User talk:DGG/Archive 159 Apr. 2020

                                       ARCHIVES

DO NOT ENTER NEW ITEMS HERE--use User talk:DGG

Barnstars, Awards, etc.

Reminders

Topical Archives:
Deletion & AfD,      Speedy & prod,        NPP & AfC,       COI & paid editors,      BLP,                              Bilateral relations
Notability,               Universities & academic people,       Schools,                       Academic journals,       Books & other publications
Sourcing,                Fiction,                                               In Popular Culture      Educational Program
Bias, intolerance, and prejudice

General Archives:
2006: Sept-Dec
2007: Jan-Feb , Mar-Apt , M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D 
2008: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2009: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2010: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2011: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2012: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2013: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2014: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2015: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2016: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2017: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2018: J, F, M , A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2019: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2020: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2021: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2022: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2023: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O

 

            DO NOT ENTER NEW ITEMS HERE--use User talk:DGG

Scribble97 (talk) 05:59, 1 April 2020 (UTC)For Draft article- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Rajesh_Kamat

Speedy Deletion comment

The comment you left at my talk page is concerning. It indicates to me that you are following the rules to the letter, even to the point of detriment. This type of sticklership is not helpful to anyone. The reason that my speedy deletion notice was removed was, according to that person, because I didn't provide a valid reason for deletion. This is false. I did provide a valid reason (lack of notability), but I did not point to a *more specific* reason as outlined in the speedy deletion guide. Any reasonable reviewer would have seen what I had meant, and tried to help out by changing my vague reason to a more specific one. In the process, this would help teach me how to contribute in a better constructive manner. Even better, they could have cut out the middle man and just processed my speedy deletion notice according to the provided reason if they had the administrative rights.

When I added the speedy deletion notice back again, all I had done was adjust the notice according to the criticism of the reviewer, by providing a needlessly pedantic reason for deletion. How can you reasonably argue that this was the *wrong* thing for me to do? Who cares if it's against the pedantic letter of the rules when it's clearly a helpful activity and in the right spirit?

Or, you can enforce rules blindly and frustrate/alienate potential editors by punishing them based on technicality. Why should I bother trying to help out again when I know Wikipedia handles things like a typical bureaucracy?

Myridium (talk) 3:28, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Something

I am a new editor and still learning all the ropes on using the tools Wikipedia has to offer. I understand this is my 2nd submission which has been denied due to the tone still not being up to Wikipedia's guidelines. I am a media student working on projects with looking to create/contribute info on people from the media industry. I can make a good guess as to why this individual's page wouldn't be accepted regardless of his work. Because he has no notable recognition other than PR articles and press releases?

I could use some suggestions on what to totally avoid and what I can cut out from the article (links/citations etc) as in to improve the quality and keep it purely informational.

I would also like to know if this page has any probability of being approved and get published in mainspace? The current info in the article is all I could find. Which, doesn't have enough notable achievements/contribution/work.

Scribble97 (talk) 05:59, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Deleted Draft:Joe Lamp'l

Hi, I am new to this and just trying to create an objective article for Joe Lamp'l. My article was deleted for being too promotional. Can you help me understand how I could have better stated facts about this person's career with links to what exists on the internet without it appearing too promotional? Also, if I want to give this another try, should I start from scratch or is there a way to edit the article I wrote? Thanks! Aprentice525 (talk) 15:08, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Rejection of "ShipMonk" Article

Hi David,

Hope you're well! My name is Bea and I have recently submitted an article called "ShipMonk," about an American 3PL company, to Wikipedia. I have ties with the company, something I have disclosed on my page as per community guidelines. I am brand new to Wikipedia, so while I appreciate your comments, I would like to be able to speak with you and perhaps clarify some of the concerns you have.

First, you deemed our article "not sufficiently notable to be included in Wikipedia." While I can understand that, I would like to note that one of ShipMonk's main competitors, ShipBob, has their own page which is very similar to the one I submitted. ShipMonk and ShipBob have both been around since 2014, and while I can't speak for ShipBob, ShipMonk has been highly regarded, with features on Forbes, Inc, Deloitte, Sun Sentinel (local publication), Florida Atlantic University, and more. Since ShipBob and ShipMonk are essentially direct competitors, I would like to better understand what makes one more notable than the other. Additionally, the ShipBob page is flagged as being "written like an advertisement." What allows an article deemed promotional to be accepted, but flagged as such, while a similar article is outright rejected?

Second, my article was deemed "contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia." I believe this would tie in to your comment that my article "was essentially an advertisement." When writing the article, I stayed away from flashy adjectives and buzz words. I chose my selection of words very carefully and kept in mind that Wikipedia is a resource for all, not a sales directory. If you truly feel like this was not the case, would you be able to provide more tangible feedback I could use to improve my article?

Thank you for your time and I look forward to a response.

Beatanese (talk) 20:11, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

Draft: R Dub!

I had replied to your previous comments and haven't received a response, maybe because we're in a different month. You asked if the article I submitted ias paid or is a co-worker, etc. It's not. It's just of personal interest. I've written a lot on wikitravel but this is my first created article on wikipedia itself. Another editor had previously asked me to identify wiki-3 to prove notoriety, which I did note on the article. Can you help me with what comes next since I did that and still got rejected? The subject of the article was recently cited as a music industry source for music trends in Billboard magazines, has awards listed in the article, etc. so I think that satisfies the notoriety request. What comes next? Thanks Smithryanallen (talk)

usual fault--moving to the next one too quickly to notice. I'll try to remember to check thta it works right. DGG ( talk ) 03:11, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Help needed!

Hello David Goodman! My draft article: Robam Kenorei was declined earlier! These few days I have edited and added some information to the draft article. The reference for this dance is very rare, I could find only a few on internet! I did my best seeking help from others as well! This dance was almost vanished during the Cambodian civil war. I believed creating the article about this dance will allow others who have access to its sources to edit it! I need somebody to improve it as well but I dont know where we can get help for this draft article! This draft article will be a new article with the title "Robam" of the Royal Ballet of Cambodia like other articles such as Robam Tep Apsara (now Apsara Dance), Robam Sovann Maccha, Robam Moni Mekhala,...

Please check my edition to the draft article and inform me whether it is ready for approval! I need other editors to improve it as well! Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antony Willianson (talk • contribs) 15:51, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Antony Willianson. you are correct that having it in mainspace will make it more visible to others who might want to work on it, so I accepted it. And I certainly urge you to continue on related topics. You might want to ask the Dance wikiproject for help with sourcing. DGG ( talk ) 17:46, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Scripts++ Newsletter – Issue 14

News and updates associated with user scripts from the past month (March 2020).

Danski454's code-link is this month's featured script

RealFakeKim's pageInfo • Guywan: InsertShortcuts • ConfirmLogout

Headbomb's Unreliable/Predatory Source Detector has been updated to include more sources

• Evad37's rater script is now on version 2.5. New features include:

1. No longer showing dropdowns for projects without ratings
2. Making use of Category:WikiProject banner templates not based on WPBannerMeta to detect templates
3. Automatically detecting Good Article, Featured Article, and Featured List status, and limiting ORES predictions to B-class

• An updated version of Twinkle was released. Features relating to the recently-enabled
  partial blocks include automatic lookup of pages and expanded options for block templates.
  See a full list of changes here
• For users of Enterprisey's easy-brfa script, the bug with transcluding new BRFAs has been resolved
• Guywan's RefCruncher has had minor updates

Miscellaneous

• For any scripts that previously made use of the edit API to change a page's content model,
  a new API module is available: use action=changecontentmodel to specify the new
  content model of an existing page. Documentation is available: mw:API:ChangeContentModel.
• The dispute resolution noticeboard wizard is no longer a gadget, but rather is loaded using
  withJS and withCSS. See the discussion at MediaWiki talk:Gadget-DRN-wizard.js

Pending requests

• A script to help file movers process requests, including
  1. renaming the file
  2. updating file links
  3. removing the {{Rename media}} template (when relevant)
• ...and many more, all available at Wikipedia:User scripts/Requests

Stay safe, --DannyS712 (talk) 05:48, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

---

• About the newsletter
• Subscription options
• Discuss this issue

DGG hello, are you aware of this Google Script (fiddle) to pull data from wikipedia Covid template ? Yug (talk) 07:27, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank You

Thanks for the help with Luis Miguel Romero Fernández…

"Fight the Good Fight Every Moment"

Roberto221 (talk) 21:22, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Don't understand why the article was denied. Please help!

Hi DGG,

I saw your note about the Beyond Better Foods article, and am confused. What was on it that made it seem promotional?

Most of the articles are direct references to the existence of the company and the product, with the primary article, being a full page feature in the New York Times, goes into detailed length about the formation of the company.

The article that you referred to, the USA Today article, was listed (and ultimately summarized in a non-promotional way) with 9 other articles, merely to give an example that the products of this company have covered extensively in major outlets with extensive reach over a long period of time, which they indeed have. Would it help to remove the sentence though (although it feels relevant to establish the impact that the products that beyond better foods have had in the market)?

If you could help provide this clarification, that would be great and allow me to correct this. It seems that a major company such as this, that is available around the country and has multiple products, should be here. I see other similar companies, like Halo Top Creamery (there's a full list here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ice_cream_brands) all have pages.

Also I might add that this page also lists major legal controversy (which I thought was also relevant) to illustrate neutrality as well.

Thanks again for your help - these comments are in earnest and looking to find a way to improve this. Came across this while reading Lisa Lillien's page and thought there should be a connection.

Best!

Articlegooroo (talk) 02:41, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

The purpose of AfC is not to give the reviewer's personal judgment on articles. Rather, it's a place where the reviewer uses their experience of what happens at WP:AFD deletion discussions in WP to predict whether an article has a decent chance of passing an AfD. In the end, the community makes the decision.

It is quite possible that not all the ones listed there ought to have articles; There are many hundred thousand articles in WP accepted in earlier years when the standards were lower that we need to either upgrade or remove. The least we can do is not add to them. The current standards for companies and their products, WP:NCORP, is much more rigorous than when I started here 12 years ago. It is designed to limit the coverage to those firms for which people would expect to find an encyclopedia article, because they have been the subject of substantial independent discussion in reliable source, discussion that is not based on press releases or interviews where the founder says whatever they please--even if such interviews are published in otherwise trustworthy news sources--even the best newspapers such as the New York Times has been known to do so, and even good journalists sometimes write them. The article there seems to be of that sort. The Times is respectable, and the author a skilled professional, and therefore the article actually and honestly explains at the top that it was inspired by one of the investors in the company. And that's pretty much what is expected in its "Small Business section". It's reasonable for a newspaper, but not an encyclopedia.

But in any case we need more than a single good reference, which is one of the ways we guard against this sort of PR. Some of the other reverences are not substantially about the company, but about the product category-- Redbook (2 sentences out of 5 paragraphs, Healthline, Womens Health, Today.com . One is just a collection of blurbs about assorted interesting products: refinery29, One is an openly declared press releases: NOSH. Two are PR disguised as pseudo-articles: delish.com, popsugar. And one is about a competitor: GQ.

The negative information is a feature we've been seeing more frequently: when a promotional editor does it, it's an attempt to convince the reader that the articles is neutral. And, of course, "All publicity is good publicity"

I don't think you're a promotional editor; rather, a promotional style is so common in WP, and in the real world, that it's hard to avoid. And I do not think the article hopeless; I declined it; I didn't reject it. (At AfC, "reject " is used when a article is hopelessly inappropriate, and the message that would be posted would warn the editor not to resubmit.) I think you can strengthen the article by omitting the weaker references. And then another reviewer will judge. DGG ( talk ) 03:35, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi User:DGG,

I"m really trying here to get this article up to snuff. What do I need to do? I tried providing a number of articles that list dietitians and certified individuals from NUMEROUS outlets, providing plaudits and listings for this company and its products. What am I missing here? Now I'm being told it reads like a press release. I feel like every time I'm moving forward its actually two steps back.

I feel like this is hopeless and yet so clearly should be something that should be here. Is there someone that can just go through and edit it as it needs, or give some kind of guidance? I'm unable to find articles that read well that I can model for a similar product or company.

Please help :/

Articlegooroo (talk) 02:13, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Draft:The Roadex Project

Dear DDG. I trust that you are keeping safe in these unprecedented times. Thank you for your comments on the draft ROADEX project page. I have tried to take them on board and simplified the draft with less jargon and in-house references. I would welcome your thoughts on where I have got.Ronmun (talk) 15:49, 4 April 2020 (UTC) Ronmuni. I revised it further, and accepted it.. DGG ( talk ) 03:26, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you DGG. I had a declaration on my Ronmun account giving the background to the page and my involvement. I have updated it to make it current and have copied it here also. Hopefully it will be sufficient for COI.

"This account has been created primarily to document the history of the EU Northern Periphery ROADEX project and its successor ROADEX NETWORK collaboration. I am retired civil engineer and was actively involved with the ROADEX project since its inception in 1998. I held various roles ranging from steering committee member for the pilot ROADEX project, steering committee chairman for ROADEX II and project manager for ROADEX III & IV. I am currently an ad hoc adviser to the consultant ROADEX NETWORK secretariat on historical issues. I realise that there are guidelines on editing pages where there could be an apparent conflict of interest and will try to keep my text to statements of fact only, supporting by references and citations where possible. It is my intention to follow all of Wikipedia's guidelines and I will welcome any help or contributions to ensure that the ROADEX Project page remains within these guidelines".Ronmun (talk) 10:49, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

that declaration will do very well. If you want to add more, add about their accomplishments, not their plans, and use 3rd party sources. DGG ( talk ) 21:24, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

@@@@@@

About Sandeep Maheshwari

Actually I am confused with your deletion request as you told that the article is promotional but is it because in the article social blade is used? Is the reason or something else? Kashish pall (talk) 05:45, 5 April 2020 (UTC) @@@@@

Hello and thank you

Hello DGG, thank you for your insight and suggestions on the Draft:Cel-Sci Corporation. I tried to fixed as per your suggestions and your valuable comment and review is required. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mickey Richard (talk • contribs) 09:02, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Mickey Richard, I accepted it, but that just means I think it will pass a challenge at AfD, not that I guarantee it. DGG ( talk ) 03:55, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you very much, I completely understand. Mickey Richard (talk) 18:16, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Couid you please help me restore my article on Jerrold Mundis?

Hello DGG, I really appreciate your page where you explain your view of the universe. A great read. If you could help me restore all the hard work I did and help me get on a path to do it properly, I would be most grateful. I think it would also help a great many people. Jerrold's death is a big loss to many as I anticipated it would be.

I will leave the explanation for my appeal that I wrote for the speedy deletion. Please note that after I wrote that I added some citations from the New York Times (which I planned to do all along) to bolster my case. But alas, the initial article was gone when I returned a few hours later. If you could please help me get it back, I think it would be just.

If I have to start it somewhere else, like my sandbox, subject to approval, I will do so. But I'd love to retrieve my work thus far.

Here was my appeal:

This page is not unambiguously promotional, because... this person died 4/4/2020 from the Covid-19 virus. He is the author of 30 books, both fiction and non-fiction and has been an editor at The New York Times. He is a member of the Authors Guild, PEN American Center, and Poets & Writers, is listed in Contemporary Authors and the Directory of American Poets & Fiction Writers.

I was surprised to find there was no Wikipedia page on him so I created one. I am sure other writers and publishers will be interested in his passing and will be willing to help with this page if more needs to be added to it. At the present time I was just trying to create a factual page about a genuine important person with a writing career that spans over 40 years. Please let me know what I can do to improve this article. I was not trying to be overly promotional, just to state his importance as a public figure. His book HOW TO GET OUT OF DEBT, STAY OUT OF DEBT & LIVE PROSPEROUSLY has helped literally tens of thousands of people all over the world and is an important text in the 12 step worlds of Debtors Anonymous and Underearners Anonymous. Furthermore, the current economic crisis is sure to being more people to these 12 step fellowships for help.

I would be happy to do more research and/or make any changes or eliminate any sentences or paragraphs or citations that appear to be promotional that you deem necessary to being this article up to your standards. I was just trying to make a first pass at creating a summary of this man's importance to the world. Like I said, I was very surprised that he was not already listed in Wikipedia. Thank you for seriously considering this. I am sure many people will be looking for this article in the days to come as news of his death becomes more well known.

I realize now perhaps I should have put it in my sandbox and begun it that way. Whatever could happen to set things right, I am willing to do it to get this article up. Jerrold Mundis helped thousands of people, died Saturday of the Covid-19 virus and I would put him in the category of a professor that you cited in your DGG page. I loved what you wrote there and though he was not a professor, he had a 40 year career as a published writer and deserves to be on Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iochone (talk • contribs) 13:30, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Iochone, Yes, you can make another try. I have combined the earlier material into the present Draft:Jerrold Mundis DGG ( talk ) 21:24, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

But to make a viable non-promotional article, you will need to remove t like "Mundis first studied debt management following the navigation of a tough spot of his own financially. Working as a freelance writer his whole life meant not having a fixed income. Needing to borrow if he didn’t manage his money properly, he had debts around $80,000. Unable to escape this cycle, he discovered there were no resources available which inspired him to write his book." or "has helped thousands of people getting out debt and made him a "superstar of getting out of debt and debt management.", and also eliminate all adjectives of praise or quality. Additionally, smashword, goodreads, , and wealthclinic are not acceptable sources: list the books --all the books, but combining multiple editions--according to their entries in Worldcat.,not amazon, because Amazon includes promotional material with their entries. Boca Raton News and other local newspapers are not really great sources--try to stick to the NYTimes and sources of similar quality.

And be aware that Wikipedia uses notable as a term of art to mean only, "appropriate for an article in Wikipedia according to its guidelines" , which has no necessary connection with the general meaning of " importance to the world" ., or whether someone "deserves" to be in Wikipedia

Finally, since the contribution was written in exactly the format of a press release, it is reasonable to ask whether you are a connected contributor, in which case you must declare the connection. Please see our rules on Conflict of Interest If you are writing this for pay or as a staff member of the organization, see also WP:PAID for the necessary disclosures. DGG ( talk ) 19:35, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks so much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iochone (talk • contribs) 19:55, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

PS I am not a connected contributor, not writing this for pay and not a staff member of any organization connected to Mr. Mundis or his publishers. Thanks.

Thank you for your valuable inputs. Will definitely make the mentioned improvements in the article to make it neutral along with 3 independent sources for reference. Thanks again. Regards, Tarukh Kaul

 Tarukh Kaul (talk) 08:25, 7 April 2020 (UTC)  @@@@@

Draft:T.L. Mitchell

Dear DDG. First, I hope you and your loved ones are safe and well. Crazy times! Now to business -- thank you for your comments on the draft T.L. Mitchell entry. Your specific and detailed feedback will really help me with this submission. I admit I am a Wikipedia novice (if even that) and I'm trying to learn as I go. I am grateful to folks like you who take the time to help me better understand how to make submissions appropriate for Wikipedia. I will work on this and hope you will have time to review it again when I'm done. Thank you!--Jody Venturoni 15:36, 6 April 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jventuroni (talk • contribs)

Look at what I said, and remove the excess. Then remove promotional fluff such as his appointment by a unanimous vote. Then resubmit. DGG ( talk ) 17:46, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Kat Nouri Bio

Hi DGG,

I appreciate you reaching out. I wanted to ask if you could specify which areas within this bio you found to be advertisment-related? I noticed that all of Kat's information is sourced and referenced accordingly. I do not work for Stasher or have any unwavering biased toward the CEO of the company, and am open to suggestions of where rewrites should be. Chistina.mlynski (talk) 16:18, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

The article contains sentences like " Stasher bag[s] are the only bags on the market with a patented Pinch-Loc™ seal that are oven, dishwasher, microwave, fridge, freezer, stovetop and sous-vide safe. Every Stasher is made from pure-platinum silicone, can be heated without leaching harmful toxins and is free from chemicals or fillers. and "Today, Stasher Bags are sold at Sur la Table, Amazon, Whole Foods and Target, as well as www.stasherbag.com. The standard sandwich bag size costs $12.", Not a single word of that is acceptable encyclopedic contents. Furthermore, none of your sources meet the requirements for references providing substantial coverage from third-party independent reliable sources, not press releases or mere announcements . Ref 1 is a local journal, which will write articles about every firm in the area; ref. Ref 2. is an interview where she is allowed to say whatever she pleases, and therefore not independent; Ref.3 is bizjournals, which is a source devoted to press releases Ref.4 is a sharktank youtube Ref.5 is an article where the company is only one of those included, and what is included is PR, Ref. 6 is a mere listing, Ref 6 is a article on multiple products.

If you want to write Wikipedia articles on people, don't write them on the founders of new companies. If you want to write Wikipedia articles on products, write on a generic product with multiple producers, and mention none of them. DGG ( talk ) 17:41, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Request for reconsideration of my draft on Lawrence and Mayo

The draft has been rejected basis soapboxing/advertising.

This is to bring to your notice that I have no personal interest to gain from creating a wiki on Lawrence and Mayo. I am an MBA student and did a dissertation on this company as part of our program and could not find a Wikipedia page on it. So I relied on other articles and press releases available on the web. Thought it might be helpful for others in future to find a consolidated Wikipedia page on a 150 year old organisation which is headquartered at the Lawrence and Mayo House, a heritage site in the bylanes of Fort,Mumbai. Notable clients included many prominent freedom fighters of Indian National Movement.

All the information is available widely on the net, and I had referenced the same in the draft.

However, being my 1st engagement as a contributor to the Wiki community, if there was some error on part of the format, I'd request the community to excuse me for that.

I'd respect your decision to not publish my draft if you don't find reason in it. But as part of national heritage of India, as well as being a leading retail chain business in optics, it warrants a Wikipedia page in public interest.

Thanks and regards,

Tarukh Kaul — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tarukh Kaul (talk • contribs) 20:59, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Tarukh Kaul, The legacy section is name-dropping throughout, and it ends with the sentence: "Given the company’s image, perception, reliability and reputation, Lawrence & Mayo became the first choice for many internationally recognized brands such as Ray ban to launch their products into the Indian market." That kind of language belongs only in an advertisement.

Of the references, not one is independent and substantial. They are either mere mentions, or press releases, and the one in Business Standard is written and signed by the president of the company!. If -- and only if , you can find at least 3 good references providing substantial coverage from third-party independent reliable sources, not press releases or mere announcements, then you can try an article, but make sure that it includes nothing that would be suitable for an advertisement or press release. Those two forms of writing are with encyclopedias. . DGG ( talk ) 21:47, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	Thank you for your extraordinary diligence! Reciprocater (Talk) 07:37, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Deleted Draft: Joe Lamp'l

Hi, I am new to this and just trying to create an objective article for Joe Lamp'l. My article was deleted for being too promotional. Can you help me understand how I could have better stated facts about this person's career with links to what exists on the internet without it appearing too promotional? Also, if I want to give this another try, should I start from scratch or is there a way to edit the article I wrote? Thanks! Aprentice525 (talk) 13:34, 7 April 2020 (UTC) @@@@@@@@@

Rejected Article: Heal

Hi, I was recently rejected the article for Heal(2017 documentary film) and I was wondering what sections were deemed as advertisement. I included biographical data of the individuals of the film and the purpose for their appearance in the film, overall summary of the film, background on mind-body medicine, and the few accolades it has received. As for the lack of notability reason, I believe the film is sufficient for its own article as it is widely available through Netflix. Overall, I believe my tone was neutral and so any detailed feedback would be appreciated. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CaMenendez (talk • contribs) 18:33, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Apparently this is part of an educational project, so it was not intended to be promotional  ; unfortunately are so many hundred thousand articles in WP accepted in earlier years when the standards were lower that are promotional , that it can seem natural to write in that manner. Looking more closely, promotionalism is not the main problem. There are the following problems with the article:

1. The promotional element was the inclusion of the promotional information about the participants in the biographies. Biographies of this sort of the people in the film are not normally part of a Wikipedia article. They are , however, part of press releases. It would have been sufficient to link to the articles on the people who had them, and identify the others in a few words within the text.
2. Being available on Netflix is irrelevant. Notability of films depends upon references providing substantial coverage from third-party independent reliable sources, not press releases or mere announcements; we sometimes do use major awards as a convenient shorthand, and also some of the other factors in WP:NFILM
3. There are no third party sources about the film. Ref 1 is the film itself, 2 is the film's web page, 3 & 4 are about mind-body medicine in general. the others are about the individuals who appear in the film. The only one of them that seems to mention the film is https://robwergin.com/heal-documentary-media/ IMDB, as you know, does not count as a Reliable source to show notable ,as it includes everything it can get information on.
4. Did your course instructor suggest this film for an article? DGG ( talk ) 22:15, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi DGG, Thank you for the response, it cleared many of my questions. I plan on removing many of the biographies of the individuals that already have one like you mentioned. I found a couple of reviews of the film such as https://slate.com/technology/2018/01/documentary-heal-makes-important-points-about-positivity.html , https://www.filminquiry.com/heal-2017-review/ and https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/review/heal-1052491 among others. Perhaps I can include these reviews in a "Reception" section to address the notability and third-party issue. To answer your question, my course instructor gave the "OK" for the film. Please let me know if this is a good method to proceed. CaMenendez

U|CaMenendez}}, go ahead as you plan-those reviews are critical, especially Hollywood Reporter, if the review there was substantial. It is one of the best sources in the industry DGG ( talk ) 03:35, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

I have just made the necessary edits to the article as you suggested. I do agree that it seems to be a stronger and well-balanced article now after your suggestions, so thank you for that. Please consider the article to be published and once again, thank you for your time in helping me with this. CaMenendez

CaMenendez. There's still the problem that thedetails of the peoples illnesses are minor plot details, and the reports of them do not meet the standards for MEDRS. The list of individuals duplicates about half of this, and does not describe them in NPOV language. For example, there is no such thing as a chiropractic physician; a chiropractor is not a physician. DGG ( talk ) 19:33, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Request on 18:54:50, 7 April 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Mischievousgnome

• Mischievousgnome (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Velocity Dependent Inertial Induction (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello, in reference to the above submission, please note that some new references have been added, and further modifications will be made shortly, including a new section. The latter cannot be drafted until I have been able to seek expertise from a third party, which may take a bit of time. I also propose to rename the article to "Inertial induction" and to make appropriate changes to some section headings. I will resubmit once all amendments have been carried out satisfactorily. Thank you for your patience.

Mischievousgnome (talk) 18:54, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

the only thing that is likely to make a difference is references providing substantial coverage from third-party independent reliable mainstream scientific sources. DGG ( talk ) 01:56, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Question concerning draft

Hi DGG. Thanks for all you do. You recently commented on a draft submission that was declined - Draft:Avanti_Centrae. I've read several of the subjects here on your talk page and I understand it's a common issue to have language that may seem advertorial in nature, regardless of of the writer's intention. Can you help me understand what I can do to fix this specific draft's language to prepare it for submission? Thank you so much! AaronMychael (talk) 22:31, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

first of all, from the disclosure on your user, you are a paid editor. You imply you did not write that article with a promotional intention, but it appears you are being paid for doing just that. When you studied journalism, your teachers were paid for teaching you; when you were a beginning writer, the people who guided you did it as part of their paid employment. You wish me to help you write an article for promotional purposes, that will not appear promotional and thus be accepted, so that you will be paid Why can you reasonably expect me, an unpaid volunteer, to do that?

For reference, a working definition of "promotional " for our purposes is that promotional writing is what the subject would like readers to know about himself, in contrast to encyclopedic writing, which is what a general reader might want to know. Your article does exactly that--it discusses her childhood interests in a sympathetic tone, gives her opinion on various public issues, talks about how hard she work, and what she is trying to accomplish. That's what writers usually try to say for a blurb, because they think it encourages people to buy their books. The public might want to know the nature of her books, and whether major critics think them important. The article does give the content, but as no major critic for a major responsible paper has reviewed them, it instead refers to minor local newspapers in her area, interviews which let her say whatever she chooses, and awards from a company devoted to publishing and promoting authors.

Based on my experience, there is nothing you can do that will get her an article on Wikipedia at this stage in her career. When she wins a major nationally-known prize or write a recognized major work, some volunteer here will know about her, and there will be no need for her to pay for an article. DGG ( talk ) 02:18, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Jerrold Mundis

I realise that the article creator had approached you before he agreed to improve the draft, but now the promotional content has been restored and the draft is as bad as it was before I deleted it in the first place. Deb (talk) 10:10, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Kirkus

Hi, saw your statement about Kirkus in afd. Is it no longer reliable due to Simon purchasing it? Will the Reliable Sources page be updated? Thanks for any help you can provide. Caro7200 (talk) 12:59, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

It reviews independently published books if they are paid to do so. But I need to check that this is still thecase. It certainly was in the past. DGG ( talk ) 17:57, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Mikhail Konstantinovich Kudryavtsev

Hello! You proposed an article for deletion that was recently created by me. Kindly note that I have added more content to the article. I would like to remove the deletion request placed on the article, but before doing so, I would like to request you to take another look at the article, and to kindly let me know if the content is still not at the minimum level to have that article on Wikipedia. Thanks, Мастер Шторм (talk) 13:58, 9 April 2020 (UTC) @@@@

Мастер Шторм: I accepted it. DGG ( talk ) 20:56, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you so much , Мастер Шторм (talk) 21:40, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

AfC Draft Freudenberg Performance Materials

Hi DGG,

I hope you are well! I've seen that you edited the Draft: Freudenberg Performance Materials. I wonder if you have any recommendation on whether the article should be moved to mainspace or not. If you think it should be moved, I am happy to update the financials real quick. Thank you very much in advance for your feedback. Best, Conandcon (talk) 09:19, 10 April 2020 (UTC) @@@@

(talk page stalker) I won't speak for DGG, but I can tell you that if I were to review that page right now it would be a decline. There's too many sources that are press releases, unreliable blogs, or non-notable niche websites. Sulfurboy (talk) 01:34, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

I think the best course for the present would be to incorporate it into the main article or the parent firm, and do similarly with the other divisions of the company. The deWP to a considerable degree seems to accept the notability of major companies based upon common sense as well as references ,and accepts that the majority of the references wiill come from the company itself. TheEnglish WP,because of the degree to which it is underattack by promotional editiors, tends to rely moreuponstrict conformity with WP:NCORP. Personally, I think that for historic firms, the German way is better, but it is difficult to make that argument here. DGG ( talk ) 03:09, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you Sulfurboy and DGG for your feedback. Maybe two remarks: The current German version of the article uses a mix of literature, news (trade and daily press) as well as company sources such as the annual report. We had chosen other sources for the enWP as the sources are all in German and it would have been hard for independent users to check content and sources. Regarding the deWP way of handling companies: The German WP has a clear and communicated notability criteria. When it comes to companies this means that the company needs to have at least 1000 FTEs or more than 100m revenue or being listed at a regular stock exchange or have 20 sites according to article 5 OECD-MA DBA or it has to "have a dominant position or innovative leaderhsip in a relevant product group or service (independent source required)" or it had fulfilled one criteria at some point in the past. As a consultant - obviously - I believe this is a pretty straight forward way to handle this - even though the criteria regarding market position leaves space for interpretation. Regarding sources the German community seems to accept trade press and (some) company sources more likely than enWP. However, you generaly need to have independent, reliable sources to back it up. Company sources tend to be accepted when it comes to facts (e.g. employee numbers, revenue etc.).

Having said that: My intention for this query was to ask how to proceed with the draft of Freudenberg Performance Materials, as you DGG, had made some changes. I thought I maybe could be of assistance. So I did not come here to argue or discuss anything really. My primary goal is to connect companies with the community and try to get a better result for the reader at the end. All the best, Conandcon (talk) 19:33, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Conandcon, Just so it's clear (as some of your comments seem to be misdirected) the German wiki notability standard has zero bearing on whether or not this company would be considered notable on enWiki. We are two separate projects. Our concern also with this article is how it is sourced. The vast majority of the sources are either press releases, unreliable blogs with zero editorial oversight, and/or niche trade magazines which are often subject to both of the aforementioned concerns. We need to see sourcing from reliable, secondary sources.

Yes, I fully understand and respect (!) that. I was just trying to clarify the German way. I was not trying to argue or discuss. Sorry, if that has not come across clearly. Best, Conandcon (talk) 19:52, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

G13 Eligibility Notice

The following pages will become eligible for CSD:G13 shortly.

• Draft:Mhairi Threlfall

Thanks, HasteurBot (talk) 04:00, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Review an article?

Hi DGG, could you possibly find the time to review an article I have created about the Armenian violinist and composer, Haig Gudenian? Thanks. Carlstak (talk) 15:28, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, DGG. Best regards, Carlstak (talk) 11:51, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

{U| Carlstak)), I removed a little fluff. Interesting career. DGG ( talk ) 21:01, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Galerie Chalette

Hi DGG-- I joined Wikipedia recently, and I'm writing here because I saw your entry on the Wiki-Projects Visual Arts page as having a "primary interest is in rescuing inadequate or threatened artist biographies." Looking over all that you've written here, I'm thinking that this is a primary element of a secondary interest for you, but... reading through your page, I get the sense that you are tilting at some of the same windmills that interest me.

I started working on the Galerie Chalette page because it was something that I knew a little bit about and which I figured would lead me into an interesting and valuable group of artists. I first picked off Leon Polk Smith for serious revision, and have been working outward from there. Jean Arp and Josef Albers are probably the two most obvious notable/important artists by some measure... it was actually pretty shocking to me that Albers's teaching was not addressed in detail in the first draft I saw up.

In any case, I am now grappling with the aspect of all these pages/articles that visual elements are important to understanding much of anything in this field. I very much am trying to conform to Wikipedia's copyright/fair use policies, but still evidently haven't figured them out yet as an entire gallery was stripped out of the Galerie Chalette page (unless I am imagining things and I didn't save my changes, an entirely possible/plausible explanation). If you have the time or interest, would you mind having a look at... the Galerie Chalette, Leon Polk Smith, Jane Davis Doggett and Stephanie Scuris pages? I list the four because it shows... more broadly what I am attempting to do. Also Robert Engman, though that page really need some sorting and I haven't quite figured on the best workable approach there.

This ia a truly notable group of artists who had a notable impact through their work. But there are several different levels of complication in transferring an informational sense of their work, lives, and impact into a written account.

Oh--and here's the general statement that I'm trying to develop for my non-free fair use uploads...

"Writing about late 20th c. Art and Artists and Art Galleries

This is not easy, particularly as the bulk of the visual supporting material remains under copyright. This has led to a general avoidance of developing quality articles on these subjects. It is not possible to understand these visual topics without illustrations of the work in question. While repecting these elderly and dead artists' estates (where such exist) rights to retain copyright, it will not be possible to broaden either appreciation or understanding without some minimal visual representation of the work and context in which that work was produced."

None of this is intended as a complaint--I'm reaching out in the hope that I can improve my learning curve. My preference--doing the work in an acceptable format... the first time.

All best, Katya Sicklemoon (talk) 17:51, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

First, the general part: you will find it extremely difficult to change the NFFU criteria: The enWikipedia community takes a very narrow approach to this, and their basic principle is to keep it to an absolute minimum. The justification is to make as much content as possible usable directly in those countries that do not recognize Fair Use, and those commercial re-uses for which Fair Use would not apply even in the US. They are aware that in the US it would be legally possible to be very much broader--the US law of fair use is more liberal than any other country.

My own personal view is different, and I think we should take advantage of as much fair use as falls squarely within the current US judicial interpretation. Since some of our images are fair use even now, people reusing in non-fair use countries already know they have to be careful, and we would,, as we do, label the fair use content. My view has approximately zero chance of ever being accepted here. Some of the reason is historical: at the time WP started, copyright observance on the internet was chaotic, and outright pirating was rampant.As Wikipedia was trying to do something that had never been done before, it could well have been seen necessary to adopt a very strict approach to this to differentiate ourselves from the pirates-indeed, the eventual decision to allow fair use images at all was a close thing, and many other WPs decided differently.

My advice is not to even try. If you do, prepare tor either a quick dismissal of all your arguments without serious consideration, or a long discussion with almost everyone opposing you, and an eventual overwhelming vote against you. DGG ( talk ) 19:44, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Hola! It took me a few days to see this...

Thank you for your serious response (and your patience in coming back to a question that I'm sure has been posed before). I note with irritation the rather good job that has been done on the John Singer Sargent page. I guess if you are a socially successful artist and popular, and have been dead since 1925, you're in good shape! The talk page there was interesting. And, yes, definitely there has been a contention over many of the images.

I have to say, coming at this from another angle... I also wonder if there is some sort of unconscious conservative bias at work against non-figurative modern art. For a lot of people, Picasso, in their mental landscape, really is the end of things.

And I will add--the gallery creep and creeps!--who seem to be doing a lot of the writing here are rather skin-crawly. I don't have any real desire to become a champion for this late 20th c coterie, but... there's such a void in the knowledge base.

Okay--I am sure you have much else to do, but I wanted to touch base to say your background info was helpful. I'll be interested to see what happens with the Galerie Chalette exhibition catalogues! And, yes, I'll try not to let a fixation on images prevent me from doing some more work on the late 20th c art guys & gals.... all best, K Sicklemoon (talk) 18:51, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

If anything, there's a certain bias against figurative contemporary art. The coverage of Wikipedia is based on what people are interested in writing, and most of the volunteers here interested in the visual arts are more likely to be interested in developing genres, or else in art history. But what is absolutely true, is that about 90% of the articles on contemporary artists are written by the press agents. As you apparently noticed, the style is distinctive and very similar to a gallery brochure. We would need a serious campaign to rewrite them, but at least we try to avoid accepting more. And the articles on galleries and dealers are a particular problem this way-- so much so, that it is very difficult to get any new ones accepted. You may be interested in our many WP:MEETUPs devoted to the arts--in the NYC area, and elsewhere, once they are able to resume. DGG ( talk ) 00:01, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Point taken. The safely dead, or the currently trying to move artwork. I... am feeling a touch naive for having jumped into the pool with the idea of filling in... the gap that comes between those two. After I put up the Stephanie Scuris page, I sent her a postcard at the address the 'net has for her. She's...90? I've never met her, but wow she was hot potatoes in the 1960s! Here's this amazing woman who made a living out of doing these huge, "important" sculptures in metal, she made a comfortable bundle, she was up there with 'the big boys,' and... she's old news, so there was no article for her. If she cared about the internet or bothered with press agents, she'd definitely already have had an entry here!

I'm still trying to figure out how far to enmesh myself in this project. Don Quixote, right?

As always, thank you for the thoughtful response. --K Sicklemoon (talk) 18:53, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

Seven years!

- Happy Easter, or: the resurrection of loving-kindness --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:12, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Paul Andrews (scientist)

Dear DGG, I've edited the page again for neutrality, added biographical details, and have added a section on clinical use of the receptor antagonists that is supported by referenced works independent of Andrews.

Many thanks for reviewing it again. Best wishes Emesis-historian (talk) 11:34, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Taidoc

Hi DGG! I'm trying hard to create my articles and started this page as a stub, can't we start out as a stub and wait for the item to become more notable? -Keiichi88 (talk) 01:15, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

first question:hav you any conflict of interest with this company, as defined in WP:Conflict of Interest? If it is in any direct or indirect sense a paid conflict of interest, see also WP:PAID for the necessary declarations. DGG ( talk ) 02:58, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

no conflict of interest, however, I do intend on continue writing listed companies, I'm just stressed out why it's not "notable". -Keiichi88 (talk) 00:43, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Keiichi88Notability for a company requires meeting WP:NCORP, several references providing substantial coverage from third-party independent reliable sources, not press releases or mere announcements . The only such ref is the money.dj, which I expected to find a mere database listing, like the ones from Bloomberg and Yahoo, or a promotional interview with the founder, as in most business "news: publications, but (judging by what seems to be a very effective Google translation) is a full detailed analysis, based on data, not just promotional statements from the company. . (judging by what seems to be the very competent Google translation) You need to find some way to include some translated quotes from it, and ideally find one more source. But for now just add some information about market share, and resubmit, and let me know on my talk page.

In general, please realize that 90% at least of articles we get submitted on new or small companies are essentially promotional, and most of them written by undeclared paid editors. We are therefore somewhat skeptical. The way to write of companies is to try to pick the longest established with the largest market share, and to look for good references before you start writing. DGG ( talk ) 07:02, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Understood! Will continue to work on it, had some time to think things through since getting rejected, but I'm determined to contribute and will follow your suggestions. Keiichi88 (talk) 06:15, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Revised:Heal

Hi DGG, I have made the edits you previously suggested to the article including reviews for the film to address the notability and third-party issues. Please consider accepting this draft and thank you for your time and effort in helping me with this project. CaMenendez' ( talk )

you're getting there. But consider such phrases as "He has visited over 33 countries to conduct speeches about a variety of topics" this is first of all vague and meaningless,, and second sound lie it was taken from the film's publicity or introduction. Easiest way to go would be not to have numbered sections on each person, just short paragraphs. irt decreases the overemphasis of the names, and makes it sound less promotional . DGG ( talk ) 07:06, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi DGG, I have made the necessary edits to make the article as neutral as possible. Thank you. CaMenendez' 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Revised

Hello DGG, I made the edits that you suggested but I am not sure if there are any more minor details. Please give me an example of any because I dont think anything included in this should be removed. Thank you! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Frank_J._Manheim Fmanheim1 (talk) 22:13, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Fmanheim, When he joined a board of directors, he became a director not the director. (this is of course different from the UK position of "managing director"). Most important businessmen become members of the board of directors of many companies, but the role is not significant unless they are chairman of the board. For the others, just list them. You do not have to describe what the various companies did in any detail. Check your use of tense: past events go in the past tense. DGG ( talk ) 07:27, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Draft:J osef Mitterer

RE: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josef_Mitterer Just wanted to say thanks for your kind review! Bronsky 2020 (talk) 00:11, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

G13 Eligibility Notice

The following pages will become eligible for CSD:G13 shortly.

• Draft:HealthPocket

Thanks, HasteurBot (talk) 04:00, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi!

Anushka Sen article was deleted. Please restore it on my sandbox. Thank you, Dineshswamiin (talk) 05:18, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

My submission at VCE Exam Simulator (April 15)

Hi David. Thank you for taking your time to review my edit. I do see why somebody might consider the article to be non-notable enough, I guess that is subjective. The reason for writing here is to check whether you declined the page because you suspected it to be spam / written with commercial or such intentions. As I understand you deal with such spam regularly. I just want to state that my submission was not intended as spam or with commercial intentions. This is my first WP article and this took me quite some time to write and collect the references based on the feedback of Liance. I do think the quality of WP comes first, but just want to make sure it was not rejected because of some misunderstanding of the intentions for posting. The reason for posting was because it took me quite some time to figure out why it was so difficult to find a version of an VCE file that would open with an older version of the VCE Exam Simulator. While this product seems the only actually used product in this market of exam simulators it is hard to find independent information on the subject. I looked on WP because I hoped to find more on it here. Since nothing was here I hoped to facilitate by publishing the little that I do have reliable / independent information of. This might make it easier for others to add to in the future. Please let me know if this might change your POV on the submission and if there is anything else I can do to preserve this information. Paulvl (talk) 07:59, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Paul Andrews (scientist)

Many thanks DGG for your help with this page, much appreciated. Best wishes Emesis-historian (talk) 09:01, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Question on citations

Hey DGG, First of all, thanks for reviewing my article that was submitted for creation! It is reassuring to know others take the time to ensure that shared knowledge is of good quality.

Now, as for my question I'd like to say that I am fairly new to writing Wikipedia articles. In fact, the draft about Text World Theory is my first serious article that I would love to see published. The theory itself is of course not my original research. I just read the book for a University class, saw that it had no Wikipedia page and wanted to share it for others to see.

You commented that it seemed notable, but that it needed additional references to see where the statements came from exactly. Since I am new to this and I cannot really claim that I am a complete expert on the topic myself, I heavily relied on the book that introduced the theory for students like me, plus additional sources that work with the same concepts or use the theory in a different context. Consequently, I could reference nearly every sentence to a certain passage in one of the books that I used. However, it seems to me that that would both be unnecessary as it is clear that the article is based on these books or peer-reviewed articles, as well as that it would make the entire article less enjoyable to read with this immense amount of little blue numbers.

So my question is, when can it be said that the amount of references suffices? The guidelines that I have seen on this aren't clear enough for me, so I turn to an experienced editor for help.

Thanks in advance! I will continue to work on it, but I would love to hear your tips. Owndifiction (talk) 15:00, 15 April 2020 (UTC)Owndifiction

there are several different complementary answers.

1. the amount of references suffices when nobody challenges them. this can depend on how conroversial the article is, how much aention it gets, or just someone being difficult.
2. . It varies by subject: for biographies of living people, we usually do reference every substantial individual fact,--which is our own rule; for medical articles we usually reference every sentence--which is the custom in the professional literature; for articles on history, we usually give only fairly general references, though professional writing in this field usually references every individual fact, resulting in books composed about 2/3 of references, and the other humanities seem to be moving in the same direction--but normally we do not do this here, though a few Wikipedia articles written by academics in the field are written somewhat in that manner
3. . It depends somewhat on the likely familiarity of the reader with the subject, and that's the problem here.
4. . The way to go is to cite one or two standard works for most parts--you can cite them repeatedly: If in the visual editor, you cite one, and then simply copy the reference number. For specific points, then cite additional references. Its not the number of references, but their strength that matters. So for books, always give the publisher; for articles, always the journals; for web sites, avoid unless there's nothing better. DGG ( talk ) 00:07, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Brewbaker v. Regents

Hello DGG,

Article Declined

Thank you DGG ( talk ) for your review of Draft: Aaron D. Lewis, corrections noted and would work on them. TheEpistle (talk) 00:56, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

I apologize if I am reaching out incorrectly or if this is not a matter for the talk page, as I am unfamiliar with Wikipedia. I am the person who proposed deleting the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brewbaker_v._Regents page. Thank you for your response to my proposed deletion. I did find a third party source on the case, a book titled The Law of Higher Education, sixth edition, student version, and cites the case for the proposition that an administrative school disciplinary matter held after a criminal prosecution for the same conduct does not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause. Does this make the case notable with respect to Wikipedia? I would volunteer to try re-writing the page to focus on its legal notability in order to remove the strange interpretation that the original author of the page, who was the plaintiff in the case, included in the article. However, I am a lawyer who represents a party who the plaintiff of this case is suing in another, unrelated matter. I discovered this article while researching the plaintiff and assumed that Wikipedia would not want off-base legal interpretations in articles written by the losing plaintiff. I believe it would be just as improper for me to write about the case given my adversarial posture to the plaintiff as it was for the original plaintiff to use Wikipedia as a place to vent about having lost the case. I would certainly try to be neutral, but the article would be better written by an expert in law (probably a lawyer or paralegal) who is not connected to the case or the parties involved in it in any way.

I am not sure how to propose that the article be rewritten, so I am leaving this note on your talk page in case you take an interest and are able to take steps to have the article be rewritten.

Best regards 207.45.84.127 (talk) 19:31, 15 April 2020 (UTC)AB

Dear 207.45.84.127, I appreciate your realistic and objective view on this. The information should be added, you should not be the one to do it, and I am no expert. I'm going to mention this to a wiki-friend of mine who, unlike me, is an attorney and has helped in similar situations; I'm sure he will deal with it competently. DGG ( talk ) 05:20, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Hattie Hasan

Hey DGG, I think that Hattie Hasan is notable for an article. Clearly whoever wrote it was pushing a POV, which is unfortunate but I've cut out a lot of the fluff and fixed the formatting, etc. Is this better? Her book is notable enough, I added a reference to it and included it in her published works not because of advertising but because it was significant. She got an MBE and is a female plumber who advocates for more women in an industry primarily made up of men, I think this is notable in its own right and she has had some reasonably reliable press. - Chris.sherlock (talk) 20:32, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

I see you improved it, so I accepted it. Sometimes the community decision is that articles such as this are encyclopedic. DGG ( talk ) 01:10, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Request on 10:29:35, 16 April 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Kojomo

• Kojomo (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Kola Oyeneyin (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I am requesting your assistance in editing this article. I would like if you could point out specific areas that make the article unacceptable and advise on how to prevent this. Thank you

Kojomo (talk) 10:29, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Help regarding a 'contested deletion' response in WP:CSD case

Hi, I require help in a 'contested deletion' response for Draft talk:OnePageCRM. I took the WP:CSD action on basis of WP:G11 after being declined for same reasons earlier. The author has contested the WP:CSD. Do I need to do anything or the deleting administrator will take the decision? Please help. Thank you. Amkgp (talk) 13:03, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Submission rejected

You rejected Draft:Renowned_LA. Does that mean it cannot be modified to fit guidelines? Will it be reconsidered with the new edits? WP:TEA was unsure. Pilot333 (talk) 13:50, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

As I use it, it means you are strongly discouraged from trying to write an article until you have references providing substantial coverage from third-party independent reliable sources, not press releases or mere announcements. Celebrity endorsements are not sufficient. substantial articles about their products are. it's the next step up from declined. The stronger further step is for the draft to be deleted as hopelessly promotional , which means you have to be very sure indeed before trying to recreate it, because if its still not good, we go to the third step, which is to delete and protect it against recreation, which means you need to first convince an administrator there's enough; the very strongest step is to delete the draft, protect , and block the editor as promotional-only, which means you have to convince the blocking admin that you intend to write acceptable articles.

But since this might be possible if you looked carefully, and since WWD is a very good source, but one that I cannot access, I'm changing it to Declined. DGG ( talk ) 23:41, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

DGG - I have changed the WWD links to their archived versions, which are indeed publicly available for your viewing pleasure. I have also removed the bulk of the celebrity endorsements except the one collaboration with Chris Brown, since I believe a magazine cover is probably significant. I believe my original article was too aggressive to prove notability, so instead of proving notability via text, I'll let the references linked do the proving. Pilot333 (talk) 02:23, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Pilot333 (talk · contribs), I will take a look in another week or two; please excuse the delay, but things in the world are so much more difficult and depressing that I am not working at very high efficiency. DGG ( talk ) 07:49, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

DGG (talk · contribs), hope you're doing well. Work has picked up for me so I haven't been on Wikipedia as much. Here's a ton more coverage about the brand I found. Not sure if this will help with getting your approval. Let me know. Thank you. Pilot333 (talk) 17:12, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Pauline Johnson

I have requested a topic-ban against the paid editor. The professor probably should be the subject of a BLP, but won't be as long as her flack continues to push fluff at us. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:40, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

I made the edits you suggested

Hello I made the edits you suggested before for this rticle please let me know if this can be accepted for review now. Thank you. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Frank_J._Manheim Fmanheim1 (talk) 00:01, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

FMannheim, as frequently the case with connected contributors, theres still too much trivia. Membership in a society is rarely worth mentioning, as distinct from being a president, or it being an elected honor.; the list of board membership needs to be condensed into a listing: He served as a member of the board of directors of XYZ (19xx-19yy)[ref], ABV (dates) [ref] etc. DGG ( talk ) 04:04, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Draft: Hobart Reimann, MD

Hola DGG.

My new article just got bounced. I'll go through it again tomorrow and trim it down as per the recommendations.

This said, I have already gone back and done some work, and I had briefly touched base with Sulpherboy, who first flagged it, before resubmitting, and I haven't gotten an answer to that yet. Here's a cut down version of the comments I made there:

My article just got declined for peacock language. The bot didn't like the use of the word "landmark."

The subject is a medical doctor who wrote a landmark article on Pneumonias in 1938, which is part of the reason he is notable. A landmark article in medicine is the first time a subject is discussed in a peer-reviewed publication. Reimann's was viral pneumonias, which had not been described prior to 1938.

How should I edit this article so it doesn't get bounced for that particular word? Should I just not call it a landmark article? Put "landmark" in quote marks?

I'll have a look for other language that might be an issue, but I think that's the one (it gets repeated a couple of times in discussion/reference to that article) that's causing the main issue.

My other concern-and a greater concern for me personally-is that another reviewer flagged it for potential plagiariasm. I will go back through before resubmitting and work to comb out anything inadvartent along those lines. It's a fairly long, complicated biography with a lot of statements of sequential actions, and in cutting down the bits and pieces and trying to get it into shape, some of the citations may be in weird places for all the editing that has been done.

I see also that I mentioned the common cold thing, but don't discuss it in the body of the article. The only citation I could find online for that wasn't a great one (Reimann wrote the 1948 JAMA article that got published in Reader's Digest in 1948, saying that there was no treatment for the common cold--there's a New Zealand paper on-line that discusses it--not a great source from WIkipedia's perspective, I am sure!).

Apologies for the kitchen sink approach. This is my third article, and I'm still figuring things out. Re: Reimann's seven causes for misuse of antibiotics--I can certainly take that out, but my impression is that from a historical perspective, Reimann was the first, or one of the very early, virologists who were approaching this concern from an organized perspective. It seems cliche or unoriginal now. But circa 1960 or 1950, just as with the common cold article, it came as quite a shock to the general public that the wonder-drugs of the 40s might stop being so wonderful. Also--Reimann's quip about the "Multimycin" antibiotic cocktail gets quoted a number of ways--both by readers who understand that he was joking and those who don't understand his reputation as a diagnostician. Should I pull that out too, or add the second viewpoint? (which I thought about putting in, then decided it was just someone who hadn't done much research.

In any case, I'll be interested to see what you have to say about the Landmark article thing. And--no non-free images in this one! All best, Sicklemoon (talk) 07:16, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Sicklemoon (talk · contribs), It will be at least another week until I get to this, things in the world being as they are, with everything more difficult and more depressing. DGG ( talk ) 07:47, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

David--I made the necessary fixes, and someone else put it through. It was "just" a lazy cut-and-paste error--another administrator showed me how to check my work for this, and it was "just" in the family history part--something I hadn't given a lot of attention to because it wasn't an important aspect of the article. So--the article has been out in (I'm going to use the wrong word here) open-space for awhile.

It's interesting, really. On the one hand, Hobart Reimann is an obscure virologist of the past century. On the other hand--he was a physician fighting viral and bacterial infections in the pre-antibiotics era, and the first person to describe viral pneumonia in print. So what could be more timely? There's a great account from a patient of his who was later a student:

PHTHALMOLOGY ORAL HISTORY SERIES A Link With Our Past An Interview with Harold Glendon Scheie, MD

Hughes: You were taking mainly science courses?

Scheie: Yes, there was quantitative chemistry that I had not taken. Fortunately, I had taken adequate zoology and enough math. There were some odds and ends, but to pack them all into one year was difficult. I surmounted French by taking a reading test, which I was able to pass, and also satisfied the medical aptitude test. I began to take the other required courses. What with outside jobs and an overload of courses, I became so run down that I developed lobar pneumonia and nearly died. In those days there was no treatment, only support. I was in an oxygen tent and unconscious for about a week.

Hughes: What could be done for pneumonia in those days?

Scheie: Go to bed and wait for the so-called crisis which would occur after about seven days. I became extremely ill and out of it. When I regained consciousness at the end of the week, my mother and father were sitting in the room. I knew then that I had been very ill because only a very serious problem could get my dad to come to the big city. I had been taking a course in bacteriology at that time and assisted at an autopsy on a man who had died of pneumonia. I was run down enough, I think, with all of the things that I was doing that I was predisposed.

My physician, Hobart Reimann, was the chairman of the department of medicine at the medical school. His specialty was infectious disease and bacteriology. He had come in from China where he was one of the Rockefeller people who taught and did research at the Peking Union Medical College. Years later he came to Philadelphia to be chairman of the department at Jefferson Medical College.

Shortly after I was admitted to the university hospital student section, Dr. Reimann came in, examined me, and took a sample of my saliva for culture and injection into mice. I am not sure that his psychology was very good-he was so scientific-because he came in very proudly about thirty-six hours later with a tray holding several dead mice lying on their backs with their feet sticking up in the air. He triumphantly said, "Look, I recovered your organism. It's type III [pneumococcus]." Well, that I didn't need because I knew there was no treatment for this type. Therapeutic serum was available for the other two types. Possibly seeing the dead mice on the tray knocked me out, but they were the last thing I remembered for a week. It is now quite humorous to think of all those dead mice and their ominous suggestion.

Dr. Reimann became one of my very favorite teachers in the medical school and a supportive friend. He always had a dry and ready humor that enlivened his conferences and lectures. I was a premed student when the pneumonia occurred, and later when I was taking clinical medicine as a junior and a senior in medical school, Dr. Reimann seemed to enjoy seeing me in his classes but he always gave me a difficult time. For example, we used to bring patients that Dr. Reimann had selected into the amphitheater where someone would be called upon to present the clinical findings and discuss the patient. On one occasion I was presenting a patient and happened to say that I did a urine on a patient. Dr. Reimann was a very precise person but also had a great sense of humor. He walked over to the patient, pulled the covers down, asked the patient to turn over, and he said, "I wondered if the patient became wet." [laughter]

Another time when we were making rounds one morning-there were probably half a dozen or a dozen medical students with Dr. Reimann-we came to a patient with pneumonia. He asked me to examine the patient's chest. It was a great opening for Dr. Reimann since he had treated my pneumonia. I was listening to the chest with the stethoscope while he was talking to my fellow students and telling them about the patient and the type of pneumonia. A fellow student asked about the percentage of empyema with this type of pneumonia. Dr. Reimann, without smiling, said "Ask Scheie, he's the pneumonia specialist around here." I had no idea what it was but I acted very self-important and didn't look up. He tapped me on the shoulder. I listened to the question again and, acting as important as I could, I think I said, "Six percent, Dr. Reimann," and then, without smiling, went back listening to my patient. There was quiet for a matter of seconds, after which he tapped me on the shoulder again, and said, "Scheie, you are a liar. It's twelve percent." He was great fun as a teacher. .....

Yes, I know this is not something for an encyclopedia. But the true spirit of a researching physician! There is a lot of crap being propagated re: Covid-19. But I am sure there are still thinking physicians out there, working through this. And the tools they have today are so much more sophisticated than existed in 1938. Thinking people--they are going to be able to accomplish so much.

I worked on, then deleted, the part of the article which talked about how many of Reimann's mentors and teachers died of the diseases they were studying. Supreme sacrifices were made to get us to this point in our knowledge. That spirit still exists.

In any case, this was a cool and timely article to get to write, and an interesting exercise in cutting something down to to useable bits for WP. Sicklemoon (talk) 13:23, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

yes, Sicklemoon, It looks fine now. I usually format a list of appointments as a series of bullet points not a table, but there's no fixed rule. (It's mainly that I find the way WP does tables somewhat clumsy). You teaching example is nice; the art of teaching is in some ways as difficult as that of a physician, because there is so much less reliable theory. And people still die of the diseases they study and treat. DGG ( talk ) 15:43, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Request on 14:33:24, 18 April 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Kojomo

• Kojomo (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Adewale Aladejana (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Dear DGG, Thank you for taking out time to review this article, but I would like you to advise on what I should do, I'm open to learning more about creating and editing Wikipedia pages. While I have read lots of articles about creating Wikipedia pages, I still find myself not getting it. I believe if you assist in editing this, it will help me to understand better. Thank you

Kojomo (talk) 14:33, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Aniah Blanchard article

Hello! I am the creator of the Draft:Death of Aniah Blanchard article. The article was declined because it was "too soon." Would it be possible to submit this article again at a later time? In that case, could we keep it is a draft and then publish it when the time comes? Thanks Gingerbreadhouse97 (talk) 15:12, 18 April 2020 (UTC I decided to accept it, after taking another look at the references, which are strong enough, even tho the trialh as not yet taken place--see my note on your talk p. for how to revise it. DGG ( talk ) 22:38, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

The Burgess Battery Company

I'm surprised you accepted this from draft. It has substantial copyright problems. I'm not sure it's quite bad enough for WP:G12, but would you object if I moved it back to draft until the copyvios can be cleaned up? -- RoySmith (talk) 15:39, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Somehow after I accepted it, I did have a residual feeling that something was wrong, and I should have goneback--my error entirely, and I've moved it back to draft. . Working too fast. My apologies. DGG ( talk ) 23:17, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Hyro draft

Hi DGG, thank you for your comments. I'll be sure to re-edit.

I actually am not affiliated or related to the company. More of a fan who has some free time at the moment to advocate for Israeli/American companies I believe in.

Jack Feldman draft

DGG, thank you for the update and explanations regarding Draft:Jack L Feldman. I have no financial COI, but I do know the subject as a scientific colleague. Should I add a COI under Edit Summary, such as:

 ?

Thanks Vincenzo42 (talk) 5:35, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Edits

Hello DGG, I made the changes you suggsted to the article under the directorship headline. Could you please take a look and let me know if this article can be ubmitted now. thank you. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Frank_J._Manheim Fmanheim1 (talk) 19:16, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Nikolai Udianskyi

Please have a look at Draft:Nikolai Udianskyi. I've cut out a lot of the fluff. Is this better? Thank you. --Perohanych (talk) 20:38, 20 April 2020 (UTC) Perohanych, you;ve done what you could, but the community would not consider his career notable . DGG ( talk ) 03:50, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Seeking Your Professional Opinion

Hope you are well in these crazy times!

I created a new page via AFC but it was rejected due to lack of notability. I would have thought winning App of the year would help it satisfy this and felt there was enough other sources and notable coverage for the page to be notable, but if not, not and the page shouldn't be created. What are your thoughts?

Update: Oh my @DGG:, just realised forgot to sign my entry. Apologies not myself in these times. MaskedSinger (talk) 18:15, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

You may have missed this so circling back. Is there enough here to justify the notability or no? Will abide by whatever you say. Reviewing editors can sometimes be a bit trigger happy - not sure how much time they put into reviewing the page and going over the sources. Being rejected quickly can be due to it being an open and shut case and also wanting the article to improve which is an excellent reason for it to be initially rejected. Just unsure as to where this one lies. Your inpuut would be appreciated! MaskedSinger (talk) 04:54, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Following up on this @DGG:, did you have a chance to look at the new page? Would love to know your thoughts. MaskedSinger (talk) 05:01, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your wonderful idea @DGG:! You really are terrific. Will merge it as suggested. Thank you! MaskedSinger (talk) 04:44, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Nikolai Udianskyi

Hi, DGG

For Draft:Nikolai Udianskyi there is significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. They are mentioned in "External links" section

Alas, they are in Russian:

• "Удянский Николай — досьє" (in Russian). Левый берег. Retrieved 2020-04-16.

And in Ukrainian:

• Oliyarnyk, Mykola (2020-03-06). "Mykola Udianskyi — Ukrainian IT entrepreneur, social activist and scientist". elita.org.ua (in Ukrainian). Elite. Retrieved 2020-03-28.

Please let me know at least one sentence in the draft article, which appears to read more like an advertisement and is not written from a neutral point of view?

Please let me know any from 14 diffetent references that are not independent or reliable?

I hope that after careful consideration you will change your mind. --Perohanych (talk) 12:35, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

I've read them both. They are press releases, not genuine new coverage; The accomplishments are to have started 7 companies, none notable enough for WP. And the articles so close a paraphrase of the first that it seems copyvio.There's no notability, and the claims

Equally to the point i am just one of the three separate administrators who considered the article non-notable and /or promotional in separate reviews. DGG ( talk ) 13:56, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

I am sure Coinsbit.io cryptocurrency exchange is notable enough or WP. Now it is # 6 in Top 100 Cryptocurrency Exchanges by Trade Volume.

The first ( https://lb.ua/file/person/4900_udyanskiy_nikolay_aleksandrovich_.html ) was published on 15th of April 2020 and it used some information from Uk-WP dated on 7th pf April and from the second ( http://elita.org.ua/mykola-udians-kyy-ukrains-kyy-it-pidpryiemets-hromads-kyy-diiach-i-naukovets/ ) dated from 6th of March. I wrote a complaint to lb.ua and they already put the text of the free license at the end of the publication.

I showed you that I did not violate copyright of of https://lb.ua/file/person/4900_udyanskiy_nikolay_aleksandrovich_.html It was lb.ua who violated copyright of the author of http://elita.org.ua/mykola-udians-kyy-ukrains-kyy-it-pidpryiemets-hromads-kyy-diiach-i-naukovets/ and my copyright in WP. But lb.ua just corrected their mistake and added the appropriate text to the end of their publication.

I do not edit much in En-WP, as my English is not perfect. I started 3200+ articles in Uk-WP, edited 20 000+, made 100 000+ edits and I just want the world to know the fantastic Ukrainian person associated with cryptocurrency.

I hope you take my explanations into account and remove the db-copyvio template. You would also make me happy if you change your mind about the draft article. --Perohanych (talk) 19:21, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for taking off the db-copyvio template! Do you continue to insist that the draft appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia? I asked you to let me know at least one sentence in the draft article, which appears to read more like an advertisement and is not written from a neutral point of view. --Perohanych (talk) 09:39, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

I intend to let other reviewers deal with it further.. the question is not whether I personally think the article ought to be in Wikipedia ; the question at AfC is whether I think it would pass an afd discussion by current community standards at enWP. Current standards here are quite restrictive about new firms and their proprietors. DGG ( talk ) 03:37, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Heal Revised Round 2

Hi DGG, I have made the edits you mentioned to make the article as neutral as possible. Let me know what you think and please consider this article to be accepted. Thank you again for your time and effort in helping me with this. CaMenendez ( talk )

Articel Review

Thank you DGG ( talk ), for the rejected article Draft: Aaron D. Lewis, corrections noted. Article would be edited accordingly. Thank you. TheEpistle (talk) 00:56, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

I continue to think it completely fails notability, as an author (the individuals books are in almost no library) , politician or otherwise. DGG ( talk ) 03:41, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you so much DGG ( talk ) for taking out time to review, your constructive criticism was really helpful. I have worked on the article to improve the tone and remove numerous puffery words, thanks a lot to the Avoid peacock terms article, would certainly be useful in further instances.

Secondly, as regards to notability, he contested in the Hartford Mayoral Election, every major event I cited has been covered by Hartford Courant which is the oldest US newspaper in continuous publication, NBC Connecticut and sometimes Eye Witness News, He has been invited to Harvard (which I cited in Hazard Gazette). Futhermore, I think he has authored books available in libraries, on Amazon he has these books, while this book and this book are on google. You may correct me if I am wrong and suggest possible solutions, and you may review the article again as I has implemented earlier suggestions, thank you. TheEpistle (talk) 14:00, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

The Courant is a major newspaper, but if the election is not noticed outside the are it is not notable . Google will list any book anyone wants it to. AfC is guided what would happen if the community made a decision on the article in an afd discussion. Based on 12 years of experience community would certainly reject this article. There is no way of fixing it at the present state of his career. DGG ( talk ) 03:47, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Frank Manheim

Hello DGG, I have made changes to this article that you suggested such as the directorship section and I noted that a personal conneection exists on my talk page. Please let me know what else needs to be done to get this article published. Thank you. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Frank_J._Manheim Fmanheim1 (talk) 18:11, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Perms

Hi, I think you have reviewed some of my previous articles before. As such, I'm asking if you would object if I went to apply for autopatrol permission so it wouldn't be a burden on others. Also perhaps page mover to not leave redirects in userspace. Starzoner (talk) 21:16, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia and Information Management Software

Greetings!<

Wikipedia has an unusually robust amount of content devoted to personal information management (PIM) software. This content is useful for people trying to find the right software for their needs in a category that is flush with software titles. I realize Wikipedia may not be right place for this content, but it has been allowed to flourish here, and it now serves as a useful though incomplete reference source.

Among the useful resources is the List of personal information managers which features a table showing software specifications and in most cases a link to the Wikipedia article for each software title. Some Wikipedia articles listed in the table:

Personal Knowbase
MyInfo
Whizfolders
Calendar

I attempted to add a personal information manager (Zoot) to this collection, but the article is getting rejected with the following explanation:

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. Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Among the secondary sources listed for Zoot is a full length piece in Atlantic Magazine written by James Fallows. I would think that would qualify as published, reliable and independent of the subject.

But to the larger point: while I can't argue whether or not articles about software titles belong on Wikipedia, they have nevertheless found a place here, and it seems to me that this area of Wikipedia should either be allowed to flourish or it should be removed in its entirety. If the content cannot be expanded and improved then it will exist merely as a flawed and incomplete reference.

PeterCrossXYZ (talk) 21:31, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

• Wikipedia is not a product directory. So the question is the appropriateness of an article on this product, not the general policy.

I accidentally used the wrong tag, and have now corrected it: The problem is not the references, but the lack of encyclopedic information in the article, Perhaps you can add some more material. other than a list of features, all of which seem more or less standard--and avoid advertising terms like "robust" . And please add a recent reference if youcan find one--only a current date in the infobox shows it is still in production, for all the refs were from 20 years ago. DGG ( talk ) 06:32, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Request on 22:39:44, 24 April 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Tenacious pg

• Tenacious pg (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:International Swan Day (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi, I wanted to request more information about the article I wrote on International Swan Day. Is there anything in particular you would need from me before you considered the coverage to be more appropriate to an encyclopedia article than a press release? The organization has been covered in a range of periodicals, as I demonstrated through citations; let me know if you need more evidence on that point.

Tenacious pg (talk) 22:39, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Tenacious pg, it consists only of the promotional language of pt.1 , and then a list of a few cities where the event has been held. If it's notable , there should be many more good references--not just local notices and items in a list.

Since this is your only contribution, and since it is written in exactly the format of a press release, it is reasonable to ask whether you are a connected contributor, in which case you must declare the connection. Please see our rules on Conflict of Interest If you are writing this for pay or as a staff member of the organization, see also WP:PAID for the necessary disclosures. DGG ( talk ) 18:38, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello there! I am a film critic who has attended SWAN Day events, not a SWAN Day organizer. I am paid for my work as a film critic by the websites I work with, but I am not paid by or affiliated with SWAN Day. I am however passionated about advancing women in the arts. I feel the event is important for both women artists and women audiences.

Could I request to be connected with someone else at Wikipedia for a second opinion on SWAN Day’s notability? Tenacious pg (talk) 18:42, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Request on 03:30:03, 26 April 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Vietscoutmaster

• Vietscoutmaster (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Robin W. Winks Award for Enhancing Public Understanding of National Parks (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Vietscoutmaster (talk) 03:30, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

You write that my references are merely "mentions", but what do you expect for an award? That someone writes about it, even if it is not the main subject, is enough indication that they consider it significant. Besides the main reference to the organization, there was only another reference to it, and one press release. I have removed both and I added new ones. This leaves 19 references, 18 not from the organization. Compare to the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ansel_Adams_Award_for_Conservation_Photography which has only 5 references, all of which from the organization! I could provide plenty of other examples. Either accept my article, or remove the other (many) award articles, whichever option conforms better to Wikipedia goals, but please be fair! Vietscoutmaster (talk) 03:30, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

VietscoutmasterLooks like I am one of three separate administrators who thought theaward would not pass our notability standards. The thing to do is to merge it with the article for the sponsoring organization, which does seem to be notable DGG ( talk ) 18:33, 26 April 2020 (UTC) . DGG ( talk ) 18:33, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

DGG Am I correct in inferring that you, and other administrators think that the award is not notable enough because the organization is not notable enough? That is the only explanation for why nobody seems to have a problem with the similar Ansel Adams Award from the Sierra Club. If that is the case, let me tell you that despite the Wikipedia Page for the National Parks Conservation Association being very undeveloped, it is one of the top conservation organizations in America. It was founded by the same people who founded the National Park Service, is more than 100 year old, has more than 1 million members (fewer than the Sierra Club 3.5 but still not too shabby!) and issues a magazine with a circulation of more than 300,000. I am not going to modify further the Winks Awards article, because it appears that the Wikipedia administrators seem to object to the National Parks Conservation Association notability rather than the awards. If you do not approve it independently, I am going to follow your advice and merge it with the National Parks Conservation Association page, but given that my article has more references than the National Parks Conservation Association's article, wouldn't make it a bit unbalanced? Thanks. Vietscoutmaster (talk) 04:06, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Telluride Foundation

Thank you for taking the time to review my article. Can you please elaborate on your concerns about the article? In particular, I would like to know what kind of references are considered valid. I have seen many non-profit organizations without any references and having more promotional writing than mine. For example, Retired Enlisted Association. Alleyrubadeau (talk) 12:13, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

There are many hundred thousand articles in WP accepted in earlier years when the standards were lower that we need to either upgrade or remove. I'll need to check the one you mentioned for available references,, but at least, REA is a national organization, not one limited "portions of three counties in southwest Colorado". The one non-local reference, ref 7, is about someone helped by a different foundation founded by the same people.

Since this is your only contribution, and since it is written in exactly the format of a press release, it is reasonable to ask whether you are a connected contributor, in which case you must declare the connection. Please see our rules on Conflict of Interest If you are writing this for pay or as a staff member of the organization, see also WP:PAID for the necessary disclosures. DGG ( talk ) 18:30, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Hyro draft edited and resubmitted

Hi DGG, I hope this message finds you well. I have edited and resubmitted the Hyro draft as per your comments.

Thank you very much, J — Preceding unsigned comment added by JacobFeigelson (talk • contribs) 18:57, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

replied on draftt page. DGG ( talk ) 23:53, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Title change?

Sorry if this is not showing up in the right place. I don't see how one is supposed to add a "section" to your User talk. You recently approved my article on Jack Ives. I tried to get back to you by leaving a comment on that page, but you probably haven't seen it. I wanted to know if I could have the title changed to Jack D. Ives, which is how the subject almost invariably refers to himself in print (except in refs, where it is often shorted to JDIVes). He apparently cherishes his middle initial, perhaps because Jack and Ives are rather common. Thanks for your help. Hortonio (talk) 16:20, 27 April 2020 (UTC)HortonioHortonio (talk) 16:20, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)Hortonio,  Done We usually title articles with how their name is most often seen in sources and it looks like the majority of his publications and the references about him do indeed refer to him as Jack D. Ives. Cheers Sulfurboy (talk) 17:30, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Thanks for the kudos in regard of the article about Prof. Wilhelm von der Emde!

Hager Irene (talk) 17:01, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Seeking Your Assistance in editing these Articles

• Draft:Adewale Aladejana
• Draft:Kola Oyeneyin

Hello DGG, I am a new editor still learning the rules and guidelines of Wikipedia. I have had success in creating some pages but I am currently having it difficult creating the two above. I would appreciate if you can help edit the articles or point me in the right direction as to what to correct, as I do not seem to understand what is wrong with them. Thank you. Kojomo (talk) 13:02, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

First of all: Since articles like these are your only contribution, and since they are written written in exactly the format of a press release, it is reasonable to ask whether you are a connected contributor, in which case you must declare the connection. Please see our rules on Conflict of Interest If you are writing this for pay , see also WP:PAID for the necessary disclosures. After you answer this ,we can discuss further. DGG ( talk ) 00:38, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello DGG, I am not a paid editor or in anyway connected to these individuals, never spoken or seen them. I am a Nigerian trying to contribute to Wikpedia, which is why I only edit Nigerian biography articles, apparently I still have alot to learn. And the reason why I messaged you in the first place. To learn more.Kojomo (talk) 10:11, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

I am not alone in having these doubts, but I will consider your statement. If you're a good faith volunteer editor, get experience with people who unquestionably meet our requirements, such as MLAs, beforeyou move into the more amorphous fields of business executives. DGG ( talk ) 10:23, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Request on 15:49:52, 29 April 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by CharlesMerrimack

• CharlesMerrimack (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Steve Kropper (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Thanks for your efforts on Wikipedia in general, and this submission in particular. I am new at this, so bear with me. By the way, I loved this passage in your own bio. Good advise!

In the period after the February Revolution had overthrown the Tsar, when the Bolsheviks were a very small minority, Lenin's slogan was "patiently explain", as he urged the policy of talking to workers and soldiers individually to convince them of the validity of the party's program. Most of his colleagues wanted either to compromise with the more moderate politicians, in which case they would have been quickly swallowed up by their opponents, or go out immediately on the streets, where they would have been destroyed immediately. Lenin and his co-workers continued persuading until they were a majority in the key places--the forces of soldiers and sailors who would have been sent to suppress them. That's when they went out on the streets, in October, and they succeeded immediately. DGG (talk) 19:50, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Regarding the submission on Steve Kropper, I created the entry because he is besieged every week with people asking for help. If they know what he is about they will be better prepared and not waste time with the wrong approach or about approaching the wrong person. So I looked at a few dozen pages for people who have done similar work in energy, telecom and public policy. I looked at the Wikipedia guidelines, endeavored to fit them, and to tell a story that was well documented. The guy is a pioneer in energy conservation in buildings, telecom, public safety and has spent his life with an undercurrent of public service. The entry is not an advertisement as he has no upside from helping young people these days as they come to him with seeking career or political advice.

So I felt that your critique was unfair and need advice on how to help this public figure present himself so people take advantage of him in a good way.

CharlesMerrimack (talk) 15:49, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

see below--this ewill tak me another week. DGG ( talk ) 00:22, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Issue 38, January – April 2020

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 38, January – April 2020

• New partnership
• Global roundup

Read the full newsletter

On behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --15:57, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Amanda Elise Lee

Hello DGG. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Amanda Elise Lee, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: It's not that spammy. Don't know that it would pass a notability check though, but that's an issue for AfD. Thank you. GedUK  16:42, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

afd on the way DGG ( talk ) 00:22, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

A goat for you!

Thanks for "goating" me along with great suggestions. They really helped.

WeavingGrace (talk) 18:05, 29 April 2020 (UTC)