User talk:Timtrent
![]() | Start a new discussion thread |
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 |
This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
In the event that what you seek is not here then it is archived (0.9 probability). While you are welcome to potter through the archives the meaning of life is not there.
Medford knife And tool
Hello, This is my Draft, You are more then welcome to take a look, a let me know what you think, Thanks. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Medford_Knife_and_Tool_-_M.K.T#Products Eytankey (talk) 16:41, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
- @Eytankey: From my persecutive this is a far tighter and less advertorial article than the one which was deleted. I have not checked the references. I'm glad you have kept it entirely about the org, and avoided the owner's ethos, because that hindered the article.
- One important question is the picture. Who is the photographer? There is no camera data, and most folk on Commons tend to require OTRS submissions to assert and release the picture to and beyond Commons. It is also important that the logo is allowed.
- However, these are small issues, and the final ones you need to consider. I suggest submission for review, a process I will recuse myself from because I became involved with the prior draft.
- The final hurdle, assuming it passes review, is that it is sufficiently different form the deleted article to allow it to remain as an article (we have a rule for instant deletion of re-created overly similar articles). I suggest most strongly that you do not move it to main namespace yourself. Get the Blades project editor involved in the review. I forget who they are, but I am sure you remember. Fiddle Faddle 16:56, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks for the fast response, what it the "main namespace "? Eytankey (talk) 21:04, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
- @Eytankey: "Main namespace" is our jargon for "A real, accepted article" Fiddle Faddle 21:38, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks for the fast response, what it the "main namespace "? Eytankey (talk) 21:04, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello, "Medford knife and tool" is mentioned in those articles https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pocket_knife and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighting_knife, you think it might change something? thanks Eytankey (talk) 08:29, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
- @Eytankey: I am afraid not. Wikipedia is not, of itself, any use of any description to show notability. WP:CIRCULAR is what we tell folk who go a step further and think it may serve as a reference. I know you don't think that at all. Your problem is showing how this company with excellent products passes WP:CORP from things external to Wikipedia. I think it is a matter of searching with diligence for better references and potentially for accepting that it may not yet be time for the article. Fiddle Faddle 08:34, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
CSD
Before asking speedy deletion, please execute due diligence and check the web. Taufiq Rafat is clearly notable pakistani poet. It is big problem of english wikipedia that national topics are very neglected. Please help to cover these gaping holes. - üser:Altenmann >t 17:33, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
- Thank you for you message. The article was poor enough to face speedy deletion. It is still. There is no obvious assertion of notability still. Fiddle Faddle 17:49, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
- I agree the page was close to none. I was talking about giving it a benefit of doubt and do some research. I agree that if a person is important enough, somebody will eventually write a decent article, and I would not say a word, if the subject were, say a yet another American underground musician or a brand new startup. However I am talking about extending some courtesy to topics for countries with poor outreach of wikipedia. - üser:Altenmann >t 04:56, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
- I treat all editors and all topics as equal. I do not make allowances for poor work. In this case we are looking at the outpourings from a contributing editor who seems unwilling or unable to understand our need for notability, and who is bombarding us with a series of trivial articles about nonentities. Fiddle Faddle 05:56, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
- re: "bombarding" - I understand now. "as equal" - I don't say you shouldn't. I was talking about helping them become "equal". I am not coercing you to do this: we are all volunteers and we do with our free time what we want. Best wishes. - üser:Altenmann >t 14:36, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
- A great place to help is WP:AFC, somewhere I spend a great deal of time as a reviewer. May I invite you to come and play? Fiddle Faddle 14:39, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
- Done. - üser:Altenmann >t 03:14, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
- Is there something wrong with me or my luck? In exactly 1 hour (20:30-21:30) I declined 8 submissions and accepted none! What's your stats? - üser:Altenmann >t 04:34, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
- Regrettably we have a load of wholly atrocious submissions surrounding a few nuggets. Some folk will go on to edit and provide decent work. You might like to copy or plagiarise some of my extended rationales to help new editors at User:Timtrent/Reviewing which i use multiple paragraphs form, sometimes modified for circumstances. I am afraid your experience is wholly typical. This is a labour of love, is WP:AFC. You are likely to find th older submissions more intellectually challenging and more ready for acceptance. We work on the basis that we try very hard to accept drafts that have a 60% chance or better of not being subject immediately to a deletion process. What we have achieved is keeping much rubbish out of main namespace, and finding a good number of editors who actually want help. Fiddle Faddle 06:25, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
- Is there something wrong with me or my luck? In exactly 1 hour (20:30-21:30) I declined 8 submissions and accepted none! What's your stats? - üser:Altenmann >t 04:34, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
- Done. - üser:Altenmann >t 03:14, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
- A great place to help is WP:AFC, somewhere I spend a great deal of time as a reviewer. May I invite you to come and play? Fiddle Faddle 14:39, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
NZ
- Rajcurator (talk · contribs)
First of all thank you for reviewing my article & giving your feedback. I request you to inform me of which provided source (mentioned in my draft) is reliable as per Wikipedia. Do I need to modify the title of my draft to comply with mentioned sources? Any other information which helps me to comply it with Wikipedia's norms.
@Rajcurator: Part of the steep learning curve that WP:AFC helps you with is WP:BURDEN. I have looked at your first three references, and none of them qualify as meeting the very strict criteria we lay down. ON this experience I venture to suggest that the remainder are unlikely to qualify either. Please read WP:42 and comp[are your references against it. Fiddle Faddle 12:28, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
05:23:09, 10 August 2015 review of submission by Atif1122
sir there is no history of banday's on wikipedia while it is very noble and respectable faimly of kashmir.
sir the history i have written in article is from authentic sources.so please accept my article so the people would know about bandays
Atif1122 (talk) 05:23, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
- @Atif1122: there are many families not on Wikipedia. My own is not. Why does this one qualify? Please see WP:GNG. Fiddle Faddle 12:29, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
Grammar Edits
Morning Timtrent,
Thanks for the note, I didn't see your past message regarding letting it be. I was trying to work on the grammar and flow based on some of the more credited articles in the business section. I'll let it be and let the community fine tune it.
Cheers,
- Be the article's father, never its mother. Fiddle Faddle 13:14, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
16:08:14, 10 August 2015 review of submission by Kendo1000
Kendo1000 (talk) 16:08, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi I understand your view on the original article, I am attempting to explain the difference between what is accepted by the term 'wizard', 'medieval and Harry Potter' style description and bring it back to the original understanding when the word 'wizard' was used to refer to a 'wise person'
I use the 'artof modernwizardry.org' website as a ref for this, but wrestling the term wizard away from the 'fiction' writers of the last few hundred years is proving to be a difficult task, so it would be better to provide it as a new branch of wizardry so that people can begin to see that there is a differenee between the standard wizard of an ego driven spell casting figure who is likely to cause more harm than good, and provide an alternative viewpoint that refers to the ancient past when wizards were venerated as people who did good. Thus providing a balanced viewpoint between the very ancient and the rise of the 'dark ages' wizard.
can you suggest what I should do to provide to this, I am happy for the 'artofmodernwizardy.org' to be excluded from any reference providing the point can be provisioned correctly
Thank you Ken
- @Kendo1000: The thing we require is referencing for what others have said. We cannot accept WP:OR however good it may be. Your own explanation is great for a different website, but cannot be used in Wikipedia. We can only report what others have recorded. We require references from significant coverage about the topic of the article, and independent of it, and in WP:RS please. See WP:42. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources.
- Without these references you may have to face the fact that this interesting topic is outside our remit. Fiddle Faddle 21:16, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tim, I was chasing off wikipedia a blacklisted website which was popped up in my watchlist by a bot, and run into rat's nest of "metaspammers" which tried to promote in wikipedia their spamming systems under innocent names which use the word "notification" in the articles. As part of dealing with them, I put a {{prod}} tag on Draft:Mass notification system, you declined 4+ months ago, but is shows a big red notice Please use PROD only on articles . So, how do we delete this kind of drafts? Staszek Lem (talk) 21:35, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
- Hi Staszek Lem. We use CSD if appropriate, otherwise MfD. Is this a WP:ANI thing, too? Fiddle Faddle 21:41, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
- I don't see it is ANI case yet, because so far I saw only old edits by various redlinked accounts. e.g. one good spammer magnet was "Notification system". with lots of editors whose contributions are to be checked. I am almost feeling sorry to close this flytrap by turning it into a redirect. Staszek Lem (talk) 23:05, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
Request to Review this Article
Hi Timtrent,
I request you to review the below updated article & let me know where I am not comply with 'Reliable Source' or 'Secondary Source' definitions of Wikipedia.
Please do not paste draft material into talk pages
|
---|
IntroductionN Z Seasonal Wear Pvt. Ltd. is an Indian company registered in 2009 & their Corporate Identification Number (CIN) is U17200MH2009PTC192995.[1]. Mr. Dinesh Trivedi is the Managing Director and the company is specialized in manufacturing rain wear[2][3]. HistoryThe company was registered in 2009 and grew gradually over the years[1][3]. It gained ISO 9001:2008 certification for its quality[3]. The company is based in Bhiwandi, Thane & entered into export market[3]. ImageAccording to the news published in Business Standard, ABP Live on 29th May, 2014 the company announced Bollywood actor Vivek Oberoi as the official brand ambassador for Zeel Rainwear during a company organized Fashion show in Mumbai[2][4]. During the show, Dinesh Trivedi, Managing Director, Zeel Rainwear, mentioned that the Indian rain-wear market has tremendous scope and organized players are still at a nascent stage[2][4]. “We are now looking forward to further expand our distribution network and reach out to customers across India looking for the best rain-wear to bear the Indian monsoon," he further concluded[2][4]. |
Rajcurator (talk) 05:34, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
- Each of your references is inappropriate. None is significant coverage. One is a government list, at least two are passing mentions. I forget what the fourth is. I know it is invalid
- There are many companies in the world. Simple existence is not sufficient to get a listing in Wikipedia. WP:CORP must be passed
- Reviews are performed on the draft itself. Please do not paste draft material to talk pages. Fiddle Faddle 06:49, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
[Edward_Gabriel_Andrè_Barrett] - corrections
Hello, thanks for the tips on [Edward_Gabriel_Andrè_Barrett].
I've made the appropriate changes (I hope) . May I resubmit the page for discussion?
User:EdwardMauri — Preceding undated comment added 07:21, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
- Always
another reviewer will look at it. I try not to re-review drafts. Fiddle Faddle 07:39, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
A kitten for you!
Thank you for working and sorting this M.K.T issue with me
Eytankey (talk) 09:56, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
- I wish I felt as if I deserved the kitten, Eytankey. All I seem to be doing is pushing the draft back to you, though I do it with good intent. What I wish is that I could wave a magic wand for you and make the sources needed for notability appear before your eyes. Thank you form an undeserving fellow Wikipedian. Fiddle Faddle 19:24, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
- I understand where you come from, It is clear to me that this is constructive criticism and not an attempt to thwart the article Eytankey (talk) 07:13, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
Medford
I can help here and there, but the paying jobs take precedence over wiki. You're not going to see CNN, NYT or the Guardian write about MKT. The reliable sources will come from the publications dedicated to knives, guns, etc. I'll look around and see what else I can come up with, but my time for this is limited as I have 8 print pieces due by September 1 and three times that much in online writing due by then. Wish I could throw more time into this one, but it is what it is. The rocking horse shit cracked me up, thanks for the chuckle...hadn't heard that term in years!--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 04:45, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
- @Mike Searson: I agree totally about the sources. The references are only likely to be in specialist or in trade press. The problem with trade press is that it is so hungry for articles that it often takes press releases verbatim and adds no value to them. Help here and there is fine. Apart from a 'boy's curiosity' with knives and liking the look of the Medford product I have no expertise in the area. I like using good knives for cooking, and have a couple of fine Japanese chef's knives, but that is where my expertise, such as it is, ends. Fiddle Faddle 06:57, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
That is actually The Kendall WALL Band. Template:Timtrent
- @Mike Searson: thank you for the help, I'll keep looking for more, I saw you added another source, @Timtrent: you think it will help? BTW for how long does the draft stay? is it time limited? Eytankey (talk) 07:08, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
21:20:28, 13 August 2015 review of submission by Imasku
Imasku (talk) 21:20, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
First it is the KENDALL WALL BAND NOT KENDALL WARD BAND. PLEASE DELETE ARTICLE. I HAVE PROVIDED RELIABLE SOURCES THAT ARE THIRD PARTY. I HAVE ALREADY STATED THE FORMULA IS NOT WORKING PROPERLY TO LIST THOSE.
- You seem to have hit the caps lock key. I ignore people who shout online. Fiddle Faddle 07:18, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
22:32:14, 13 August 2015 review of submission by 74.124.171.179
74.124.171.179 (talk) 22:32, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi, can you please tell me how to change the title of the article, I can't seem to figure it out!
Also, I would like to add some photos to the article. Would it be ok to submit them if I give credit to the source or is that illegal? Thanks, JOhn ----
- At the head of the page is the "More" tab with a down arrow. that down arrow leads to a "Move" function and that renames the page.
- To upload a picture you must have permission to upload it or to be the copyright owner. I suggest pictures are the final thing to add. WP:Donating copyright material will help you, though it is complex. Fiddle Faddle 07:20, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
01:42:23, 14 August 2015 review of submission by 24.34.106.226
Dear Timtrent,
Thank you so much for taking the time to review our article on Exact Sciences and for your feedback. We are eager to edit the article to meet Wikipedia's requirements and have done our best to respond to all the feedback provided us by reviewers to date. We want to get this right so I'm hoping to get some additional insight from you, if possible, on what the issues with our article might be.
In our earlier drafts, we provided numerous third-party, published sources that are unrelated to the company as validation of the information in our article (these included the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the American Cancer Society, The New England Journal of Medicine (a peer-reviewed scientific journal), as well as several local, regional and national media articles). I have included this original version, with the references, below so you could easily see what we did. The feedback from other reviewers was that the article was too promotional. In the next version, we tried to pull back on anything that we thought could be considered promotional, but still included some of these important references. The next reviewer indicated that the article was then too much like an essay. In our third attempt, the one you reviewed, we tried to pare down the entire article in the hopes that if we stuck to the most basic facts about the company, that might past muster, but it seems that now we've removed too much of the "meat" of the article.
In working to revise our article, we took a look at the Wikipedia pages of several other companies in the healthcare industry, including Hologic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hologic) and Epocrates (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epocrates) and feel that much of the information they provide in terms of background on the company, its leadership/management team, introduction to its products and other information is similar to what we wrote for Exact Sciences.
One thing I did notice is that some of the media articles these pages refer to are national business publications (such as Forbes, U.S. News, etc.). These are all publications that have published stories about Exact Sciences and/or its products. Would including some of these references be helpful?
Is there any additional guidance you might be able to provide as we work on a new version of our article for review?
Again, thank you so much for your review and we very much appreciate any additional insights you could offer -- we are committed to getting this right!
Best, Marisa
Please do not paste great swathes of material here. There is absolutely no point in doing so
|
---|
Original Version of Article Exact Sciences Corp.(1)(http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/EXAS/profile) was founded in 1995 in Boston, Massachusetts with the goal of partnering with healthcare providers, payers, patients and advocacy groups to help eradicate certain types of cancers. Today the company develops, manufactures and markets noninvasive molecular diagnostics for the early detection and prevention of prevalent gastrointestinal diseases. Headquartered in Madison, Wisconsin, Exact Sciences employs more than 400 people across operations, sales, laboratory, R&D, manufacturing and customer support. The company’s initial focus has been on colorectal cancer—the second leading cause of cancer-related death among both men and women. (2)(http://www.cancer.org/cancer/colonandrectumcancer/detailedguide/colorectal-cancer-key-statistics) Developed in collaboration with Mayo Clinic, Exact Sciences’ stool DNA (sDNA) screening technology for the noninvasive detection of colorectal cancers and pre-cancers was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in August 2014. (3)(http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm409021.htm) It is the first noninvasive colorectal cancer screening test for the average risk population that analyzes both DNA and blood biomarkers in stool. In a 10,000-patient clinical trial published in the April 2014 New England Journal of Medicine, the test found 92% of colon cancers and 69% of high-risk precancers (high-grade dysplasia) that are most likely to develop into cancer with 87% specificity. (4)(Imperiale TF, Ransohoff DF, Itzkowitz SH, et al. Multitarget stool DNA testing for colorectal-cancer screening. N Engl J Med. 2014;370(4):1987-97. http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1311194) The technology is included in the colorectal cancer screening guidelines of the American Cancer Society (5) (http://www.cancer.org/cancer/colonandrectumcancer/moreinformation/colonandrectumcancerearlydetection/colorectal-cancer-early-detection-screening-tests-used) and the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Exact Sciences has exclusive intellectual property protecting its molecular sDNA technology and holds 11 patents, with an additional seven recently issued or allowed, all in the U.S., and 50 patents in foreign jurisdictions. In 2014, Exact Sciences opened a 30,000 square foot, state-of-the-art, Federal Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA)-certified clinical laboratory in Madison where all of its sDNA tests are processed; this facility is currently capable of performing up to 1 million tests per year. The company also operates its own contact center to support patients and prescribing physicians. Exact Sciences was named one of the “2014 Best Companies to Work For” by InBusiness magazine (6) (http://www.ibmadison.com/In-Business-Madison/December-2014/Best-Companies-to-Work-For-2014/index.php?cparticle=1&siarticle=0#artanc) and its CEO, Kevin T. Conroy, was recognized as a 2014 E&Y Entrepreneur of the Year for the Midwest region (7) (Wisconsin State Journal: http://host.madison.com/business/exact-sciences-ceo-kevin-conroy-wins-entrepreneurship-award/article_273589a9-20d0-5454-b078-e5ca03074e21.html) and named a 2015 Executive of the Year by InBusiness magazine. (8) (http://www.ibmadison.com/In-Business-Madison/February-2015/Executive-Prowess-Our-2015-Executives-of-the-Year-exemplify-great-leadership/) References: (1)MarketWatch: http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/EXAS/profile (2)American Cancer Society: http://www.cancer.org/cancer/colonandrectumcancer/detailedguide/colorectal-cancer-key-statistics (3)U.S. Food & Drug Administration: http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm409021.htm (4)New England Journal of Medicine: Imperiale TF, Ransohoff DF, Itzkowitz SH, et al. Multitarget stool DNA testing for colorectal-cancer screening. N Engl J Med. 2014;370(4):1987-97. http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1311194 (5) American Cancer Society: http://www.cancer.org/cancer/colonandrectumcancer/moreinformation/colonandrectumcancerearlydetection/colorectal-cancer-early-detection-screening-tests-used (6)InBusiness Madison Magazine: http://www.ibmadison.com/In-Business-Madison/December-2014/Best-Companies-to-Work-For-2014/index.php?cparticle=1&siarticle=0#artanc (7)Wisconsin State Journal: Wisconsin State Journal: http://host.madison.com/business/exact-sciences-ceo-kevin-conroy-wins-entrepreneurship-award/article_273589a9-20d0-5454-b078-e5ca03074e21.html (8)InBusiness Madison: http://www.ibmadison.com/In-Business-Madison/February-2015/Executive-Prowess-Our-2015-Executives-of-the-Year-exemplify-great-leadership/ |
24.34.106.226 (talk) 01:42, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
- I am concerned about your use of "our". Are you part of this corporation?
- To create a worthwhile article you need to take the following steps:
- Ignore all other articles unless they are in the WP:GA list. Those are articles that meet our needs very well indeed.
- Look for references, which are defined as follows: We require references from significant coverage about the topic of the article, and independent of it, and in WP:RS please. See WP:42. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources.
- Take facts from those references and marshal them onto the order that makes the most sense for the article.
- Write the article using the references to cite those facts
- Ensure that nothing in your tone could be considered promotional
- That, put simply, is all you have to do. If you do that correctly then your article simply needs to pass WP:CORP (in this case) and it is immediately suitable for Wikipedia Fiddle Faddle 07:29, 14 August 2015 (UTC)