User talk:Bradv

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Messages

  • Please put new text at the bottom.
Click here to begin a new topic
  • Please help keep the discussion together.
  • If I left you a message on your talk page, please reply there.
  • If you leave me a message on my talk page, I will answer here.
  • Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~).
  • View the archives for old messages.
One Two Three Four Five Six Seven Eight Nine Ten

Links


Need Help?

 


Editor of the Week[edit]

Editor Worm That Turned submitted the following nomination for Editor of the Week:

I nominate Bradv to be Editor of the Week for a number of reasons. I first came across Bradv when he was trying to fix a tag and ended up mediating a dispute admirably. Looking at his contributions (10.000 edits plus), he spends the majority of his time helping, be it at the Teahouse or at Articles for Creation. He has been away for a while, but has recently returned and I'd like it known how much his work is appreciated.

Project editor retention.svg
Editor of the week.svg
Barnstar of Reversion Hires.png
Bradv
Improves the encyclopedia
 
Editor of the Week
for the week beginning May 8, 2016
10K to mainspace, uses the summary 97% of the time, recently re-activated, fights vandalism. The majority of his time is spent helping other editors.
Recognized for
Fighting Vandalism
Nomination page

Thanks again for your efforts! Buster Seven Talk 19:34, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

  • Congrats! Welcome back, thank you for your help and hope you stay around. - NQ (talk) 21:51, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Congrats! Nice job. (And thank you for reviewing my AfC Draft:Maryland Psychiatric Society. I will improve the sources.) Drdaviss (talk) 00:49, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

06:28:01, 21 February 2017 review of submission by Brutesin[edit]


Have submitted the link where it defines notability and reason why award was given. Please see newly added link with details. As its been awarded in 2011 there are few archives available at this point and this is one of them, which defines notability. I also chatted on wiki and got it confirmed. Please recheck. [1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brutesin (talkcontribs) 06:28, February 21, 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – December 2017[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2017).

ANEWSicon.png

Administrator changes

added Joe Roe
readded JzG
removed EricorbitPercevalThinggTristanbVioletriga

Guideline and policy news

  • Following a request for comment, a new section has been added to the username policy which disallows usernames containing emoji, emoticons or otherwise "decorative" usernames, and usernames that use any non-language symbols. Administrators should discuss issues related to these types of usernames before blocking.

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • Over the last few months, several users have reported backlogs that require administrator attention at WP:ANI, with the most common backlogs showing up on WP:SPI, WP:AIV and WP:RFPP. It is requested that all administrators take some time during this month to help clear backlogs wherever possible. It should be noted that AIV reports are not always valid; however, they still need to be cleared, which may include needing to remind users on what qualifies as vandalism.
  • The Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative is conducting a survey for English Wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works (i.e. which problems it deals with well and which problems it struggles with). If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be emailed to you via Special:EmailUser.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:57, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, Bradv. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Aydin Aghdashloo[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Aydin Aghdashloo. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Message from GermanGamer77 21:17, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[edit]

I intend to have "Yee" reviewed. GermanGamer77 21:17, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Really? You think this is up to Wikipedia's standards? Bradv 21:19, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Message from Dirkworld[edit]

hello Bradv,

So this page exists on other countries wikipedia pages. Why is this being rejected for the usa when it has credible sources, links to publications and international album release reviews, the all music guide, Kerrang, metal hammer,etc.

What needs to be done to finally get this up for good? This is a group who have sold well, toured and had major album releases since 1988. Any help would be so appreciated. Dirkworld (talk) 02:31, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

The English Wikipedia's guidelines for notability are listed here. There are a set of 12 criteria that help identify whether bands are worth writing articles about. If it doesn't meet any or all of those criteria, perhaps it is not suitable for Wikipedia at this time. I hope that helps. Bradv 02:44, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Message from umairsy[edit]

Dear Bradv,

As suggested by you, changes has been made in the reference section. The blog references has been replaced with authentic book references.

This article is very important piece of history, which is missing now. Please check Wikipedia page on Battle of Chinhat for more reference on Barkat Ahmad.

Umair (talk) 03:03, 6 December 2017 (IST)

Thank you for that. Can you also remove the link to Wikipedia as a source? Wikipedia also is not a reliable source. Bradv 12:40, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
Respectfully fixed. Removed the link of page of Sir henry Lawrence. Request another kind review. Umair (talk) 11:03, 7 December 2017 (IST)
 Done. Bradv 14:43, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
Thanks Bradv for your services.

Message from AntonSamuel regarding move from cantons to regions[edit]

Hi! Why did you reverse the Rojava-related articles that I moved? I thought I had followed the guidelines, I waited a week and there was pretty much consensus on the talk pages. The only one who opposed misunderstood the sources, which I explained to him but he didn't respond much to that. So I thought that according to the regulations regarding moves ("Consensus is determined not just by considering the preferences of the participants in a given discussion, but also by evaluating their arguments, assigning due weight accordingly..") that it would be valid for me to move them. AntonSamuel (talk) 13:05, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Requested move discussions are to be closed by an uninvolved editor (see WP:RM#Closing instructions). The discussions are now relisted for another week in order to get a broader consensus. Once the consensus is clear someone else will close the discussion. It's very well possible that the discussions will go your way, but we need to allow the process to continue. Bradv 14:35, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
For the selfiess service towards making Wikipedia articles authentic and complete. Great at providing guidance to make Articles better and publishable. Umairsy 18:05, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Request on 20:57:49, 7 December 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Antonzaitsev[edit]


Hi. First of all, thanks for the review. It seems there is a huge pile of submissions and you do a great job reading all these drafts.

Secondly, thanks for understanding. It's frustrating indeed to have a draft declined.

You said I should find sources and provided some links to start with. As I know from communication with another reviewer it's okay if the sources belong to the same country as the subject of an article. So if the subject has the good coverage in Russian sources, it's enough. Is it correct?

Please comment on these sources.

Antonzaitsev (talk) 20:57, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Unfortunately I don't read Russian, and neither do the majority of users on the English Wikipedia, so I can't evaluate the Russian-language sources to verify the information in this article. I can only evaluate based on the English-language sources given, of which there are two:
  1. https://www.fastcompany.com/most-innovative-companies/2013, which says in its entirety: "Topface: For championing a local, online dating scene."
  2. https://themoscowtimes.com/articles/top-10-russian-internet-companies-in-2012-20345, which only has three sentences on the subject.
As you can see, I simply don't have enough information to be able to accept this submission. Perhaps you can find some more English-language sources, or find an experienced editor who can speak Russian. Just out of curiosity, where are you getting the information to write this article? Are you translating all of this from these sources, or do you have another source that's not listed here? Bradv 21:08, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
If I want to find an experienced editor who can speak Russian, what should I do first? It's all translated of course. If there was another independent source, I would cite it. Antonzaitsev (talk) 18:45, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Talk:2015_Thalys_train_attack#Requested_move_21_November_2017[edit]

According to the current draft of Wikipedia:Names of articles on recent events, first sentence, "There is no consensus" on article naming. We are keeping track of the results of RMs like this one to help establish consensus over time. Thus having a closure for or against based on the arguments would be helpful. Even if the close is "no consensus -> default to current name with date". -- GreenC 02:02, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

I did find consensus not to move the page, the main arguments being that the current title is clearer and more precise, even if it's less concise. However, I tried to leave it open to the possibility that, with broader participation, consensus with respect to these kinds of articles changes. If it does (or is clarified one way or another), then I would expect that the next discussion for this specific case would take a different tack. So no, I would not close this as "no consensus" but as "not moved". (But consensus can change.) I hope that helps. Bradv 02:17, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Message from Enycez99[edit]

Hi Bradv,

Sorry to interrupt you but I found that my article was declined for the reason of liking an advertisement. However, I refer to some independent, reliable, published sources to write this. It's really confused. Would you mind to help me?

Thanks Enyce — Preceding unsigned comment added by Enycez99 (talkcontribs) 02:20, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

I see that this is your first Wikipedia article. If you're interested in contributing to Wikipedia, I would recommend starting out by editing existing articles, participating in talk pages, and finding areas that you can contribute to. If you're not here to help build an encyclopedia, but you're trying to promote your company or your products, then I suggest you read the guidelines at WP:PROMOTION. Bradv 02:28, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Message from Ead345[edit]

Hi Bradv- I would love some assistance with the Liposarcoma Genome Project page. Liposarcoma is a rare cancer and thus not a great deal has been published about it. But how can people learn about rare cancers if the wikipedia page is denied due to insufficient sources. When the Director of the National Institute of Health posts an article about the lead liposarcoma genome project researcher at MGH/Harvard/Broad Institute, Bradley Bernstein,well what more evidence is needed to give this cancer credibility? I would like help please. Thank you. Ead345 (talk) 01:07, 9 December 2017 (UTC)EAD345

I get what you're trying to do, but Wikipedia requires "significant coverage about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject" (as indicated in my note on the draft). Of the references provided in the draft, only the New York Times article meets that criteria. The rest are either primary sources or not independent of the subject. Are there any other independent sources available? Bradv 01:17, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Request on 01:19:59, 9 December 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Ead345[edit]

Hi Bradv- I am unclear why the liposarcoma genome project was denied. The articles listed were incredibly notable- the Director of the National Institute of Health just wrote an article about the project's lead researcher. The human genome project was new at one point in time before it became notable- so why wouldnt the liposarcoma genome project be credible? It is the same exact premise- basic research and an understanding of the epigentics of liposarcoma, an incredibly rare soft tissue cancer. It is an incredible shame that the wiki page was denied because how else are people going to be able to learn about this lifesaving research that is currently happening by some of the most brilliant minds in cancer research at MGH/Harvard/MIT/Broad Institute. How can we fix this?

Ead345 (talk) 01:19, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Answered just above. Bradv 01:21, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

14:13:28, 10 December 2017 review of submission by Abmnn[edit]


Thanks for reviewing my article on Nimble Commander! You rejected it for notability reasons. I respectfully disagree and here is my argumentation that I hope you find reasonable:

Wikipedia's notability guidelines state that "a computer program can usually be presumed to be notable if it is discussed in reliable sources as significant in its particular field [...]".

Of the four sources I used, the first two (Softpedia and MacTech) are well-known websites/journals in the Mac software domain that both have their own Wikipedia articles. The third is a well-known tech blog (lifehacker.ru). The fourth is a recommendation by the author of the golden standard file manager of the last two decades (Total Commander).

Objectively, the quality of these sources is at least equivalent to the ones used in the acticles of Nimble Commander's direct competitors, all dual-pane file managers for macOS:

Please take 2 minutes and see for yourself. Take Fman for example: In its Reception section, it cites three sources. The first is Softpedia, like I did in my article. The only difference is that Fman was rated 3/5 and Nimble Commander received a 5/5 rating. The second source is a journal, comparable to MacTech which I cited. The third is ProductHunt, a product launch website where everybody can post their product without any peer-review.

Please help me understand in detail why you rejected the article - and please don't be like the last reviewer who ignored and deleted my post twice without an answer. Help me add a good article for a popular piece of software - thanks! :)

Abmnn (talk) 14:13, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

@Abmnn: Are there any other sources available? This is probably right on the edge. Those other articles are also right on the edge (one is tagged as possibly non-notable, and one barely survived a deletion discussion). Nevertheless, any improvements you can make to the sources for your article will help the next time it gets reviewed. Bradv 01:35, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Message from T4mb4y 22[edit]

Hi there! Why did you delete my article for Angola at major beauty pageants? Well if that is the case delete all the Countries at major beauty pageant then...

Request on 00:40:05, 11 December 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by T4mb4y 22[edit]


Hi! Why did you delete Angola at major beauty pageants? You know what delete also countries at major beauty pageants.

T4mb4y 22 (talk) 00:40, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

@T4mb4y 22: I didn't delete anything. I pointed out in my comment that this topic is already covered at Miss Angola. Bradv 01:36, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

RE: Recognition of same-sex unions in Austria[edit]

Is there any chance you could please close the move discussion at Talk:Recognition of same-sex unions in Austria and move the page per WP:SNOWBALL? Thanks. Me-123567-Me (talk) 02:19, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

While I agree there is a good chance the outcome of this discussion can be predicted, I think it should run the full 7 days, just as with any other requested move discussion. I am not convinced of any pressing need to abbreviate this process. Bradv 05:23, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Your close of RM for Victoria (TV series)[edit]

I'm not sure how you got a "no consensus" from Talk:Victoria (TV series)#Requested move 28 November 2017. There is clear consensus to move, with a couple of editors thinking that the discussion should be put on hold. However, they are in the minority. --woodensuperman 13:38, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

My apologies, I should have provided more information in my closing statement. There are three possible outcomes for a move discussion: consensus to move, consensus not to move, or no consensus. As there were two people supporting the proposed move, one opposing the move, and two suggesting it would be better to hold off until a relevant RfC is complete, there is no consensus. As the outcome of the RfC may affect this discussion, it would be disruptive to move the article and then move it back. Please note that as this is a "no consensus" move, there is no requirement to wait before nominating it again, although I would recommend waiting until the RfC is complete in order to satisfy those objections. Bradv 20:30, 11 December 2017 (UTC)