User Talk:Winged Blades of Godric
Welcome to My Talk Page!
Hello! and Welcome to my talk-page!
I am Godric. I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction. If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at my talk page – I'm always happy to help. Alternatively, type Resources
Finding your way around:
Need quick help?
Let's get a bit more detailed
How you can help:
Do's and Dont's
Final reminders
|
Please sign your message.
.
Hi - regarding my article on Prof Dr Suresh DavidHi, Thanks for reviewing the article. I understand biographies of living ppl is difficult. I have tried keeping to the norms with the help of people whom i know and some really helpful ones on Wikipedia. Could you please give some suggestions when you find some time.? Thank you Naepin (talk) 16:57, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
Naepin (talk) 11:50, 15 April 2017 (UTC) Can you please revert your WP:BADNAC there? This closure is contentious, AND it is a close call. Also, it looks more like a WP:SUPERVOTE than a proper closure.Burning Pillar (talk) 04:20, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
04:50:59, 19 April 2017 review of submission by Gitakrishna
Mamata BanerjeI just want to know what did you find that makes the calcutta high court's order , non neutral. I have read many articles on Wikipedia. I think that wikipedia is not just about praising someone but also to tell the facts that exist. It is a fact that the bengal government took the decision of banning the durga puja immersion after 4pm. And the Court said that is Muslim appeasement. You can read the pages of other politicians like Shivraj Singh Chauhan, yogi adityanath, Mulayam Singh etc. Some of them even have a seperate section like" corruption ", " controversy" and have all the events related to that person. So please explain to me how is info added by me on Mamata Banerjee's page non-neutral. 59.97.83.156 (talk) 07:06, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
10:17:15, 19 April 2017 review of submission by TGSTINT
I may disagree with the second decline of my draft submission as i had handchecked every author of the used online sources for its work in professional journalism. I totally disagree with your recent decline of my draft submission as i added only sources from handchecked (and prominent) books and magazines (even with linked wikipedia articles) - written by professional journalists and published by well know publishers. So please explain me why (besides all the online articles by professional journalists - all mentioned in the references):
2. A whole section in a book about Guitar Styles is not enough? (alongside Sheryl Crow, Tracy Chapman, Fleetwood Mac and other musicians half the world knows..) is not enough to show a notability? 3. A whole article in one of the most known and established music magazine besides maybe the Rolling Stone is not enough to show a notability? 4. Several articles in THE most known magazine about female musicians - which is know archieved by Harvard University as "American Women’s History artifacts" does not show enough notability??
Edit: to elaborate even more - and quote the guidelines on the notability of music-related topics - my draft covers these guidelines in several points: Criteria for musicians and ensembles: 1.first band - she was "just" a guitar player - but received several praizes for that - leading to having an own section in my reference no 4 - notable guitar styles of women in rock music (alongside other world famous artists) + she is mentioned as band member in the well known encyclopedia i linked as reference no 2. 2. 2nd band: SHE is the songwriter of all the songs (and frontwoman) - the other two already have own wikipedia pages (as they played in some well known bands afterwards / producer). This mentioned in refernence no 4 and 6 (one of the worlds biggest music magazines). 3. 3rd band: She is the band. Only member - just not under her name. Own label to. As mentioned in my reference no 8 of a famous rock magazine. 4. 4th band: bass player - but also producer of some of the albums - as shown by reference no. 9
1 (all references) - especially the books and magazines (Reference 2,4,5,8 - which i added because of that criteria before the last submit) - which are well known and worldwide published - as you can easy see by the wikipedia pages i added to the references 5 One album on a major label as frontwomen and songwriter: (Furslide (Virgin records), several on independent labels - for example with Here we go magic (secretly canadian) - as bassist and producer 6 In an ensemble with two or more independently notable musicians: almost every band consisted of one or more now famous and notable person - easy to link wikipedia pages: (Furslide (Adam MacDougall), Here we go magic (Luke Temple), Thrillionaire (Joey Waronker, Marius de Vries), High Desert Fires ( Taylor McLam , Chris Traynor) - just to name a few 7 Has become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style: Yes - reference No4 is a book about guitar styles - covering her style alongside of other world famous artists such as Sheryl Crow, Fleetwood Mac or Pj Harvey. 10 inclusion on a notable compilation album: maybe - One of her Furslide songs (as i said - shes the songwriter there) is on this compilation album: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffy_the_Vampire_Slayer:_The_Album As composer: - she wrote an album/song covered on a compilation album https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffy_the_Vampire_Slayer:_The_Album and had a record deal with virgin records for that - magazine articles about Furslide and Inner (best examples reference 5 and 8) - showing coverage in publications devoted to a notable music sub-culture
If these sources, books and magazine articles are not enough - please show me ANY source that shows notability more than ONE of the four i mentioned above for any kind of artists - as i can not see what else besides articles, magazine articles and books can show more the notability of a person. How can you show notability if after online works of professional journalists are not enough - and also articles in magazines written by professional journalists and published worldwide and books and encyclopedias written by professionals who have done this job their whole life are not enough to be considered notable and reliable? As I just had a longer chat with some other reviewers in irc and none of them could see the reason for declining the draft - im asking you to please elaborate your reasons for declining - as they are not comprehensible only for me - but also for others.
I don't think your assessment of this above deletion discussion is correct. You didn't leave an explanation why you think the result is a keep and I'm left with the impression you made a simple head count. That should never be done. Per the AFD instructions you should assess the strength of all the arguments and given their correct weight in the decision. The reality here is that none of the "Keep" contributors provided a meaningful policy or guideline-bases reason why they think the article should have been kept. Three of the five were even simply votes without any explanation why it should be kept. When two of them were queried about them they either didn't reply at all our didn't reply with anything meaningful. From one of the replies it was even obvious that the keep voter had not idea what the contested article deals with. Since the keep "camp" didn't provide strong arguments and thus should not carry much weight, I will kindly request you to overturn your decision.Tvx1 10:36, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
DRNHey, since you've opened the case Talk:Shakya#Ethnicity, I thought It's best not to interfere but mentioning here instead - the opening summaries by a few users seem to be a beginning of personal attacks. Also, about the SPI comment, there's no open SPI and the tag was not placed by any involved editor so the case is still valid, though I'd suggest keeping an eye for a potential sock puppet. I'd have warned and made these notes myself but since you've opened the case, I thought It's best for you to know. I'd say you've put your hands on a bag of worms. By the way, on a more personal note, even I'm from Kolkata. Yashovardhan (talk) 17:02, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:W56The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:W56. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 22 April 2017 (UTC) |