. Altamel (talk) 15:12, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Altamel, if you're going to mark what appears to be (on the surface) a perfectly normal draft as a "test page" you should add a comment underneath the CSD as to why you did so. I know that I (and a few other reviewers) would have removed that CSD due to the oddity of it. You are welcome to re-CSD the page, though; it's not like a declined draft is immune You appear to be correct, though I've tagged it G10 and G12 since they are more applicable. Primefac (talk) 15:30, 19 February 2015 (UTC) (talk page stalker)[reply]

Seeking advice for a page you declined

After placing more references to legitimize the page and editing the content I was hoping to seek your advice on a page you recently declined. The link to the page is here:

Draft:WompMobile

I was wondering what parts sound too much like an advertisement and what I could change specifically to sound more neutral or if it's the entire article? To help guide the structure to make it sound less like an advertisement during last couple edits, I looked at other businesses within the industry that has a Wikipedia page as a reference, such as Mobify's page. Thank you for reviewing my article promptly I appreciate the effort and time!

Leungal (talk) 19:36, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Kimberly Goldson article

Hi Kikichugirl,

I recently submitted an article for fashion designer Kimberly Goldson. You rejected it stating that it wasn't written in a formal tone. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Kimberly_Goldson&diff=next&oldid=647785432 I am writing to see how I can improve the article so that it can be approved. I cited good sources - NY Post, Essence Magazine, Huffington Post, etc.

Thanks in advance, Shelly ShellyBK (talk) 22:32, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ShellyBK, phrases like "Luxurious textiles in classic shapes with a nod to current trends are at the center of the brand" are very promotional, and do not hold the professional tone of an encyclopedia. Essentially, all flowery language and weasel words need to be removed. Wikipedia should be, as they say, "just the facts." If you want more help, stop by the Teahouse, the IRC channel, or the help desk to ask someone for assistance. Primefac (talk) 00:44, 20 February 2015 (UTC) (talk page stalker)[reply]

Nepali Art Scene

Hello Kikichugirl,

I recently added an article on Tej Bahadur Chitrakar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Nepali.art.research/sandbox. I have included references which indicated his contributions to Nepalese Art scenario. Including link to Published book [1] [2][3]and articles. These are secondary sources as required and not something I wrote or related to the person in question.

I do not understand why you thought it otherwise. Anyone interested in Nepalese Art certainly wants to refer who Tej Bahadur Chitrakar is. Please elaborate what factors needed to be placed; and why do you think it is not significant to the encyclopedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nepali.art.research (talk • contribs) 02:43, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Nepali Water Colour Painting in Retrospect, Nepal Watercolour Society,1908-2004
  2. ^ B.P. Upadhyaya, A Compendious Book on Nepal Parichaya
  3. ^ Madan C., Tej Bahadur Chitrakar: Icon of a Transition, Tebachi Art Center, 2004

A cup of relaxing tea for you!

You've been reviewing a lot of AfC drafts. Here, have some tea. I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 04:50, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

18:04:09, 20 February 2015 review of submission by Nadya Inoubli


Hi ! Thank you for your feedback on my draft. I would very much appreciate if you could have a look at it one more time before I resubmit it for review. Thank you very much!

Nadya Inoubli (talk) 18:04, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

06:29:45, 21 February 2015 review of submission by JennaSys


Hi, I'm hoping to get some clarification on what context needs to be added for Draft:Vocademy. Based on WP:PCR, is it just providing short clarifications of lesser known terms like describing what a makerspace or Maker Faire is? Or is it about providing more general information about this specific subject? Thanks! JennaSys (talk) 06:29, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

JennaSys, I believe the reason kikichugirl declined this draft as "not having context" is because it is rather disjointed (at least, that's why I would decline it as such). You have some really good references, but the body of the draft just contains five seemingly random sentences that don't really go together. I know it's really difficult to write a piece about a business without sounding overly promotional, but I think with the sources you have it should be doable. In particular, I think discussing what Vocademy actually does would be helpful (there are a lot of things you could categorize as a makerspace, what makes this one special/different/etc?). If you want more help, stop by the Teahouse, the IRC channel, or the help desk to ask someone for assistance. Good luck! Primefac (talk) 11:07, 21 February 2015 (UTC) (talk page stalker)[reply]
Thanks for the suggestions. I'll give it another go and then try the Teahouse to have someone look it over before submitting for review again.JennaSys (talk) 08:15, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

11:08:16, 21 February 2015 review of submission by Michaelemmi


Hello, I am an employee of the IMDEA Software Institute tasked with creating the institute’s rejected Wikipedia page. This draft

User:Michaelemmi/IMDEA Software Institute

has been rejected for the seemingly-generic reason that it does not appear to be “written as an encyclopaedia article”.

I am writing to figure out whether there was a specific piece of text that does not adhere with Wikipedia’s requirements, and which has caused this draft to be rejected. Can you please point me to any offending text inside the article?

As far as I can tell, we have written only objective facts, and provided an adequate number of eternal links and references. In addition, this draft closely resembles a currently-published Wikipedia page for another institute under the same governing body:

IMDEA Networks Institute

Does that article also violate Wikipedia standards?

Any feedback you can give to justify this rejection would be greatly appreciated.

Best regards, M

Michaelemmi (talk) 11:08, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Michaelemmi, just going to point out a few things: first (and foremost) if you are working on these pages as part of your job, you need to put the {{paid}} template on your userpage in order to comply with the terms of use regarding paid editing. Second, the Networks Institute article is not the best (bordering on unacceptable), but OTHERSTUFFEXISTS and you should not use one article to justify another. Third, your draft currently has a small issue with CITEKILL, so some of the references should be removed or used in other places. None of these had any direct impact on why kikichugirl declined your draft, but you should definitely improve these before you resubmit. Primefac (talk) 11:21, 21 February 2015 (UTC) (talk page stalker)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Articles for Creation barnstar
For all the work you do on AFC and responding to the users questions about the AFC process! TheMesquitobuzz 05:23, 22 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Seconded. The work you do is simply amazing. --L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 23:17, 22 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Bompeh Senior High Technical School

I notice that you deleted this as G-11. Obviously I've got no idea what the content was, but it's clearly about a high school, and high schools are considered notable. It was also an article sarted by a new editor. Couldn't you have stripped out any promotional text and left a bare stub on the lines of "... is a high school in Ghana", advising the editor on how to continue from there? Especially as they had created it as a draft, rather than in article space, it seems unduly harsh and WP:BITEy to delete the whole article like that. PamD 13:35, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@PamD: (I didn't delete it... I'm not an admin...) As an AfC reviewer, I default to declining, not deleting, promotional drafts. While I don't exactly remember the actual content of this, it must have been sufficiently promotional enough to choose deletion over declining. Perhaps deletion review would be the venue here. — kikichugirl speak up! 18:11, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I'd got confused by the fact that you'd CSD'd it so it was your message on the user's talk page. I still don't see why you (and the deleting admin) couldn't have left it as a stripped-down stub, more positive for that new editor than deleting. But I see she's already had it turned down at Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion#Bompeh_senior_high_technical_school, so I've left what i hope is a helpful message on her talk page. PamD 18:48, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Kikichugirl. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lab Snacks.
Message added 17:49, 23 February 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Note: the Thorlabs article has been restored (by another user). NORTH AMERICA1000 17:49, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback

Hi, thanks for your feedback,I hope I'm doing this correctly by posting this on your talk page. I appreciate you being more specific in your feedback. I am new to wikipedia and we had to post for an assignment. Although I searched, I didn't delve as deep into Myer's Briggs as with personality and learning styles which there isn't as much on personality types and learning so I thought I was okay. I'm not sure how to fix what I've written but at least I know I have duplicate. Thanks again.

Smartiecatt — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smartiecatt (talk • contribs) 00:06, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Smartiecatt. You forgot to sign your comment (my edit notice at the top of the edit screen does teach you how though...) but otherwise yes my talk page works. I am also a fan of MBTI myself but we already have articles on them - we even have an article on INTJ, ENFP, ESTP, etc for each of the combinations. As such, your post was extraneous. Perhaps your professor should take a look at WP:Education program so that your assignment is better benefitting the encyclopedia. (Maybe Lixxx235 has something to add about the education program?) Good luck! — kikichugirl speak up! 01:57, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Draft article: Suzanne Arms

Hi user:Kikichugirl - thanks for reviewing my article (draft:Suzanne Arms) so quickly. I wasn't expecting to receive a response that fast! Obviously you felt that it needs more work and I took note that the tone needs to be addressed (including peacocking). I'd like to focus on the right areas and so would be grateful for any guidance on specifically which parts should be changed. Thanks in advance. Fbell74 (talk) 05:04, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

06:46:12, 24 February 2015 review of submission by Nimantharaj


Nimantharaj (talk) 06:46, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have written the above article with all reliable sources and following the style of several similar pages published in Wikipedia (even having very similar references). May I kindly get some examples from my article for the reviewers comments (below mentioned) so that I can objectively improve the article. Thanks for your efforts.

1. Unreliable sources 2. Peacock terms

Notability for conductors?

Thank you for your feedback regarding Draft:Einar Ralf.

I couldn't find anything on conductors on Wikipedia:Notability (music). Does that mean that conductors are never notable? Or is there some other page I should be reading? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.13.237.34 (talk) 07:12, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Kikichugirl&oldid=648599916"