Jump to content

User talk:Praxidicae

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user is a member of the Wikimedia Volunteer Response Team.
This user has account creator rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user has autopatrolled rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user is an edit filter manager on the English Wikipedia.
Je suis Coffee
This user has new page reviewer rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user has page mover rights on the English Wikipedia.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Caileam Raleigh (talk | contribs) at 13:05, 18 May 2018 (→‎Kastus Technologies declined: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

This user wishes she was back in Turks and Caicos
But this in no way affects Chrissymad's ability to respond. She just wants everyone to know.


00:10:21, 10 May 2018 review of submission by Jamesreadings


I have revised the draft page and removed all contents that would make it sound like advertising. I would love to know which part of the article is sounding like an advertisement. Jamesreadings (talk) 00:10, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Aima Baig

Hi! OK I understand there was the hand of a sock user, but there were my edits too. Please guide what to do to restore my added content. Thanks! M. Billoo 00:33, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Respected Chrissymad, I am waiting for your kind response. Thanks! M. Billoo 11:37, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 11:59:23, 10 May 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Raylonergan1234



Raylonergan1234 (talk) 11:59, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Hi there! I crafted my first wiki page but was not accepted due to 'This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources.'.

I was just wondering if possible to get advice on what sources were or weren't reliable within the article, so I can replace them with more appropriate ones? OR, if it's the content rather than the sources cited that is the issue?

Page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Skillnet_Ireland

I don't want to have to change every source if some are okay and I just need to update a few of them :)

The article is for a Government agency based in Ireland, so I tried to keep the information as objective and matter as fact as possible.

Thanks, Ray Raylonergan1234 (talk) 11:59, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Raylonergan1234 - it is imperative that you read Wikipedia's paid editing disclosure policy before making any further edits about this topic. Thanks. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 12:59, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Drm310 I think I have now updated my user page to make my disclosure of being employed by Skillnet Ireland
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Raylonergan1234
Is there another step I should take or edits I should make to the article to help with possibly getting it reviewed again?
Raylonergan1234 (talk) 13:18, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Raylonergan1234: Thanks for the disclosure. There was a response to your post at the WP:Teahouse. In summary, your sources are not good enough to show that this organization is sufficiently notable enough for inclusion. Only in-depth writings from reliable and independent sources will be considered as evidence to gauge whether it has attracted sufficiently significant attention by the world at large and over a period of time. References that are just passing mentions aren't sufficient; press releases or interviews with employees are not considered independent and won't be considered valid. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 14:11, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Drm310 Thanks for that. I will find more appropriate citations from reliable sources and re-edit the page and resubmit. Skillnet Ireland is pretty much on par with these two Irish state organisations (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IDA_Ireland / https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enterprise_Ireland) so I was trying to match their style and substance. Thanks for the help so far.

Raylonergan1234 (talk) 14:17, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Halszka Wasilewska

Hello Chrissy, thanks for reviewing my draft. I have an old photo of this brave lady from the 1920s. When can I insert into the infobox? --Po Mieczu (talk) 12:38, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Annette Lee

Please stop reverting the old pages, the article was further written by an experienced user. If you have any issues, please highlight the offending parts in the talk page thanks

Stop adding poorly sourced information and promotional material to a BLP. The person you said "reviewed" it is an editor with a conflict of interest. Do not remove the tags again. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 13:21, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Why do you think that person has a conflict of interest? That user Rqiang84 has written many articles in the singapore online media space and although we do not know each other, from his edit history, i reached out to ask him to help look into this article in an attempt to satisfy your constant revisioning. If you could please highlight the offending parts in the talk page, it will be more helping than keep reverting. Thanks
How do you expect someone without a COI to be able to make this statement? Additionally, you need to disclose any WP:COI you may have as well. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 13:31, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Proactively reaching out to artist to obtain photo, especially in a small country like singapore, is not uncommon and not indicative of COI. However, i have no idea about how that user came about that comment, but i will leave that user to defend their own work. Furthermore, all the statements that that user had written was factual and properly sourced. I hope you can indicate in the talk page which are the portions that you disagree with, instead of constantly reverting the pages. Thank you!
No, the content I removed was either promotional and an attempt to fluff up the article (ie. the "grammy award winning" constantly being thrown in for no reason) and the rest was not sourced or sourced to content which is not reliable. I'll note you still haven't addressed the COI issue either. Please also sign your comments. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 13:42, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps my earlier attempts you might not have agreed with, but how about rqiang84's revision? I hope you can share specifically what are the parts you do not agree with so that it will make it easier for editors to understand your point of view. thanks.Iz55 (talk) 13:44, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I explained it very clearly in my series of edit summaries in the history. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 13:47, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I respectfully disagree. user rqiang84 in his/her version on 07:54, 10 May 2018 had written completely new content but you had reverted it with the comment that it is improperly sourced fluff. I wanted to highlight that this user's version of new content is not similar to the previous content that i had written and which you had also reverted. I understand we are both at an impasse but i hope you could at least look rqiang84's content over and share the insufficient parts in the talk part so that other editors can improve on it. I hope i am being respectful to you about this, you have "mad" in your username so don't wanna get into too much trouble with you :)Iz55 (talk) 13:56, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'll note, again, you haven't addressed the COI for yourself. What is your affiliation, if any? And as an example of one of the many issues here, can you explain how adding that someone she worked with is a grammy award winner and has worked with xyz is relevant to her? Notability is not inherited and this seems like a blatant attempt to pad the article to make her appear to be more notable than she actually is. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 14:00, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I had addressed your comments in the talk pageIz55 (talk) 14:08, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I am a fan of the subject, but as such, when you first tagged me as COI i had made a conscious attempt to ensure the neutrality of the article by searching out editors of other internet personalities in Singapore. I then reached out to all of them on their talk page (as also written in subject's talk page) and rqiang84 had responded. But you had still reverted rqiang84's content! I hope you can reconsider and make edits on his content instead.Iz55 (talk) 14:22, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I hope you don't mind but i have posted a RFC. I think that will be the best way to move forward as i am sure you are busy too. Thanks so much for everything you're doing for WP. I recognise this is not personal and i respect what you are doing. Thanks so much once again. Please feel free to delete this section once you have read it. I will also stop coming to your talk page. Thanks so much!! Wish you the best Iz55 (talk) 15:30, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Mdm User:Chrissymad,

I understood that you had suspected that I might have committed a conflict of interest, due to the specific updates I have done since I had already stepped in to help out with the article and reverted my revision yesterday, which I fully respected your decision.

Although I personally went as far as getting a photo (yet-to-be approved in wikicommons due to an issue) from Annette herself soon after I had completed my said revision on the article in order to simply represent the article of the said person, so that it would at least be displayed just like any other wiki articles which I and everyone had seen at the Wikipedia website, I would like to declare that I am neither a close friend nor a promoter to Ms Annette Lee. I am merely a contributor to Wikipedia and most recently as the approved person of her permitted photo to be uploaded to the wikicommons.

For this I greatly apologies for all the inconveniences and misunderstandings caused to the administrators at Wikipedia and Wikicommons.

I would like to discuss with you what can be at best done with the said article which currently having multiple issues, and would wished to hopefully revise it upon your request but under your supervision. Thank you Mdm. Rqiang84 (talk) 11:30, 11 May 2018 (GMT+8)

As a person with no connections to Ms. Lee, or Singapore, or comedy, or music, I removed content I felt was promotional and/or not relevant, for example, naming people she recorded with in Nashville. In my opinion, what remains is a neutral article about a notable person. If the photo permissions can meet Wikipedia's criteria, it will be a nice add. And then stop, at least for a while. David notMD (talk) 02:26, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Chandrashekhar (TV series)

I don't know the controversy with the creator of the page but this is a notable show with enough internet hits to be sourced very well. I intend to remove the deletion tags and add many good references to make the page better. And since you have removed "tellychakkar" and "indiantelevision.com" references citing them as "exclusively wikis" is largely baseless accusations. Both are reputed "non wiki" internet news source running for more than last 17 years. Thanks JayB91 (talk) 20:09, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 00:09:29, 12 May 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Harshaw61


Hi Chrissymad,

Thank you for reviewing my page! Any chance you could tell me which of my sources are unreliable? Here's the page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:The_Americans

And here are the sources: 

The Americans (2013-07-22), The Late Show with David Letterman, retrieved 2018-05-09

"Ashley Monroe and The Americans - Jubilee, The Sessions, American Epic, Arena - BBC Four". BBC. Retrieved 2018-05-09.

Texas Killing Fields (2011), retrieved 2018-05-09

A Country Called Home (2015), retrieved 2018-05-09

Little Glory (2011), retrieved 2018-05-09

"LIVE: Beat This: Hal Willner Presents: A Celebration of the 60th Anniversary of Allen Ginsberg's "Howl" With Music, Words, and Funny People at the Theater at the Ace Hotel (4/7/15)". FLOOD. Retrieved 2018-05-09.

"I'll Be Yours - The Americans | Releases | AllMusic". AllMusic. Retrieved 2018-05-09.

Thanks,

Harshaw61 (talk) 00:09, 12 May 2018 (UTC)harshaw61 Harshaw61 (talk) 00:09, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Reverted 1 edit by Marshmallych (talk): Coi still exists."

Hello. You reverted my edit on page KaOS (Linux distribution). Bravemidwesterner has reworked "History" section, and after his/her reworking, article does not looking advert. No there grammar problems. Marshmallych 05:12, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

05:32:18, 12 May 2018 review of submission by 92.78.183.127


I added references to Barri's work from the NYT and Pitchfork, (please read a bit more than just the headlines). Also, if you search in en.wikipedia.org there are some mentions (and backlinks) for Barri already.

92.78.183.127 (talk) 05:32, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

SerenataFlowers notability

Hello, I have added a few references about Serenata Flowers from sources such as blogs and news press. Thank you. Jamesreadings (talk) 14:44, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Jamesreadings That is the exact opposite of what will establish notability. Please stop resubmitting it. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 14:45, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You mentioned about artspam on my draft about SerenataFlowers. I would love to know what the problem was when it did not contain promotional contents. Jamesreadings (talk) 16:04, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sitabani Wildlife Reserve is not a promotional Article.

Kindly help and inform us that what are the Promotional lines in the Wikipedia Article Titled "Sitabani Wildlife Reserve" ?

Please help us. Regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:204:2103:BB20:A8BF:BF84:965:79D (talk) 17:56, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Draft:Busiswa

Hello Chrissymad. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Draft:Busiswa, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not so promotional it can't remain in draftspace. Thank you. GorillaWarfare (talk) 21:53, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Question about OTRS

Aren't we supposed to close tickets after we have properly responded to them? My dashboard shows 45 open tickets, and I saw that you responded successfully to many of them so I'm not sure why they're still showing up as Open tickets/need to be answered in the Dashboard. Please ping me when you answer. Thanks in advance. Atsme📞📧 14:53, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message. I am unsure if I have reacted in the expected way, but I hope that the result has actually been helpful, and you have been an unexpected part of it. Sorry for the testing disruption. I hope you enjoy the new Huggle configuration and have a nice day. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:40, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

hello

I have created one page "Shri mamasaheb deshpande" but it has tagged for speed deletion. not clear why it have been done. I have given sufficient reference and no commercial links in that. not clear why it have been done. how to proceed in this regard? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yogesh dol (talk • contribs) 02:06, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reversion of Sibelius (scorewriter) revisions

I have spent some days revising and improving this article, with many citations, and organising the material into sections. I have just noted that you have reverted all of this. The merges were the result of an AfD discussion re Save Sibelius, and I note this merge has also been reverted. Can you please go into detail as to why none of the edits are ok? Thank you. Chrisdevelop (talk) 18:44, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Because it was largely promotional and contained significant copyright violations. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 18:48, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Which copyrights were violated? Re 'promotional', the practice I have been used to is to signal the offending sections with {{advert}} rather than to delete the entire revision. Can you please point to the sections that were promotional? Chrisdevelop (talk) 18:56, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Draft:Derek Williams (musician)

Thank you for reviewing my article on Derek Williams. While I appreciate you're still mid-review, most of the deletions you are making have now become un-undoable. For example, I note you have deleted his entire discography on the grounds that he entered all the credits on Discogs himself, however if you take a look through all 35 credits, not all are on Discogs, and you will find he entered only a few that had been missing from the catalogue. Moreover, there are many others credited on these albums, including the record companies themselves, and I have not seen any challenges made. The majority were not initiated by him, he is merely a contributor among other contributors, and those he did edit are also to be found on other catalogues such as CastAlbums, which were also listed in the Discography.

I notice you've also deleted numerous citations on the grounds that they're not directly about him, yet the full page story in the Rotorua Daily Post was entirely about him, in fact the article headline directly names him, so I am at a loss to know why that wasn't admissible in the background to his LGBT activism.

Re the Early Life part of the bio which you entirely deleted on the grounds that it was 'unsourced', as I understand it, facts such as which primary school the biographee went to don't all require to be sourced, as they're unlikely to be disputed, and it's nearly impossible to find a newspaper article about where a 5-18 year old child lived and went to school. Were that to be the case then the article would indeed become 'refbombed'. I also suggest that not every citation has to be directly about the individual, if it ties crucial facts together. For example, to place him in the White House, I had to first place the choir in the White House, and to do that, I had to go to Pat Nixon's diary for that day, and then to show from other sources that the Festival Choir Williams belonged to was there.

I added the section on his grandfather because Claud Williams himself was notable enough to have an entire chapter written about him as a notable explorer in the book Great Desert Explorers by Andrew Goudie, alongside a number of other books, and Derek Williams represented the Williams family not only at the Royal Geographical Society launch of his book, but in its research phase. He is also mentioned by name in the book acknowledgements, and in an independent review of the launch where he was the invited guest speaker, which was among the citations deleted. What I had been hoping for in the Review phase was helpful feedback, so I could make the fixes myself, and thereby avoid accidental deletions of items like the above. Chrisdevelop (talk) 21:02, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 04:48:59, 15 May 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Hankag


Hi, I urgently need to find out why the submission has been rejected. Please could you provide me with specific points as to what I need to change? Thank you sincerely for your help.

Hankag (talk) 04:48, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Hankag: Hello! Your article was rejected as it was using large portions of copyrighted material from this website. Wikipedia does not directly copy/reproduce content - you must write it in your own words citing your sources. Hope this helps :). (talk page stalker) -- Dane talk 04:52, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

de:Henry (Name)

„Mit Werbung bombardieren“ → That is a really interesting translation :-). Sounds like Google ... thank you very much. Greetings from Munich, ‑‑mupa280868 (talk) 15:34, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mupa280868 It was indeed - I don't speak a word of German so I googled "computer spam in German" hope it wasn't butchered too terribly! CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 15:35, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You wrote something like “to bomb with advertising” (is that the correct noun?). „Werbe-Spam“ was the correct translation. Or just write in english, most of us understand this. Thank you again :-), ‑‑mupa280868 (talk) 15:43, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

19:38:19, 15 May 2018 review of submission by Vogelsillum


Vogelsillum (talk) 19:38, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Hello Chrissymad. I don't understand why you declined the article 'maurice smeyers'. Can you please explain? Because this text is approved by the Dutch Wikipedia, and appears in several art historical encyclopedia (which are neutral)

Vogelsillum It is not neutral. It doesn't matter that it appears in other languages as all projects do not have the same criteria. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 19:39, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ryan Wilson (poet}

Thanks for looking at the article. I'm not sure what the problem was where you added the {{citation needed}} in this edit, but the quotes are definitely in the source cited (http://www.literarymatters.org/ryan-wilson-our-editor/). Let me know if I've misunderstood your intent there. --RexxS (talk) 18:45, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

RexxS As I responded on the TP, yeah you've misunderstood. Clearly it's stated there but it's a primary source, on his own companies website about him being praised by someone. It's the equivalent of me saying "Chrissymad is brilliantly witty" said Jesus H Christ, award winning director and then linking back to my own website that quotes it. Find the actual source. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 18:47, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It's not a primary source. Biographies are almost never primary because they collect together previously published material, which is how we define a secondary source. It's not his company. He merely works for the Association of Literary Scholars, Critics, and Writers, which is a reputable, notable publisher. Your webpage doesn't have a Wikipedia article, which is where the analogy breaks down. --RexxS (talk) 19:04, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It's published on his own companies terribly laid out website with no source for it. I fail to see why you can't provide an actual source for the statement praising his work outside of his own website.? CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 19:11, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The aesthetic of the Literary Matters website isn't for you or me to comment on, nor does it affect its reliability one jot. May I assume you'd be happier with the parent institution's website at http://alscw.org/publications/literary-matters/ ? I fail to see why I need to find the primary sources quoted by a reliable secondary source. If you don't agree that Literary Matters is a reliable source for its information about Wilson, it would probably be best to raise the issue at WP:RSN, where it could receive other opinions. --RexxS (talk) 19:23, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Just a (talk page stalker) note:​ given their status as literary reviewers (i.e. they have Wikipedia pages) and the reliability of the source Chrissymad is contesting, I'm not so much concerned if they said it, but the question that immediately comes to mind is "where did Jarman and Pinsky say these really nice things?" In that aspect, Chrissymad does have a point, because I could say that Neil deGrasse Tyson reviewed my physics article and found it groundbreaking, but if there is no "primary" location for that comment, do we really know it was said? Is it just citogenesis?
I guess my point is that the references raise more questions than they ask. On the other hand, I don't think either of those glowing reviews is really necessary to include in the article, but it's not necessarily a hill I'm going to die on. Primefac (talk) 13:01, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
So what I'm hearing is a cite to a source where they say this would be extraordinarily nice.-- Dlohcierekim (talk) 13:29, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with much of what you say, Primefac, and remembering that I didn't write Wilson's article (I just copied it out of Ottava Rima's talk page for him), I wouldn't have chosen to include those quotes either – I would have summarised. You would really have to ask Ottava where the original quotes were made, assuming he looked at the originals, rather than relied on the ALSCW to be accurate. Nevertheless, I still think that some notable poets praising Wilson is noteworthy in the article; and because Wilson is only borderline notable, IMHO, that reference is valuable to indicate notability. --RexxS (talk) 13:36, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kastus Technologies declined

Hi Chrissymad, I've just seen that you have declined an article I've authored on Kastus Technologies on the basis that its sources lack notability. The note left on the page stated that "Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject". At the minute, I'm struggling to see how the sources fail to meet these criteria. There has been significant coverage of the topic across nearly every major Irish print newspaper, which themselves are reliable and secondary sources. There is also a scientific journal, which is an independent peer-reviewed journal verifying the properties of Kastus' product. Other sources include articles published by DIT, Ireland's largest Insititute of Technology. If these sources aren't suitable enough, then please help me by letting me know what is. Thanks for any help you can give me. Caileam Raleigh (talk) 13:05, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Praxidicae&oldid=841845726"