User talk:AngusWOOF

	; Archives (Index) ;
	1; 2; 3; 4; 5; 6; 7; 8; 9; 10; 11; 12; 13; 14; 15; 16; 17; 18; 19; 20; 21; 22; 23; 24; 25; 26;
	This page is archived by ClueBot III.

This is AngusWOOF's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26: 20 days

Draft: BAITSSS

Hi AngusWOOF,

Your suggestions had been incorporated in this draft, please let me know if it had been improved or anything needs to be done.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.130.88.169 (talk • contribs)

129.130.88.169, how does "Estimating Water use by Vegetation is crucial for conserving water, managing Irrigation, and acquiring Water right information of individuals for Legal purpose. Farmers need these information to apply accurate Water in Crop for optimum Crop yield...." introduce what the BAITSSS is? It should start with the second paragraph and be more concise. It needs a history of the term / project. Who created it? How was it funded? How was it rolled out? Is it still active? AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:55, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Great, I have incorporated your various suggestions. I would appreciate if you review again.

Not sure about history and rolled out, this draft is based on the fact what is found in the web. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.130.88.169 (talk) 18:37, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.130.88.169 (talk) 03:02, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

129.130.88.169, the article already has a bit of the history and origins in the lead paragraph. It just needs to be explained in better detail in a History section. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:06, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Added small section of history as per found in web. Can you please let me know? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.130.88.169 (talk) 15:24, 19 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Does anyone know what is the problem in this draft, I have updated some? — Preceding unsigned comment added by IDKANS (talk • contribs) 14:49, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

IDKANS, it still looks overly technical like a journal report, see WP:NOTJOURNAL. It doesn't need to be a status update or a mirror of a website. I'm also concerned if any of the editors on this are connected to the program or the research group. If so, they should declare WP:COI. It's still in the submission queue, so other AFC reviewers can take a look from a fresh perspective. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:14, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure about all these micro details, but for me, it looks a nice model description and better than many models described in the wiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IDKANS (talk • contribs) 15:16, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Seems you have asked many things to add ?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by IDKANS (talk • contribs) 15:22, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There is also promotional verbiage in the lead: "The estimation of water use by vegetation is crucial for conserving water, managing Irrigation, acquiring water right information, and crop production.[3][12] Farmers need these information for accurately applying water to crops for optimum yield." Other lines / bullet points read like they are advocating the advantages or using this model over others. This needs to be rewritten neutrally. Also it should be able to have some criticism from others in the scientific community. See WP:PROUD AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:25, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think so, it seems accurate statement to me. "The estimation of water use by vegetation is crucial for conserving water, managing Irrigation, acquiring water right information, and crop production", there might many other literature to support that.

Regarding the bullet, I think, they are trying to make some distinctions between other models, at least it is from the published manuscripts, not sure about the scientific community. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IDKANS (talk • contribs) 15:34, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Removed the bullets. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IDKANS (talk • contribs) 15:40, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

IDKANS, I just realized the formatting of some other threads got mixed up with the BAITSSS one. Anyway, my point about the "estimation is crucial" phrase, and others like it, is that it carries a promotional advocacy tone. It's like saying "Clean drinking water is good for your health." See WP:NPOV. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:16, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Edited as per your points. Not sure, what can be done to make better. Overall, it seems widely published and mentioned in various places. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IDKANS (talk • contribs) 17:50, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

IDKANS, another option is to put those opinionated statements as quotes from one of the researchers or reviewing writers, like: Ramesh said that "the estimation of water use by vegetation is crucial for conserving water, managing Irrigation, acquiring water right information, and crop production." (provided he actually said that) AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 18:38, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think, removal of that line is safer. Thanks, Overall good. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IDKANS (talk • contribs) 19:09, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what is that cite error referring. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IDKANS (talk • contribs) 19:27, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Great, anything needs to be done on this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IDKANS (talk • contribs) 20:21, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Seems, this draft is pending for year, not sure, the expectations of reviewers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IDKANS (talk • contribs) 06:11, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have done some minor edits and updated some references, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/tables is showing prediction vandalism, any idea. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IDKANS (talk • contribs) 06:02, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

IDKANS, how is it pending for a year when the last feedback was last month? AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 00:26, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

IDKANS, the more it can be reduced to its basic explanation of the project and its impact / applications, without too much technical detail, the more that would help. It also helps if there are WP:GNG sources on the project. Ones that are secondary external news sources that are independent of the subject. Can you list those up front in the comments section? AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 00:28, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please specify the section that needs to be reduced (do you think we need to reduce or delete the Approach Section or reduce and also the technical details in application sections??). Probably, I can try to reduce as per your guidelines/thoughts.

Secondary external news sources that are independent of the subject: (added in comment sections). My concern this draft was initiated in January, 2019,and some of the coverage may start disappearing in websites/news.

IDKANS, thanks, that looks good. Thanks for pointing out the citations from the other journals and the AAAS article. That helps. It might still be tagged for being overly technical, but I'll let the other editors figure that out. if you are concerned the websites/news sites are going offline, then you have those particular articles archived with Wayback. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 14:49, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I would help to clean up and make neutral point of view, if someone gives some clear guidelines, anyway, thanks again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IDKANS (talk • contribs) 18:03, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

IDKANS, so are you connected to the group in any way? Same university department or used their product in your research? AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 20:03, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Evapotranspiration is common to many subjects (engineering, agriculture, agronomy, biology, hydrology), BAITSSS is different than others. I am interested/aware of these models. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IDKANS (talk • contribs) 20:16, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas Nail

Thank you for your feedback on "Draft:Thomas Nail". The article has been rejected twice but no one has told me how to fix the issues. One comment suggests that academics need a "named chair" to be listed, which is clearly no the case for most entries. Another says I need reliable independent sources that are verifiable—but that was what I thought I just added with links to peer reviewed journals, etc. I am super confused. Other entries are way less supported than mine. Can you tell me specifically what I need to do here? Its all so mysterious. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RyanHSanborn (talk • contribs) 02:40, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

Also: I read the wiki instructions and its pretty clear that the article meets at least one of the academic criteria listed: "The most typical way of satisfying Criterion 1 is to show that the academic has been an author of highly cited academic work – either several extremely highly cited scholarly publications or a substantial number of scholarly publications with significant citation rates. Reviews of the person's work, published in selective academic publications, can be considered together with ordinary citations here. Differences in typical citation and publication rates and in publication conventions between different academic disciplines should be taken into account.

I have linked to google scholar and academia.edu to verify this. Thomas Nail has a book, The Figure of the Migrant, cited 285 times (which is a lot for philosophy books). He also fulfills the other named criteria of "unique" contribution that can be verified by reading the linked book review of Theory of the Border- where the reviewer clearly states the original and unique contribution of a whole new conceptual framework. Check it out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RyanHSanborn (talk • contribs) 03:22, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

Please read this: I am pasting here the explicit criteria on wikipedia for academic notability and precise how Thomas Nail satisfies this: WP:NACADEMICS: Academics meeting any one of the following conditions, as substantiated through reliable sources, are notable.

1. The person's research has had a significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources.

"The most typical way of satisfying Criterion 1 is to show that the academic has been an author of highly cited academic work – either several extremely highly cited scholarly publications or a substantial number of scholarly publications with significant citation rates. Reviews of the person's work, published in selective academic publications, can be considered together with ordinary citations here. Differences in typical citation and publication rates and in publication conventions between different academic disciplines should be taken into account. To count towards satisfying Criterion 1, citations need to occur in peer-reviewed scholarly publications such as journals or academic books. Publication and citation rates in humanities are generally lower than in sciences. Also, in sciences, most new original research is published in journals and conference proceedings whereas in humanities book publications tend to play a larger role (and are harder to count without access to offline libraries). The meaning of "substantial number of publications" and "high citation rates" is to be interpreted in line with the interpretations used by major research institutions in determining the qualifications for the awarding of tenure."

Here is how criteria number 1 is verified: a) follow the link "highly cited" to google scholar and see that there are several "highly cited" books and many well cited peer- reviewed articles. b) follow the academia.edu link at the bottom to see that Thomas Nail has over 4,000 followers with a quarter of a million downloads. c) when determining "highly cited" consider 1. that philosophy has much lower citation rates than the sciences, 2. that books are much more important that articles, and 3. that Thomas Nail is a tenured faculty, meaning that he has published enough to be considered to have made an impact in his field. d) view his CV on academia.edu to see the 10 books he has written and over 30 peer reviewed articles and major conferences and full range of interviews.

Let me know what you think

Please see WP:NACADEMIC and indicate how this professor meets any of the criteria there. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 03:14, 8 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In all fairness, the author did cite from WP:NACADEMICS, and did show how the professor met criteria 1. Utopes (talk) 02:27, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Utopes, yeah, I just didn't see it when the editor posted the wall of criteria 1 text and put me in a WP:TLDR state. I've added an AFC comment to have folks look at the talk page of the draft for the detailed analysis. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:31, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Article Improved 'Yusuf Magaji Bichi'

Hello AngusWOOF,

Thanks for your contributions! I have improved my article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Yusuf_Magaji_Bichi based on your corrections, can you please recheck it for me again? This article seems the same with the biography of the previous DGs State Security Service (Nigeria). Ibnadambici (talk) 10:47, 8 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ibnadambici, okay, it's good enough for now. I've moved it to mainspace. Please continue to provide more external news sources. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:34, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Raoul Bhatt wiki

Is it possible I can get your help to rewrite the Raoul Bhatt Wikipedia article as I don’t know how? Tonystargazer (talk) 16:16, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tonystargazer, I suggest you try rewriting it without using any primary sources. No websites, social media, or press releases. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:20, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I fixed and removed all the social media links, and reworded it so it doesn’t read so much like a resume. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tonystargazer (talk • contribs) 08:22, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tonystargazer, the article was speedy deleted for advertising. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:37, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

AngusWOOF, Can you please reinstate the article as I removed the social media references as you said? — Preceding unsigned comment added by tonystargazer (talk • contribs)

Tonystargazer, can you rewrite the draft from scratch? AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:59, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

AngusWOOF, Can you let me know what was wrong with my previous version? Why wasn’t it valid? Any good examples you can suggest? I don’t want to get it deleted again if I put in that effort. — Preceding unsigned comment added by tonystargazer (talk • contribs)

For sources I suggest CTV [1] Edmonton Sun [2] Swimco (primary source interview, but interesting) [3] Global News CA [4] [5] Edmonton Journal [6] Although that only shows notability in the Edmonton area. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 20:15, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Toriko split?

I think we might need a consensus regarding split of the Toriko manga and anime series into different aspects (i.e. a manga page, an anime page and an episode list). As it stands now, the List of Toriko episodes is essentially an anime series article; the production was originally added without a proper consensus and most of it will need to be moved to a separate article (in this case, Toriko (TV series)). I'll see what can be done. I've also contacted Nihonjoe (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) and Sergecross73 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) for their thoughts on the matter. Thoughts? Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 08:03, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sjones23, the original action from last month (October) was that the List of Toriko episodes was boldly renamed to Toriko (TV series), which I stopped and the result was the Request Move. That resulted in a month-long debate over whether the articles should follow WP:ANIME or WP:TV standards. During this period, the LoE article was reformatted to have the (TV series) sections with Production, Casting, Reception, Broadcast and other sections, but was reverted a few times in case the LoE was going to remain a separate article. The result by the admin was no consensus but that all parties are willing to try a standalone (TV series) article. So without having to reopen the entire box, I suggest that TV series be developed proper and to leave LoE alone. Maybe this can be attempted in a draft? AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:16, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@AngusWOOF: I see; I was quite busy with other things, so I missed the discussion. Given your thoughts on the matter, do you think we should consider restoring the article to the way it was before the situation happened as per WP:STATUSQUO? Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 17:36, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sjones23, I did fix up the LoE table structure and home media so that stuff should stay. But I think a draft would be a good idea as per Draft:School Rumble (TV series) AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:42, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@AngusWOOF: My original draft was located at User:Sjones23/List of Toriko episodes (check the history page for it; it's a redirect now), but it was way back in 2011 when I spun it off from the main series article. Do you think we should restore the DVD cover and use the One Piece (season 5) (An FL) and the Naruto episode FLs as models to make it a potential FL? Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 17:44, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sjones23, you can check with the others on the talk page for LoE. If there's enough material to create (TV series) then it would be put in the draft, and the LoE can then stay more like the LoE. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:52, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and as a heads up, the WP:VPM discussion was closed with the result being that the project is "Interconnected, not subordinate". Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 18:04, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sjones23, regarding the DVD covers, you and the others are good at ensuring those aren't having issues with NFCC or Commons, so I'll support whatever you want to place for those. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 18:07, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Gotcha. Like I said, I think we should restore the DVD cover for the article once the dispute has been worked out. I think everyone involved should review WP:BATTLEGROUND and WP:OWN, as noted in Anomie's closing statement regarding WP:ANIME. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 18:18, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm creating a new draft at User:Sjones23/Toriko (TV series) and have restored the LoE to the WP:STATUSQUO version for now. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 20:34, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Section break

Since the previous image was deleted as per this discussion, do you think we should restore it if it's absolutely necessary or change it to a promotional poster per WP:NFCC#8? I felt that it wasn't a decoration for the episode list like in some featured lists such as One Piece (season 5). Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 20:26, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Olivia Rodrigo

Where do you think we are with this one now? She has three bona fide "significant" roles released now, so she certainly technically meets WP:NACTOR. And the High School musical series is getting a lot of press... But when I look for profiles of just Rodrigo, I'm still not finding much. So... thoughts? (TIA!) --IJBall (contribs • talk) 22:38, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

IJBall, I see [7] which is echoed on TV Insider. That's got her birthplace but a paragraph-sized profile of what she's been in. I'm hoping there are some more detailed articles though. Here's a profile from See Jane / Geena Davis Institute [8] This article on AV Club is headlined how she and othe cast members are already stars [9] Lots of "meet the cast" articles from mainstream media though. Here's one from Columbus Dispatch about her career with Madison Hu on Bizaardvark [10] (same article at Fresno Bee [11] ) Here's one for Paved New World in J-14 magazine [12] and Variety [13] She in a ton of Just Jared Jr. blog articles, although that's not that good a source. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 22:52, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think one good profile piece or interview (from a decent-quality source) would get this one over the hump. But I've yet to find one that I really think does it (this LA Times piece makes some mention of her, but still not in enough detail)... However, it's possible with the Disney+ debut that somebody will write something substantive up on her over the next few weeks. I'll try to remember to keep an eye out... Thanks! --IJBall (contribs • talk) 04:13, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a press release that mentions her middle school. [14] and this interview talks about that she's Filipino [15] AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 08:18, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sweety High isn't the most RSP of sources but still worth an interview [16] Video interview with ET Canada [17] Popsugar cast interview [18] It looks like co-star Madison Hu has her own page. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 08:29, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

IJBall, I don't know if that interview article will come out; it might be too much to expect something like Lena Waithe's Vanity Fair cover article [19] for interview, but do you think there's enough based on the news media coverage on the High School Musical web series? AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 21:19, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Even for someone at career level of Rodrigo, and "in depth" profile is not out of the question, IMO. For example, look at some of the non-inline sources at Draft:Cree Cicchino (another draft article I need to go over again at some point, and see if it's ready!) – Cicchino actually has 2 or 3 in-depth profiles (from 1 or 2 decent media sources), so it's not unreasonable to wait for Rodrigo to get similar coverage... As to your question, without a more in-depth profile, I'd say it's a "not yet", as the HSM coverage is mostly about the show, with Rodrigo only getting more peripheral focus in a lot of those articles. However, as soon as Rodrigo gets a decently in-depth profile or interview in a decent-ish quality WP:RS, then I'd say it's ready for mainspace. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 21:37, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, please be careful with Starklinson and their edits (FTR, I'm not the only one who has problems with this editor) – IMO, this is an editor that is more interested in getting articles into Mainspace than they are with writing good quality articles that are well-sourced. The issues that you and I have discussed with this article remain, and Starklinson's changes really do nothing to address them – it's still missing a high-quality profile article or interview. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 02:52, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

IJBall, okay will hold off on the CSD part for now. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 03:08, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tfue

I've nominated into AFD this person, this is believed to be non notable due to huges unreliable sources like forbes and etc there, pls create Afd on that page, thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 113.150.100.49 (talk) 06:19, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

113.150.100.49, I suggested a redirect to the group he was associated with. I don't know if there's enough coverage of him independent of that after he left the group. If there is, then a new article can spin off from that. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 21:21, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

least dangerous assumption (draft)

Hi AngusWOOF,

Thanks for your (very rapid) reviews of the page I'm proposing. The turnaround is appreciated.

This is an important page to get on Wikipedia. The phrase passes the criteria notability, verifiability, and reliability of sources. It's an important concept and it should be documented. I am at a bit of a loss to know where to go with it. As far as I can see I have set the context clearly (it's a pedagogic concept, particularly important in educational policy areas such as inclusion, and used in the fields of intellectual disability and communication disorder). I've described the contept in an encyclopic way (neutral, reling on reliable secondary sources), saying what it is and illustrating its meaning with an example. I'm not sure waht else I can do. Sure I could write more (way more) but some entries surely need to be terse and to the point (I don't see what a history of its coining adds to the understanding of what it is). And I've never seen a journal abstract looking like this draft (maybe in terms of length, but not in terms of content) - so I'm rally not sure in what way it looks like a journal abstract. So I'd very much appreciate figuring out how to get this moving in a way that enables a terse, informative entry to find its place in wikipedia.

I very much appreciate the review process and the shared agenda of ensuring that wikipedia stays what it is intended to be - so none of this is 'moaning'. [[Draft:The_least_dangerous_assumption]

Iorek 12:16, 12 November 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iorek100 (talk • contribs) 10:16, 12 November 2019 (UTC) Iorek 12:15, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Iorek100, here's a blog writeup where someone tries to explain LDA. [20] Note how it includes the origins of the phrase. "Over 30 years ago, special educator Anne McDonnellan coined this phrase by stating that in the “absence of conclusive data, educational decisions ought to be based on assumptions which, if incorrect, will have the least dangerous effect on the likelihood that students will be able to functional independently as adults.”" Here's another blog writeup [21] that mentions 1984 as origin. And one from Oilbean [22] So it should explain what LDA is and then how it's been popularized and widely used since then. But find a more magazine article like source or a reliable source website rather than random blogs. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:17, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help with this. It's a good process having page creastion so carefully gate-kept. I'll endeavour to ensure the page keeps improving now that it has been created, in line with the aims of Wikipedia. Iorek 16:36, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

Please help in solving queries

Regarding Your suggestions to improve article of Tanya Maniktala and Shivam Kakar.

1. I will work on your requested point to become neutral i.e.I will imagine I dont know them and try writing a concise (precise) stuff what is required from reader's point of view. 2. I have used all web sources only to gather the information. Can you give a example where I have not. 3. Additionally you have mentioned, the tone of writing is self promotion based. My answer to that is : I will modify the draft again. I am a follower of these upcoming actors who are very much popular since last two-three years in India. People have asked queries about them at several platforms and They have that credibility now (not a year before perhaps!) to have a wikibiography page. They have bagged good projects (tanya is going to work for Mira Nair in International - BBC project and Shivam is going to work for a bollywood movie. So as far as India viewers are concerned they are well searched in internet" Data for Tanya - https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=IN&q=Tanya%20Maniktala Data for Shivam - https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=IN&q=Shivam%20Kakar

Please suggest me, apart from promotional tone, what else I should rectify? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sagargenetic (talk • contribs) 07:14, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sagargenetic, the concern is that the article is full of promotional verbiage such as "She is set to take the British TV industry by storm". Please read stuff like WP:NOTADVERTISING and WP:NPOV and try to get rid of the promotional phrases, stuff that makes the actor look good. Replace it with more neutral phrases which explain what the actor has done. It's okay to say whether they starred in or co-starred in a particular show or film.

Regarding Draft:Tanya Maniktala, please indicate her significant roles in significant productions that would meet WP:ENT. These web series don't have any notability as it stands, so you need to have other shows. Do not write promotional stuff like name drops "which is being directed by famous Mira Nair" or stating opinions as facts like "is a rising star" We known Nair is famous. Also the web series should be briefly summarized, not that detailed because she didn't produce or create the series, just acted in it. If critics praise her work, then list the critics' names and publications represented and have it quoted. See Kari Wahlgren, a voice actor who has a ton of lead roles in cartoons, and how I briefly describe the role. It should also not be all positive tone, and open to criticism.

Same issues with Draft:Shivam Kakar. The web series isn't notable right now, so you have to find other shows that he stars in to meet WP:ENT. He should be in one of the lead roles there where external news articles from reliable sources can talk about his work or his career.

Hope this helps. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 21:15, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Anime biographies

Hello again. I have some concerns here. On some articles, Starbeam2 (talk · contribs), a relatively new user, has been using BTVA as a source when the user reformatted the tables in the Debora Rabbai, Michele Knotz and Veronica Taylor articles, despite most of them not including checkmarks. I've already notified them about BTVA here. I think we might need to use some resumes for those articles and probably help cleanup the Veronica Taylor and Michele Knotz articles (the former article only uses BTVA as a source for the voice credits, without resumes or other sources like CrystalAcids.com), using the Mike Pollock article as a model. Can you please let me know what your thoughts are about this and see if the user needs help? Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 10:07, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Lord Sjones23, if they aren't checkmarked in BTVA then they can't be referencing BTVA, and I would remove those entries or comment them out for now. Also Starbeam2 should not rowspan the reference column like that per MOS:ACCESS. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 18:07, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Lord Sjones23, Starbeam2, I cleaned out Rabbai's article for now. I'll try to do the others later, unless you want a crack at it? AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 21:02, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Location Based SMS

I have resubmitted this article for review https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Location_Based_SMS

Will you be reviewing this again? I have made changes as recommended in your comments.

EBKJG (talk) 14:27, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

EBKJG, if it's in the AFC queue, then any AFC reviewer can do this. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:47, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

EBKJG (talk) 15:44, 21 November 2019 (UTC) so does that mean it will be in review now? I don't know the process well enough, please help me understand, do I need to submit this another way?[reply]

Draft:Arnab_Dutta

Sir, i just add a reference. Please help or suggest me how to create it main article . Listvl255 15:27, 14 November 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bongshomoy (talk • contribs)

Bongshomoy, please find more news articles that focus on Dutta's career and indicate how Dutta meets WP:MUSICBIO or WP:ENT. The artist isn't in one of those regions where they have charting from the usual places like Billboard, so you'll have to dig up those news articles instead AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 20:58, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	Thanks for your general helpfulness and patience with my first article's creation, and corresponding tectonic chain reaction of assorted article movements it'll cause. Jacob Ford (talk) 05:05, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft

Hi, what should i do? for my draft Enes bi (talk) 20:28, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I was add sources Enes bi (talk) 20:29, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Enes bi, please read WP:MUSICBIO and explain how this rapper meets the criteria there. Yes, you can add more external news sources to show notability for the person, preferably through news and magazine articles AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 20:57, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Television#Article hierarchy clarification

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Television#Article hierarchy clarification. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 23:07, 15 November 2019 (UTC)Template:Z48[reply]

Recent draft: declined

AngusWOOF,

I have seen that you declined my submission for Draft:Xavier Riddle and the Secret Museum (season 1). The reason you stated was that it was a duplicate of the draft List of Xavier Riddle and the Secret Museum episodes (which you also declined, I understand). This wasn't a duplicate; it was listing a season of the show. I hope you understand. Thank you! --Purplemountainman^talk 19:32, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Purplemountainman, there's only one TV series with one season. It doesn't need to be split off from the main one. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:58, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@AngusWOOF: True. But when there are a lot of seasons (e. g. Season 15), we could probably have a use for that article. --Purplemountainman^{talk contribs} 20:03, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Purplemountainman, that's for later, not when the series has just come out this year. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 20:44, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@AngusWOOF: Let me explain. I am reading my comment and I realize did not explain it clearly. What I'm saying is when the show's article is not anymore a stub, we could start expanding from there. Hope this makes sense. --Purplemountainman^{talk contribs} 01:18, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Help

i dont know what you mean by reviews. i want to add it but i dont understand. you mean game reviews? and how many do you want? who do you want it from? please be more specific. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OTFTYT (talk • contribs) 02:05, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

OTFTYT, yes, game reviews from video game magazines and websites that are considered reliable under WP:VG/RS AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 02:18, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

AngusWOOF, Ok, I'll add that. I'll just add some top reviews from the app store because i can't view reviews from the Nintendo Store. OTFTYT (talk) 02:33, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

OTFTYT, they need to be professional reviews, not aggregates from the App Store / Nintendo Store or random people on there. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 02:42, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

AngusWOOF, Thats the problem. thats the only place the game exists. I can't use people like IGN because its not rated like that... — Preceding unsigned comment added by OTFTYT (talk • contribs)

OTFTYT, online games / apps can still garner reviews from those websites in the WP:VG/RS AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 02:20, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Hi, hope you are doing good. I edited a page but not sure what happened, subject is rather complex and important I think so. Please review the changes and suggest if it needs further adjustments. Draft:Emergent Coding Greg JJ (talk) 07:09, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Registration and Electoral Office

I understand regularly the article will be undersourced but it is very common for Hong Kong Government agency Wikipedia page and I follow the ongoing standard, I will be happy to look for more but here are some of those pages comparison. Electoral Affairs Commission, Home Affairs Department,Labour and Welfare Bureau,Financial Services and the Treasury Bureau. Commonly these category of articles only have 2-3 references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Felixishim (talk • contribs) 08:36, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Felixishim, can you find some external news articles about it though? It could easily be absorbed into the Electoral Affairs Commission article which has that REO in bold. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:03, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It has been updated with external sources, I would like to mention as well that this page existed in another language so notability shouldn't be an issue.Felixishim (talk) 13:49, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding speedy deletion of my page.

Hello AngusWOOF

Greetings!

I am writing to request your help following a change in my Wikipedia page.As you know, I have been trying my level best to get my page correct. At present, it is not clear what exactly the problem is.

I would like to request you that please have look at the attached file for my contest for deletion along with the reply from your side for my last edit.

It would be a lot more effective if you can do let me know how can I modify the document, all the necessary details will be shared to you if you need them.

Here is the link for my google document page: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1TpvGBV7_J6qRXiZclF9BgtK6DvnX9p3ZCZeDCSEBmKk/edit#heading=h.mzdudx8900tv

Here is the link for Wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Manishprivet/sandbox

Thank you in advance for your help and I hope I would be able to update my page without any hindrance.

Yours sincerely,

Aurora Team ABVIIITM — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sumitshinde2608 (talk • contribs) 15:52, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sumitshinde2608, the page is now at Aurora (festival). You can develop it there, however, do not add the detailed program / agenda / schedule that you had in the sandbox as that is excessively promotional. Also, you have a direct conflict of interest so you and Manishprivet will be limited on what you can add to the article. See WP:COI AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 02:13, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion

Hi AngusWoof

Could you give me some advice about the deletion of a draft article? I can't find a reference to which article it was. And I guess it's been deleted now.

This would help me to do better in future.

Was it about Spac Nation? I added citations from two national newspapers, Huffington Post, and one local newspaper; and that seemed to meet Wikipedia's guidelines. But maybe I'm wrong?

I'd value any thoughts you might have.

Thanks Sadgrove (talk) 18:27, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sadgrove, Huffington Post can only be used if the editor is actually part of the Huffington Post staff, and not a contributor. See WP:RSP on what sources can be used. Same with Forbes. Do not use Forbes contributors. There was a draft for Spac Nation but it was speedy deleted because it was an attack page. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 02:17, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft: Injury Reserve

Hi AngusWOOF

Thanks for looking at and reviewing my article on Injury Reserve's self titled album so quickly after I submitted it.

You mentioned that I should add more in the critical reception section, which I did. However, you also mentioned that I should put where it charted. As far as I know, the album didn't chart anywhere, as it doesn't show up on Billboard's website (they also track the non-US charts). I believe that the album is still noteworthy and deserves an article though.

If you think it's okay for me to submit the article anyway, then I'll do that. If otherwise, let me know and I'll see if I can fix the problem.

- Krimzonmania7078

Krimzonmania7078, it needs the reviews and the charting in order to meet WP:NALBUM. Please review the criteria there and indicate how the article would meet that. If it didn't chart, it needs critical reception from reviewers of reputable music websites. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 02:18, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

AngusWOOF, I've had a look at the WP:NALBUM criteria and it would definitely meet 1. (it has been covered by multiple reputable music websites). According to WP:NALBUM it only needs to meet one of the criteria to be noteworthy.

- Krimzonmania7078

Krimzonmania7078, you can resubmit that, and indicate that it would meet so. I've cleaned up the sourcing a bit to include the authors. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:38, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Krimzonmania7078, please ensure that the critics reviewing the album are respectable journalists and not the random "contributors" of the Huffpost/Forbes kind that post their own reviews without editorial oversight. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 00:30, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

AngusWOOF, I've looked at the journalists in question and they all seem to be from reputable, music-specific publications, so hopefully that is fine.

I wanted to ask about the album cover: I uploaded an image of the album cover to Wikimedia Commons and put it on the draft article, but the image was removed from the draft (as 'non free images are not allowed except on articles'), and now the image itself has been removed from wikimedia commons. Do you know what I can do about this - can I submit the article and add the image later, or is there some other way I can resolve this? Thanks for your help.

- Krimzonmania7078

Krimzonmania7078, yeah you might have to wait until the article is in the mainspace first. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:12, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Krimzonmania7078, I'm requesting the redirect be cleared so I can move the article over to mainspace. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:20, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

AngusWOOF, Thanks so much! This is my first article and to see it get onto Wikipedia is really rewarding. People like you are what makes doing this worthwile. I appreciate it!

- Krimzonmania7078

Can you please coach me

Can you please coach me — Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.246.230.218 (talk) 02:29, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

196.246.230.218, you can check out Wikipedia:Coaching for some resources on how to get more help. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:20, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:14, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Jess Dyce

Hi AngusWOOF I'm currently trying to build a new page for Jess Dyce and have submitted two versions. The first was a fumbled attempt at trying to create a page but the second one is the one that I feel is a little better. The one that I would like published is;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Jess_Dyce_2

I understand that there is some problems with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Jess_Dyce_2 but did not know what to do to improve it. Once this page is OK I would like to delete the first version (Jess Dyce)

Thanks Jennie — Preceding unsigned comment added by UONLTL (talk • contribs) 00:22, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Jennie, can you edit on Draft:Jess Dyce version? I deleted the (2) version and redirected the content to that one. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 00:32, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

TOMMY ROBERTS

Mr. Woof I am new to Wikipedia. If you could help me in any way to better this submission it would be greatly appreciated. Thank You, Monmouth1946 (talk) 16:40, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Monmouth1946, it looks like the verbiage was copied from some other biography, so that needs to be rewritten, otherwise it is a copyright violation. Also if there are better attributions to online media newspapers or books, that would help show whether the person is notable. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 20:06, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 14:02:52, 20 November 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Ezbsg

Ezbsg (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Rabies Reader (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

AngusWOOF, I'm new to Wiki. How is this different than the iPhone page that promotes one product and company? I'm using other products as a guideline but struggling with these seemingly arbitrary decisions as to what is and isn't a promotion. Creating up a p[age that defines a significant product and how it helps rescue pets doesn't seem like "blatant advertising" to me. I reference Microsoft Windows and Apple's iPhone as examples. (talk) 13:53, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ezbsg (talk) 14:02, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ezbsg see WP:NPOV. It should describe the product or company in a neutral way and not read like verbiage copied from their website. See if you can write the article without using any of its websites, press releases, or social media. Also if you are connected to the company or its people in any way, you need to disclose conflict of interest WP:COI and it would be better that someone else write about the product. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 14:46, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

AngusWOOF I've read NPOV and understand its stradegy. Once again I reference iPhone which has links to Apple's web site and describes a single product and talks about nothing but the iPhone. I don't see the difference between that page and what I am trying to create. (User talk:Ezbsg) 14:56, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ezbsg It should only have a single external link to the company / product at the bottom. The rest of the info can be constructed from secondary source news articles that write about the subject. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:04, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

AngusWOOF Once again I reference Apple's pages which do not follow your guidance. Why is it acceptable to have many links there but not acceptable to have a couple on what I am contributing. There appears to be a huge gap in in consistency as to what is acceptable and what is not. (User talk:EzBsg) 15:12, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ezbsg, if you look at the iphone articles like iPhone 6S, most of the references are not coming from Apple. There are a few places where they do, like specs and technical information that can't be garnered by external news sources. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:18, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ezbsg, I would suggest trying to dig up information on Rabies Reader using sources that are not connected to the product or company. Get some newspaper or magazine reviews on it. See WP:WBA on the sections on impartial tone. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 20:01, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

AngusWOOF, Understood. It seems for new services or products that don't have much maturity that could be a stumbling block for creating an article. (talk) 20:08, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Michael Cammarata

Hi,

I have edited the draft of Draft:Michael Cammarata by incorporating your suggestions. I have also filtered out reference and have only included the ones which were neutral and detailed. Reference number 8 - NASDAQ, I am not totally sure about, if you want I can remove that. Please let me know if this is OK or if you have any other improvement points. Thanking you. 103.27.231.148 (talk) 15:14, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

AngusWOOF - I wanted to check if you have any views on the Draft:Michael Cammarata. Kindly let me know if you need any other modifications. Thanking you.103.27.231.247 (talk) 16:31, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

About Draft:Markov constant (Diophantine approximation)

Thanks for informing me of the problems of my draft article. There are a few things I would like to ask as a maths pro (my username translates to "Lord of Math"):

Firstly, the draft I wrote was intended for mathematicians, the object in question itself is intrinsically technical and laypeople is unlikely to come across this term from normal math books. So do I still need to provide (at least some) explanation for some terms? Because I wrote this draft based on the style of Lagrange number.
Besides, Markov number, Markov constant and Markov spectrum are actually different types of things - a sequence of integers, a function on numbers and a set of real numbers respectively - so I think it is quite easy to distinguish between the three. Also, I already put the term "Diophantine approximation" on the title, and the other two items are also unrelated to Diophantine approximation. So by your comment "Please indicate how this is different from Markov number...", how do I proceed?
Finally, do you know an admin who excels in math? I would like to know one.

Thanks. 數神 (talk) 01:46, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

數神, the reason I asked why they were different was because the article started talking about Markov numbers in bold. I would check the history of the related articles and see who has been editing it the most and is still active. They can help you from there. As far as AFC reviewing, we need to know how the term is notable so we need external news sources, journals, or papers that discuss it and that are not coming from the originating research group. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 02:41, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

AngusWOOF Okay, I guess that was a typo; I am also not sure if the sources I cited were sufficient and high-quality. 數神 (talk) 03:22, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:IRS and WP:GNG for reliable sources. But like I said, we need sources that discuss the use the term that aren't from the person or group who might have coined the term. Markov chain and Markov process are well known in the community. I just don't know about the constant. There's only one paper so far from E Pelantová that makes use of the term and not much else. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 04:48, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

AngusWOOF Okay, Markov Chain is actually unrelated to Markov constant - they are, in fact, different concepts. As I said before, this new item is related to "Diophantine approximation", and that is not related to Markov chains/processes. Plus, the books that I cited also include the use of the term. Anyway, the amount of available scholarly articles is (slightly) limited, and authors sometimes name this same item differently. Reading through WP:N, I suppose this subject is notable enough. 數神 (talk) 05:18, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

數神, I don't see an entry for the Markov constant in MathWorld, the website that you used for the similar constants. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:37, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 09:04:00, 21 November 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by SimonC404

SimonC404 (talk · contribs)
- Draft:David Clutterbuck (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello - thanks for your input re https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:David_Clutterbuck Could you eloborate please re _ "The biography section still needs to be referenced, even if it's to offline sources." What factual / opinion items do you believe need referencing ?

Thanks,

SimonC404 (talk) 09:04, 21 November 2019 (UTC)SimonC404SimonC404 (talk) 09:04, 21 November 2019 (UTC) SimonC404 (talk) 09:04, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

SimonC404, there are whole paragraphs in that biography section that aren't referenced to anything. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:35, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

KKCG declined / Karel Komarek review pending

Hi AngusWOOF, thanks for the explanation of KKCG declined, I will prepare more relialible sources for KKCG article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:KKCG

I have another question, I sent "Karel Komarek" for review at 8th August, but the article is still pending for review (the first information was 6 weeks, now it is 4 month).

Is there any possibility to find out in what order is this article? Because this trend shows that article would be never published:)

Thank you so much, Marthy007 (talk) 12:44, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Marthy007, you can look at WP:AFC. Articles can be reviewed in any order. Some AFC reviewers like to tackle the really old submissions, and others the really new ones. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:37, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the image restoration for the List of Toriko episodes

Hello again. I have a concern about restoring the previous image to the List of Toriko episodes. Since it was deleted as per this discussion, should we restore it, take it to WP:Deletion review or replace it with a promotional poster for now? Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 09:06, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Lord Sjones23, it's up to you. DVD would be okay for List of episodes or the (TV series) draft. I would go with the manga covers for the Toriko franchise/manga side. It sounds like the WP:TV folks would prefer a logo; that would be fine as well. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:39, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

AngusWOOF, I just restored the DVD cover to the article. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 14:18, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

My "Draft:New Moon (EP)"

Please please please do not delete my page. I spend so much times to find the news sources and edit the information. Please take a look at my new edits to see if they met your requirements yet. Thank you in advance and please support the group. Thinh Vü Düc 18:20, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thinh Vü Düc, declining is not the same as a request for deletion WP:MFD I don't see it in danger of being deleted. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:55, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Prezzee

Hey there. Would you mind taking a look at this draft if it's not too much of a hassle? Davykamanzi → talk • contribs • alter ego 10:19, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Injury Reserve (album)

Just an FYI, I deleted Injury Reserve (album) per your CSD request. Feel free to move the draft when ready. --Michael Greiner 20:11, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Greiner, thanks! :) AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 20:15, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Google Code-In 2019 is coming - please mentor some documentation tasks!

Hello,

Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.

I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org, so we can invite you in!

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

If you have any questions, please let us know at google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org.

Thank you!

--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:58, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Concert_Seasons_of_Bagheria

Thanks for reviewing my draft. It's my first-ever attempt to create a new page on Wikipedia and that's great you offered how to improve the article. I agree with your comments that notability should be expressed in a bolder way. Moreover, when I came across this topic, I actually thought it's more like a local event stuff. But then I delved into this, searched for mentions in more sources, and it appeared to be quite a big project held for several years and far from a single event, that I thought it deserved to be described here. So now thanks to your comments I paid more attention to what notability is and how it needs to be shown, and I've just added more external sources, including Giornale di Sicilia, for example, which is definitely a notable one as one of big popular media. Let me know if it is good to get approved now, please, because it looks like it does, so I am resubmitting it now. Thank you. Avbgok (talk) 10:02, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Avbgok, please add the national or outside-the-region coverage of the event; That will help show notability. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:19, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

AngusWOOF, I've found and added several larger-scale references in addition to existing - coverage on Agenparl, an independent national agency for political, economic and social information based in Rome, Association of theaters of Tuscany's Pistoia region, and cultural ministry's website covering its second season as it went under its auspices within the framework of the European Year of Cultural Heritage according to the related designation by the European Commission. Looks much better and its notability is more understandable when it is shown like this, I agree. Great experience for me to better understand how it all should work here, in fact. Please do the final check when you get a chance just in case. Thank you. Avbgok (talk) 19:33, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft: Suryakant_Chintaman_Chafekar

Hi @AngusWOOF, I made the required changes you suggested. For the Coi, I have already me tioned it on my home page. Please check and let me know. I have resubmitted the article again. Manas.chafekar (talk) 16:55, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft: Paul J. Tesar

November 22, 2019: Hi AngusWOOF, thank you for your helpful feedback for construction of this draft. The changes have been made and references improved to include news articles rather than primary citations. Please let me know if it now fits Wikipedia standards. Thank you- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marissascavuzzo (talk • contribs) 22 November 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Joseph A. Camp

Good morning, and happy thanksgiving. I just corrected the concerns that you had with the article "Draft:Joseph A. Camp" and resubmitted it for consideration. Thank you for your constructive critique. After adding additional verifiable citations to the entry it does indeed appear to be a more reliable and notable article. I had previously submitted the article which was declined as a placeholder. Joseph is a complicated individual because his satire is often not connected to his birthname. Some of his satire is spread across non-reliable sources such as third party blogs and the like, created by others. I am working to chronicle what we have as far as what we KNOW is Joseph, but not connected by name to him. I believe the resubmitted article is enough to get submitted to the article page, and I can continue to work on the edits thereafter. The cited sources are news, court filings, federal agency documents etc. I removed much unsourced details for the time being and kept it pretty basic as I have seen on other entries. Thank for the feedback, the amendments truly did make the article better. ~~Allen — Preceding unsigned comment added by Denvernativ (talk • contribs) 17:22, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Issues related to my article draft

Hello, I want to address your review on my draft[[23]] that I have tried to write it according to Wikipedia article guidelines, with proper referencing. I think I have added the information relevant to the topic, which is not plagiarized from any article or journal but a thorough research information, in a neutral point of view. I have also read different Wikipedia articles to see the Wikipedia style, they are written in similar manner as I have written my draft. I request you to kindly review and pin point the mistake or short-coming of the draft in particular, as now I have made some changes. Lastly, it needs to be published asap as it is part of my graded assignment. As I am new to Wikipedia, I did not know much how to communicate with you, that is why I am writing you here. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amnakhan28 (talk • contribs) 17:44, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Amnakhan28, you need to add a History and development section for the draft, and remove the Conclusion section. This would explain how this work has come about. When did it start? Who popularized it? How has it been adopted by the medical community? Maybe add a Uses section? The Conclusion section reeks of WP:NOTESSAY and should be removed. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:51, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Amnakhan28, your grade should not be based on whether the article is published. Have your teacher read WP:INSTRUCTORS If you need it peer-reviewed by people in your class they can do that on the talk page. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:52, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your answer. Kindly check the draft now, I have changed it as you suggested. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amnakhan28 (talk • contribs) 18:39, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Resubmitting my draft article for resubmission

Hi @AngusWOOF,

First of all apologies for the issue I may have created that led to undoing the revision. Not sure what happened there. I have resubmitted my article that you rejected on 4th Oct 2019. I have already declared the CoI on my user page and have made the changes suggested by you. Please have a look. Manas.chafekar (talk) 20:36, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

My last name in the title of my profile page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Trace_Borroughs (still a draft) is spelled wrong. How do I fix that? Thank you.