User talk:Legoktm/August 2012
|This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.|
- 1 legobot 17 regex
- 2 The Signpost: 06 August 2012
- 3 Talkback
- 4 TUSC token aada5fe9b74953c4cd6dffde08c73d0d
- 5 New Page Patrol survey
- 6 Articles for Creation Appeal
- 7 The Signpost: 13 August 2012
- 8 Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/ASI Government
- 9 Kasey Lansdale
- 10 ASI Government
- 11 Marco V Cigars & co.
- 12 Soundslides (Audio Slideshow Creation Software)
- 13 ASI Government
- 14 Shaurya
- 15 Rejected?
- 16 Schinasi Mansion edit
- 17 The Signpost: 20 August 2012
- 18 GOCE news and September drive invitation
- 19 Untold article
- 20 Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Singh Rashmi
- 21 What rates.
- 22 Thanks
- 23 Doc Jazz article
- 24 The Signpost: 27 August 2012
- 25 Northeast of England Process Industry Cluster (NEPIC) Article for Review
legobot 17 regex
The Signpost: 06 August 2012
- News and notes: FDC portal launched
- WikiProject report: Summer sports series: WikiProject Martial Arts
- Featured content: Casliber's words take root
- Arbitration report: No pending or open arbitration cases
- Technology report: Wikidata nears first deployment but wikis go down in fibre cut calamity
02:24, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
TUSC token aada5fe9b74953c4cd6dffde08c73d0d
I am now proud owner of a TUSC account! 02:25, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
New Page Patrol survey
New page patrol – Survey Invitation
Hello Legoktm/August 2012! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.
Please click HERE to take part.
You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey
02:25, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
Articles for Creation Appeal
|Articles for Creation urgently needs your help!
Articles for Creation is desperately short of reviewers! We are looking for urgent help, from experienced editors, in reviewing submissions in the pending submissions queue. Currently there are 1139 submissions waiting to be reviewed.
If the answer to these questions is yes, then please read the reviewing instructions and donate a little of your time to helping tackle the backlog.
02:25, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
The Signpost: 13 August 2012
- Op-ed: Small Wikipedias' burden
- Discussion report: Image placeholders, machine translations, Mediation Committee, de-adminship
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Dispute Resolution
- Featured content: On the road again
- Arbitration report: Youreallycan request for arbitration
- Technology report: "Phabricating" a serious alternative to Gerrit
I was trying to educate a colleague on Government's acquisition being a business and found this company's capability helpful. I refer to similar companies including SRA International, General Dynamics, CACI, etc. And I do agree we need to keep the article neutral and I have no intention to market for the company. I want to use this so my colleagues (and possibly all other knowledge seekers in acquisition as a real business) can refer and compare various providers in the Government space without the bias driven by their own Websites.
Any tip to keep just the "neutral" and informative sections will be appreciated and having some content on a respected place like Wikipedia might help. I do not want to market for them and would like to know things that appeared to you in that light.
- Responded on users talkpage. 02:47, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
It took you .05 seconds to shoot this article down. This is my first attempt at a full length article. Any feedback would be helpful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PKDASD (talk • contribs) 02:39, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
- Responded on users talkpage. 02:47, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for your pointers. I think I understand now. I will try to make this purely educational (which in fact, is my sole purpose so my staff and other government employees can also benefit). I intend to contribute more on the subject of government acquisition so this might be a good start to understand how information needs to be laid out.
I will try once more to add value than dilute.
Marco V Cigars & co.
I guess I do not understand what I have to do to get this article approved?
Soundslides (Audio Slideshow Creation Software)
Thanks for your feedback on the Soundslides page I was working on.
I have gone ahead and re-saved the page trying to model the content more like the german soundslides wikipedia page. (http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soundslides) Please let me know if there is anything else I should adjust.
Best regards Justin Winter
I have reattempted to create some content that reads academic. I wish to continue to build out a catalog of government acquisition experts alongside General Dynamics, SRA International, CACI and others in the space for the staff to educate themselves than be confused from a salesy company Website, the very purpose that your reminded me Wikipedia is intended to be.
sir i have received your review and your comment states that its like an essay. sir we always wrote from an neutral point of view. so can you please elaborate on what you really felt was wrong? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saipraveenmantha (talk • contribs) 09:22, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
You just rejected my article on Gary Snyder. I am quite confused as to why. The notice said it read like an advertisement, which I don't understand. There is nothing in it that can be construed as anything remotely like an advertisement. I also don't understand how it is any less neutral than any other article in Wikipedia. I provided over 70 verifiable and neutral references. Please explain the problem there.
I submited an article about Smart 911 and you choose to decline my submission, stating that "This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed." I did write the article from a neutral point of view, without any sort of value judgements, stating only what this service is about. Almost every phrase had references and all the references I used are independent, reliable, published sources like USA Today or TMCnet.com. These materials in well-established papers like USA Today are not clearly produced by myself and are not even published under the press release or advertorial tag. I really don't understand why you declined my submission because the reason you gave me is neither valid nor fair. 184.108.40.206 (talk) 12:17, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
Schinasi Mansion edit
Hello Legoktm, you recently denied my Schinasi Mansion and this being the 3rd time I have been denied I am a little lost as to what to do next. I have fixed the references and the specific paragraphs in question. I would love to get this up and running and would take any suggestions necessary that could be a little more specific on what I should do if you have time. Krodman (talk) 16:32, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
The Signpost: 20 August 2012
- In the news: American judges on citing Wikipedia
- WikiProject report: Land of Calm and Contrast: WikiProject Korea
- Featured content: Enough for a week – but I'm damned if I see how the helican.
- Technology report: Lua onto test2wiki and news of a convention-al extension
GOCE news and September drive invitation
|Invitation from the Guild of Copy Editors
The Guild of Copy Editors invites you to participate in its events:
Message re: submission "Northeast of England Process Industry Cluster". Hi thanks for your comments on the submission "Northeast of England Process Industry Cluster". I have had another go at neutralising the subject. All except 1 of the references are third party written and sourced. The one I have written has been third party edited and sourced. The reason that I have written about this subject is to give a real example. in detail, to show that the economic development of regions through clusters, as researched by porter et. al, can lead to measurable success. I am unaware of any other cluster that can report so accurately on its economic outcome. I have attempted to describe how in this case it has come about. I hope the update article (update 22-08-12) is more neutral. I would appreciate help with this. Gairderek (talk) 13:49, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi LegoK Could you let me know which sources were unreliable in the Untold article? As these sites used seem to appear all through wikipedia?
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Singh Rashmi
My article was declined by you on the basis, it was not neutral. I have now cut out all the peacock terms as according to your perception. SarahStierch has also declined it on the same basis. But now the article has no such and terms is absolutely neutral I think. If not the kindly cut down the terms which you feel objectionable.
Moreover, I am not the author herself as pointed out earlier by one of the editors. I have selected this username so people can have access to what is being done for this author. I belong to her state.
As far as notability is concerned all the references are true and the The Economic Times reference stands for it. Sometimes when clicked on this ref. , the page doesn't open so you double click or if the main page of the paper opens, you go back and click again, the page about the author's book will open.
I'm cutting my teeth starting a new article from scratch. One thing that baffles me is what should and shouldn't be included in this project. This is a list of hundreds of pornagraphic actresses with each one having her own article complete with a graphic.(BTW, none of these graphics are licence free) How are these articles worthy of inclusion to this project? I mean it's staggering! PKDASD 03:51, 27 August 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by PKDASD (talk • contribs)
I will get the categories and post on WP:Algae, then link here. I find creating talk pages tedious, but I think confused editors will post and discuss there first and post questions at the projects. They are useful. Eau (talk) 03:56, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
- Sure, let me know when you're ready. 03:57, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
Doc Jazz article
On the 17th of august you reviewed my submission of the Doc Jazz article and declined it because it read to much as an add and not so much as an entry for an online encyclopedie. First I want to thank you for reviewing my submission. I know you guys do this on a voluntary bases free of charge so I really appreciate it. Secondly I was hoping that maybe you could help me out in improving the article so that when I submit it again it will be accepted. Could you maybe point out to me some (specific) points that are too 'commercially' inclined or phrased? It will help me recognize the addvertising-like language I appearantly used in this article. I thank you in advance for your help.
The Signpost: 27 August 2012
- News and notes: Tough journey for new travel guide
- WikiProject report: From sonic screwdrivers to jelly babies: WikiProject Doctor Who
- Featured content: Wikipedia rivals The New Yorker: Mark Arsten
- Technology report: Just how bad is the code review backlog?
Northeast of England Process Industry Cluster (NEPIC) Article for Review
Hi Legobot, I have had yet another go at this article to nutralise it etc. All but 1 of the references are third party. and relevent to the point being made. I may need some serious help with this.Regards Gairderek (talk) 14:49, 30 August 2012 (UTC)