Jump to content

User talk:Avs5221/Archive 3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5

Re: Your AfC (Xuwoni Tora)

You recently made a submission to Articles for Creation. Your article has been reviewed and because some issues were found, it could not be accepted in its current form; it is now located at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Xuwoni Tora. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. Feel free to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved. (You can do this by adding the text {{subst:AFC submission/submit}} to the top of the article.) Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia!

Jarkeld.alt (Talk) 22:53, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Survey for new page patrollers

New page patrol – Survey Invitation

Hello Avs5221/Archive 3! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.

  • If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only.
  • If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it.

Please click HERE to take part.
Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback.

You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Wiki Media Foundation at 11:25, 25 October 2011 (UTC).

Articles for Creation Appeal

Articles for Creation is backlogged and needs YOUR help!

Articles for Creation is desperately in need of reviewers! We are looking for urgent help, from experienced editors and administrators alike, to help us clear a record backlog of pending submissions. There is currently a significant backlog of 1026 submissions waiting to be reviewed. These submissions are generally from new editors who have never edited Wikipedia before. A prompt, constructive review of submissions could significantly editor retention.

Do you have what it takes?
  1. Are you familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines?
  2. Do you know what Wikipedia is and is not?
  3. Do you have a working knowledge of the Manual of Style, particularly article naming conventions?
  4. Are you (at least) autoconfirmed?
  5. Can you review submissions based on their individual merits?

If the answer to these questions is yes, then please read the reviewing instructions and donate a little of your time to helping tackle the backlog.

Click here to review to a random submissionArticle selected by erwin85's random article script on toolserver.

We would greatly appreciate your help. Currently, only a small handful of users are reviewing articles. Any help, even if it's just 1 or 2 reviews, would be extremely beneficial.

On behalf of the Articles for Creation project,
AndrewN talk 23:38, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Lindsey Pavao

How sure are you that the article doesn't meet the notability requirements? The person placed in a major musical competition, has had one single in the billboard top 100, and had one single in the bubbling under top 100. Ryan Vesey Review me! 13:59, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

IE: Articles for creation/Imonggo

I am contesting your decline of a page I created, titled: Articles for creation/Imonggo

One, the article has a notable source. CNET is a media site that follows journalistic standards in their news articles and reviews. It even has an editorial board. Other than a media site, CNET also lists software, so probably this led to your confusion. CNET is an independent source (Softpedia also is. The article passes WP:NEWSORG and WP:RELY

Two, Imonggo is notable for being one of the first could-based POS software systems. Cloud-based Saas systems gained ground in 2006 after Amazon started its web service. The first web-based POS was LivePOS, Imonggo was second. The problem is that there is almost zero coverage of POS applications in media, so this is original research on my part.

Three, Imonggo is notable for being the first free web-based POS. At least that's what their website is saying.

The reason why I created this page is that I am building the Point of sale article, and it lacks coverage of new POS systems, that are web-based. List of software products also do not have coverage of business applications like POS. I want to add a new list, but the page seems to accept only blue links. Imonggo is the first POS page I created, and next will be Vend, Posterita, LIvePOS, and others.

List of software products also has non-notable software as articles, such as Jokosher, EZ Word, and Jarte. There are more.

What I am asking for is a second opinion, or a detailed reference (ie, a list of reasons that led to your conclusion) for the rejection. The existing notice you have posted is not helping, and I do not agree with it.

Perhaps the article can exist as a stub? Can that be an option? I really want to build the POS articles in Wikipedia, which it lacks. Please help me start this and break new ground. Mvching (talk) 15:56, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Response

I understand your objections and certainly would like to answer them. I'll try and tackle all your sources and point out any problems.
You can use softpedia or other sites such as cnet if they provide valuable information. The cnet article does, but the softpedia article is used as a reference to substantiate the claim Imonggo is a "complete web-based retail management solution." The problem is that quote comes directly from the Imonggo website, so that would fall into the domain of self-publishing.
I know where you're coming from, but beware of the company's claims of being the "first free web-based POS." That's why Wikipedia avoids self-published claims and makes vigorous use of reliable sources. If your own efforts uncover sources validating the company as notable, then add them! Don't rely on original research. Instead, find publications and other sources that can veritably support the company's claims.
I know I didn't answer all your question, but I hope I've clarified my reasons for declining your article. If you have more questions, please let me know here.
avs5221(talk|contrib) 16:28, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the concise answer. Is there a way to edit this article so it can be a stub? Maybe shorten it to have only information from the valid CNET reference? Mvching (talk) 17:31, 29 June 2012 (UTC)


Frankly, I'm not sure I would. If you rely solely on the cnet article, you're left with what can only be viewed as a brief review of the product. You have to ask yourself, is this product novel? Has it done something worthy of a stand-alone article? I don't think it would pass muster and would be tagged for deletion if the right user came across it. I don't say that to dissuade you. AfC is supposed to be that intervening step between draft and live article. If you were to parse it down to stub-level, I don't think it would make it through AfC. If you're gung-ho on improving these articles, I would focus on the Point of Sale article before trying to tackle a litany of smaller articles. If you're dead set on this article, I would begin by trying to find additional sources and bolster its status as a notable company. That will be your greatest hurdle.. avs5221(talk|contrib) 17:42, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
Okay thanks Mvching (talk) 17:57, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Mvching has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Articles for creation/IFSC Sport Climbing European Championships

You just declined my article for which I cannot see a serious reason. There is a same style article for the IFSC Sport Climbing World Championships so why shouldn't be there an article for the IFSC Sport Climbing European Championships?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ma75k (talk • contribs) 10:51, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for creation

Thank you for reviewing and accepting Cranwell branch. It was very kind of you. — GrahamSmith (talk) 21:51, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for suggestions on Anna Green Winslow

First of all, thank you for reviewing my article -- especially at this time when there simply aren't enough reviewers to go around!

I have made some changes to the article on Anna Green Winslow, including her inclusion at the Old South Meeting House, which is now a museum. I've killed the blogs, as you suggested (except one, which notes that the diary has never been out of print; I looked and looked but I couldn't find it anywhere else!, and I've added some scholarly articles from EbscoHost and JSTOR. (I should have started there. I am sorry.

If you still think the article should be for the diary reader than the diarist, I will do as you ask. Again, thanks for your patience with a relative newbie. Miss Ivonne (talk) 23:20, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

declined article for creation / IFSC Sport Climbing European Championships

You declined my article "IFSC Sport Climbing European Championships". I cannot see any reason why there is a similar article for the IFSC Sport Climbing WORLD Championships but there should be none for the IFSC Sport Climbing EUROPEAN Championships?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ma75k (talk • contribs) 10:46, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Please read the rationale. I suggested merging it with the International Federation of Sport Climbing page. I declined it for that reason. avs5221(talk|contrib) 10:55, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Reviewing notice on AFC

Hi Avs5221!

I wondered if you'd be happy to use the 'mark as reviewing' notice on articles you're working on at AFC. i was reviewing the same article as you (Zett Why) and had marked it as such but when I hit the 'review' button my review got deleted cos you'd already done it! No biggy at all, mind, just figured it would be a bit of a waste of time if it happened more than once!

All best,

Loriski (talk) 11:33, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

I quick declined that one, so I think that was just an unfortunate edit conflict more than anything else. If I plan on spending more than a few minutes on it, I try to mark it as under review. Sorry that happened! avs5221(talk|contrib) 11:40, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
hey, no worries at all! bound to happen every now and again eh? :) Loriski (talk) 11:44, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

submitted article

Hi Avs5221,

If you don't mind, I would like a clarification about a recently submitted article about the American College of Veterinary Surgeons. The article was declined, and you commented that it relied heavily upon self-published sources, however only 2 of the 20 references are to the ACVS website. Most of the remainder refer to the American Veterinary Medical Association, which is the supervising body that establishes and monitors specialty colleges like the American College of Veterinary Surgeons. I am particularly confused when I look at an article like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_College_of_Surgeons, which has far fewer reliable references. Please help me understand this disparity.

Thank you for your help, Mgvet (talk) 13:32, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Mgvet. I would consider advisory/parent groups to be included in WP:SELFPUB. If you include AVMA, that makes 12/14 of your references. That aside, I'm not sure I see the notability of the subject. Can you provide additional sources that mention why the group is notable or recognized? The references you provided do little more than talk about the group and what it does, not why it's notable. avs5221(talk|contrib) 13:40, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Newlyweds

Why does Newlyweds (2011 film) violate the golden rule when The GoodTimesKid, my last Wikipedia did not? — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheWarOfArt (talk • contribs) 18:23, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Please provide the following, using reliable sources on the film's page, as suggested in WP:NF: "The film is widely distributed and has received full length reviews by two or more nationally known critics." avs5221(talk|contrib) 18:31, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Submission decision - Article: Insect thermoregulation

Dear Avs5221,

I appreciate you reviewing my submission. I understand that your only criticism is that it is too short to stand alone and I agree with this statement. However, being my first article submitted, I thought that the whole idea behind Wikipedia was that other users can add/edit information to the articles making them better and better. This is the main reason why I submitted what I consider a good introduction to such an article. There is a lot of information that can (and should be added) to the topic "Insect thermoregulation" and I can definitively make it longer. I guess that the reason behind me writing you is to ask you two things: 1) Are you interested in seeing a longer version of the article? and 2) What is your criteria for evaluating an article's length?

Thank you in advance,

Crespo j (talk) 18:55, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

I could definitely see it being a stand-alone article; as it stands right now (and as I declined it), it would be better suited as an addition to an existing page, whether that be insects or the main article on thermoregulation. As far as length, there is no hard-and-fast, number of characters type of rule. You can use WP:NOTABILITY as a guideline, but to a great extent it comes down to experience. Consider creating a sandbox in your user talk. There's a handy link there to create one easily. Make sure you include {{userspacedraft}} on the page. There's a link to submit the page to AfC inside that template. If you need help or have other questions, don't hesitate to ask! avs5221(talk|contrib) 19:19, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Thank you and good night

I'm very sorry but I can't accept her - we already have four! Please take her back! David_FLXD (Talk) 21:18, 1 July 2012 (UTC)


Dear Avs5221,

You recently declined my EmergencyLink submission stating that the sources were not reliable and the articles referenced were mostly in April and July 2012. EmergencyLink is a newly formed company and as a result has only recent references. Walt Mossberg of the Wall Street Journal just published a favorable review of the company and product. His article was printed in the WSJ and posted on the WSJ website and on All Things Digital. Walt is one of the highest regarded technology writers in the world. Walt and the WSJ are very reliable sources in my opinion. In addition, I referenced LifeHacker and Third Age both are highly regarded websites and have readership in excess of 1 million per month. Also, several of the sources I referenced have wikipedia articles themselves. Doesn't this indicate notoriety and reliability? I would ask you to reconsider, or specifically recommend what needs to be changed.

Thank you for your time and consideration. Bill.vancleave (talk) 19:46, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Bill. Thanks for the questions. The Third Age content comes from YellowBrix, so I'm not sure of the editorial oversight. The LifeHacker article is nothing more than listing of product features and doesn't really help to establish notability. Aspen Institute link provides some good info on the CEO. The crackberry article also doesn't provide much information. I agree the WSJ article is very good and shows a promising company, but I don't believe the company yet meets general notability guidelines. Since it is a new company/product, it may not be possible to add more reliable sources at the moment. I just don't believe the articles, WSJ aside, provide significant coverage, although I won't argue with their reliability. I hope this helps, but please feel free to ask any other questions! avs5221(talk|contrib) 20:00, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Articles for creation/New South Wales X10 class locomotives

I would like to contest the rejection of this article, as mentioned in the opening sentence of the article the X10 class was a miscallaneous class of locos etc. The class has a non existant link in the NSWGR section of the "Sydney and New South Wales Rail Rolling Stock" related articles table at the bottom of the page (this table created by someone else). This miscellaneous class of locos is no more or less notable than the the other classes of locomotives Z12, C30 & C38 etc called up on this table that have their own page. This new page on the X10 class was created to fill that non existant link. The tables in the submitted areticle were used to get across the basic information on each member of this class without excessive text.

Looking forward to further comments & thanks for reviewing. Shed Rat (talk) 05:40, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

I totally understand wanting to "complete" an article by finishing all the red links; but, just because the other pages exist doesn't necessarily speak to the need for this specific article. If I just go off WP:LISTN, it doesn't meet notability guidelines in my mind. Could I be wrong? Sure. But show me the evidence as to why this specific list is notable. avs5221(talk|contrib) 08:51, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Revisions: Pedro Tongio Liongson

Have revised the article for the second time. Many of the original sources were written in a "wiki-puffery" style. With all the changes I have made, I'm worried that my subject will lose his viability as someone worth writing about. What makes this subject interesting for me was that he was a man in the background doing his work quietly and the best he can under the most extenuating circumstances and under the overwhelming shadows of the so-called accepted heroes of his time. Considering his background and love for country, he didn't have to take all that "shit" from his superiors. That is what makes him heroic. Hope I have successfully reduced the article into an acceptable encyclopedic context this time. Would appreciate your suggestions of specific segments to modify. It will save me a lot of guesswork.

Jvrodriguez (talk) 08:42, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Give me some time to read it over, it's quite long. avs5221(talk|contrib) 08:56, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
Ok, here's my initial impression. The puffery I mentioned before has been mostly attended to, but there are still some passages to note. Specifically, wording such as:

With the support of local villages and intimate knowledge of terrain, guerrillas began to harass, sabotage and ambush Americans by raids on supply trains, patrols and small detachments.[35] The insurrectos or insurgents became a hidden army transforming from peaceful civilians to military cadres or vice versa at will.

According to Albert, Luna had a bitter argument with Buencamino accusing the latter of treason. Aguinaldo intervened but the confrontation left a bitter taste on everyone’s lips

Unable to contain the northward advance of General Arthur MacArthur, Jr. after a series of setbacks, Luna moved his headquarters to Bayambang, Pangasinan in May 1899 where the controversial court martial of Col. Manuel Arguelles was conducted.

This quote specifically, why is there no citation? Why was the court martial controversial? Those types of claims will be subject to scrutiny.

The Constitution of the First Philippine Republic containing the hopes and aspirations of the Filipino people was completed and approved on January 20, 1899.

There are more, surely, but I think that's a good cross-section of claims/prose that would be considered non-neutral. I also have reservations with the sprawling length of the article. By including so much history, you seem to detract from the subject of the article. There are entire subsections that don't even mention Liongson until the final line or two. I evaluate that as either verbosity and over-inclusiveness or padding a person's page to make them look more important than they in fact were. That's not to say I don't think this person is notable, but try to be more concise and focus on the person rather than the period and events, which currently seem to envelope Liongson. Please feel free to ask any other questions, but hopefully this will give you a good jumping-off point. avs5221(talk|contrib) 09:12, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Articles for Creation: Toonz

why do you all keep rejecting the submission of this page? --土地 空気 火災 水 12:12, 2 July 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gilthanas91 (talk • contribs)

Please link to the specified page. avs5221(talk|contrib) 12:14, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Toonz

--土地 空気 火災 水 13:05, 2 July 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gilthanas91 (talk • contribs)

Articles for creation/Osminin Alexander

Dear Avs5221!

First of all, thank you for reviewing my article and many thanks for your recommendations! I've rewritten it in a more encyclopedic format. I hope now all is well. it would be great if you could to check it out again! kind regards, Linuxik (talk) 16:17, 2 July 2012 (UTC) P.S. Please, excuse my English, it's not my native language.

Articles for Creation: Mackintosh Braun

Hello, you recently declined my submission (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Mackintosh_Braun), claiming that the group is not notable enough for inclusion. I respectfully disagree with your decision; the artist is signed to Atlantic Records, whose parent company Warner Music Group is one of the world's four largest record companies. They have released a studio album through Atlantic, and have been picked up for the soundtracks of many national television shows. The first time I submitted this page, it was declined for the same reason, but when I contested the ruling on the IRC chat, the editors there agreed with me and revoked the rejection. If you could take another look at the page I would greatly appreciate it. Thank you very much, Schaan383 (talk) 16:29, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

I understand that I'm in the minority. Thankfully we rule by consensus and my declining your article has very little affect on it become a live article or not. That said, I'll put this here in hopes someone stumbles across it one day. I hear this argument all the time that if a band is signed they are somehow notable. If you look at the notability guidelines for bands on WP:MUSIC, you'll notice it makes zero mention of being signed to a label or not. Still referencing WP:BAND, let's go through the criteria one-by-one:
  1. Maybe. Your first three references on WT:Articles for creation/Mackintosh_Braun are simply noting the band has been signed. You provide interviews with Spinner and Nylon. Good. Then we have AudioholicMedia. I've looked over the page and aside from a "contact the editor" type page, I can see no reference to editorial oversight. Seems to fail WP:RS. Next, Boston.com, good but not really substantive. ABC is good. IMDB not substantive aside from proving they had a song in a show/movie. Rest of links follow this pattern.
  2. National music chart - No
  3. Certified gold - No
  4. Concert tour coverage - No
  5. Two albums on a major label - First was self-published, so no
  6. Ensemble with two or more notable musicians - Michael Oates could be argued, but you yourself say he "has played on a few of the group’s recordings" (emphasis added). I don't believe this meets the criteria anyway, but I wanted to add it for fairness.
  7. Representatives of a notable style - No
  8. Major music award - No
  9. Major music competition - No
  10. Maybe the most divisive one here, performed music for a work of media that is notable, e.g. a theme for a network television show, performance in a television show or notable film, inclusion on a notable compilation album, etc. They've had some songs played in TV shows. But I think this is conveying acts that have performed on TV shows, ie Jay Leno or something similar. They haven't made any theme songs or otherwise made notable contributions to compilation album, shows, films, etc. Their songs have made it on to a few things. I'm not trying to be rude, just putting things in perspective.
  11. Rotation on major radio - No
  12. Featured subject of a substantial broadcast segment across a national radio or TV network - No.
This band, to me, seems close to reaching notability, but in some categories they come a peg or two short, while in others they have no claim at all. In no one category can they really claim notability. I'm sorry other editors disagree with me, but this seems clear to me. If I'm overruled, so be it, but I hope I've laid out my argument in a clear and logical format that will make my reasoning more accessible.
All that said, I must note I'm concerned by your tone both here and in your article. The sort of WP:PUFFERY you've written here - rattling off the band's accomplishments -, combined with " the band's increasing public presence" and "Mackintosh Braun have received significant placement exposure" and riding on the coattails of Michael Braun should be noted. I hope you'll read over WP:NPOV and WP:GNG in the near future. Please let me know if you have other questions. avs5221(talk|contrib) 08:26, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Articles for Creation: Tyler Ward

I have to disagree with you declining my AfC submission as many other articles have lists. For example, John Grisham, Sam Tsui, Christina Grimmie or Kurt Hugo Schneider. I promise to clean the lists up and make them look nicer but I will not remove the lists. Cheers, Riley Huntley talk No talkback needed; I'll temporarily watch here. 19:19, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

For an experienced editor, I'm simply aghast by your attitude. You won't remove it? Ok... You submitted it AfC, which is an avenue for receiving feedback and constructive criticism. You intentionally exposed yourself to that and then, at the slightest bit of criticism, come on my talk page and stomp your feet. I don't understand....avs5221(talk|contrib) 08:44, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
I'd also like to note you've provided absolutely no sources to explain why his videos or covers are not notable, let alone a reason to list every one. These lists makes no sense. I appreciate you feel strongly about it, but it is counter every rule Wikipedia abides by in regards to reliable sources. You can't use youtube as a source to prove he's well-known. You have reliable sources in your reflist, use them! avs5221(talk|contrib) 08:50, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Deliberate Nuisance?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Sumankp/hahaha had AfC tag and nothing else. David_FLXD (Talk) 20:11, 2 July 2012 (UTC) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Paintedinoils/sandbox ditto David_FLXD (Talk) 20:47, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

New users who aren't sure what they're doing? Not sure, just remove the AfC template like you did and move on. There are a ton of pages in userspace right now. I move them if they look legitimate (even if it's a decline) or just remove the template if they look like nonsense. I've added {{userspacedraft}} to a few to help out the user. I've also come across a few that were blatant advertising and reported them to WP:UAA. avs5221(talk|contrib) 07:50, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Hello, a question about improving my article

I recently made an article about Kalasatama, the area being built in Helsinki, Finland. In your opinion, which I respect, the article wasn't notable and that my references weren't veriable. I had references to the official site of Helsinki City of Kalasatama, both Finnish and English versions. Can you tell me, what was missing from the article, for improving matters? I really want it published in the English Wikipedia. Kalasatama is a big buzz in Finland at the moment, and it will be one of the biggest living areas in the whole country.

Thank you.

And sorry, my english can sometimes be a little tacky, that's because I'm only 15 years old and English isn't my first language. Also, I would have wanted to add a render of the Kalasatama area to the article to get a better view at the scale of the area, but that wasn't possible.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Kalasatama

Matthiastt (talk) 20:43, 2 July 2012 (UTC)Matthiastt

Hello, Matt! Your English is commendable (that's to say, it's very good!). The tough part about your article is the area isn't built yet! Wikipedia has a rule called WP:CRYSTAL. Wikipedia tries to not speculate on future events. That said, it seems you're very familiar with Kalasatama. You said there's a lot of buzz around it. Do you have any sources for that buzz? If you could find a few and add them to article, that would help a lot! Let me know if you need any help (as long as it's not translating Finnish :D ). avs5221(talk|contrib) 08:58, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Articles for Review: Rocco Leo Gaglioti

Hello! Thanks for taking the time to review the article about Rocco Leo Gaglioti. I hate to be a nuisance, but may I ask if there is anything in particular I need to cite? Do I need to provide links to pages proving each of his professions? Or some of the not-so-well-documented claims, such as modeling at a hair show or picking up photography in 1997? Some of the citations provided are covering the last couple sentences before them--do I need a separate citation for every sentence, even if they're located on the same page?

Thank you very much! Alana Gilston (talk) 02:00, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure you've established his notability. VidBlogger Nation uses two self-published sources that show us the episodes existed but don't tell us why they were notable. With Fashion News Live, you again provide examples of his work, but no sources noting notability. Remember Wikipedia's notability guidelines. You have to show that "he has been the subject of multiple published secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject." You have not done that...yet. Go find more sources about Rocco rather than sources by Rocco. avs5221(talk|contrib) 09:10, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Resubmitting an article rejected by Avs5221

Hi,

I just made some changes to the article that I had submitted and which you had rejected for reading too much like an essay and not being in a neutral enough voice.

Hopefully I have addressed your concerns, by removing most of the adjectives altogether, by tightening the writing (and deleting some sentences) and by offering less interpretation than was in the prior draft (which is a pity, in my opinion, because readers may be left guessing about the significance of even the most important scientific research, if it's laid out in an entirely facts-only way, devoid of any statements about the research's significance).

If for some reason you are still not satisfied that my rewrite has addressed your earlier concerns, please this time let me know the specific instances that you believe violate Wikipedia's standards. Your earlier critique gave no specifics, so it left me guessing about where you wanted me to make changes.

Also, this article already contains 10 footnoted reference articles (all from very well known peer reviewed scientific journals) as well as nine external link references to reliable third party sources including the New York Times, NPR and other news sources that everyone knows. So hopefully you agree it is sufficiently sourced. But again, if there's a section that you think requires more sourcing, please just let me know which section and I'll find some more sources to back up that section.

Thanks.

TMAS1999 — Preceding unsigned comment added by TMASI999 (talk • contribs) 04:13, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Review of Articles for creation/BroadLight

Hi Avs5221,

Thank you in advance for your time and I hope you can help.

I've noticed you were the last to review Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/BroadLight : The article is structured in a very simple and informative way yet conveys no less information than already published similar articles such as Alphamosaic, Gigle Networks, Element 14, Redpine Signals and others.

I recognize the page has been rejected several times and I am not sure how this fact influences each additional review. In any case, I would greatly appreciate your practicle insight on how to make some positive progress with this submission.

Regards, /se

Semiexpert (talk) 17:47, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

The problem is they don't seem very notable. They were acquired and raised some venture capital, ok. They've created some products, ok. But none of the sources provided really expand upon why their product is an "innovation." Every company has press releases and patents, but not every company has a Wikipedia article. You need to show WP:NOTABILITY by showing why the previous things mentioned are relevant and notable. avs5221(talk|contrib) 17:54, 1 July 2012 (UTC)


Avs5221,

Thank you again for your feedback and direction. Per your guidance to show notability I've added the text and associated reference sources. The company significants is its envisioning of a market that did not exisit, betting that it will happen, creating a product for it and achieving success & marketplace recognition. I'd apprecaite if you can take another look.

/se Semiexpert (talk) 21:50, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Explanation "WP:NOT"

I didn't understand your explanation "WP:NOT" at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Nonuniform sampling, so I expect the submitter didn't, either. I understand there are many things that WP is not, but it's not clear what you think this draft article is. I agree it needs a lot of work, it may be a COI issue, it's not well wikified with links, etc., but it looks like a plausible topic. Can you be more specific? Dicklyon (talk) 17:20, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

I totally agree it's plausible. Admittedly, it's also way over my head. And that relates to why I declined it. Please see WP:NOT#JARGON, specifically points 7 and 8. I'm not sure of a reasonable way of presenting something this complex to the average reader, but it also clearly fails to explain the topic in clear terms as prescribed by point 7. This may also fall under point 6, as this does seem to be more textbook than encyclopedia. Anyway, hope that answers your question! avs5221(talk|contrib) 08:34, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
Couldn't you just leave it for someone better able to understand and advise? I think the result of turning down this new editor this way is that he went looking for other articles to cram his complicated stuff into. Someone needs to help him, and I don't have the time or patience, and you don't have the background, but this just kind of shut him down with no useful info. Dicklyon (talk) 17:37, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
He's only made 4 edits, so I'm not sure where else he's cramming this information. I think it's a tad pessimistic to label this a case of WP:BITING, but I understand your point-of-view. That said, I think I evaluated his article fairly and I think I did a fine job of addressing your criticisms, all of which you seem to have ignored to focus on my lack of comprehension of the topic. The points I made directly address the obtuseness of his article and the reasons why such issues should be corrected. That has no bearing on my ability to advise him in the context of evaluating articles submitted to WP:AFC. That said, I'll be sure to leave a note on the user's page better explaining why I declined his submission. avs5221(talk|contrib) 17:56, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
It was ill-advised to make a supposition. His 4 edits have been very...productive. I don't know enough to say if they're good edits or not, I can only speak in the context of his AfC article. avs5221(talk|contrib) 18:02, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
Well, after you turned him down without explanation, he added the material to Nyquist–Shannon sampling theorem, twice, and twice I reverted him and then tried to get his attention on his talk page. So far no luck. Dicklyon (talk) 18:08, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
I'll leave it at this, but you seem to blaming me, as though I gave him the keys to Wikipedia and said, "go crazy." You're an experience editor. If you see a problem with his activities, let him know. It'd be more beneficial than having the conversation here with someone who can only do so much. Could I have done more on AfC? Yes; point made. AfC has a backlog of almost 400 articles, down from 800 a few days ago. The templates we leave provide a general reason for why we decline. If the submitter has more questions, they can always ask me. Take a look at my talk page, it's nothing but questions, but you'll also notice they all have answers. avs5221(talk|contrib) 18:13, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

rejecting a submission

why do you all keep rejecting the submission of this page? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Toonz) --土地 空気 火災 水 14:20, 3 July 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gilthanas91 (talk • contribs)

Edgar Perez entry

I do not understand what the issue is with my new entry for Edgar Perez. I have changed it dramatically from my latest revision, including not only more independent resources but also those conducted in other languages, or media outlets from foreign countries). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.10.141.179 (talk) 14:31, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Newlyweds

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newlyweds_(2011_film) — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheWarOfArt (talk • contribs) 14:55, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Hello again!

I have made some improvements into my article about Kalasatama! I have, for example, added information about the history of the area and where it stands nowadays, so it doesn't feel like the area doesn't exist yet. I also made a new section for the future plans of Kalasatama, which contains the main text of the first version of my article. I hope that's OK, I didn't know if an article can include information about the future of the area or does that break the law of the crystal ball too.

You asked about the fuzz that was going around Kalasatama. Well, in Finland, people are suggesting new ideas of living, and in Kalasatama, townhouses and floating houses by the coastline will be something new. It's all a part of the World Design Capital year. I didn't really find any articles in English, but only some little inaccurate ones describing that there haven't been bigger projects in Finland than now, as three very large areas (which all are by the sea by the way) are being built in Helsinki. But I did add some more references to the reference list.

Thank you! Matthiastt (talk) 17:53, 3 July 2012 (UTC)Matthiastt

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Kalasatama#Kalasatama

A star you completely deserve.

The Articles for Creation barnstar
I rarely give barnstars to people, in part because i rarely remember i really should do so more often. However, your AFC work is so utterly tremendous that i feel utterly compelled to place one of these on your talk page. One very well deserved star for a great deal of excellent work. Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 18:36, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Reference Denial of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Kendall County Sheriff’s Office (Illinois)

Can you please expand as to why Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Kendall County Sheriff’s Office (Illinois) was denied beyond just "Not Suitable for Wikipedia", as the page was started off of a dead link on "List of Law Enforcement Agencies in Illinois" and is following the example of Wikipedia pages for other similar agencies as closely as I could ascertain. Thank you.

MountainTreker58 (talk) 19:13, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

WP:NOT may not have been the most descriptive way of declining the article. Specifically, I'm not sure it passes general notability guidelines, but that could be resolved by showing significant coverage in secondary sources. The WP:NOT was in reference to being an indiscriminate collection of information. Please let me know if you have any other questions! avs5221(talk|contrib) 19:27, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

More references?

Aloha, 

 Thank you for reviewing the page for Jamieson Jones.  My name is Billy, and I am his wiki manager.  I was curious as to why the references are not enough for his notability.  There are several articles across Billboard.com, allmusic.com, and his name is in the album credits for the contribution he made to two globally selling albums out right now.

Thank you for your time and assistance as to what else may be required to get his page in the wiki space. -Billy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamiesonxjones (talk • contribs) 22:12, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Fares Fares

Hello, it seems that you have deleted my article Fares Fares for copyright infringement; however, no specific details on that infringement has been given. 2 people reviewed it before and no one pointed out the problem, all they said is that I needed to insert more external sources. Which I did but then you deleted it. I even logged into the Wikipedia live chat to ask for help and all they told me was to add external sources. Please let me know what could be done in order to approve the article. Rchamaa (talk) 22:40, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

This has been addressed by User:RHaworth. avs5221(talk|contrib) 05:10, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Avs5221. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Help desk.
Message added 00:43, 4 July 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Athleek 00:43, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

StoreGrid- Can u help me to publish this article online with some edits

Hi, Can u help me to publish this article online with some edits.

Please someone make some edits in the article and make it live.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/StoreGrid

Help me out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lenin1234 (talk • contribs) 05:34, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Great Little Box Company

HI Avs5221,

I am new to wikipedia. You just finished reviewing my entry on the Great Little Box Company. I was wondering if you can provide me with some advice. The sources I used comprised of government sources, news sources, and other sources unrelated to the company. Arent't these the types of sources required? Am I missing something here?

Best regards, Abahgat — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abahgat (talk • contribs) 03:24, 1 July 2012 (UTC)


I'll be off for a little while, but I'll take a look at it when I get home. avs5221(talk|contrib) 03:26, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Ok, thanks Abahgat (talk) 03:31, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Avs5221,

Could you please adopt me as a wikipedia user? I could learn a lot from your expertise.

Abahgat has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Abahgat (talk) 21:19, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Avs5221,

I was wondering if you had a chance to take a look at my article again. Please let me know.

Abahgat (talk) 23:22, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Sorry about that! The sources look good, but I'd really like to see inline citations in the article. I'm not sure about the neutrality of an awards section. It seems like a fine company, but I question its overall notability for a stand-alone article. Let me know if you have other questions. avs5221(talk|contrib) 23:30, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Avs5221,

Thanks for the advice, can you please tell me how to add inline citations? Also, you are right about the awards section, I will remove that. But I do believe that this company should have its own stand alone article. All the sources I am using are significant government sources. Also, some of the major newspapers like the Financial Times have written articles about the company, so there is significant coverage of it in major sources. There are also several business books where the company is cited for its good practices, I will try to include these sources as well. Furthermore, other less known companies in Vancouver, British Columbia like MC Freight Systems have their own stand alone article without a single reference. Abahgat (talk) 05:50, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Once again thanks for your advice, I would like to re-edit the article using in-line citations and have you review it again. Please let me know if there is any more advice you can provide me so that I can create a top-notch article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abahgat (talk • contribs) 05:46, 5 July 2012 (UTC) Abahgat (talk) 05:51, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Regional Railway Museum (Chennai)

The Regional Railway Museum (Chennai) article has been improved. Could you please take another look at it? Eastmain (talk • contribs) 03:15, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

I concur, it's been improved since the AfD. avs5221(talk|contrib) 13:11, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
If you feel that the Afd debate is no longer needed for this article then you can withdraw your nomination following WP:WITHDRAWN so that the discussion can be closed early. you can make a comment at the AfD to inform about withdrawl --DBigXray 21:02, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Seth Mokitimi

Hi Avs

please look at this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Seth_Mokitimi, which is a contribution of mine. Please consider Vivek Rai's comment and tell me if you think they are justified, especially encyclopedic tone and NPOV. I don't mind the complaint about insufficient sources, but the latter part left me feeling thoroughly cheesed off. Thanks! David_FLXD (Talk) 06:55, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

I missed this, what happened? avs5221(talk|contrib) 21:13, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
Following my response to him (assuming "him") he dropped the NPOV and encyclopedic tone issues and asked me to add infobox, categories, more sources if possible. Then he put the page up without waiting. I've since added the infobox, categories & more refs. I'm working on permission for a photo. I understand that any permission must allow WP users to copy the image, but that requiring attribution to go with the image is one of the acceptable forms, which is what I am requesting. Is that right? David_FLXD (Talk) 09:37, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
WP:ICTIC. There is an attribution tag, yes. avs5221(talk|contrib) 12:19, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Articles for creation/Osminin Alexander

Dear Avs5221!

You just didn't answer my last messages, so I got worried. I appreciate you reviewing my submission and many thanks for your recommendations! I've rewritten it in a more encyclopedic format.

I hope now all is well. it would be great if you could to check it out again! Please, excuse my English, it's not my native language.

kind regards, Linuxik (talk) 16:17, 2 July 2012 (UTC) P.S. i'll be grateful if you help me to improve my text and correct my mistakes among other things :))

Some things I'm noticing:
  • Has he won any major competitions? I see he's won competitions, but are they notable? The links you've provided (such as this) are not helpful.
  • "As a concerto soloist Alexander enjoys associations with many major orchestras." This isn't backed up by your source, which is only a history of the hall.
  • The tone of the article, things such as "It's also worth mentioning," 'Central to his repertoire," "As a concerto soloist Alexander enjoys associations with many major orchestras." These are not encyclopedic. In English, this would be considered informal.
I hope some of this feedback helps. Let me know if you need help. avs5221(talk|contrib) 21:59, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Re George O. Jackson entry and Essence of Mexico photographs

Thanks for the comment. You're right. I'll create an entry for the Essence of Mexico Collection. JoanLouise (talk) 11:20, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Good to hear. Let me know how it comes along. avs5221(talk|contrib) 13:07, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Toonz

why in the name of the Allmighty do you all keep rejecting this page?

it has reliable sources, or do you want to say that an Italian University is not reliable enough?

Chirp - It may not be, if the software company is a partner in that Italian University's training course (which in this case it is), which could mean that the university is benefiting from free or discounted software licence/s. David_FLXD (Talk) 12:49, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
Avs, I happened to see this, if this chirp on your talk page is naughty / deprecated, please tell me! David_FLXD (Talk) 12:49, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
I'll give you a (talk page stalker) for that ;) avs5221(talk|contrib) 13:06, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

--'''土地 空気 火災 水''' (talk) 12:12, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

p.s. sorry for the poor english

and what should i add as a source? btw, the relation with the university WAS a research collaboration, so we are not partners, nor the university gained free/discounted licenses

--'''土地 空気 火災 水''' (talk) 13:05, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

yeah, they keep chit-chatting between them but no one answers me... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gilthanas91 (talk • contribs) 13:21, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

The problem is the links you provided do not show significant coverage and instead provide general information about the product. It's not enough to merely show the product exists; you have to show significant coverage. Articles merely stating what the product is, what it does, or how much it costs do not establish the notability of the product. Can you show that it's been used significantly or has some sort of technical notability. Otherwise it can be seen as software in a sea of software. What makes this product more significant? avs5221(talk|contrib) 13:27, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

what makes Toon Boom Animation significant enough? the program has been used for years from studio ghibli (honestly, we keep developing it with them...), but they do not write this on they're website. --'''土地 空気 火災 水''' (talk) 13:36, 4 July 2012 (UTC) p.s. by the way, all the articles posted on the internet regarding Toonz are old, there is a solution to this or do i have to delete the page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gilthanas91 (talk • contribs) 13:37, 4 July 2012 (UTC)


You do not have to delete it; you can always add sources. In regards to Toon Boom, it has a list of significant users, showing that it is notable in its field. avs5221(talk|contrib) 13:40, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
significant users with no references, i was working on this page: [[1]], and i intended to put here the users of toonz, but if it is needed i'll put them in the Toonz page. --'''土地 空気 火災 水''' (talk) 13:43, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

ok, i putted some users in the Toonz page, what else do i have to do? --'''土地 空気 火災 水''' (talk) 13:45, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

p.s. i do apologize once again for my poor english

happening to come here, the problem is not just the notability, but the promotional nature of the article. It uses unsourced adjectives of praise, is written in the second person, appealing to the reader to buy the products, and goes into excessive detail about the capabilities of the product. The references furthermore are all or most of them mere mentions. What is needed is substantial product reviews from 3rd party independent published reliable sources, print or online, but not blogs or press releases, or material derived from press releases. And make sure none of it is copied from your web site. DGG ( talk ) 08:23, 5 July 2012 (UTC)


roger that, i apologize if i seemed angry, but honestly i'm not used to discuss in a "serious way".

Anyway, thanks to both avs5221 and DGG for the help, i'll work on the article in order to improve/modify it. Alas, i cannot find sources different from blogs or press releases, since our clients (i do work with the company that developed Toonz) do not write in they're websites that they actually use Toonz. Is there another way to find some references? Thanks in advance.

--'''土地 空気 火災 水''' (talk) 12:17, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

re: British International School of Tunis

Hello, Avs5221. You have new messages at 81M's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

81M (talk) 14:33, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

RE: Babatunde Rotimi

Hi Avs5221, Thanks for reviewing my page. I do have a little issue. In your posted comment, you suggested that the discussed person cannot be considered notable because all the sources link to the same event. But even though each of those referred links do in fact discuss the Caine's prize award, they also discuss different parts of the client's personal and professional life which are referred to in the article.

I'm also a little unclear on why subject is not notable enough because most of the sources link to one event. Surely being the recipient of a prestigious international writing prize, managed by reputable judges, is reason enough to be considered notable? That's like suggesting Lee Harvey Oswald is less notable cos all the references on him link to his 'singular event' (despite the fact that they highlight other subjects).

Thanks again for the quick review. Forgive me, I'm still adjusting to Wiki-ecosystem. P.s Beyond the question of sources, do you have any other advice or correction? i.e Is the tone/format of the article alright?

Carlang (talk) 17:30, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I think that this comment i left covers the above section as well. Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 20:28, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
Agreed, I goofed on that one. Sorry, Carlang! avs5221(talk|contrib) 21:11, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

No harm done. Mistakes happen. I can only imagine the amount of work that you have to review and edit everyday. Thanks for your contribution and evaluation. If I should work on anything in the future (here's hoping), you'll defintitely be one of my 'Go-to' options. 41.219.195.96 (talk) 21:35, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Appreciated avs5221(talk|contrib) 21:37, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Bhaap Wikipedia Page

Hi there, I noticed you declined my submission for lack of independently published articles. The reviewer prior to you asked for two more independent articles that had been published, which I added prior to your review. Solarra also promised that the submission would be published if that happened.

Since Solarra's review, I have added 3 independently published references and complied with all requests. Please reconsider your decision based on these facts.

Thanks. The Match Referee (talk) 09:27, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Need Clearer Feedback Re Ilai Fund Article

Dear Editor, You recently rejected the above article for reason of insufficient context. I'd like to understand more clearly what exactly is lacking. I'm aware that third party references in English are currently lacking or insufficient. I hope this will be remedied in the coming months. Please confirm if that is the main problem, or if the problem lies elsewhere. If any context is lacking in a specific area, apart from this problem, please inform. Best Regards, Susan de la Fuente sdlfsusan@yahoo.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by SuedlF (talk • contribs) 14:26, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Revisions to article about Jewish Fiction .net

Dear Editor,

Thank you for your comments on my first submission about Jewish Fiction .net. I took your comments into account, rewriting it in the formal, neutral tone expected of an encyclopedia and avoiding "peacock terms." I saved the new version, but must have made some sort of mistake because I was just returned to the page with your original response. Below is the revised version of my article. I would appreciate your response on this. Thanks and best wishes,

David S. Weiss


Jewish Fiction .net (www.jewishfiction.net) is an online literary journal founded in 2010 by Nora Gold, and is at present the only English-language journal, either in print or online, devoted exclusively to the publishing of Jewish fiction.[1] [2]. Published 3-4 times annually, the purpose of Jewish Fiction .net is to showcase the finest contemporary writing on Jewish themes (either written in, or translated into, English), and to provide a publishing space for first-rate but not yet well-known Jewish authors.[3] [4]. Each issue of Jewish Fiction .net features both emerging and established writers. Some of the established authors it has published so far include:

S.Y. Agnon, Ruth Almog, Aharon Appelfeld, Yossi Avni-Levy, Marcelo Birmajer, Orly Castel-Bloom, Daniella Carmi, Kim Chernin, Jasminka Domas, Andrew Furman, Avirama Golan, Shira Gorshman, Gail Hareven, Pamela Jenoff, George Jonas, Gabriel Josipovici, Yoram Kaniuk, Grigory Kanovich, Abraham Karpinovich, Judith Katzir, Alan Kaufman, Gordana Kuic, Mario Levi, Savyon Liebrecht, Mira Magen, Norman Manea, Aharon Megged, Edna Noy, Peter Orner, Yehoshue Perle, Nessa Rapoport, Thane Rosenbaum, Chava Rosenfarb, Judith Rotem, Nava Semel, Clive Sinclair, Steve Stern, Morley Torgov, Zvi Vapni, Lara Vapnyar, and Elie Wiesel.

In its first 22 months, Jewish Fiction .net published 91 stories or novel excerpts, originally written in ten languages: English, French, Spanish, Russian, Romanian, Serbian, Turkish, Croation, Hebrew, and Yiddish.[5]. [5]. This journal, which has readers in 92 countries, has been written about in The Forward, The Jerusalem Post, The Jewish Week, and Hadassah Magazine.

Jewish Fiction .net’s founder and editor, Dr. Nora Gold, is an author residing in Toronto, whose book, Marrow and Other Stories[6], won one of the Canadian Jewish Book Awards.[7].

The Advisory Council of Jewish Fiction .net is comprised of Alice Shalvi, Ellen Frankel, Michael Kramer, Thane Rosenbaum, Joseph Kertes, Linda Lipsky, Nava Semel, Norman Manea, and Steve Stern. Subject of my article is Jewish fiction — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr. David S. Weiss (talk • contribs) 15:40, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

  1. ^ Lauren Friedman, "Proliferating Jewish Fiction Online", The Forward, June 28, 2010
  2. ^ The United Synagogue Women's View "Great Fiction from Around the World", The United Synagogue Women's View, March 2012
  3. ^ Sandee Brawarsky, "Jewish Fiction Online", The Jewish Week, October 5, 2010
  4. ^ Elana Sztokman, "Nora Gold on the Launch of Jewish Fiction .net", The Jerusalem Post, November 14, 2010
  5. ^ Barbara Trainin Blank "People of the Web Site", Hadassah Magazine, May 24, 2012
  6. ^ http://www.amazon.ca/Marrow-other-stories-Nora-Gold/dp/1894020316/ref=sr_1_1/701-6123376-8704344?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1189473169&sr=8-1
  7. ^ "Canadian Jewish Book Awards - Past winners"
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Avs5221/Archive_3&oldid=1146430078"