Jump to content

User talk:Onel5969

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user is a WikiGnome.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Abdella2 (talk | contribs) at 01:42, 25 July 2016 (→‎01:38:52, 25 July 2016 review of submission by Abdella2). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Onel5969's Talk
Phoenix ... It's a dry heat ...
Born
New York city
NationalityAmerican
SEMI-RETIRED
Am waffling between this and full retirement. I may or may not respond to any messages left here. If you have a query regarding an AfC issue, please leave your question at that site, or at the Teahouse. Best of luck to you all.

08:50:09, 24 May 2016 review of submission by Janani.Jayabal


01:56:00, 25 May 2016 review of submission by Flashpepi



I have added citations, deleted citations and tidied up the format of my article Marc Clark (sculptor). Could you please review and suggest any further changes, as neccessary, before I re-submit the article,

Thanks,

John Flashpepi (talk) 01:56, 25 May 2016 (UTC)Flashpepi (talk) 08:25, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I have been advised to make further changes which I have done,

cheers,

JohnFlashpepi (talk) 09:05, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Can you please assist now. I've made the requested changes wrote it in Prose format. Removed services and all keeping it precise to the briefest information on company. Cited very credible independent source referring back to the company. What else can would you suggest. Thanks for your assistance so far. --Mahmoodyaqub (talk) 11:06, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

21:54:06, 25 May 2016 review of submission by Etaft


Hi, thanks for your feedback -- I'm new to wikipedia writing. I think I fixed the issues with reliable sourcing. Added several links, replaced one or two others. Is this sufficient, or do more lines need sources?

03:39:29, 26 May 2016 review of submission by Tdeblase94


I do not understand why Margherita Datini is for some reason not considered "notable" enough, so I would certainly appreciate a re-review. I used nearly all the references available for her, including the excellent work done by historian Ann Crabb; Datini is fully deserving of a Wikipedia page as the writing she did was important to Prato's merchant politics and the role of women during the time. I worked very hard on this research and I'm extremely disappointed that the entry did not go through. I think a great amount of people could benefit from learning about her life.

05:36:29, 26 May 2016 review of submission by 121.128.1.17


Thank you so much for the review and feedback. I checked the references you recommended for more information and am wondering if you had any more specific requests about how to improve the page with regards to citations specifically. There are many other beauty pageant titleholders who are included in Wikipedia who have much fewer citations concerning coverage or interviews on newspapers and international media. Should I remove some information to simply make it more basic and only have information on the page that was covered by newspapers and television?

Thank you very much for your time and help.

11:29:22, 26 May 2016 review of submission by IZSoperations



Would it be possible to help me understand exactly what I need to do in order that my submission might be accepted;I understand that rejections are most common because of lack of references, a lack of notability, and too much bias in the writing style. Regarding the first two, could you let me know if the following would be a good start and I am on the right track:

Notability: attaching links to Biographies etc, of the founder members, together with the council members, Also, I would put the Professional Standards ie EQA etc, in long hand afterwards. Validation: In the Professional Standards paragraph, if I write the acronyms out in full ; Credibility: if I can provide examples of where the professional Standards have been used maybe

Thank you in advance for your assistance.

Regards

14:21:51, 26 May 2016 review of submission by Hannah Quarantine


Hello, I'm new to Wikipedia and I'm trying to set up a page for theatre company, Quarantine. My draft has been rejected because it reads 'more like an advert than an encyclopaedia entry'. It was rejected previously on the 12 May for the same reason, with the comment that it contained 'peacock language.' I tried to amend it by taking out what might be read as 'peacock language' but clearly there is still a problem - is there anything else I can do to make the draft more acceptable? Would I be right in guessing that this is no longer an issue of language, but of the fact that many of the references link the Quarantine's website? Advice/guidance would be very much appreciated. Thank you, Hannah.

Thanks for all your hard work over the years

I just happened to click a link to your user page today and noticed the semi-retirement message. Thank you for your work, especially at AfC. Best, /wiae /tlk 15:24, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Jay Solomon Source

Hello. I am sorry to start a new section, but I cannot find my original note. The mention of Solomon's role with VidaPrimo is at the bottom of the Video Age article I used as a source. The first source I used was a press release. The second one from Video Age was not. Please adviseLG Brichetto (talk) 22:31, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

13:42:48, 28 May 2016 review of submission by Gsv gravitas zero


I'm not sure I'm doing this right. Can you let me know if there's anything more needed on the Robert Valley submission? If not, is there anything else I need to to as the queue position seems to be rising rather than going down. Thank you for your time and patience.

08:55:34, 30 May 2016 review of submission by TJ847


Hi Onel5969,

Would it possible to point out the unsatisfactory parts of my article, ie. the sources, or the written copy in certain sections? I have made a couple of edits over the past month but they might have been in the wrong direction.

Thanks for everything thus far!

Review of submission by DrArminius re Draft:Allan_Anderson_(theologian)

Dear Onel5969,

Thank you for flagging up your concerns re: notability. I am collecting evidence to rectify this and hope to demonstrate Professor Anderson's notability to your satisfaction very soon.

Kind regards. DrArminius (talk) 20:35, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sharvesb (talk) 03:39, 31 May 2016 (UTC)== Request on 03:39:13, 31 May 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Sharvesb == [reply]


Hi,

I would like to check why the edited submission for my draft is still under review. It stated as 7 days but it has been close to 11 days since submission but there has been no feedback. Do let me know. Thanks.

Do take note that formatting and reference to the company's websites and sources have been edited to suit your editors comments. Do let me know if there's anything further.

Sharvesb (talk) 03:39, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

05:46:39, 31 May 2016 review of submission by Scomma



Hi, could you please inform us, how is the references that we use are not notable or verifiable? those are all the information that we have about page365. This Page365 is very similar with soldsie, thus we would like to make similar article about the sample of social commerce.

Revert of Miami

You can't link directly to census data. The previous link was not the actual citation either. There's no point in reverting. And way to make it harder for me instead of simply asking. Scythe33 (talk) 20:22, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

17:35:17, 1 June 2016 review of submission by A7600404


Hi there, requesting a re-review because I believe I've improved the language that was previously not considered to be neutral. Please let me know if there are any more changes/improvements I can make.

Thank you!

Request on 17:40:47, 1 June 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Etaft


Hi, thanks for the feedback. I added several references and replaced one or two others. Is this enough, or are more citations needed?

Etaft (talk) 17:40, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

2016 Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Community Survey

The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.

Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:48, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

03:08:07, 4 June 2016 review of submission by Lquessenberry


Bear with me as this is my first time submitting and I can't quite get my head around notability. I have been putting a lot of research in on the subject of my entry and I am wondering if it was a technical hurdle that I did not overcome, or is it simply not enough reference material citing the subject?

Chris Fuller Draft Article

Hey there, we spoke a month or so back about the Chris Fuller article in the draft space (the "Loren Cass" filmmaker). I did what you requested and have really built the article up with some great information and major sources). It meets all of the guidelines for the notability of creative professionals, but, after a lengthy wait, some other Mod just rejected it for the number of works the subject has had. My understanding is that the number of works has no bearing on notability. It seems like an endless pursuit and some of the Mods don't seem to understand the guidelines themselves. I'm not sure how things work on your end and I know you're semi-retired, but if you have a moment to re-review the article it would be much appreciated. Thanks! Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Chris_Fuller — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.190.83.144 (talk) 19:15, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

02:25:48, 11 June 2016 review of submission by 67.9.151.198


Hi Onel5969,

I'm requesting a re-review of an article you declined about a month ago. It has been built up since then by several authors independent of the subject over a long period of time. It meets the Golden Rule guidelines and the Guidelines for the Notability of Creative Professionals (filmmakers, etc.)

The Golden Rule: The subject indeed has significant coverage (multi-page editorials, not Q&A interviews) in reliable sources (NY Times, LA Times, LA Weekly, Hollywood Reporter, Variety, Filmmaker Magazine, IndieWire, the Museum of Modern Art, etc.) that are independent of the topic (of course, the periodicals previously mentioned aren't related to the subject of the article in any way).

Guidelines for the Notability of Creative Professionals:

1) The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors.

The subject has been covered as one of the top 100 new filmmakers in a book published by Phaidon Press that was curated by major film festival programmers from around the world. The subject has also been nominated for an IFP Gotham Award. Also, included in the sources are interviews with other filmmakers who cite the work of the subject as an influence and something wholly original.

2) The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory, or technique.

See the above respond to #1. The filmmaker is known for the originality of his work.

3) The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews.

The subject created a work that was deemed significant by the NY Times, the Museum of Modern Art and the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. The work, "Loren Cass", has also been the one of the subjects of a book ("Take 100" published by Phaidon Press) and of multiple independent periodical articles and reviews.

4) The person's work (or works) either (a) has become a significant monument, (b) has been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) has won significant critical attention, or (d) is represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums.

The subject's feature film, "Loren Cass", is known for its originality (a), was featured in an exhibition at the Museum of Modern Art in NYC (b), has been named a NY Times Critic's Pick and received strong reviews in numerous mainstream publications (c), was nominated for an IFP Gotham Award (c), and is represented at the Museum of Modern Art along with the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences (d), linked below for verification.

The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences: http://catalog.oscars.org/vwebv/search?searchType=7&searchId=224&maxResultsPerPage=50&recCount=50&recPointer=0&resultPointer=0

10:08:55, 12 June 2016 review of submission by Naitikavyas


Hello, We strongly believe that Mr. Pankaj Naram has done remarkable work in the field of Siddhaveda and Marma Techniques which can help people live their life with vibrant health, peace of mind and unlimited energy. I have personally experienced it. I would like to take your help to guide us what should we write which can be considered as accepted criteria. I understand that article should not look like PR exercise or self publicity and we do not want to do that as well. We only want it to be here in Wikipedia as it will help millions of people. I was searching for another article in wikipedia w.r.t Ayurvedic Doctor and found this one. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partap_Chauhan I am amazed that if this article can be accepted then why not https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Pankaj_Naram ? Do guide us to rewrite the way it can be accepted.

Thanking you in advance.

Naitikavyas (talk) 10:08, 12 June 2016 (UTC)naitikavyas[reply]

Thank you so much for your quick feedback. Really Appreciate!

Do find below my response. 1. Wikipedia account is Single user only. When I am using a term "we" I mean all the people who have been benefited by Pankaj Naram somewhere or other w.r.t Health Issues. I am using term "we" on their behalf. We want Pankaj Naram's basic profile to come on Wikipedia.

2. I do understand that earlier low quality content approval doesn't mean to approve other of similar nature. But at the same time I believe that Wikipedia should also look into those people who can change someone's life forever and benefits the masses.

3. I request your help to guide "we the people" who have benefited by Pankaj Naram to submit the article which can meet the criteria of Wikipedia Article section. We are all here to abide the rules and regulations and I want to personally volunteer Wikipedia forever.

[1] Naitikavyas (talk) 04:33, 13 June 2016 (UTC)naitikavyas[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Pankaj_Naram

11:36:07, 13 June 2016 review of submission by Yellowmug7



Hello! I'm attempting to make The Cavendish article appropriate for Wikipedia and was wondering whether you had any advice for any specific changes I can make to make the submission more suitable? Thank you! Yellowmug7 (talk) 11:36, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there! I'm working on a project trying to bring most of the coding on Wikipedia up to the most current standards (HTML5), and I noticed that your signature is using <font>...</font> tags which were deprecated in HTML 4.0 Transitional, marked as invalid in 4.0 Strict, and are not part of HTML5 at all. I'd love to help you update your signature to use newer code, and if you're interested, I suggest replacing: 

[[User:onel5969|'''<font color="#536895">Onel</font><font color="#FFB300">5969</font>''']] <sup>[[User talk:Onel5969|<i style="color:blue">TT me</i>]]</sup>

with: 

[[User:onel5969|'''<span style="color:#536895;">Onel</span><span style="color:#ffb300;">5969</span>''']] <sup>[[User talk:Onel5969|<i style="color:blue">TT me</i>]]</sup>

which will result in a 170 character long signature with an appearance of: Onel5969 TT me compared to your existing 156 character long signature of: Onel5969 TT me

— Either way. Happy editing! (t) Josve05a (c) 18:12, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Josve05a - No worries, done. Onel5969 TT me 12:22, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 09:51:29, 22 June 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by TomCunnane


I have tried to submit this page 3 times for a colleague. Rejected due to refs. Now updated.

TomCunnane (talk) 09:51, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi TomCunnane - I removed the draft you inappropriately posted to my talk page. I can only see where you've submitted it once, and it was declined by st170e. Not sure why you are posting on my talk page, but I agree with st170e's assessment. Your article suffers from large formatting issues, both in the structure/style of the article, and particularly in its citations. I'll post some links on the draft which might help you. Also, you shouldn't remove the AfC decline statement. Onel5969 TT me 12:35, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A favor

Hi Onel5969! I gather you've mostly retired from AfC (totally understandable, BTW – there's a reason why I've never really tried to take up reviewing over there!...). In any case, I trust your judgment from your AfC experience, and I was wondering if you could take a quick look at Draft:Tori Anderson for me, and tell me if you'd "publish" it if it were an AfC submission. And, if you can't take a look at it, no worries! TIA in either case! --IJBall (contribs • talk) 00:17, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi IJBall - I think this is a case of WP:TOOSOON. She's had several roles in episodic television, she has a recurring role (which is miscategorized as a main role in her article) in The Other Kingdom, which is a relatively new cable show. Her role on Open Heart is a main role, but it is a relatively insignificant show, having lasted only 12 episodes. I think once No Tomorrow begins to be broadcast it might work. But this is just my opinion. You might want to submit it through the AfC process, and another editor might see it differently. Take care. Onel5969 TT me 03:38, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I agree. But I also know that someone (likely a "drive-by editor") is likely to create a one-line (unsourced) stub in the next three months at Tori Anderson. So I'm wrestling with doing this the "right" way and waiting until more sourcing becomes available, or just moving the article to mainspace now so at least there's something with proper sourcing at that location (to prevent something worse from getting created there in the meantime...).
One question I've had for a while – do articles in Draftspace have "precedence" over articles created in mainspace at a later date? – In other words, do articles created earlier in Draftspace get to automatically "replace" (bad) articles created later in mainspace? If the system worked like that, it would be a great incentive to doing article creation the "right" way... But I've always gotten the impression that mainspace is like the Wild West, and basically whoever gets there first "wins". --IJBall (contribs • talk) 05:13, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
IJBall - Responding to your last question first. No, no preference is given to articles in draft space. It's part of the concept of Wikipedia (at least I've been given this impression, never actually seen it written anywhere) that this isn't a contest, it's a project, and everybody should be working on it together. Of course, that is belied in the fact that so much emphasis seems to be put on article creation, and I'd be a hypocrite if I said I didn't get enjoyment out of being an article's creator. By all means move it to mainspace. But be prepared for it to have an AfD challenge. And keep on top of it, adding extra sourcing when it comes available. 12:36, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kreuzes and Dreiecks

You've now three times removed a category in five redirects, including two sets recently and one set on 2016-04-14.

First of all, please do not use edit summaries to comment about other editors, as you have done in both of your recent sets of reverts.

Regarding your assertion that I "had not bothered to check", I have shown you that I reviewed the general issue two years ago at the Help desk.  Do you now understand that I "bothered"?

Your most recent edit summary asserts that WP:INCOMPATIBLE "argue[s] for not cat", yet WP:INCOMPATIBLE is in the set of "When to categorize a redirect".  So your response does not appear to be supported by the source.

And in the sum of all three of your edit comments, you've yet to state why you are removing the category.  Why are you removing the category?  Thank you, Unscintillating (talk) 13:34, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that you "bothered" two years ago. And got it wrong with your recent edits. The help desk inquiry was regarding cats on the target page, not the redirect. Read the guideline again, WP:CAT-R, "Most redirects should not be placed in article categories." While there are exceptions, none apply in these instances. Onel5969 TT me 20:23, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
First of all, thank you for answering the basic question of why you've been removing the categories.  No, the discussion on the help page concluded that the redirect Thomas Mantell should have a category, as, "It is a nonsense to give an article on an event a birth category."  That discussion shows that I am, and have been, aware that categories on redirects are not necessarily the norm.  Please stop underestimating my skill level in this discussion.
Now, I have good reason to believe that this is one of the exceptions.  You should be able to see by inspection that Bundesautobahn 44 is not a "Road interchange in Germany".  Both WP:CAT-R#Redirects whose target title is incompatible with the category and WP:CAT-R#Subtopic categorization are applicable.  Unscintillating (talk) 06:25, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No, I'm pretty much hitting the nail on the head when it comes to your skill level. Your reference to the help page is not germane, being that was a decision on cats after a merge, not an article deletion. Your first example above simply has no bearing on this issue, and the second actually would make a better argument for not including the cat, since this article has gone through the AfD process - it's not likely (possible, but not likely) that the article will be expanded. So that pretty much sums it up. Don't post on my talk page in the future. I have no wish to have any further interchange with you. Onel5969 TT me 15:48, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

14:52:13, 7 July 2016 review of submission by Ballantinesrose



Hey there! I have been getting feedback that the page I am writing isn't matching my references. Can I change the title of the main draft so that I can arrange the whole document to be more cohesive?

Thanks!

Ballantinesrose (talk) 14:52, 7 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

18:48:23, 10 July 2016 review of submission by Kaitlinh24


I read the criteria for Wikipedia notability, but will the following items suffice? If not, please let me know what else is required: The philosopher of education, Dr. O'Hara, is worthy of note because he has been a teacher and teacher preparer for 37 years having taught an estimated 4000 students. The impact his work has had as a teacher preparer extends exponentially to the tens of thousands when one considers the teachers he has prepared over two decades at three universities, West Virginia University, Towson University and The University of Tampa and the impact his students have had on their students.

Dr. O'Hara has had a significant scholarly impact as he has over 30 articles in peer reviewed academic journals and has been an academic leader for well over a decade.

The transcendent teacher learner relationship philosophy is historically significant because it is the first philosophy specifically developed for teacher learner relationships. The philosophy has won critical attention from:

-Dr. Maxine Greene, Columbia University, existentialist philosopher and author of numerous, critically acclaimed books and articles, see her Wikipedia site (letters with critique from Dr. Greene to Dr. O'Hara are available upon request, Dr. Greene also served on Dr. O'Hara's doctoral committee).

-Dr. Clark Moustakas, with Abraham Maslow and Carl Rogers originated humanistic psychology movement, and co founder of the Center for Humanistic Studies, and the Journal of Humanistic Psychology, see his Wikipedia site (a letter with critique is available from Dr. Moustakas to Dr. O'Hara is available upon request).

-Dr. Edyth Wheeler, Professor Emerita of Early Childhood Education, Towson University and author of Conflict Resolution in Early Childhood: Helping Children Understand, Manage, and Resolve Conflicts, Prentice Hall (her written critical response is available upon request and can be forwarded directly to Wiki by her).

-Dr. Patty O'Grady, Associate Professor of Education, The University of Tampa and author of Positive Psychology in the Elementary School Classroom, Norton (her written critical response to O'Hara's work is available upon request and can be forwarded directly to Wiki by her).


Dr. O'Hara's philosophy is worthy of notice because derives from a series of heuristic studies conducted over a period of twenty-five years.

Dr. O'Hara's transcendence philosophy is remarkable because it draws upon three fields of research is broadly applicable as it stands at the intersection of education philosophy, education psychology and education best practice.

Nomination of A-1 Trailer Park, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article A-1 Trailer Park, Arizona is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A-1 Trailer Park, Arizona until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Mb66w 15:20, 12 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Images for Harry Jackson article

Hi Onel5969. I had pinged you on the Harry Jackson (artist) talk page because you reviewed a previous draft about him. Well, the draft is now in main space and I submitted an edit request to add three fair use images to the article. One editor has responded, "I'm not confident the images will be acceptable since they are not at least fair use". I think this is just because the file pages currently display a warning template because they are fair use but not included in any main space articles at this time. Would you be willing to respond to this edit request by adding these three images to the article?

I've posted an edit request and asked to help at WikiProject Visual arts, but no one has responded and the fair use images are set to be deleted within 2 days if they are not added to the article. I don't think my request is controversial, but I prefer not to edit the article directly given my COI. Thanks for your consideration. Inkian Jason (talk) 21:08, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Surname map

Hi Onel5969, I wanted to know if you could make a surname map image for the Maiorana article, or if not, know someone who can? Based on the ones on Griffin (surname) and Jones (surname) pages, it should cover U.K. and Ireland (which come from this website [1]). The website explains how it works, but basically areas with higher density of people (Wigan and Lancashire, etc. in Maiorana's case) are dark red and areas with no people with Maiorana name (Scotland, etc.) stay white, with shades of pink for less people. Here is the numbers of U.K. Maioranas [2](but the numbers don't have to show up on the image). If it's something you can do I'd appreciate it very much and it would be a great benefit to the page, thanks you.

An example of the look.
--2A02:C7D:C22A:F600:7859:62F1:9E80:6F27 (talk) 19:35, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

01:38:52, 25 July 2016 review of submission by Abdella2


I believe this article is notable enough to be published and I don't understand why it got rejected. The biography of Kaeya Majmundar isn't just significant because she was on the Season Finale of Shark Tank but also because she has released two independent products which have gained enormous success. A line of apparel named #Bullies with the heavy endorsement of Derrick Rose. It has been covered by TMZ, Chicago Tribune, etc. Her second product ZipTank was showcased on primetime television on The Steve Harvey Show and seen throughout Rapper Vic Mensa's first tour - an artist signed by legendary businessman and rapper Jay Z. It was also endorsed by Beyonce's Hair stylist, Ty Hunter. The argument that Kaeya is simply known for her Shark Tank appearance is no longer accurate. She has been featured on numerous third party sources for her business ventures and made Forbes' list, "12 of The Most Promising Women Entrepreneurs Under 30 from Shark Tank." We can only expect this page to continue to grow with her numerous celebrity endorsements, successful product lines, philanthropy. I understand that this is my first article but I had done tremendous research and I will continue to work on this page to make it even better. My only request that we give this page a chance.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Onel5969&oldid=731389409"