User talk:DrStrauss

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user has rollback rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user has pending changes reviewer rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user has new page reviewer rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user has page mover rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user has file mover rights on the English Wikipedia
This user has extended confirmed rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user has AutoWikiBrowser permissions on the English Wikipedia.
Trout this user
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ubaid1salfi (talk | contribs) at 16:30, 7 July 2017. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Usertalksuperwitharchives

DrStrauss talk 20:27, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

HEY DrStrauss- could you help me get my page approved - it keeps getting rejected - apparently it sounds like an article and isnt correct for this forum. You declined it about 2 days ago - if you could point me in the right direction on which bit needs changing and where i am going wrong, it would be greatly appreciated - This is the 6th time i have tried to get the article approved just feel like i am going around in circles when the whole article appears factual and has links to back it up. Thanks in advance Michael

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:1.61_London

Hi,

I'm seeking better understand and address the reason the following page was declined as an article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Chittoor_V._Ramamoorthy

It seems like there are many specific publications, awards and one of the largest bodies of scientific publications l seen listed (and in top science journals). What can be done to improve this article? It would be very time consuming to reference each article (they can be found in google scholar or found on a google search), but it can be done if that resolves the problem.

Just looking for some direction on what to do next.

Thank you, Rgnod (talk) 10:22, 3 July 2017 (UTC) (Username: RGNOD)[reply]

@Rgnod: you're right, I meant to decline on the grounds of neutral point of view, I've now rectified that. You need to remove phrases like "looking to the future" because they're subjective and biased which is against our policies. DrStrauss talk 11:11, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

approving the page of Jayathma Wickramanayake- UNSG envoy on youth

Dear DrStrauss,

I'm the campaign manager of the incoming UN secretary Generals Envoy on youth jayathma Wickramanayake. We noticed that her draft wiki page has been rejected by few people, last was you. I would like to request you kindly to publish the page as she is holds the most important youth development role in the world today as UN SG's envoy on youth. https://www.un.org/sg/en/content/sg/personnel-appointments/2017-06-20/ms-jayathma-wickramanayake-sri-lanka-envoy-youth

All her work is widely cited and specially on UN data sheets.

Yours

Sanka — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sankachandima (talk • contribs) 10:56, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sankachandima, I'm not going to approve the draft until it has enough independent, reliable sources that give Wickramanayake significant coverage are cited to verify what's said in the article and to establish notability. The tone of the draft needs fixing as it is not written neutrally, something which we require. I've also created a userpage for you with a conflict of interest declaration per your message above. Thanks, DrStrauss talk 11:08, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

12:35:09, 3 July 2017 review of submission by Devendra Kalkar


Hi DrStrauss,

Thank you for taking time out to review this article. Can you please provide a feedback on Draft:Arunava Chaudhuri. Also, can you please offer suggestions to get this article through the AFC process.

Thanks

Hi Devendra Kalkar, we need more reliable sources that are independent of the subject and give him significant coverage. Currently, your draft has some of these but more are needed. Find any sources which fit this description and cite them. DrStrauss talk 12:47, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Move Land Securities to Landsec

Hi DrStrauss

Thank you for taking the time to review the change of name for Land Securities to Landsec. Could you provide me with some feedback on the decision not to move the page and perhaps suggest any changes that could be made to allow the move to go ahead?

Thanks

Mattbur (talk) 13:00, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mattbur, apologies, I should have accepted that one, I was looking at several discussions in tabs got two mixed up. I've moved it now. DrStrauss talk 13:04, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks DrStrauss for moving the page, really appreciate it. Do you know when that change will be live?
Thanks
Mattbur (talk) 14:11, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Mattbur: it's live now. DrStrauss talk 14:15, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much!
Mattbur (talk) 14:22, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

13:38:08, 3 July 2017 review of submission by Greatbritishstyle


Hi DrStrauss, thank you for reviewing the BVG submission, and for your comment. As you pointed out, the addition of stub tags to the article was the only change made.

I felt the article would benefit from some help from the wikipedia community, as well as additional input from myself. The article's initial reviewer TheSandDoctor agreed a stub would be an appropriate way to do this, so he added a stub tag to it and I resubmitted as a stub.

If I’ve followed an incorrect process or if you believe the article is not acceptable as a stub, please advise so I can amend. Greatbritishstyle (talk) 13:38, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(They are referring to this discussion on my talk page --TheSandDoctor (talk) 16:48, 3 July 2017 (UTC))[reply]
Hi Greatbritishstyle, I agree with TheSandDoctor (thanks for the link) in that a stub tag would help expansion because people roaming the stub categories will expand it. However, there's a certain level which must be met before a draft can go from a draft to an work-in-progress article. The idea of the draftspace is to help sort out the issues before they get into the mainspace. DrStrauss talk 18:21, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I somehow linked the wrong discussion on my talk page, anyhow, the WikiLink is now correct. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 22:37, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi DrStrauss, thanks for getting back to me on this (and thanks TheSandDoctor for your continued help). Current feedback is that it needs some expansion, which it's agreed adding a stub template will help with. Please can you advise on what other issues need addressing so the article can move from the draft space into the stub categories for help with expansion? Thanks again, I appreciate your help with this. Greatbritishstyle (talk) 11:05, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

16:28:01, 3 July 2017 review of submission by ComPol


Hi Dr. Strauss, I hope you are doing well. I just came across this page and found it very interesting, so I wanted to implement some of the recommendations you have made for it to get improved. I hope you like these few changes and will approve it or give some insights on how better improve it. Thank you very much for your time. ComPol (talk) 16:28, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ComPol, I'm glad you found my advice useful. I see you have submitted it so either myself or another reviewer will come and have a look in due course. DrStrauss talk 18:17, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for your willingness to help me out on getting this article published correctly and more importantly, on improving its content so that it can be useful for others. I appreciate any assistance or guidance on getting this job done just like you have been doing so far. Again, thanks for your support Dr. Strauss and the quick reply.ComPol (talk) 20:21, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@ComPol: that's fine, I might give it a copyedit myself in the morning. DrStrauss talk 20:24, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That's absolutely awesome Dr. Strauss and very kind of you! I wish there were some mechanism for us to give a nice review/rating to people who are really committed to contribute and make a lasting impact on the improvement of this Wikipedia community, people like you Dr. Strauss. Again, greatly appreciate it.ComPol (talk) 20:36, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

looking in, Dr. S.'s original decline was correct--I declined it again, because the notability is so borderline ("Intirim director') and the accomplishments listed so trivial (He met some notable people) that the article would be quickly deleted in main space. I can't advise working on it further until he publishes somethig really important. DGG ( talk ) 01:04, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, DrStrauss and ComPol, and DGG. I was just about to sit down and weed out the promotional looking content from the page, but it looks like ComPol was faster. I was watching this conversation, and I'm glad you started a process in discussing this draft, although it has been cut short by DGG. Do you, or DGG have any suggestions? I see that the section about the Odebrecht case has been deleted, and I think that was a large-enough case, and as I learned, Manuel Jimenez's complaint file was partially based on Vicente Romero's publicly available analysis... maybe that could help, for it's a bit more than just "meeting with some notable people"? FZsolt (talk) 05:31, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi DGG, thanks for the attention you've given this. I'll nevertheless give it a copyedit just so we've only got one issue. DrStrauss talk 08:18, 4 July 2017 (UTC) Update: DGG, might you cast your eye over my copyedit and see what you think? Obviously, it still doesn't fix the source issues you flagged up. diff DrStrauss talk 09:01, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you to everybody for all your advice and support, especially to Dr. Strauss for being such a professional editor by showing respect when mentioning the parts that needs improvements. Dr. Strauss we really appreciate your willingness to help on making these changes from minute one. Thanks!ComPol (talk) 04:16, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dr. Strauss would you kindly take a look (copyedit) at the article before I submit it one more time? If yes, I will be greatly thankful. Thanks for all your support to improve this wonderful Wikipedia community.ComPol (talk) 16:25, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yoshiro Taniguchi

Note for record: question pertains to earlier discussion here which was incorrectly archived. DrStrauss talk 08:23, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello - I'm not certain whether you saw my reply. I have made the corrections to this article and would ask for your reconsideration. Thank you. ChristopherC. Gelber (talk) 20:02, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Looking in, C. Gelber, it seems very likely to me that this is copied from some other publication--the style is considerably more formal and literary than would be appropriate here. For example "This time, well-trained and full of new ideas, Taniguchi could lead the efforts to start again, not only to help build a new city but also to find a bridge to the obliterated culture of his country’s past, its history, its architectural traditions, it’s unique character." or "By the time he entered Tokyo University in 1925, he had already undergone the first cycle of this path, watching the old architectural world of Tokyo which had filled his childhood sketch book give way to the new revivalist style ..." It makes the sort of explicit judgements of the work which is normal in printed work where the author is assumed to be an authority, but which we call Original Research and consider unacceptable. If it has been copied or even paraphrased, it must be rewritten from scratch. In any case it needs to be rewritten.
But it does show notability, and I do not see why that should have been given as a reason for rejection. DGG ( talk ) 04:08, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi DGG, yep, it appears that way now but before the weasel words were removed, for me, it was difficult to establish notability but that's probably just the way my brain works! Often, bio and npov rejections go hand-in-hand anyway but thanks for the note. DrStrauss talk 08:21, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Rosemarie Truman

You quite correctly declined the draft, but the main problem is that is is a pure advertisement for her , written with blatant COI by an editor named CAIStartups, which happens to be the name of her company!. I've blocked the editor for promotional username, and listed the article for speedy deletion--or, if it turns out to be necessary, for MfD. DGG ( talk ) 02:43, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Just to note, I think that it would be better if stuff that was notable but was advertising in draftspace should be cleaned up, but whatever. Anyways, I think that doing this probably won't help DrS at all (although I hope that he has got the message that non-notable stuff should be tagged for G11 if they are eligible). RileyBugz会話投稿記録 03:05, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Myself, I think the reminders are obviously necessary. Both notable and on notable stuff should be tagged for promotionalism is it applies. And Draft:The Governor's Institutes of Vermont was a very close paraphrase and I've listed it for G12 copyvio. It had already been listed once before for copyvio !!. DGG ( talk ) 03:58, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

06:30:56, 4 July 2017 review of submission by Wes Sherman


Hi I am trying to get this page out on wiki but I am having a hard time with submitting enough references. What type of references is wiki looking for? Do I need to link a source for everything posted? Not everything posted is able to be found online as it is too old to verify online.

I just need some help into the right direction so I can fix this.

(talk page stalker) @Wes Sherman: Hello! I would recommend for you to read WP:ARTIST which outlines the requirements for a creative professional to be on Wikipedia. These requirements then must be backed up using reliable sources, mainly from national news organisations. Take a look at these three links, they will help you identify if there is sufficient sourcing present. I will say, that if the subject of the article has not had a significant amount of coverage from national news organisations (not student papers or local/industry newspapers) it is unlikely they will pass the General Notability Guidelines. Hope this helps. Nicnotesay hello!contribs 08:24, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Wes Sherman, I don't think that's the key problem. The key problem is that the artist has not yet met the key requirements of WP:CREATIVE that there be works in the permanent collection of a major museum, or substantial critical discussion. or does it seem to meet the GNG.--but I don't see why newspaper sources are zany more important than the any other possible sources. DGG ( talk ) 19:38, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding declined movement of the draft page of Vivek Shanbhag

Dear DrStrauss,

Please let me know what I can do to make my entry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Vivek_Shanbhag read neutral. Though I have provided most of the internet links available on the topic in the reference section, will adding a few more citations help? Or are there any specific statements that need to be removed?

sanaha (talk) 13:44, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Sanaha.jar: Hello, Wikipedia:Writing_better_articles#Information_style_and_tone might be useful to you. It is not about adding more citations, but rather the style of writing. Take a look at other wikipedia articles and you will see that they are brief and direct. The section The journal served as a platform that encouraged intra-cultural dialogue and served as a launchpad to many new writers and translators adding to the diversity in writing, thus, nurturing new talent is unreferenced and clearly not encyclopedic - it serves only to promote the subject of the article. Give the link a read and let me know if you are still uncertain about the style and tone required. Best, Nicnotesay hello!contribs 14:39, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Sanaha/jar, there's an additional problem. This is a Biography of a liviing person, and the references must be added to the text at the appropriate places to support the essential facts, not just listed at the bottom. . (there's no problem of establishing notability, because of the NYT review, but the references need to show it properly). For help with referencing , see WP:REFBEGIN DGG ( talk ) 19:48, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Chemicalize

Hi DrStrauss. You declined Draft:Chemicalize as an AfC submission the other day, but the same content appears to have been copied-and-pasted into the mainspace as part of a page move changing Chemicalize.org to Chemicalize. I understand that AfC is not mandatory, but I'm not sure if this normally how things are done for declined submissions such as this. Would you mind taking a look at the article and reviewing it to see if it's worth trying to clean up or if it needs to be moved back to the draft namespace? Thanks in advance. -- Marchjuly (talk) 14:01, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Marchjuly: I have PRODed this. As you know yourself this article is pretty messy with the page move, so a CSD may be declined. You are welcome to support the PROD by writing underneath the PROD {prod2} using two curly braces on each side. Nicnotesay hello!contribs 14:48, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Question about declined page 2

Hi,

I'm seeking better understand and address the reason the following page was declined as an article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Van_Bemmelen

It seems to me that quite a few independent references are used. Should they all move to footnotes?

Furthermore, a few Dutch families have a similar WIKI-page, like the Boissevain family, Van Eeghen (family), Kolff, Tetrode (family), or Fentener van Vlissingen. It seems logical that my page could be added to this list.

Could you assist me in imporving the page so it is useful for the Wiki-readers?

Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.82.199.142 (talk) 14:30, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@84.82.199.142: It may be a very good idea to move all the references to the footer by using in-text citations (WP:CITE will give you a good idea on how to do this most effectively). Subsequently the article may need to be re-written as the headings are not appropriate for the style of Wikipedia. Let me know on my talkpage when you have moved all the citations to the bottom and I can help you with your article then. Nicnotesay hello!contribs 14:57, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
84.82.199.142 (and Nicnote, though these changes would indeed make a better article, I do not see how they would help with the fundamental problem, of it not being clear how the family as such is notable, as distinct from the individual members listed there. DGG ( talk ) 19:34, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Question about declined page

Hi

Thank you for reviewing our Researchfish page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Researchfish). I'm a little confused as to what else I can do regarding references - I added the external validated references since the previous review:

Medical Research Council: About Researchfish https://www.mrc.ac.uk/funding/guidance-for-mrc-award-holders/researchfish/about-researchfish/ Jump up ^ Research Councils UK: About Researchfish http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/research/researchoutcomes/researchfish/ Jump up ^ Researchfish: A forward look. Challenges and opportunities for using Researchfish to support research assessment https://www.kcl.ac.uk/sspp/policy-institute/publications/Researchfish%20A%20forward%20look.pdf Jump up ^ ORCID Member List https://orcid.org/members/001G000001nDwx4IAC-researchfish

Can you please advise?

Thanks for your help.

81.159.79.108 (talk) 14:50, 4 July 2017 (UTC)Michael Francis 04/07/2017[reply]

@81.159.79.108: Hello, hope you are well. Taking a look at this draft it seems that it is still somewhat promotional, but nethertheless, fundamentally it does not pass the General Notability Guidelines. WP:NWEB outlines the requirements on Wikipedia for web content. There is a lack of independent sources from widely acclaimed international news organisations or journals. A source from an organisation funding the project is not independent. The sources you have provided only demonstrate a narrow notability of the web content, which means that it would not be able to pass WP:GNG, and thus did not pass the Articles for Creation process. Similarly, companies that are published in trade journals do not demonstrate wider-scale notability. Hope this helps. Nicnotesay hello!contribs 15:09, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - I think there has been a misunderstanding here regarding the sources - they do not fund Researchfish - they are our customers who use our online platform to track the outcomes of their own funded projects - please can our submission be re-reviewed in light of this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.142.151.234 (talk) 09:07, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Muslim Women's National Network Australia

I do not understand in what way this draft was as you state not "written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article" and not "written from a neutral point of view". Please take more care when reviewing articles by new editors. This article has now been moved to article space (not by me), and I do not see why you rejected it. Please explain your thinking. PamD 20:41, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi PamD, thank you for your message. I generally find drafts about organisations which state their mission goals in numbered points to come across as promotional but I can see why some may think that this doesn't violate WP:NPOV in itself. I'll take as much care as I believe is required when reviewing drafts and I intend no disrespect by the following comment but you're not an AFC participant and while WP:NPOV is a general policy, its application to the draft space often involves marginal decisions. I'd also like to put on record my disagreement with the edit summary used by the mover. We have a backlog to eliminate and because I have been reviewing drafts in such high numbers it follows that there will be more complaints. My talk page is usually a complaints desk so please don't look at it and think it reflects my overall editing standards. DrStrauss talk 20:56, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I think that quoting an organisation's stated aims, and attributing them clearly to the organisation, is not at all promotional but is giving a very clear description of the organisation. I do not see anything "not written in the formal tone...". Correct, I am not an AfC participant, but I see many many new articles each week while stub-sorting and I aim to help and encourage good faith new editors rather than mystifying and upsetting them. The AfC proccess has discouraged a conscientious good faith editor from trying to create any more new articles: not the intended outcome. PamD 21:11, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi PamD, if a new user can be driven away by legitimate, well-worded criticism of their actions whilst criticising the way Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion by dubbing their contributions victim to systemic bias then we can't do anything about that. Wikipedia is a collaborative project and if an editor is convinced to leave by such a minor setback one must question how convicted they are to the spirit of the project in the first place. DrStrauss talk 21:16, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
PamD, quoting the goals concisely is not promotional, but the overall content of the article strikes me as advocacy. I doubt I would have accepted it in its present form. I'm looking to see if some cuts or rewriting will help. DGG ( talk ) 01:26, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

22:44:13, 4 July 2017 review of submission by Ghostorchid


Hi DrStrauss. Thanks for taking the time to review my article on James Heneage. I've added some more references from mainstream UK Papers including the Times and The Mail. There are other articles with the subject as the main lead, such as article in the Guardian that uses him in the headline and the lead of the article, but it felt convoluted to add them and I'm wary of adding too many citations as per the guidelines. I've also added his Random House Group Award for Outstanding Contribution to Bookselling, and included a quote from the judges about "His achievement will leave an ideological and emotional imprint on this industry,". I would also draw attention to the article from the broadsheet The Telegraph (the final citation) which is specifically about him 'Odd man out in a cut-throat world' which I used to glean the biographic details. I feel that this fulfils the requirement for significant coverage, along with the demonstration of his chairing and judging high profile book awards, so I am submitting for re-review. I'm very grateful for your help and guidance.

Ghostorchid (talk) 22:44, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ghostorchid, I'll take a look at it now. DrStrauss talk 14:43, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Update: another reviewer has declined the article since you left this message, you might want to ask them as they are the most recent handler. DrStrauss talk 14:43, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi DrStrauss Thanks, I've done that now. Still new to this, and finding my feet, so I appreciate your help. Ghostorchid (talk) 19:44, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Chostorchid: no problem, come back if you have anything else you want to ask! DrStrauss talk 19:45, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Francis Bellamy

I declined the speedy deletion of Francis Bellamy because http://sullivan-county.com/id3/bellamy.htm was apparently copied from Wikipedia. Note the "Ref. Wiki" at the end of the article there. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 23:37, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

trout Self-trout. DrStrauss talk 06:49, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Submission of Draft:René_B._Azurin

Hi DrStrauss,

Thank you for reviewing the article Draft:René_B._Azurin. User DGG has removed the quotes from the submission and I've resubmitted it for review. Kindly review, if you have the time.

Again, thank you. Peppa.santos (talk) 00:19, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Peppa.santos, I see that TheSandDoctor has recently declined it, I'm pinging them in so they can add additional comments if needed. DrStrauss talk 14:45, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! Peppa.santos (talk) 01:37, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

02:14:28, 5 July 2017 review of submission by Cadotc


I feel like this article has many sources, so I guess I want a clarification of the reasoning of "not having adequate sources". Does this mean that are not enough sources quantitatively because if this is the case I feel like all the facts presented are backed by a source, and that the sources used are varied. If by inadequate sources you mean that the sources themselves do not seem reliable, these sources all come from credible places like universities and established organizations and peer reviewed scientific articles. Please point to any specific places in the article that you think need a source backing or any specific sources that you think are not sufficient.

Ok, so I see that sources must be independent so I guess I couldn't use infomation from the SOCCOM website? Cadotc (talk) 02:14, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

10:24:09, 5 July 2017 review of submission by Bodank1994


hello DrStrauss, kindly aid me in the refrencing style using the footnotes you recommended

hello Dr Strauss, i have tried as much as possible to get this article Draft:Francis Addai-nimoh which was rejected by you on July 3 of this month citing the fact that i should used footnotes..i want you to kindly aid me to help get this article through it has been a month already. please aid me out — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bodank1994 (talk • contribs) 10:38, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Bodank1994, thank you for your message. On Wikipedia, especially in biographies of living persons, we require claims made about things to be sourced. This means that you need to find an independent, reliable reference and cite it using our formatting standards. We require citations to be placed inline next to the claim they are verifying. WP:REFB, WP:ILC and WP:BLP explain these concepts in more detail. Your draft currently lacks inline references which is why it was declined. Thanks, DrStrauss talk 14:50, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

14:41:59, 5 July 2017 review of submission by Devopam


hello @DrStrauss:, could you please elaborate on the reliable sources aspect here when you get time. It will help to understand the issue and subsequent correction where needed. Devopam (talk) 14:41, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Devopam, we need independent media sources that give significant coverage to Bhowmick to establish notability. DrStrauss talk 14:49, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

15:09:53, 5 July 2017 review of submission by NataliaWozniak


Hello DrStrauss, thank you for taking your time and reviewing the article about tenor saxophone player Jimmy Roberts. I would like to ask for your help and get some information about the neccessary changes that need to be made to improve the article. This is the first Wikipedia article I'm creating and I've been looking at the articles of other instrumental musicians to make sure my references are good enough and since https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jake_Clemons is an instrumental musician as well I looked at the references from this page and thought that the sources I found will be good enough. I found additional information about the artist at http://www.allmusic.com/artist/jimmy-roberts-mn0000088777/credits. Could you let me know if this source is reliable enough and would be a good reference source? NataliaWozniak (talk) 15:09, 5 July 2017 (UTC)NataliaWozniak[reply]

Hi NataliaWozniak, half of the references are to affiliated sources. One link in an "external links" section to an official website is fine, but using them as inline references is useless for establishing notability. DrStrauss talk 14:52, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File mover granted

Hello DrStrauss. Your account has been granted the "filemover" user right, either following a request for it or due to a clear need for the ability to move files. Please take a moment to review Wikipedia:File mover for more information on this user right and under what circumstances it is okay to move files. When you move a file please remember to update any links to the new name as well! If you do not want the file mover right anymore, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Thank you, and happy editing! Widr (talk) 18:45, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In reference to:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shraeya Srinivasan

Hi, Shreaya is an upcoming national level athlete and just finished her high school. That's why you see lots of articles, references from the local newspaper and her school. She's just starting to get regional and national attention as a champion and there are now new references from the reputed Boston Globe, Boston Herald.

Also since most of the articles are from single local source, its easier to verify as well. Let me know if you want the journalist contact and i can have it arranged for verification. Srinisankar (talk) 19:10, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Srinisankar, can you cite the journalist's work using our inline system? A walkthrough can be found here. DrStrauss talk 14:54, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
(@DrStrauss:) Ah yes i've used Cite to refer to all the sources and the journalists. You can see that section under References there. Pls let me know if you need any additional information. Srinisankar (talk) 18:41, 6 July 2017 (UTC)srinisankar[reply]
@Srinisankar: well, you need to put absolutely everything about Srinivasan in the article to show her notability. Everything. If there's more, then there may be a chance of preventing it from being deleted, in its current state, it's not got much of a chance. DrStrauss talk 19:18, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Thanks a lot for all your support! ComPol (talk) 21:38, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@ComPol: wow, thank you! And anytime! DrStrauss talk 09:27, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Don't mention it! Quite well deserved! — Preceding unsigned comment added by ComPol (talk • contribs)

A Draft needing your great expertise!

Would you take another look at the article because I made a few changes after your recommendations? Your feedback were very helpful. I added another session by neutrally highlighting the subject's notability on the media (prestigious websites). What I did was to basically highlight his involvement on the transnational Odebrecht bribery scandal investigation and how his papers were crucial to file the first lawsuit against corrupt politicians in Dominican Republic. http://wikivisually.com/wiki/Draft:Geovanny_Vicente_Romero

Draft

Hi, Can you please take another look at my articles. I need to publish it quickly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pierrelias (talk • contribs) 06:44, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, what's your draft called? DrStrauss talk 09:13, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Pierrelias: are you referring to Draft:Dominique Lemay? DrStrauss talk 14:55, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi DrStrauss, I have updated the tone of my article, Draft: Dominique Lemay. Can you please take a look. I need to get it done quickly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pierrelias (talk • contribs)
@Pierrelias: your draft is in the queue and myself or another reviewer will look at it as soon as we can. May I ask why you're so keen to get it published so quickly? DrStrauss talk 18:53, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Because i have been working on it for over a month now :/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pierrelias (talk • contribs) 11:10, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Re submission of Emtec Draft

Hello DrStrauss, I have been working on the Emtec draft for Wikipedia. We have edited the draft numerous times based on feedback and removed press release links since they were cited as not reliable. Can you tell me how many "reliable sources" are needed to validate the existence of the organization? We have provided numerous links to partner pages where we are listed. We are not a large IT services organization like an Accenture who gets articles written about them... so need some help if you can to understand what we need to get it approved. We have modeled our page after other competitors that are currently live and listed. We have seen other orgs with minimal info that are approved. Any help would be appreciated.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Emtec

My ID is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Devers9

Devers9 (talk) 12:23, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Devers9,
Throughout your message you often refer to yourself in the plural and imply that you are employed by Emtec e.g. we are not a large... organization. I therefore must ask you to read our terms of use in relation to conflicts of interest which can be found here. I would strongly advise you to place {{UserboxCOI|1=Draft=Emtec}} in your userpage to declare said COI.
The reliable, independent sources that I was referring to are not needed to verify the existence of Emtec but to establish its notability. Most companies are not notable enough to meet Wikipedia's criteria for corporate inclusion so you need to show that Emtec has received significant coverage from multiple major independent, reliable media sources.
You may find the following links helpful: WP:COI, WP:NCORP, WP:42 and WP:DISCLOSE.
DrStrauss talk 15:04, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:U&I (NGO)

I had posted an article on Draft:U&I (NGO). It was declined on the context that it doesn't have references. I have added references at the end of the page, as bibliography. Could you please tell me ways to improve my article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by NandakumarSG (talk • contribs) 12:48, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi NandakumarSG, we strongly recommend using inline citations, not just links at the end. Please see WP:REFB and WP:CITE to learn how you can make inline citations. DrStrauss talk 15:08, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you sir! — Preceding unsigned comment added by NandakumarSG (talk • contribs) 16:26, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

14:01:11, 6 July 2017 review of submission by 213.8.204.22


Dear Dr. Strauss: I have improved the submission for Yitzchak Mayer by adding citation references. All of the information in the Early Life section (not just the first line) comes from the Jerusalem Post article I have referenced. I didn't think it appropriate to cite the same source multiple times. There are many other sources for this information, but they are articles in Hebrew, French and German. Should I cite these foreign language articles as well? Ambassador Mayer is a prominent Israeli public figure whose work is now available in English for the first time. As a result, I believe it appropriate that he have an English Wiki page. 213.8.204.22 (talk) 14:01, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @213.8.204.22:, we generally require extensive inline citations in biographies of living people next to all claims made. Don't worry if you cite the same source multiple times, but having other sources to corroborate another is always appreciated. Thanks, DrStrauss talk 15:23, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

16:17:54, 6 July 2017 review of submission by Holdhard


I am not sure what is meant by not able to substantiate the references, I have personally checked those that were possible and indicated where the reference could be found on the internet. As this is my first article I am struggling to make sense of all the requirements so some help would be much appreciated. Short rejections are sometimes not useful to beginners. Many thanks for your help

Hi Holdhard, thank you for your message. The issue with your draft is that it has no references. The headings you have used do reference books but not in the style we usually require. We prefer inline citations next to claims as opposed to the article being structured around the references. The "In Conclusion" section may want cutting out because it is very essay-like. Links that may help are WP:REFB, WP:HOWTOCITE and WP:ESSAY. Thank you. DrStrauss talk 17:28, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Advice

Please advise on proceeding after rejection. Variety.com has 17 million unique monthly visitors (Source: Google Analytics, 2015), IMDB, etc. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Return_to_Timbuktu 103.255.238.168 (talk) 05:41, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Draft review decline clarification

Hi there!

I'm writing to clarify your recent review of this article - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Luminar My second version of it (the one you reviewed) was prepared according to the first reviewer, who asked to use a neutral tone and remove the promotional statements. That's why I replaced all information that could be taken as promotional and left only most informative and basic information, which could be confirmed by the references I was able to find. I didn't add a detailed explanation of all its features, workspaces, details of software etc. in order to avoid the "promotion", which was the main issue in the first version. As I understood your suggestion, the article isn't informative. But I'm afraid that I might cross the line of "promotion" if I add more information about the product. I'll be glad to edit the article once more, but I wanted to ask you how should I do that, to meet your "informativeness" criteria and avoid "promotion".

Please advice. Thank you! (Jenyajc (talk) 08:09, 7 July 2017 (UTC))[reply]

12:52:23, 7 July 2017 review of submission by Abenci


Hi DrStrauss,

Please help me to understand what's wrong with my article and if there is any chance to be able to publish it. Should I remove some references or there are some other conceptual wrong matters?

I used these pages as reference and they look to me even worst:

Thanks,

Alberto

15:13:08, 7 July 2017 review of submission by Human Venue


Many thanks to DrStrauss and other reviewers who have improved this article. HumanVenue has added some suggested edits breaking the over long sections into new sub categories, but very happy to be guided further from those more experienced in article construction. Thank you for your assistance.

Request on 16:30:06, 7 July 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Ubaid1salfi


Hello DrStrauss, Thanks for your review. I have given enough relevant citation for above subjects notability. A person saving people during riots and building a blood bank to serve the humanity is notable in my view. I found some news paper cutouts at https://tajallieshahabblog.wordpress.com/in-news/ which are in regional language but those are not available as archive copy on respective newspaper websites, so kindly suggest me the way to include those as citation. your help is much appreciated. Thanks

Ubaid1salfi (talk) 16:30, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:DrStrauss&oldid=789483300"