Jump to content

User talk:S0091/Archive 5

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1←Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6

Seeking Help. Draft: Gary Hutton

Hello and Happy New Year @S0091. I've admired Gary Hutton's work forever. And Gary's body of work deserves recognition and a Wiki. I've looked at the draft with fresh eyes and added new references that establish notability. Plus, it is quintessential for the interior design indsustry to be covered through their most striking projects. Do the changes now fulfill the goal? Please have a look and let me know what I could do differently.


P.S: This is my first Wiki. I enjoy doing it. And would really like to get a hang of it. SKCOTT (talk) 20:32, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi @SKCOTT you have resubmitted it so another reviewer will take a look. I do strongly suggest listing on the draft's talk page, Draft talk:Gary Hutton, the three best sources that establish notability per the guidelines. See WP:THREE for a guide. If you do that, let me know and I will leave a comment letting the reviewer know to look at the talk page. S0091 (talk) 20:39, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
Hi @S0091,
Thank you for the opportunity to resubmit. 
Clarification:  Gary Hutton is an interior designer who trained as a fine artist.  His main notability and press/media coverage are for interior design. That is likely WP: creative or possibly WP: architect.
His work has been published by notable magazines in every one of the 40 years of his career. We’ve added three best sources that establish notability per the guidelines.
One of your colleagues turned down the submission before we had time to respond to your questions.
Re-stated/resupplied here:
1. This is a recent San Francisco penthouse covered by "Interiors", the leading magazine for interior design professionals: https://www.interiorsdigital.com/interiors/_october_november_2020_/MobilePagedReplica.action?pm=1&folio=62#pg63
2. Gary's book "Art House"-is a best-selling book about his work for a single client. Published by Assouline, the book reprinted in 2017, 2019 and 2021: https://www.assouline.com/products/art-house
3.  Architectural Digest, the leading interior design consumer magazine https://www.architecturaldigest.com/story/chara-schreyers-los-angeles-home This house was republished later in 2019 Phaidon – "Interiors: The Greatest Rooms of the Century"
References Added:  
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Gary_Hutton&action=submit SKCOTT (talk) 11:02, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Hey @S0091,
I'm still getting a hang of all things Wikipedia. The changes reflecting the clarifications above have just been published. Please have a look and let me know what you think? SKCOTT (talk) 15:58, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
Hi @SKCOTT, please post what you outlined above on the draft's talk page (linked above in my original response) so it is available to other reviewers. You can just copy/paste from here to there. When ready, click the resubmit button and another reviewer will take a look. S0091 (talk) 16:15, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
What's outlined above has (also) been addressed to the second reviewer on the talk page. I've hit resubmit. Thank you @S0091 for getting back to us. *Fingers crossed* SKCOTT (talk) 17:34, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Mark Wiens

Hi I resubmitted this but I figured I would ping here as well. It seems to meet WP:GNG. Any chance you could elaborate on the decline rationale. Andre🚐 04:54, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Andrevan, it's been reviewed again and there are some additional comments suggesting to post a note at the AfC helpdesk to see if an admin will accept it given it is protected. S0091 (talk) 15:48, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
Thanks. Yes, it is being discussed there Andre🚐 15:50, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Spade and Grave

Happy New Year. Just wanted to let you know I fixed the issues you'd highlighted with the Spade and Grave article.

All my best, Morsehead (talk) 15:43, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Morsehead there is a backlog drive going on so hopefully it will not take too long for it to be reviewed. Happy New Year to you as well! S0091 (talk) S0091 (talk) 15:49, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Happy 2023

I hope it's a great year for you. Take care and thanks for all your great work S0091. FloridaArmy (talk) 07:50, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

William Mabson

Hey S0091, since the article creator is blocked and can't edit the article (and of the course the article WAS on a notable subject), maybe we can help them out a little--if you can add to or improve the article, I'd appreciate it. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 16:42, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

@Drmies oh yeah, it is not uncommon for me and other AfC reviewers to do at least some sprucing on FA's drafts before accepting them. I will work on it over the couple days or so. S0091 (talk) 16:50, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Charge to 100!

Greetings. I write to ask how I can make the article acceptable. I read what you said to me, and deleted all the unnecessary things that were in the article. However, I don't know how to undo the unsubmitting. Thank you so much anyway. Fico Puricelli (talk) 18:09, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

@Fico Puricelli I am not sure what you mean by "undo the unsubmitting" but the draft was rejected, meaning it will not longer be considered. I mean, I guess you can try submitting it again but it will likely rejected again. I am not sure there is anything you can do to make it acceptable because no amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability. S0091 (talk) 18:18, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Draft Edward Hayter

Hi, I have found the draft a few weeks ago and have been since editing it. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Edward_Hayter I have removed non reliable sources like Instagram, wiki fan page, imbd... I added awards and more reliable edits. There are informations that were also told in a video interview which is on YouTube but since YouTube is a non reliable website I cannot add the link to these informations. Also he has appeared in some magazines but since they are physical sources how do I add them since it's not on the Internet? I would like to know what you think of the modifications after it was declined a few days ago. Veganpurplefox (talk) 23:21, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Veganpurplefox I generally do not do re-reviews because I find it is best to get another pair of eyes so I suggest resubmitting it and another another reviewer will take a look. S0091 (talk) 21:09, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

I see thanks, I've got help from the tea talk and I've got some help there and he still doesn't meet the criterias so I won't resubmit it yet Veganpurplefox (talk) 22:06, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

@Veganpurplefox sometimes it is simply WP:TOOSOON for a Wikipedia article which may be the case here. Drafts are deleted after six month of inactivity (no edits) but even after deletion can be restored upon request so keep that in mind as it may be some time before the article can meet the notability criteria. It is not an uncommon situation. S0091 (talk) 22:12, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Me being editing it does it count as activity? Like could it be deleted right now? I will update it frequently and has been for a few weeks now Veganpurplefox (talk) 22:46, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

@Veganpurplefox your editing counts as activity...any human edit does (there are bots that do things too but those don't count). The rule is six months with no human edits a draft is considered abandoned (see WP:G13) but again, even if it is deleted after six months of inactivity, it can be restored upon request. S0091 (talk) 22:55, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

OK thank you! Veganpurplefox (talk) 23:27, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Teamwork Barnstar
Thank you for leaving the research for citation development for William Mabson on the talk page. I did some clean up (mostly to clarify him from his son). It could probably use more development on the legislative career and newspaper career, if you have time later. Thanks again! PigeonChickenFish (talk) 23:34, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
Thanks @PigeonChickenFish! Had I known you (or someone else) were going use them I would have formatted them. I enjoy looking for sources so don't hesitate to ask. I also suggest becoming an AfC reviewer (request at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation/Participants) so you can accept pending submissions you have improved or any others, of course. I will work on Mabson, although I am not the best writer. :( S0091 (talk) 15:49, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
I didn’t want to "step on toes" in case you wanted to add more content yourself. But please do not feel pressure to add. Also any additional citations are always welcome IMO! Keep up the good work and thank you! PigeonChickenFish (talk) 21:23, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
Don't ever worry about stepping my toes and I agree about sources. They are the foundation for any content so I figure if I can at least provide sources so editors can more easily expand content and interested readers can find more information. The only reason I was using the talk page on Mabson is because Drmies had asked me to expand it so thought I'd try compiling sources then expand. Usually I just plop them in and may or may not expand the content. S0091 (talk) 22:09, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Hargeisa

Hello, my editing of Hargeisa in Somalia was sadly marked as not constructive. Hargeisa is internationally recognised to be part of Somalia. It is like Wikipedia denying France to be marked as the country of Paris. Editing facts are always constructive. We can’t deny under international law that Paris is in the country of France, thus we can’t ignore that Hargeisa is Somalia, under the international law. Thank you! History1960 (talk) 23:14, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

@History1960 please see the discussions that have already occurred on the article's talk page and I suggest seeking consensus (read that) for your proposed changes by starting a new discussion. S0091 (talk) 23:21, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Jan muller

Dear reviewer, Thank you for your suggestions, I do understand the gist of it. However, please May I give you some background to explain why I don’t want to rely heavily on the book “The survival of Jan Little”. The author of the book “the survival of Jan Little” never paid her any money for it. He was paid a substantial amount of money (I have a copy of the contract), but did not share this with Jan. Jan got interest from screen writers who wanted to make a film of her story. The copyright issues with the author of the original book got too complicated, so Jan decided to write her own story, so that she owned full copyright over that. However, it became more important to her to tell her story in her own words, she never pursued the screen play.

I inherited Jan’s manuscript and promised her before her death to publish it. Because the only real source out there atm is the first book I wanted to create a Wikipedia page and collect as many references as possible, without too much connection to the first book. Do you think there is a way?

Many thanks for your attention Nathalie 88.202.245.93 (talk) 16:39, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi Nathalie, that is not the purpose of Wikipedia. As an encyclopedia Wikipedia is not a publisher of original research or personal analysis and it would also violate the neutral point of view policy. Also, what you describe may be a copyright violation. While I am personally sympathetic with the situation, Wikipedia is not the correct venue for what you want to accomplish so you will need to pursue a different outlet. Best of luck, S0091 (talk) 16:54, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Causal AI

Has been deleted if you want to accept the draft. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 18:20, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

COI and a draft author

You have been reviewing a draft for an author who I have reported on suspicion of being a paid editor. See Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#User:Bida_thomas 10mmsocket (talk) 22:02, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 January 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:14, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Tim Burton page

Hi! Per your removal of my controversy section on the Tim Burton page, are there any edits you would recommend making so that it is as objective as possible?? I think what I added is very important information for anyone looking into Tim Burton to have, and I never branded him racist or inserted my opinion into what I wrote. The removal of my edits reads less as a commitment to objectivity and more as a dismissal of the very real concerns of Black people and communities of color who don't feel appreciated by Burton's work and are upset by his comments. Basicwhitebach (talk) 20:09, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

@Basicwhitebach did you read my comments on your talk page and follow the linked pages? You still did not format the citations properly, although that was not the main reason for my revert, it does make it difficult follow the sources. I think there is likely a better way to handle the content than a big Controversy section but that is also why starting a discussion on the article's talk page where others can join and consensus can be gained is the best path. S0091 (talk) 20:28, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
I don't have an established talk page because I'm a relatively new user: I only saw your comment about my controversy section being controversial. I understand that my citations were incorrect, but they were sufficient to support what I wrote and I think a better move would have been correcting the citations rather than simply deleting everything I wrote. I would also be more than happy to integrate the information into an existing section rather than creating a new one: I'm just not sure where that would be appropriate. Basicwhitebach (talk) 21:03, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
@Basicwhitebach you do have a talk page, see User talk:Basicwhitebach. I left you a Welcome message along with other comments. :) You should have WP:notifications. S0091 (talk) 21:26, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
you're right - I apologize. Again, I'm new here and am still learning the ropes (for example, I now understand that labeling the section I added "Controversy" instead of just describing it objectively was inappropriate and not in keeping with Wikipedia policy) Basicwhitebach (talk) 21:51, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
@Basicwhitebach no problem! You might want to amend the statements on your User page as discussions/consensus is how things are work around Wikipedia so stating you don't have time for such things is the antithesis to Wikipedia's collaborative crowd-sourced approach. I mean, I get what you are saying but it comes across as antagonistic (maybe?). At the of day the ONUS (read that...its short) is really on you to support the content you want to add. There's lots of established rules and guidelines, for better or worse, so the best advise I can give a new editor is to be mindful of what those with more experience say until you get the hang of it. S0091 (talk) 22:17, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Kandiid

Please advise, Kandiid is a bona-fide social networking app that has been featured in Forbes and Yahoo news. In addition, the app won the W3 award for best cultural app design for 2022 out of 3,023 entries world wide. Curtmarsalis (talk) 23:52, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Curtmarsalis existing is not enough; a subject has to meet the relevant notability criteria. The Forbes article is not a reliable source because it was written by a contributor rather than staff (see WP:FORBESCON). Yahoo! News is only a news aggregator so in of itself is meaningless and not even cited in the draft and winning a W3 award does not confer notability. I suggest you read through all the policies and guidelines that have been provided to you on your talk page because so far none of the drafts/articles you have submitted have been accepted. S0091 (talk) 17:07, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Awad_bin_Mohammed_al-Qarni

I submitted a draft for Awad al Qarni yesterday, and you did not accept it on the basis of WP:GNG. I would just like to generally advise that before rejecting a draft it could be a good idea to do at least one search for the subject, because Awad al Qarni passes WP:GNG with flying colors, and this can be detected very quickly after entering his name in Google (in English, let alone Arabic!). I just didn't have time to add more sources, and I was hoping that others could improve the page.

Anyway, I've added more references, but just for future reference I think it would be a good policy to do a basic search before rejecting subjects as non-notable. Maybe I'm wrong about this, and the burden of proving notability should rest completely with the person drafting the article. If so, maybe you can advise me about some Wikipedia policies that I'm unaware of that relate to that. Thanks. Chagropango (talk) 05:26, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Chagropango AfC reviewers review drafts as they are so if you want sources to be considered you need to cite them before submitting. With that said, you have enough edits that you do not need to go through AfC and can move drafts to mainspace where it will be reviewed by WP:NPP but generally they will move articles back to draft if they think an article is not ready for mainspace. At the end of day, it is the creators responsibility to show a subject meets the notability guidelines. A WP:BEFORE search is generally expected only when an article is nominated for AFD. S0091 (talk) 16:48, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
Hi @S0091, okay, that makes sense. Thanks for the information. Chagropango (talk) 17:53, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
@Chagropango one thing you can do is go ahead and cite the additional sources so they are there for reviewers then expand later. A well sourced WP:STUB is acceptable. It is not uncommon for editors to create articles with only a few sentences, even directly in mainspace, then expand them over the course of days. S0091 (talk) 19:14, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Boris von Brauchitsch

Hi, you were ind enough to give me some feedback on my first wiki entry for Boris von Brauchitsch. I'v followed your advice on the references but I'm nervous about removing some of his Bibliography, I wouldn't want to present him in a diminished form and he's done so much. Any advice, gratefully received and thanks for your time! Catseye1975 (talk) 15:27, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

@Catseye1975 the problem is a Wikipedia article should not be an indiscriminate list and you do not want to bury his most notable works (i.e. most written about or cited). The other issue is most of the content is unsourced. Almost all claims need to be cited with a reliable independent secondary source. What he or those affiliated with him (his publishers, etc.) have written or said matters not; only what others have written or said such as their analysis and opinions about his work. Primary sources are fine to use for very basic facts. For the quote, it should not be its own section and it needs attribution (who said it). S0091 (talk) 16:20, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
Super, thanks! I've taken a lot from his German Wikipedia page but I'll give it another go. Have good day! Catseye1975 (talk) 17:00, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
@Catseye1975 each Wikipedia language is its own separate project with different policies and guidelines. I do believe he is notable so I think the main focus should be sourcing. If you translated material from the German article, you do need attribute it (see WP:TFOLWP, its easy, an edit summary will do). S0091 (talk) 17:15, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Lauren Burch

Hi. I submitted a draft for this page. I didn't add any references because I don't really know which websites are reliable sources, & which are not. I might start adding some references though. GeneralizationsAreAmazing (talk) 06:12, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Draft: Ó Ríordáin

Thank you for the feedback on the article.

I wrote the article to give a more in depth account of the Ó Ríordáin clan, in response to seeing some articles on Wikipedia that contained very little, but also very incorrect, information.

Unfortunately secondary sources don't really exist as our clan is not that big. I was wondering, if it would make more sense, for me to update one of the existing articles instead?

The articles in question are

Thesraid (talk) 20:35, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Thesraid I suggesting posting a note at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anthroponymy (the experts) to get some guidance on how to handle the variations and history. Granted, you still need some secondary sources to expand them a bit but I also wonder if they should be combined or if there is some other better option. S0091 (talk) 20:50, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
Thank you very much! Thesraid (talk) 11:45, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
Keep the list of people with name Riordan and variants of such separate from the clan. These people have close to zero relation to the clan, on average. Make a clan page like Ó Ríordáin dynasty. BurgeoningContracting (talk) 13:25, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Draft: Mountain States Policy Center

Hi there, not sure what else can be added or subtracted from this page to have it be approved? NorthStar1980 (talk) 06:52, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi @NorthStar1980 their website nor those affiliated with them are reliable sources so you need reliable, secondary sources whose content is independent of the center (not what the center says about themselves, interviews, etc.) that have written in-depth about the center. Merely existing is not enough. S0091 (talk) 21:01, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
Okay, we have removed their website from all parts except where it refers to something specific. Everything else is a secondary source. NorthStar1980 (talk) 05:38, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Lilly Yokoi

Re. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Lilly_Yokoi

Google it.

Don't just decline stuff,

Check it out.

There's loads of reliable sources about this person.

I'm not COI. I just heard about her today.

There's dozens of books which mention her.

Don't dismiss things without checking.

Wikipedia should contain information about all notable subjects... and I'm pretty sure Lilly is one of them.

86.24.168.231 (talk) 03:49, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi IP, it is the responsibility of the draft's submitter to provide the sources that shows a subject meets the notability guidelines. Reviewers generally do not search for sources. I see you have added some additional sources so you are welcome to resubmit it (click the blue "Resubmit" button at the bottom of the decline message) and another reviewer will take a look. S0091 (talk) 15:53, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi.

On [Draft:Lilly_Yokoi], you said "Sources used are not reliable and/or not in-depth".

The sources include,

  • Perry, C. (2016). The Kaleidoscope British Christmas Television Guide 1937-2013. (n.p.): Kaleidoscope Publishing.
  • Billboard, 7 Apr 1956. Vol. 68, No. 14, ISSN 0006-2510. Published by Nielsen Business Media, Inc.
  • Tatarsky, D. (2016). The Splendid Book of the Bicycle. United Kingdom: Portico.

Are you sure that those are not appropriate reliable sources? 86.24.168.231 (talk) 11:00, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi IP, two other reviewers have reviewed the draft since my original review and declined after you added additional sources, and another editor left comments stating one sentence is not enough. You have resubmitted it again so yet another reviewer will review it. While I will not review it again. I do strongly suggest expanding the article summarizing what the cited sources have written about Yokoi. S0091 (talk) 16:32, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Sfold

Hi S0091,

Thank you for the editorial feedback. We are new to Wikipedia page creation.

To address your comments, we added eight new independent references (11, 12, 15, 16-20), and removed two short non-essential paragraphs that were strongly associated with the creators. We note that references 21-25 are also from independent sources.

We hope the revised version meet the Wikipedia requirements.

Please let us know if you have any comments on the revised draft, before we resubmit. DOHrennie (talk) 21:03, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

@DOHrennie who is "we"? S0091 (talk) 21:05, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
Computational RNA Scientists. DOHrennie (talk) 15:20, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
@DOHrennie maybe I am misunderstanding but accounts cannot be shared (see WP:NOSHARING). Is there more than one person that has access to DOHrennie? S0091 (talk) 16:34, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
No, just me. The "we" refers to the other people in our research group that I have talked over the page with. The prose is all mine, such as it is. DOHrennie (talk) 20:35, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
@DOHrennie thanks for the clarification. You have resubmitted the draft so another reviewer will take a look. However, I will say that most of the sources used are not independent which will still be an issue. The best advice I can give is to remove those sources entirely along with any of the content attributed to them. S0091 (talk) 20:42, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
Thank you. I will take another look at the references while waiting for a decision on the article. I think there are quite a few references I can trim. DOHrennie (talk) 15:29, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Our campaigns

In 1976 United States Senate election in Nebraska there "Our Campaigns - NE District 1 Race - Nov 05, 1974". www.ourcampaigns.com. Retrieved 17 August 2021. so your wrong and it source are Omaha world herald (talk) 22:02, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi @JohN2839 as for other articles, see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Our Campaigns is user-generated so not reliable so I suggest using the Omaha World Herald instead. S0091 (talk) 16:46, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you

S0091:

Thank you. I re-formatted and re-wrote the submission "Four Together" as you suggested based on the submission for "A Concert for Charlottesville." I also added a few additional citations.

Please note that regarding the connection with the son of one of the performers, I have never met him in person and only exchanged a few text messages with him. As such, I would not say I have a relationship and thus am not sure a COI form is required. He solely pointed me to fact-based sources I could use to create this submission.

I look forward to your review. I believe the concert was substanital and historical and so I hope for it to be published. And thanks again.

Bpin604 Bpin604 (talk) 18:45, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Bpin604 I am confused. You have not improved Draft:Charity Concert: Four Together, which is the draft I reviewed. There is also Draft:Four Together, created before Draft:Charity Concert: Four Together. Either way, you need to improve Draft:Charity Concert: Four Together and when ready resubmit it for review and another reviewer will take a look. S0091 (talk) 20:26, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
I'm not sure what happened but the changes I made only appeared on the message you sent me. So to eliminate the confusion, I copied those changes onto both previous versions you linked to. I know that means there are multiple (identical) versions submitted but this way all the changes are visible.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Charity_Concert:_Four_Together
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Four_Together
Rather than another reviewer, I'd love your opinions since you are familiar with the content and changes.
Thanks again. Bpin604 (talk) 20:04, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
@Bpin604 no offense but I have reviewed at least a hundred draft since I reviewed this one so I honestly do not recall anything about it. Also I find "fresh eyes" are best so it is not just my opinion; therefore, I will not re-review it, as is my general personal policy with any draft so this is not anything personal or specific about this draft. S0091 (talk) 21:11, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Daily Variety request for Horace Jackson (filmmaker)

Hi, I scanned the Daily Variety article you requested at Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request/Archive_141#Daily Variety, and can send it to you if you email me so that I can attach it in reply. If you no longer want it, please mark the Resource Request thread {{resolved}} so that it will be archived, and volunteers will know not to bother with it. --Worldbruce (talk) 18:48, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

@Worldbruce  Done. Thanks!! S0091 (talk) 19:09, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Vermont SportsCar draft

I edited the citations in question for the Vermont SportsCar draft to be third-party and independent of Wikipedia. Please see the revisions: Draft:Vermont SportsCar Chowderphone (talk) 00:29, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 February 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:45, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

Alakh pandey

Accept alakh pandey draft . He is public figure in India. Tousif.15 (talk) 05:34, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

Review

Can you please review https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Piet_Emmer, i have updated the article with more sources, together with a more experienced Wikipedia editor from the Dutch Wikipedia, thanks. TheRoyalTrust (talk) 15:41, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi @TheRoyalTrust you have resubmitted it so another reviewer will take a look. S0091 (talk) 16:16, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
Ok, thanks. TheRoyalTrust (talk) 17:17, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Trade publications

Hello @S0091

You recently left a message on a submission of mine regarding the suitability of some sources I cited. The comment was "trade publications are considered weak at best." I'm not saying this is wrong per se, I just couldn't find it in Wikipedia's guidelines on reliable sources (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources). Is it articulated somewhere else? 24.187.65.246 (talk) 03:41, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi IP. Thanks for asking. It is part of the notability guidelines for companies: Trade publications must be used with great care. While feature stories from leading trade magazines may be used where independence is clear, there is a presumption against the use of coverage in trade magazines to establish notability. This is because businesses often use these publications to increase their visibility. S0091 (talk) 15:35, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

"Not a reliable source"

On Draft:Palmer Memorial Episcopal Church , you called the church's archives not reliable.Why not? Cash713 (talk) 20:24, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Cash713, thanks for the question. A reliable source has editorial oversight and a history of fact checking, such as newspapers. Also, at the end of the day what a subject says about itself is largely not usable because it is not independent. It is fine to use the site for very basic facts such as name, location, etc. but beyond that should be avoided. What is needed are secondary reliable sources, independent of the church or what they say. For example, interviews with those affiliated with church may be published by an otherwise reliable source but that is not an independent source because it is a regurgitation of what the church says. See also primary. S0091 (talk) 20:33, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
but it includes legal documents and stuff Cash713 (talk) 20:34, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
Legal documents are primary sources. You need more than just supporting the church exists; you have to prove it is notable which means secondary reliable sources have written in-depth about it. I suggest trying Google Books (always worth a shot). S0091 (talk) 20:43, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Kemal (software)

Thank you for the review.

I added all the references I could find. There are actually 3 different references that make this article reliable from independent sources

- One from O'reilly which is a reputable publisher

- One from CodeMiner42 which is a reputable software company

- One from Serdar Doğruyol who is the developer of Kemal

I'm not sure what else to add at this point. Could you please re-review or help? 85.101.154.129 (talk) 05:09, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Draft:2022 Ms. Olympia

There is no reason why 2022 Mr. Olympia should be allowed to have it's own Wikipedia page when 2022 Ms. Olympia does not. There has been over 40 pages of every Ms. Olympia event held every year from 1980 Ms. Olympia to 2021 Ms. Olympia. What is the double standard? Gengeros (talk) 15:00, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Gengeros see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. I cannot comment on existing articles as that is not what was reviewed. You are welcome to resubmit it to get another opinion or you can move it to mainspace (article space) yourself where it will be reviewed by WP:NPP. S0091 (talk) 15:15, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 February 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:03, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Rita Flynn

Hi @S0091:,

could you please review this draft for American actress Rita Flynn? 186.188.178.109 (talk) 12:09, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

Did you see the note I left you at User talk:190.140.147.233? S0091 (talk) 15:20, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Inspera

Hi @S0091,

You declined the submission Draft:Inspera on 7 January 2023. In an attempt to improve the submission, I would very much like some more input on what changes are needed.

You stated the article needed multiple published sources that were in-depth, reliable, secondary, and strictly independent. I had attempted to provide that in the submissions with the references [1] and [2], which both point to in-depth articles about Inspera in Dagens Næringsliv, a leading Norwegian business newspaper. I also provided references to how-to guides written by customers like the University of Oxford[3], as such how-to guides are mentioned explicitly in Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) - Examples of substantial coverage.

Are these sources considered insufficient?

You also commented about Wikipedia:Citation overkill. Would the submission be improved by stripping down to just these three references, and removing the content (and supporting references) about the company history and list of customers?

  1. ^ Gjerde, Anne Skalleberg (2016-11-20). "Mener eksamen er «the missing link»" [Thinks exams are "the missing link"]. Dagens Næringsliv (in Norwegian). Retrieved 2022-10-08.
  2. ^ Solem, Lars Kristian (2021-09-27). "Selger seg ned i sin tredje oppstartssuksess – nå har gründer Bjørn Rustberggaard flyttet hjem til Hemsedal". Dagens Næringsliv (in Norwegian). Retrieved 2022-10-08.
  3. ^ "How to use Inspera for online exams". University of Oxford. Retrieved 2022-10-08.

Mbkruger (talk) 08:57, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Mbkruger I do not have access to Dagens Næringsliv so cannot assess those sources (lost the "bypass paywall" browser extension a week or so ago). What I suggest doing is adding a note on the draft's talk page outlining what you have here then resubmitting the article for review and another reviewer will take a look. Let me know if you do that and I will make a note so the next reviewer will know to look there. As for WP:CITEKILL generally only one source is needed to support a fact. For example, there are 4 sources supporting The investment company CGE Partners invested in Inspera in 2021, buying out previous investor Spring Capital., when likely only one is needed. S0091 (talk) 14:24, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
@S0091, thank you for your swift response. I will do as you suggest, add a note to the draft's talk page and resubmit for review. I will also try to cull the reference list somewhat. Mbkruger (talk) 08:17, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

My bad

Hey, sorry about that overlap in reviewing a draft. I'm on my second day of AFC reviewing and still getting a hang of the script. Is there a function that publicly notes I'm reviewing a draft to prevent two editors from inadvertently reviewing simultaneously? Thanks for being understanding of my failure to properly notify and not sparing you the effort. ~ Pbritti (talk) 18:57, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

@Pbritti No problem! In my experience it is rare to edit conflict with reviewing but most likely to happen with new submissions (folks grabbing the low-hanging fruit). The AfC script does have a mechanism to mark drafts "under review" (although I don't think I've ever used it). After the launching the script, click the double arrows next to "Comment" and you will see the option. Thanks for joining AfC! If you have questions, utilize WT:AFC and of course you are welcome to ask me as well and will help if I can. S0091 (talk) 19:07, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for your kind words–you are the second friendly AFC reviewer I've had the pleasure of receiving guidance from since I started! I'm glad to have found such a helpful group and I hope that in a few months I can provide the same support that you all have given to me. ~ Pbritti (talk) 19:31, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

Recheck

Hello, can you look at the draft that you rejected on September 6, 2022, a lot of it has been updated, we would like to hear your opinion? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Stefan_Mihajlov 89.216.144.19 (talk) 14:21, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Talk page for WP:THREE

@S0091, I just saw your comment on Draft: Reya Sunshine to "See the talk page for WP:THREE." Was that a message to me to look for something in particular on the WP:THREE talk page, or a message to an AfC editor that the draft's talk page contains an argument for notability based on WP:THREE for whenever it's re-submitted?

Also, after you archived our discussion on Draft: Reya Sunshine, I had a couple of subsequent inquiries, but I didn't hear back from you. They're not particularly relevant now, so don't worry about it, but do you know if this occurred because adding replies to archived talk pages no longer produces notifications? If that's case, that's definitely worth knowing for future reference - thanks!! Ajax0714 (talk) 18:34, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Ajax0714 I noticed your updates on the draft's talk page so added that comment to alert a reviewer to look there if you resubmit it.
Archives should not be edited and do not generate a notification. The options are to un-archive or link to the archive for reference. I do not recommend un-archiving a User's talk page as that might be considered over-stepping but can ask an editor if they will un-archive, I suppose. S0091 (talk) 18:52, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
Got it, much thanks for adding that comment to alert an AfC reviewer, as well as letting me know that archives shouldn't be edited and don't generate a notification! Also, I don't think there's any need to un-archive the previous discussion - if I have any other inquiries about it, I'll just link the archive for reference. Ajax0714 (talk) 19:29, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Chelsea Handler

The 2010 archive of TV Guide does have her birth date. https://web.archive.org/web/20100916040408/http://www.tvguide.com/celebrities/chelsea-handler/bio/198528 Should her b-day be included? Cheers Adakiko (talk) 05:52, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Adakiko, yes it can be included with that source. The current link did not have her birthday and I did check archive.org but did not find the original version so glad you did. S0091 (talk) 15:54, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
@Adakiko I went ahead and added it because an IP updated the infobox and I didn't want them to be reverted by another editor but did make note in the edit summary you provided the source (don't want credit when not due to me). Thanks again. S0091 (talk) 17:23, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 9 March 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:42, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Draft:Kadije Barry Fashion Brand

Hello S0091, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Draft:Kadije Barry Fashion Brand, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not unambiguously promotional. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 20:12, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Ivanvector thanks for the note. I think the draft does meet "unambiguously promotional" but also why a second pair of eyes is appreciated so no argument. Given your opinion, do you think my reject of the draft is justified or should l reverse it? S0091 (talk) 20:26, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
Definitely justified, the draft needs more work to establish notability. I think it's just not quite at the point of being unambiguously promotional, which means clearly being written as an advertisement with no other purpose. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 20:32, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 March 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:17, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Mission Zero: Independent Review of Net Zero

Hello S0091, you declined my article for lack of secondary sources. Given the material I am writing about, I would like to get some guidance on how I can make a better submission. As the article is specifically about what the Review stated, I do not think it is appropriate to ask for additional sources. I reference the Stern Review which does not use secondary sourcing for it's recommendations section. ThisUSEr2233 (talk) 11:08, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi @ThisUSEr2233 per Wikipedia's notability guidelines, multiple secondary reliable sources that have written in-depth about the topic are required. If none exist, then a Wikipedia article is not warranted. I suggest taking a look at Your first article. S0091 (talk) 14:19, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Charles W. Anderson

Hi User:S0091. Was it you who offered to handle disambig pages for me? I worked up this one that I think is needed. The redlink is where I think the current Charles W. Anderson page should be moved to make way for the disambig page. FloridaArmy (talk) 14:32, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to my talk page FloridaArmy! Yes, I did offer to handle dab pages so you would not have to submit them. This one tricky because I can't just accept/move it. Do you want to go ahead and move the soldier article, then I can request the redirect to be deleted so I can move the draft/dab? S0091 (talk) 15:09, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
Done. FloridaArmy (talk) 01:10, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bane Hunter

Hi. Just wanted to drop you a note and let you know I think you do an excellent job over at AfC. Rarely do I disagree with your assessment. This was the particular case of it being mostly about the crime, so I can see why it got through AfC. I didn't want you to take offense. Onel5969 TT me 17:07, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks @Onel5969! I really appreciate the compliment. No worries at all with taking anything I accept to AfD. I depend on NPP and the community for a second eye. S0091 (talk) 17:30, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Draft:James M. Malcomson

Thank you for letting me know how my first draft of this topic needed to be improved. I have now submitted a revised draft in which I have added many inline citations using footnotes. I hope this is now acceptable but please let me know if you would like me to change anything.

The previous draft was tagged as "US" but I not actually American. How do I change this? Facio Saltus (talk) 10:01, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Facio Saltus you have resubmitted it so another reviewer will take a look. I don't see anything indicating US. Where do you see that? S0091 (talk) 14:39, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 03 April 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:46, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Wiki:Marianne Williamson

Hello S0091, you revised my edits to the Marianne Williamson wiki. Given the material I am providing, I believe it to be relevant to the information the page. Apinchofspence (talk) 22:26, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Apinchofspence first, this "wiki" is an encyclopedia, not a platform like social media and there has been a lot of disruption on the article going back a few months. See also the note I left on your talk page about conflicts of interest and make the appropriate declaration, if any. Given you are new editor, I suggest making proposals on the article's talk page to gain consensus for your changes until you get the hang of things. S0091 (talk) 22:42, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
Hi @S0091, I understand that this "wiki" is an encyclopedia, and not social media. I would like to mention the edits that I am contributing are not disruptive or misleading, except the one of the external link. In terms of being a COI, I am volunteering on Marianne Williamson's campaign and am only making edits with graphics that I have. The main profile image was originally cited as someone's original work and I worked to reverse that with an image that credited someone's work. If you could provide insight on how these edits should be made rather than revising/deleting the one's I've made, please feel free to leave me a message. Thank you. Apinchofspence (talk) 22:50, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
@Apinchofspence if you are volunteering for the campaign, then you have a conflict of interest so must make the appropriate declaration and you should not edit the article directly, but rather make edit requests as instructed in the notice I left. Failure for you or anyone else affiliated with her or her campaign following the COI guidelines will result in being blocked. Wikipedia takes both biographies of living people and neutral point of view (read those) seriously. I have already placed a note on a noticeboard asking for more eyes on the article given all the COI disruption in the past few months, if not years as the article is an absolute mess. If you are (or anyone) has questions or need help, you can ask at the Teahouse. S0091 (talk) 23:26, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Marianne Williamson 2024 presidential campaign

Just wanted to thank you for your note in the edit summary. But I agree with your assessment. I think there's enough coverage by now to make it notable. Onel5969 TT me 13:12, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

The Special Barnstar
I'm feeling generous today. JustAnotherUndertaleFrantic (talk) 22:29, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Tallawanda Hall (Miami University)

This page was originally reqjected because of WP:NORG under the title of a business. I changed the page topic to a building at a university for which there's many Wikis out there and added the history of that building, including some of the content that doesn't warrant a stand alone page.

Making sure it's been resubmitted and looking for favorable approval for the reworkings. WyoHome1 (talk) 15:21, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi @WyoHome1 the article serves as a WP:COATRACK for Tuffy's, which deserves perhaps a couple sentences but not much beyond that. In addition, much of the content is unsourced or poorly sourced (tourist cites or the school's website). S0091 (talk) 15:55, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

Latter Day Church of Christ

Hello, and thank you for your welcome. I'm hoping to update this wiki article with more recent information. Both these controversies have had major developments within the past few months. Do I need special permission to edit this page? DrakeCharras (talk) 22:05, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi @DrakeCharras no, you do need special permission but in hindsight, given your second edit, I think your first edit made unintended changes. Your second edit was fine, adequately sourced and factual based on what the sources stated. If another editor reverts (removes) your update, you can start a discussion on the article's talk page (Talk:Latter Day Church of Christ) but I don't think it your edit is an issue. Either way, if you ever have questions or need help, you can ask at Teahouse. S0091 (talk) 22:17, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 April 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:18, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 8 May 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:25, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

AWK

Thank you for working on the sourcing of this draft. I feel AWK is important, but I've been struggling to find sources to meet our needs 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 15:37, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, even what I found isn't great but may be helpful? Take a look. No issue if you choose not use them. S0091 (talk) 15:44, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
They are better than anything I have found so far. Feel free to submit for review when you consider it to have a chance at stardom 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 17:33, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
@Timtrent here's the thing, she was dismissed from her dean position which the article would have to state in order to meet NPOV and I am sure that was not a fun time for her. I think the claim to notability is weak, solely hinging on her deanship but also keep in mind I am weak from a PROF perspective (I largely do not review PROFs unless its super obvious) so maybe I am wrong. However from a WP:BLP perspective, I strongly lean towards sitting on it to see if a different claim to notability occurs, not only to make notability more clear but also to "round out" her career. I hope this make sense and, of course, no issue if you disagree and I certainly will not oppose if you resubmit it. S0091 (talk) 21:31, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
I'm only half tempted to resubmit it. No issue with stating that she was dismissed. I admit that had passed me by. How could I miss that? It may have to lie fallow until more references exist. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 06:19, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
@Timtrent her dismissal was not an easy find so I don't think it was a miss on your part at all. I just happened to come across a source that mentioned it so did some digging with that angle. Also, there were some sources I ignored because they seemed to be her statements but maybe there is more to them. I will do another check in a couple days or so to see if I find anything more (I like digging). S0091 (talk) 15:23, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
Wikipedia has far too few Black US figures represented, so all help greatly appreciated. I have just been the editor who started it. I am truly happy if you or others can make it article-ready 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 18:14, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Fuzzy hashing

G6 applied. Please proceed with AFC acceptance. -- Whpq (talk) 21:21, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Muharrem Aslan draft

Hi, My article has been declined. Could you tell me how the article can be improved? Should I delete some parts to meet with the criteria? Thanks. user:Dreamboy3143 03:25, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Dreamboy3143, No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability. Aslan does not meet the notability guidelines so an article is not possible, at least not in the foreseeable future. S0091 (talk) 14:56, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

William Lupinacci

I was immediately able to verify your identity based on your preferred candidate for President (“Marianne Williamson”). Once again, William Lupinacci has my wikipedia page tagged and is on the lookout for any potential edits (which, by the way, mostly do not come from me, unless I see a clear error or mistake, or mischaracterization).

The problem with you, William, as with most lefties (“leftyincel”), is you shove people into a tiny box without any ability for them to explain their behavior. If you’re angry about the Dr. Phil interview give me a call rather than attempting to smear the first result that comes up on Google when you search my name.

tom1233337 at gmail dot com - email me there, (my main email is full) if you have a problem with something I said. Do not interfere with my wikipedia page, that includes deletion attempts and any disrespectful edits you may be considering.

Right now I have a job, I have a girlfriend, overall I am a functioning member of society and for you to think it’s acceptable to alter my page for the purpose of making me look bad on a Google search is evil. I am a human being with emotions. Do not respond with “I’m just following wikipedia guidelines Jack” this is clearly false, you broke guidelines multiple times which I can even prove.

Once again, contact me at tom1233337 at gmail dot com if there is a problem you want to discuss. I’m probably nothing like what you’re imagining in your head. Lightedsun7989 (talk) 07:48, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

@Lightedsun7989 wow...snap judgement! (And completely wrong). Out of the 70K edits I have made to Wikipedia only 11 have been to Marianne Williamson. I don't even reach the top 20 editors. I have the same interest in her as I do Jamie Vardy (19 edits), which is none other than those articles have suffered vandalism or some other type of disruption over the years.
I am also not the editor who reverted your edits to Jack Richard Peterson. Other editors did that but I noticed they did not leave you any kind of notice so I did, along with a Welcome message because that is the fair thing to do. I have no clue who William Lupinacci is or anything else you speaking about. Also, please be mindful Wikipedia is a global encyclopedia so editors are from around the world, not just the US or other Western countries for that matter. I don't mind engaging with you, at least at this point, but do not make baseless accusations/assumptions toward me or any other editors.
As for "your page", I don't know who you are (Peterson?) but I can say you do not own (read that) the article so cannot dictate anything and further, you have a conflict of interest so should not edit the article directly. I will leave you some additional information on your talk page about how to handle having a COI. S0091 (talk) 14:46, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
Oh, I see where the incel comment comes from now...I wondered. I added a wikilink to Incels.is to the Peterson article, a draft submitted by an IP I reviewed and accepted as part of my WP:AFC activities. Before that, I had no clue about Peterson (still don't really) and other than knowing "incels" exist, have no interest in the topic. I had to do a bit a research to determine if incels.is met the notability criteria and I also had to cleanup the draft a bit to remove unsupported claims and useless sources. It was a confusing endeavor because of the sites name/domain changes so now I know a little more than I ever wanted to. Because I have edited these article, they are on my WP:Watchlist (same as Williamson and Vardy above, along with 4,500 others) so I see any changes to them. S0091 (talk) 16:35, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Draft: Ossett RUFC

I have since removed the references as they don't have the correct substance for Wiki. I hope now we're able to get our page approved. Thanks WikiCreator2023 (talk) 14:53, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi @WikiCreator2023 the club's website is not a reliable source. In order to meet the notability criteria, secondary reliable sources unaffiliated with the club that have written in-depth about them are needed. Please read through all the linked information in the decline message. S0091 (talk) 15:01, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
Its hard to find detailed history on a small amateur rugby club. I have added references from the main England RFU board website of our win history hoping this is acceptable. WikiCreator2023 (talk) 15:12, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
@WikiCreator2023 usually small clubs cannot meet the notability guidelines but another reviewer will take look. S0091 (talk) 15:25, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Asking suggestion about COI

How to solve the Conflict of interest? Sir please can you fixed it on my article? Ardo27 (talk) 15:57, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

@Ardo27 you need to move the articles back to draft and go through the WP:AFC process as strongly recommended for those with a COI. Currently none the articles meet the notability guidelines so will likely be deleted. It may very well be they cannot meet the notability guidelines so articles are not possible. S0091 (talk) 16:05, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Draft: Morgan Galen King

Hi, I was surprised that my draft was turned down. The note says there is not significant coverage from reliable sources, but there are multiple Deadline articles cited, an endgadget article ... I just don't understand how someone who directed a feature length film that premiered at SXSW wouldn't qualify for an article. Agregory (talk) 19:02, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Agregory in-depth coverage about him is needed for a biography. The sources are either interviews/his comments thus not independent or trivial mentions. You are welcome to resubmit it though and have another reviewer take a look. If you do so, I suggest placing a note on draft's talk page with the WP:THREE sources that meet WP:GNG. Let me know if you do that and will place a comment letting the next reviewer know to look at the talk page. S0091 (talk) 19:13, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
I understand that some of the coverage about him isn't correctly cited: for example, he himself in an interview states that he drew gory comic books, same with the Windows auto-update. However, the most crucial parts of the article, the existence of the Spine of Night, his collaboration with Phil Gelatt, his ownership of a record label all seem sufficiently substantiated to me. Would this draft fare better if there was actually less information? Eg, cutting the gory comic books / former graphic designer?
Thanks for linking me to WP:three. Looking at that, I see the two separate deadline links as being quite strong, but don't see a great 3rd source. Would something like the movie database (www.themoviedb.org) work for a 3rd source, or would you suggest finding another non-interview article? Lastly, would you consider the two separate deadline articles to count as two sources, or only one because they are both from deadline?
Thanks for your help with this. Agregory (talk) 21:00, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
@Agregory I will not review the draft again mostly because I believe more eyes are better. Similar to WP:THREE, you can state your argument of how they meet notability on the draft's talk page but you do want be concise and I would not propose more than four sources for consideration. S0091 (talk) 21:10, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
OK. I will think on this. Do you agree that fewer personal details would help on a future review? (or do you consider giving me more advice to be too close to a re-review on your part) Agregory (talk) 21:16, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
@Agregory without going through everything all over again, I can't say one way or the other about personal details. What I can say is more is needed about his career, per in-depth coverage via independent research/analysis by secondary sources is needed. However, none of the sources really provides much in that way which is an issue. S0091 (talk) 21:29, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Request on 04:26:33, 15 May 2023 for assistance on AfC submission by Cyberspacecat


Hello, yes. I am proposing a split. Saying time-based media does not deserve a page because that info is covered in conservation is like saying painting does not deserve a page because painting is described in painting conservation. I updated the conservation page because was very messy and too dense. Time-based media deserves its own page because media conservation only exists because time-based media came first.

Cyberspacecat (talk) 04:26, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Cyberspacecat, resubmit it and I will accept it. S0091 (talk) 14:14, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 May 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:40, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

We rave you draft

Hello there, i am not sure why after i edit the draft and was given the okay to submit, you declined it with the reason you did.. I would appreciate you explaining what's the problem and I will fix it. I want to note there are realted articles on alike magazines here in Wikipedia and this is an international magazine read by so many people... Raves2023 (talk) 06:48, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

@S0091hello, it's been 6 days so Im writing again. Can you please respond because my draft is blocked... Thank you. Raves2023 (talk) 10:49, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
Hello @S0091, I am writing but getting no response from you. I will try and get help if you cant help me... please let me know. Raves2023 (talk) 09:21, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Don't remove information about any article people need that information this is Wikipedia so don't do it again.

Don't remove information about any article people need that information this is Wikipedia so don't do it again. 223.239.24.91 (talk) 16:33, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

Richard Warren Reinhardt

I received notification today that my draft article on Richard Warren Reinhardt had been rejected for a shortage of sourcing. Obviously, I was disappointed -- having worked on it for many months, including extensive discussions with the subject of the entry -- but I understand (and appreciate) that Wikipedia has standards and rules.

You mentioned in your reply that writing biographical entries about authors and journalists can be tricky, and that was certainly the case here. Richard W. Reinhardt never sought publicity and very little has been written about him; indeed, this was an attempt to rectify that. It's obvious that he is a person of significant authorial accomplishment and community involvement.

He's also a person primarily from the pre-internet era, so online information about him is very sparse. He was particularly known in San Francisco in the 1950s and continued to publish books and articles and play an active role in community organizations thought the 80s, but whatever was written about him at that time in print is inaccessible.

I appreciated your suggestion to start by trying to post Wikipedia entries about some of his books. The most likely candidates are, as you identified, Out West on the Overland Train and The Ashes of Smyrna. Aside from that, I can try to dig up verification of his board service dates and other details.

I do hope you understand that my draft was very thoroughly researched based on the information I had available to me, including interviews with Mr. Reinhardt and physical copies of his books and articles.

I look forward to working with you on finding a way to post a Wikipedia entry about this important contributor to San Francisco's journalistic history in the last half-century.

P.S. I didn't understand the comment about not including links in the text. Do I take that to mean that I can link to other Wikipedia topics but not to external URLs? I thought links would help establish the connections between the subject and other topics, but I'm fine to remove the URLs if you advise.

Andy Reinhardt (talk) 04:31, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

We rave you draft (2)

Hi @S0091, I just looked to see if you replied and I see you havent although you do reply to others so I thought before I am reaching out the chat to open a new topic.. can you please address my draft please and explain why you put a stop tag to it? I resubmitted it after I fixed it and there are more than 2-3 sources. I know it's been declined but I am new to this and I fix what needed. Raves2023 (talk) 09:29, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Raves2023 going by memory almost none of the sources are reliable. Many appeared to be PR//SEO, routine coverage about events or the like and often was what the publication said about itself which is not independent, none which are helpful for establishing notability. S0091 (talk) 14:52, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
Hello @S0091, Everything there is not PR or SEO from the magazin side. Did you maybe see other magazin's pages? Raves2023 (talk) 16:42, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
@Raves2023 I didn't say everything was, I said many were PR/SEO, along with routine coverage, etc. I am not sure what you are asking. You are welcome though to present the three best sources (and only three, see WP:THREE) that meet WP:ORGCRIT (read that carefully) on the draft's talk page and I will take a look. Just ping me there. S0091 (talk) 16:54, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
Hi @S0091, how do I do it on the draft page? wont that be visabel to all if let's say you will decide there are good..? can I please do it somewhere else? Raves2023 (talk) 10:04, 5 June 2023 (UTC)
@S0091, I will do it here and if that's not okay, Please let me know and I will erase it and place it wherever you say, here goes:
first I want to say I read what you said but still I cannot be sure I am choosing the right 3 so I will state a few more just to be on the safe side - please forgive me if it's too many:
1. https://megatickets.co.il/magazine/we-rave-you/ - this source is a dedicate articel on the magazin. Not Pr and written by the website team. It's in Hebrew but I can translate and send your way if you wish.
2. https://edmhousenetwork.com/we-rave-you-launches-the-essential-plugins-gear-catalogue-featuring-worlds-leading-artists1/ - is a huge site and this was written by Dylan Smith.
3. https://www.lux-review.com/winners/weraveyou/ - this is no text articel but it shows the award we rave you won for Best Electronic Dance Music Magazine 2020.
4. https://www.nhl.com/panthers/news/florida-panthers--we-rave-you-to-host-catz-b-side-electronic-music-performance-on-march-25/c-341722178 - im sure I dont need to present the NHL and if you'll scroll down you will see they also wrote on we rave you, the artists and also the the all articel is about the Panthers partnering with We Rave You.
5. https://amqueretaro.com/vsd/2022/12/16/yotam-dov-el-productor-influencer-y-fundador-de-we-rave-you-trae-grandes-planes-para-este-2023/ - this is an article on the founder and his plans for we rave you in title but it's all about the magazin. Also not a PR although you can pay to get written about in this website.
6. we are also on https://muckrack.com/media-outlet/weraveyou and https://www.1001tracklists.com/source/nqhlr3/we-rave-you/index.html - which not many get to be presented like that there...
Social Media - on instergram over 253K followers, on facebook 1.1M followers and 1.1M likes! Raves2023 (talk) 10:27, 5 June 2023 (UTC)
Hi @Raves2023 looking at the first five, the first one is a ticket sales outlet so not a reliable source (and possibly not independent if they sale tickets for We Rave You events), the second and fourth sources are press releases/announcements by the magazine/platform and/or those affiliated with it so not independent. The third one is a non-notable award and the fifth one is an interview with the founder mostly containing what he says about himself and the platform so also not independent. The number of followers, etc. matters not. None of these contribute to establishing notability. S0091 (talk) 14:59, 5 June 2023 (UTC)
Dear @S0091, allow me to reply:
  1. 1 is not just a ticket outlet, it's also a magazine.
  2. 2 - is not from we rave you and they choose to write about without getting paid.
  3. 4 is NHL.com which is the official web site of the National Hockey League and they are writing about the collab
  4. 3 this is very notable award in the industry.
  5. 5 Please check the bottom although I agree.
I stated the social so you will see how many people are touched by it. To sum it up, what can be done? I mean, this magazine is not a side magazine that 5 people are reading, it hostd huge events and is read by millions. I also took a look again in other magazines and I cant find the difference.. I know it's an ask, but please help me... Raves2023 (talk) 12:03, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
I'll share which I looked at:
DMA (magazine), DJ Mag and Debug (magazine) Raves2023 (talk) 12:09, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
@Raves2023 :
1 - It is a commercial site with its main focus being ticket sales as they state on the About Us page (also a large portion is an interview).
2 - "We Rave You, one of the biggest global media outlets in the electronic music industry, has announced...." (bolding mine). This is clearly emanating from We Rave You, not to mention their stated purpose is to promote the industry so not a reliable source: "EDMHouseNetwork is a network specialising in delivering promotion for a huge collection of artists & labels."
3 - Is actually the Flordia's Panthers site (as it states at the top) and is an announcement stating they have entered into a partnership with We Rave You. This is a primary source, not secondary. It can be used to support the fact the partnership exists but it is not independent because they are affiliated with We Rave You so not useful for notability, not to mention the Panthers are not journalists.
4 - There are a ton of awards across various industries that may be meaningful to the industry but the vast majority do not convey notability here. Examples of awards that may indicate notability (not a guarantee) are generally major awards like Pulitzer Prize, Grammy, BAFTA, Nobel Prize, etc. I also find Lux's stated purpose of their awards at least somewhat concerning: "Our primary responsibility is to ensure that our winners can benefit from the exposure that we offer, whether that be items in our free of charge marketing toolkit, or helping them select the most appropriate commercial package in order to get the most value out of their budget."
As for the articles you linked, see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXIST. In the early days Wikipedia did not even have notability guidelines and sources were not required. Looking at the ones you linked, the first two were created in 2006, as the very first notability guideline was being established. The third one was created in 2009. Even today articles can get by when they shouldn't and the guidelines still do change, with the last major change being a year or so to WP:NSPORTS making that guideline generally more strict.
At this point, there is not anything you can do as no amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability (read that). The draft is rejected, meaning it will no longer be considered and nothing presented here suggests anything has changed. If this draft were accepted, it would either be moved back to draft or be deleted as it would not survive a deletion discussion. I will also tell you that once an article is deleted, it is a monumental task to later get it accepted because the bar generally raises from mostly likely would not be deleted to indisputably notable, meaning there is no chance it would even be nominated for deletion much less actually deleted. S0091 (talk) 16:40, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
@S0091 Hello, I read what you wrote carefully and I cant say I agree with all of what you said... i do understand but it seems each source I placed, big as it is, was found not noteable, even Flordia's Panthers.. Raves2023 (talk) 14:17, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
@Raves2023 I am not sure why you bring up notability of a source as that is not the criteria to assess a source. If the New York Times writes about an event it is sponsoring that would not meet the criteria, just like if the NYT publishes a Q&A type interview of the CEO of a company or a press release/annoucement. Those are primary and/or not independent. In order for a source to contribute to the notability of a topic it needs to meet all four criteria: reliable, secondary, independent and cover the topic in-depth. None of the sources presented meet all four and I have explained why a couple times now. You are welcome to disagree but it doesn't change anything. I given this enough of my time so will not be engaging further. S0091 (talk) 15:27, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Certinal eSign

Our company page's submission has been declined due to the following:

Would be really helpful if you could help me with an email address if possible to discuss this further.

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia. Cathy.miller123 (talk) 11:02, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Cathy.miller123 discussions should occur on-wiki so if you have a question, you are welcome to ask here. However, before you do please read through all the information linked in the decline message and the messages Jimfbleak left on your talk page. S0091 (talk) 17:26, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Incels.is

I won't put that content again, but it's pretty obvious Onion1981 (talk) 21:09, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

@Onion1981 if it is an obvious conclusion, readers will come that conclusion on their own. Wikipedia can only summarize what reliable sources have written in a factual, neutral manner. S0091 (talk) 21:16, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 5 June 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:22, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

Reliable sources?

Hi, I see that you declined a draft for the Metallica song “Welcome Home (Sanitarium)” because most of the sources used were, in your words, not reliable. Can you please tell me what makes a source reliable on Wikipedia and provide me some reliable sources related to the draft’s subject?

(PS, can you also help me with another draft I’ve been working on, which is for White Reaper’s 2023 album Asking for a Ride? I’ve put a lot of work into that draft, only for it to be declined because of a similar reason.) KevinML (talk) 01:39, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

Hi @KevinML, can you provide a link to the draft? I have no recollection of it. In the interim, see WP:WikiProject Albums/Sources as a starting place. S0091 (talk) 01:43, 5 June 2023 (UTC)
Thanks!
Here’s the link: Draft:Welcome Home (Sanitarium) KevinML (talk) 01:54, 5 June 2023 (UTC)
@KevinML oh wow, back in December...no wonder I don't remember lol (and that unintentionally rhymes). There's a lot sources and I don't want to go through them all so can you point me three that you think supports notability? You can just give me the footnote numbers but please read WP:Articles for deletion/Welcome Home (Sanitarium) first. S0091 (talk) 02:06, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

Lilly Yokoi

Hi @S0091,

I noticed the article when someone mentioned it in the "WikiProject Film". I doubt the IP address will manifest itself and complete it. But i will gladly put in "Start" shape. Filmman3000 (talk) 02:44, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

@Filmman3000 awesome! Thanks!! S0091 (talk) 13:42, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Draft - National Police Federation page

Hi @S0091

I'm looking to resolve the sourcing issues you raised regarding this Wikipedia page draft, and I have a question. Your comment states that we only use one third party source - the CBC article - however I've linked to several federal government reports, annual reports from competing union associations, etc. Do those not count in any capacity as a third party source?

Also in regards to the comment that our web page should not be used in any capacity for sourcing beyond basic information, I used this page as inspiration and noted they source their own web page continuously. Could you advise on why this was acceptable but not for our page draft? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Association_of_Chiefs_of_Police

Thanks for your assistance! 2607:FEA8:A5A0:7E90:F47C:9A60:F4CF:35E0 (talk) 13:23, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Hi IP, sources serve two purposes, verifiability and notability. Primary sources are fine to sparingly use for verifiability but do not help to establish notability. Please also be aware WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, meaning there are plenty of articles that do meet standards. S0091 (talk) 13:35, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Re Lilly Yokoi

copyeditor trophy
Thanks for editing the draft and your help with publishing. Appreciated! Gryllida (talk, e-mail) 03:36, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
Hi @Gryllida, this is an article that was "meant to be" despite obstacles. I was the reviewer who ultimately rejected the draft after doing a cursory search but like you, it was one that bugged me (i.e. I wanted her to be notable). A couple days ago the IP who created the draft removed all the AfC messages when I happened to be online so noticed it on my watchlist. We got into a bit of battle over it but ultimately it caused me look again. They had added some additional sources which piqued my interest so I searched again for more using a different method and found several which I added the draft so reached out the IP to get their help as clearly they are familiar with Yokoi. Around the same time you had posted messages about the draft on several projects seeking help which @Filmman3000 thankfully took up so here we are. I really appreciate you questioning the declines/reject and please do not ever hesitate to reach to me if you think I misjudged a draft (or anything else). S0091 (talk) 21:40, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
Hello @Gryllida and @S0091,
Good job both, and thanks again for the trophy!
I intend to start a topic about about my disagreement with some of your edits. I will start below because I don't how much Gryllida wants to be involved, moving forward.
While pages that I've worked on have been flagged before. I never had that flag prior.
I have noticed that this phrase below isn't backed by the citation. It just confirms that she came back from a Harlem Globetrotters tour in 1957. Not the timeline of her touring.
Through the mid to late 1950's she toured with the Harlem Globetrotters where she would perform her tricks before the main event and between breaks. Filmman3000 (talk) 23:12, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
@Gryllida I was about to write a separate section for topic about my pointers. I thought to myself that you may be the right person to copy edit and remove the tag.
This my last edit before after moving the article.
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lilly_Yokoi&diff=prev&oldid=1158929794
And this is S0091 last edit before the current one.
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lilly_Yokoi&diff=prev&oldid=1159192972
Don't get me wrong "Early life and family" section by @S0091 is much better than the one I did.
I also think that making a Work cited section for the books that S0091 used, and that all links to newspaper.com be deleted after reviewed.
Give us your input if you'd to give further help with the article, if not its ok too. Filmman3000 (talk) 23:44, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
@Filmman3000 I will add another source or two to backup she the time frame she was touring with the Globe Trotters as I am still doing some research and will be expanding it. I am not sure why you think links to sources, such as newspapers and books, should be deleted though. The links are there so readers and editors can view the sources and is standard practice (see WP:CONLINK). Thanks for adding the photo! S0091 (talk) 13:38, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
@S0091 I was told at one point to reduce the URL, because it slows down a page when loading on poor connection, and privacy related matter. Also while I am not worried about Yokoi who's nearly a 100 years old, it could be problematic to open the press of someone too suddenly, and if it falls on someone impulsive catastrophic. I used to do it the way you do, but got reprimanded for it, these are the reason cited. Filmman3000 (talk) 15:44, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
@Filmman3000 see these recent discussions about making clippings and citing with Newpapers.com. I wonder if there was an issue at one time that may no longer be an issue? For the concern about the press, sorry, I don't see that as being valid. We use news articles all the time for BLPs. See also Ray Reardon, a BLP which is a WP:FA and uses Newspapers.com clippings (see footnote 18 for example) along with other archived news articles.
On another note, I added a couple more sources to support the time Yokoi toured with the Globtrotters. You think that is sufficient? I also noted in the The Sun-Advocate article dated 1959 (footnote 8) which was already cited, Saperstein states she had been with them for a couple years. I think the sentence structure is certainly better than what I had. S0091 (talk) 16:22, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
@S0091 Do your thing I am sure it will be awesome. Filmman3000 (talk) 18:25, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

Draft not accepted.

Hi S0091, Thank you so much for promptly reviewing my draft on an Indian film reviewer/YouTuber. I am new to Wikipedia editing and took up a person whose work I have followed for a while. I should add that I took it up as an exercise. Since there are many stub pages of similar personalities from India, I thought it would be easier to execute this one. I am going to follow your instructions and revise the draft. But is there something you want me to be really careful about?

Also, I couldn't find appropriate tags while drafting. Could you help me figure that out.

Looking forward to hearing from you.

Thanks RootsandMore (talk) 12:34, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

Hi @RootsandMore for Biographies of living people, in-line citations are required, which is noted in the decline along with a guide but you may find this guide more helpful along with Your first article. Also, be sure to read through everything linked in the decline message. I am not sure what you mean by tags? S0091 (talk) 16:49, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
Thank you. Will go through these guidelines and try and improve the draft. By tags, I meant the categories section at the bottom of the page. Couldn't find them. RootsandMore (talk) 17:54, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
@RootsandMore categories should not be added while it is still in draft. They can be added if the article is accepted. S0091 (talk) 17:57, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

Opinion needed

Hi, Do you think the article Chipukeezy may not meet notability criteria? Thanks. PushaWasha (talk) 18:00, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Hi @PushaWasha I am not sure why you are asking me specifically. Given @Oaktree b is the one who tagged the article with notability concerns, I suggest asking him instead. He is a knowledgeable editor and from what I have seen, he seems to be quite fair. S0091 (talk) 18:10, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
It's alright. I just wanted your opinion. PushaWasha (talk) 18:16, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
@PushaWasha don't ever be hesitant to ask the person who raises an issue why they think there is an issue if you don't understand. I also see the article has yet to be reviewed by an WP:NPP reviewer. Once they do, that will give you another opinion. In the interim, Oaktree might reply here as well which they are welcome to do. S0091 (talk) 18:32, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I tagged it as it does have multiple sources used, I wasn't sure of the quality of each (see [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources#Sources] for the most common examples. To be honest, I'm not very familiar with Kenyan sources, so it might just be ok. The New Page Patrol will look at it and let you know, I glance at the list every so often, mostly to see what new articles we have in wiki (I'm curious!) and will tag some if I feel I can help the process. Thank you for asking, we're all trying to work together to build the best version of Wikipedia we can. Nice to have you aboard!Oaktree b (talk) 18:47, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
Pinging @PushaWasha so they see this. @Oaktree b you might find User:Novem Linguae/Scripts/CiteHighlighter helpful. Based on a brief look, I see a couple "green lit" sources (Guardian footnote #8 and Nation #11). Of course this does not mean the others are not reliable but at least two have been listed somewhere as reliable. S0091 (talk) 19:03, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
Oh cool, I'll bookmark that! Oaktree b (talk) 19:07, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Cherry Hill Park

I don't have a clue what else you want me to add to the page. I read the guidelines, but still NOTHING. Please help.

Contributor 118,784 (talk) 18:05, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Contributor 118,784 you need in-depth coverage by reliable sources such as newspapers, magazines, etc. See WP:42 for a guide on the type of sources needed and what to avoid. S0091 (talk) 18:14, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for your correspondence. I have added a new section and submitted the page for review. Contributor 118,784 (talk) 18:25, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
@Contributor 118,784 check Google News but be careful, you only want to choose high quality sources. Here is one from the Washington Post and this one from USA Today. S0091 (talk) 18:27, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
Thank you so much for your help. Contributor 118,784 (talk) 18:32, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

㈜== A cookie for you, since you're a smart cookie. ==

B'dmm chh. Contributor 118,784 (talk) 18:33, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
Yum! :) S0091 (talk) 19:06, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR HELP, DUDE!! Contributor 118,784 (talk) 19:20, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

@Contributor 118,784 thanks for creating the article and coming here asking questions and seeking help! If you ever have questions or need help, the Teahouse is the place the go (also linked in the Welcome message I left you). Also be mindful of what put on your User page or elsewhere here. Everything you do here is public. I have requested WP:Oversight to delete portions of you User page for your safety. To be clear, you did not do anything wrong but the safety of our editors comes first (and yes, you are officially an editor once you made your first edit thus part of the community here). Congrats on your first article! S0091 (talk) 19:31, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
You got it. Thanks! Contributor 118,784 (talk) 19:37, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
Just wanted to let you know that this editor has been blocked indefinitely. Liz Read! Talk! 03:07, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

Ketch Secor

Hello, S0091,

I have moved this article from Draft space to main space in case you want to tidy up the article. Liz Read! Talk! 03:07, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

Stuart Land

Hello you previously declined an article that didn't have according to you have reliable sources.

The person has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment. This being his art being in major blockbuster films. Studios zealously guard the length of the tail credits of a film and for this he was not credited in most of them as an artist. Most artist arnt credited but none the less he made unique contributions to critical acclaimed movies which is the clause.

The person has received a well-known and significant award or honour, or has been nominated for such an award several times. This being his screen play awards. He has won significant awards in writing screrenplays that being the reviewers choice award.

Multiple independent sources are used may be combined to demonstrate notability. Primary sources are original materials that are close to an event. His audio interview regarding his work in blockbuster films should be enough for that. However there are other sources cited for additional proof.   

Creative professional. The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work. The movies hes helped create and his interviews regarding them. MNeivandt (talk) 01:25, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

Recovery of Deleted article

Sir can you please recover the deleted article.i did copyright mistakes but I will remove copyright content and I will improve it better please recover draft:UUCMS this article. Ardo27 (talk) 12:39, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Ardo27, I am not an administrator so cannot deleted or undelete pages but what I can tell you is copyright violations are a legal issue so will not be restored. You can however create a new draft using your own words. S0091 (talk) 18:38, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 June 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:10, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

Muhammad ibn abdul wahab

How is writting fake stuff about him neutral? Like calling him qarn al shaytan Muhammad al-Uzbekistani (talk) 18:55, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment on Draft:Amity Blight

I had a similar issue with the Hailey's On It! page, with a user copying the content over to a new page, even though a draft already existed (the user who copied the information over seemed to not recognize this or perhaps ignore it), and it got real messy. I don't think it will be messy in this case. Historyday01 (talk) 15:17, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

@Historyday01 hopefully the histmerge will be completed today and I can accept it. Just so you know, you really do not need to wait for AfC in these cases. You can request the histmerge yourself then once complete move it main space, even if the draft is in pending review status. AfC is not required for autoconfirmed editors outside of COI/Paid or some other restriction. S0091 (talk) 15:35, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
That is good to know. I'll keep that in mind in the future. Historyday01 (talk) 15:39, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
S0091, I'm not sure what you are trying to histmerge, the redirect in mainspace or talk page? AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 23:04, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
@AngusWOOF oh shoot. Is it confusing? The current redirect needs to be merged. I mentioned Talk:List of The Owl House characters because that is where consensus was gained Amity Blight should be a stand-alone article so admins would know. I subsequently left a note at Primefac's talk page because I had another histmerge waiting. S0091 (talk) 23:14, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
The biography content in the redirect seems to be different from the draft version. Draft was started 20 October 2022. Redirect bio was made in 22 February 2022, but is completely different in writeup. The 21 April 2023 was an attempt to bypass Draft and put it into mainspace. That doesn't need to be remembered in the history. I would just put db-afc-move on the redirect so it can be deleted and then the draft can be accepted. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 23:15, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
I went ahead and put the db-afc-move request on it. Like I said, I don't believe there's any value in preserving that other biography, which was probably copied from Fandom or some other place. If that portion needs to be preserved, the histmerge can be attempted. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 23:19, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
@AngusWOOF With the 22 February 2022 version, after checking, it doesn't seem to be copied from any Fandom articles, or anywhere else. It instead appears to be a unique writeup done by user who made the February 2022 edit. As for the 19–21 April 2023 edits, though the initial 19 April edit was an attempted bypass of Draft, the subsequent edits contained corrections & improvements to spelling & wording which, through seeming oversight, were not added back into the actual draft. I think both are worth perserving with a histmerge (&/or at least some text-merging from the 21 April 2023 revision of "Amity Blight"). – Jamie Eilat (talk) 00:42, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
Jamie Eilat, thanks, hopefully histmerge can combine these. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 01:28, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
@AngusWOOF I clarified my note about the talk page. Do you think that is sufficient or you think I should remove it? This is only my second histmerge request with the first being a couple days ago so still learning. S0091 (talk) 16:34, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Michael Strode

Hi, I was wondering if you could be more specific in the reasons why this article draft was declined. You say the sources are not independent (two of them are affiliated with his charity or a group that actually promotes knowledge of the individual, the others are independent Catholic news sources). Granted, the sources are broadly primary - there are secondary sources available about this man, including a biography and documentary, which I do not currently have access to and therefore cannot cite, but that does not mean he is not notable. He founded a major international charity, another charity that is unfortunately now defunct, was the recipient of several major awards, had a distinguished medical career, as well as a prominent candidate for canonisation within the Catholic Church (essentially if an article is not published now, I guarantee it will be within the next year when the canonisation is actually presented). He is certainly notable, and the sources are mostly independent bar two. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sjmcristero (talk • contribs) 16:55, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Sjmcristero the article by Peter Strode, even though published by The Tablet which generally is considered a reliable source, is not an independent because he is his brother, nor really are the sources by the church and primary sources cannot be used to establish notability. The last source by The Tablet is solid though. Notability is not inherited so his charity may be notable but that does not mean he is. For example, a founder or CEO of a notable company does not mean they are notable (we see that a lot). Please note, I declined the draft rather than rejecting it. A decline means may be notable but needs improvement. For the film, you can simply state a film was made about him and cite the film (or maybe it is listed at BFI]). You might try posting a note WP:WikiProject Catholicism to get some guidance (it may take a couple weeks to get a response). You are also welcome to resubmit the draft to get another opinion but I strongly recommend citing at least one more secondary source. Maybe this one? S0091 (talk) 17:38, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Ross W. Duffin

I have added a section entitled "Other works," which mentions recordings, a few editions, and parody compositions. It's notable that they drew national press (Sport's Illustrated, Chronicle of Higher Ed, etc). Do you think that's too lightweight? Also, the only reference I could find that mentions Selena & David are our children is my mother's obituary. Is that acceptable? I'll be interested if you find other matters problematic. Once these are settled, then I'm ready to resubmit the article. Beverly Simmons (talk) 19:59, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

@Beverly Simmons to be honest, when I was looking for sources about the children, I also looked for obits but didn't mention it because thought it might come across as insensitive and/or morbid but they really are great sources. No issues with the other content so I have now moved it back to main space. S0091 (talk) 20:17, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
Glad to know that it is an acceptable source. Beverly Simmons (talk) 21:21, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
@Beverly Simmons there is also great caution if they are not written by a journalist. They might be fine to use to establish a relative but if not written by a journalist (or the like) they cannot be used for much else. S0091 (talk) 21:31, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
Thanks! Beverly Simmons (talk) 21:57, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
There is a now a notice: This article uses bare URLs, which are uninformative and vulnerable to link rot. Please consider converting them to full citations to ensure the article remains verifiable and maintains a consistent citation style. Several templates and tools are available to assist in formatting, such as Reflinks (documentation), reFill (documentation) and Citation bot (documentation). (June 2023)
However, I couldn't find any bare URLs, so I'm not sure what needs fixing. Can you advise me? Beverly Simmons (talk) 21:58, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
@Beverly Simmons don't worry about the tag, Generally there will bots that come by to fix these things within the next month and I also ran reFill. S0091 (talk) 22:09, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

Suhel Debbarma

Hello, S0091,

I was thinking of tagging this article for speedy deletion and then I saw that you accepted it. What were your thoughts on this article because I don't see much significance to the individual or their life. I also have suspicions that there is paid editing work being done on this and other articles. What do you think? Liz Read! Talk! 02:39, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi Liz, looking at the history I originally rejected it then reversed my decision based on the outcome at WP:Articles for deletion/Purna Chandra Jamatia which established being a member of TTAADC meets NPOL so it would likely be kept if you took to AfD. I just cleaned up the article to remove all the unsourced/promo content. S0091 (talk) 14:47, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

Masashi Kishimoto's page

Hello! Thank you for warning. Next time I will do edit with accurate explanations.

I've edited Masashi Kishimoto's page, because the information, presented in the article, has no official confirmation in japanese sources. All the speculations about Kishimoto being the current author of Boruto manga come from the tweet posted by an official account. The tweet states that further manga chapters (52 - …) will be based on original idea (原案) of Masashi Kishimoto. Original idea is not a script. Thus Masashi Kishimoto can be called “author of the original idea”, but not “author of the manga” or “writer”/“script writer”.

The original tweet: https://twitter.com/NARUTO_kousiki/status/1328186182681804807?s=09 ET Tasogare (talk) 12:48, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 3 July 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:15, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

Question about Draft:Jean-Claude_Vignoli rejection

Hi @S0091, You recently rejected the creation of Draft:Jean-Claude_Vignoli motivated by the lack of secondary source. I would like to point out that this is a secondary source, and two interviews 1 2 in main Swiss newspapers are not directly secondary sources but include long paragraphs about the life of Vignoli. There has been many articles written about that person, showing the importance of the subject. You also mention "The others are either affiliated with him or are brief mentions." I don't understand how the main Swiss newspapers could be affiliated with Vignoli (he his freelance, he's not an employee) and Swiss newspapers are independant, not working for publishers. Most of the sources that are related to him are the main Swiss newspapers, are dedicated full article coverage about the writer, so I'm a bit lost with regard to your arguments. Could you expand further your decision? Thanks. --Malaga345 (talk) 15:37, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

I just added an extra source found on the Vignoli's website. Again, much info about his life (2 full paragraphs) before starting the interview. Most of the French speaking Swiss newspapers talked about this guy! Malaga345 (talk) 15:56, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
Hi @Malaga345 I did not reject it, only declined it. A reject means it will no longer be considered while a decline means the subject may be notable but it needs some work. When evaluating sources, not only the publisher is considered but the content within source. Interviewers where most of content is emanating from the subject (what they say, have written, etc.), regardless of the publisher, are not independent so cannot be used to establish notability. For example, the first source you link gives a brief introduction about him but then the rest is mostly regurgitating his book. There is no independent analysis, etc. by the author. S0091 (talk) 15:56, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
@Malaga345 you are welcome to resubmit the draft and another reviewer will take a look. S0091 (talk) 15:58, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
OK, thanks @S0091! Malaga345 (talk) 16:47, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

Draft:1956 Cairo DC-6 crash

Hello! I see you didn’t accept the draft Draft:1956 Cairo DC-6 crash I wrote. I have a few question because I don’t understand it. You say it’s not meeting the wikipedia:Notability but I don’t understand why it’s not meeting WP:GNG? Secondly you say the event is listed (in a few sentences) at some other pages. But why is that a reason? When looking that is the case with every article that has it own page! Also I can’t find another recent flight with >50 deaths that has not its own page. As it was main news in Dutch secondary sources, it must have been even more described in Egyptian sources. So I don’t understand when reading guidelines what is wrong. 109.38.133.153 (talk) 07:14, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi IP, NEVENT is a slightly more strict guideline than GNG in that lasting coverage that is not routine is generally needed (along with WP:GEOSCOPE but I don't think that is an issue with the draft). If you can add a couple sources showing it was still being written about in the media a few months after or something like that, that will meet it. My note about it being covered elsewhere was informational to let you know it is at least covered somewhere on Wikipedia, not the reason I declined. Apologies for the confusion. As far as other articles, see WP:OTHERSTUFF. S0091 (talk) 14:11, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for the explanation. There was not only coverage days to months after the crash, but also years after the crash about the investigation. I added content from 1964 about the cause of the crash and the new measure to prevent a crash like this in the future. I also added a source from December 1956, indicating that it was one of the main international disasters of that year. Do you think this is sufficient? 109.36.149.21 (talk) 08:46, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
Hi IP, I added a couple more sources, The New York Times to cover GEOSCOPE and also a book published in 2016 (last footnote). Take a look at the book as it states the captain was convicted of involuntary manslaughter. I am hesitant to state that in the article without another source but likely the best sources are in French. Anyway, I think this is good to accept so you are welcome to resubmit it. S0091 (talk) 14:26, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
Nice you added some sources. I added the information about the conviction, as it completes the puzzle. Because I already hesitated to add information that the pilot was blamed, because it is stated at the aviation safety website. But in my opinion this sources completes that puzzle that it is indeed the case. I resubmitted the draft. 109.36.149.21 (talk) 17:54, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
Ah, you are fast! Haha. Thanks for accepting. 109.36.149.21 (talk) 17:56, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
I happened your re-submission in my watchlist feed. Thank YOU for creating it. :) S0091 (talk) 18:04, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
Oh and don't forget to add wikilinks in other articles that mention the crash. S0091 (talk) 18:05, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

Draft: Last Comiskey

I added additional independent and reliable sources. In addition to the Chicago Tribune and Chicago Sun-Times, the two largest and oldest newspapers in Chicago, I included the Daily Herald, the third largest newspaper in Illinois, plus WBEZ the NPR affiliate in Chicago. All of these sources are independent from the production, in addition to being reliable. The discussion of the film's content is from the film itself. The submission guidelines say that the work that is the subject of the article itself is inherently a reliable source, if not for the truth of the matter asserted, but for what the work says. So I cited the work. There is no better authority on the film than the film itself. Thank you for your review; I really appreciate it. DSRacer (talk) 01:09, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi @DSRacer good job! I accepted the draft and changed the section header from Content to Synopsis to align with guidelines. I also suggest trimming the synopsis down along with the list of starring roles in the Infobox. I think the guideline is around 500 words for a synopsis. Take a look at The Last Dance (miniseries) for a somewhat similar article where there is a separate section titled Interviews rather than a list in the Infobox and may offer some additional ideas for expanding the article. S0091 (talk) 14:07, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
Thank you. I very much appreciate your contributions, revisions and suggestions. Very helpful! DSRacer (talk) 21:46, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
Hi do you know where I can find the guidelines for synopsis length? You had mentioned it, so I was trying to educate myself but cannot find it. Thanks! DSRacer (talk) 19:50, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
@DSRacer see MOS:PLOTLENGTH. It's not a "hard" guideline but another editor added the tag about it being long so I am the not only editor who thinks it might be too long. There's also WP:NOTPLOT but I don't that's an issue because of the Critical reception section. S0091 (talk) 20:01, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
Very helpful, thanks DSRacer (talk) 20:11, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
@DSRacer anytime! The Teahouse is also a great place to ask questions/get advice because often you will get more than one editor's take on something. S0091 (talk) 20:27, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Disney Lorcana

I've added some more recent coverage, related to two incidents (rules leak and copyright suit). Might be good to go now? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:58, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Piotrus yes, I think its good to go now. You are welcome to move it mainspace yourself as there is no requirement to submit it again through AfC. Thanks for improving it! S0091 (talk) 15:03, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
Will do. @BOZ, @Mindmatrix in case you'd like to add anything (and/or DYK this). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:31, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Declined draft: Daniel Kraus (rabbi)

Hello S00091,

I'm writing regarding your rejection of Draft: Daniel Kraus as the "vast majority of sources are primary and/or not independent so cannot be used to establish notability." I went back to thoroughly look at WP:NOR and would like to respectfully appeal your decision.

The page sites that "In general, the most reliable sources are" and lists: "Magazines, journals, and books published by respected publishing houses" and "Mainstream newspapers." Forty percent of the sources used in this draft are, in fact, independent and reputable news sites, including Crains New York and the Jewish Telegraphic Agency. Both these news articles recognize the Rabbi's contributions as noteworthy, both in the secular and religious world, and list key facts about his life and work history. Another three sources are the websites of professional organizations.

I understand from reading your past remarks on similar matters above when you decline a draft rather than rejecting it, it means the submission may be notable but needs improvement. I would welcome your feedback and hopefully a pathway to publication.

Thank you very much for your time and consideration and all you do to keep Wikipedia a reliable source of information. Rhiannon1991 (talk) 10:52, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Rhiannon1991 in order for a source to contribute to notability, it needs to meet all four criteria: reliable (WP:RS), secondary, independent and provide in-depth coverage about a subject (see also WP:42). Crain's is a paid-for announcement so fails reliability, independence and it's not in-depth. Some sources are affiliated with him (his organization, written by him, etc.) so primary while others make no mention of him or not reliable. The only source that comes close it is this one but it's a about the couple and quite of bit of it is what the couple say about themselves (not independent) so is weak for establishing notability. Also at least one source meeting the criteria needs to be outside of the NYC area. The article previously existed but was deleted due to the same issues. S0091 (talk) 14:37, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 July 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:02, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 57

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 57, May – June 2023

  • Suggestion improvements
  • Favorite collections tips
  • Spotlight: Promoting Nigerian Books and Authors

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:22, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Trying to improve notability on a draft

Hey. I've been working on a draft (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:KB_Brookins) with another person for over a year, and I see that you declined it. I am trying to figure out what exactly is needed to improve the draft. This person is associated with some of the largest literary institutions (Academy of American Poets, Poetry Foundation, National Endowment of the Arts) and has more accolades than many comparable poets that have active wikipedia pages (Kimberly Nguyen, Hieu Minh Nguyen, Simone Person, etc), yet it is declined on grounds of not having "significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject". I spoke with someone in the live chat about how this could be improved, and they said to reach out to people who've declined it.

I am confused, and quite frustrated. Let me know what source would contribute to notability of an author/poet, and what exactly this draft needs to get published. Fuzzyrocket (talk) 17:44, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Answered on draft's talk page. S0091 (talk) 16:53, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Draft: Misbah Uddin

Hello S00091,

You recently declined the draft on Misbah Uddin with your reasons being "Interviews, press releases/announcements are not independent so cannot be used to establish notability and blogs are not reliable sources (Hamnawa for example)".

I would like to give some context about the Pakistani music scene. There has been a lack of labels and music channels in Pakistan for quite some time due to which music distribution was halted. Therefore the lack of mainstream options meant many musicians and songs have not been documented well.

One major lasting consequence is the lack of music journalism in Pakistan, even though there is a surge in music content and listeners. Despite its popularity, Pakistani music possesses a low-resource database. Interviews are the most common form of publication on Pakistani musicians. If they were removed as a source then these musicians would never be known. Wikipedia is essential for precisely this reason.

Moreover, there are many Wikipedia musician/music ensemble pages that make use of interviews (most contain quotations from interviews) and PR (such as release dates and festival lineups). Examples include, but are not limited to, Taylor Swift, The 1975, Billie Eilish, Hozier, The Neighbourhood, Rainbow Kitten Surprise, Oh Wonder, alt-J, and Bob Moses. Hence, there is a precedent for making use of interviews and press releases for mainstream and indie artists. 2noizy (talk) 19:16, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi @2noizy sources serve two purposes, verifiability and notability. Interviews are fine to support someone said something or may contain some independent material outside of the interview that can be used but if it is mostly what the subjects says, they cannot be used to establish notability. Same for press releases which can be used to verify a record was released but not helpful for notability. I did find a couple better sources to support Urdh Jaa (spelled Urdh Ja in sources) so switched out the source you had but even with those not enough to meet notability.
While I sympathize with Pakistani musicians and other artists (found this too), please be aware Wikipedia does not lead, it follows so is not the platform to make someone "known" or right great wrongs (read that). As an encyclopedia, a topic must already be notable under Wikipedia's definition to warrant an article. My sense with Misbah is right now it is WP:TOOSOON, meaning it is simply a matter of time. With that said, there might be enough sources about Asfar Hussain and his solo work to warrant a stand-alone article about him if you want to give that try in the interim. My other piece of advise it to summarize what sources say about a subject/their work rather than only chronicling what they did or what what the subject says. S0091 (talk) 15:40, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Articles for creation: Miguel Berzal de Miguel

Can you please review again this article? I made under section External links link to subjects press media apearance, there is list of links that lead to independent press web-pages that covered subjects life and work, there i found out that subject and his work have significant coverage in independent press. Do i need to rewrite article with references to independent press web-pages? Special:Contributions/IListenClassicalMusic (talk) 17:22, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Declined Draft The Old Clan

I would like to know that why you decline the draft. The informations were already referenced. The Article was a supporting body of the History Of Old Clan H.I.H Shah Jafar I (talk) 17:56, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi @H.I.H Shah Jafar I the website you are citing is not a reliable source as there is no evidence of editorial oversight. In fact, it is not clear at all who created or owns the site and there are several issues with the draft outside of sourcing. At least some of the content appears to copied from the website so is a copyright violation and it is not written in a neutral encyclopedic manner. I suggest reading through all the links provided in the decline message. If you have questions or need help, you can ask at the Teahouse. S0091 (talk) 18:18, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
do you mean the Imperial Clan website H.I.H Shah Jafar I (talk) 18:28, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
well perhaps, Wikipedia is the authentic source for adding more history, as you know we are in a age of discovery which we may find new historical view. The Old Clan was a real Supranational Entity during the Ancient Times, but some of its remains are now present if you look deep. H.I.H Shah Jafar I (talk) 18:31, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
Honorable Editor, I would be very pleased if you check my draft again. I will be very pleased that you will approve my draft, the draft contains medium narrative as it must be. H.I.H Shah Jafar I (talk) 18:33, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
@H.I.H Shah Jafar I You need sources with proof it has editorial oversight, an established history of fact checking, like reputable newspapers or books published by reputable publishers and/or have gone through peer-review, like scholarly journals. Also, do not remove the copyright violation template as doing so will result in you being blocked. An administrator will review the deletion request and determine if it is a violation. I will not review the draft again. You have resubmitted it so another reviewer will take a look but I can guarantee you no one is is going to accept the draft in its current form with the current sources. S0091 (talk) 18:36, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
Acknowledged H.I.H Shah Jafar I (talk) 18:54, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Declined Draft Review - Ghassan Ghaib

Hi S0091, I would like my draft article to be reviewed as I have fixed the references as you have suggested. I would be happy to work with you regarding this, so please let me know if anything is needed from my end. Thank you. AkkadianArtist (talk) 22:35, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi @AkkadianArtist you have resubmitted it so another reviewer will take a look. I suggest trimming the group exhibitions to only include the most notable. S0091 (talk) 13:35, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

Raja Randh Deo of argal

sir,i have onformation but that will go beyond histroy of raja randh deo because he is related to gautam rajput clan Rishabh.s2123 (talk) 15:47, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Luíza Fazio

Hello, @S0091 -- First of all, thank you for the speedy evaluation of the draft! In hopes to improve my contributions in the future, I'd like to better understand your reasoning behind the rejection -- I understand it was deemed "not sufficiently notable", but if you could give any further information about this verdict, it would be very helpful.
Secondly, I'd like to understand if it would still be possible to send a new version, with improved writing and sources, of this draft for evaluation in the future.
I am a recent editor and all clarifications are much appreciated -- thanks in advance!

Vmbr903 (talk) 02:31, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Vmbr903 sources serve two purposes, verifiability and notability (read that). Many of the sources are interviews or her comments which are not independent so cannot be used to establish notability and/or have questionable reliability. For example, Lorena appears to a blog and Writersroom51 mainly provides consulting services. Others are brief mentions or do not mention her. The Vogue article was written by her so also not independent and should be used very carefully. In order to meet the alternative NARTIST it needs to be shown she played a major role in co-creating a significant well-known body of work. It appears, at least thus far, she has largely been a staff writer rather than the lead/main writer for the most significant works (i.e. she is not on the top billing). She certainly is accomplished but being accomplished does not always equate to notability by Wikipedia's definition.
I am happy to reconsider if you can provide a couple sources by reputable publications (think mainstream media) that have written in-depth about her and is not mostly based on what she says. S0091 (talk) 15:54, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Draft rejected: Babaji Bob Kindler

Dear Sir/Madam.

I want to thank you for the feedback on my Wikipedia Draft. Unfortunately, the draft was rejected, but I hope you don't mind me inquiring further about this decision.

I can see the draft was deemed as being not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia.

I'm wondering about this issue of notability. This draft does obviously not represent a monarch or hugely influential political figure - but nonetheless a man which has published over ten books. Some of his work is suggested for further reading, like is done on Sri Sarada Devi's Wikipedia page - and even on Wikiquote's Tantra page, where this man is cited few times.

Best wishes, Guðmundur. Gudkarl (talk) 21:05, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Gudkarl please read through the previous decline message before my reject as that has links which explains Wikipedia's definitions of notability and what is considered a reliable source, etc. S0091 (talk) 16:49, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Gabriela Bucher

Hi @S0091, thank you for taking a look at my article. You wrote that her "interviews or her comments are not independent so cannot be used to establish notability," and I wanted to clarify your concerns as I work to improve the article. I included comments she made in her role as Executive Director of Oxfam in order to highlight the direction she took the organization, and I am having trouble reconciling how to discuss her role leading an activist organization without highlighting her comments. Was your concern that overall the article contained to too much of that content relative to other information, or am I misunderstanding entirely?

Thank you again for your help and feedback! Eventhisacronym (talk) 21:18, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Eventhisacronym sources serve two purposes, verifiability and notability. You can use those sources to support what she said but what is needed for notability are sources that have written about her, her impact. reactions/criticisms about what she said, etc. The first Forbes source meets the criteria but at least one more is needed. On another note, looking at your talk page it appears I have reviewed most of your drafts but please know that is not intentional. S0091 (talk) 16:36, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
Thank you, that is helpful! I didn't think it was intentional, we must be online at similar times - but on that note, I did incorporate your feedback on Draft:Heyward_Donigan, including changing citations and adding more sources about her. If you wouldn't mind taking a look again and letting me know if you had any additional feedback, I'd really appreciate it! Eventhisacronym (talk) 16:50, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
Hmm....the trick is when assessing a source for notability is to completely disregard anything directly emanating from the subject or those affiliated with the subject. In this case, anything that is based on what Rite-Aid (or another company that employed Donigan) says, even if published by an otherwise reliable source. This is includes press releases/announcements. For example, WSJ piece "Rite Aid Names Heyward Donigan as CEO", the independent coverage about her are the first two sentences in paragraph two, "Ms. Donigan, 58 years old, was chief executive of Sapphire Digital..." and the last sentence, "Before her time at Sapphire Digital....", so that is trivial coverage, although fine to use to support those facts. However, I found this Fortune article that I think is great. Even after you ignore what she says she wants to do, it provides independent analysis, commentary by other experts about her strategy, etc. S0091 (talk) 17:58, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
That is a great find, thank you! Added in analysis from that Forbes article, let me know what you think. Eventhisacronym (talk) 14:29, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 1 August 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:39, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Help!

Wikileith (talk) 13:32, 1 August 2023 (UTC)Hello! Thanks for your message. I'm trying to learn how to edit major entries having previously helped out with a mass effort to add detail to several hundred Scottish lochs a few years ago. Now I've retired I wanted to see if I can help out with more than just making a donation!

I followed the WikiHow pages to see if I could figure out how to change this entry for practice. I have a friend who knows the subject and and they suggested that I might use her entry as a starting point. Having worked in libraries for most of my life - and having a friend who is very active in the community I thought it might be beneficial to both myself and the community.

But I confess I'm not too sure what I'm doing yet so don't know the status of this page now that it's been reviewed. Would you have time to enlighten me? Grateful for any help you might be able to offer.

Hi @Wikileith: I see you successfully moved the page to a different title. I don't think is correct as we don't use "former" but that's ok. Someone else will likely fix it. I also see you have added content but you did not add any sources which is a violation of the Verifiability policy. See this guide for how to add sources. If you have any other questions or need help, I suggest asking at the Teahouse as you will likely get quicker responses. S0091 (talk) 16:47, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Draft!

Hello. I was wondering if you could look at my draft. It is called Draft:Noriyuki Konishi. If it is bad, can it be fixed? Or how do I fix it? Dracques (talk) 21:26, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Re-review

Hello! I was hoping you could take another look at my draft to know how to progress positively with it. Thanks! Adamvibes123 (talk) 11:53, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Draft:The_Portraits_(music_duo)

Hi there S0091

I've just returned to this article to try and resolve it after an extremely busy year in which I simply haven't found the time to focus on it properly. Now, I'd love to try and sort it out, with your help.

Last year I took a great deal of time reading and understanding Wikipedia's notability guidelines for musicians.

Three of the key points are these:

"1. Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself." 

   I have included in the article references to articles in the major national newspapers Irish Independent (https://www.independent.ie/entertainment/music/single-honouring-those-who-have-died-from-covid-19-aims-to-reach-number-one-39880151.html), The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/media/2021/nov/11/john-lewis-christmas-advert-electric-dreams-arrangement-accused-copying) and Telegraph (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/11/12/john-lewis-accused-stealing-music-idea-folk-band-werent-edgy/) amongst others.

"2. Has had a single or album on any country's national music chart." 

   This has been shown, with reference to the UK's officially recognised national music chart compiled by the Official Charts Company, as listed by Wikipedia, as published on 25 December 2020.

"12. Has been a featured subject of a substantial broadcast segment across a national radio or television network." 

  The musicians in question were the subject of a key segment in December 2020 of ITV's flagship television programme "This Morning" in the lead up to Christmas that year, as well as a similar piece on Jeremy Vine's self-titled Channel 5 programme. These are two of the main national television networks. They were also featured on BBC Radio 2 (the UK's most listened to radio station) in 2017 in a programme that had a segment focussing on their song 'Nobody Can Ever Murder Love'. https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b08n102f

In the light of the above, I wonder if I could respectfully request that you review your decision to reject the article on notability grounds?

Please let me know if you need any further information from me.

Best wishes and have a good day

Euann Euaanmill (talk) 18:18, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Euaanmill First, thank you for taking to time to read through the guidelines as so many don't. With that, here is my assessment. The Telegraph and Guardian articles are about the same thing, the lawsuit, published at essentially at the same time (within a day), so they count as a single source (and also strongly suggests it was press release). I will also note most of the information in those articles is coming from the band or those involved (he said/she said/they said) so are largely not independent sources and I will further note The Telegraph states the song "didn't chart particularly well" and Guardian describes the band as "little-known". None of them provide in-depth coverage about the band. All three of the sources you provided were in the article before so had been assessed at least by one other editor (some of the sources by at least two) previous to my rejection, as was the TV/radio spots.
When reviewers assess a draft, mostly what we are trying to do is determine, if accepted, the likelihood it will be nominated for deletion and further the likelihood it will survive the deletion discussion. Based on my experience and those who had declined previously (really only counting the two before my rejection) this would not. The notability guidelines are indicators, not guarantees. What the community is mostly looking for is in-depth reviews of a band/artist's work by reputable critics/sources. The reason things like charting is listed as an indicator is because usually if a song/album is at the top of the charts, in-depth reviews exist even if not cited. I hope this helps at least some. S0091 (talk) 20:47, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
Hi again S0091
Thankyou so much for taking so much time over this and for your other message about conflicts of interest which I feel I’ve responded to and dealt with but I can elucidate on further if needed.
If I could return to the clarifications you give on the specifics of the article itself, I note and completely accept your comments on the Guardian (etc.) articles and the reference to the act being “little-known”.
In response to this, I refer to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability#:~:text=On%20Wikipedia%2C%20notability%20is%20a,not%20have%20a%20separate%20article where an emphasis is placed on whether a subject is “worthy of notice” and it is expressly stated that notability “does not necessarily depend on things such as fame, importance, or popularity”.
In fact, in an earlier draft of the article, I specifically made reference to the fact that the act in question hadn’t achieved widespread mainstream success, but these references were removed by an earlier Wikipedia reviewer as part of a fairly heavy edit.
“Worthy of notice” I do believe them to be: the act’s career has shown longevity, a steadfast relevance to the social issues of the day over a period of nearly twenty years and a unique list of achievements in harnessing the admittedly limited power of their success to make a significant noise when raising awareness of social issues directly relating to their songwriting. These include creating a song featuring 2000 voices of regular people around the country to recruit new signers to the stem cell donor registry in the UK, raising thousands for a school in Burma/Myanmar with an album of songs about the country and the particularly notable case of their cover version of ‘Together In Electric Dreams’ which has had a widespread appeal and influence, including, it has been reported, on the choice of a major UK store’s Christmas advert music as per the articles I quoted earlier.
The selection of articles from The Guardian, Telegraph and Irish Independent I sent you previously was made because of their prominence and relative recentness, but I can see how these might have given the impression that the act referred to was something of a one-trick pony from the point of view of historical media coverage. This certainly isn’t the case.
You say “What the community is mostly looking for is in-depth reviews of a band/artist's work by reputable critics/sources” and there are certainly a plethora of these out there, in the form of reviews of the duo’s albums over the last two decades. Let me draw your attention here to five such pieces of coverage of their work and a French article about their music. I can provide more if needed. I hope to have your further feedback, and once again, many thanks for your time on this.
A number of these are available online, and some not, so for ease, I have copied some pieces to my Dropbox for simpler access for the sake of this conversation.
Eurorock magazine, March 4th 2009, review of ‘Timescape’ album: https://www.dropbox.com/s/cp5zq0tcn5wta6v/Music%20Review%20-%20the%20portraits%20timescape%20jeff%20perkins%20blog%20critics%20eurorock%20column.pdf?dl=0
Folking.com, August 2015, review of ‘Lions and Butterflies’ album: https://folking.com/the-portraits-lions-and-butterflies-sensorypulse-records-spcd006/
Fatea magazine, 2015, review of ‘Lions and Butterflies’ album:
https://www.fatea-records.co.uk/magazine/2015/Portraits.html/
Folk London magazine, August 2013, review of ‘Counterbalance’ album: https://www.dropbox.com/s/rvceqz9hdq3mxg2/FROM%20FOLK%20LONDON%20feb%202013%20counterbalance%20album%20review.pdf?dl=0
Rock n Reel magazine, July/August 2017, review of ‘Global Heartbeat’ album: https://www.dropbox.com/s/vxmvg4o2xgwtgtv/r2%20rnr%20portraits%20global%20heartbeat%20review%20july%20aug%202017%20crop.jpg?dl=0
Sud Ouest, August 2015: https://www.dropbox.com/s/9atigh3pwyxgp1c/du%20jazz%20aux%20accents%20folk%20article%20in%20sud%20ouest%20re%20portraits%20jazz%20in%20aout%202015%20festival.JPG?dl=0
Best
Euann Euaanmill (talk) 08:02, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
@Euaanmill for the COI, if you are not affiliated with the band, please post a response to the notice on your talk page stating that so it is recorded there and that should wrap it up.
You are right in that fame, etc. does not mean notability (under Wikipedia's definition). Usually that applies to things like YouTubers, number of plays from streaming platform, etc. For example, a YouTuber can have millions of views/subscribers and still not meet notability but it does go other way as well.
While I am not going to access your dropbox for security and other reasons, I did check out the websites.
Out the above sources, many are blogs, no info really about them or their standards, or offer PR services thus suspect. HOWEVER, the two I find most promising are Rock n Reel (established publication, broad distribution) and Sud Ouest, which I am assuming is Sud Ouest (newspaper)? If those are in-depth reviews (not interviews or what the band states) then I agree those are likely helpful. While sources do not need to be online, you might try archive.org to see if there's an archived screenshot available.
Assuming those reviews are helpful, I have added a template to the draft which allows for resubmission. Once you have added the sources, summarized what the sources say in the draft and resubmitted, let me know and I will leave a note on the draft for the next reviewer letting them know why its being submitted yet again as I will not review it again (another set of eyes is always better). You can quote a sentence from each source, which is typical for reviews as long as you attribute it to the source and cite it (i.e. Rock N Reel gave a generally positive/negative review, stating the album/song was "blah blah...."). I also suggest posting note on the draft's talk page outlining the three best sources (and only three) and how they establish notability. Be concise. S0091 (talk) 19:27, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
Hi - many thanks once again for your in-depth help with this and your suggestions for the COI and additions of sources to the draft's talk page which I am currently doing. I do appreciate all your suggestions.
You've seen that I've been a little hasty over the last 24 hours and have submitted the draft for review before fully reading everything you've said above...very much my bad, apologies.
I've now edited the article further and left it in "submitted" mode, and hope the changes are fully visible to the next reviewer?
I have certainly focussed on the Sud-Ouest (yes, the French newspaper) and Rock and Reel magazine coverage. Although I have also kept the refs to FATEA magazine, which is, in my experience, a genuinely respected UK online music magazine with a folk focus, and likewise folking.com which I've found is fairly regularly cited on Wikipedia in other articles. I hope that is OK.
Thanks for your offer to leave a note on the draft before passing it on.
E Euaanmill (talk) 08:53, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
@Euaanmill oh yeah, that is fine and I see the sources, etc. are there so have added a note. The only issue is the RnR link to goes to the main site rather than to the review so update it if you can. Good luck! S0091 (talk) 14:18, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
Thanks again - shall do Euaanmill (talk) 11:34, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Merging Rudhraksh J with Rudhraksh Jaiswal page

i want to merge the two articles under the title Rudhraksh Jaiswal since the given information in both the articles falls under the same individal's information. please help me merge the two. Wasabisushi2913 (talk) 16:24, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

@Wasabisushi2913 I responded at the draft's talk page. S0091 (talk) 16:30, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Declined submission of Rise of Cultures article

Hi!

I've seen your rejection of the draft for an English Rise of Cultures article Draft:Rise of Cultures#cite note-3

On one hand, I get your points. On the other, it's the translation of an existing German article. So, either the German moderators have not done a good job or you are being to critical. I am leaning towards the latter given that English articles for comparable games such as Imperia Online or Travian are also lacking the citations you are asking for, at least as far as the description of the story and the gameplay is concerned.

In short, your feedback may reflect Wikipedia guidelines, but it contradicts established practice. And, let's be honest, it's established practice because it's so difficult to find external citations for games that have not received a massive amount of coverage. And limiting Wikipedia to those wouldn't do the medium of video games justice.

As for your specific criticism of some of the citation sources I had used: Again, those may be formally correct, but they do not reflect practice, in this case gaming industry practice. The browser version of Rise of Cultures, for instance, was announced only through a YouTube video. It's not uncommon these days that official announcements are made only through social media channels. I have looked for other sources, but couldn't find any. By a similar logic, mobile games are typically going into unannounced soft launches first. The only - and very reliable source - of information about a game's actual first publication (the official PR announcement is done later, sometimes even months or years later) is the app stores. From that perspective, it simply doesn't make sense to consider app stores inappropriate sources of information. 

Bebenzahn (talk) 08:17, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Hi @Bebenzahn, its actually none of the above. Each Wikipedia language is their own project with the own policies and guideline so something acceptable on one may not be acceptable on another. The English Wikipedia tends to be the most strict. As for other articles, see other stuff exists. Policies and guidelines have changed overtime so something acceptable years ago may not be acceptable today and some actilces get by when they shouldn't. I can say both articles at least violate the verifiability policy. Per policy, unsourced content may be removed at any time. As for finding sources, you may find WP:WikiProject Video games/Sources helpful. Generally speaking, video games meet the notability criteria with multiple in-depth reviews by reputable sources. S0091 (talk) 13:43, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Hi!
I have overhauled the draft and resubmitted it.

Thanks for your help and suggestions

I see you worked on Draft:Paul_Prestopino and left a note on the Talk page. Much appreciated. Harborsparrow (talk) 18:15, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

@Harborsparrow sure! Sorry for messing up your citation style. S0091 (talk) 17:19, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

Are you familiar with

User:SBD091? I've got suspicions about their contributions and am wondering if they're low key impersonating you. Folly Mox (talk) 18:18, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Folly Mox no, not familiar and I think impersonation is a stretch. Soo91, yep or maybe even S0092 or something like that but I don't think SDB091 is quite enough unless they were doing things to mimic me like copying my User page, etc. However, taking a quick look at their contribs, certainly agree with your other suspicions. Appreciate you checking! S0091 (talk) 18:29, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 August 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:17, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

New pages patrol invitation

Hello, S0091.
  • The new pages patrol team is currently struggling to keep up with the influx of new articles and redirects needing review. We could use a few extra hands to help.
  • I believe that someone with your activity and experience is very likely to meet the guidelines for granting.
  • Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time, but it requires a strong understanding of Wikipedia’s CSD policy and notability guidelines.
  • Kindly read the tutorial before making your decision, and feel free to post on the project talk page with questions.
  • If patrolling new pages is something you'd be willing to help out with, please consider applying here.

Thank you for your consideration. We hope to see you around!

Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 16:59, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

Anani Mohamed Draft

Hi S0091–can you please assist with the deletion of Anani Mohamed? I have followed the citing procedures and also have used the same sources as other players on the Guyana National Football Team to support details about the player. Globalsoccerhero (talk) 22:09, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

Voiceless uvular nasal

Hi, I was looking through the linguistics drafts and saw you'd rejected Draft:Voiceless uvular nasal on the basis that the subject already had an article at voiced uvular nasal, but they're not the same consonant, as one is voiced and one is voiceless which is a huge distinction. -- NotCharizard 🗨 11:17, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Notcharizard thanks for catching my mistake. I should have selected "merge to" which is next to "exists" in the AfC pick list and really should have also added WP:V as a reason because most of the draft is unsourced. If you look at the history and the templates at both the draft and article, another editor suggested merge and to re-title as Uvular nasal. The editor who created the draft has not edited since they created it back in June though. However, if you are interested feel free to improve it and merge it or either resubmit it or move it to mainspace if you believe a stand-alone article is warranted (i.e. be WP:BOLD). You might also consider becoming an AfC reviewer yourself. See WP:WikiProject Articles for creation/Participants for the criteria. S0091 (talk) 13:43, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Draft, Kate Clark (flautist)

Hi S0091,

I am updating Draft:Kate Clark (flautist), and have added more sources to address your comment that "still some of this is unsourced." I have focused on sources that seemed verifiable and that mentioned something more than just her name. I also removed some bits of information that I could not source separately from what Clark has said herself in interviews and in her bios. I do have a question about how to source something like her connection with the Amsterdam Baroque Orchestra, a very prestigious orchestra in the early music field, led by the leading harpsichordist and Bach scholar Ton Koopman. I have not yet found any reviews specifically mentioning the quality of Clark's performance in a particular concert, but there are countless advertisements for past and upcoming concerts. I note that under "Criteria for musicians and ensembles," point 1 says that sources that merely mention concerts do not count. What should I do in that instance, since the mere fact that she plays with such an orchestra with such a leader has a lot of weight?


I have also added a link to show that Clark has won first prize at a major international music competition, which fulfills point 9 under "Criteria for musicians and ensembles" on the "Wikipedia: Notability(music)" page.


It also occurs to me that perhaps the field of early music is lesser known--some of the things on the notability criteria chart will likely never happen to anyone in early music. I wondered if there is something I need to do to show that the prize Clark has won and ensembles she plays with are quite prestigious and respected in the field?


I would appreciate any feedback you have! Traversotwin (talk) 21:30, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Traversotwin I think another fitting criteria for her is WP:NMUSICOTHER, specifically #3. I also looked for a better source to support her performances with the Amsterdam Baroque Orchestra but came up with the same as you. However, I think is fine to add a source even if it is just a mention to support she performed for verifiability. You can also use her Royal Conservatory of The Hague bio to fill in some pieces. See also her AllMusic entry which may help fill in some of the pieces about recordings.
I found a couple sources on ProQuest which I added, one from The Independent regarding Les Musiciens du Louvre: "Kate Clark's flute solo was quite exquisite; clean, incisive, and virtuosic but never to a meretricious degree."
I also found one from the The Jerusalem Post about a performance from the Authentica Plus series at the Jerusalem Music Center, Mishkenot Sha'ananim on February 1, 1996 where she performed with Ofer Frenkel and Yocheved Schwarz (footnote #2): "The subtle art of ornamentation and refined musical taste were demonstrated by Clark's faithful-to-style renditions. Improvised embellishments were placed just where one felt they belonged, in just the right, never overdone dosage. Her agility in lightly hovering over the instrument's finger-holes in the fast movements, particularly in a highly virtuoso finuetto of a sonata by Leclair, brought the piece's gracefulness to life in all its delicateness. ....Clark's instructive talk about the intricacies and the salient features of the period's ornamental style provided an appropriate introduction of this fascinating evening." I wasn't sure where to put it so I just plopped it in but you can use it to expand the draft. S0091 (talk) 15:15, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
@Traversotwin see also footnote 33 I just added which has a lengthy review of Madame d'amours by the Early Music (journal). I think you can access one page but the second page states: "While this disc shows what can be done with vocal sources on purely instrumental forces, it is also a tour de force of instrumental ensemble playing - meticulously prepared, carefully thought out and an exuberant celebration of the flute consort at its best. This recording will have appeal beyond the early wind specialist and scholarly community." S0091 (talk) 15:50, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
Hi @S0091,
Wow, thank you so much for all of these ideas and extra tidbits from your own research! You found some real gems of reviews! I have rearranged some sentences in order to better accommodate the quotes you found, and I added a lot more recordings based on her AllMusic entry.
I was hesitant to include too many things from her biography from the Royal Conservatory of The Hague, as I thought that might not count as "sourced" from Wiki's perspective, since bios are most often written by the musicians themselves. So I just included the things that I could reference. I must admit that this feels like a bit of a gray zone for me.
I really appreciate your taking the time and effort to help me. I am already feeling better about resubmitting soon (just want to dig around for any more reviews). Traversotwin (talk) 13:38, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
@Traversotwin see WP:PRIMARY and WP:ABOUTSELF for some guidance on using primary sources. In this case, I think it is fine to use the bio for her date of birth and education if no other sources exist or for other dates (ex. she started teaching at Royal Conservatory of The Hague in 1996). Yes, I agree the draft is shaping up nicely. :) S0091 (talk) 14:19, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 August 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:44, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

Alexandre Raymond (1872-1941)

Good morning,

First of all, thank you for giving your time to Alexandre Raymond's wikipedia.

I will look for the missing references concerning it and I will, over the days, insert them in the wikipedia.

1 - That said, the book by researcher Afifa Bätur "Bir Mimar Bi Yorum: Alexandre Raymond" - which is presented at the very bottom of Wikipedia - is a solid reference in itself.

https://www.nadirkitap.com/bir-mimar-bir-yorum-alexandre-raymond-sergi-katalogu-an-architect-an-interpretation-alexandre-raymond-yayina-hazirlayan-sennur-senturk-raymond-alexandre- kitap24552088.html

2 - Alexandre Raymond was editor of a technical journal in Constantinople in 1910-11-12. This journal can be found in the BNF

https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k8937528?rk=21459;2

3 - Finally... the large and new library of Istanbul carefully keeps books and originals by Alexandre Raymond that have been available for consultation on the net for a short time:

https://katalog.ibb.gov.tr/yordam/?dil=3&p=1&q=alexandre+raymond&alan=tum_txt

I would not understand that these three references are not sufficient to justify the acceptance of Alexandre Raymond in the wikipedia.

The French Wikipedia has been accepted: why shouldn't the English Wikipedia be?

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

Good for you! Karagil Karagil (talk) 07:20, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Karagil each language Wikipedia is its own project and has their own policies and guidelines so something acceptable on one may not be acceptable on another. The English Wikipedia tends to be the most strict. Please also note I am not the reviewer who declined the draft but I did leave comments with guidance about the type of sources needed. It appears from the above these are still primary sources. You need secondary independent sources that have written in-depth about him or about his work. S0091 (talk) 13:21, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
Good morning,
Once again thank you for paying your attention to Alexandre Raymond's Wikipedia. As external references, I will add 2 links. But above all, I add extracts from the book that Afifa Batur, architectural historian, wrote on Alexandre Raymond (Bir Mimar, Bir Yorum: Alexandre Raymond - 1999). There was never any question of Alexandre Raymond because he suffered precisely from a lack of knowledge of his art during his lifetime. His hundreds of drawings on Islamic Art and on Hagia Sophia in Constantinople (Istanbul), which recently became a mosque again, are emerging.
You tell me that it is not you who has the power to prevent the appearance of the English Wikipedia, so who decides? Can't I speak directly to the decision-makers? Can you pass on my message to them?
THANKS
Karagil September 1, 2023 Karagil (talk) 13:53, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
Hi @Karagil I am a reviewer but just not the one who mostly recently declined the draft. I just removed that large quote you added from the book. You cannot do large quotes like that. Generally only a sentence or two is allowed. You need to summarize what sources say in your own words. Please also cite sources appropriately. See WP:REFBEGIN for instructions. S0091 (talk) 14:39, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
Good morning
Well received...
If I summarize in a few lines what Affa Batur wrote about Alexandre Raymond, will it be accepted?
He’s not a “little Sunday cartoonist!” Born in Constantinople (Istanbul), he drew on Islamic Art and the Hagia Sophia (which became a mosque in 2022). He is hot on international news. It is for this reason that his drawings stand out at Sotheby's and Drouot in Paris.
When will I know if Alexandre Raymond is accepted on Wikipedia?
Karagil Karagil (talk) 15:40, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
Good morning,
I added references to sites on the web: a current link with the BNF, a link with Persée which quotes an author who speaks of Alexandre Raymond in the magazine Echos d'Orient in 1926, and a sentence from Afifa Batur on Alexandre Raymond. Karagil (talk) 15:38, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
Hi @Karagil there is still a lot of over-quoting, most everything is still sourced to primary sources (letters) or unreliable sources and citations need to formatted correctly (see WP:REFBEGIN). Also, stating things like "He did not enjoy the success he deserved during his lifetime, which is why his Wikipedia only appears today." is inappropriate for an encyclopedia. It needs a lot work. S0091 (talk) 16:34, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

A cupcake for you!

I'm as surprised as you are! Theroadislong (talk) 20:27, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
@Theroadislong a lot of giggling and a bright smile on my face! I have to say the whole thing is one of greatest exchanges I have seen between editors on Wikipedia. And I agree with AstrowszechwiatWKG, you are the best! :) S0091 (talk) 20:40, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

I also missed the black hattedness

But it was immaterial in pushing it back to draft. If I were pressed om my rationale I would have trouble being specific. My antennae twitched. That is the best answer I have. It meant that I gave the whole thing a hard stare, and found it to be deeply insufficient.

I see little point in re-reviewing the remainder, but will if three people or more ask me to do so. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 14:09, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

@Timtrent I had removed some of the bad sources before you reviewed it but they would have been there when OLI accepted it. I left it for NPP review because, like you, my antennae twitched but wanted another eye. I posted the note at AfC to bolster OLI was not wrong in accepting it. Antennae calibration comes with experience. :) I agree there is little point in doing any more re-reviews, not to mention if I thought more re-reviewers were needed I would do them myself instead of asking you. You have spent more than enough of your time. S0091 (talk) 14:41, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
I do think Oli has had a bit of a baptism of fire. ANI felt a bit like a pile on, and AFC was a subset. ANI is still dragging on.
The re-reviews were interesting. Nothing surprised me. It was a progression of fewer and fewer errors. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 14:46, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
@Timtrent Yep, the ANI was unfortunate and I didn't realize it was still going on. Its a relief to know your reviews showed positive progression. That's really all we can ask from new or even experienced reviewers and we all make mistakes. FYI, I posted a note at AfC agreeing the thread can be closed. Time to move on. S0091 (talk) 15:11, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Liz Linden

Hi there, You have taken out some of my sources on Draft:Liz Linden and I'm trying to add in the citations you've noted. (This is my first new page so I'm learning as I go, and I appreciate your input!) I'm confused about a couple of your comments though: You took out a New York Times mention of the artist (and it's true that it's her speaking about issues facing mother/artists rather than being about her work directly) BUT it also includes her photographs/her work so it seemed relevant in terms of proof of noteworthiness (which was your first comment.) Also, you removed the New York Observer article I cited but that was about her & Jen Kennedy's work (which was a performance/reading group that the journalist attended and described in the article.) You may have misunderstood the article as the artist's comments on media generally, but that was a description of the work itself. Can you just reconfirm whether these are useful-- either for proving noteworthiness and/or as secondary sources. (These are both mainstream journalistic sources that have covered the artist's work.) Another issue you mentioned is that some sources are about her collaborative work, but she is indeed an artist who frequently collaborates so to ignore that would be to create a somewhat inaccurate portrait of her work. Is there something else I need to do to address that? Thanks again for your help. Sculpture2000 (talk) 20:16, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

@Sculpture2000 I took a look at the NYT and Observer articles again and neither of them cover her art work. The NYT included a couple pieces of her work but does not say anything about them. The Observer piece is about the reading group and the only mention about Linden is "Ms. Kennedy and Liz Linden, a Brooklyn-based artist, came up with the idea for The New York Times Feminist Reading Group in 2009, as part of an ongoing collaboration into the “semiotics of feminism."" which is not about her art. You can use it state she and Kennedy started the group and a bit about the group's purpose but that's about it. Neither are helpful for contributing to notability which requires a source to meet all four criteria: reliable, secondary, independent and provides in-depth coverage directly about the subject. Neither provide in-depth coverage about Linden and neither are independent as they largely rely on what she says. My note about the collaborations is that you need to give credit to the collaborator as well if the source is about a collaborative work. I also struggle a bit about if the article should be about her and Kennedy, her most frequent collaborator, as most of the sources are about their collaborations so its difficult to separate the two. S0091 (talk) 14:39, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
Hi there, Thanks for this. But The New York Times Feminist Reading Group IS an artwork. (It's a public performance-based work that's been exhibited in various museums and galleries (see this or this as examples). It doesn't look like a "traditional" artwork because it falls under the category of "relational aesthetics.Relational art".) Yes, the Observer is not in-depth about Linden, but it does provide in-depth coverage of her work (in this case an artwork she makes with Kennedy.)
Re: your other comments I'm happy to tweak mentions where the collaborative work is what is addressed as well as find more on her individually to add, but I want to clear up whether the Observer specifically is relevant; it is about her artwork, even though it may not look like "art" in terms of its medium. Sculpture2000 (talk) 15:10, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
@Sculpture2000 Ahhh! Fascinating. The Observer piece does not make that clear (at least to me). Its in the Media section rather than Arts and now looking back there is one sentence that describes it as art but not until the 6th paragraph. Anyway, yes, it does make sense to include it. I also suggest you describe the work in the draft and include one (or both) of the other museum sources you provided above. Ideally, an article should provide at least some information about the specific work covered with a summary of what sources said about it, even if brief. Of course the draft does not need to be expanded to that extent for it to be acceptable. Even a well sourced WP:stub is acceptable but leaves the reader with little understanding of the topic so something to consider. S0091 (talk) 21:13, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Incorrect marking of edits as 'minor'

I have just finished the third of three edits to the wikipedia page about the Boy's Own Paper. Due to a lack of understanding on my part I marked the first two as 'minor' edits when I now believe I shouldn't have done. Is there any way back from this, or will my edits be cast into the outer darkness, and me with them?

I hope I'm asking in the right place - there's an awful lot of things to get right all at once! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Duckspindle (talk • contribs) 17:25, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 58

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 58, July – August 2023

  • New partners - De Standaard and Duncker & Humblot
  • Tech tip: Filters
  • Wikimania presentation

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --14:27, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

Article rejection

Hello, I hope you are well. You have recently rejected the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Group_GTI. The points previous were that the page read too much like an advertisement, I have since cut a lot of the content that was there previously and only kept a short introduction and a company timeline. With only these remaining I was wondering why the choice for rejection? I am willing to adapt or add anything to make it work. I appreciate the work you do and I'm sorry to use your time. All the best Adambanks11 (talk) 14:32, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Adambanks11 the previous reviewers and the editors at the help desk outlined the issues. There is nothing that indicates the company can meet the notability guidelines so will not be considered further. See WP:No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability. S0091 (talk) 14:55, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
I have looked at the previous reviewers and editors notes and have now added in sources and references all over the article where possible according to the feedback. Nothing here is also suggesting the page is trying to advertise anything, I have kept it short and factual. If you may, please review the rejection again after these changes. Thanks for your time with this! Banks11 (talk) 08:34, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
@Banks11 none of the sources you added meets the notability sourcing criteria. I do not say this to be mean but my best advice is move on as this is waste of time not only for you but also volunteers. Group GTI is simply not notable under Wikipedia's definition and I will not reverse my rejection. S0091 (talk) 19:47, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:IPhone 15 Pro has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:IPhone 15 Pro. Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 00:02, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

Emmanuel Njoku;Notabality and Article Rejection?

hi @S0091, I have been making progress with understanding and applying the wikipedia guidelines as it has to do with writing and editing articles, but does it mean the notability refers to being very famous? because if what I gather from allowed and available resources to reference my articles are interpreted by you who declined the article to be what was said by the individual, what happens then considering what was said was independently reported by witnesses who heard what was said and I believe reports are a product of what is said or done. secondly the issue of quoting more than one source carrying the same report may have been an oversight which has been corrected, but could different platforms not write about a subject depending on the way information was sourced? I hope you can take another look and offer further writing and editing advice if you can,I have seen less or similar articles being approved in terms of referencing. Thank you and I appreciate Dukology (talk) 16:30, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 September 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:37, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Deleting bio headings

Hello @S0091. On Lalla Salma's page you have deleted Headings developing well sourced details to compact all into a single heading titled:Biography. It's wrong. I couldn't revert it since you edited the source manually.

You told me on Revision History that my addition for the Mosque named in her tribute should be summarized further. Reasonable, I could have done it, but I see you did it. However, the problem is that you've deleted everyone's well referenced additions of her bio, englobing: the Foundation Against Cancer she created, her other international health engagements and the explanations about the status of her "public role": which is unprecedented in the history of the country. I think it should be remediated. Thank you.--~~~ AvaBrandon2000 (talk) 09:35, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi @AvaBrandon2000 thank you for the note. You can restore it to your version by going to history, clicking on the time/date stamp of your edit yesterday (19:44 15 September 2023) to pull up that version. At the top there will be a link "restore this version", click that to restore it. You can just state in the edit summary something like "restoring per discussion at S0091's talk" so other editors will not think you are edit warring. I have no attachment to article. Note though, most of the content I removed was completely unsourced and Hello! is a tabloid so is a weak source (see WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 267#Hello! Magazine). If you think the content should be kept, you need to find reliable sources or it will likely be removed again. S0091 (talk) 13:37, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
Noted, thank you @S0091. I'll delete the note I left on Talk:Princess Lalla Salma of Morocco if you agree. I'm sorry, I though you were seldom active, but you took your time to reply very quickly--AvaBrandon2000 (talk) 16:38, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
@AvaBrandon2000 eh...leave the note on talk page since I did respond and perhaps another editor may have an opinion about the sources. All good! S0091 (talk) 18:07, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
Ok thank you for your reply @S0091.AvaBrandon2000 (talk) AvaBrandon2000 (talk) 19:54, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Aanal Kotak

Hi, hope you are doing well. Thank you for your feedback regarding the Aanal Kotak Wikipedia page. I appreciate your guidance, and I have made the necessary revisions to address your concerns. In response to your comments,I have removed press releases, announcements, interviews, and comments as you suggested. Instead, I have replaced these references with reliable, secondary sources from reputable news outlets. These sources are entirely independent of the subject and provide verifiable information about Aanal Kotak's notability and accomplishments. I hope these changes meet the Wikipedia content guidelines, and I look forward to your further feedback. I would like to thank you in advance for your time and assistance. ScholarlyScribe (talk) 13:29, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi @ScholarlyScribe click the blue "Resubmit" button and another reviewer will take a look. S0091 (talk) 13:45, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Rishi Kuppa Page

Hi, I can see you have declined the submissions. Rishi Kuppa is a child actor and the references produced are primary sources. Can you please let me know where you see a conflict? Thanks 2A02:C7C:5A3E:8D00:C582:AF66:4B6E:4870 (talk) 16:23, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi IP, I am not sure what you are asking but primary sources cannot be used to establish notability. Also see Block evasion. S0091 (talk) 20:43, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

Health and Safety (Safety Signs and Signals) Regulations

Hello @S0091,

first of all, I am sorry that I misused the AfC-Wizard for direct resubmiting. But I have two questions: why do you think, this draft doesn't meet the notability threshold? I have seen plenty of articles in this wiki about legislation and tables of signs, some being stubs, some not, so I think there is indeed a relevance for this draft. I kindly ask you to withdraw your rejection. And secondly, what do you mean with socking? This is my only account, I don't use sockpuppets. Thank you in advance, RandomDuck5000 (talk) 00:11, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi @RandomDuck5000 I apologize. I was completely out of line about the socking. We do have a long term sock that creates somewhat similar articles and I made a bad assumption. Also you did nothing wrong in resubmitting the draft so no issue there. I have reversed my reject so the draft is back in pending review status so another reviewer will take a look. S0091 (talk) 15:18, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
Hi @S0091, no issue! Thank you for taking another look and reverting your rejection! Have a nice day, RandomDuck5000 (talk) 17:02, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Can the Draft:Bubbleblabber be deleted or something?

It seems like there are continual attempts to bring it back, but its never been proven to be notable. Also, I have a suspicion that User:Jschwarz8 is John Schwarz, the editor for Bubbleblabber, which would be a conflict of interest if true.Historyday01 (talk) 18:44, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Historyday01, it don't think it meets any of WP:CSD criteria. It's not blatantly promotional or a copyright violation, etc. You are not creator so you cannot request it be deleted under WP:G7. It will be WP:G13 deleted if no human edits it in the next six months, though. Also, I just rejected it so it cannot be submitted again to AfC. Why did you submit back in May? S0091 (talk) 18:51, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
Hmm, ok. I submitted it back in May because I guess I thought it might result in a deletion? I probably should have just left it alone and let it be deleted via WP:G13 and I'll keep that in mind. Historyday01 (talk) 19:02, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
I see. The only other option to get it deleted is to take it to WP:MFD but I doubt that will be successful as most editors will just say it's not doing any harm in draft space and will most likely be deleted in six months anyway. There are tons of drafts similar to this one. They will never become articles, likely (or confirmed) COI/Paid, etc. but they do not meet CSD outside of eventually WP:G13. My best advice is to not let it bother you; otherwise you will go mad and no need for that. :) S0091 (talk) 19:13, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Please consider reviewing

Hi, hope you're well! I see that you're an active figure in AfC and thus would really appreciate it if you could review Draft:Charles de Schwartzenberg. Thanks. Omnibenevolence (talk) 20:34, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

@Omnibenevolence as I sure you now know, another reviewer accepted it. Good job! S0091 (talk) 20:44, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Bowdon College / Bowden College

Regarding this request, it looks like Bowdon College is the redirect that should be deleted and Bowden College should have its redirect target adjusted after the draft has been moved to article space because it is "Bowdon" and not "Bowden. -- Whpq (talk) 13:59, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

@Whpq Shoot! Good catch! Didn't notice that and it appears @Firefangledfeathers moved the draft to Bowden College, which is not the correct name. Firefangledfeathers can you please move it to the correct title, Bowdon College? Sorry, its confusing because it has been spelled Bowden at times in sources and the legislature appears to have misspelled it in a bill. S0091 (talk) 14:14, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
So moved! Thank you both. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 14:51, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
Thanks @Firefangledfeathers! I had this all straight in my head yesterday but a night's sleep apparently wiped my brain. :) S0091 (talk) 14:53, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

G. F. Richings

I started Draft:G. F. Richings. Any ideas on what G. F. stands for? FloridaArmy (talk) 14:20, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Maybe George F. ? Found 1910 census record, born around 1853, born/living in Ohio, occupation Lecturer, industry Educational wife Romina. S0091 (talk) 14:38, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
@FloridaArmy yep, that's him, see https://www.newspapers.com/clip/the-philadelphia-inquirer-lecture-on-co/132169548/. S0091 (talk) 14:47, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Moiz Abbas

Hi @S0091,

I edited this Draft:Moiz Abbas. Last time, you had reviewed it. So, I have added the necessary information. I want you to review it. Thank you, have a beautiful life ahead. Zoraiznaeem (talk) 19:30, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

@Zoraiznaeem the draft has been WP:CITEBOMBed and I am not going to go through all those poor sources (Dawn Images, interviews, etc.). The draft is rejected so will not be considered further. S0091 (talk) 19:37, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for your review. What do you suggest? Btw, citation is just added as a reference to every point. Zoraiznaeem (talk) 20:32, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
@Zoraiznaeem I suggest moving on as Abbas is not notable and no amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability. S0091 (talk) 20:38, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

M. O. Penix

Here is another case of initials. FloridaArmy (talk) 12:48, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

@FloridaArmy I looked at that one a couple weeks or so ago and while I am certain his name was Mandon (Find a Grave, wife Mollie), I was unable to find a reliable secondary source. S0091 (talk) 13:34, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
How very strange! The findagrave lead is definitely interesting but I too came up with nothing. There is a Penick family that moved from Kentucky to Little Rock and seems to have made some waves (also connected to Worthen family). It too had a Mollie. She married a Penick. Here are a collection of family papers. Maybe I am stretching too far but I believe I saw Penick / Pinick as alternative spelling of the Penix surname. FloridaArmy (talk) 13:56, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
@FloridaArmy Looking at census and other records, M.O. and Mollie (nee McAlister) were born and married in Arkansas. They had no connection to Kentucky, although they may have shortly lived in Kansas and moved to Texas in their later years (daughter Nancy lived there), and the last name is consistently spelled Penix. S0091 (talk) 14:10, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia

Hi, @S0091

I suggested english version for Draft:Arseny Zhilyaev But your review says it is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. May I ask what was the reason for such decision?

Thanks in advance for your time Tatiana Neri (talk) 18:08, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Tatiana Neri I apologize. That was an error on my part when going through the edits by a blocked sock who also randomly submitted drafts created by others. I have restored the draft to the version prior to the sock's edit which put it back in pending review status. S0091 (talk) 18:20, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
Thank you! Tatiana Neri (talk) 18:30, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Newspapers

I was also wondering if you could promote the list article / disambig page Draft:List of newspapers named The Democrat to mainspace? FloridaArmy (talk) 13:53, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

@FloridaArmy I don't think this meets WP:NLIST criteria as there is only one topic with an article, others listed have no mention of a newspaper called "The Democrat" in the linked articles and there are no sources discussing them as a set or group. Maybe List of newspapers named or referred as The Democrat? Oh, but check out Northwest Arkansas Democrat Gazette and The Leader (Corning) (at some point in their history were The Democrat) so maybe? S0091 (talk) 16:38, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
It links to The Democrat (which needs to be moved), Arkansas Democrat, and Davenport Democrat so that's three pages already. FloridaArmy (talk) 17:30, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
I also added the two you noted above so that's five. I'm confident more will be added. FloridaArmy (talk) 17:42, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Initials

Regarding Draft:Chandru Selvaraj

Hey S0091, Hope you doing well. I just wanted to let you know that I retrieved Draft:Chandru Selvaraj and have moved it to main space after addressing your concerns placed on it on 17 December 2022‎ [1] of the BLP being not notable enough for Wikipedia. Cheers <3 Jeraxmoira (talk) 19:50, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Jeraxmoira thanks for making improvements to the draft and getting into mainspace! S0091 (talk) 18:37, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 3 October 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:31, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Draft:George Atkinson (Northumbrian piper)

I am writing an article about this Northumbrian piper - this is one of a series about noted players of the Northumbrian smallpipes. Atkinson's father Will was a noted musician, one of 'The Shepherds', but he was himself highly respected for his artistry and the accuracy of his technique. The surviving recordings of his playing, particularly those on The Wild Hills of Wannie, are influential to this day. He is certainly an important figure in the recent history of the instrument and its music. I'm trying to find as much material in published sources as I can - the Northumberland Gazette interview, which came to light recently, is helpful. Can you keep the draft article live, so that I can complete it in the coming months? John Gibbons 3 (talk) 20:42, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi @John Gibbons 3 the WP:G13 deletion criteria goes by the last edit by a human, meaning it will only be deleted if a human has not edited it in six months. Given you just updated it, it will not be deleted at least six months from today. S0091 (talk) 20:57, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

Infinity ECHS - feedback.

I appreciate your feedback. How can I improve my article for Infinity ECHS? I a have removed peacock language, I added another secondary source. I also moved academic info for the school into a new section at the bottom of the article.

What can I change to get my article published? I appreciate your feedback. WesWall2003 (talk) 22:53, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

Answered on their talk page. S0091 (talk) 15:16, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

J. A. Yordy

Any idea what this fellow's initials stand for? FloridaArmy (talk) 14:12, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Jacob Astor, grave, obit. That one was tough! S0091 (talk) S0091 (talk) 15:07, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
Ping @FloridaArmy:. S0091 (talk) 15:07, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
@FloridaArmy Also, he was actually from Pennsylvania, not Ohio. S0091 (talk) 15:22, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 October 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:01, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Out West on the Overland Train

Information icon Hello, S0091. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Out West on the Overland Train, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 17:03, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

A slight nitpick

You recently made some comments regarding Murders of Abigail Williams and Liberty German that the consensus was to not include the suspects name in both your comment to an editor, as well as on your revert but it was actually WP:NOCON.

While it may seem like splitting hairs, the way you have stated it implies that the consensus was in favor of exclusion, where none was found.

Slight nitpick, but I know you tend to do reversions on that page, and wanted to point it out for future reference. If I could suggest that in the future, it may help to offer them the chance to start a new topic on the talk page to discuss whatever they want to add. Take care, and realize that all of this was just intended as a civil heads up (which is why I commented on your Talk Page rather than the above listed users comment page) for an editor I respect.


Awshort (talk) 09:01, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

@Awshort ahh...yes, you are correct of course. It had been a while since the RfC and my memory failed on the specifics. On top of that, consensus can change so really either way I should have mentioned they can start a discussion. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. Also, you certainly would have been within your right to have corrected me on the user's talk page and had you do done so, it would not have bothered me a bit. A WP:TROUT is also appropriate. :) S0091 (talk) 21:11, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Draft:A. P. Huggins

Would you be able to figure out what his initials stand for? FloridaArmy (talk) 18:35, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

@FloridaArmy looks like Allen P., got census and Freedman's Bureau records hits, see this article and this grave is likely him. Oh, on another note, check out Airdrie, Kentucky, I found out founder was Robert A. Alexander. S0091 (talk) 19:12, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
Kentucky and horses. That's interesting that his entry doesn't mention anything about it as far as I can see? Great to see some pieces of the puzzle coming together. Thanks for your help on Allen P. Of course we still don't know his middle name??? Have a great weekend. FloridaArmy (talk) 19:20, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
@FloridaArmy I added a sentence about Airdie to Robert's article. I think P=Pardee (1896 voter registration in CA, living in Pasadena) and also census records indicate he was incarcerated in 1910 (Malibu) but there's no obit that I can find. S0091 (talk) 19:50, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Bendahara Sakam Review Request

Hey Soo91, if you are free to review a draft please review the Draft Bendahara Sakam. this draft has been unreviewed for so long... Syazwi Irfan (talk) 09:43, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

November Articles for creation backlog drive

Hello S0091:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive!
The goal of this drive is to reduce the backlog of unreviewed drafts to less than 2 months outstanding reviews from the current 4+ months. Bonus points will be given for reviewing drafts that have been waiting more than 30 days. The drive is running from 1 November 2023 through 30 November 2023.

You may find Category:AfC pending submissions by age or other categories and sorting helpful.

Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.

There is a backlog of over 1000 pages, so start reviewing drafts. We're looking forward to your help! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:24, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Religious horror film (draft) to be reviewed

Please re-review this article: Draft:Religious horror film. It has been improved in terms of sourcing and fixing mistakes. Thanks! Russell7890 (talk) 17:57, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Russell7890, At a brief look it appears quite promising but I think it is best to get another reviewer's take. There's a backlog drive starting tomorrow so hopefully it will not take too long. S0091 (talk) 18:12, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 6 November 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:44, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Draft: Gerasimos Tsourapas

Hi there -- thanks for the advice on the new article on Gerasimos Tsourapas, super helpful! I have edited the page to satisfy Criterion 8, as suggested (chief editor of a major well-established academic journal in their subject area), and cited the journal website to document this as a reliable source. Does that resolve the earlier comment? Caresmin79 (talk) 16:06, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

@Caresmin79 now that it is in mainspace (Article) an WP:NPP reviewer will take a look. In the future though, please use the WP:MOVE function rather than copy/pasting a draft into mainspace as it creates duplication and confusion. S0091 (talk) 16:58, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
absolutely. it is my second article on here (bit of a learning curve!) Caresmin79 (talk) 17:00, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
@Caresmin79 I understand. :) Also, given you are WP:autoconfirmed, there is no requirement you submit drafts to AfC for review (unless you have a WP:COI). You can create the draft then move it mainspace when ready. The move I think automatically cleans up all the draft templates but you can simply delete anything left over, if any. S0091 (talk) 17:08, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Malcolm Merlyn

On the my draft about Malcolm Merlyn you said I needed to cite plot detials would citing the episode or citing plot summaries or reveiws be better?Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 19:38, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

@OlifanofmrTennant I think the issue it is not "plot details" but a biography about the character (which I know to a large extent are the same). I think plot summaries and/or reviews are better but I also don't think you need to cite everything in the biography; just enough that proves other sources have written about Merlyn's biography for each season. Does that make sense? Also, good job as it is well-written. S0091 (talk) 19:52, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Connected contributor

Hi @S0091, thank you for linking the advice page to my draft (Draft:Bernhard Ruchti). I have reviewed the COI page. My connection to the musician described in the page is that I have contacted him to get approval to use his picture. I believe that I should use the "connected contributor" template but I have to make sure I do it right, would it be possible to help me? Right now I placed the following section at the top of the article I am about to resubmit (in comments):

{{Connected contributor|User1=Dkoltorcan |U1-declared=yes| I declare that I had contact with the musician described on this page when I asked him for permission to use his picture.}}

Is that enough? Is there anything else I should do? I also added a COI section on the talk page.

Thank you for your help. Dkoltorcan (talk) 00:21, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

@Dkoltorcan I have added the declaration to your User page (User:Dkoltorcan) and the draft's talk page. S0091 (talk) 13:26, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Thank you! Dkoltorcan (talk) 17:09, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Barnstar of Good Humor
I know you know this already, but I just need to remind you (even though you didn't forget, lol) that you are one user with good humour. Thank you for always lightening my mood, and thank you for your calm spirit. Thank you for correcting me without biting me, I mean, I've encountered many users since I became a new page patroller but you are one of a kind. Thank you for teaching me hidden stuff, and making things clearer. You are such an amazing person. I know I still have a lot to learn from you so, I can't wait :).

PS: I was planning to do this by 11th (when I become three month old on here) but I can't wait no more, lol. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 20:45, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Awww...thanks @Vanderwaalforces! S0091 (talk) 21:19, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Um...

Wtf, S0091? I wasn't done with the draft nor was I planning on submitting to AfC at all. SilverserenC 22:15, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

@Silver seren I was going through drafts created by FA based on this list and submitting some I thought would pass because the AfC drive has brought pending submissions down to almost zero. If you want to me skip any you have edited, I can but not sure if any other editors are going through them (or unsubmitted drafts in general. see also WT:WikiProject Articles for creation/November 2023 Backlog Drive#What to do for the remaining 2.5 weeks). I am not sure one can stop another editor from submitting drafts they did not create or significantly contributed to. S0091 (talk) 22:40, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
It's just generally considered really rude to submit a draft someone else is actively working on. Just because a draft page exists also doesn't mean someone is planning on using AfC at all. SilverserenC 22:42, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
@Silver seren I understand where you coming from and apologize. I did not mean any offense and will be sure not to touch any of FA's drafts you have edited. S0091 (talk) 22:48, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Okay, thank you. Sorry if I was brusque, I was just surprised. SilverserenC 22:59, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
@Silver seren now that I see your note at the AfC discussion and understanding you were planning a DYK I get the Wtf a bit more. I should have noticed your recent edits but honestly didn't think to look as the vast majority have only been edited by FA. S0091 (talk) 23:15, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

User:Silver seren I noticed that you are back, and I was trying to hold off on asking for help with various subjects so as not to chase you away! User:S0091 thanks so much for helping with my many drafts!!! FloridaArmy (talk) 16:12, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

R. G. Williams

Was R. G. Williams a pseudonym for William Lloyd Garrison? Someone else? They published abolitionist publications. Thanks. FloridaArmy (talk) 15:50, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

I think Alexander Anderson (illustrator) did the engravings for his various abolitionist publications, but I don't see anything about them in his entry. An Alexander Anderson noted as illustrator here. FloridaArmy (talk) 16:05, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
When you write the Ransom G. Williams entry please include File:Letter to) Bro. Williams (manuscript (IA lettertobrowilli00phel).pdf this letter to him. Actually there may be lots of other images to illustrate including the publications themselves. Good luck!!! FloridaArmy (talk) 16:16, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Kitten of appreciation

I was new here on Wikipedia and didn't quite understand the rules of anything. Thank you for helping me in a civil way! Here is a nice photo of a cat for you.

GordonFreeman1997 (talk) 18:54, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

A comment you made a long time ago

Just giving you a heads up that the comment you made here provided incorrect information to a new editor. The extended-confirmed restriction applies everywhere, including draft space. I'm not sure if this is still the advice you'd give, but I figured it's best if I popped in the clarify. I appreciate your good faith work helping new editors and working at AfC, so please don't take this as any sort of admonishment. Thanks for all you do. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:18, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

@ScottishFinnishRadish thanks for taking the time to let me know. Luckily, I believe that is the only time I have given advice about ARBPIA other than leaving a notice and even that is rare. S0091 (talk) 14:12, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

Sustainable Ventures Draft

Hi S0091,


Thanks for your input regarding my wikipedia submission. What sources would be credible to prove that the company exists? Or what references would showcase impact besides internal impact/investing reports? Besides the information I've referenced, there's not any more online articles. Is it also a case whereby I remove some references, besides the company website references, which other ones are irrelevant?

Have a lovely week and hope to hear from you soon!


Many thanks,

SustainableJragon SustainableJragon (talk) 10:20, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

@SustainableJragon Wikipedia is a not a directory so merely existing is not enough to warrant an article. Please read through all the links in the gray boxes in the decline messages which outlines what is needed. S0091 (talk) 17:07, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
The article isn't supposed to be a directory but a page for information that people can refer to if they want to learn more about the organisation. If existing and doing impactful things in the sustainability sphere such as hosting Prince William and raising £1bn for climate-tech startups isn't enough, then what else is needed to warrant it's own page? SustainableJragon (talk) 12:00, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

Help artist page

Hi @S0091 thank you for your reply, after few search like you mention it "demonstrate they have had solo shows at major galleries or museum, etc." I can see here (https://www.mutualart.com/Artist/Brice-Gelot/8D7F2F76DBC5780E) the artist has been featured by the Glasgow Gallery of Photography in Scotland, also represented in London by the art gallery Maggio and featured on Artsy_(website) (https://www.artsy.net/artist/brice-gelot) where they confirm his notability. Madison.y (talk) 23:56, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

@Madison.y Mutual Art supports he exhibited in a group show at the Glasgow Gallery of Photography which does meet multiple solo shows at major galleries or museums. Artsy is a commercial site selling his work so not a reliable source. S0091 (talk) 15:38, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
@S0091 thank you for your time and reply. So if this meet the criteria what should I amend on the page to be accepted ?
Also to be sold on Artsy as artist you need to be represented by notable art galleries, only art gallery can sold artist artwork thru this platform, single artist itself or unrepresented notable artist are not allowed. Madison.y (talk) 23:39, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
@Madison.y I see I missed a crucial word in my reply. I meant "which does not meet multiple solo shows at major galleries or museums." I apologize for the miscommunication. Again, Artsy is not a reliable source and being represented by a gallery is meaningless from a notability perspective. If his work has had critical reviews by reputable art publications, like ArtForum or mainstream media (newspapers, etc.) those can be used to establish notability, though. Be sure they are reviews, not interviews or promotions of his shows. S0091 (talk) 20:11, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Trevor Ombija's Wikipedia page

Hello S0091,

I have made necessary changes to the Draft article on Mr. Trevor Ombija in regards to your feedback a few days ago about adding more relevant sources. I kindly request you to review the draft once more and if you can return feedback on whether it is ready for publishing yet or not. Thank you

Regards,

Serrwinner Serrwinner (talk) 14:49, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

@Serrwinner you have resubmitted the draft so another reviewer will take a look. S0091 (talk) 15:38, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

Political image of Javier Milei

Hi @S0091, can you please fix the rejection? One editor moved the article to Drafts:Javier Milei, without explanation. It then got rejected two times because the main article exists already, this was corrected and it was resubmitted. The initial rejection has been addressed, by updating the content to be more in line with a Political image article. The creation of spin-off articles is also valid, as was demonstrated with the creation of the positions article. Pedantic Aristotle (talk) 14:18, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon proposed a merger so let that discussion run its course. I pinged the editors who participated in the Political positions of Javier Milei AfD so hopefully the discussion will move swiftly. S0091 (talk) 14:26, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
Yes, but that was because the article had been moved to Drafts:Javier Milei. He moved it back to Political image, so i could resubmitt it; https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Public_image_of_Javier_Milei&diff=prev&oldid=1185771524 Pedantic Aristotle (talk) 14:30, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
@Pedantic Aristotle what a mess! Yes, I will undo my rejection so will go back to pending review. S0091 (talk) 14:39, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
Haha, yes that would be an understatement for this whole topic. Thanks. Pedantic Aristotle (talk) 14:42, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
@Pedantic Aristotle: I've declined your submission. Your idea for how to create this article is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines. You can create an article under this name by splitting it from the source article. But you can't create an article with duplicate content and just reorder paragraphs under different headings, and not follow WP:SUMMARYSTYLE in the source article. Sincerely—Alalch E. 04:41, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
Hi @Alalch E., thanks for the feedback, I was not aware there was a dedicated process for this. I initially duplicated the content, then I was asked to fix the content before resubmitting, which is why it ended up this way. Have restarted the process according to WP:Splitting now. Pedantic Aristotle (talk) 11:11, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Christopher Del Borrello Submission Rejected

Why did you reject my submission? I believe it is absolutely notable to be on Wikipedia, did you take the time to look at the sources and my note? Antny08 (talk) 14:24, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

@Antny08 The draft has been reviewed reviewed 10 times with that last reviewer stating it was WP:too soon. I looked at the sources you added since that decline, which were New Jersey Globe. As last previous reviewer noted they not carry much weight, and were largely what he says about himself so not independent in addition to being routine campaign coverage. He fails WP:NPOL, as has been stated numerous times, and does not meet WP:GNG. S0091 (talk) 15:05, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
But they do carry weight, New Jersey Globe is a long-running news source that posts multiple articles DAILY, and is rated as neutral by a highly reliable bias checker source. I see nothing that shows that it is not a notable source, other than just opinion, which is different from fact. Antny08 (talk) 15:56, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
And also, I read every single article, many of the ones which I sourced are not him talking about himself, many are genuine independent sources. Antny08 (talk) 15:58, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
I ask that you please look over it again, the previous denials were mostly because I did not have WP:THREE until pretty much the most recent submission. I discussed with the previous reviewer who listed it as WP:TOOSOON, and he admitted that you could maybe consider it a reliable source that can carry weight. New Jersey Globe is a good source, as it is independent and well-known. I have 46 sources for this person, I do not understand how he could possibly not meet WP:GNG with that many sources mentioning him. Thank you. Antny08 (talk) 20:53, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
@Antny08 I will not reconsider. You had a robust discussion on the previous reviewer's talk page and they even told you the New Jersey Globe is likely not sufficient, yet that is all you added for additional sources. The New Jersey Globe is a reliable source but in order to meet notability the source must also be secondary and independent (if all they are doing is largely regurgitating what someone says, that is primary and not intellectually independent|). In addition, it needs be something outside of routine campaign/election coverage (see WP:Run-of-the-mill). The role is non-notable and the sources you added fails the notability criteria. It is not about the number of sources but about the quality of the sources and what those sources actually contain. This is the end of the road for the draft so I suggest moving on. I will not respond any further. S0091 (talk) 21:50, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
you are a big fat monkey Antny08 (talk) 22:15, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
@Antny08 you must have me confused with User:Big Fat Monkey. :) S0091 (talk) 22:22, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
you're right!!! 0_0 Antny08 (talk) 22:28, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
But honest question lol, if Chris ever runs for a higher office again and succeeds, will the rejection be removed? Antny08 (talk) 12:59, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
@Antny08 state-wide or federal offices are automatically notable. For local offices, the only that are automatic are mayors of large cities, such as Trenton and Newark for example. Other than that, local politicians usually require sustained in-depth national/international coverage beyond the scope of what would ordinarily expected for their role so keep that in mind. But yes, rejections can (and are) undone to allow for re-submission.
Also, a few things to be aware of. Drafts are automatically deleted as abandoned six months after the last human edit but can be restored upon request. You will get a notice on your talk page with instructions as well if it is deleted. In addition no one owns a Wikipedia article so if accepted and released into the wild so to speak, it is open for anyone to edit which includes vandalism, negative press, etc. (good, bad, ugly). You or those affiliated with Del Borrello will not be able to control the content. I suggest reading WP:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing even though this does not appear to be about you. S0091 (talk) 15:29, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
Ok, thanks. Antny08 (talk) 15:39, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 November 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:44, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Tony Kenning

Thank you for your feedback. After working for almost a year on this submission, it is clear that I will not meet the criteria needed to have my submission approved. It is a shame that someone complained and took down the original submission without, in my opinion, adequate reason. I was simply trying to return what was already in Wikipedia's resources. Tony Kenning should be recognized within Wikipedia as an original founding member of Def Leppard; sadly, this will not happen. RuthPres (talk) 22:57, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Out West on the Overland Train

Hello, S0091. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Out West on the Overland Train".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 04:52, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Impulse Space has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Impulse Space. Thanks! asilvering (talk) 22:39, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

False chart performance in an accepted AFC

Hello. I thought I let you know that there were false chart performance added to The Bob's Burgers Movie (soundtrack) by an IP at before you accepted this article. The UK charts I'm sure this soundtrack did not appear on per OCC. I tagged the other ones as failed verification as the chart search on Billboard isn't working for me to confirm. Thanks! MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 01:27, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 59

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 59, September – October 2023

  • Spotlight: Introducing a repository of anti-disinformation projects
  • Tech tip: Library access methods

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --16:16, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:51, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Ozjasz Wasser

One of the consequences of World War 2 was the destruction of documentation relating to Polish culture prior to the War.

My interest is to attempt to record some of the Polish people who has so much potential that was never realised due to being killed during the War. I believe it is up to us not to forget that these peoples' lives were taken from them before they were able to show their true worth in improving mankind.

Wasser played a very important role in Jewish life in Lviv from early 1900s until his death in 1941. This fact is mentioned multiple times by the sources provided. These secondary sources meet the Wikipedia source requirements. They are all published, reliable and independent of the subject. The Balaban book on the Tempel Synagogue contains the most extensive references to Wasser. This includes his biographic information and the tribute to him by the Chief Rabbi of the Synagogue. Below I offer a rough English translation of an excerpt from the main reference - The Encyclopedia of the Jewish Diaspora Polish Series (Lwow). It is a well-regarded and invaluable source that documents Jewish life in Lwow that was obliterated by the Holocaust.

Wasser is mentioned multiple times in the series and it is clear he was one of the leaders of the Jewish community in Lwow from the early 1900s until his death in 1941. Here is a translation of part of Chapter 19, Page 247: "For twenty years Dr. Wasser held the difficult and responsible office of chairman of the Temple Management Board, devoting much work and time, money and abilities to this institution and trying to maintain it at the appropriate level. No wonder, then, that his colleagues in the Management Board, and especially those who had been following the pace of his work for years, decided to celebrate the anniversary in a solemn way, perhaps in part to reward the president for his efforts and diligence. At the meeting of the Board on May 12, 1934, in the absence of the president, Eng. Rauch-Berger to the fact that on December 8, 1933, 20 years had passed since Dr. Wasser was first elected president of the Executive Board. The Board unanimously resolved to celebrate this occasion on the second day of Shavuot during the morning service, and it was decided to read the prescribed passages from the Torah donated by Dr. Wasser, and to ask one of the rabbis to give an appropriate speech. It was also decided to make a photo album of the Temple and its officers and hand them over to the jubilarian during the ceremony."

The Lviv Interactive Center of Urban History is playing a critical role in resurrecting the Jewish culture and life prior to the Holocaust in modern day Lviv. The Center has done extensive research and the fact that they have chosen to reference Ozjasz Wasser in the roles he played at the Tempel synagogue and as a well-known lawyer, is evidence that Wasser was an important person in the Lviv Jewish community.

One of the consequences of the Holocaust, in addition to the tragic loss of life, was the total erasure of the Jewish people and community from cities like Lviv. This makes it extremely challenging when it comes to finding sources for documenting the lives of those who perished.

I saw your comments about my latest update and I agree - I will withdraw it.

It would be great if you could assist me in moving the Draft to Livespace.

Thank you for your attention. Didgeridoo2022 (talk) 05:51, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Bruce Ryan

Hello - I have replied to you on my talk page. Sylvan1971 (talk) 16:54, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

Patrick Christys

Could you have a closer look at the references on this article. There are 16 sources in total, and only 4 are what I'd describe as Primary Sources. I'd also say that the notability guidelines are met. Patrick is the focus of many of the linked sources, rather than just a mere mention. Thanks. GlobalEdits00 (talk) 19:14, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

@GlobalEdits00 GB News, BBC, TV Zone UK (a press release), Just Giving (written by him/his page) and Twitter are primary sources and some are not independent because they are affiliated with him. Also, IMDB is not a reliable source (see WP:IMDB) nor is Express UK (see WP:DAILYEXPRESS). S0091 (talk) 19:23, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

Science/math writing on Wikipedia?

Thanks again for your excellent suggestion to contact WT:WIR for help with my PLEXUS article.

The next project I want to work on is on a very different topic: an article about geometric intersections between lines and cylinders. It would be like Line–sphere intersection, but based on this super well-written pre-draft article by Nominal animal. I've tried to contact that editor but no response so far. I'd like to help them convert that into a real article.

Are there communities (“Projects”?) for science/math/geometry topics that might be as helpful as WT:WIR was? BananaSlug (talk) 01:57, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi @BananaSlug, Nominal animal has not edited since 2010 and only edited for a very short time. You can check an editor's contributions by using the User contribution link on right side bar under General when you are on their page (the options change depending on what type of page you are on). You can also enable the Navigation Popups gadget which will give you info about a editor by hovering on their User name when it is linked (like in a pages history or above you linked their name so I was able to hover over it to get info) - go Preferences under the person icon on top right, then Gadgets. For a project, see WP:WikiProject Mathematics. You can search for projects at WP:WikiProject though be mindful that many are no longer active but you can tell by how active the talk pages are. Mathematics is quite active. Also, for general questions about editing Wikipedia, you can ask at the Teahouse. S0091 (talk) 15:14, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
Thanks. I'd seen Nominal Animal's history and noted the long absence. I found the pre-draft via an answer he/she/they gave in 2016 to a stackoverflow question. I'm not in a hurry to do anything, but I agree that they seem to have gone silent, and are unlikely to respond or collaborate on my proposed Wikipedia article.
I think my main concern, before I take any concrete steps, is the propriety of re-using Nominal Animal's public content. If it were an official Draft:Line-cylinder intersection then it would seem fine to continue editing and eventually submit for AfC review. But it is instead on the User page, and I do not want to appear to plagiarize Nominal Animal's work.
Do you have advice, or should I take this to the Teahouse? BananaSlug (talk) 17:15, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
@S0091: never mind! As soon as I'd given up on @Nominal Animal I got an email reply from them. They said I was welcome to try again getting an article created. As I suspected, the original attempt was declined for lack of relevant citations, it being “just math” which stood on its own. I will take the old text and try to follow the citation style of other “just math” articles.
Again, thanks for your mentoring! BananaSlug (talk) 18:48, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
Oh wowl! Surprised you got a response. You can ask for the old draft to be restored at WP:REFUND. If you start your own using Nominal's work, be sure to attribute it to them in an edit summary (like "copied from User:Nominal animal"). S0091 (talk) 19:14, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Draft: Pamela Price

@S0091, I deeply appreciate your detailed feedback about the draft article about Pamela Price. I added information about the Jasper Wu case and specified that the defendants may still face hundreds of years in prison with the option of parole. I added a reference to suppor this. I found an article about the persecutor that left the office, Charly Weissenbach but I was not sure where to add it. Could you try to add it? https://www.berkeleyscanner.com/2023/03/22/courts/alameda-county-district-attorney-pamela-price-prosecutors-resigns-ethical-reasons/

I added that the shooter was 17-year-old in the Converse case and added an article supporting it.

I added the reply from the DA office about the NAACP statement and relative reference.

Do you think it is ready to be submitted for review? IDruben77 (talk) 18:37, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

@IDruben77 Wikipedia does not even describe Ted Bundy as a murderer like you have with the Lamar Converse case nor is that how the juvenile is described by independent sources. Note I only listed a couple examples or so not everything to highlight the overall issues. You are still editorializing to fit a narrative (Price is bad) and it appears you are cherry picking sources. Please only stick to the object facts as stated in independent sources and sources that are largely what those involved say are not useful so best to use/summarize sources that are not directly involved (pick out what the journalist is independently stating, ignore quotes or things like "according to" or the like). What is the independent analysis about Price? The content about the Wu case at this point seems like a nothing burger so not even sure that is worth including (i.e. WP:UNDUE) unless there's more. I am not familiar with Price so I am going by what you are presenting outside of the quick search I did about Wu. Please also familiarize yourself with the WP:BLP and WP:NPOV policies as you are violating both. S0091 (talk) 19:45, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
@S0091, Thank you for your feedback. I aimed to maintain a neutral tone and adhere to the guidelines. However, if a more experienced editor could enhance the article directly, I would greatly appreciate it. Initially, I focused only on the first part of the article, detailing her biography and explaining her importance. Unfortunately, it was rejected for lacking notability. I believe she meets notability requirements due to holding public office, being the first African American woman in the Alameda County DA office, facing a recall attempt, and garnering attention from national and local organizations. This recall is part of a broader pattern observed among several DAs in California. I expanded the content to showcase media coverage by national and local news outlets but it is perceived as biased. I would be grateful if you could help condense the text while maintaining acceptability.
Thanks, IDruben77 (talk) 00:53, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
"Pamela Price is an American lawyer and, since January 2023, the District Attorney for Alameda County, California. She is the first African-American Woman to ever serve as Alameda County's DA.[1] She supports progressive legislative reforms and run on police accountability and rehabilitation.[1] She is facing a recall effort.[2][3]
Bibliography
Price was born in Dayton, Ohio in 1957.[4] She experienced the Ohio juvenile justice and foster care system.[5] She received a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science in 1978 from from Yale University. She received a Juris Doctor from the UC Berkeley School of Law in 1982.[4][6] She worked as defence and civil rights attorney and she started her own firm in 1991 specializing in employment litigation and representing victims of retaliation, wrongful termination, sexual assaults, and discrimination.[6]
In 2018, she run for Mayor of Oakland and lost against Libby Schaaf with 13.1% of the votes. In 2018 she also run for the nonpartisan primary for Alameda County District Attorney and lost against Nancy O'Malley with 42.2% of the votes. She run on policy of police accountability. She won the 2022 Alameda County District Attorney election on November 8, 2022 against Terry Wiley with 53.1% of the votes. She is the first Black woman to serve as Alameda County District Attorney and the first person to take the role without having worked in the District Attorney Office. She ran on a platform centered on rehabilitation and addressing instances of police misconduct. She pledged to terminate the utilization of the death penalty, cease the practice of charging individuals under the age of 18 as adults, establish a unit dedicated to ensuring the integrity of convictions, and enhance services for victims of gun violence. She started her tenure in January 2023. IDruben77 (talk) 00:53, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
@IDruben77 I think your recent updates are helpful and notability is established. How about this...resubmit it to get another reviewer's take. S0091 (talk) 18:36, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
@S0091. Thank you. I will resubmit and see what happen. IDruben77 (talk) 22:38, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 December 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:10, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

PLEXUS Woo/Tribune ref merge undone

Yesterday I followed your suggestion (re PLEXUS article) to merge the two refs to the 1986 Woo article (“The Perils of Off-Beat Publishing...”) into one ref.

Then Rublamb reverted that change. I agree with you, and the advice on Wikipedia:Newspapers.com#Citations_across_multiple_pages/clippings but am not going to get into a flame war over this.

— BananaSlug (talk) 16:53, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

@BananaSlug Yeah, agree not worth it. I am neutral about the issue so was going by the instructions.¯\_(ツ)_/¯ S0091 (talk) 18:25, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Request on 02:48:54, 6 December 2023 for assistance on AfC submission by Eniagrom


Hi there, "Culemborg" is a city in the Netherlands, and the "County of Culemborg" was an independent state in the Holy Roman Empire. These are not the same, evidently. The fact that Culemborg the city was at one time contained in the county doesn't mean that we should merge these concepts. Similar reasoning would prevent us from covering a great number of territories in the Holy Roman Empire, which was by its nature a collection of territories and free city states that do not always have easy modern analogs today.

The article in question is a translation from the Dutch Wikipedia (with extra references and some copy-editing). Similar articles exist on both de and fr. In general, coverage of the (incredibly complex) Holy Roman Empire is better on these Wikis because of their historical connection to the state, but to my mind that is not a good reason for en to exclude coverage of the topic.

For example, the County of Culemborg had certain rights within the HRE that allowed it (as a polity) to mint its own currency and maintain its own justice system. This allowed it to disallow entry to Dutch creditors, which gave it a reputation as a place debtors could flee to. Note that this is not the city proper -- the entire county had this character. This gave it a reputation as a haven for con-artistry and law evasion during the middle ages. The Dutch article mine is based on doesn't explore these concepts much, but that article is no more than Start class at best, and having a dedicated article on the county would allow us to explore these and other aspects on en. I mentioned some of this on the draft article talk page.

At some point if we want good coverage of topics we do need articles on those topics. Eniagrom (talk) 02:48, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Eniagrom (talk) 02:48, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

@Eniagrom thanks for explanation. I have reverted my decline and accepted the draft. S0091 (talk) 14:20, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
Thanks so much for you reconsideration! Eniagrom (talk) 07:34, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

Article draft submission

Why was my article draft for creation at submissions for Adamawa fulfulde rejected? I provided sufficient information on the language and i provided two main sources one of which is reliable on the language. Pulaar had no reliable sources cited when it was first created nor was the source that the information was taken from, was from a reliable source. 2600:1700:2F01:CDC0:DDF1:72AB:7BC7:E9F8 (talk) 22:49, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi IP, Omniglot is a blog so not a reliable source and should not be used. While Ethnologue is a reliable source, it is not in-depth and multiple reliable sources with in-depth coverage are required to warrant a stand alone article. As for other existing articles, see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. You are welcome to include it in the main Fula language#Varieties article using information from Ethnologue. A redirect can be created so anyone searching it for will be directed there. S0091 (talk) 14:35, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Draftification

Hello, S0091,

After you move an article from main space to Draft space and inform the page creator of the move, please tag the main space page for CSD R2 speedy deletion. If you don't use it, I encourage you to try out User:MPGuy2824/MoveToDraft script. We tag these pages for speedy deletion so we don't have redirects from main space to Draft space or User space. Thank you! Liz Read! Talk! 23:40, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Please wait

I am in the middle of fixing up the draft. BD2412 T 19:53, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

@BD2412 Oops sorry! Hands off. :) S0091 (talk) 19:56, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 Done. BD2412 T 20:08, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of List of Michigan political scandals

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on List of Michigan political scandals requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 22:14, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

@Significa liberdade I thought I caught all of these. I screwed up draftifying some articles using a script I had not used before (lesson learned!) but if you find more, please tag them without hesitation and apologies for the trouble. S0091 (talk) 22:20, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
So worries! :) Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 22:31, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
Hey @Significa liberdade and S0091: I noticed the discussion here and wanted to point out that List of Colorado political scandals is on the mainspace. I've done some copy editing, but I didn't want my name on the revision history to be confused for any endorsement of the article. Feel free to incubate it if you think it's still not ready, my revisions should by no means constitute any active improvement of the article, per WP:DRAFTIFY. Cheers, microbiologyMarcus (petri dish·growths) 17:52, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
@MicrobiologyMarcus thanks for the note. There are two I am unable to move because the redirects contain history so require a page mover or admin. I posted a note at WT:AFC a moment ago where there is an ongoing discussion about these articles. S0091 (talk) 17:57, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
See that now, I was literally just catching up on the wikiproject talk thread. microbiologyMarcus (petri dish·growths) 17:59, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Can you please reconsider the link to my website which used the copy 'Collecting antique typewriters' as my collection of 19th century typewriters contains many rare and historically typewriters. Also my website has many images and copy pertaining to the world's first typewriters. My collection is one of the largest of its kind and is recognized globally as a major collection and source of information. Thank you, Martin Martin Howard (talk) 22:43, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

@Martin Howard: please be aware of our conflict of interest policy regarding promotion of your work, you might also see a list at WP:OTHERLINKS of arguments to avoid when trying to justify inclusion of your work. If you would like to see the link to your project included on the article, please consider disclosing your COI per the guidelines at WP:DISCLOSE and then propose the changes on the article's talk page to gain consensus. Kindly, microbiologyMarcus (petri dish·growths) 17:47, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Recent Draftification of articles

Hello there @S0091! I saw you recently draftified the following articles: List of Arizona political scandals, List of Delaware political scandals & List of Georgia political scandals with a custom reasoning. May I please know what your reasoning was? ❯❯❯ Raydann(Talk) 18:33, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

@Raydann please see the discussion at WT:AFC#"List of x state political scandals" drafts. Concerns were raised about WP:BLP and WP:OR so I moved them back to draft at least for the time being. S0091 (talk) 18:38, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
Thank you. I was unaware of the context. I have moved the remaining two as well. ❯❯❯ Raydann(Talk) 18:51, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
Thanks @Raydann! Also, I do not draftify articles often and this is the first time I used the script (recommended by Liz above) so if there's anything I could do better, let me know. I did screw up a a handful by not understanding an error so learned one lesson. :) S0091 (talk) 19:04, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
No worries! Everything is fine. I was just unsure about the reason for draftification that's why I asked. And hey, there's a first time for everything; I'm sure you'll find the move-to-draft script really easy and helpful. Take care! ❯❯❯ Raydann(Talk) 21:19, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Article review request

Hello, sorry to bother you but I recently submitted the article Draft:BasiGo for review under AfC about a week ago. I'm relatively new to creating pages so I'm not sure if this is standard procedure. I was kindly requesting if you could review it as the other article I created took five days to be reviewed and I'm not sure if it should take this long. If this is not standard procedure I sincerely apologize for undertaking any untoward actions by requesting this to your talk page. Thankyou. Serrwinner (talk) 15:32, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Serrwinner in November there was an AfC backlog drive. When the drive began, AfC had almost 4,000 pending submissions with some over four months old. Right now there are 402 with an estimated wait time of over a week. Given reviews have slowed down, it may take three weeks. S0091 (talk) 15:45, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

Draft for Borgu Fulfulde

Hi can you check of my draft for Borgu Fulfulde is ready and good to submit. [[2]] 2600:1700:2F01:CDC0:DDF1:72AB:7BC7:E9F8 (talk) 22:01, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi IP, you need to update the citations with exact page numbers that support the claims made. The best advice I can give is not make reviewers have to dig around themselves to try to find what is coming from where because most likely they will not take the time to do so. Be very precise with your citations. See this guide and and this one for how to add appropriately add citations. If you have questions or need help, you can ask at the Teahouse. S0091 (talk) 22:14, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
Oh the pages are that talk about the history of Borgu Fulfulde are from 543 to 551. 2600:1700:2F01:CDC0:DDF1:72AB:7BC7:E9F8 (talk) 23:56, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
That's the entire source. What is needed is the exact page number that supports, for example the claim that "The presence of Borgu Fulfulde in Benin can be attributed to historical migrations and interactions among the Fula people." Again, a reviewer is not going read almost 10 pages to figure that out. Take a look at footnote #3 in Adamawa Fulfulde, which is a source I added. That source is 31 pages (pp 23- 53) but I only cite pages 28-29 because those are the pages that support "Adamawa Fulfulde was originally brought to Cameroon in the early parts of the 19th century during a religious war". S0091 (talk) 15:05, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

Article Review Request

Hi! I submitted again the List of Germania Insurance Super Stage performers page, I added a couple of references but one is a press release but it not from the actual venue. I feel that adding sources defeats the purpose of a list because it just stating the performers. Rodrigo1198 (talk) 03:11, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

@Rodrigo1198 for one, they are needed for verification which is a core Wikipedia policy. So far, you only have sources to support 3 performances so it fails verification. The other reason is to support notability. If sources have not written in-depth about the these performances as a group, then it likely does not merit an article. Notability is not inherited so notable artists performing at a venue does not mean the venue itself is notable or the performances are notable.
I see a similar list is being discussed at WP:Articles for deletion/List of Germania Insurance Amphitheater performers to determine if it meets the notability criteria and so far it's leaning delete, though the discussion has just started. You need to convince the community such lists meet the criteria and that is done by providing sources that have written in-depth about the importance of the venue and those performances. S0091 (talk) 15:34, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
@Rodrigo1198 This Billboard article on page 8, Amp It Up, is a good source for the Amphitheater (when it was initially named Tower Amphitheater). Not quite as good, but this one shows it won an award and these couple bits from the Dallas Observer, here and here. You want to avoid sources in Austin for notability because they are local but are fine to use for verifiability. S0091 (talk) 16:56, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
American Institute of Steel Construction IDEAS2 award. S0091 (talk) 17:14, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
Hi, I have merged that list to Germania Insurance Amphitheater but I want to source the official website of Circuit of the Americas as they are the ones that have the date where it was built. Would it be a good source or not? Rodrigo1198 (talk) 04:08, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
Also I think List of Germania Insurance Super Stage performers page and List of Germania Insurance Amphitheater performers should be deleted now that the Germania Insurance Amphitheater page is created. I nominated List of Germania Insurance Amphitheater performers for deletion. Rodrigo1198 (talk) 18:02, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
Hi @Rodrigo1198 I think using the official website is fine for very basic facts like when the amphitheater was built, though I think that is covered in other sources so check if a better source exists first (maybe this one, I no longer have access). Secondary sources are always preferred over primary ones.
As for the deletion discussion, I think you have your terminology mixed up. The editor who starts an WP:AFD is the nominator, in this case Significa liberdade. You participated in the discussion via an WP:!vote, see WP:AFD#Contributing to AfD discussions. AfDs generally stay open for at least 7 days so it will likely be closed in the next day or two. S0091 (talk) 18:33, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

James Clemens High School page

What is the point of posting the relative size of the school to the wiki page? This will always be dynamic and will have to be updated or even deleted. Also, some schools count only 10- 12th grade while others count 9 - 12th in school size. This seems like it is rather pointless.

Thanks, ~TMM — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tmmhunt (talk • contribs) 23:10, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Tmmhunt I am assuming you are referencing the infobox but the same could be said for a whole host of information across Wikipedia, such as population data, sports statistics especially for current athletes, rankings, etc. This is also one of the many reasons why Wikipedia itself is not a reliable source. Wikipedia is a work in progress, with missing, dated, or even blatantly incorrect information. Best practice is it to make the date of the information clear so readers know if the information is current or not, and of course providing a source for verifiability. For example, James Clemens High School makes it clear the enrollment figures are as of 2020-12. If there are other important factors, that should be noted that as well. If you have other questions about to handle information in a school's infobox, the likely best place to ask is at Template:Infobox school's talk page. S0091 (talk) 17:13, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
All of that may be true, but the school's relative size is a superfluous fact that is essentially irrelevant when there are numerous more important facts you could be adding. By adding this information, you are merely insuring that someone will have to edit the page again in a year or two when new school data is released and the school's size relative to other schools changes. Seems totally pointless. Please consider adding only pertinent information to wikipedia pages and it might add to the value of wikipedia instead of just making the argument that the site is not a reliable source of information. Be part of the solution, not the problem. Thanks. Tmmhunt (talk) 03:24, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
@Tmmhunt I did not add the information and I am sure why you think I did as I have never even edited the article. In fact, I did not know the it existed until you came to my talk page. If you do not think the information is meaningful, then be bold and remove it. If someone adds it back, then start a discussion with them to get consensus (read that) which is how decisions are made on Wikipedia. No single editor owns any article and I personally could care less about this particular one. S0091 (talk) 15:09, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
That's interesting. The page history shows that "Republic of Selmaria" made this revision on 12/4/2023. That's you, right? Or did I somehow click on a different user for feedback? If that's so, I apologize for the confusion. And yeah, I understand how Wiki works. But I thought replying to the person who made the change made sense first. We've had vandals in the past making changes and when they get fixed they just make another change. So, if this isn't your edit, I'll address the right person. Tmmhunt (talk) 19:48, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
Umm...look at my signature in addition to scrolling up to the top of the page where it says User talk:S0091. Nope, I am not them. :) If your issue was the edits made by Republic of Selmaria another editor, Theroadislong, just reverted them so maybe problem solved? S0091 (talk) 20:06, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
Add @Tmmhunt ping. S0091 (talk) 20:07, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

Jon Hamm page

I suggest you read the suggested reading so that you will know how it relates to Jon Hamm 2600:1700:F00:4140:198:BB94:6743:C5F9 (talk) 14:37, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

I suggest you read WP:NOBLOGS. Personal blogs are not appropriate and is considered spam, not to mention So here's a shout-out to my new BFF's Jon Hamm and DJ adds nothing to one's understanding about Hamm or his life. Its about a person who simply met him like thousands of others. S0091 (talk) 14:46, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove an appropriate edit to a wikipedia page. 2600:1700:F00:4140:198:BB94:6743:C5F9 (talk) 14:56, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

Borgu, Nigerian, and Central Eastern Niger Fulfulde drafts

Hi can you review my drafts for Borgu, Nigerian and Central Eastern Fulfulde and see if they are ready to be accepted as articles. [[3]] [[4]] [[5]] 2600:1700:2F01:CDC0:DDF1:72AB:7BC7:E9F8 (talk) 06:40, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

Did you check it? Are you busy? 2600:1700:2F01:CDC0:DDF1:72AB:7BC7:E9F8 (talk) 16:39, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
Hi IP, I do not do reviews by request so if you want them reviewed, submit them. Also see my note above about including the relevant page numbers in sources. S0091 (talk) 16:50, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
For the Nigerian and Central Eastern Niger Fulfulde can you help by filling in the urls. It's the third and fourth links. 2600:1700:2F01:CDC0:DDF1:72AB:7BC7:E9F8 (talk) 13:37, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
There's a tool available to those who have accounts called ReFill that will automatically fill in some of the citation fields which is what I and others use. I just it ran on Draft:Central-Eastern Niger Fulfulde but another editor had already ran it on Draft:Nigerian Fulfulde so the citations are already expanded with as much as tool can do. Any additional expansion will need to be done manually.
I suggest using Visual editing instead of Source editing. When you are in the edit window, there's a pencil icon at the right next to Preview which gives you the option to change which editor you use. Select Visual and there will options across the top with one that will say Cite (or the double quote icon...it changes, but its next to the link icon). Select that which will launch a box. The default is "Automatic". Just paste the URL, click Generate, then Insert and will cite it and format it. It works for most websites, Google Books and JSTOR urls but do double check it cited the right source. If it does not work, you can select Manual then select the most appropriate template (Website, Book, etc.) then fill out the appropriate fields manually.
You can switch between editors as needed. S0091 (talk) 15:53, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

Checking my citation for draft

Hi can you check my citation for my draft [[6]] and see if it is the correct way of citing the book. 2600:1700:2F01:CDC0:DDF1:72AB:7BC7:E9F8 (talk) 20:46, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Draft: MetroPlusHealth

Hello, thank you for reviewing my original submission for this topic. I have resubmitted a new draft. This version addresses your reasons for not accepting the original submission.

Specifically, I have removed non-independent sources like press releases and links to the organization's own website. I have added information from sources including The New York Times, Reuters, and CNN. They are independent of the source.

Local news articles and information from official government websites are also included. I have also removed words and phrases that could be interpreted as "peacock terms" to ensure a neutral tone.

Thank you again for reviewing. The feedback is extremely helpful. Thinkingcreatively (talk) 20:33, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi there, @S0091. Thanks for re-reviewing my submission. I will remove the New York Post and Forbes articles. But, before I resubmit, would you be able to offer some advice about the sources you're looking for? Specifically:
Outside of NYC sources question 1: You mentioned that it would be good to provide sources that are outside of NYC. Would the The New York Times still be acceptable? It's an internationally-recognized publication cited throughout Wikipedia that happens to be in NYC. One of the NYT articles that's cited in this latest draft mentions MetroPlusHealth throughout the article (much more than 200 words' worth). Here it is for reference.
Outside of NYC sources question 2: I have some clarification on the existing non-NYC sources (Reuters, CNN) that are on the latest version: the articles from these sources mention NYC Care, which is a part of MetroPlusHealth. It is a specific plan that MPH works to provide through NYC Health + Hospitals and the NYC Government. I realize it's a bit confusing (like everything related to insurance), but these are in-depth articles regarding coverage that only MetroPlusHealth offers—although MetroPlusHealth itself is not mentioned in the articles. Is it okay to use these non-NYC, independent sources in the article? Would it be less confusing if I cite a mention of MetroPlusHealth offering NYC Care first, then use these other sources after that clarification?
Thanks so much! Really appreciate it your help. Thinkingcreatively (talk) 20:39, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
Hi @Thinkingcreatively first apologies for not answering your initial query. I must have either missed it or saw it then went on to other things and forgot. As for NYT, you ask a great question and one that causes great debate among editors regarding large newspapers that also cover local news (other U.S. examples are LA Times, Chicago Times, etc.) so please take what I say with caution as other editors may disagree and is my personal opinion. In this specific instance, I would count as it regional coverage meaning broader than NYC because it is in the New York section, which looking at today's coverage appears to also cover state wide news (see WP:AUD for the language in the notability criteria). For the others, yes, I think you do need to tie NYC Care to MetroPlus. With that, what I suggest is mainly using those three sources, summarizing what they independently state (not using anything coming from MetroPlus representatives or their website/publications or other primary sources). After doing that, which will likely lead to a very short article but that's ok, use a couple or so local news sources to fill in critical gaps (very basic things that for whatever reason were not covered in the "main" sources). You will likely still have a short article but one without "fluff" and likely with only one section or even perhaps none (but again that's ok). S0091 (talk) 21:35, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
Hi @S0091 no apologies necessary. This is just one article out of many that you're helping with. Stuff happens. I have totally been there.
The information about tying NYC Care to MetroPlusHealth is extremely helpful. I'll add that in!
Do I need to get rid of all regional sources, meaning all information (like the Social Determinants of Health information not covered by Newsweek, Cheddar, etc.) needs to go? Is there a certain amount of international/national-level sources that would balance out using regional sources?
Here's why I'm asking: MetroPlusHealth is owned by a government-affiliated organization, NYC Health + Hospitals. A lot of pages related to NYC government use both regional news and state government sites as citations (Regional sources cited in these Wikipedia articles include: amNY, NY1, Brooklyn Eagle, nyc.gov; State sources cited include: NY State Senate, NY State Department of Education). These citations can be found on pages like Mayor of New York City, New York City Department of Transportation, New York City Housing Authority, just to name a few.
I know that it's hard to compare existing pages to drafts looking for approval, but I get a little confused about what's acceptable and what's not for this particular topic.
Thanks again for your help. I say it every time, and I mean it every time! Thinkingcreatively (talk) 22:30, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
Cheddar does not appear to be a reliable source (no evidence of editorial oversight, etc.). Given MetroHealth is government-affiliated, government sources, including interviews/their statements, are not only primary they are not independent so should be avoided. I cannot comment on their use in other articles as their use may or may not be appropriate (WP:CONTEXTMATTERS). For example, using a government source to support the entity's budget is appropriate but using a government source to support the success or aims of one of their initiatives is not, at least without additional independent analysis by secondary sources (and looking at Mayor of New York City, it is a poor article for various reasons). You also want to avoid trade publications like Health Care IT News as they are at best weak sources because they generally exist to promote an industry and do not use sources that do not have a by-line with a named author. Honestly, I would remove the Social Determinants of Health Initiatives and the COVID-19 Initiatives sections because they are poorly sourced and are promotional. Anything covered by reputable secondary sources can be rolled under History. S0091 (talk) 17:14, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
Hi @S0091 thanks for this thoughtful response. I will start making edits accordingly. Thinkingcreatively (talk) 16:03, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Regarding Draft:Matt Weinhold

I'm finding (and have added) multiple full length articles on Weinhold and his comedy from over the years, so I'm not understanding the comment you left back in October regarding not finding anything. SilverserenC 22:32, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Silver seren I didn't say I could not find any source; I said it was grasping at straws and if you look at the history and the talk page, I did find some sources which I added. It's been a while so I am going by memory but what I recall is finding sources with blurbs (a couple sentences or so), trivial mentions or sources that were largely interviews. If you are finding enough to meet notability, I of course have no issue with you moving it to mainspace. S0091 (talk) 14:22, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 December 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:59, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for participating in AfC November 2023 Backlog Drive

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
Thank you for your participation in the Articles for Creation's November 2023 Backlog Drive! You made a total of 127 reviews, for a total of 166.5 points. – robertsky (talk) 06:48, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Happy holidays!


– robertsky (talk) is wishing you Happy Holidays! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user Happy Holidays, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Happy holidays}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

– robertsky (talk) 06:48, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Season's Greetings

Hello S0091: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Vanderwaalforces (talk) 11:46, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message

Scripts++ Newsletter – Issue 23

New year, new scripts. Welcome to the 23rd issue of the Wikipedia Scripts++ Newsletter, covering around 39% of our favorite new and updated user scripts since 24 December 2021. That’s right, we haven’t published in two years! Can you believe it? Did you miss us?

Scripts Got anything good? Tell us about your new, improved, old, or messed-up script here!

RefRenamer by Nardog is this issue's featured script. For whatever reason, the foundation will only give us better reference names in VisualEditor if we wish for it in the next survey. Nardog to the rescue! This script has a ton of options to satisfy almost anyone who wishes to use better refnames than ":0" and ":418".

Updated scripts Updated scripts

Holy RefRenamer
Screenshot of RefRenamer, a user script that assists in replacing non-descriptive reference names


Scripts++ Newsletter
Scripts++ Newsletter

Improve a script

Pending requests Requested scripts

New scripts New scripts

Due to budget and procrastination limitations, we've only had time to review the first ~39% of the scripts since last issue. Help us out here! Aaron Liu (talk) 13:24, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Unverifiable statement on Tragedy of the Commons

Recently you reverted two edits I made to Tragedy of the commons#Regulation - I agree with the decision to remove the second edit, but the first edit I made was a rephrasing of the existing sentence "Given the current system of rule of law, the solution of giving a legal right to nature at large (from object to subject) could be a game changer" so that it uses unbiased language. I believe it's very evident that this statement is unverifiable, as it speculates that a specific legal proposition could be "a game changer", which is clearly biased and non-neutral language on an otherwise factual page. I request that you reconsider reverting that change, which simply rewrote that statement so that it makes no claims about the possible efficacy of that legal proposition. Thank you for your patience. Accurate Puppy (talk) 21:02, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Accurate Puppy a reasonable request so I have restored the first edit. The tool (aka gadget) I used, WP:Twinkle, reverts all consecutive edits made by an editor so I likely did not review them separately, which was an error on my part. S0091 (talk) 21:16, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:S0091/Archive_5&oldid=1201974396"