User talk:StraussInTheHouse

Welcome to StraussInTheHouse's talk page!

You can create a new thread by clicking here. Please give descriptive titles to new sections.
If you're leaving a message in an existing thread, please indent your posts with colons.
Please sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).
Replies will be made here, please notify me of discussions elsewhere with {{ping|StraussInTheHouse}}.
Experienced users may stalk this page and answer any queries.
If you're contacting me about a draft, please read the FAQ page first.

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

Draft: Nimita1989

Good Evening Mate, I started writing in Wiki a little time ago, So I Directly not Submit a page as there are more chances you banned from the Wiki Community. So I write on Sub User Page Firstly but you declined it as soon as I started writing, Please reconsider it and help me to draft the article. Thanks in Advance

Draft:Jacob Lipkin declined for peacock terms

Thanks for your feedback, and you are right. (Just learning Wikipedia protocols for new pages.) I will make the changes to this language and resubmit.CANdo-artreview (talk) 19:25, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I made many changes to the Draft:Jacob Lipkin page and resubmitted for review April 1st, 2019. I appreciate your feedback and expect that I have resolved the problems. Many thanks. CANdo-artreview (talk) 14:00, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Efraim Barak

Hi StraussInTheHouse, Thanks for reviewing the draft. I would like to ask about the reason for rejection – the mentioned reason is that "The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes". However, the draft includes footnotes. Could you let me know what actions need to be done regarding the inline citations? Thanks Romika64 (talk) 15:53, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Romika64, I added a comment alongside, the issue is that the Biography section is unreferenced. Please add citations there as well to verify the content. Many thanks, SITH (talk) 16:12, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks StraussInTheHouse, I've added 3 references to the Biography section. Are they sufficient? Romika64 (talk) 18:18, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft disappeared: Ziad Alexandre Hayek

Hello! My last submission of the draft was rejected for being highly promotional but that was fixed and the picture titled: "own picture" is taken by me in the office with a professional camera and uploaded manually on Wikimedia (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ziad_Hayek.jpg#filelinks). Today i cannot find my draft though I edited it yesterday. Could you please help me? Thank you NicoleKhaw (talk) 09:22, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi NicoleKhaw, Graeme Bartlett has restored it. Many thanks, SITH (talk) 18:39, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft: Jan Peterson

Hi there, you recently flagged a the Jan Peterson draft I had been working on for potential copyright issues. I followed up with you on your talk page letting you know that I had edited issues with the draft and had hoped it could be re-reviewed. You had said that you would have another look at the source text and would replace the template with a revision deletion request to redact the page history if appropriate. Just wondering where this is at? Thanks. VanIslander1234 (talk) 18:25, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

VanIslander1234, many thanks for your edits, I've taken another look and the only remaining matching text is a list, and is therefore okay per WP:NFCC. SITH (talk) 18:41, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Confused

Hi. I'm confused.

You indicated that there were 2 blatant copyright violations in an article awaiting adoption. I do not understand how either of those are blatant copyright violations.

The article is Draft:Amy Wax

Sentence 1 which you said is a blatant copyright violation says "She worked as the Assistant to the Solicitor General in the Office of the Solicitor General at the U.S. Department of Justice in the late 1980s and early 1990s."

The words I bolded can't be copyright violations. They are her title, the office title, the department title, and the years.

The only words left are "She worked as the .. in the .. at the ... in the ... and." Can you explain how those words are a blatant copyright violation? I cannot imagine it.

Plus -- the first of the above words (which I've bolded) are not even in the supporting ref here. So that can't be a blatant copyright violation.

What we have left are the words "as .. in the .. at the .. in the .. and." Are you saying that is a copyright violation? Please point me to some policy that support that. I do not think it is true.

Or if you insist it is - can we please have and admin comment? Perhaps user:DGG? I see you are doing this a lot, and I wonder what effect it has on well intentioned editors who might be driven away from contributing. Copyright is important, but I do not understand you interpretation of it.

(The second sentence has similar issues .. "seven years" and "University of Virginia Law School" being in the ref and the text cannot be a basis for a "blatant copyright concern."). 2604:2000:E010:1100:34D4:FB55:EBA9:BA18 (talk) 21:27, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DGG appears to have cleaned up the submission and moved it to the mainspace. Many thanks (to both), SITH (talk) 18:37, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Todd Hiscock Article

Hi StraussInTheHouse,

thank you for the suggestion on imporving my article. I aksed for help on the chat forum and hopefully got the article right this time. COuld you please let me know if I have to work on any more improvements?

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcela McLeod (talk • contribs) 03:46, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Marcela McLeod, please can you let me know which "chat forum" you're talking about? It's best to ensure the only places you ask for Wikipedia help is on-wiki or via the IRC help channel. Many thanks, SITH (talk) 18:36, 9 April 2019 (UTC);[reply]

Hi StraussInHouse, I used Wiki help forum of course. I wonder if you hve a feedback to my updated article or if I need to ask other editors to look at it. Marcela McLeod (talk) 23:22, 9 April 2019 (UTC)Thank you. Marcela Mcleod[reply]

Submission of Ji Golpor Ses Nai

A draft for an upcoming Assamese movie Ji Golpor Ses Nai was declined. The subject is the first anthology film of Northeast India which makes it a notable film. Many references have been given about the film. Kindly look into it. Prodyut Kumar Deka (164.100.149.245 (talk) 11:25, 5 April 2019 (UTC)).[reply]

Hi, please see WP:NFILM. I agree it's a borderline case, but citing major reviews or critical reception would help. Many thanks, SITH (talk) 18:35, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sir, thank you for your advice. The draft is re-written and submitted again for your approval. Prodyut Kumar Deka (164.100.149.245 (talk) 06:11, 10 April 2019 (UTC)).[reply]

Difficulty in sourcing for Ningen Dock topic

Hi SITH

I see you rejected the Ningen Dock article and understand why - but I've (am not the original author) have been searching for information on Ningen Dock for weeks - and I can tell you the language barrier is farking real! It seems to be a ubiquitous topic in Japan and almost a secret everywhere else.

I was thinking - would references from an English medical journal like Lancet or BMJ be credible enough? Assuming I understood the problem - I'm new to wiki editing. Thanks - I.N. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Internautnotes (talk • contribs) 10:24, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Internautnotes, please can you provide a link to the page in question? Many thanks, SITH (talk) 18:33, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft: Aggrelin

Hello SITH,

thank you for your constructive feedback on my "AGGRELIN" article. I have reviewed the parts that you have pointed out and I've rewritten them accordingly. I would be happy, if you could look into it once again and tell me what you think, before I send it in once more.

Many thanks, Honorandrespect (talk) 10:15, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Honorandrespect, thank you for the edits, I or another reviewer will be with it shortly. Unfortunately, most reviewers, myself included, don't review drafts on request, otherwise our talk pages would be very long! Many thanks, SITH (talk) 18:33, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tagging

Please see the input and conversation here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft_talk:Harry_Gideonse#Comment, on your tagging an article and keeping it from being promoted. Thanks.--2604:2000:E010:1100:A066:E3A3:DD44:3FFC (talk) 16:17, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, to see removed content (provided it hasn't been deleted from the page history), please click "view history" and choose the difference you wish to examine. Thanks, SITH (talk) 18:32, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft: Hans Baldauf

Hello Strauss,

I was advised to add in line citations and I wanted to know if every sentence in an article needs an inline citation. I have submitted my article for review using published sources as references in many of my inline citations. Thank you for your time! — Preceding unsigned comment added by PeterMa1234 (talk • contribs) 18:57, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I or another reviewer will be with it within the stated time period. Many thanks, SITH (talk) 18:30, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft: Digital Product Studio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Digital_product_studio

Dear SITH. Sincere thanks for taking the time to review my draft. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Digital_product_studio

In regards to reliable sources for Digital Product Studio, it's a chicken and egg situation. If you type in "Digital Product Studio" into Google you get pages and pages of results.

https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=%22digital+product+studio%22&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

and in the news section the phrase is mentioned over and over https://www.google.com/search?q=%22digital+product+studio%22&client=safari&rls=en&source=lnms&tbm=nws&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjamPu7oMPhAhUrTt8KHQkDDHsQ_AUIESgE&biw=2015&bih=1150

So this industry model 100% exists. This is also why I am trying to write about them. I do not know how to solve the chicken and egg situation and would love your help in getting this draft over the line.

Deep thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ezyjules99 (talk • contribs) 14:54, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ezyjules99, unfortunately existence isn't enough to prove notability. Of the sources displayed in the search results you gave above, which are independent, reliable and cover the topic in significant detail? Many thanks, SITH (talk) 18:30, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]