Jump to content

User talk:SwisterTwister

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Coverdale1234 (talk | contribs) at 14:08, 18 July 2017. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Please sign your messages with four tildes ('''~~~~''') and please be as specific and concise as possible. If I reviewed your Articles for Creation submission, please read the message(s) at the draft page clearly before adding a message here. As this has happened multiple times, please ensure your message is only posted here once (not doubled).

PLEASE ADD YOUR MESSAGE AT THE BOTTOM and generally, I will reply here so please watch this page for a response. Unless it's an AfC page, where I'll usually comment there and you will get a notification for that. If I have taken time reviewing your draft, please be patient and I will get to it as I am quite busy with other tasks but am certainly willing to look at it and will not need reminding.

New users: If you want to learn the basics of Wikipedia, my page for new users here contains useful information. Information such as citing sources, submitting images and changing & deleting username. If that page hasn't answered your question(s), contact me here.

13:24:38, 5 June 2017 review of submission by Rhish

I've added a range of published articles about her could you review these? —Preceding undated comment added 13:24:38, 5 June 2017

22:26:40, 19 June 2017 review of submission by Helen1921


I'm not sure why you are saying that the newspaper articles are not reliable sources. Many are too old to be found online but they definitely exist and are published sources. This organization has a very long history. What kind of sources are you looking for?

06:12:28, 21 June 2017 review of submission by Queensonu


{{SAFESUBST:Void|}

I have submitted my Wikipedia page 28 days ago by the name "Farah Siddiqui Matin" but till now it has not been published or reviewed? can I know the reason please?


13:50:18, 28 June 2017 review of submission by Lukendo


Hi, I am confused, this has not been accepted as it does not have independent recognition. In the United Kingdom since 1901 The British Psychological Society (BPS) is the recognised body for Accrediting Psychometric Tools and Training for publishing. Identity is a Personality Profiling Tool Accredited by the British Psychological Society and as such users have to have a Level 2 Test User: Occupational Qualification to purchase and to interpret the tool. The BPS have extremely strict criteria and ongoing accreditation reviews and would not give their Accreditation if the Identity Tool did not reach their standards and verification requirements. Identity has been Assessed by and is registered with the British Psychological Society Psychological Testing Centre (PTC).

Hope this helps, many thanks.

Page about musicologist Paul-Gilbert Langevin, 28 June 2017


Hello User:SwisterTwister, What does mean Latin student in the third sentence? I think it's a mistake, the exact mention is student or physics student or ESPCI student. Except that, I think that the english of the page is now correct. Can you suppress the copy editing headband about grammar and style, please? Many thanks.

About musicologist Paul-Gilbert Langevin

Hello SwisterTwister,

This is the message I got from Brian Newbould: "There may be difficulty with the Wikipedia article because you wrote it yourself.  You need to get someone outside the family but with knowledge of your father and of the musical world to validate it. They could read it through and say that it is accurate (if they think it is) but perhaps change or add something here and there. I will still ask others about this."

Paul-Eric Langevin (talk) 12:20, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sanjeewa Malaviarachchi

Hi Swister Twister,

Thanks for the review comments on my draft 'GSSL". Your comment was the references are not adequate o the notability. I have added verifiable 5-6 references which are reliable and true. However, if you see the Wikipedia page of the similar type of body for Geological Society of India, it have only two references, but that does not reflect the Society. However, it is accepted. Please compare it and re-review my page GSSL. Thank you for your time and waiting to see a positive reply.

Sanjeewa Malaviarachchi (talk) 03:56, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Draft:Khatib & Alami

Hello SwisterTwister. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Draft:Khatib & Alami, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not unambiguously promotional. Thank you. Primefac (talk) 02:23, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please I didn't understand your reasons for declining my article. If you can elaborae and direct me to do it better I would appreciate. Waiting for for your response. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AmohPoku (talk • contribs) 09:06, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 13:39:55, 5 July 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by SierraBriefings


Hello SwisterTwister,

Thank you for your notes. Just so that I'm clear, would I be able to use the information that your highlighted if it was properly quoted and cited? I wanted to use an exerpt from the book to provide some context on the material. Furthermore, I have contacted the copyright owner and ensured that I have their permission to publish this part of their book. Would that still be an issue?

Thank you again for your help,

Sierra Briefings

SierraBriefings (talk) 13:39, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Questions from Richboy999

Hello SwisterTwister,

So I'm assuming that I can ask questions on your talk page (I'm new). Anyways, is it like you guys reject the vast majority of new Wikipedia articles? Somehow I feel like that's true... Just out of curiosity. And I looked at some of the other articles that you guys were thinking of deleting. And I actually wonder why your criteria has to be so strict. Like I found a page called "Khatib and Alami" and the company employs 4000 people. So I wonder why you can't just let the draft go through. It's not like Wikipedia can be too big right.

Richboy999 (talk) 02:38, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 06:35:57, 6 July 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Zazpot


Hi, thanks for reviewing Draft:GoodRelations. Unfortunately, there seems to be a typo in your explanation of why you declined the AfC request. Did you mean "Major reviews if available would help here."? If so, please could you explain what you mean by a "major review"? Please WP:NOTIFY me in your reply. Thanks!

zazpot (talk) 06:35, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

10:30:59, 6 July 2017 review of submission by Ghostorchid


Hi SwisterTwister. Thanks for reviewing the article. You said:

"The best thing that would've convinced us here is majorly published books as it's not something as commonly found in authors, therefore significant."

I've added in a couple of lines to show that the books are now published by a major publisher (Hodder, part of the Hachette Book Group)[1], and that he had a three book deal with Quercus which was extended to a fourth book deal when Hodder & Stoughton took over. Then I've resubmitted the article for consideration. Thanks very much for your time and your guidance.

Ghostorchid (talk) 10:30, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://www.hachette.co.uk/search.page?SearchText=james+heneage

notability criteria for page Jubilee (DJ)

Hi SwisterTwister, I wanted to ask about your comment about the page for Jubilee (DJ). I included 12 sources, 11 of which Jubilee is the primary subject (either an interview with her or a review of her music). The sources include extremely reputable publications with very large followings, most of which also have a print publication- Brooklyn Magazine, The Fader, Spin, The Guardian, and Complex.

These are some of the most reputable sources that would cover a contemporary electronic musician, and I fail to see how they don't meet the notability criteria.

Luvtoucans (talk)luvtoucans

Request on 15:17:16, 6 July 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Poutnikl


about rejection of [1]

Hi, SwisterTwister,

I am afraid it was rather a discouraging laconic rejection for the 1st time submitter. I would definitely appreciate some more particular improving hints.

I admit It is difficult for the 1st time submitter to keep neutral point of view without a bias, while writing about software I am actively using. But it is not "Only an advertised business profile..", there is no advertising nor business behind that, not even for the author. Perhaps I have just unluckily chosen the style of presentation. I will try better next time.

Perhaps omitting the unnecessary detailed descriptions, and using for the beginning rather a stub-like style article ? Like [2] about the redirected BRouter = Bridge Router. I have naively thought my article could be better than this one, but what can I know ?

About independent references: There are not many existing, but I can definitely add some more. Unluckily, I have chosen such a reference style, that 3rd party references are more as external links, while references to product or product author info are often as inline citation to support mentioned ideas. So it may look as solely relying on the author. I admit I may struggle with notion of notability.

Poutnikl 15:17, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Poutnikl 15:17, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Tracker Software Page

Hi,

I just created my first article for Wikipedia - Tracker Software - which is about a company in my hometown. I went to considerable lengths to get the information for this article, write it, reference it and take photographs. In order to do this I used the pages of similar companies for this page. Please see the Wikipedia pages:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foxit_Software

and

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adobe_Systems

I do not understand why the page I created is considered an advertisement, when it is based on these pages, which are permitted in Wikipedia. Can you please give an explanation?

Thanks.

Sean SeanG007 (talk) 22:55, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your fast reply. If what you are saying is true, then why are those other pages still up on Wikipedia?

Sean

SeanG007 (talk) 23:06, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have made some further changes to the Tracker Software page and removed the links that relate to the main website of the company. Please review. Thanks, Sean

SeanG007 (talk) 18:51, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SwisterTwister, can you please respond to my message above? I have made the changes that you suggested for the page. Many thanks, Sean.

SeanG007 (talk) 18:30, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

23:35:23, 6 July 2017 review of submission by Doramensah1971



What do you mean by the subject does not meet the notability standards. All the articles I added focus on the subject. I can add 100s more. This is one of the biggest stars in the Nigerian film industry!

23:56:14, 6 July 2017 review of submission by Doramensah1971



I've added a few more and resubmitted it. There're so many articles about him I don't know which ones to use. Caan I get help if it's declined?

[3] was a pretty subjective call. Just pass this one please, it's got a long history and the guy is notable with significant coverage. Legacypac (talk) 00:00, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

18:20:13, 7 July 2017 review of submission by KBVI




I am genuinely confused as to why the article I wrote about attorney Catherine M. Stanton was rejected. I have seen many similar articles about many other attorneys on Wikipedia.

I provided legitimate news sources about attorney Stanton. The article is not an advertisement. It's about an accomplished, female lawyer in the highly competitive market of New York City.

Any additional feedback would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you,

KBVI

18:21:24, 7 July 2017 review of submission by KBVI




I am genuinely confused as to why the article I wrote about attorney Catherine M. Stanton was rejected. I have seen many similar articles about many other attorneys on Wikipedia.

I provided legitimate news sources about attorney Stanton. The article is not an advertisement. It's about an accomplished, female lawyer in the highly competitive market of New York City.

Any additional feedback would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you,

KBVI

KBVI (talk) 18:21, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

18:21:45, 7 July 2017 review of submission by KBVI




I am genuinely confused as to why the article I wrote about attorney Catherine M. Stanton was rejected. I have seen many similar articles about many other attorneys on Wikipedia.

I provided legitimate news sources about attorney Stanton. The article is not an advertisement. It's about an accomplished, female lawyer in the highly competitive market of New York City.

Any additional feedback would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you,

KBVI

KBVI (talk) 18:21, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(KBVI (talk) 18:21, 7 July 2017 (UTC))[reply]

18:22:00, 7 July 2017 review of submission by KBVI




I am genuinely confused as to why the article I wrote about attorney Catherine M. Stanton was rejected. I have seen many similar articles about many other attorneys on Wikipedia.

I provided legitimate news sources about attorney Stanton. The article is not an advertisement. It's about an accomplished, female lawyer in the highly competitive market of New York City.

Any additional feedback would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you,

KBVI

KBVI (talk) 18:22, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(KBVI (talk) 18:22, 7 July 2017 (UTC))[reply]

18:58:36, 7 July 2017 review of submission by Poutnikl


I admit I am very confused now, if and how can I ever improve the references to meet the criteria, or if I should ever try.. :-(. Perhaps this my first attempt will be my last one. Why is the single source PC Magazine in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridge_router considered better than wiki database of OpenStreetMap, combined with multiple admitedly less notable sources ?

A barnstar for you!

The No Spam Barnstar
for contribution. Light2021 (talk) 17:23, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

19:05:13, 8 July 2017 review of submission by Heystack



Would you please review William M Gayton once again? We are not sure why there are other "Scouts" that have Wikipedia pages that haven't held Director of Scouting positions nor have they been involved w/ as many decisions. Thank You!

10:35:22, 9 July 2017 review of submission by Jamesrawson79


thanks for taking the time to review the draft. I have added reviews of the person practice and career written on significant, independant and mainstream news sources such as the Guardian Newspaper, Wired Magazine, Filmmaker Magazine and Creative Applications. These sources are both in their field and in mainstream media all significant third party and verifiable major sources that meet wikipedias guidelines for independance and significance. I have included references to works written about the authors work on the BBC, another significant independant news source and one such article was part of BBC's Best of 2015 list. In the exhibitions section i have included references to one of the works produced by the art group found by the person of note which was acquired by the Victoria and Albert Museum in London. I have also summarised the position of these mainstream news references and included them in the article to make it clear why the works are significant. Together with the existing extensive links and references all to verifiable thrid party sites like the Independant, Creative Review, a BAFTA nomination, and extensive profiles of the individual on major news and industry sites. I trust that all these changes demonstrate sufficent notability. thanks.

Concern

Hi SwisterTwister, I've noticed you've not responded to any of the message on your talk page relating to AfC reviews - these are people who are actively trying to improve a draft you declined, and it is your responsibility to follow up on these messages if you're going to choose to review drafts. Please address these questions before doing any more reviews. Thank you -- There'sNoTime (to explain) 11:31, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher)I think he has the habit of commenting directly at the drafts on the improvements, problems et al.Winged Blades Godric 12:14, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

15:13:26, 9 July 2017 review of submission by MSmuzynski



Hi SwisterTwister, Thank you for reviewing my article! Unfortunately, it was declined for lack of notability on the subject. I cited 10 articles from independent, reputable national news and international publications that wrote about the attraction/company. It has been featured in many, many more so I am happy to provide additional sources. How many would you recommend including in the article to meet notability guidelines? Thanks so much for your help! This has been a great learning experience.

I have added five more sources and additional information to the article draft to improve notability. Would you mind reviewing it again and letting me know if more improvements need to be made? Thanks again for all of your help!

19:30:27, 9 July 2017 review of submission by Thull2011


Just asking for guidance. If I were to change the title would the content be sufficient? The reason I am writing this entry is because this artist has done a lot of work that he didn't get proper credit for.

Thull2011 Thull2011 (talk) 19:34, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]



9 July 2017 review of submission by Rachelharrisla

Hello Swister Twister,

This is in response to your review and declining my article draft of artist Draft:Skye_Nicolas. You noted "notability standards as we best consider museum collections or major art reviews here". Not all notable contemporary artists have works included in "museum collections", or have been covered "major art reviews", often paid for by galleries.

I do believe that the sources I have cited, meet Wikipedia's guidelines. The artist I have written about:

1. Made front page news in the Philippine National Inquirer (the nation's largest newspaper), featuring a front page photo of his installation artwork as a tribute to the Fukushima Disaster in 2011. A secondary source was cited, of an independent source that scans ALL front pages of The Inquirer. The source shows the front page in which the artist's tribute artwork was featured.

2. The 'Buy Some Love' art dollar bill was covered by chief editor Oliver Maxwell Kupper of Autre Magazine, a prominent fashion arts culture magazine that is sold at exclusive fashion/arts store Colette, Paris.

3. The fashion art film VIS A VIS in collaboration with French high fashion designer Isabel Marant, was exclusively covered by Refinery29, a highly notable New York fashion media outlet.

4. M*DEL F*CKR was, again, covered by Autre Magazine, as well as New York fashion arts and culture magazine Frank51.


My main point is that the sources I have shown, are all credible and quality press sources that fit Wikipedia's definition of "notable" in the arts and fashion.

This artist's page for example Conor_Mccreedy, has sources that are similar in quality. And if we were to objectively weigh in the merits of both artists, Skye Nicolas' front page news story of his tribute to Fukushima, followed by the art installation he did with MediaNow New York in the Brooklyn-Queens Expressway (in collaboration with the Children of Chornobyl Relief and Development Fund to commemorate the Chernobyl nuclear disaster), has a far greater social impact, as well as being newsworthy of being added to Wikipedia.

Perhaps you could suggest the removal of some topics on the page draft, leaving only topics about "works" that have notable sources. But, I must humbly implore that his tribute to Fukushima which made "front page news", is undoubtedly noteworthy.

Otherwise, please consider deleting pages such as Conor_Mccreedy, Ina_Jang, and Henrik_Purienne. These article pages cite similar online sources in terms of quality and notability.

Thank you for your consideration.

Rachelharrisla (talk) 00:15, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]



Request assistance for Draft:Unigma

User:CorbuleacM (talk) - 12:20, 10 July 2017 (GMT)

Hi SwisterTwister,

I've added several more independent sources to Draft:Unigma. All of them are unique now. I've read and followed Wikipedia guidelines and I am trying for more than a year to get the page published. Please let me know.

Best regards,

Mihai.

14:24:31, 10 July 2017 review of submission by Bronagh1


I am not requesting a re review, i AM JUST A LITTLE CONFUSED ABOUT THE COMMENT! IF I COULD JUST GET A BIT MORE CLARIFICATION THAT WOULD BE GREAT!

17:41:11, 10 July 2017 review of submission by Seporche


I am confused as to how the Trial Lawyer Hall of Fame, Texas Monthly, National Review, National Law Journal, D Magazine, and Dallas News are not considered significant sources for notability. The subject is a leading lawyer in her field and, although she is associated with notable persons, is an independently notable figure. Would you recommend expanding upon any certain sections of the article to better demonstrate this notability?

Request on 18:32:43, 10 July 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Tracyalicious


Thank you for responding to my questions but there is still some confusion on my part. One: The Forbes story is NOT from an announcement and the company was 10 years old, not a start-up, when that mention was posted in their magazine.

Another question I have is, if a writer puts down that a company has raised x amount of money, I assumed that to verify that number one should verify it by linking to a source showing that they did, indeed, raise that money. Isn't that what the verification is for? So, in that instance, I would think that you'd want independent press sources listed to verify a money raise. (Otherwise, how do we know if the number and or money sources are correct?) How else does one establish the veracity of that information?

I thought that the citations were supposed to be used to verify the information posted, as coming from outside legit media sources (and not made up by the wiki writer). Shouldn't each citation in an entry be used to verify where that information came from? I tried to do that here. NPR (Freakonomics) and the Wall Street Journal are both prestigious outlets.

What sort of citations do I need in order to improve my submission and get it accepted into Wikipedia?


Tracyalicious (talk) 18:32, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

04:46, 10 July 2017 (UTC) Response to SwisterTwister comment in review of submission by Rachelharrisla

Your latest comment to Draft:Skye_Nicolas - "I see, yes, but the one best thing that would help here is at least major art reviews since we find that especially convincing in significance."

The artist's most recent (2016) feature interview with ART WEEK is significant.

Art Week is partners with: The National Arts Centre, The Brooklyn Museum, New York Academy of Art, The National Gallery, Institute of Contemporary Arts, National Portrait Gallery, Yale, Stanford University, Duke University, Scottsdale Museum of Contemporary Art, New York Center for Photographic Art, Lincoln Center For The Performing Arts, Boston Center for the Arts, among many other art institutions.

It is a sister publication of ARTNET, and both are highly credible resources for contemporary art news by curators, museum directors, fine art collectors and art world insiders.

High fashion designer and top high fashion brand Isabel Marant wouldn't have collaborated with the artist on their fashion art video, if he was not notable. The short film has garnered over 1 million views on YouTube, and featured in Refinery29 (as a referenced in the page draft), a major fashion media publication that is often cited in the New York Times and T-Magazine (NYT style magazine).

The artist's tribute to a major news event, Fukushima Nuclear Disaster in 2011, made front page news of The Philippine Daily Inquirer! The nation's largest newspaper. A scan of the front page was provided as reference in the page draft, which points to a site that scans every 'Inquirer' front page. Not all publications have been digitized, especially in countries where resources are scarce and ephemera such as newspapers are not always given priority. But nevertheless, credible evidence has been duly noted and referenced. Is a national newspaper not a notable source of reference(?), especially when the person being discussed was featured on its front page, in reference to a major historic news event such as Fukushima?

I am willing to supply a very detailed scan image of 'The Inquirer' front page, which can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, as a supplemental reference to the page draft. That would surely add more notable content to the article.

Again, I humbly implore for your re-reviewal of this page, as the contemporary artist I've written about has substantial work that is notable and has been deservingly featured.

Thank you for your kind consideration.

Rachelharrisla (talk) 21:36, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Richard Painter

Hi SisterTwister, as far as I see you handled the first Painter deletion discussion. In my opinion, this whole thing is ridiculous but anyway: The person bringing up this present request explicitly states that he or she does this with exactly the same reason as before. As far as I know it is necessary to bring up new points when starting a new request. In this case I would think this new request is in for SpeedyKeep. I would be grateful if you could look into this. --Bernardoni (talk) 07:06, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment on Draft:Innovation Lab Canvas

"Comment: Would highly benefit from all additional significant sourcing. SwisterTwister talk 04:45, 10 July 2017 (UTC)"

Dear SwisterTwister, Thank you for your comment on the drafted article to innovation labs (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Innovation_Lab_Canvas). For me it is the first article i wrote so I am not sure what do to now? Should I add more sources. From my knowledge I added the most recent and relevant sources, otherwise I would have added them already. What can I do to improve the article and getting to a positive review?

Thanks Mirko Ba (talk) 07:28, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SwisterTwister, Any additional information about the article waiting for a review decision would be great. I am not sure where I can improve it right now. Thank you very much! Mirko Ba (talk) 12:32, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

17:29:06, 11 July 2017 review of submission by MikeODonnell


I am not an experienced wiki page builder. In fact I don't have much of a clue about your construction process.

But (and I know you must hear this a lot) you must be kidding: when you are tell us that there is not enough notoriety for Tom MacLear to be mentioned in Wiki. You see the sources, although some are mentions as you say, but IMDB? AND THE OTHER well known Print & Internet Publishings of Tom MacLear in Entertainment Media, Neilson Ratings etc., are not relevent?

Facebook has "verified" him as a significant person in the entertainment business.

Facebook Definition of 'Verified' : What is a verified Page or profile? ..."If you see a blue badge on a Page or profile, it means that Facebook confirmed that this is the authentic Page or profile for this public figure, media company or brand. Keep in mind that not all public figures, celebrities and brands on Facebook have blue badges."

I can post you 10-20 Wiki pages that contain persons who have done far less than Tom MacLear in the entertainment world, which you have up on Wiki Pages.

You're instructions of what constitutes a person of Notability IS FAR TO VAGUE to follow. Especially when you have novices in our industry up on your Wiki pages, but who obviously are Record Label acts with large amounts of money behind them contribute to your companys efforts.

Do I hire you to construct this for us? Can you log on to Google and look him up and understand what we are talking about?

Please let us know....

Tom MacLear is mentioned in a Wiki page musicians site as his contributing Producer and Writer.... any love on that?

no·to·ri·e·ty ˌnōdəˈrīədē/ noun noun: notoriety 

   the state of being famous or well known

Mike MikeODonnell (talk) 17:29, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]


21:21, 10 July 2017 (UTC) Response to SwisterTwister comment in review of submission by Rachelharrisla

Hello SwisterTwister,

First off, thank you for your most recent comments.

You recently said: "A scan wouldn't be necessary as there would likely be some challenges over licensing; but the simple information about it such as title, date, publisher, relevant quotes, etc. would be accepted. This would be a start and all additional ones would certainly help."

As per your recommendation, I have added more details to Draft:Skye_Nicolas. Details include (title, date, publisher, relevant quotes, etc), and quotes referencing the original published articles have been clearly referenced in block-quotes. Details including the digital archiving of the printed article has also been mentioned. All clear, concise, and highly relevant information has been added to make for a stronger article page, thanks to your guidance and comments.

Please have a look at the newly edited page. As you mentioned in your most recent comment, " This would be a start...". It certainly would. This article page would make a great foundation to build on if published, as all the notable and relevant references are there.

Also, would a Facebook VERIFIED page be worth mentioning?

Facebook Definition of "Verified" profiles: "If you see a blue badge on a Page or profile, it means that Facebook confirmed that this is the authentic Page or profile for this public figure, media company or brand. Keep in mind that not all public figures, celebrities and brands on Facebook have blue badges."

Facebook has verified Skye Nicolas as a public figure and notable artist. Should I add this to the space that lists the artist's official website?

Thank you.

Rachelharrisla (talk) 22:04, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]


00:39:59, 12 July 2017 review of submission by Jamesrawson79

'

Hello, I dont know if you have had a chance to re review my draft submission but in lieu of your comments i have no added a series of articles that are directly about the subjects work/projects from independant and significant sources such as The Guardian, BBC, Wired Magazine, Filmmaker Magazine, The Independant, The Belfast Telegrapgh, Popular Science, Tank Magazine and IMDB in adition to the other web based references I had included previously. I trust this meets your notability criteria now. Thanks so much for your help through this process.

Speedy deletion declined: Draft:Hawthorne Direct

Hello SwisterTwister. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Draft:Hawthorne Direct, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not so bad that it needs to be immediately removed from draftspace . Thank you. GorillaWarfare (talk) 02:09, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kosta Gara

Hey! Thanks for taking the time to review my page. I've been talking to RileyBugz to help with the sources (I incorrectly cited 4 videos, which is why they were removed). I'm confused as to why the tags were added after the content that was deemed promotional was removed. (I'm also not sure why some of it was considered promotional, like where he was born...I understand some of it, since I got a lot of biographical material from his autobiographical writing, but not all of it). I'm newer to Wikipedia, but I really want to work my way up to eventually writing a Good Article or even Featured Article, so all your feedback helps!!! I want to correct the page so I can remove the tags and make it look nice again :) Rtt11talk 02:36, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Rtt11 The current article along with information and sources are promotional such as what his own advertisements would say, not an encyclopedia here. We cannot accept publications by name alone if the contents are still either announcements, press releases and notices. SwisterTwister talk 02:39, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

SwisterTwister Thanks for your quick response. The majority of the sources are interviews, either by bloggers or by news stations. What makes those promotional? They aren't press releases or announcements...just interviews. And the career section is so barebones now that I can't see how it would be seen as promotional. Rtt11talk 02:42, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Rtt11 Because, whether intended or not and I fully understand the story behind this, but those sources would be too focused in what the subject himself would say, such as if it's a local newspaper or a local listing, therefore we cannot accept this; therefore we need only the best amount of independent significant major news, and not simply something still tied to the subject. There's no limit on good sourcing, as long as it's convincing. SwisterTwister talk 03:24, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

03:11:10, 12 July 2017 review of submission by 36.102.227.121


Hello, I Would like you to please advice me on a possible way to make my article look less like an advertisement. can you please point out some specific areas you would like me to change? Thanks

Request on 04:30:16, 12 July 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Jogideep


Hi, I have submiited this article as this is of public interest. This is important for people who are looking to buy properties in Bangalore. People need to know how trustworthy builder this as buying a property is a huge investment. It is a completly neutral article. It would be great if you can highlight areas where we can make changes to make it more user friendly.

Thanks

Jogideep (talk) 04:30, 12 July 2017 (UTC) Jogideep (talk) 04:32, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

04:56:48, 12 July 2017 review of submission by Jogideep


My reference links are either PR links or high authority news sites. Those are not related to company anyway. Jogideep (talk) 04:56, 12 July 2017 (UTC) Please could you give me some more guidance on which bits are causing it to be declined?[reply]

12:38:48, 12 July 2017 review of submission by skatertx4

Skatertx4 (talk) 05:34, 12 July 2017 (UTC)skatertx4 My sources are detailed in Wikipedia, so I would hope you would find them reliable: OutSmart Magazine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OutSmart (a magazine that has been published and printed continuously since 1994. Similarly the Unity Leaders Journal is a publication for the 100+ year-old Unity movement described here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unity_Church. I would hope Wikipedia would be more than self-deprecating and self-referential.[reply]


06:12, 12 July 2017 (UTC) UPDATED Response to SwisterTwister comment in review of submission by Rachelharrisla

Hello SwisterTwister,

Your latest comment: "(I can invite someone else for additional comment about this too)"

Of course, I appreciate and welcome any other comments and reviews by other editors to better the article page. Would the NEW editor reviewing Draft:Skye_Nicolas be able to see our entire conversation thread, so that he/she would be up-to-speed with all the facts, details, and points that have been pointed out? I just want to make sure that the new person looking into this would take into account all the valid points that have been brought forward, as well as be able to see how the article page draft has been slowly edited and corrected as a response and in compliance to your comments.

Please take note that I've carefully made NEW UPDATES (as per your request), and all these new updates clearly cite the newspaper articles that reference the artist's FRONT PAGE feature in The Philippine Inquirer, the nation's largest and premier newspaper. Being on the front page of The Philippine Inquirer, would be the equivalent on being on the front page of The New York Times in Southeast Asia.

Thank you for your kind consideration, and further review.

Rachelharrisla (talk) 06:20, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

06:29:11, 12 July 2017 review of submission by Andreei


Hi! I am a user of this software that I personally find really fine. But also I found out that there is no Wiki page about it that was a little bit strange for me because the product is absolutely notable to be included into Wikipedia. That's why I decided to write an article about it. I spent more than 5-6 hours reading your guides and rules how to create a proper article. I stronly believe that the way I wrote it is neutral with no commercial or advertising nature. It's just the description that you can't write in a different way. What concerns sources. I found them in the Internet in a few minutes. It means that the product is widely presented on the Web with reviews from different people and sites. Yes, I agree that some reviews are similar. But those reviews describe the functionality of a product. If the product does have this or that feature, it won't be described differently. The description will be the same, words can differ a little bit. But still, as this tool was my reliable handler during several months and now I have some spare time, I do want to go on with creating Wikipedia page for it. Please, help me to improve it. I will appreciate it!

Draft: Fears Watch Company Ltd

Hi! Thanks for your comment on my draft page, I've added further press instances for the business now as per your suggestion. I hope this will suffice. Many thanks, BristolIcarus (talk) 10:06, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again, Thanks very much for your help with improving my article. I've added another review which I found on [www.watchitallabout.com] which is the only other review I could find. If you know of any more I’d really appreciate if you could signpost them to me so I can add them too, as I’m really eager for this page to get approved! :) Many thanks BristolIcarus (talk) 14:39, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WASPI (Women Against State Pension Inequality)

Hi! Thanks for reviewing the changes I made to the Draft:WASPI (Women Against State Pension Inequality) article. I've since expanded the article a little further with a couple more sources, however I wanted to check in with you regarding the article meeting WP:GNG and WP:NONPROFIT.

I had felt the the FTAdviser article was significant as the whole article discussed the changes in the organisation and also independent and reliable as the FTAdviser appears to be a spin-off of the Financial Times. Furthermore, I believed the the Press & Journal article to be significant as it discussed an official WASPI event and again was reliable as it is a well-established newspaper. I've since also added this article from The Telegraph which I hope also meets the criteria as it discusses in depth a government minister's response to WASPI's demands.

It'd be greatly appreciated if you could help clarify how I can meet these criteria. Maesterial (talk) 14:38, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still a little confused. Many major British news organisations have talked about WASPI, including unbiased broadcasters such as the BBC and ITV as well as a number of well-reputed national and local newspapers on all sides of the political landscape. WASPI, the organisation, has become synonymous with the issue as a whole, indeed all women affected by the changes to the state pension are often referred to as 'Waspi women'. A lot of media articles do include a summary of what WASPI is, reporting factually on the organisation rather than on any particular action, for example this is taken from a BBC article:
Women Against State Pension Inequality (Waspi) emerged to campaign over those issues.
Waspi wants compensation for the "unfair" way the changes of 1995 and 2011 were implemented.
It wants payments for those who have already reached the state retirement age, plus extra income for those still awaiting their state pension.
But it is not asking for women's retirement age to return to 60.
Critics of Waspi say it is not clear how much their demands would cost.
I firmly agree that minor news and announcements do not indicate significance, but the group has received in-depth coverage, for example a search for 'waspi' on the FTAdviser returns 51 articles. As evidenced by a number of sources in the article, the group's campaign has reached the attention of many senior politicians and the issue at hand has frequently been discussed in parliament with reference to the official WASPI campaign. Could you give me an example of what kind of article would be needed to meet the criteria? Maesterial (talk) 15:28, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Maesterial The BBC one is actually not a concern so you can add it, but we will still need all additional good ones overall. SwisterTwister talk 15:36, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I've gone through the article and ensured that all the information is now fully sourced with either articles from trustworthy news organisations or government-related websites. Where a first-hand source such as WASPI's website is used for basic information, I've also now added an additional second-hand source as well.
On top of the BBC article I mentioned earlier, another three of the article's media sources give similar summaries of WASPI which I hope are suitable:
"The national campaign started with five women in 2015 to combat the impact of both the 1995 and 2011 Pension Acts, which included plans to increase the retirement age from 60 to 65." ~ The Press
"Campaigners are not against equalisation, but want fair transitional arrangements to be put in place to protect against hardship.
They argue the women affected have been unfairly disadvantaged both by the speeding up of the process and lack of notice of the changes." ~ The Press and Journal
"The Waspis have waged a fierce media protest in recent years against changes to the State pension age which were first brought about in 1995 to bring women's state pension age in line with men's.
What they are calling for is a “bridging pension” that would fill the gap between their anticipated pension age of 60 and the later date at which their state pension is due to start under the new rules." ~ The Telegraph
I would be very grateful if you could take another look through the article and advise me on where I could improve the sourcing further. Maesterial (talk) 17:07, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That's brilliant! I've re-submitted it for review but I'll be sure to add further references and expand the article when I can. Maesterial (talk) 17:27, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 15:50:49, 12 July 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Phillipbarcio


SwisterTwister-- Hello, Thank you for the feedback and advice you provided on my first Wikipedia page, on the artist Jessica Snow. Since I would like to make more pages for artists I follow in the future, I would like to request some clarification. You said: "What establishes notability is museum collections or major art reviews." The article I wrote listed multiple museums Jessica Snow has exhibited in and also listed a review on Hyperallergic, which I thought was a major art world publication. Could you please clarify what Wikipedia considers a "major art review" and also define "museum collection?" Thank you again for your assistance in making my articles stronger! Phillip Barcio Phillipbarcio (talk) 15:50, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Phillipbarcio (talk) 15:50, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 18:48:28, 12 July 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Luvtoucans



Luvtoucans (talk) 18:48, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

hi, i am following up about my earlier message on my edits for the page for Jubilee (DJ).

~~luvtoucans

Article creation 5miles

Hi! I submitted 5miles article recently and it was reviewed by you. First of all, thank you for your time. I would like to ask you if you can you please help me understand your remarks and how can I improve the article. In your remarks you wrote down "notability cannot be inherited" and I totally agree, hence why I read all the guidelines, found and read dozens of similar pages, wrote it in a neutral way, explained why is significant to be included as per the guidelines definition and added reliable sources. I understand the need to protect the community and keep it neutral and significant but a quick search online will retrieve dozens of significant results directly related with this article, with verifiable information. Your feedback is more than welcomed, especially if you can explain exactly what you found as too suggestive of an advertised business profile. Thank you! 06:27, 13 July 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mchichorro (talk • contribs)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Thank you, David! Robertgombos (talk) 23:57, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

03:58:02, 13 July 2017 review of submission by Jamesrawson79


Thats fantastic!! Thanks so much for your patience and guidance with this. Do you mean i need to do something regarding the page move myself? Or is this now out of my hands now and I just need to wait? thanks again,

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Thanks for the review, will follow Wikipedia guidlines Depthmikky (talk) 05:56, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Cleaning up accepted Articles for creation submission (AFCH 0.9)

Hello SwisterTwister and thanks for reviewing and accepting the Draft:Jasmine Directory AfC submission. I have just one question, it is safe to remove the {{AFC submission}} template from the bottom of the page since you already moved Jasmine Directory in the article space? The history merge request was processed as well by an administrator. Cheers! Robertgombos (talk) 11:35, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

16:40:03, 13 July 2017 review of submission by Rachelmurrayliu


Hi SwisterTwister,

I can appreciate where you are coming from, but I also feel like many other profiles on Wikipedia in the edtech space are referenced in the same way so am somewhat confused as to why these are acceptable but this page not.

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otus_(education) or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathletics_(educational_software) as examples. Many of their sources are from the respective company websites or press release. I took care to ensure than my sources were all independently written. i.e. not written by the company itself.

Is there a difference between these pages and the Learnosity one that I am missing that would help illustrate further?

Thanks

Rachelmurrayliu (talk) 16:40, 13 July 2017 (UTC)Rachelmurrayliu[reply]

04:28, 6 July 2017 review of submission

Hi, SwisterTwister, thanks for your help on the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Chad_Lefkowitz-Brown article. After your comment, I added a review from the NY Daily News where the subject headlines the article. Let me know if that will suffice. Thanks! Stephanie.sanz1932 (talk) 18:41, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]


19:31, 13 July 2017 comment on submission

Hi, SwisterTwister, thanks for your additional comment on the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Chad_Lefkowitz-Brown article. I just added two more major reviews (in addition to the NY Daily News headline) where the subject headlines the articles. Let me know if that will do, and thanks again for your help! Stephanie.sanz1932 (talk) 18:41, 6 July 2017 (UTC) Stephanie.sanz1932 (talk) 20:31, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Jim Brau

Hi SwisterTwister, just a note re: a bio you created. It's been vulnerable to COI, copyright violation and promotional edits in recent weeks. I've pared some of the unencyclopedic content, but you may want to keep an eye on it, as well. Thanks and cheers, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 21:35, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 08:02:53, 14 July 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Vlaurentius


~The person is notable for several reasons. He is one of the oldest living members of the ancient nobility from Germany. The Noble Lines Falken and Reck.

He also advised the royal family of Holland, Oranje-Nassau and he advised the former minister of Finance Onno Ruding. The proof of this is available. It involves an email trail which I have access to. The person also published an article on the bankruptcy of the biggest Entertainment Company in Holland and Belgium. I also have this article in my possession. Further he is a lecturer innovation at two Dutch Universities. How can I show you this evidence? LAST but not least he is used as alter ego for the new book of a Dutch famous writer


VL 08:02, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

16:17:15, 14 July 2017 review of submission by 70.171.176.153

I am the person who gave the Omaha Black Music and Community Hall of Fame Awards in 2011, and was inducted for my work with many bands including Rhythm Machine. You can google Rhythm Machine Donald Harris for an interview I did years ago with Larry Grogan (music historian) on funky16corners.com - My information on wiki was incomplete and vague. I wanted to give concise information. I have never submitted a complete list to wiki of the recipients of the awards in 2011, but would be more than happy to. I am uncertain of who provided the information you have, but it is incomplete and leaves several people unmentioned who should be reflected as honorees on wiki. Thank you

16:44:55, 14 July 2017 review of submission by Trepanationsolution


Can you provide more info on why the newspaper articles and the edited book on his work don't count as evidence of his notability? The previous editor stated that the book IT'S ALL ALLOWED wasn't appropriate as a reference, even though it is published by Intellect and the Live Art Development Agency (and by University of Chicago Press in the US) and is a peer reviewed academic publication. This evidences notability, as does the number of obituaries in broadsheet newspapers (including one that calls him the subject a "legend"). Other references are all single-focus articles in peer-reviewed scholarly publications. Are there specific aspects that require additional evidencing?

17:27:13, 14 July 2017 review of submission by Vlaurentius


Thank you very much for your clear explanation. Would it be better if I write an article about his ancient nobility background? and leave out any business related activities. Maybe I could just mention his advisory role to key politicians?

Draft:Taylan Susam

Dear SwisterTwister,

Thanks for your review. I've worked with another editor through IRC to work on your helpful pointers. Here's a quick summary of what I did:

1. The editor brought up the question whether I think the article satisfies WP:COMPOSER. I believe this to be the case in virtue of article 6 ("Appears at reasonable length in standard reference books on his or her genre of music."); see footnote 6 of the article. The editor in question then added a link to the standard reference book in which the subject's musical work is discussed in some depth.

2. In addition to this, I've added a number of reviews, as you suggested:

a. I've added another academic publication (footnote 12) in which the subject's work is reproduced, to substantiate claims made in the first "Music" paragraph.

b. Two reviews that appear on personal blogs of noted experts in the field, who have also published in the appropriate venues, as per Wikipedia policy (footnotes 7 and 13).

c. Two additional articles in reputable magazines that review the subject's work at some length (footnotes 9 and 15)

d. And two reliable sources confirming a claim made at the end of the second paragraph of the "Biography" section (footnotes 5 and 6).

I expect that all this will serve to establish the notability of the subject. What's the next step?

Thank you again for your time and effort, Wandelwiki (talk) 20:22, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Rating

Hello David, Sushn345wiki here. I wanted to ask whether you could rate my article Ortho-diethynylbenzene dianion. Would you please rate the article. Sushn345wiki (talk) 19:00, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have added even more information, added more citations and I also have added pictures. I f you don't mind, could you please have a look at the article? Sushn345wiki (talk) 19:08, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thank you. Please do suggest me ways to improve my article! Sushn345wiki (talk) 19:31, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

FEARnyc Final Review

I have made the requested updates to the draft page for FEARnyc. Can you please review and publish if it meets the qualifications? The article is now well-sourced. Thank you. Jt51 (talk) 19:44, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

22:54:28, 15 July 2017 review of submission by Hassan H Bencheikh


This article is not an advertisement. It is supported by a number of newspapers. Mr Hassan Bencheikh was decorated by the King of Morocco and there are a lot of people out there who will be interested on this achievement. it is a valuable piece of information to have in Wikipedia.



(Hassan H Bencheikh (talk) 22:54, 15 July 2017 (UTC))[reply]

11:12:13, 16 July 2017 review of submission by Blitzer99


Blitzer99 (talk) 11:12, 16 July 2017 (UTC) Hi. Thank you for reviewing my first draft of a page on spens clauses. As you have suggested, I have added several more references. There are plenty more out there but I feel they start to be duplicative. I work in this field and so can assure you that this is a notable concept in Finance. Indeed I was surprised that it didn't already have a Wikipedia page which is why I have bothered to write one.[reply]

If this is still not sufficient to be accepted I would welcome your more detailed guidance on what else is required.

Request on 11:24:10, 16 July 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Zackraab107


Hi SwisterTwister, Can you please give me a bit of guidance as to which part of the article that you reviewed is missing independent references (according to your comment)? After the article was declined the first time, I added many more sources and thought that would be enough. Thanks for the help. Zackraab107 (talk) 11:24, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]


George Grüner

Wikipedia received an email regarding an article you created George Grüner. For confidentiality reasons I cannot reveal the contents of the email without the permission of the person who sent it but I can share that there concerns about errors in the article. I will share advice on how to request corrections but for a starter, you identified the individual as a Hungarian physicist. I believe I've looked at all of the references you used as well as the official UCLA biography, none of which identify him as Hungarian. This claim is challenged — what was your basis for the inclusion?

  • Sphilbrick Yes, I had noticed there was an anonymous IP removing content, which was in fact based from his faculty profile, and they were stating they were the subject and that information was inaccurate, but this is a curious thing because the faculty profile would be highly unlikely to be inaccurate given it's the official CV. As a matter of fact, his own CV shows he was educated in Hungary here and here, his book cover at Amazon states so and his biography here states he was also educated in Hungary and later returned to Hungary. This also suggests he is Hungarian given it's before he joined UCLA. For example, see this and this were stated to be inaccurate yet they are based from his linked UCLA bio, as was also this example (information I added was not only in Wiki-format but, was removed in place of information pasted from his CV instead). I happened to notice this same IP had in fact changed it to "Hungarian-American" instead too, here, suggesting the information was not entirely inaccurate. I also notice that the last time this IP came back here, they once again pasted it a different way instead of the still accurate information based from his CV. I'm not quite sure the contents were inevitably blanked by the end. SwisterTwister talk 22:32, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for that explanation. My initial thinking was that many Americans have been educated in non-American universities so one could conclude based on the location of his university where he was born. However, the Amazon cover page referencing "native" And the Hungarian Academy of sciences reference to him are certainly strongly supportive of his Hungarian background. It might be shorter definitive and it might not even be true but I no longer assume the statement was made simply because he attended a University in Hungary. I'm not sure what we do next.--S Philbrick(Talk) 00:04, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'd consider a suitable solution (based on our facts) that changing to "Hungarian-American" would be sufficient especially considering the IP once changed it to that before blanking the page. If there's any trouble after, we can always work something else out. Cheers, SwisterTwister talk 00:12, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I concur with the above - the references provided don't really demonstrate that he actually is Hungarian, but I'm satisfied with the other links you've provided. Good digging. Primefac (talk) 00:18, 17 July 2017 (UTC) (talk page stalker)[reply]

Girish Jhunjhnuwala

Coincidentally (wink), an anonymous IP undid your edit (see diff). I rolled back that edit with Twinkle (vandalism) (diff here). Just wanted let you know. Interestingly, New Pages Reviewer Patrol brought this to my attention. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 03:41, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Emily Cockayne

I've responded to your helpful comment on Draft:Emily Cockayne. Thanks! --Panu savol (talk) 13:00, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

20:08:22, 17 July 2017 review of submission by Gospitt


Hi there regarding

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:James_Evans_(Historian)

I have used 3 references that detail reviews of James's work 

Milton, Giles (Nov 2013). "Route to Riches". Literary Review. Retrieved 17 July 2017.

Jump up ^ Finlayson, Ian (28 Sept 2013). "Merchant Adventurers". The Times. Retrieved 17 July 2017. Check date values in: |date= (help) Jump up ^ Gulliver, Katerina (8 July 2017). "How the Puritans, not the Pilgrims, colonised America". The Spectator. Retrieved 17 July 2017.

These are 3 reviews from 3 of the most eminent publications in the United Kingdom.

Do I need to include further reviews?

As I could include.

http://geographical.co.uk/reviews/books/item/321-merchant-adventurers-the-voyage-of-discovery-that-transformed-tudor-england-by-james-evans

https://www.irishtimes.com/culture/books/james-evans-as-arctic-ice-melts-an-old-dream-resurfaces-1.1990796

and he is featured at multiple literary festivals.

http://yorkfestivalofideas.com/2017/talks/why-english-sailed-new-world/

Your input is appreciated.

Best

Oli

Request on 22:21:58, 17 July 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Soli58


Hi SwistedTwister, and thank you for reviewing my article! Regarding your comment, "Would need all additional significant sourcing for establishing the needed substance", I have been looking for additional sourcing. Can you tell me what you mean by "needed substance"? The significance of this article is it's approach to helping at-risk-youth, so any help is appreciated!!! Thanks again! Soli58 (talk) 22:21, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Soli58 (talk) 22:21, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hawaiian Chocolate Factory

Dear SwisterTwister,

I am not trying to add promotional content to Wikipedia. My motive for writing this article came from a trip to Hawaii, where I visited the Hawaiian Chocolate Factory. I have always been interested in contributing to Wikipedia, so I was at home one day looking for Encyclopedia-worthy topics. I noticed that the Hawaiian Chocolate Factory wasn't on Wikipedia, but, as it turns out, a page that I want the page to look like exists, Koa Coffee Plantation is. I figure since this page was allowed, so should the Hawaiian Chocolate Factory. I would not have decided to write about the Hawaiian chocolate factory if there wasn't anything special about it.

I'm sorry that you think that I am advertising, that was not my goal.

RavePyroKitty (talk) 22:32, 17 July 2017 (UTC) RavePyroKitty[reply]

Request on 00:53:40, 18 July 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Isabella Zuralski


The link about Handwerker's artwork at the Art Institute of Chicago is to that museum's collections webpage. Exactly, what is here suggested as a good reference source.

Isabella Zuralski (talk) 00:53, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Isabella Zuralski (talk) 00:53, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Tillack

A tag has been placed on Tillack requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G6 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an orphaned disambiguation page which either

  • disambiguates two or fewer extant Wikipedia pages and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic); or
  • disambiguates no (zero) extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. NikolaiHo☎️ 04:50, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

04:57:49, 18 July 2017 review of submission by Poohbydz

 Hello SwisterTwister,

Poohbydz (talk) 05:28, 18 July 2017 (UTC) First of all, thanks for your comment and review. However, i do have some questions and concerns about your comment.[reply]

As you read, "Amook", also known as fishcake is different. The purpose of this article is to tell people around the world what exactly is "Amook". Most people around the world would know that fishcakes are from Japan. From what i have studied prior to writing this article is that fish cake is from Japan and "Amook" is originated from Japan. My intention is no where close to advertising any products. I solemnly wrote this article to inform people about Korea's food culture. When talking about Korea's history, it is impossible to avoid mentioning Korean war. "Amook" is heavily interconnected to Korean war.

Also, your comment pointed out that Wikipedia is not a cook book. I understand what you mean by that, however it is very difficult to write about food product without mentioning its ingredients and how its made in a brief words. I have tried my best to state the facts and history about "Amook".

If its possible for you to refer to specific part of article that looks like advertisement, please let me know so that i can explain it to you why it is written like it is. I wish to talk to you as soon as possible and i am willing to make modifications if necessary.

Thanks for reviewing. Poohbydz (talk) 05:28, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

08:04:01, 18 July 2017 review of submission by Captterra


Hi SwisterTwister, I saw that you declined my page on Basement Pong because I do not have any references. In fact, this is a game invented by me and some friends, we play it a lot. Therefore, there are (for the moment) no official references that exist. How can we solve this problem?

Regards,

"Indisciminate"

Hi there. I noticed you are pointing to WP:INDISCRIMINATE in many of your AFD !votes but I don't see that section of WP:NOT talking about the same thing you do, i.e. sources covering subjects indiscriminately. Do you maybe mean WP:SPIP which is about such sources? Regards SoWhy 10:51, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

14:08:58, 18 July 2017 review of submission by Coverdale1234


Please could you let me know which references are troubling you? I have sourced neutral and credible websites to back up my article. Please clarify what you mean by 'notability can not be inherited'.

Thanks

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:SwisterTwister&oldid=791157682"