Jump to content

User talk:Bobby Cohn/Archive 4

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6

Your draft article, Draft:List of Emojis

Hello, MicrobiologyMarcus. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "List of Emojis".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, 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.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 21:56, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

RFA2024 update: phase I concluded, phase II begins

Hi there! Phase I of the Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review has concluded, with several impactful changes gaining community consensus and proceeding to various stages of implementation. Some proposals will be implemented in full outright; others will be discussed at phase II before being implemented; and still others will proceed on a trial basis before being brought to phase II. The following proposals have gained consensus:

See the project page for a full list of proposals and their outcomes. A huge thank-you to everyone who has participated so far :) looking forward to seeing lots of hard work become a reality in phase II. theleekycauldron (talk), via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:09, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Final Five Voting: Question About Rejection

Good day, and thank you for your review of my draft, Final Five Voting.

Your rejection cites this reason: "Neologisms are not considered suitable for Wikipedia unless they receive substantial use and press coverage; this requires strong evidence in independent, reliable, published sources. Links to sites specifically intended to promote the neologism itself do not establish its notability."

The article is thoroughly cited with articles in mainstream media about Final Five Voting, and the voting method has been used in major elections nationwide (described in the article) so I believe it meets the criteria for substantial use and press coverage.

You mention that the topic is included within an existing Wikipedia article, "Top Four Primary," but I believe it would be an inappropriate commandeering of that article to fully flesh out the Final Five Voting section. For this reason, and the depth of information in the Final Five Voting draft, I believe it justifies having its own page.

I appreciate your consideration of this appeal. Aapril3 (talk) 15:20, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Aapril3: some minor semantics here, I did not reject your draft, I simply declined it. As such, you have the option to resubmit if you would like to have another reviewer review it.
In regards to notability, I personally found that the citations did not demonstrate the that the subject itself was notable. Take, for example, "Politics Industry Theory maintains that standard industry evaluation techniques and competition thinking like Porter’s five forces analysis can be applied to the U.S. election system to produce election results more reflective of the true preferences of voters" the end of the history section, with the citation to Stateline.org.[1] The only mention of the final-five in the article is "Then, in a system known as final-five voting, the top five candidates would advance to the general election. In the general election, voters would then rank those top five candidates, triggering the ranked-choice mechanism during the vote count." Otherwise, the article seems to be focused on Ranked-choice voting in the United States, which was my suggestion of where the content should go; see my declination comment "... perhaps on Ranked-choice voting in the United States which is linked in the draft, given that all the examples seem to be American. Especially considering all of the examples don't even use final five systems as it is." Take a look at our WP:Significant coverage policy on WP:Notability for further guidance here.
With regards to my reasoning, I felt I expanded a lot in my AFC comment in addition to the declination reasoning, showing other articles that may be a suitable location for it. Not every example of state usage listed in the draft article even use "final five" voting, so would the explanation of those voting systems even be applicable in your draft article?
If, given all the above, you still think this topic has independent notability and the states examples are specific to "Final five" and not simply ranked choice voting, feel free to present which WP:THREE sources demonstrate as much. While that linked essay is mostly applicable for Notability discussions at WP:AfD, it's philosophy is very applicable at AfC. I would reconsider if you still feel strongly given my guidance on the draft page and here, and you provide those three sources.
Kindly, microbiologyMarcus [petri dish·growths] 16:56, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Vasilogambros, Matt (March 12, 2021). "Ranked-Choice Voting Gains Momentum Nationwide". Slateline.

Angelita C. et al. v. California Department of Pesticide Regulation

Just want to say that the article was objectively terrible on several levels and while the topic is in fact highly notable, this really would not have been at all obvious to anyone who hadn't already done some reading on strawberry pesticides, or lived in some very specific areas of California.

If you are around in a day or so I could possibly use some fresh eyes to assess how well I have explained the thing for a reader that knows nothing about all this. Don't worry, not a full-scale AfC, just whether you can actually read it without getting a headache. I'd appreciate hearing about any continuity errors. Elinruby (talk) 14:13, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi Elinruby, I would be more than happy to dive into that article and provide feedback when I next get a chance. Looks like an interesting read. Cheers, microbiologyMarcus [petri dish·growths] 14:47, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
After we talked I noticed your interest in Wikiproject Soil. Do you have an opinion on or are you familiar with soil fumigation? If so feel free to suggest sources anytime. I find it, er, interesting, that all of the EPA documents linked in the news sources are now giving 404 errors, but some have been archived. And someone uploaded a lot of PDFs to Commons, trawling through those. Elinruby (talk) 02:10, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
Hi @Elinruby, I did some quick copy-editing for clarity and changed the lead to present-tense as is typical in court case articles that are still valid (see, for example Roe v. Wade in stead of Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization).
In regards to soil fumigation, what is your concern? I hadn't previously checked, but I noticed that Soil fumigation redirects to Fumigation which is, well... *opens to do list*. What was specifically are you interested in? You wanted to add sources to the article? You think some of the sources given aren't suitable?
Let me know, microbiologyMarcus [petri dish·growths] 01:06, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
I think that almost all of the sources are extremely RS but hmm what I knew about the facts before I started editing this article revolved around Oaxacan migrants and agriculture on the Central Coast. I am suggesting that perhaps you have specialized knowledge that I do not. I hesitate to outline the topic on your talk page, since that will involve length, but soil fumigants are injected into the soil, which is then covered with a tarp to mitigate the drift of carcinogenic particles. From Fumigation#Chemicals methyl bromide is the topic of Angelita C. article, and chloropicrin and 1,3-dichloropropene are alternatives to methyl bromide now that methyl iodide is no longer on the market.
The essence of Angelita C. is that the tarps don't work very well and the methyl bromide disproportionately harmed non-whites given that agricultural communities in California are disproportionately non-white. A lot of the sources take issue with the scientific review process at EPA, and the models used to assess health risks. I am literate enough to get through the reports but it's a hard slog, so I am asking whether this would be any easier for you. And also asking whether there is something that can/should be said about the idea of killing anything alive in soil that will be used to grow produce. Just spit-balling. I think, as an effort to clarify the structure, I will outline this topic on my talk page, since one of the things I am asking you to look at as fresh eyes is whether it is clear what the Montreal Protocol or methyl iodide have to do with anything. Also whether it is clear that while the complaint focused on children (and given mandatory school attendance probably rightly so), these pesticide issues affect millions of people, and that is without getting into the even more polluted Central Valley. Side note, I am assuming from the mention of Guelph that you are in Ontario and not necessarily familiar with the names of California regions, so let me point out a hole in the road: Central California = Central Coast + Central Valley but all of the areas mentioned in the article are on the Central Coast and the Central Valley has very different harvests and climates.
Appreciate the input and any further suggestions. I still can't find a good inbox, also; might have to set up something bespoke, since this is *not* a court case and was specifically disallowed from being a court case. Hope this clarifies my request. Given some of the (well-sourced!) material about the EPA, I really want the article to avoid amateur error, is another reason why I am asking for your thoughts Elinruby (talk) 01:56, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
I put that outline on the article talk page if interested Elinruby (talk) 04:35, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Ship naming conventions

Thank you for reviewing the submarine article. Though I also wanted point out, that to my understanding, the original title of the article was in line with Wikipedia's naming conventions for ships. The normal style is nationality, type of ship, and ship name. I just thought I would let you know, and thank you again for reviewing the article. Romanov loyalist (talk) 16:38, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

@Romanov loyalist,  Done! My apologies, that reading of the article title conventions looks correct. I've swapped those pages. Thanks for the heads up, microbiologyMarcus [petri dish·growths] 16:56, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Pre-colonial trade routes in Africa

Hi, MicrobiologyMarcus!

I popped in to thank you for pointing out an erroneous citation on my Draft, Pre-Colonial Trade Routes and Networks in Africa, the citation of which I have since removed. I may have miscopied an ISBN—otherwise, I have no idea how that citation happened there.

Psst! I'm not sure how to leave a message here, but I'm clicking on "Add topic" coz it's the only option I have.

Best Regards. Matandi2001 (talk) 00:36, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Matandi2001, you are correct in that adding topics on the talk page is the best way to get in touch with another editor. Good job on your first draft. I wasn't the one to leave the remark about the citation, my comment on the draft was that it was a little light on the citations, I didn't feel that it was ready for mainspace quiet yet but thought I would leave it to another reviewer if someone else felt it ready to accept. With more inline citations, I think I would feel it more acceptable and in line with our WP:V policy.
Cheers, microbiologyMarcus [petri dish·growths] 16:44, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
Hello, MicrobiologyMarcus!
Thanks for the compliments. Did you say "With more inline citations..."? I didn't know 13 quality references were inadequate for that size of an article! But well, we always learn something new.
Best, Matandi2001 (talk) 17:13, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
Hi @Matandi2001, it has to do with some sections of your draft lacking citations. Currently, there are large sections that are entirely void of citations. It is fine if that is sourced from the same material that sources other statements, those sections just need those citations to be identified so others can easily verify your work. Take, for example § Cultural exchange, which currently has no citations, so someone could challenge that material and remove it as unsourced. You are probably familiar with our {{citation needed}} maintenance tag that exists for this purpose. Material will need to have sources demonstrating it has been previously published and not WP:Original research.
Cheers, microbiologyMarcus [petri dish·growths] 17:29, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
And, by the way, @MicrobiologyMarcus, I know you're more experienced; why is my signature, Matandi2001, in red, indicating that the "page does not exist"?
Most obliged, Matandi2001 (talk) 17:19, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
You can find your user page at User:Matandi2001 and clicking create source and adding some text and then publish page. Mine is located at User:MicrobiologyMarcus. The link will turn blue once a page has been created there. If you have any other questions, please do not hesitate in asking!
Cheers, microbiologyMarcus [petri dish·growths] 17:32, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
Thanks, Marcus! Matandi2001 (talk) 21:10, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

User:Fishsicles/sandbox

Hi MicrobiologyMarcus, the draft User:Fishsicles/sandbox has been made made redundant by the publishing of the Sodium tetrapropylborate article and I want you to blank the entire sandbox and remove all the contents and corruption in it and make it an article and give it to Fishsicles. 2409:40F4:300E:27B2:8000:0:0:0 (talk) 11:34, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Madilen Negri

puoi darmi dei suggerimenti per rendere il testo più consono a Wikipedia...? Andrea Vizzini (talk) 08:24, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Request on 06:26:07, 12 June 2024 for assistance on AfC submission by Sumansindhu


Hi,

I read your message on why you have rejected the article. Can we speak on why you thought that the subject is not noteworthy and how I can improve the article. Thank you very much for your time.

Sumansindhu (talk) 06:26, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Gaurav_Burman&action=edit Sumansindhu (talk) 07:08, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
Hi @Sumansindhu, your draft wasn't rejected, it was declined. As such, you still have the option to make improvements and resubmit the article.
  1. Have you read the declination reason given by myself or @DoubleGrazing? In both instances, the reasoning given said:

    This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people)

    or the second reasoning which said:

    This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed

  2. Have you addressed any of the comments and feedback left by any of the reviewers at the top of the article, specifically as it relates to inline external links?
  3. Have you addressed any of the maintenance tags that reviewers left in the article pointing out flaws in the draft article?
Lastly, DoubleGrazing has asked on your talk page that you affirmatively respond to a WP:Conflict of interest or WP:PAID concern regarding the subject of this draft. Please respond there and make any necessary declarations on your user page in accordance with our policies.
Thanks, microbiologyMarcus [petri dish·growths] 13:19, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
Thank you, @MicrobiologyMarcus
1) I understand and improve on Inline Citation external links when making further changes to the draft.
2) I will make sure to keep the point of view as neutral as possible going further.
3) I am not paid or have any monetary expectation from the subject. I realized that the subject is noteworthy and that I could start my article writing journey with this. Sumansindhu (talk) 07:08, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Compare and contrast essay

Hello Marcus,

Suggestions noted. Can you just tell me what seemed like fluff to you so that I can remove it?

Thanks. DKas321 (talk) 09:35, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi @DKas321, in my opinion, everything south of "Writing & Organizational Techniques" is not encyclopedic. I wasn't going to delete it for you because you have references in there, but you need to ensure that you are citing to references that demonstrate the subject of your draft article (here, a specific type of essay) talk about the subject in depth and are secondary to any purpose the author or publisher of the work might have, such that it sufficiently demonstrates the subject of the article is notable, a requirement for any article on the project. Again, this is my opinion, but university instructional material on "how to write" a compare and contrast might not be sufficient in demonstrating WP:Notability, but I would concede other editors might differ on this opinion.
If you have any other questions, feel free to ask. Cheers, microbiologyMarcus [petri dish·growths] 13:32, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

Dear @MicrobiologyMarcus

Thank you so much for all your feedback on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Ronalds_Gonzalez We would really appreciate if you can take a look at it now and check if now we comply with your recommendations. The recommendations were the following: Does not presently appear to meet WP:NPROF. Written in a promotional tone, not using objective and descriptive language. WP:Bare URLs require cleanup, see WP:REFB for more information. microbiologyMarcus [petri dish·growths] 19:45, 12 June 2024 (UTC) Marquezronald (talk) 16:11, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Marquezronald, who is "we"? microbiologyMarcus [petri dish·growths] 16:50, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
Hi @microbiologyMarcus me and a friend from Venezuela Daniel Calderon (who studied with Ronalds Gonzalez), We believe that Ronalds Gonzalez is one of the Venezuelans that can be highlighted as one of the top researchers in biomaterials from our country. I am from Universidad de Los Andes, the same University where Ronalds Gonzalez graduated. Marquezronald (talk) 17:02, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
Would you please answer to our previous question? "We would really appreciate if you can take a look at it now and check if now we comply with your recommendations." Marquezronald (talk) 17:03, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
@Marquezronald you and your friend need to both make your own unique account as this account is a violation of our WP:SHAREDACCOUNT policy. microbiologyMarcus [petri dish·growths] 17:07, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
I am not sharing an account, after you asked for more information, I had to ask Daniel Calderon other details (who knows him), for example city of birth, etc. I would really appreciate it if you could take a look at my answer to your recommendations. "The recommendations were the following: Does not presently appear to meet WP:NPROF. Written in a promotional tone, not using objective and descriptive language. WP:Bare URLs require cleanup, see WP:REFB for more information." Marquezronald (talk) 17:11, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
@Marquezronald have you reviewed WP:NPROF and do you believe your draft article currently demonstrates that the subject satisfies one of the criteria? Second, do you have proper citations to previously published sources for the personal information you have given above. Personal knowledge is both WP:OR and, given the subject, a violation of our WP:BLP policy if you do not have proper WP:V for that information. microbiologyMarcus [petri dish·growths] 18:15, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

Sandboxes Submitted for Review

Some of them are worth reviewing, and some of them are not worth reviewing. Thanks for reviewing them. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:28, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon: Very cryptic, but always happy to help. I definitely find reviewing good, quality articles more rewarding but sometimes you gotta go through the clean-up categories as well. I know I appreciated when someone cleaned up my first draft.
Cheers, microbiologyMarcus [petri dish·growths] 21:09, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
What happened is that you and User:KylieTastic and I had a race with the items for review in user space, and some of them were crud. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:43, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Stefan Pastine

Hi MicrobiologyMarcus, thanks for your work on Wikipedia.

I wrote the Stefan Pastine draft entry you reviewed and rejected today. I added several external citations (SBIR/NSF, MIT Technology Review, Simems Gamesa Report). I'm just wondering whether those aren't sufficient as credible outside sources and/or if you feel like there needs to be more of them?


Thanks again

SC Seamus Costello (talk) 18:24, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Seamus Costello, a small clarification: I didn't reject your draft, I declined it. As such, you are encouraged to make the necessary changes required for a mainspace article before resubmitting. At the top of the draft, the individualised instructions I left were "Inappropriate external links in text. See WP:REFB to understand how to convert these to inline citations." You'll notice that in the draft article, there are links that are not formatted as citations but external links. These will need to be corrected. Cheers, microbiologyMarcus [petri dish·growths] 18:28, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
Appreciate that @MicrobiologyMarcus. Ill reformat those links.
Best
Seamus Costello Seamus Costello (talk) 18:35, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

Feng Qing Jin Si Baota

I just saw this article moved into mainspace. Regardless of its quality, it's an unattributed copy of the same article on the Ukrainian wiki run through Google Translate (though it is written by the same user), so it may need more than basic cleanup. Reconrabbit 16:40, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

Hey @Reconrabbit, I've considerably WP:STUB-ified the article. It cited to a product listing and was mostly health benefits and other promotional content. I'm in the process of a WP:BEFORE to determine if the topic meets WP:N or if it should proceed to the next step... You aren't familiar with the topic at all, are you? Any opinion on its notability? microbiologyMarcus [petri dish·growths] 16:43, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
I am of the opinion that it is in the same boat as many food and drink topics - it may be independently notable, maybe in its native language, but good luck finding independent sources on its notability; all you will find are product listings. Maybe it deserves a spot on List of Chinese teas, where you will find other products with similar issues, e.g., Jin Jun Mei tea. Reconrabbit 16:48, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
@Reconrabbit: fair enough. Seems to be lots of product listings, nothing too encyclopedic in any BEFORE. Suppose the article is fine as is now without any of the frivolous claims and hopefully can be cleanup with the existing tags. microbiologyMarcus [petri dish·growths] 16:51, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
@MicrobiologyMarcus thanks for checking. I was initially just confused at the move history, glad it was put in an acceptable state. Reconrabbit 16:56, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
In regards to the unattributed translation, I've left {{uw-translation}} on the author's talk page. Thanks for catching that! microbiologyMarcus [petri dish·growths] 16:46, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
I just noticed that it was the other way around - the article was just translated to the Ukrainian wikipedia today, and their userpage there already has {{Uw-translation}} from January. Reconrabbit 16:49, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

About that duplicate of Abu Al-hayja

I accidentally made two pages about it, please if you can delete the first one and only review this one. Jackhanma69 (talk) 20:03, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

@Jackhanma69, not a problem. Given that the page is now in the correct location and the old page has been corrected, I have removed the declination from the AfC history and done some minor copy editing to the draft while it awaits further review. Cheers, microbiologyMarcus [petri dish·growths] 20:09, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
thanks for your cooperation and assistance :) Jackhanma69 (talk) 20:13, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

Madga G. Chippel Sandbox

Hello, thanks I appreciate your feedback. Please is there anyway I can prevent the page from deletion? 102.89.22.58 (talk) 21:52, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Editors or authors of pages marked for speedy deletion may contest the speedy deletion by leaving remarks arguing against the deletion on the articles talk page. microbiologyMarcus [petri dish·growths] 17:22, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Thintronics

Hi microbiologyMarcus, You left a note on my Stefan Pastine entry suggesting that the independent citations weren't enough in number. I added another, there are now 4 independent media refs in there.

Alexaner Tulio from C&EN

Will Mathis From Bloomberg

James O Donnell from MITTR

Mike Buetow from Printed Circuit Design & Fab.

Is that sufficient, I can add some others but from my POV those cover the coverage.

Thanks again for you wiki efforts. Seamus Costello (talk) 20:26, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Seamus Costello, did you note my comment regarding WP:External links? At present, your draft still has two inline with the text. My suggestion would be to resolve those as it is likely to be declined again on that basis, but if you feel it sufficient, you draft has been submitted for review. At the time time of writing, the AFC submission template says Review waiting, please be patient. This may take 3 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 3,239 pending submissions waiting for review.
Personally, I don't believe WP:Notability has been demonstrated and the article still takes a WP:Promotional tone. Do you have any relevant WP:COI declarations that you need to disclose in accordance with the Wikimedia Foundation's Term's of Use? See WP:PAID. It's fine if you do, these just need to be disclosed on your user page, and you are doing the correct thing by creating the draft article through the WP:AfC process.
I'd suggest you familiarise yourself with the relevant Wikipedia policy, as writing a draft article can be a difficult task for a new editor. See the guidance at WP:THREE as a good place to start
Kindly, microbiologyMarcus [petri dish·growths] 20:41, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Gia Walsh

Thank you for the clean up of my draft. Any insights you could share regarding what I may need to add? Your input would be appreciated !

mgenzac

Mgenzac (talk) 00:04, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Mgenzac: as my concerns with the declination related to WP:Notability, try to demonstrate coverage of the subject in independent and reliable sources. Take a look at one of the WP:SNG such as WP:PRODUCER as it relates to the subject, to see what might be used to satisfy our notability requirement for articles on the project. You might also find the essay WP:THREE helpful. Cheers, microbiologyMarcus [petri dish·growths] 00:17, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Commission on Human Rights in South Sudan

@MicrobiologyMarcus - Would you kindly take a look at the amended draft with new primary sources added? Really appreciate it. Rajeevstkt (talk) 13:17, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Rajeevstkt, I have resubmitted your article on your behalf. Please be patient while a reviewer gets a chance to review the draft article. I will review it for the improvments I suggested if I get the chance. Thanks, microbiologyMarcus [petri dish·growths] 13:22, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
Many thanks 185.26.153.26 (talk) 13:24, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Centra Tech

Information icon Hello, MicrobiologyMarcus. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Centra Tech, 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) 23:06, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Jasper Harris (musician)

Hi Marcus - thanks very much for reviewing Draft:Jasper Harris (musician). I appreciate you spending the time and I’ve made some changes based on your feedback.

You pointed out that the Variety article I cited for the first of Harris’s two Grammy nominations only said he worked on Kendrick Lamar’s “Family Ties,” which won a Grammy. This is correct. But the Wikipedia sentence has two citations - the second is directly to the website of the Grammys. The same is true for the following sentence, which also provides a source providing context to Jasper’s work on the Grammy nominated album of the year, and is followed by a second citation directly to the Grammy website.

If you go to the draft, you’ll see that in order to address your concerns, I have restructured the sentences so that the context language does not mention the Grammy awards and the Grammy award language cites directly to the Grammy website.

In your comment, you don’t mention that I cited directly to the Grammy website to confirm his nominations when you say you can’t tell if he had actually been nominated. Perhaps this is an oversight? I hope you will agree that the Grammy website is a proper use of WP:Primary since the source is independent of Harris, is the most credible source possible concerning Grammy nominations, and, as per policy, is used to represent “straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source but without further, specialized knowledge”.

I must disagree with your statement in your note that “A lot of the sources cited are interviews and therefor not independent.” There is only one Q&A among the sources and I was careful to only use it to cite facts reported by the journalist in the three paragraph lead, before the Q&A begins. I took nothing from the Q&A itself. And there are no other sources in Q&A format.

Of course he was also interviewed as part of other, standard articles, but I assume that’s not what you meant – journalists always interview the subjects of articles and then use their judgment to determine what quotes and facts to include in those articles. There’s no prohibition on the use of articles that interview biographical subjects as that would eliminate almost all journalism from Wikipedia.

I thought you might want to do a fresh review before I submit this again for reconsideration. I have left a comment on top of the page that reviews the points above. I’ll resubmit in a couple of days if I haven’t heard back.

Thanks again for taking the time to do a review and for considering taking another look.Garfield075 (talk) 17:21, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

@Garfield075, the article has been resubmitted on your behalf. Thanks for taking the time to address the concerns, but there is no need to give me a preemptive warning to change my mind on the first review I've completed. It is a part of the AFC record and if another reviewer has a different opinion of my own they are welcome to accept it. microbiologyMarcus [petri dish·growths] 17:39, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

About Draft:Super Bowl LIV: Electric Boogaloo

Hey MicrobiologyMarcus, we seem to have had an edit conflict on this page. Did you mean to remove the CSD template I'd put on there? I maintain that the title seems like a rather implausible phrase to refer to its target. Let me know what you think! —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 20:24, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Hey @TechnoSquirrel69, I did; my apologies I should have made that more clear in the edit summary. Although looking at the page history now, I will say that I'm surprised I didn't get a second edit conflict warning when I went ahead with the edit.
My good faith reading of the author's edits suggested to me that they probably meant to submit a redirect for creation, so my intention was to use the AFCH to leave the redirect declination notice at the top and the declination on the authors talk page. My reasons for this are two fold, of course AFC/R requires you to submit sources if applicable, but also I didn't think it would meet R3 based on the fact that it would also have a {{submit}} template on it.
If you think the page should still be speedied, by all means re-tag it, but that was my thinking. Thanks for the note, hope that helps — microbiologyMarcus [petri dish·growths] 20:41, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Also, for what it's worth, I agree: if I saw that in the mainspace without the AFC wiki project on the talk page, I would agree on a speedy tag placement or a nom to RfD. microbiologyMarcus [petri dish·growths] 20:43, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for the clarifications! I think I'll leave it as is now; in any case, our edits to the page now make its history substantive enough to be disqualified from that speedy deletion criterion. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 20:54, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

The Long-Acting Therapeutics Patents and Licensing Database (LAPaL)

@MicrobiologyMarcus: Dear Marcus, Thank you for your comments on the LAPaL article. This is the first time I am editing a wikipedia article although I have several experience of writing scientific journals. I understand that the nonpromotional policy of wikipedia. I will edit the content based on that but I am still not sure about the references. I have given 11 references however I understand that something is wrong with the references. I would really appreciate if you could direct me the references which are in conflict with Wikipedia so that I can replace those (possibly).

Thank you for your cooperation

Best Wishes Dr Prajith Venkatasubramanian University of Liverpool Great Britian Prajithkanna (talk) 10:00, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Prajithkanna, in general, writing a Wikipedia article requires that you only describe what has been said in reliable, secondary sources using only neutral language. You cannot conduct any original research and you cannot try to advocate or promote a topic, see WP:NOT. It is very different than scientific writing article where you may be trying to argue a point or back up your research with previously published sources—I am sympathetic to this argument, as it is a different style of writing that requires forming a different habit or instinct.
As an organization, the topic will need to demonstrate that it has been the topic of coverage that meets the aforementioned requirements, review WP:NCORP for more details.
In § Database highlights and added value, this is not written in summary style; this language could be taken right out of a promotional pamphlet or commercial for the product.
The § Funding and collaboration section contains external links which are inappropriate to be used inline in the article. You will note that was one of the comments I left in my original review.
For the section § Conclusion, Wikipedia articles do not typically have conclusion sections because—as mentioned earlier—articles are not argumentative essays or papers. You will not find these sections on many articles; it is generally a good idea to familiarise yourself with the project before writing your first article lest someone accuse you of only being here to promote something.
You have mentioned your affiliation with the University of Liverpool, one of the affiliates of the topic of the draft. Please review WP:PAID and WP:COI and make any necessary declarations on your user page.
Kindly, microbiologyMarcus [petri dish·growths] 17:37, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Draft:V Venu

hi Marcus, I am just learning to create wikkipaedia articles. Please correct me where I am wrong Vivek.feels (talk) 14:02, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Vivek.feels, I can only offer generic advice to generic questions. I would suggest you review Help:Your first article. Kindly, microbiologyMarcus [petri dish·growths] 17:44, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you

for updating my info box image, and for your support of new editors. Much appreciated :-) Marilyn Fowles (talk) 07:59, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Marilyn Fowles and thanks for your note! You're welcome, I'm more than happy to help; someone helped me by properly formatting my first draft. Welcome to Wikipedia, and happy editing. — microbiologyMarcus [petri dish·growths] 14:05, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for replying @MicrobiologyMarcus. I'm looking forward to my first draft article being reviewed - at least I know the info box is in good shape! All the best. Marilyn Fowles (talk) 20:58, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
Thank you again - my article is now published! I'm thrilled! Marilyn Fowles (talk) 17:49, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

answer for the review comments regards my article is moved to draft page from mainspace

I, Muthamilselvi, my username is "TheValorWomanMTS", have edited my own Wikipedia article for personal purposes and have not received any compensation for these edits. My edits are intended to improve the accuracy and quality of the information presented. please help me resolve the issue and redirect my article to main space. TheValorWomanMTS (talk) 03:17, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

@TheValorWomanMTS: thank you for your response here, but you will need to make a WP:COI declaration on your user page and then note that, per WP:COIEDIT, you are not able to publish your draft article to the mainspace without third party review from an independent editor. microbiologyMarcus [petri dish·growths] 15:02, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Nomination of John J. Fisher Jr. for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article John J. Fisher Jr. is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John J. Fisher Jr. until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Extraordinary Writ (talk) on behalf of 173.175.200.238 (talk) 07:16, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Re: Request for assistance

Greetings,

I hope this letter finds you well. My name is Brian Ngugi, and I am writing to express my interest in contributing to the Wikipedia community, particularly in regards to improving the draft article on Dr. James Alic Garang, the Central Bank Governor of the Bank of South Sudan.

I have been a long-time user of Wikipedia and have always been impressed by the depth and breadth of information available on the platform. As an avid learner and researcher, I have relied on Wikipedia's comprehensive articles to deepen my understanding of various topics, and I am now eager to contribute my own knowledge and expertise to this valuable resource.

Dr. James Alic Garang is a prominent figure in the financial and economic landscape of South Sudan, and I believe that the current Wikipedia draft is timely for approval. As someone who has followed his career and the developments in the South Sudanese economy, I believe I have a good understanding of his background, achievements, and the challenges he has faced in his role as the Central Bank Governor.

I would be honored to work with the Wikipedia team to enhance the existing article on Dr. Garang. I am confident that I can provide well-researched and accurate information, as well as offer valuable insights and perspectives that can enrich the content. However, I also recognize the importance of adhering to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and I am eager to learn from the experienced editors on how best to contribute to this process.

I would greatly appreciate if you could guide me on the specific steps I can take to improve the article on Dr. James Alic Garang. I am open to any suggestions or feedback you may have, and I am committed to working closely with the Wikipedia team to ensure that the information presented is of the highest quality and meets the platform's standards.

Thank you for your time and consideration. I look forward to the opportunity to contribute to Wikipedia and to learn from the experienced editors. Please let me know how I can best assist in this endeavor.

Best regards,

Brian Ngugi Bngugi (talk) 20:42, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Bngugi: I see you've already published the article at James Alic Garang. Good job with the style but as a WP:BLP it is lacking many WP:Inline citations. Consider adding more to address the maintenance tags in the article. Kindly, microbiologyMarcus [petri dish·growths] 16:16, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Eights Week

Hi Marcus

I hope you're well. I'm wondering what was your rationale for closing the requested move of the page Eights Week to Summer Eights? This was proposed as "uncontroversial" two weeks ago and I contested and reverted that move, on the grounds that the "Summer Eights" name doesn't seem to comply with WP:COMMONNAME. As you can see from this ngram: [1], Eights Week is significantly more widely used than the other title. I don't see any evidence presented at the RM discussion to counter that. Please could you explain the reasoning behind this, or else revert the move?  — Amakuru (talk) 11:09, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Amakuru: thanks, hope you're doing well too. It’s regrettable that evidence wasn't presented during the RM. To explain my closure of the discussion, that was clearly the consensus at the time based on the participation in the RM. My preference, given that evidence, would be to revert the move and relist the discussion such that evidence and conversation could be given for and against the evidence you have presented here—I know that this is a common option at MOVEREVIEW. Before I do that, I'm just searching for policy that would support my being able to undo the close without appearing as a supervote, without having to waste editor time at MOVEREVIEW. microbiologyMarcus [petri dish·growths] 13:45, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
Hi @Amakuru: as promised, I've been reading a lot of policy. I'm leaving my message here more as a historical record. While Wikipedia:Closing discussions § Challenging a move seems to suggest that the complete process for challenging a move requires the Move review process, it makes no mention of what to do in the event the closer agrees. As such, I am looking to guidance in the following section § Challenging other closures where it says:

Closures will often be changed by the closing editor without a closure review: 1. if significant additional information or context was left out of the discussion and the closer was not aware of it.

I think a reasonable interpretation allows it to be applied to the former, as the former does not speak to this situation. I would invite you to present the ngram argument in the RM once I have completed relisting it. Kindly, microbiologyMarcus [petri dish·growths] 15:30, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Mahmoud Hashem Abdel-Kader

Hi Marcus, I have been reminded that I have not yet worked on the submitted brief article about the EUE founder and that the time frame will expire soon. I now carefully searched for selected and included various references, and I hope that my selection is appropriate/sufficient.

Right now, I do not dare to resubmit yet. But I feel that I am done. Please, advise. Thanks a lot. There'snoplacelikehome (talk) 07:52, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @There'snoplacelikehome, as you made those edits, that will restart the six-month timer. I can take a look, a cursory glance shows that it will still require some copy editing and removal of promotional wording and WP:External links but the subject likely meets WP:NPROF. Unless there was a reason you didn't want your draft to be considered yet. Let me know, Kindly, microbiologyMarcus [petri dish·growths] 11:49, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
Marcus, thank you for your kind reply. No, there is no particular reason. I just wanted to get hold of personal data of the person (e.g., date/year of birth) and basically double-check things. As I cannot find that info (e.g. age), I am giving up on this now. Otherwise, it is fine. Yes, I (as inexperienced wiki writer) would appreciate your opinion and learn from it. And because it was quite a bit of research work to write the first version a while ago, I tried to avoid rejection. Again, thank you for your kind reply and support. There'snoplacelikehome (talk) 05:27, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
Hi @There'snoplacelikehome, that's fine. I'll keep in on my radar to do some cleanup and copy-editing next chance I get. Keep in mind that a lot of personal information may not be previously published, and if you can't find it, it's inclusion would be unsuitable for publication on Wikipedia. See our policy on WP:BLP for more information, but it is common for non-public yet notable figures to have Wikipedia pages without birthdates/ages. Kindly, microbiologyMarcus [petri dish·growths] 15:04, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
Thank you, Marcus. There'snoplacelikehome (talk) 15:57, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
Hi Marcus or Bobby, I am not sure about the next step. Do I need to "resubmit" now? Thank you for advising. There'snoplacelikehome (talk) 23:19, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @There'snoplacelikehome, you may, and that will place it back in the queue to be reviewed. Kindly, Bobby Cohn (talk) 11:46, 27 July 2024 (UTC), formerly MicrobiologyMarcus (talk)

Thank you. I tried to resubmit, but now the system wants template data (?). I need to read about this. It appears I cannot resubmit now. There'snoplacelikehome (talk) 12:59, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
@There'snoplacelikehome:  Done, I have resubmitted on your behalf. Bobby Cohn (talk) 13:34, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
This is very kind. Thank you very much. There'snoplacelikehome (talk) 14:27, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

User:Collins P Mabasa/sandbox

Hi, Please assist. I would like to know why my article is rejected Collins P Mabasa (talk) 13:48, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Collins P Mabasa, have you reviewed the declination reasoning given or the warning on your talk page? Bobby Cohn (talk) 13:51, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
Yes Collins P Mabasa (talk) 14:32, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
@Collins P Mabasa: that's good. That means you understand that Wikipedia is not a means of personal promotion and that autobiographies often, as your did, suffer from failing to adhere to the policies on WP:NPOV, WP:V, WP:N and WP:SPAM. — Bobby Cohn (talk) 14:46, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Mir Aasif

my draft was declined by you, I read your feedback but I need help to how my article will publish Miraasif0 (talk) 15:25, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Miraasif0, please read the declination reasoning given at the draft article, and see that it says (1) the article does not meet the minimum standard of inline citations and (2) the references do not yet demonstrate the subject qualifies for an article on the basis of notability. These messages are full of links to relevant Wikipedia policy that fully explain the requirements for article publication. See also, the comment I left when reviewing the article where I point to a resource for assistance with properly formatting your inline citations and then make note that as an autobiography, there will be significant hurdles to overcome to prepare the draft article for publication. You might also find more generic help at Help:My first article. —Bobby Cohn (talk) 15:57, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
yes, exactly I read that but i need help to publish my drafts, kindly help me Miraasif0 (talk) 16:05, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
@Miraasif0: my advice is to follow the instructions on those pages to correct the issues on the draft, and then you may resubmit the draft to be reconsidered. —Bobby Cohn (talk) 16:07, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Swamini Brahmaprajnananda Saraswati

Hi Bobby,

I just got the draft I created for my Vedanta guru (Swamini Brahmaprajnananda Saraswati), my teacher deleted by you. I cannot access it. This was my first attempt at it and I understand some paras may need to be re-written to give it a neutral point of view. I respect you showing me the right pages to refer there.

Since I moved from Sandbox to Drafts - the page is not available for me to make any amends. Can you help me retrieve it in my Sandbox please so that I can edit it within the policy framework and re-submit? It has taken me a diligent effort over some weeks to produce that and I dont have another copy of the same.

Also, any other things that you want me to keep in mind as I re-write it, please help tell that.

Have a great weekend.

Best,

Baldeep Baldeep1102 (talk) 11:50, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Baldeep1102, as the page has already been deleted, you need to contact the deleting administrator, Pickersgill-Cunliffe.
Kindly, Bobby Cohn (talk) 13:40, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
Hi Bobby, thanks for your response. I am confused how best to reach Pickersgill, I went to his page but there was no option like this to write to him. Can you please help me. Getting a bit anxious here. Thanks a bunch. Baldeep1102 (talk) 13:54, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
Hi @Baldeep1102, something I failed to mention earlier: because of your connection with the subject of your draft, you'll need to declare your WP:Conflict of interest on your user page. To do this, copy and paste this code: {{UserboxCOI|1=Swamini Brahmaprajnananda Saraswati}} as you see it on your screen to your user page and click Publish page.
After doing this, you can reach the administrator on their talk page and click Add topic in the top left. Please be aware that items that are written as promotional are not always refunded, you will need to discuss more in depth with the administrator. Declaring your COI on your userpage will help in demonstrating good faith in that discussion.
Best of luck, Bobby Cohn (talk) 18:42, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
Thanks. Did all that you recommended and wrote to @Pickersgill-Cunliffe. Awaiting his response.
Best,
Baldeep Baldeep1102 (talk) 19:20, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Manmohan Misra: help

Dear Bobby, I have edited the material. Please review. Regards, Bijoy Bijoymisra (talk) 01:05, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

@Bijoymisra: the draft has been resubmitted for review on your behalf. Please be patient as there are 2,690 pending draft articles and they are reviewed in no particular order. Kindly, Bobby Cohn (talk) 01:23, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

Aazhi is 32 minute drama short film

It has significance yet you declined Vivekcreator96 (talk) 17:02, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Vivekcreator96, Wikipedia is not concerned with significance but WP:Notability.
If you still believe the subject is notable, would you be able to provide three sources here (don't worry about drafting an article or creating prose, just demonstrate the sources here) that are in-depth from reliable sources that are independent of the subject? Then I would reconsider.
Kindly, Bobby Cohn (talk) 17:15, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
Check these sources [2] [3], films are made into history, if you don't know. Don't be so ancient. Most of the flop films are being showcased, why not this one with a change making initiative. 103.70.197.23 (talk) 18:23, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
These links also for your reference.[4] [5] 103.70.197.23 (talk) 18:30, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for proving me with those links for consideration. Kindly, Bobby Cohn (talk) 18:42, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
Please review it and publish. This film is a milestone. Please remove the stop submitting option. Vivekcreator96 (talk) 13:42, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
@Vivekcreator96 the sources and links to search results provided above do not meet our requirements for in-depth independent coverage from reliable sources. If the film was a milestone, someone would have published a review saying so. It is clear that your are the creator of the film, so your work here is promotional and not the purpose of Wikipedia, and your actions suggest you are only here to promote your work for personal gain. Please follow the advice you have received here and at other places on the project and stop your promotional and single purpose editing. Bobby Cohn (talk) 14:06, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Sad that you misunderstood. How many of such articles you rejected. Enjoy your power. Vivekcreator96 (talk) 14:50, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
@Vivekcreator96 (talk page watcher) I appreciate that you are disappointed, That is no reason to abuse the editor you are in conversation with. We are required to be civil at all times, and your most recent remark was not.
Instead of arguing, prove that it passes WP:NFILM, which is all you need to do. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 15:35, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

Isabel Lauchenauer article should be Isabel Cañas

Hi Bobby, thanks for moving my article. I just wanted to clarify that the title should be Isabel Cañas as that is the author's official pen name. I'm still a new user so I am not sure how to change the title to "Isabel Cañas." I would love any pointers regarding that. Lauchenauer is the name they use for their academic persona. Cheesy.A (talk) 22:18, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

@Cheesy.A:  Done. See Draft:Isabel Cañas. Kindly, Bobby Cohn (talk) 01:00, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Far-right usage of social media

Hey Bobby Cohn,

thanks so much for reviewing my Wikipedia article! Haven't had the time yet but I'll look at it and try to rework it now. Paulpaulll (talk) 10:20, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

@Paulpaulll, awesome. Let me know if you have any questions. Cheers, Bobby Cohn (talk) 17:48, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Draft Mary Conway Kohler (American Judge)

Mr Cohen: I am not sure howvI have created thisvin the wrong location. I am really overwhelmed at times by wikipedia. I would likevto fix thisnpage so it meets wiki requirements. So any guidance is appreciated. Henrybardklein (talk) 18:19, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

I dont understand what you are commenting. I am only trying to fix this page. My poor understaanding of wiki is the problem. I am not responding to any one but you. Henrybardklein (talk) 18:23, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Apparently my name and srticle have been deleted. Whatever i did to bring this about was not intentional. I ferl that i am b in ng penalized for something i had no idea about. Please show me how i can continue to work. Henrybardklein (talk) 18:35, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Henrybardklein, that is okay, everyone who edits Wikipedia didn't know much when they started editing either. But when that is the case, you need to be more careful and pay attention to all the details; read and pay attention to everything you are doing if you aren't sure about it. You already have a draft located at Draft:Mary Conway Kohler:
 Courtesy link: Draft:Mary Conway Kohler
Please work on it there and follow editor feedback already listed. You can submit your draft for review by clicking the blue button "Submit the draft for review!"
The problem with the other versions of the page you created were that they were placed (1) on your user page and then (2) duplicated in the draft namespace with the article title of your username, see here—neither of these locations are appropriate and then by duplicating them without regard for the messages left on your talk page is considered spam and disruptive. That's the purpose of your talk page, people are trying to communicate with you and help, so please read them if you are, as you say, inexperienced and looking for help.
And then, in the same pattern, you've left three messages back to back to back without allowing me time to respond. Again, my advice is to slow down, think about what you are doing be deliberate. Read policy or help pages if you don't understand. Bobby Cohn (talk) 14:02, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

My draft article for Mary Conway Kohler

I am responding to Mr. Cohn's note on August 4. I am so worry to be having these difficulties and thank you for your patience. It has been quite a few years since I have tried to write anything for other people. Mostly, I had been running a school. Ms. Kohler's work has been beneficial to young people like those I have worked with and has had a great deal of influence more widely. I would like to be able to bring this work to the attention of more people through wikipedia so that the ideas can benefit others. Because of my age, I am able to do only a limited amount each day. I hope to return to this tomorrow. Henrybardklein (talk) 19:00, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Bobby_Cohn/Archive_4&oldid=1249567486"