Jump to content

User talk:Theroadislong

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by SusanGreene (talk | contribs) at 18:36, 24 January 2018 (→‎RE: Article on Susan Merdinger). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Welcome to my talk page. Click here to leave me a message .


Q on reference source language

07:53:55, 14 November 2017 review of submission by FriendlyB


Dear Thereodislong,

thank you for reviewing the draft "Dr. Petry Textile Auxiliaries".

For the sources, I cited independent sources, such as - http://www.genios.de/fachzeitschriften/artikel/MTB/20080617/umweltschutz-und-nachhaltigkeit-in-/060817061.html - https://www.biooekonomie-bw.de/de/fachbeitrag/aktuell/insektenchitin-macht-textilherstellung-nachhaltiger/

In order to have more evidence, I added information from further independent sources and references: - https://www.bloomberg.com/profiles/companies/6311207Z:GR-textilchemie-dr-petry-gmbh - https://www.bluesign.com/industry/chemical-suppliers/references/textilchemie-dr-petry

Thank you in advance for re-reviewing.

Thanks for your help!

Thanks for your assistance with Draft:InnoCare. I have included

and noted it on your user page that I work for that company. They're not paying me to create this page, I just think it would cool to have a Wikipedia page. Let me know if there's anything else you can suggest to improve my draft. I appreciate your help!

05:44:48, 23 November 2017 review of submission by Lizzybunker

I've added the appropriate citations!

Invacio

Hi Theroadislong I've edited the text - please let me know if it's better this way I appreciate your feedback!

00:53:26, 27 November 2017 review of submission by Cmolaro


I added more 3rd party sources that are verifiable and are independent, professional sources (not personal blogs or sites). I now have 15 citations.

Please let me know what else you think is required to have it accepted?

12:54:53, 27 November 2017 review of submission by Llewol


08:40:08, 28 November 2017 review of submission by Salt&pepper12345


Hi there, thank very much for your care and consideration to to help build this page. I can understand why the review was rejected, as i hadn't cited enough sources on the first draft. I was wondering if you'd mind having a read over the latest draft and checking if it is better now thank you. SP

13:22:45, 4 December 2017 review of submission by 79.106.95.85


21:10:13, 6 December 2017 review of submission by Innocent Cuty


Dear Theroadislong

Hope you are fine and doing good.

I am requesting for a review again as the major comment for rejection/decline of this article was its Reference section or having less references. Now, the draft has been updated, and more than 20 solid references have been employed, with more historical details, and best possible bibliographic support in the light of the available literature. This single page article is now having over 25 appropriate references, and are strengthened with new data.

Your anticipation in this regard will be highly appreciated.

Sincere Regards

Dear Theroadislong

Thank you very much for your prompt response.

The objected references (facebook) has been udpated with the departmental URLS (links to the webpages). I think, these were the most up to dated and regularly updating references. Moreover, the last paragraph was deleted, because the book describing the paragraph and the mentioned material is in press (which is written by Dr. Ikram), and once the book got published, the three to four lines paragraph will be inserted again.

I do hope, that the draft will get approved now and will get online, as after coming across other such articles, this one seems to be far better than those.

Your prompt and positive anticipation in this regard will be highly appreciated.

Thanking you in anticipation

Sincere Regards

07:43:09, 15 December 2017 review of submission by Kgkg90


Cornshed sisters draft

Hi! I drafted a page which was declined for publication. I was wondering if you had any thoughts on why and how to fix it. The page was clearly of interest - this is a band with two albums, that has appeared on a film soundtrack and on the BBC, whose members are present or former members of well-known bands - so I can't see the issue. But I'd appreciate a bit of guidance to resolve it. Thanks. JamesLance (talk) 03:01, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft contains a number of Wikipedia references, these need to be replaced, (Wikipedia is not a reliable source) also Twitter. Allmusic and Youtube are not reliable sources either, see WP:BAND for the notability guidelines for bands. Theroadislong (talk) 08:02, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Arishfa khan

hey this is chiranjiv i want to create an article about mys sister she is an actress her name is arishfa khan so can you help me to write an articlejivarshu 19:24, 23 December 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chiranjiv138 (talk • contribs)

I'm afraid your sister doesn't appear to pass the Wikipedia guidelines for inclusion. Theroadislong (talk) 20:13, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

23:49:06, 23 December 2017 review of submission by Pearl ally


The submission's referencing was improved as advised, and I added a few more. More information on his teachings and publications were added. The page exists in 3 other Wikipedia: https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Russell https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Russell https://sk.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Russell

In-depth coverage

I added RPG Site. Is that a reliable source?

In-depth coverage

I added RPG Site. Is that a reliable source? Martinc1994 (talk) 07:19, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Compulsive Hoarding

Hi Theroadislong I have just tried to correct and update my url in the last 30 mins from cityclearances.com to averyassociates.co.uk but I see you may have thought it was not a legitimate correction, would you kindly take another look and reconsider the action I appreciate your assistance in this matter jeffreyavery53 Jeffreyavery53 (talk) 14:49, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It looked like spam to me i.e..promoting your own website. Theroadislong (talk) 14:52, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas!

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2018!

Hello Theroadislong, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2018.
Happy editing,
JudeccaXIII (talk) 20:33, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

St Lawrence Shakespeare Festival

Hi. You rejected my article because you believed it sounded more like an advertisement than an article. I disagree, and unfortunately you have given no facts in support of your opinion. This is, in itself, a violation of first principles of Wikipedia, regarding the emphasis of evidence over opinion. So, here are my facts. First, let's look at the article. Why does it seem like advertising? There is only factual information here---it has information attesting to the importance of the Festival (an essential qualification for Wikipedia articles), about the origins of the festival, and some brief information about the fifteen-year history of the festival, including its leadership and the highlights of their contributions, as well as mentions some of the more significant productions. In no way does it advertise upcoming seasons. That is exactly the sort of information that I would write (on a different scale) if I were preparing an article on any theatre company. Second, while I find it distasteful to cite my credentials as point of debate, it seems necessary in this case, because you have effectively suggested that I do not know how to write an article about a theatre company. I don't know upon what basis you have made this judgement, because you simply deleted my work with that sneer about advertising and without offering a single helpful comment. But the fact is that I certainly do know what an article about a theatre company needs. I am a full professor at Queen's University, I have a PhD in Drama and have edited a great number of encyclopedia articles and written contributions to various journals. So, please tell me about the factual basis upon which you have made your decision and perhaps you would also be so good as to explain what your credentials are to make this judgement. Craig Walker (talk) 18:25, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please assume good faith, I have edited the parts I deemed advertising and your article has been accepted. Theroadislong (talk) 18:28, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. You will understand, I hope, why it is difficult to assume good faith when a whole article is rejected without any specifics offered. But I am grateful for your helpful alterations.Craig Walker (talk) 18:37, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Draft for Shehab Khan

Hi,

You asked me to remove sources from The Sun and Facebook.

This has been done - I was just wondering if you could possibly have another read and see if the article is now acceptable?

Also, Merry Christmas! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Asda3991 (talk • contribs) 00:22, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

02:14:50, 26 December 2017 review of submission by Pearl ally


Please see references 15,18,19,21,22

World-Ecology article

Hi Teahouse!

What are the criteria for notability for a new academic field? The links indicate for World-Ecology: 1) 3,300 followers on academia; 2) annual conferences with 60-plus papers every year; 3) high profile scholars; 4) over 250 published essays in the field.

Can you help clarify? By way of contrast, Wikipedia includes an article for the field, Object Oriented Ontology, which has a far more narrow reach relative to world-ecology: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object-oriented_ontology

Warmly, Jason — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jasonwsmoore (talk • contribs) 19:30, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your article has no references. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject, if these sources exist then notability might be established but with no sources it is unlikely. The article Object-oriented ontology has 53 sources by contrast. Theroadislong (talk) 19:34, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

20:52:55, 26 December 2017 review of submission by DgpG201AS


I have converted all references to inline citations to publicly available documents with access dates in them. I just wonder whether the problem I had in the page page originally has now been addressed. Thank you.

Thank you, article has been accepted. Theroadislong (talk) 21:13, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hugo gottesmann

Thanks for any help you can give me. Mary Jane Doerr — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:C40B:F50:A51C:4763:6371:E9E0 (talk) 00:03, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]


The article should be included on the Wikipedia page giving that Tor Madira has been one of the upcoming writers in South Sudan who have as a matter of facts attracted the attentions of thousands of South Sudanese readers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Junubipedia (talk • contribs) 09:55, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Tor Madira Machier

Dear Theroadsilong,

Thanks for reviewing the article I created, Tor Madira Machier. However, to my surprise, I see that the article is rejected. As I did, I mentioned independence sources such as the Sudan Tribune, and Tor's own blog. I wrote the article because Tor has attracted the attention of thousands of South Sudanese readership in recent years.

Thanks

looking forward to seeing you reconsidered my article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Junubipedia (talk • contribs) 09:59, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Tor's own blog is not independent? In order to demonstrate notability, you need to provide references to articles written about Tor Madira Machier in unrelated, independent journals, magazines, books, etc. Theroadislong (talk) 10:02, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

10:35:14, 27 December 2017 review of submission by TheoSalisbury


The "Copyrighted" text taken from www.exiliansudios.com is information that I own. I am the owner of the website and should be aloud to use my own words from my website www.exilianstudios.com . I understand that you would not have known this and I am requesting that I am able to publish my article on wikipedia.

Thankyou.

If you insist on using content from your own website then you will need to read to Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials

and change the text on your website which currently reads "2017 Exilian Studios. All rights Reserved." Please be aware that writing an article on Wikipedia is difficult and writing an autobiography is about the hardest thing to do and is STRONGLY discouraged. If you are truly notable someone else will write it eventually. Theroadislong (talk) 11:14, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Remove Reference

How to remove reference link from my draft article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vikas9gupta (talk • contribs) 12:20, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry I don't understand your question. Theroadislong (talk) 12:28, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Gold Medal for Italian Architecture

Dear Theroadislong, the Gold Medal for Italian Architecture is wide known internationally as the most important architectural prize in Italy. Strange enough most of the available references I know are in Italian language. I'm trying to collect more. as much as I can at least. in order to re publish the article with more comprehensive data. In any case I suggest you to consider that the entire argument "Triennale di Milano" is treated in wikipedia eng in a very curious way as it looks like we are speaking of museum or a local institution while instead The Triennale is the most important cultural institution for art, design and architecture promotion of Italy. If you may and have time, please help me to correct all this issue. Best, EnghireSpika — Preceding unsigned comment added by EnghireSpika (talk • contribs) 13:57, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft has only one reference which is to the subject's own website. Wikipedia requires independent reliable sources. Theroadislong (talk) 14:26, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to Women in Red's January 2018 worldwide online editathons.



New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/64|"Prisoners"]]

New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/65|"Fashion designers"]]

New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/66|"Geofocus: Great Britain and Ireland"]]


Continuing: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/00|#1day1woman Global Initiative]]

(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list)


--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:13, 27 December 2017 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Thank you but I am already a member. Theroadislong (talk) 18:16, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry! That part wasn't supposed to be included. I'm going back and removing by hand. :P Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:23, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 03:29:46, 28 December 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Faremusic23


What information do you recommend to implement this artist in wikipedia?

Faremusic23 (talk) 03:29, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

FUTSOC WIKIPEDIA

We have received your message rejecting our submission. Kindly imndicate specifics so that we may proceed to edit and re-submit for consideration. Thank you! 2601:589:101:6725:5027:926D:B0CE:CD5E (talk) 04:35, 28 December 2017 (UTC) Esteffan Lopez[reply]

07:39:46, 28 December 2017 review of submission by Nat.johnson


Hi Theroadislong! I have recently uploaded a draft of the article "Admitad" here and you have declined it. Could you kindly explain what can I do to make it right? Is it possible to work with you as my mentor on the draft? Or, maybe, you can help with writing, could you kindly tell me what is the best option? admitad is a global company, it already helps over 630,000 people worldwide. I believe, that it needs to be on Wikipedia.

11:49:18, 28 December 2017 review of submission by Nicholaspanteliwiki


Reposted from WP:TH My question concerns Draft: Logic Sticks (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Logic_Sticks). As per Wikipedia’s need for significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondarysources that are independent of the subject— Logic Sticks are an emerging skill toy which have their own website, social media (I know, off-limts for WP referencing) but have yet to have their coverage in academic journals or other approved media. What should I do? For full disclosure, I am working towards a brief set by my client, the creator of Logic Sticks, Mitchell John but want to put forward a stub (or possibly an article) worthy of the well-meaning, and nobler, aims of this encyclopaedia.

Best wishes,

Nick

Nicholaspanteliwiki (talk) 11:49, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Reposted from WP:TH My question concerns Draft: Logic Sticks (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Logic_Sticks). As per Wikipedia’s need for significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondarysources that are independent of the subject— Logic Sticks are an emerging skill toy which have their own website, social media (I know, off-limts for WP referencing) but have yet to have their coverage in academic journals or other approved media. What should I do? For full disclosure, I am working towards a brief set by my client, the creator of Logic Sticks, Mitchell John but want to put forward a stub (or possibly an article) worthy of the well-meaning, and nobler, aims of this encyclopaedia.

Thank you! Best Wishes, Nick — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nicholaspanteliwiki (talk • contribs) 11:49, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid that, like many others, you have misunderstood what Wikipedia is about. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that summarizes what independent sources say about a subject. You would need to provide detailed references showing the subject has received significant coverage, in reliable sources that are independent of the topic. You also have a conflict of interest I'm afraid that, like many others, you have misunderstood what Wikipedia is about. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that summarizes what independent say about a subject. You would need to provide detailed references showing the subject has received significant coverage, in reliable sources that are independent of the topic. You have a conflict of interest because you are working for the. Theroadislong (talk) 12:53, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Help is needed Theroadislong

Greetings Theroadislong,

I trust all is well. Please advise me in simplest terms of what I need or must do in order to have a wikipedia page for the Mayor of Greenville, MS? I am seeking assistance because I am unsure of what mistakes or necessary changes are needed. Any assistance with this matter would be greatly appreciated. I'm thanking you in advance!! Much obliged- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Erchinn37 (talk • contribs) 15:17, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There are a number of links in the decline notice which explain what is required but basically... Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that summarizes what independent sources say about a subject. You would need to provide detailed references showing the subject has received significant coverage, in reliable sources that are independent of the topic.. You would need to provide detailed references showing the subject has received significant coverage, in reliable sources that are independent of the topic. His own website confers no notability at all. Theroadislong (talk) 15:23, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Solar Innovations

How does it read like an ad? It's an objective history on the company citing regional newspapers and industry publications. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frankiestar (talk • contribs) 15:28, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

style

Thank you so much for helping. This is totally new to me and I didn't know that I was reversing your help. I did not mean to do that. I have edited it again but I haven't gotten the line that you put in under Military Service under all the sections right. I have made the changes recommended on the references.

I will not touch it until you have looked at it. Please let me know when you have seen it. I hope I have gotten things better  !! Dec. 28, 2017 10:47 am. Mary — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mary Jane Doerr (talk • contribs) 15:49, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I can't thank you enough for your kind help. Can I resubmit it now? ```` Mary — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mary Jane Doerr (talk • contribs) 16:41, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

style - page numbers

Hi, I just put in the page number for Tully Potter's book.

The Hugo Gottesmann - Gestorben 1970 is a published world wide by the Rathaus in Vienna. I have given that source and the date. 

  THANK YOU AGAIN FOR HELPING ME.  ````  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mary Jane Doerr (talk • contribs) 17:25, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 18:47:59, 28 December 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Mri2018


Dear Reviewer, This article mentions about a person who lived in one of most underdeveloped states of India when there was no internet. Hence, many resources are not available online. Request you to kindly guide. Warm regards, Martand S

Mri2018 (talk) 18:47, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sources don't have to be online but they do need to have been published somewhere like newspapers or magazines. Theroadislong (talk) 18:53, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Review

Hello! I was wondering if I could have a bit of an assist with your comments on the article I created on the IPSF. I already wrote the wikipedia pole sports article with a variety of academic sources. As I wrote that article, I realized that other sports federations have pages but not the IPSF. I wanted to create a quick simple article that gave basic statistics on this federation. I looked at other sports federation pages and they mostly discuss such facts as well as any historical controversies. I edited my article to add in academic sources like peer-reviewed journal articles as background but the details of that are in the pole sports general page. Since this is a relatively new federation there is not much to write about controversies. I now reference some media sources, as pole sports getting GAISF observer status made some headlines. Can you please let me know what I am doing wrong or if this is sufficient. Thanks! Dmfennell (talk) 22:09, 28 December 2017 (UTC)dmfennell[reply]

22:16:45, 28 December 2017 review of submission by KarsOG


Theroadislong, changes are made with information from reliable sources only, could you review this article again?

Looks like you requested deletion and it has been deleted? Theroadislong (talk) 12:59, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Too Bold

Thank you for your guidance, I have cleaned up the article per your suggestion. Blackflute (talk) 02:28, 29 December 2017 (UTC)blackflute[reply]

page` numbers and publishers

Hi, I can't thank you enough for helping me. I clarified the information on Tully Potter and the Information on Wiener Kultur-Notizen published by the City of Vienna.

Mary Jane Doerr (talk) 12:24, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

HNY

Happy New Year!

Best wishes for 2018, —PaleoNeonate – 13:37, 29 December 2017 (UTC) [reply]

I don't know how to do LINKS I have tried but wasn't successful.

There are numerous possibilities: Busch Quartet, Das Gottesmann Quartett, Hugo Kauder, Hugo Gottesmann Wikimedia Commons. Vienna Symphony,

Also I have pictures but I have failed to figure how to incorporate them.

Thank you so much for your continued help. Mary Jane Doerr (talk) 13:44, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Simply enclose the words with two square brackets either side. [[Busch Quartet]] will give you Busch Quartet. There are details here Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Linking#Link specificity Theroadislong (talk) 14:16, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Clifford Inniss

Hey. I've read the references guide and made some changes. Thanks once again for your help. BajanBrent (talk) 14:39, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That's great...I know nothing about cricket so will leave it to another reviewer to work out if he is notable or not. Theroadislong (talk) 14:42, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. I understand. I've decided I don't want to be a member of this site. There are too many things I don't like. Too many bad editors who spoil articles and make life difficult for the better editors. I see all this and don't want any part in it. Can you delete the draft for me, please, because it will be a waste of somebody's time. You have been a real help and I appreciate that. One of the good guys. So long and thanks again. BajanBrent (talk) 17:32, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am not an admin so can't delete your draft, I have accepted the article, if he is not notable then someone might tag it, but it seems fairly good to me. 17:50, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

References

Dear Theroadislong, Thanks for the message about Wikipedia not a legal reference. I will remove those before it gets reviewed. This is the first draft of my first submission. Cheers Sandwich58 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sandwich58 (talk • contribs) 15:45, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Article Help

Hi Theroadislong,

Thank you so much for reviewing the article I submitted for review. The notability of the subject of the article was questioned, could you please provide some additional insight on how I can edit this for publishing? This is my first article on WIKI and I want to ensure I am meeting all guidelines. If you can provide any additional tips/advise I would really appreciate it! Thanks again for your help, look forward to getting my first WIKI article published! Esmarin (talk) 20:19, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I put the LINKS in. It says the the Wikimedia page does not exist but it does. You have been a wonderful help. Thank. Mary — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mary Jane Doerr (talk • contribs) 22:51, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You listed the linked the words in a separate section though?? The idea is to link relevant words in the body of the article, I have linked a few terms for you as an example. Theroadislong (talk) 23:17, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am working on those links. You have been so fabulous. Mary Jane Doerr (talk) 13:29, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

New Years new page backlog drive

Hello Theroadislong, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Announcing the NPP New Year Backlog Drive!

We have done amazing work so far in December to reduce the New Pages Feed backlog by over 3000 articles! Now is the time to capitalise on our momentum and help eliminate the backlog!

The backlog drive will begin on January 1st and run until January 29th. Prize tiers and other info can be found HERE.

Awards will be given in tiers in two categories:

  • The total number of reviews completed for the month.
  • The minimum weekly total maintained for all four weeks of the backlog drive.

NOTE: It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing. Despite our goal of reducing the backlog as much as possible, please do not rush while reviewing.

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. — TonyBallioni (talk) 20:24, 30 December 2017 (UTC) [reply]

I hope that I have these correct now. Thanks Mary Jane Doerr (talk) 15:15, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notability and verification...?

Thank you for your feedback on my submission for Texas Consilium. I have reviewed the notability requirements and am trying to better understand the disconnect and your concerns so I can take appropriate actions.

From my perspective, the recognition of Texas Consilium by the State of Texas with the State's own House Resolution HR 922 dedicated to Texas Consilium, read on the House floor and published in the House record on behalf of a state representing 28 million people, would constitute "notable." As I understand the Wikipedia guidelines, this recognition by the State of Texas would constitute published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of Texas Consilium.

It is unclear to me whether the concern is that this does not constitute notable, or whether this notability of HR 922 is not adequately verified by the referencing, or if I am missing the standards in some other way. Would you kindly provide further insight and guidance for me? Thank you.

JimKarla (talk) 16:38, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is a primary source [1] This is a press release [2], and I’m not sure what this is [3] but none of them are independent sources which discuss the subject in-depth. In order to demonstrate notability, you need to provide references to articles written about Texas Consilium in unrelated, independent journals, magazines, books, etc.Theroadislong (talk) 16:50, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Thank you ... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andy Deddy (talk • contribs) 17:34, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Notability and verification...?

Sorry, but I couldn't figure out how to add a comment to our existing talk dialog so I've copied and pasted it here for reference.

You said "I’m not sure what this is [3]" and I wonder if that confusion might be the root issue here, since [3] is the key documentation presented here for the notability of Texas Consilium. [3] is the .gov official online publishing verification of the resolution by the State of Texas, documenting the State's evaluation of the importance of Texas Consilium to the State of Texas and Texas Consilium's impact on the economy of the State. The State of Texas is independent of Texas Consilium, was published as a representation of the 28 million residents of Texas, and this entire resolution is dedicated to Texas Consilium. While many organizations can be discussed in journals, magazines, books and other commercial publications, we are not aware of another business improvement organization that has received this level of published recognition by the State of Texas, or any other state government.

If we clarified the importance and this meaning of [3] in the article, would this be helpful?

JimKarla (talk) 19:18, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Could you clarify who you are referring to as "we" ? Theroadislong (talk) 19:54, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]


PRIOR DIALOG

Notability and verification...?[edit source] Thank you for your feedback on my submission for Texas Consilium. I have reviewed the notability requirements and am trying to better understand the disconnect and your concerns so I can take appropriate actions.

From my perspective, the recognition of Texas Consilium by the State of Texas with the State's own House Resolution HR 922 dedicated to Texas Consilium, read on the House floor and published in the House record on behalf of a state representing 28 million people, would constitute "notable." As I understand the Wikipedia guidelines, this recognition by the State of Texas would constitute published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of Texas Consilium.

It is unclear to me whether the concern is that this does not constitute notable, or whether this notability of HR 922 is not adequately verified by the referencing, or if I am missing the standards in some other way. Would you kindly provide further insight and guidance for me? Thank you.

JimKarla (talk) 16:38, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

This is a primary source [1] This is a press release [2], and I’m not sure what this is [3] but none of them are independent sources which discuss the subject in-depth. In order to demonstrate notability, you need to provide references to articles written about Texas Consilium in unrelated, independent journals, magazines, books, etc.Theroadislong (talk) 16:50, 1 January 2018 (UTC) Hi, Thank you ... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andy Deddy (talk • contribs) 17:34, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Notability and verification...?

My apologies for my ambiguous writing. I can only speak for myself, so please replace "we are not" with "I am not." Thank you.

RE: Could you clarify who you are referring to as "we" ? Theroadislong (talk) 19:54, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

PRIOR DIALOG

Notability and verification...?[edit source] Sorry, but I couldn't figure out how to add a comment to our existing talk dialog so I've copied and pasted it here for reference.

You said "I’m not sure what this is [3]" and I wonder if that confusion might be the root issue here, since [3] is the key documentation presented here for the notability of Texas Consilium. [3] is the .gov official online publishing verification of the resolution by the State of Texas, documenting the State's evaluation of the importance of Texas Consilium to the State of Texas and Texas Consilium's impact on the economy of the State. The State of Texas is independent of Texas Consilium, was published as a representation of the 28 million residents of Texas, and this entire resolution is dedicated to Texas Consilium. While many organizations can be discussed in journals, magazines, books and other commercial publications, we are not aware of another business improvement organization that has received this level of published recognition by the State of Texas, or any other state government.

If we clarified the importance and this meaning of [3] in the article, would this be helpful?

JimKarla (talk) 19:18, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

PRIOR DIALOG

Notability and verification...?[edit source] Thank you for your feedback on my submission for Texas Consilium. I have reviewed the notability requirements and am trying to better understand the disconnect and your concerns so I can take appropriate actions.

From my perspective, the recognition of Texas Consilium by the State of Texas with the State's own House Resolution HR 922 dedicated to Texas Consilium, read on the House floor and published in the House record on behalf of a state representing 28 million people, would constitute "notable." As I understand the Wikipedia guidelines, this recognition by the State of Texas would constitute published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of Texas Consilium.

It is unclear to me whether the concern is that this does not constitute notable, or whether this notability of HR 922 is not adequately verified by the referencing, or if I am missing the standards in some other way. Would you kindly provide further insight and guidance for me? Thank you.

JimKarla (talk) 16:38, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

This is a primary source [1] This is a press release [2], and I’m not sure what this is [3] but none of them are independent sources which discuss the subject in-depth. In order to demonstrate notability, you need to provide references to articles written about Texas Consilium in unrelated, independent journals, magazines, books, etc.Theroadislong (talk) 16:50, 1 January 2018 (UTC) Hi, Thank you ... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andy Deddy (talk • contribs) 17:34, 1 January 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by JimKarla (talk • contribs)

Request on 14:30:17, 2 January 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Shenalyn2018


all the citations came from notable Asian newspaper. Shenalyn2018 (talk) 14:30, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Shenalyn2018 (talk) 14:30, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reference number 1 is to his own website which is a primary source, refs number 2,3 and 5 don't mention him, refs 7, 8 and 9 are to his own website. Theroadislong (talk) 15:29, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ubagroup.ci

Sorry, but this is not CSD A7. This just makes double work for accredited reviewers. I suggest you read WP:NPR and the tutorial and apply for the reviewer right. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 17:01, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you I already have had the right for some years. The article was about a website with no indication of importance why wasn't it CSD A7 ? Theroadislong (talk) 17:07, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have now completed the text along with references

I have now completed the text along with references I hope it can be now accepted Alfons Helbert (talk) 19:11, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:REFB for help with formatting sources we need in-line citations to verify the content. Theroadislong (talk) 19:22, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Shehab Khan

Hi,

As you requested I removed the links from The Sun and Facebook and have provided other external sources about the entry which include the BBC, Press Gazzette, Manchester Evening News and LBC.

Could you please read over the entry, would be great to hear from you and happy to make any other changes you deem necessary.

Best, Asda3991 (talk) 20:58, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Suzanne A. Rogers

Hi there: I don't know Suzanne A. Rogers but just chose her as a subject to try my hand at writing a Wiki entry, for learning. She is a fashion influencer in my city. If you can give me some guidance, I'd appreciate it. I was concerned about altering the wording as much of it is referenced in articles and other sources. I did get permission from the photographer to use the main image, so if you can give me a sense of what needs to happen to put it back up, I will do what is required. Thank you.Katie Dupuis82 (talk) 00:27, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The photo was deleted as a copyright violation. The photographer would have to release the photograph under a creative commons licence letting anyone use it. Theroadislong (talk) 08:54, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

help

You left a message on my talk page for George S. Flinn sandbox. Can you glance at that page again and give me additional feedback. I'm made some revisions. I appreciate feedback. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Orual1963 (talk • contribs) 01:03, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Submission Rejection

Hello Theroadislong,

Thank you for your prompt review of the article submission for Delta H Design, Inc.

I believe the company should be part of Wikipedia's database so I wanted to ask what should be explicitly omitted and/or added to get the article in proper shape for publication.

Once again thank you for your time and expertise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gottaloveham (talk • contribs) 21:43, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The whole article reads like an advert and some content has been copied and pasted from here [4] Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously you need to re-write the article entirely in your own words using available independent sources. Theroadislong (talk) 21:54, 3 January 2018 (UTC),[reply]

Re Theo Brown

Theo Brown - I thought she was notable enough, but I am not sure I can do more to confirm that - so I may have to give in. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Charles.bowyer (talk • contribs) 22:35, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I hadn't noticed the external links you had added, I have used these as references. It could do with a bit of editing still but I think she is probably notable enough to pass the notability guidelines. Theroadislong (talk) 22:48, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Theroadislong

I just wanted to ask. On average how many citations do I need for an article to be considered acceptable?

Regards,Theroadislong

Jakelewis2 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jakelewis2 (talk • contribs) 17:47, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If they are reliable, in-depth and independent then two to three would suffice more details here Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. Theroadislong (talk) 17:52, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

23:24:44, 4 January 2018 review of submission by Yesterdaysfire


Hi there!

I was just wondering what the issue was with my article submission? I tried to follow all the guidelines. I hope that I can make any revisions that you may require!

oops!

Sorry about that!

I'm new here and just learning how all this works! haha!

I think I messed up and clicked in too many places and ended up in the sandbox instead of in my user profile.

Thank you for your help so much! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yesterdaysfire (talk • contribs) 23:28, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My Milan Diekman draft

I've submitted a draft which you then declined for obvious reasons so I improved it and resubmitted it, then you declined it again with the exact same message. So I changed it again with the exact same structure another (accepted) page had, and I also addressed the problems in my draft (according to your message) head-on and re-submitted my draft again. Now you've declined it once again, which I don't mind, but I'd just like to know the reasons why because I feel like I can't do anything with the message you've send me three times now. Thanks in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LucaKlijn (talk • contribs) 13:37, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@LucaKlijn:You have ignored the comment I left, that says that you cannot use Wikipedia as a reference which you have done three times. The remaining reference is a primary source and also not acceptable. Notability requires verifiable evidence, sources of evidence include newspapers, magazines, peer-reviewed publications, credible and authoritative books, reputable media sources, and other reliable sources generally. See WP:WHYN. Theroadislong (talk) 13:42, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Gerhard W Goetze

Hello Theroadislong, Thank you for looking at the draft on Gerhard W Goetze. What suggestions would you make to improve it? I left out an interview with Walter Cronkite because I need to verify the date of the broadcast. Many thanks, rgromanRgroman (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:14, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Rgroman:You have done a very fine job for a first article! It could do with some more categories being added. Theroadislong (talk) 17:18, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Theroadislong, could you clarify what you mean by adding some more categories. Does that mean adding more material or just sectioning into more categories the material that is already there. I am a first time contributor and tried to follow all the suggestions as best as possible so thank you in advance for your patience in answering my questions to make this the best possible article! RgromanRgroman (talk) 22:53, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Rgroman: categories can be found at the bottom of the article I have just added the category inventors but there are probably many more that could be added I will take a look. Theroadislong (talk) 22:58, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - that sure makes more sense now. RgromanRgroman (talk) 23:12, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for improving Marisa Peer article

Just stopped by to say thanks for improving Marisa Peer article. -- Bbarmadillo (talk) 09:58, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You just stepped all over me... with glacier cleats.

You changed a section of the Marshall HS page I was working to correct as I was doing it resulting in a complete reversion of two sections; completely wasting two hours of my time. Did Wiki not tell you that before you saved your change? I am demotivated to spend the time to fix it again. It will just have to remain the mess it is. Charley CarlitosCorazon 14:41, 6 January 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by CharleyHart (talk • contribs)

My edit removed a very ungainly, poorly formatted table, with non notable alumni. Theroadislong (talk) 14:44, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Gerhard W Goetze Draft

Hello Theroadislong, I wanted to share this youtube link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-IeG5aZPwms. Is it possible to use some of the words in this article - it was a CBS broadcast on July 21, 1969. The reel to reel tape is in the Goetze Family collection. In gratitude for your time and efforts with all of Wikipedia, Rgroman Rgroman (talk) 14:49, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

We don't usually use Youtube as a source and in particular this type which looks like a copyright violation of CBS. Theroadislong (talk) 14:52, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

15:13:55, 6 January 2018 review of submission by Hhpop

Hello, Re: the Esmee Visser article submission - the content is a carbon copy of the Dutch page for Esmee Visser. The Dutch version, incidentally, is also sourceless. (Edit: someone has inserted an ISU source, by the looks.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hhpop (talk • contribs) 15:16, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that there are poorly sourced articles on another Wikipedia is not a good argument, and you or I watching a programme is NOT a reliable published source, somebody else has helped out and added a source so it will be accepted soon. Theroadislong (talk) 15:23, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Draft for Shehab Khan

Hi,

I hope you are well - you have not replied to last few messages.

As you requested I removed the links from The Sun and Facebook and have provided other external sources about the entry which include the BBC, Press Gazzette, Manchester Evening News and LBC.

Could you please read over the entry, would be great to hear from you and happy to make any other changes you deem necessary. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Asda3991 (talk • contribs) 20:05, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to say thanks

As a new wikipedia user I appreciate the assistance. Shawn M. Kent (talk) 20:19, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Draft for Shehab Khan

Hi,

Thanks for the feedback - unfortunately that's the best I can offer at this time in terms of sources.

I am very disappointed but no bother, maybe there will be more sources in the future.

Would just like to thank you for your time and feedback.

Best wishes, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Asda3991 (talk • contribs) 20:35, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Thanks for reviewing Banglar Bodhu, Theroadislong.

Unfortunately Winged Blades of Godric has just gone over this page again and unreviewed it. Their note is:

None of the sources mention the film.How did you pass it without any tag?

To reply, leave a comment on Winged Blades of Godric's talk page.

Winged BladesGodric 07:03, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The film has a notable award, I assumed with good faith that the foreign language reference confirmed this. My mistake. Theroadislong (talk) 08:32, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

12:24:07, 7 January 2018 review of submission by JoeyFeeni

I think the page now meets Wikipedia's standards

I will leave it for another reviewer to look at. Theroadislong (talk) 12:32, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Tai Lopez (Entrepreneur) declined

Hey Theroadislong, I saw you declined this draft on basis of notability. I'm not sure that was a fair assessment, given the three reliable sources I added to the article yesterday (Forbes, Vice, HuffPo) which are mainstream media outlets that have significant coverage of the subject of the article. Could you please take a moment to look over the article again? I think it easily meets WP:GNG. Thanks, AdA&D 14:45, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My decline was before your addition of sources, I'll let another reviewer take a look. Theroadislong (talk) 15:27, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I see that now. My mistake! AdA&D 15:58, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sherry Sufi

Hi @Theroadislong ,

In regards to the submission for Sherry Sufi, given that we have articles such Karina Okotel and Avi Yemini, who have similarities with Sufi in regards to being right-wing former or prospective candidates who have a public profile, hold political positions, and were featured in interviews and write opinion pieces, I believed the article is sufficiently notable. He has multiple television appearances both related and unrelated to his political candidacy. The original draft wasn't mine, but I've taken it up for consistency's sake. Thanks, Judeti (talk) 15:16, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't decline the article? I pointed out that no changes had been made since the previous decline. Theroadislong (talk) 15:29, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Donovan J. Greening

Hi, please give me a call I have a few questions on how we can adjust the Donovan J. Greening wiki page so that it can be more reliable and remain on wikipedia. 248-225-0882 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.70.133.170 (talk) 16:07, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No thanks you can tell me here. Theroadislong (talk) 16:16, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 18:41:05, 7 January 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Camdavis


I don't understand. I made the mechanical fixes requested. Then the article was rejected for a completely different and more fundamental reason. I would not have made the mechanical fixes requested had I known earlier about the newest and different reasons for rejection. A lot of us understand that Wikipedia relies heavily on volunteers. All the more reason that respecting people's time is paramount.

I'm not sure what to do now. And even if these latest problems are fixed, whether Wikipedia will reject the article again for completely different reasons.


Camdavis (talk) 18:41, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The article is entirely unsourced? No articles are ever accepted without sources. The first decline was for being poorly sourced, the second was because it doesn't show why the subject is even notable enough for an article. WE need reliable secondary sources that discuss the subject in-depth. Theroadislong (talk) 18:50, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

edited

Hi there Thanks for your comment. Made the edits per your notes on the page for David A. Hurwitz. GigiH0118

Thank you for your quick review

I appreciate your quick feedback on the draft page for thank you for reviewing the draft for "Krishan A. Canekeratne". He truly is an interesting man from the creation of several major companies, receiving the Sri Lanka Sikhamani Honor to being the number 1 ranked under-16 table tennis player in Sri Lanka. I would love to be able to get this page up there for him. I have removed all in-line external hyperlinks as you requested to improve the overall readability.

I look forward to your re-review!

Greenough Ben (talk) 12:59, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

13:36:39, 8 January 2018 review of submission by Tearstosweat


More reliable references like newspaper sources(Times of India, Decaan Chronicle) are added

Liz Hannah

Hello! I saw back on the 14th of December, you reviewed my Liz Hannah page. I have added three sources, so I think it should be fine now! I am just telling you because it has not been reviewed again in around 24 days. Thanks for your initial review, and will accept and change anything that you point out. Thanks a ton for the help!

DrChicken24 (talk) 15:25, 8 January 2018 (UTC)DrChicken24[reply]

Gerhard W Goetze Draft

Thanks for the heads-up on the YouTube. Will try to contact CBS directly since we probably have the only tape of that time period. Also, just FYI made a donation to Wikipedia Foundation with gratitude for your work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rgroman (talk • contribs) 20:47, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 11:35:18, 9 January 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Orlando Murrin


Hello, thank you for your comments. No I didn't create this page, it was done by an academic at Exeter University but he asked me to check it for accuracy and provide citations, and then I ended up posting it myself because he found the publishing system confusing. It seemed to me was disproportionately long and detailed. Regarding notability and verifiability, a lot of the facts in the biography are recorded: e.g. books and articles published. Would you suggest I ask him to try again, sticking only to these 'published' facts? Would you rather he actually published it, rather than me? Thank you again Orlando Murrin (talk) 11:35, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orlando Murrin (talk) 11:35, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

16:07:57, 9 January 2018 review of submission by Bgrandone80


Hello, can you please help me with the edit of my article? I've tried to follow all your notes and I've quoted each time certain peacock terms are used. It's my first time here, I'd love if you could point out more specific edits I can do to improve the article! thanks Bianca — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bgrandone80 (talk • contribs) 16:07, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for giving feedback on my article so quick! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nimbo.lo (talk • contribs) 20:48, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

01:36:45, 10 January 2018 review of submission by Sparx.kfukui



Hi Theroadislong,

I updated the sparx group draft page and resubmitted for publishing. I had originally not done enough citing; I found 5 or so articles that directly discuss Sparx group. There are many more articles in Japanese than English, wondering if I should add Japanese references as well.

Would appreciate if you could take a look when you get a chance.

Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sparx.kfukui (talk • contribs) 01:36, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Japanese references would be fine, I will not be advising you further though, because you are being paid to edit. Theroadislong (talk) 18:51, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

11:01:59, 10 January 2018 review of submission by JWegel


Hello, I don't know what I have to change in this article that it can be published. Could you please tell me exactly what I need to change or give me examples in the text? I do not quite understand why this article is considered advertising. What is exactly the problem?

I look forward to your reply. regards

Do you work for the company by any chance? Wikipedia has essentially no interest in anything the company has to say about themselves. It is only interested in what people who have no connection with them have chosen to publish about them. Your article has no sources except the company website and so is not acceptable. Theroadislong (talk) 13:37, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Can you edit my BeepBox article?

If you find more about fixing my references, please let me know! — Preceding unsigned comment added by StinkerB06 (talk • contribs) 18:58, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Deletion

Hello,

I'm new to Wikipedia editing and I accidentally deleted the template for speedy deletion that you put in the Tammie Shannon article I am working on. I want to finish the page and contest the speedy deletion properly—not trying to play dirty here—but can't figure out how to reinsert the template, can you add it back? Sorry to bother you

here's the link to the page I'm talking about

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

PJ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Evan07x (talk • contribs) 22:07, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to have found more sources so speedy deletion wouldn't be right now, I have tagged it for notability. Theroadislong (talk) 22:14, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

23:03:11, 10 January 2018 review of submission by Rossmoody88

Please tell me what exactly about Discogs makes it an unreliable source, so I can re-do the article with sources that will be considered reliable. Also please let me know what exactly (if anything) needs to be changed about the article besides what you mentioned in your comment.

Thanks.

The Discogs links merely confirm the existence of the music. You need to provide detailed references showing the subject has received in-depth significant coverage, in reliable sources that are independent of the topic. The essay, Wikipedia:No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability, may explain this better. Theroadislong (talk) 23:11, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

01:11:13, 11 January 2018 review of submission by Sparx.kfukui


Hi Theroadislong,

My apologies, I didn't see you last response. I do work for the company, I attempted to disclose that according to the guidelines.. but perhaps I did not do it right. The citations and references I made were all second party articles, and I did not use anything the company publishes. Please let me know if there is anything I can do.

Hi again, just read up about COI and sounds like I should not be publishing this article. Would it be allright if I ask a non-affiliated friend to start this page? Thank you

Thank you Sparx.kfukui (talk) 01:54, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sparx.kfukui (talk) 01:11, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Things I should improve

Hello.. I have unsuccessfully edited the article. bt I need help. I cannot seem to reference well and put everything in order. In short I am not able to fix the notability part of the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eujoe (talk • contribs) 09:48, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Hey,

I gave enough external links to support everything, I have mentioned.

So what's up with that page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shyam.alex (talk • contribs) 12:22, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The sources you added were to his books plus one commercial link to buy his book these are notreliable sources for establishing notability. Theroadislong (talk) 12:49, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Vashmere Valentine

Would any of the several interviews that Vashmere has done be acceptable? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael Johnathan Katz (talk • contribs) 16:20, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not really no. I'm afraid that, like many others, you have misunderstood what Wikipedia is about. We only summarise what reliable, independent published sources say about a topic, we have no interest in what Vashmere says about himself. You need to establish his notability by adding references that show there is widespread coverage of him in reliable sources. Theroadislong (talk) 16:23, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Focus Investment Banking - Page Deleted

Hello, someone named Hut 8.5 deleted a page that I made for the investment bank that I work for (Focus Investment Banking). It is a real company with about 50 people who work there (www.focusbankers.com) I added it to the pages for "list of investment banks" and made it a page -- based on a number of pages for other banks. However the code is now gone, and I am afraid if I create it, Hut 8.5 will just speedy delete it again. What should I do?

FrozenMan (talk) 19:32, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you read the conflict of interest guidelines. Wikipedia is not the place to promote your bank. Theroadislong (talk) 19:35, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you remove the Article Geoeges Deicha? He has a sufficient notoriety in the French German and Russian Wikipedia.

Why did you remove Georges Deicha? He has a sufficient notoriety in the French and German edition. Bestr regards Alfons Helbert Alfons Helbert (talk) 06:51, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't remove Draft:Georges Deicha? I left you a comment about help with formatting sources. Theroadislong (talk) 09:11, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Masthaven

Hi Theroadislong, yes this is the first article i created on Wiki. Following the reaction from the first attempt in December, we tried to keep the article as clean from marketing as possible. This is 100% factual now. Can you point me to what's wrong please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Reubenv01 (talk • contribs) 10:03, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Reubenv01: Who is "we" Wikipedia accounts are strictly for single person use, if you are editing for your company you will need to read and comply with WP:COI. Advertising terms include… "Masthaven offers specialist property finance, mortgages and savings products" "Masthaven has formed a strong team" "It has the philosophy of "Human Digital Banking" to offer customers personalised and flexible solutions." plus a list of non notable awards. Theroadislong (talk) 10:10, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Theroadislong: by we - the MD and I sat down and removed what we thought was promotional material. Sorry - should have been clearer. reading the WP:COI shortly. re the advertising terms above, that's who we are, that's what we do and we are definetly not considering that as advertising :(
I don't mean to intrude on this page but I would state that the fact that you don't see how the terminology you are using is promotional would suggest that you aren't able to write an article with the objectivity and neutral point of view required. In order to successfully write an article about your business, you need to forget everything you know about it and only write based on what independent sources state. 331dot (talk) 10:26, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Growth Capital Venutres Amendments

Hello Theroadislong

Thanks for taking the time to review the submission. May I ask what sections you think come across as an advertisement so that I can amend and resubmit. Furthermore I do work for GCV, however, I decided to submit this article for educational purposes not because I'm being paid to do so.

Kind regards,

Luca — Preceding unsigned comment added by LucaPeterson (talk • contribs) 14:06, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you work for them then you are considered to be a paid editor. The entire draft reads like an advert not a neutral encyclopedia article. From the very first spam link in the first sentence to each unreferenced section afterwards. Please read WP:42. In short: Wikipedia has essentially no interest in anything that a subject says or wants to say about itself: it is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject have published about it, in reliable places. Theroadislong (talk) 14:18, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Some issue with the curation review toolbar

Hi Theroadislong. I was reviewing Charles Akinyele Akindayomi, and had decided to nominate the same for Afd using the curation toolbar. When I clicked on the button to nominate, I got the message that the page was already up for nomination, and that the curation script was cancelling my nomination. But strangely, it went ahead and actually created the nom page. Just wanted to apologize for the inadvertent inconvenience this might have caused you. Thanks, Lourdes 17:59, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No worries I think we were both editing at the same time, I've never managed to get the curation toolbar to show up despite having it installed? Theroadislong (talk) 19:56, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You could follow the instructions I've given at User:Lourdes/PageCuration (check the trouble shooting link). Lourdes 07:09, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for that!!! After 11 years I have found the curate this article link! Theroadislong (talk) 10:10, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome :) Lourdes 12:08, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Changes done, help please!

Dear Theroadislong,

I wanted to let you know that I have been working very hard on this article and I have made all the changes you requested. I have also been studying how other wikipedia articles look like and I think that finally my article is starting to look like it should to be approved by you. I also added some citations, by the way. In conclusion, I have been doing my research and homework and I think you will find this new article to be much more aligned with the wikipedia style articles.

I wanted to ask your advice on something. I have found some relevant foreign language articles about the doctor. Do you think I should include them?

Finally, I wanted to ask you if I could get the article publishsed as is and then I can continue to add on it over time.

Can you let me know? :-)

I look forward to your feedback, and thank you for everything!

SaraGWik (talk) 20:14, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

See here]

You posted a COI notice. I would note that user has been scruplous in noting his paid editing. Just sayin ... 22:09, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Yes I know he has, but I would still strongly advise them not to directly edit the article as per best practice. Theroadislong (talk) 22:13, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
please help. Lacypaperclip (talk) 10:34, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Happy to help, but what with? Theroadislong (talk) 11:35, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Revelstoke, Devon

Hello Theroadislong. Thanks for accepting my draft so very quickly, especially as it says there is a two month waiting list! Could you also look at my other similar articles Draft:Pathfinder Village and Draft:Monkokehampton? They are also places in Devon. Thanks. Ilyina Olya Yakovna (talk) 11:34, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much :) Ilyina Olya Yakovna (talk) 11:38, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm Nick Moyes. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Kifanga, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

Nick Moyes (talk) 13:23, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, it was a close call so I erred on the side of caution and tagged it with notability. Theroadislong (talk) 13:53, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Assistance at AfC

Greetings Theroadislong and please forgive my intrusion to your talk page. I am a newbie AfC reviewer and I stumbled upon your name as an AfC reviewer on countless AfC submissions. I recently encountered an AfC submission and would be in need of your help and judgement. Hope you won't find it all too uncomfortable. My apologies if you do.

I declined the submission as I thought the list was redundant per WP:LISTCRUFT and not a legitimate encyclopaedic topic. Thanks in advance. EROS message 15:23, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm no expert on list type articles but your reasoning seems sound enough as per Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Theroadislong (talk) 15:31, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you User:Theroadislong. Have a great day. EROS message 04:04, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kifanga

Hello Theroadislong, you recently reviewed my page kifanga and am looking forward to rectifying the issues you highlighted.But another editor tagged my page for speedy deletion.Am asking if you would please write to him informing him to reconsider my page as it is work in progress and that the notability issues highlighted can be sourced elsewhere is only that i have not yet referenced in the article yet. Let me know of the outcome.I would really appreciate your help on this one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Patpatrick (talk • contribs) 16:03, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You should create the article using the WP:AFC process which gives you all the time you need to work on it. I do agree with Nick Moyes though, the article still doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia. Theroadislong (talk) 16:12, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Theroadislong Thank you for your input I have made some changes to page Sina Ghanbari, adding more independent sources.Please see if you like them. Thanks.Alex-h (talk) 22:17, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to list of CEDM artists edit

Hello,

I am replying to your message sent to me earlier. I do not understand why you revised my edit back to your previous redirect. I clearly explained why I was taking down the redirect and that I was going to revise the page. I went to submit 8 hours' worth of edits just now only to have them completely erased due to your edit in the meantime. The current redirect is to a page that lists artists who claim to be Christian whom have produced EDM-type music. The redirect page is not a list of CEDM artists. These are two different things. The page that this is redirecting to is a mess anyways. Many of the listed artists are decades removed from their last production of Christian EDM music. Many of the listed artists are even improperly categorized under what that page does represent. The redirect page has completely outdated sources too. This page would be better off taken down than redirected there because, as of currently, it is spreading false information by redirecting the readers there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Newens (talk • contribs) 23:21, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit here [5] added nothing at all? None of your edits were erased because all you did was remove a redirect. Theroadislong (talk) 23:23, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome articles!

Hi!

I checked out some of your articles. Great stuff! I have been doing my research for some time and finally ready to submit. I just submitted my first one for review. I saw that someone else tried to start it. Any advice or suggestions for this and future articles?

I look forward to hearing from you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fabian0821 (talk • contribs) 21:24, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nancy Wilson (basketball coach)

I am interested in the history of Nancy Wilson (basketball coach), plus I want to see if I screwed something up by interrupting.

I do a fair amount of editing, but I haven't been involved in the review process, so I don't know the protocols.

I stumbled across this for reasons I'm not now remembering, but I wanted to work on it because of my interest in the subject matter.

I see that you initially rejected this when it was in a sandbox, but, to your credit, you quickly apologized when you realized you misunderstood the subject of the draft.

I confess I am puzzled that you decided to move it to draft space (was there a request that I missed?) and then immediately rejected it. I agree it wasn't ready at the time for article space, but it isn't clear to me that moving it to draft space was useful. Am I missing something?

The original editor clearly did not (initially) know how to do refs, but figured it out and largely fixed them, but did not know how to remove the redundancies. Unfortunately, the editor hasn't edited since then. I hope they aren't disillusioned, but they did not enable email, so I don't know how to contact them.

I did some minor editing, and checked just about every reference to make sure it supported the text. IMO, it is fine now, so I moved it to artivle space. However, I see a template suggesting it is still part of the review process – am I right you are the reviewer? So Im writing this to determine next steps.

FYI, I'm traveling, and may have limited online time until Weddnsday.--S Philbrick(Talk) 15:51, 15 January 2018 (UTC)--S Philbrick(Talk) 03:57, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sphilbrick, just a few comments; we almost always move drafts from the user sandbox into the Draft space; it had been submitted for review, so Theroadislong did not "move and immediately decline". As far as I can tell it was never in the article space until you moved it. As far as "the editor hasn't edited since then" goes, they resubmitted the draft for review, and many draft-submitters do not edit after they have done so. As far as you moving it to the article space, you should remove the various AFC templates after moving a draft to Article space; if you add yourself to the AFCH list you'll be able to use the script which does it automatically.
Also, to address your very first statement, I don't see that you've "screwed anything up", if anything thanks for moving an acceptable article out of the draft space. Primefac (talk) 15:59, 15 January 2018 (UTC) (talk page stalker)[reply]
Thank you Primefac I don't think I have anything to add to your excellent answer. Theroadislong (talk) 16:21, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Primefac: Thanks to both of you. I was worried when I saw the templates, which I am not used to seeing, that I was doing something out of process, which is why I wanted to ask rather than simply remove them. Thanks for the detailed answer.--S Philbrick(Talk) 03:57, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

CSD of Truebil

Hi Theroadislong,

I removed your CSD template on Truebil. I originally found and cleaned up a lot of the COI in the article, and warned the user for COI - however, I don't feel that the subject is suitable for CSD A7: it has credible references (e.g. India Times) to indicate notability, even with the initial COI.

Feel free to put it in for AfD if you disagree.

All the best! | Naypta✉ opened his mouth at 10:36, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Motty Steinmetz deletion and general criteria for musicians

Hi Theroadislong, you put up my page Motty Steinmetz up for deletion. I'm a bit confused about what the criteria is for weather a person is notable or not. Could you explain this please and what was wrong with the page Motty Steinmetz. Thank you very much Adam Bernstein — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adam Bernstein (talk • contribs) 17:28, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Notability explains it, we need multiple secondary sources that discuss him in depth, your article did not have these. Theroadislong (talk) 17:33, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. Would it be possible for you to have a look at a draft when I've changed it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adam Bernstein (talk • contribs) 13:29, 17 January 2018 (UTC) Hi can you take a look at this, does it meet all the necessary criteria? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Adam_Bernstein/sandbox Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adam Bernstein (talk • contribs) 15:03, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think he passes the criteria set out here Wikipedia:Notability (music)#Criteria for musicians and ensembles ? Theroadislong (talk) 15:08, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I see that you put the article into main space and it has been tagged for deletion. If you want to be able to work on an article it is best to use the WP:AFC process. Theroadislong (talk) 18:42, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much, I dint realise you could get articles reviewed before they went up. Adam Bernstein (talk) 17:04, 18 January 2018 (UTC)Adam Bernstein[reply]

Help Please!

Hey can you help me create this page for this director. I found out about her back in October. It was around for a bit that she is the first Jamaican filmmaker to have her work distributed. I think that is an amazing accomplishment.

I would appreciate your help. Thanks man.

Here's the link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Toni_Morgan_Haye — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fabian0821 (talk • contribs) 00:28, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dan Poole

Hey Theroadislong,

Thank you for reviewing the Dan Poole page. Can you please provide me with some help on what I need to do to get it into the mainspace? I've added external sources and sourced everything, so any help would be much appreciated.

Thank you in advance,

Niki Awaywithwords.ink (talk) 21:29, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

21:49:22, 18 January 2018 review of submission by Wilson 8297


Hi There, My name is Alex Wilson and I'm trying to publish my friends Theodore Salisbury Wikipedia page but some reason got declined. If you could inform me of why and how to improve it that would be great. Wilson 8297 (talk) 21:49, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft has no in-line citations, see WP:REFB for help, it was previously declined because of poor sourcing it looks like you have improved the sources somewhat. You have included a large quote from Theodore R Salisbury but Wikipedia has very little interest in what the articles subject says about himself, only what reliable sources have reported. You have two copies of the draft one of which has used IMDb 10 times and Facebook 4 times as a source neither of these sources can be used. Finally if you know the subject you have a conflict of interest. Theroadislong (talk) 22:22, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sina Ghanbari

Dear Theroadislong Thank you for your input I have made some changes to page Sina Ghanbari, adding more independent sources. Please see if you like them. Thanks. Alex-h (talk) 00:51, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of Interest

Thanks Theroadislong for your concern, but I can assure you there is no Conflict of Interest from me. I contribute to my interests only, and I am not affiliated with any page I have contributed to. I am still quite new to contributing so I have stuck to only 2 pages as I improve my skills with Wiki syntax, rules, and reference building. I hope to be a good asset here on Wikipedia with the hope of creating pages. I haven't contributed any information that does not follow the rules and is backed by credible sources. Best regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sadsignal (talk • contribs) 14:03, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Help

Every time I contribute to the University of the People page, user Adrin10 reverts my work. Why and what can be done about this? I provided information about Transfer Credits, with proof, and it has been removed. Also the I removed the Criticism section as the only reference is from a propaganda website, which I am lead to believe Adrin10 is affiliated with as much of his page contributions lead to this propaganda reference. As I am new, perhaps you can help me?

You need to discuss your concerns on the talk page here Talk:University of the People. Theroadislong (talk) 14:25, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm CASSIOPEIA. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Patrik Kincl, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

CASSIOPEIA(talk) 14:52, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why? Theroadislong (talk) 14:54, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Klara Kazmi Bio

Hi,

I've just tried to submit a Artist Bio page after a request from the artist, and it has been deleted?

Can you assist ?

Kind Regards

Kevin Klara Kazmi (talk) 21:39, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You submitted a draft article Draft:Klara Kazmi which I declined because it reads like an advert, it hasn't been deleted. Please be aware that writing a new article is difficult, and start by reading your first article: you first need to show that she meets Wikipedia's requirements for notability - Wikipedia is only interested in what people unconnected with her have published about her in reliable places such as major newspapers. Theroadislong (talk) 22:14, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

07:21:23, 22 January 2018 review of submission by Bookbinder 01


The article about child protection in Canada, can you request it? Bookbinder 01 (talk) 07:21, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry I don't understand your question. I declined the draft because 12 of the references are to their own website, we require independent sources. Please also remove all in-line external links we don't use them. Theroadislong (talk) 09:00, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

University of the People

Hello,

I read your note on why you undid my edits on University of the People. I do not understand what is considered "promotional material" that I have referenced. My edits referenced 3rd party news sources (i.e. New York Times) as well as primary sources. My additions reflect factual articulation agreements that have been made between the University of the People and UC-Berkeley, University of Edinburgh, and NYU-Abu Dhabi. This is not promotional, but explain how it is in your opinion?

Additionally, you undid an edit which I added the fee for transfer credit under the Tuition section. What is wrong with that?

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cnelsonii (talk • contribs) 13:44, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your addition started with the statement "University of the People has a rich diversity of academic partnerships with several world-renowned institutions" how is this anything but promotional? You should also declare any conflict of interest. Theroadislong (talk) 14:14, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 16:06:51, 24 January 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Diogopedrol


For your information the picture I put up on the DJ VIRGIN page, it was me who took it, and with her permission so it is mine and not copyright


Diogopedrol (talk) 16:06, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It was deleted from Commons by User:Túrelio because it was a Copyright violation, you will need to take it up with them. Theroadislong (talk) 16:14, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Novares Group

Hi Sir,

I'm Leo, I'm working for Novares Group in the digital communication of the group.

I'm sorry, I don't speak very good english and I don't undersatnt what is the problem with the Novares Group page.

Can you explain me? I don't want to see this page deleted so if I have to modify some sentences, I will do it.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LeoFermin (talk • contribs) 16:21, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated it for deletion because it is an article about a company, corporation or organization that does not credibly indicate the importance or significance of the subject, it is also written in a promotional manner and you have a conflict of interest as a paid editor. Theroadislong (talk) 16:31, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Article on Susan Merdinger

I am writing to get some clarity on why the citations of "COI" and "Payment" for this article have appeared above the Article on Susan Merdinger. I represent Susan Merdinger, as Wikipedia user SusanGreene. However, neither I nor Ms. Merdinger created this article, or paid for it and have no relationship to whomever composed it. I did, however, make a recent very minor correction/addition to the article at the request of Susan Merdinger to honor a notable musician who was omitted from the list of collaborators by the original Wiki editor, and do not feel that the article should be flagged or taken down as a result, when clear notability of the subject of the article is established with verifiable sources. The addition of these flags or citations at the top is a source of concern for the subject of the article, Ms. Merdinger, because it is potentially damaging to her reputation and integrity. It would be better not to have the article at all. However, I have no idea how to remove either the citations at the top of the article or the article itself. Now, the article is reduced to a stub and most pertinent biographical and career information has been removed, which is what I think may have prompted the flag about "notability" to be inserted automatically. Please advise and make a recommendation. SusanGreene SusanGreene (talk) 18:32, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Theroadislong&oldid=822154283"