Jump to content

User talk:MatthewVanitas/Archive 41

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 35←Archive 39Archive 40Archive 41Archive 42Archive 43→Archive 45

Rose Story

Hi, Matthew

I understand what you just told me, but I still confused how come "iphone" or "BMW" those Brand can be published via WIKI? According to your word, I don't think they qualified.

Thanks

Jordan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ddillidan (talk • contribs) 22:47, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Jordan, you are not reading the very basic information about how Wikipedia works. You really need to read WP:What Wikipedia is. So far as your comments, the reason iPhone has its own article is because it meets WP:Notability. That is, tons of uninvolved people have discussed the phone extensively, written articles about it, scholars have researched its impact on the economy and society, etc. The page is not for Apple to advertise itself, it is written by uninvolved people examining the topic from an outside perspective. So those topics very much qualify for Wikipedia.
So far, you've given zero evidence that the "Rose Story" is written about in books (not just the story, but examination of it), studied by scholars, etc. If it is, then you need to mention that and clearly cite any information about who has studied the story into the footnote. And that aside, Wikipedia is still not a place to just post portions of stories themselves anyway. It's not a place for stories and books, it's a place for articles about stories and books.
I hope this helps, but you really need to read the policies that are recommended, to better understand how Wikipedia works. MatthewVanitas (talk) 02:17, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

07:24:53, 1 May 2015 review of submission by Havan123


hello sir, Your answer are "Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Genres of music instead.". So first of all i would you ask one question , my article name are not matched any article from wiki database so which mean you ask me... and second thing is that i also check " Genres of music " article which you are suggested its totally different from my article. I am new in wiki so help me to create article...

Havan123 (talk) 07:24, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Paddy Murphy (musician)
added links pointing to Noel Hill and Willie Clancy
Yarahmadzai tribe
added a link pointing to Khash

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:02, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Rook card game logo.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Rook card game logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 04:27, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

22:06:19, 2 May 2015 review of submission by Margarida Almeida2015


I have singificantly improved (and reformulated) my previous entry following the suggestions made by the reviewer. I am still learning the best way to improve my contribution and would be happy if you could make some suggestions for improvement.

Thank you !

Margarida Almeida2015 (talk) 22:06, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Reworked Students Supporting Israel

Hey Mattthew,

Just want to say thanks for the initial review and for the feedback on how I can make the article better. I have made the corrections as suggested and resubmitted it for a re-review. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Students_Supporting_Israel

Many thanks again!

Eitzim88 (talk) 07:51, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

20:27:19, 6 May 2015 review of submission by MemberOxHS1


Hello Matthew, Thank you for doing such a quick review. For the record, I'm not requesting a re-review, but I would like to improve my article in order to have it published on Wikipedia. I have read over the links you included, before sending this request, and I'm trying to learn and understand more how Wikipedia works, please have patience.

First question, I don't really understanding your comment that you can't cite a source to itself, could you elaborate on your comment? Also, I hadn't realize that I had done that, I'll see what I can do to fix that error. Any suggestions are appreciated.

The Oxford Historical Society does have publications of books by its members, would it help the article to include some or all of these publications?

On Wikipedia there is a page: List of Historical Societies, Lennox and Addington Historical Society, and I am basing my page on this style listing and on other pages from the List of Historical Societies. This is where I was hoping to include my article.

The Society also takes parts in local events, please see this link Woodstock Sentinel Review Oxford Historical Society to Mark War of 1812, would mention of these types of events help to improve the article.

As for notability, the Society is known on a local/county/municipal level, not so much on a Canada or wider scale; is that a problem for having the article published? MemberOxHS1 (talk) 20:27, 6 May 2015 (UTC)MemberOxHS1

Hello MemberOxHS1, thanks for checking in. The issue is that the article as it now stands shows that the society exists, but does not yet show that it matters. To give a parallel, if there's a sizable restaurant in Milwaukee and it stays open for 40 years, and during that time gets no coverage other than local reviews, passing mentions in travel guides, etc., then it certainly exists, and may be a perfectly good place, but it is not WP:Notable. That is, uninvolved parties have not gone out of their way to comment on it. Meanwhile, let's say there's a hotdog stand in Waukesha that's only open 5 years, but during that time becomes famous for some unusually progressive pay plans for its employees, and for a very unique architectural design, such that the Wall Street Journal occasionally discusses it as an example of pay plans, and architecture journals refer to as an excellent example of the X school. That would meet WP:Notability.
The really straightforward summary is:

Articles generally require significant coverage

in reliable sources

that are independent of the topic.
So in the case of your draft, noting that the OxHS exists does not prove Notability. Noting that papers have been published by people in it does not meet Notability. Local media coverage of some conference it held at the school would not meet Notability. What would contribute Notability is if historical journals mentioning Event X then say "the scholarship of Even X was, however, irrevocably changed in 2004 when the OxHS held a conference decrying J. Smith as an exploiter rather than a hero." That is, people uninvolved with the Society saying "huh, here's an important fact about the society and what it does". Does that make sense?
So far as the other article you link, it is an extremely common error for new editors to pick an article on a related topic without being aware of how the chosen example is good or bad. In the Lennox case you give, they don't prove Notability, so to be fair to the other societies which do provide citations of Notability, I've proposed the Lennox one for deletion. There are many, many new articles that aren't blatantly terrible and so aren't immediately deleted, and then linger for years even though they're never something that would pass an actual proper review in that state.
Hope this helps! MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:03, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Okay, yes, this does help. Thanks again for your help, I appreciate you taking the time to give an in-depth explanation. I'm going to hold off on writing an article about the Oxford Historical Society, and if I find some notability concerning it then I will work on refining the article and resubmitting it. Cheers,MemberOxHS1 (talk) 21:21, 6 May 2015 (UTC)MemberOxHS1

Mr. Vanitas, Please review the original submission of James Walters, PhD (theological ethicist) and provide any/all suggestions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Jim_Walters_(theological_ethicist)_(2)

Best, Lora Prouty — Preceding unsigned comment added by Llprouty (talk • contribs) 23:02, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Draft:American Tea Ceremony concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:American Tea Ceremony, a page you created, has not been edited in 6 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:32, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

History of the Catholic Church in Belize

Please indicate the ways you want me to improve this article. Thank you.jzsj 10:55, 13 May 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jzsj (talk • contribs)

22:19:07, 14 May 2015 review of submission by Jonwickett


I am new to wiki, I own a set of world war diaries and am trying to get them on wiki. I am a bit lost on what I have to do to achieve this - could you email me on redacted with help please.

Jonwickett (talk) 22:19, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello Jonwickett, my main advice is to read the policy WP:Notability (books). Diaries themselves are a WP:Primary source, so well they may have extremely useful information that does not mean that they necessarily can be directly added to an encyclopedia, since a diary unto itself does not contain layers of analysis and assessment by a neutral third party.
I would suggest you visit WP:Teahouse and post there briefly explaining the situation to see what is the best way that you can help share the information from these diaries. MatthewVanitas (talk) 08:40, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

11:28:12, 20 May 2015 review of submission by Bosniaagile


Hi MatthewVanitas,

Many thanks for the review and the comment! Very helpful and straight to the point.

We are not the company but non-profit organization that would like to have an article on Wikipedia about our selves. Something like PMI has (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Management_Institute). That is also the reason why we are writing an article at this stage.

I will adjust the content to match more article format and re-submit it.

Thanks once more!

Bosniaagile (talk) 11:28, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello Bosniaagile; I use the term "company" in the loose sense. Regardless of whether non-profit or for-profit, it is generally a bad idea to make a page about your own organization. I strongly advise you read the following:
Hope this helps! Please visit WP:Teahouse if you later need to speak to a volunteer mentor for advice. MatthewVanitas (talk) 11:38, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Sonia Natra

Hello Matthew Vanitas, I would appreciate your help in reviewing and fixing the Draft:Sonia Natra. Thank you in advance, Gabi — Preceding unsigned comment added by Natra gabi (talk • contribs) 07:09, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

12:27:57, 22 May 2015 review of submission by 99.246.24.104


Hello,

My article was declined. After referring to your published works section, the subject (PRESS The Fashion Magazine) meets more than one of those criteria.

- We're a record breaking magazine - We speak regularly at Universities and High Schools - We're unique and the only one of our kind in the city - We've made media headlines with several major news networks - We're at the same level and have the same relevance as several other magazines with wikipedia pages

Please tell me what information must be included for approval as no valid reason was initially given.

99.246.24.104 (talk) 12:27, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Here's the problem, you're "telling, not showing. It does zero good to claim a magazine is "record breaking", what you would need to do is say something like "the magazine broke the 1973 record for most sales of a fashion magazine initial issue in a single week" and then cite it to, say, an LA Times article which mentions this interesting fact. Otherwise "record breaking" means literally nothing, it's just vague fluff. Same with "unique". If the magazine is so unique that the New York Post describes is as "unique" and explains why, then say "the NYP described the magazine as 'unique' for its XYZ features" and then cite it to said NYP article.
Same thing, there's no point saying "it's been mentioned in the following media..." You need to provide key facts of interest to a global reading body (not to your prospective customers), and then cite them to a reliable and neutral authority that found those facts worth mentioning. The fundamental goal:

Articles generally require significant coverage

in reliable sources

that are independent of the topic.


Hope this helps! MatthewVanitas (talk) 08:44, 26 May 2015 (UTC)


08:36:36, 26 May 2015 review of submission by Rama Net Expert


Rama Net Expert (talk) 08:36, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Well Rama Net Expert, what is it you want? You can't just post a blank message on my Talk page. I just looked at your page, it's not even an article it's just a name, and there's no explanation for why this person needs an article. Also, if you're writing about yourself, please don't waste our time. If you are worth writing about, some neutral person who doesn't even know you will write your article. Writing your own article is essentially evidence that we don't need an article about you; see WP:Autobiography. MatthewVanitas (talk) 08:46, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Rajacenna

hello I can not find why the page Rajacenna is declined?

DrawingArtAgency (talk) 10:04, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello DrawingArtAgency, my apologies, I typed the link wrong. The relevant policy you should read is WP:Notability (artists). Also, taking a closer look at your References, I see that you appear to have provided more serious documentation than I thought at first look, with links to some reputable news magazines and to the official YouTube sites of news agencies.
I have thus published your article, but I strongly suggest you better format your footnotes so that readers can see right away how strong your sourcing is. If a given news journal/station has a Wikipedia article, like Elsevier (magazine), that name should be wikilinked in the footnote so readers know "oh, this is a serious major journal, not an amateur website they are citing", like so: Elsevier (magazine). Also, when you cite YouTube, please be sure to indicate you are citing the official YouTube channel of a news source. Too many times people are citing illegal uploads, which we don't allow. I will fix a couple of your footnotes as an example of how to format them, please do likewise for the rest.
Thanks for your good work, though I am also leaving you a note that you need to change your username. MatthewVanitas (talk) 10:14, 26 May 2015 (UTC)


Thank you Matthew for your explicit information. We will format the footnotes as requested. I have one important question though: since 2010 Rajacenna has been in the printed media a lot aswell as on the internet on reliable sources. My question is: there is a lot of reliable sources which were in printed magazines and newspapers, they are not anywhere else on the internet. They have been scanned and are on her website: http://www.rajacenna.com/in-the-media.html . Do I understand that I can not use them in the references? Or may I point to the individual scan sources? Cel at DAA (talk) 10:54, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello Cel at DAA, thanks for the name change; we're very serious about our "one user per account" policy.
Very good question, and it's answered here at Wikipedia:Offline sources. It is perfectly fine to cite sources that only exist in print, not online, provided they were publicly/professionally published, reputable works. Note, please do not link to them on her own site. While she may be allowed to post press clippings, Wikipedia is not allowed to link to copyrighted works hosted anywhere other than by the copyright holder. Also, in theory, press clippings on someone's own site aren't officially credible since someone could theoretically forge them (not saying this is the case here, just explaining our policy). So please do feel free to add any facts about her career and the attention paid to her, and cite it to print sources (clearly indicating author, publication, title, date, page), but do not link to anything that is not on the official site, YouTube channel, etc of the copyright holder. Hope this answers your questions, keep up the good work. MatthewVanitas (talk) 11:00, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Article on Rik Palieri

Hi,

This is a message for MatthewVanitas to say thanks for the feedback on the Rik Palieri article.

I have followed your instructions and cleaned up the article accordingly.

What do I need to do next? There was no "resubmit" button this time, I simply saved the edited draft.

By the way, is this the best way to contact you in case I have a question? Pete4W (talk) 23:40, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

11:43:55, 27 May 2015 review of submission by Rama Net Expert


Rama Net Expert (talk) 11:43, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

someone messed up page?

Hello Matthew,

This morning we edited the "Rajacenna" page and I saw someone else had made some editing too according to the wiki policies Now I took a look at it and the whole page seemed messed up and it's missing all his data? Do you know what happened? Cel at DAA (talk) 12:59, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

I don't understand that first the whole article is accepted with good reliable sources and data and now everything has been deleted? Being on National TV and referring to the official website with the official broadcast isn't good reliable data? I don't understand why all data has been deleted? Cel at DAA (talk) 06:56, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello Cel at DAA, your best option is to click the "History" tab at the top of the page, which will show all changes made to the page. The person who's made the major changes is TheRedPenOfDoom, a pretty experienced editor. I would suggest that you contact them on their Talk page to ask what concerns led them to remove the text that they did, and how those can be addressed. Make sure that you WP:Assume good faith, TRPoD is almost certainly doing so because they believe the changes follow Wikipedia policy, not for any bad reason. It is always best in Wikipedia to try to speak to someone directly when there is a disagreement in editing an article. Try that first, and let me know if you are unable to come to agreement with them. MatthewVanitas (talk) 08:48, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
I've left TRPoD a message as well. I think part of the problem was that because of your misformatting (very common for a beginner), when you linked to the names of news-channels with a full "http://nl.wikipedia.org..." link, TRPoD thought you were citing Wikipedia back onto itself, rather than just telling us what the name of the news channel is. Please note, you do not need to include a whole "http://en.wikipedia..." or "http://nl.wikipedia..." link when you're linking to another Wikipedia article. Instead, just type them like this: [[Hyperrealism]] or for a Dutch article [[:nl:Genever]], which will provide the simple links Hyperrealism and nl:Genever. I've asked TRPoD to check back through their edits to make sure they did not mistakenly remove valid sources, which appears to be the case. Please pause for a a moment in your editing to give TRPoD a chance to take a look again, so the two of you together can get the article back on-track. MatthewVanitas (talk) 08:58, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

circle of cricket

i have insert the reference link of my company and about circle of cricket kindly approve — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tsdcorp (talk • contribs) 10:55, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

A cupcake for you!

Thank you for looking and moving forward the new article on Oscar Seagle. I know there is a large backlog of new articles and appreciate you working on the one I created. TeriEmbrey (talk) 14:10, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Hadjigeorgakis Kornesios article

Hi and thank you for accepting my article. I will work on improving it. However, the biography is categorized in 'Living People' where in reality it should be in 'Dead people'- can we change that or is there another reason?Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Perispomeni (talk • contribs) 12:33, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Babozai for deletion

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

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Boleyn (talk) 06:50, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi Mathew, Thanks for helping me with getting my article in accordance with Wiki guidlines. Appreciate if you can take a look at the inline citationes I added per your suggestion for the Omer Dror article. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Omer_Dror 

                                        Best regards,
                                                Miron Mironit9 (talk) 18:11, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Capricorn Marine Turbine

Hi Matthew

Thanks for your review of the wiki entry for the Capricorn Marine Turbine - this is my first wiki entry so your comments were very helpful.

I have made the amendments you suggested and re-submitted the article - hopefully the references etc are now in order. Do you know when you will have the chance to review it for publication ?

Mank thanks GreenWikiGuys — Preceding unsigned comment added by GreenWikiGuys (talk • contribs) 09:03, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello GreenWikiGuys, generally I prefer to let a reviewer with more tech/industry background make the bigger decisions on such drafts, so please just hang tight and wait for such a person to swing in and review the article. MatthewVanitas (talk) 09:05, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Ravi Agrawal

Hello, my friend. Re Draft:Ravi Agrawal. I am not questioning whether or not he's notable, but consider searching the name at Wikipedia. A bit of a history. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 11:34, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

Oh, and when moving a userpage to draft, don't forget to untick "move talk page". :) I'll let you sort it out. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 11:37, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

04 June 2015 review of rejection of Gelatin Shots submission by Lindseymatteo

I am writing here to request a re-review of the Gelatin Shots page. While it is true that there is already a section called Jell-o shots in the Gelatin dessert page, I believe that such a footnote is not deserving of a growing food product that is now seemingly in the mainstream. It stands to reason that it should be able to receive its own page now there is so much more interest in this type of product. Therefore, I request that you allow the creation of such a page; as for the section in Gelatin Desserts, it would be great if we could edit it into a link to the page.

Ovg8 (talk) 21:22, 4 June 2015 (UTC)ovg8

Resubmission

Dear Matthew,

I followed your suggestions and deeply revised the page "Dimitri Roditchev" you rejected. I hope now it is perfectly within the requerements of Wiki. Yours, Mitaij — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mitaij (talk • contribs) 09:17, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

02:07:22, 5 June 2015 review of submission by Morteza Ghassemieh


Morteza Ghassemieh (talk) 02:07, 5 June 2015 (UTC) Morteza Ghassemieh (talk) 02:07, 5 June 2015 (UTC) sorry do I need to open account in Persian Wikipedia to submit my article . if I want to submit in English can you or some one can help for translation.

Hello Morteza Ghassemieh, usually the same Wikipedia account will work for all languages; try going to fa.wikipedia.org and see if your account shows up as logged-in there. So you should be able to submit a draft there the same process as you did here. I think this is a page you can begin the process at fa:ویکی‌پدیا:اولین مقالهٔ شما.
My Persian is not very strong right now, and also I have too many other projects going on, so cannot help with translation.
I do want to emphasize though, it is a bad idea to write your own Wikipedia article about yourself. Here's is the guideline against writing an article about yourself, in Persian: fa:ویکی‌پدیا:خودزندگی‌نامه. So please bear that in mind. MatthewVanitas (talk) 14:55, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Ruth Ruth - Uninvited song

Hi Matthew Thanks for reviewing my entry quickly! I think Uninvited qualifies for a notable song...it was released by my band Ruth Ruth, who has a Wiki page, it charted on Billboard radio charts, the video was played on MTV and MTV Europe in heavy rotation and it was played on radio all over the world. Here's a link to the Billboard charts: http://www.billboard.com/artist/369334/ruth-ruth/chart?mobile_redirection=false I thought that many people searching for the band may remember Uninvited, so I wanted to have the song searchable as well. Please let me know your thoughts. Thanks! Chris — Preceding unsigned comment added by Guylambert (talk • contribs) 15:12, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Morteza Ghassemieh (talk) 17:10, 5 June 2015 (UTC)The article is not about my self article is about a person represent the leaders of the in National Front of Iran (Hassan Ghassemieh).

Category:German colonialism

Category:German colonialism, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Ricky81682 (talk) 22:51, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Question about notablity

Re: User:Omega1308/sandbox

Hello,

you recently rejected an article of mine (totally fine) I am very new and have just glanced over the rules and whatnot.

My question comes into play because this game I am making the article on is so new there are very few other sources I can use. This is why I am making this wiki in the first place. When I personally wanted to learn about this game, I typed in "Anime Arena wiki" which brought up a different group and I realized a wiki didn't exist for this yet as well as no other form of support. I figured there were many more like me who want to know more about the game because it is Japanese with terrible English translations, as well as confusing and ill-explained mechanics.

Long story to say I honestly do not know how to get more notability as outside sources simply doesn't exist yet. The reason I want this published is so the community of people who play the game have a place to come to to help build it up.

Is there anything I can do?

Omega1308 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Omega1308 (talk • contribs) 18:50, 9 June 2015 (UTC)


Hello User:Omega1308/sandbox, the way an encyclopedia works is that it summarizes coverage already existing elsewhere, so often things that are very new do not yet have enough reliable coverage that we can summarize. If outside sources don't exist, then by definition we can't have an article. That does not at all mean that Topic X or Y isn't important, just that we don't have enough sources for it yet.
I do really appreciate your desire to compile useful information about less-known subjects, so I would suggest taking the text/code for your article and submitting it to a more game-specific wiki site elsewhere which has less stringent sourcing standards and accepts WP:Original research. Your work could be very useful there. Also, do note that Wikipedia focuses on the concept and importance of games, not on hints and tips, so take a look at some other famous apps/games to see what kind of coverage we do here.
If this game does happen to get more media coverage in the future, like analysis in the Japanese press, or in news/academic articles about the history of gaming, by all means at that point you could try again to write an article based on those sources. See WP:Notability (video games) for the criteria.
Thanks for your enthusiasm, even if your topic is not yet ready. If you are interested in helping build Wikipedia, and enjoy gaming, I suggest you visit WT:WikiProject Video Games and ask the people there for ideas. There are plenty of influential historical games and game designers that need an article but don't have one yet. I'm not even a serious gamer, but I noticed we lacked an article on Periscope (arcade game), a very early Sega game, so I wrote one to fill that gap, citing books and articles about game and business history. So please don't get discouraged, but submit your FAQ-style draft to a site that can use it, and consider picking a more-documented older game and writing an article about it! MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:57, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

can you treat the alien come from the out space as the human beings?

hi, i'm not the human being, how can you say "It is a biography of a living person ....." really,there is a human being in my article, but that is not his biography!

the man henry only is an example, i just want to prove that it seems some kind of gene like those ergate were spreaded by the aliens in the human beings body!

we can hear from the news report that the most important materials of the human beings always were stolen,like the nuclear materials,but why the human beings just like got the amnesia?

i also surprised on found so many aliens on the earth! at least, human beings should admit their poor, especially on the genomics!— Preceding unsigned comment added by LYUQI (talk • contribs) 10:23, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Bushmaster M17s

If the info currently cited on this site is incorrect we just continue to feed the problem about the history as this is where most people go to try and find out information. The information I cited is direct from the source, you can not get any more accurate than that. It seems that you and I are battling over this and why not go direct to the source and ask him? He will respond to you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kenmcalister (talk • contribs) 14:02, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Ken, as I said before, "just go ask him" is not at all an acceptable reply. We can't have every future reader in perpetuity harassing that guy for info. We have a fundamental policy, WP:Sourcing that explains that facts must have an accessible source. Not personal knowledge, not "ask Bob", not some blog or Twitter.
If there is erroneous information on any page, especially if it is uncited, you're totally free to remove it. But you can't replace it with personal knowledge, because even if it's true it's no more WP:Verifiable than the erroneous information was, and that's a disservice to our readers. Also, you have a lot of tech info that's not useful to a layman and takes up a lot of space; the vast majority of readers don't really need a paragraph about generation differences. What they do need is a basic understanding of the history of the rifle, and its operating system, and any other useful info that fleshes out the big picture. An encyclopedia is not a tech manual or guidebook; that data would be really useful on your gunshop's homepage, but not in an encyclopedia.
I'm going to ask for a neutral party to weigh in from Wikiproject Guns, so we get fresh eyes on it. And I can all but guarantee you that any experience editor is going to tell you that you can't just cite personal knowledge. If you happen to have any books or articles that discuss the M17 and it's history, I'm even willing to do the writing for you if you want to send me scans of those documents (published documents, not letters/archival). Surely some of the major gun publishers must've had something about this gat? But again, uncited information is essentially worthless, so please don't add uncited info, and feel completely free to remove uncited or erroneous info.
I've heard good things about your work, and I'm not denying your personal expertise, I'm just laying out how Wikipedia works, and what you're currently trying to insert doesn't fit that, but I'm happy to work with you to build a strong, informative, clearly cited article. MatthewVanitas (talk) 14:25, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
I've posted a request for fresh eyes at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Firearms#Neutral_eyes_needed_at_Bushmaster_M17S. Per WP custom, I've made no judgments about who's right in the request, just noted there is a dispute and we could use an uninvolved person to weigh in. MatthewVanitas (talk) 14:29, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
This is an editor with a conflict of interest that is edit-warring for self-promtion's sake. If he continues to edit-war, he will end up blocked.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 16:15, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
He is learning how to use talk pages and not being rude. :) I've replied to his email with a few links for guidance and left a welcome on his talk page to help him out. Cheers,
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 18:22, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Liberalvanninparty.png

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Liberalvanninparty.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:26, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

User:Micaeley/sandbox

You reveiwed User:Micaeley/sandbox, and declined it, as is very proper. However you also tagged it as an attack page or an unsourced negative BLP. I doubt that, I strongly suspect that this is the plot of a novel or film or other fictional work. I can't confirm that, but does it look reasonable to you? DES (talk) 18:07, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello DES! Couldn't really be sure, so I erred on the side of caution, since I really don't want kids pulling some "hey Tommy, look what I put about you on Wikipedia for the whole world to see!" bullying. If it's a plotline, the submitter should make that clearer, and the material was unusable in any case. My gut was that it might be an attack page. MatthewVanitas (talk) 23:59, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

User:Resallc/sandbox

Hi Matthew, please let me know if the edited authoritative references are acceptable.

Kind Regards,

Todd — Preceding unsigned comment added by Resallc (talk • contribs) 01:59, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Bureaucratic despotism A10 speedy deleted

Copy of Infrastructural power by an IP avoiding a block - off to bed but can give you more details tomorrow. This involves trying to introduce concepts from the game Europa Universalis to Wikipedia. Doug Weller (talk) 20:52, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Capricorn Marine Turbine

Hi Matthew

Thanks for your further comments regarding our submission relating to the Capricorn Marine Turbine. Is there anything we can do to get it reviewed for publication any sooner ? Being new to Wiki, I still don't know my way around but it was been several weeks now and I wa shopping to have it reviewed. Any comments or advice you have are welcome.

Regards GreenWikiGuys — Preceding unsigned comment added by GreenWikiGuys (talk • contribs) 09:18, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Golden State Mutual Life Insurance Building (1949).

Hi Matthew. Hope you are doing well. You recently reviewed my draft article for the Golden State Mutual Life Insurance Building (1949). I appreciate your comments but I think you missed a critical point. There are *TWO* (2) *SEPARATE* Golden State Mutual Life Insurance Building’s in Los Angeles. The first building was constructed for the company in 1928 - this is the what the existing Wikipedia Article covers and appears to be it sole focus. The second building was constructed in 1949, this is what the new article is about. Both have their own historic designations, history, architects, etc. In light of this, I would think it makes sense to have a separate article for both. Perhaps the first article could be titled "Golden State Mutual Life Insurance Building (1928)" and the second "Golden State Mutual Life Insurance Building (1949)" - I'm not sure what the best convention is. Happy to answer any other questions you may have. Doug D (joeconsumer) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joeconsumer (talk • contribs) 21:52, 17 June 2015 (UTC)


Hi Matthew. Hope you are doing well. I'm not sure if this gets routed back to you or not but I went ahead and resubmitted the article. Again, this is an entirely *different* building than the Golden State Mutual Life Insurance Building the current Wikipedia article is on. Please feel free to reach out to me if you have any questions or additional needs. Doug D (joeconsumer) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joeconsumer (talk • contribs) 14:43, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Puzzle Rings

Hello Matthew, I hope your having a nice day. I notice you declined my submission on Puzzle Rings and was wondering if you could tell me why. This is the first time I have ever submitted anything and appreciate any feedback you could offer me. Do I not create the submission in the Sandbox?

Thank you for your time,

ilovezozo — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ilovezozo (talk • contribs) 17:00, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello Ilovezozo, as posted at the top of your draft, it was declined because we already have an article entitled Puzzle rings. AFC is indeed the place to submit a draft, but it's for drafts of new articles, not to modify or replace existing articles. If you have facts about puzzle rings that the article Puzzle ring is lacking, please add them.
However, note to that the facts you submitted, you provided zero WP:Sourcing for. We can't simply accept things you personally know. Where did you read this explanation of puzzle rings? If you got that information from a reliable book or article, please add the info with a clear footnote to the source where you learned it. See WP:Referencing for beginners for how to make a footnote.
Anything you add to Wikipedia must be clearly sourced so that readers can ascertain its truth. A good place to start looking would be GoogleBooks. And note you can instantly turn any GoogleBooks URL into a full footnote using http://reftag.appspot.com
MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:06, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Article for Tressa Silguero

Hi Matthew, thank you for reviewing my submission. I need help making this article ready to go live on wikipedia. What can I do? Are there others that would be willing to add to it? This is my first article so I don't really know what I'm doing, yet. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! Smartalecpotato (talk) 20:12, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Etienne Boulanger, new article

Hi, in your note to me, you accuse me of citing "the artist's" page. However, Association Etienne Boulanger was formed after his death, in 2009, and is composed of a board that is half family, half not, with an unrelated president. It's purpose is encyclopedic/historic in nature. Are you quite certain it is not an appropriate source?

Like others on your talk page, I am also trying to use this page as a carrot to lure out more info and collaboration, on a subject with barely any existing literature in English. It's surprising to me to learn that this is not an objective of wikipedia. Ees2112 (talk) 03:28, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Mariana Vassileva

Dear MatthewVanitas, I've been working on an article on artist Mariana Vassileva. If you would be so kind to check the links to for instance Artfacts http://www.artfacts.net/en/artist/mariana-vassileva-22291/profile.html you will find that Vassileva is prominent artist. Also links to catalogues with ISBN-numbers are correct and valid.

Best

stressrelief https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:MatthewVanitas&action=edit&section=new# — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stressrelief (talk • contribs) 10:47, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello Stressrelief, I'm leaving some comments at the top of your draft. MatthewVanitas (talk) 10:56, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

08:14:08, 22 June 2015 review of submission by AndreXuereb


Dear Matthew,

I am a physicist working in the nascent field of quantum thermodynamics. Apart from my technical work, I am also responsible for the public outreach campaign of a very large EU-funded project (technically a COST-funded Action) on Quantum Thermodynamics. I would like to add my voice in questioning the judgement that has been handed down on the draft article on quantum thermodynamics. The current article takes a point of view that is very far removed from the work that is being done in the field by physicists around the world. There are hundreds of recent peer-reviewed journal articles that take the point of view of Rkosloff and not the alternative viewpoint that is present in the current article which, as is hinted in the very first line, discusses Quantum Statistical Mechanics, and not Quantum Thermodynamics as the term is understood in the field.

I have no vested interest in this article other than the desire to see our field becoming a more familiar matter amongst undergraduates and even the interested general public. In my considered opinion, and here I represent the 220 scientists who are part of this network, whereas the current Quantum Thermodynamics article does not any justice to the field, the draft by Rkosloff provides a much-needed and very good start for achieving that goal. I very much welcome a discussion on the merits of the article, but amongst physicists and scientists and in the technical literature, the relevance of the subject matter is never questioned.

In summary:

  • The current Quantum Thermodynamics article discusses Quantum Statistical Mechanics, which is not what is understood by Quantum Thermodynamics in the literature
  • There is no Wikipedia article which addresses what is understood by Quantum Thermodynamics
  • The draft by Rkosloff addresses both these needs and is backed by over 220 scientists that form a Europe-wide network

Regards, AndreXuereb (talk) 08:14, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello @AndreXuereb:, this is out of my area of expertise, so I strongly advise you to post this comment, and a request for feedback as to your draft, at WT:WikiProject Physics, to get more advice from people with knowledge in this area. MatthewVanitas (talk) 11:08, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Arturo D. Hernandez

Hello Matthew The material that you refer to as copyrighted has been placed in the Wikipedia Commons so it is available for this article. Please take a look at that page. I cannot give proper citation to the original article at this point because the Wikipedia article has been frozen and I can't amend it. If you will release the draft article, I will put in proper citations and credits. Wisdom of Ages — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wisdom of Ages (talk • contribs) 17:05, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for explaining. The article is back, (so Matthew doesn't have to do anything.) See User talk:Wisdom of Ages. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 11:32, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

12:35:48, 22 June 2015 review of submission by Stressrelief


Stressrelief (talk) 12:35, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for advices, I will go through them and alter the article.

stressreliefStressrelief (talk) 12:35, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Hawaiian shirts

Aloha Matthew,

I just wanted to first and foremost say thank you for your feedback. You have been truly the only editor on Wikipedia with positive feedback and I really appreciate the advice you sent and will most definitely use the advice as well. Again, thank you, wish there were more editors on Wiki like you :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tawnijirvine (talk • contribs) 17:41, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Draft:SportVU

Can you please help me write this article since you were the one to decline it?

thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jhokin (talk • contribs) 20:07, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello @Jhokin:, did you read the comments in the pink box at top of your draft? It's been declined because you've not proven that outside, objective experts have found this site worth discussing and examining. We don't care at all what the site has to say about itself, anyone can claim what they want on their website. What you must show is other, uninvolved experts saying "hey, we here at Sports Magazine Weekly have been looking into this SportVU thing, and we think...".
So news articles, articles in sports magazines, academic papers about stats, etc. which explicitly discuss SportVU and at length. Not blogs, forums, FaceBook, homepages for the company or its fans. Not brief passing mentions, not business directories, etc. You need to show that experts have found this website literally remarkable, that is, worth commenting on, examining, explaining for their audience. If no neutral experts have found this site discussing yet, this means that it's not significant enough yet for Wikipedia to have an article about it. Again, I strongly advise you read WP:Notability (companies) which will answer most of your questions. Hope this helps! MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:42, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:MatthewVanitas/Archive_41&oldid=803571168"