User talk:Melcous

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

Hi Melcous I am responding to your message suggesting that I am what I think is called a "sock puppet." I want to explain my point of view regarding what is happening with the Cogewea Page. I am an American Literature Professor who has studied and taught Cogewea for many years. When I learned that the page had been taken over by an editor who is publishing incorrect and misleading information about this indigenous author, I decided to get involved. I admit I am new to Wikipedia and didn't understand all of the protocols. Yes, I decided to get involved with Wikipedia as an editor becuase of this issue, which is close to my heart, and I notified other scholars who also work on this novel to correct the misleading inormation that is now being posted to the article. I really thought this would be a good deed--getting people who actually know stuff to participate in wikipedia, of which I am an active user and to which I donate money regularly. Now that I understand the protocols more clearly I am taking steps to "confirm my account" by contributing to other articles that touch on topics on which I am knowledgable. I understand that by doing this I will be able to participate in editing the Cogewea page? I would like my account to be in good standing, and not flagged as engaged in something nefarious. Regards Shepherd660506 (talk) 13:42, 30 May 2018 (UTC)shepherd660506.


NPP Backlog Drive Appreciation[edit]

Thank-you-word-cloud.jpg Thank You
Thank you for reviewing articles during the 2018 NPP New Year Backlog Drive. Always more to do, but thanks for participating. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 05:41, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Please note the changes I made to that article were all valid and accurate. The article is full of company names. Please can you revert my changes without the external link if required. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Topfoto (talkcontribs) 13:33, 18 May 2018 (UTC) From above: I have changed the user now. The changes I wrote in the article that you reverted I did not keep. Can you resend it to me so I can redo or do I have to write again from scratch? I was trying to be helpful and constructive but instead it has been a complete mess and complicated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ImagHistrix (talkcontribs) 15:34, 18 May 2018 (UTC)


Hi Melcous, I am employed by the Yale School of Music, which is my soul source of revenue. I have a broad understanding of how Yale University music works and how different singing groups work, which is why I have been updating information on the pages. Nothing I have written has in any way been remotely connected to or geared towards advertising, and I would like to speak with you more about these accusations before you continue to delete portions of articles that are important for the public to know. Nothing is for advertising, publicity, nor promotion, and I'm unsure how you have reached this conclusion. Nothing. Not one word of it. I am a member of the Yale University staff, and keeping these resources up to date for our students. Additionally, I am just keeping this information consistent across pages for different groups, where if one group has a section of information on their page the other groups should also have that type of section for consistency. Thus, I have only edited pre-existing content for clarity and detail, to keep the information of one page on par with the information on other pages. Including citations. Including evidence. I would be happy to further discuss changes with you to ensure that there is no miscommunication and that nothing is seen as promotional. Thank you for understanding.

-Sradgowski 04-22-18 9:28pm

Changes made[edit]

Hi Melcous

Can you help me out on this issue? On how and when this template message should be removed.

Revision as of 08:06, 5 June 2018 (edit) (undo) (thank) Melcous (talk | contribs) (Undid revision 844486027 by Polyduo (talk) issues not resolved) (Tag: Undo)

Best regards, User:Polyduo — Preceding unsigned comment added by Polyduo (talkcontribs) 07:59, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Could you please note or comment of which has an unsourced claims? For us to sourced those claims. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Polyduo (talkcontribs) 09:02, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
Thanks by the way, I'm just starting to learn how Wikipedia works and in need of help to improve our article. Polyduo (talk) 09:25, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
Polyduo can you please explain who you are referring to when you say "our" article; and what you mean? What is your connection to the person the article is about? thank you Melcous (talk) 10:48, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
Hi Melcous, just want to clarify this citation needed tag "Born in Swatow, China, Lam grew up in Hong Kong and went to college in Canada at the age of 16.[citation needed]". What specifically citation is needed on this?Polyduo (talk) 11:18, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
Polyduo can you please answer my questions above first - who is the "our" you are referring to and what is your connection to the subject of the article? Melcous (talk) 11:22, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
Hi Melcous!
By “our”, I meant the article that “we” (you and me) are improving on which is Dr. Lam’s. Apologies for any confusion, English is not my first language. I have no connection to Dr. Lam - I am only familiar with his work and want to contribute to this article.Polyduo (talk) 11:44, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
Polyduo Can you explain then if you have no connection to Dr. Lam how it is that you have uploaded a photo of him with President Bush (signed by Bush) and claimed it to be your own work? Melcous (talk) 11:56, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi Melcous

I have now made those changes. If you could let me know if it's been done correctly that would be brilliant.

It would be great to remove the notification and then I have a few requests to make about changes we'd like to make - as currently Jamie's profile isn't up to date.

Best wishes

BrookyTH - 1,2 18 — Preceding unsigned comment added by BrookyTH (talkcontribs) 12:23, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi BrookyTH, unfortunately you have still not made the correct disclosures as requested on your talk page, and I can't do them for you as you have not provided enough information. The connected contributor template needs to go on the article's talk page (not on yours), and include the name/s of those who have employed or paid you. There is also a problem with your notice on your user page as you repeatedly use the term "we", I assume for your firm. This suggests your account is able to be used by more than one person, which is not allowed per wikipedia's terms of use. Please try again to follow the steps I laid out on your talk page. Thanks, Melcous (talk) 07:48, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

WikiDefender Barnstar Hires.png The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
Patronising message follows  :) Your work is good, keep it up! >SerialNumber54129...speculates 08:11, 2 February 2018 (UTC)


Hi Melcous

Once again sorry - hopefully we are getting there now.

I've made those changes again using the standard template. I've also removed the "we" reference from our user page. If - in the future - we are asked to update client wikipedia pages I will update my user page. I will also request these changes are made rather than doing myself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BrookyTH (talkcontribs) 10:50, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

BrookyTH Getting there, but still not quite, so I have gone ahead and made the disclosure for you on the article talk page to hopefully demonstrate to you what this should look like. Again, if you can use the template requested on your user page, rather than simply copying the content, that would be good. If you do not know how to do this, let me know and I can do it for you, but generally editors don't edit other people's user pages so I will only do so if you specifically ask. Thanks Melcous (talk) 11:47, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
I've also noted in my edit summary on that article, that the issues with undisclosed paid editing go back prior to you with a number of other editors, and the article does not seem to have been substantially checked since then, so I have left a Conflict of interest notice in place - I will endeavour to check through it in the next few days if no one else does, or if you have specific suggestions you can request them on the talk page. Melcous (talk) 11:49, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Psalms edits reversed[edit]


Regarding the edits I made to Psalms, which are marked as follows in the Edit History:

03:56, 5 February 2018‎ (talk)‎ . . (70,425 bytes) (+663)‎ . . (Because the moderators have (wisely) made it clear that discussion for or against authentic Davidic authorship belongs in the body and not in the header, I have moved said references to Structure, subsection 1.2. Also added citations/removed errors in 1.2)

These revisions were subsequently reversed.... I spent around 2-3 hours citing sources, correcting errors, adding information to create a more complete picture, and organizing parts of the page. My changes included:

(1) Addition of a contrary scholarly viewpoint with respect to the authenticity of Davidic authorship, backed by 4 scholarly sources (all with quotations). I don't understand why this would be insufficient, but the viewpoint citing one scholarly source with no quotations arguing against authentic Davidic authorship would be sufficient.

(2) I removed, in section 1.2, the words "and Psalm 110 to Melchizedek" from the phrase "The Talmud also states in Sanhedrin 38b that Psalm 139 belongs to Adam and Psalm 110 to Melchizedek." This is because the Sanhedrin 38b does not state Psalm 110 belongs to Melchizedek; this is plainly an error. See link to text:

(3) I added citation links to the Talmud texts cited in 1.2 so visitors could read for themselves and prevent making the mistake in (2) above.

(4) Improved organization and coherence slightly.

I would very much like to help with this article, but I don't know why my edits were summarily dismissed in totality. I know that you can understand why it would be frustrating to have 2-3 hours of good faith effort get erased with no explanation. With that said, I'm sure you are very busy with your work here and meant no harm. If you could fill me in on how to proceed, I would greatly appreciate your time and attention. Thanks!

Warm Regards, CB — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:24, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Delayed signature (my apologies): (talk) 11:42, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi CB, thanks for your message and sorry for the delay in replying. I'm sorry that you feel that your efforts were dismissed, please do note that the content you added has not been erased, but is preserved in the article's edit history and thus can be seen and discussed by other editors. However, as you may have realised, your edits have coincided with some other edits that continue to be debated on this article.
With regards to the main point about David authorship, this has previously been discussed many times and the current wording reached by consensus. It is not one scholarly source arguing against David authorship, but rather the citation given is for one reliable source which summarises the positions of a number of scholars and reaches the conclusion as stated in the article that "David authorship is not universally accepted by modern scholars." This means obviously that it is accepted by some scholars, but not by all (and I would say not by most) scholars. So there is no need to present a 'counter' argument as the fact that there is more than one view is covered by this conclusion.
With regards to your edit about the Talmud, you are correct that this is not cited and that the information seems to be incorrect - I think if you want to correct that that would be good. (And as a note, making smaller edits, one key idea at a time is generally a better way to edit wikipedia articles so that things like this don't get tied together and can be assessed individually). Cheers, Melcous (talk) 12:07, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Courtesy notice re FRINGE[edit]

please see Wikipedia:Fringe theories/Noticeboard (Psalms). Pi314m (talk) 10:55, 6 February 2018 (UTC)


Would anyone care to clarify the above cryptic message? (talk) 11:41, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Changes Made[edit]

Hi Melcous,

In response to your message on my talk page, I have added a disclaimer to my user page stating my employment. Is this suitable?


AshleighT at the RSE (talk) 10:18, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter[edit]

Hello Melcous, thank you for your efforts in reviewing new pages!
Wikipedia New page reviewer.svg
The NPP backlog at the end of the drive with the number of unreviewed articles by creation date. Red is older than 90 days, orange is between 90 and 30 days old, and green is younger than 30 days.

Backlog update:

  • The new page backlog is currently at 3819 unreviewed articles, with a further 6660 unreviewed redirects.
  • We are very close to eliminating the backlog completely; please help by reviewing a few extra articles each day!

New Year Backlog Drive results:

  • We made massive progress during the recent four weeks of the NPP Backlog Drive, during which the backlog reduced by nearly six thousand articles and the length of the backlog by almost 3 months!

General project update:

  • ACTRIAL will end it's initial phase on the 14th of March. Our goal is to reduce the backlog significantly below the 90 day index point by the 14th of March. Please consider helping with this goal by reviewing a few additional pages a day.
  • Reviewing redirects is an important and necessary part of New Page Patrol. Please read the guideline on appropriate redirects for advice on reviewing redirects. Inappropriate redirects can be re-targeted or nominated for deletion at RfD.

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. 20:32, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Updates and changes[edit]

Hi Melcous

Thank you for the amendment.

I'd like to update Jamie's page, but as requested I won't do this directly myself.

Would it be possible to make the following changes and updates?

Thank you BrookyTH

Change 1: Introduction

Please could we change the current line "he is the 2012" to

"He was the founder of JBW Group (a debt collection firm) in 2004 and then Hito (A FinTech company) which he founded in 2016. He sold both businesses for over £40 million and now operates a private equity fund, He is married with two children and lives in London.  

Change 2: Charities

Could we add a section called "Charities" with the following copy

"In 2017 the Jamie Waller foundation was set-up and is currently supporting a number of causes including The Princes Trust, Enterprise Scheme where Waller is Patron of the Trust and The Imps Motorcycle Display Team where Waller was once a member."

Change 3: Businesses

Could we add the following line to the end of this paragraph:

"Waller then went onto work in the debt recovery industry as an enforcement agent where in his early career he was held hostage at gun point."

Change 4: JBW Group

Please could we update this section to:

"Waller founded JBW Group in 2004 and sold the business to the Japanese outsourcing firm, OSI in 2016. He remained in the business for one year as Chairman until selling his remaining shares in 2017"

Change 5: Hito Limited

Could we change the Case Dynamics Limited section to be titled "Hito Limited" (the new name) and update as follows:

"Hito Limited (previously called Case Dynamics Limited) was launched in 2016. Waller sold the business just six months after product launch for a reported £9m."

Change 6: Firestarters

Could we add a new section called "Firestarters" please, with the following copy:

"Waller launched Firestarters a private equity vehicle in 2017. The business invests in a variety of businesses from consultancy services to car sales."

Change 7: Media Section

Could we add the following line to the end of the section:

"He is also a frequent contributor to UK news and radio where he specialises in entrepreneurship and personal finance.[18] Waller is the author of the business book; Unsexy Business." — Preceding unsigned comment added by BrookyTH (talkcontribs) 08:26, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi BrookyTH, these requests should be made on the article's talk page (Talk:Jamie Waller (entrepreneur)) rather than here, and the easiest way is to use the Template:Request edit at the beginning of your post. So you can copy and paste what you have written here there. However, you will also need to supply reliable, independent sources that confirm each additional piece of information that you are suggesting be added. Thanks, Melcous (talk) 12:28, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Christopher Altman[edit]

Hi there, when you have a moment would you mind taking a look at your recent edits to Christopher Altman? I think this edit is the one which caused a ref error and some missing context from that paragraph. I'd patch it up myself but don't know exactly what should stay/go. Thanks! Jessicapierce (talk) 02:01, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

That reference error was tided up by Scope creep and I've now removed another cite error which was a second link to source removed as not a WP:RS. Cheers, Melcous (talk) 12:19, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
Thank you! Jessicapierce (talk) 18:09, 20 February 2018 (UTC)


Barnstar of Diligence.png The Barnstar of Diligence
Thank you for your willingness to assist in thankless tasks, often without being asked. Best wishes and cheers, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 22:49, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
Ah, thank you - and right back at you :) Melcous (talk) 23:45, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

You deleted my text in one article.[edit]


On 2 of February you deleted my text in "List of people by number of countries visited". Why? Utuzutuz (talk) 12:15, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Utuzutuz, as explained in my edit summaries, the text has been deleted because it requires a reliable, independent source, whereas the source you have used is user-generated content which is not acceptable. Thank you, Melcous (talk) 20:57, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

We consider that references to sources of (see the reference [7] "Best Travelled People - Best Travel Forum" in this article), (see which we used, are very authoritative. These are the websites of clubs in which thousands of people consist. There are more than one hundred thousands of references to the websites of these clubs at the Internet. Unless it isn't confirmation of their authoritativeness? Utuzutuz (talk) 09:53, 7 March 2018 (UTC)


Hi Melcuous,

Thank you for your message. We are a book club and make edits to several articles about authors. We had made all edits to various articles without logging in. However, one of the articles was heavily targeted and then the Wikipedia community of editors decided that the targeting was wrong and decided on 'keep' for the article. We were advised to start editing from a logged in account for that article. Hence we did so. That is why you see only one article edited by us although we edit many because we were asked for logging in to make edits to that specific one on Sangeet paul choudary.

If you note our changes to the article, they are merely attempts to restore the information that had been removed by the targeting party. Please look at the TALK page of that article and you will note that the editors decided the targeting was wrong and asked us to restore the information. Apart from this, we have not made any subsequent edits. Note:

We have no relationship with the author except that we read his books and his blog and follow his work, and hopefully that would mean no conflict of interest. Please let us know.

Sgbookclub thank you for explaining who you are and yes, that does resolve the question of conflict of interest. However, wikipedia accounts are only allowed to be used by an individual person, not by a group. Each individual person who wants to edit wikipedia should create their own account, and this account should only be used by one person from now on. You should also read the guidelines on articles being written neutrally and not promotionally, and using reliable, independent, secondary sources to verify the content. Finally, when you leave a message on a talk page as you have done here, please "sign" your posts by including four tildes (~ this symbol) at the end. Thank you, Melcous (talk) 03:11, 3 March 2018 (UTC)


Yes, the account is used by only one person and that has been the case earlier as well. Could you please advise if some sources are not reliable, secondary sources on the page and which ones those are? I will try to find alternate sources if some sources are questionable. Sgbookclub (talk) 13:59, 3 March 2018 (UTC)Sgbookclub


Hello Melcuous, Yesterday I submitted an edit to update the image on Josh Waitzkin's page. I saw the change in the preview edit and then published. I have not gotten an any alert or response. Is there a time frame I should wait due to time differences to see if the edit was accepted/rejected before I ask? Thank you in advance for your help. Opala22 (talk) 10:59, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

Opala22 the edit request you made yesterday was incorrectly placed on the article itself rather than on its talk page, which is why it was reverted. The edit request you have made today is in the correct place, however there are still some problems with it. 1. You have not formatted the request properly - the words edit request need to be surrounded by a double set of 'curly brackets' or braces, whereas you have one set of curly brackets and one set of parenthesis markers. This means the template will not work correctly. 2. You have not explained the edit you are suggesting. For example, you could write, "Please replace the current image with this image" and then insert a link to an image file. I'm not sure what image you are trying to link to either, as there is no link to a file uploaded to wikipedia, and the website you have in the footnote is not to a page that has a relevant image. Melcous (talk) 12:17, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

Merz Akademie[edit]

Hi Melcous! You have recently reverted an edit by another user who changed the spelling of two words from BE to AE. However, the entire article uses AE spelling, those were the only two words in BE. While I believe that changes between BE and AE are arbitrary (articles about North American topics should be AE, British or European topics should be BE IMO), articles should be inherently consistent in their spelling. I have taken the opportunity to change the entire article to BE spelling following your initiative. Maybe you can cross-check I did not miss anything. Cheers. pseudonym Jake Brockman talk 07:05, 3 March 2018 (UTC)



apologies if my added link to the Brian Stableford external links was out with policy. However the link, whilst to a page I own, was not added to garner google hits as inferred in the deletion message but simply because I had interviewed Brian and was linking to that interview - having noticed several other links to interviews with him in the external links section. Again I apologise as I rarely edit Wikipedia and felt that the page linked to was in the same vein as other links accepted and that the interview might prove interesting to readers using the page.


Taliesinttlg (talk) 12:05, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Paola Andrea Muñoz Grandón[edit]

Hello Melcous. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Paola Andrea Muñoz Grandón, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Is a plausible, useful redirect or is not a redirect at all. Thank you. —Kusma (t·c) 16:54, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Paola Andrea Munoz Grandon[edit]

Hello Melcous. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Paola Andrea Munoz Grandon, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: plausible enough (no-diacritics version of full name), use WP:RFD to delete. Thank you. —Kusma (t·c) 16:56, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

The National Memo[edit]

As you wish, but 53.5% of the text is still by a paid editor, by far the majority of added text from any single contributor to the article. Regards. KJP1 (talk) 19:57, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks KJP1 - but the current article is 68 words long and already tagged for notability and third-party sourcing issues, this just felt like overkill to me. Plus as far as I can see, the article was longer than that, including much of the same content, before the paid editor started working on it. I've been one of the first to tag Bbarmadillo's work for COI and promotional issues, but I do see his point that in this case (and some others) the penalties for being a paid editor who seeks to abide by the rules seem to give the message that it would be better to just pretend to be a non-COI editor like many others do :( Melcous (talk) 06:11, 12 March 2018 (UTC)


Thanks tremendously for the help. That would have been my next step. DGG ( talk ) 10:29, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, very nice of you. -- Bbarmadillo (talk) 19:06, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

Chai Sirisute Changels[edit]

First, for the trivial. I corrected a spelling mistake on the word "traveling". You undid that.

Second, I am attempting to correct the historical record on a matter which emanated from my own pen. The links cited by wikipedia on Chai Sirisute were based upon journalism which I wrote and published in 1988 and revised in 1994, 1997 and again in 2002. Other citations mentioned on this page have either cited my work, or as is common on the Internet, just plagiarized it. This includes the links cited on the wikipedia page in question:

Sirisute,Surachai.(1987). Muay Thai Kickboxing, Unique Publications. ISBN 978-0-317-54356-8 Profile of Ajarn Chai Sirisute Archived September 20, 2010, at the Wayback Machine. Interview With Dan Inosanto Archived September 29, 2010, at the Wayback Machine.

I will republish the original articles shortly on and hopefully the matter can be put to rest.

The specific language I want removed has to do with Chai Sirisute teaching the Hell's Angels. I wrote that when I was barely 20 years old and my friend and teacher Chai Sirisute was in his early 30s. At the time I was trying to capture his mischievous sense of humor and found that anecdote laughable. I had little understanding of the brutal nature of gangs, and neither did Chai. He was a young man from a wealthy Thai family who had just arrived in this country and had no idea of who he was talking to or what crimes they were responsible for.

At this point, my perspective as well as that of Chai Sirisute, are much different. Ajarn Chai's health is failing due to repeated exposure to repetitive stress injuries associated with holding pads. He is thinking of his legacy and He does not want to be known for one naive mistake made in his youth. This language should be removed.

Terrence P. Tippie Board of Directors,

 World Thai Boxing Association

P.S.: Regarding your removal of links of notable students such as Greg Nelson, et al. I will update the language to include appropriate links. Please understand that these are people I've known on a first name basis for more than 40 years. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ttippie (talkcontribs) 15:44, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

Death of Philip J. Davis[edit]

The homepage of Davis' division at Brown has a one-sentence post announcing the professor's death. Would that be appropriate as a source?

Ben E. Whitney 14:34, 14 March 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ben E. Whitney (talkcontribs)

Ben E. Whitney - yes that is, I have re-stored your edit with the reference added and death date included. Thanks, Melcous (talk) 21:36, 14 March 2018 (UTC)


Hi! Thank you for your guide lines. Most Appreciated.

Markoulw (talk) 19:13, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

No worries Markoulw, you're welcome. Happy editing. Melcous (talk) 21:38, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Could you explain why my page keeps being deleted?[edit]

Could you? I mean... I don't understand why it keeps being deleted, since in my opinion what i do in my user page doesn't matter to other people. If i had vandalized a page but i didn't. I just edited MYuser page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Norby Lala (talkcontribs) 23:03, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

From Opala22 03/15/18

Hi there Melcous,

I'm trying to navigate through editing a bio of someone I work with. You've responded to a few of my blunders as I familiarize myself with this process since I pose a COI.

Usually, after I've requested a change, I receive a message or alert if an editor flags something wrong. I try to read these notes carefully to correct my mistakes.

I tried to make an edit on Josh Waitzkin's page 2 days ago. It is recorded in my activity, and when i checked his page it said there were 2 editing requests in the queue. Today I went on and the notice doesn't exist, the edits haven't been accepted and I have no message explaining how I should correct my ways.

Can you let me know what happened here?

Thank you,

Opala22 (talk) 15:38, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Pete Hawkes again[edit]

Hi Melcous,

I see that you helped to clean up some of the puffery at Pete Hawkes a while back. Well, he keeps on making throwaway usernames to edit the article, so I've reported him on COIN again. If you're interested, feel free to add a comment there. --Slashme (talk) 00:41, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

Your comments on deglobalization[edit]

Thanks! Your critical comments are highly appreciated. This page has for very very long carried the "This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (May 2007)". I would like to clarify what I have done and why. I have provided citations for verification and data (produced a graph) for verification that substantiated what was written by other people before. I cannot imagine that this is controversial. I have also updated the assessments of deglobalization. This is done on the basis of a recent issue of CJRES which containes only peer reviewed material. I am a contributor to that issue but I have not been involved in the design or editorial process anyhow. The fact that peer reviewed material is now available and that data have become available recently triggered my editing and updating. As you will see there are also references to opposing views. I will get rid of all citations that are unnecessary, in particular if this is to my own work (but I cannot help that I am one of the specialists) and keep updating this item in light of new literature. In my view that is good for wikipedia and your continued scrutiny will be appreciated — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peter a.g. van bergeijk (talkcontribs) 09:02, 19 March 2018 (UTC)


I have checked it and he is our mentor. Please check it. Its genuine page and do tell me what is required for it to be confirmed.Civilbeings (talk) 09:04, 19 March 2018 (UTC)Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page).

Civilbeings, it can't be reviewed because it's already been deleted. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:20, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Stephen Mansfield Wiki Page[edit]

Hi, can you help me understand why you reverted my edit, in which I added Mansfield's additional degrees to his page? It seems an all-or-none approach to listing an individual's educational degrees would be appropriate. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BenBuzzPlant (talkcontribs) 18:14, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Only account[edit]

Hi, this is the only account am using and I am a fan of Nischay’s work that’s about it. Not trying to violate terms in any manner. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hema03 (talkcontribs) 11:21, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Sure, and the fact that your sandbox and his contain identical promotional content about him is just purely a coincidence? Nope, not buying it. Melcous (talk) 11:27, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Recent link to George Mylonas's webpage[edit]

I am sorry if I violated some rule by adding a reference to an essay that is all about archaeologist George Mylonas and his career in the U.S.A. and Greece. I am about to write a new one about him and as I checked the Wikipedia entry for him which has not been updated since 2006, I thought that it would be a good idea to add mine. I could add more articles or books that have been written about Mylonas in the past 10 years. (Nvogei (talk) 07:00, 24 March 2018 (UTC))

Nvogei I am assuming you are referring to the edit made by the account Natalia Vogeikoff? If this was made by you there are two problems: 1. You should not be using multiple accounts to edit wikipedia and 2. You should not link to your own work. You may instead suggest the inclusion of the link on the talk page using the Template:Edit request. Thank you, Melcous (talk) 12:21, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the tips![edit]

Jimmy59830 (talk) 11:25, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
Appreciated, for the guidance! BlakeRM (talk) 18:49, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Notice on page[edit]

Hi Melcous, is adding a link to website and logo considered a major contributor to the page I have edited? If so, I shall remove edits. It seems I'm adding a minor part and would incur no COI issues, simply missing items and a few missing words. I'm only somewhat connected as they operate within the Africa region where I am located. - The_International_Institute_for_Justice_and_the_Rule_of_Law

Jimmy59830 (talk) 13:33, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Removing elements of a list[edit]

Hi Melcous. I'm noticing a number of deletions of prominent medicos and eminent jurists ( & perhaps some other old boys) you have made to the page List of Old Boys of St Joseph's College, Hunters Hill. I am assuming you have made these deletions on the basis that the alumni do not have their own WP article, for I note that each old boy you removed did already have an in-line ref confirming his stated achievement. What was your concern ? My understanding is that the page is a list. The list itself is notable. Every element of a list does not need to have its own Wiki article in order to make a list. I'm keen to understand your basis for the deletions and to discuss the position you are taking. -Sticks66 12:57, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

Here for instance is a List of Australian national representative rugby league footballers. There are over 750 players on the list. More than 100 of them do not have a WP article. Whilst they have been red-linked, suggesting that someone in the WP:RL project may intend to write an article one day, there is no article now. I wouldn't have thought they should be deleted from the list though. Here for instance is a List of Game of Thrones characters. In many cases neither the character nor the actor playing that character have a linked WP article (nor I note, any in-line refs). Should we delete them from the list ? Keen to understand your reasoning regarding the deletion of the listed Old Boys -Sticks66 13:23, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
Hi Sticks66, thanks for your message. This is a very different kind of list to the Game of Thrones characters one for example. If it were simply a list of people who attended the school, then every single person who has over the years could be included, but that would make the list essentially meaningless and certainly non-encyclopaedic. So it is a list of notable people who have attended the school, much like List of Harvard University people for example. So it might be worth stating up front in the article that it is for notable people. The relevant criteria are outlined at WP:LISTCRITERIA, and while as it says there it is possible for people without an article to be included in such a list, their notability must be established, which is most easily and usually done by virtue of having an article. Cheers, Melcous (talk) 13:05, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
Hi Melcous thankyou for responding. I take your point re the GoT list which is in truth not a list of people. I'm familiar with WP:LISTCRITERIA and also WP:LISTBIO which as you say, call for verifiable notability and indeed this is most simply done via a link to the existing WP article. But there are other methods for citing notability for an entry within a list (and having it be evident & verifiable). Before considering this question though, could I just clarify then the reason for your deletions of 18 March 18 of the jurists Sir William Prentice; Justices McInerney, Freeman & Coorey; QCs Miller & Cummins and the medicos Minogue, Shanahan, Frater, Fazio, Clarke, Bookali & Hughes is that they do not each have a WP article ? -Sticks66 01:16, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
Yes, that was my reason. As per the edit summary, which I know references an essay not a guideline, if they are notable why not write the article first and then add them to the list of which school they went to? What purpose does it really serve having them on the list? Also, note that an article like List of Australia national rugby league team players is a list of people who would be notable by virtue of being on that list, whereas attending a particular school is never what is going to make someone notable, so I would always argue for writing the article about the thing that makes a person notable before adding them to lists of things like where they were born, went to school etc. Pinging WilliamJE who also removed names from the list under discussion for the same reason. Cheers, Melcous (talk) 04:48, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
What then shall we do with all the red-linked entries on List of Old Girls of PLC Sydney. Will you be deleting them ? Regards -Sticks66 05:32, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
Awful lot of red-links on this one too St Catherine's School, Toorak.Sticks66 01:18, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

New Page Review Newsletter No.10[edit]

Hello Melcous, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!


  • ACTRIAL's six month experiment restricting new page creation to (auto)confirmed users ended on 14 March. As expected, a greatly increased number of unsuitable articles and candidates for deletion are showing up in the feed again, and the backlog has since increased already by ~30%. Please consider reviewing a few extra articles each day.

Paid editing

  • Now that ACTRIAL is inoperative pending discussion, please be sure to look for tell-tale signs of undisclosed paid editing. Contact the creator if appropriate, and submit the issue to WP:COIN if necessary.

Subject-specific notability guidelines

Nominate competent users for Autopatrolled

  • While patrolling articles, if you find an editor that is particularly competent at creating quality new articles, and that user has created more than 25 articles (rather than stubs), consider nominating them for the 'Autopatrolled' user right HERE.


  • The next issue Wikipedia's newspaper The Signpost has now been published after a long delay. There are some articles in it, including ACTRIAL wrap-up that will be of special interest to New Page Reviewers. Don't hesitate to contribute to the comments sections. The Signpost is one of the best ways to stay up date with news and new developments - please consider subscribing to it. All editors of Wikipedia and associated projects are welcome to submit articles on any topic for consideration by the The Signpost's editorial team for the next issue.

To opt-out of future mailings, go here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:06, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

List of English-language book publishing companies[edit]

Dear Melcous, Please check this category: There is some sort of a system error.

At „Hemus (publishing house)“

"(Reverted good faith edits by Cyril S (talk): No such category. (TW))" 

Thank you. Regards, Cyril S Cyril S (talk) 16:05, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi Cyril S, there is no error. That list is an article, you tried to add it as a category which is a completely different thing. Cheers, Melcous (talk) 18:36, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Your citation of WP:WTAF[edit]

Hi Melcous and Happy Easter to you. I've now had time to take a close read of the WP:WTAF essay and I must say, I can't see its relevance to the deletion we were discussing above. The essay is about red-linking. It's unquestionably about red-linking - of entries on lists and how that practice used to helpful to the Project but now perhaps isn't. It's not about anything other than red-linking. None of the entries you deleted from the article were red-linked. So I'm going to assert that in citing this in your edit summary - whether as policy/guidelines/an essay - that your citation is erroneous. Then here we are. I am going to re-instate Sir William Prentice. He's not red-linked. His in-line citation is an on-line reference and is there for you to click on. Click it and then tell me if his notability is not verifiable. Or by all means please point me to which bit of WP:LISTCRITERIA or WP:LISTBIO says that this this chap Prentice has insufficiently verifiable notability that he needs an article before he can be on his school alumni list. Regards -Sticks66 13:13, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

Sticks66 Yep, it's just an essay, but the general principle I would advocate for is that people in lists need to be notable, and the best way of demonstrating notability is to write an article about them first, then add them to lists like which school they went to. Personally, I'm not sure what purpose it serves to have them on such a list otherwise. But I'm not planning to argue or edit war over it. If you think notability is sufficiently demonstrated in that particular case, great, have you thought about writing an article about Prentice then? Cheers, Melcous (talk) 04:42, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
Yes and I shall. Rgds -Sticks66 11:35, 4 April 2018 (UTC)


Perhaps you should delete the Stephen Daldry page since you tagged it as insufficiently sourced. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 02:25, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

The purpose of maintenance templates is to point out areas needing improvement and hopefully encourage and attract editors to work on doing so. Cheers, Melcous (talk) 04:39, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Lauren Hoffman Edits[edit]

Melcous, you left me message saying that my edits were poorly sourced. I mean no disrespect but they are not poorly sourced. You put “citation needed” were I already had citation or rolled back changes. I mean no disrespect but if you took the time to read all of those reference and actually study the artist like I have you would not have done all that. I can agree about the whole promotional bit. I didn’t have the opportunity to fix anything. I see what you mean about the wiki tags. I don’t know how those are getting there. I’m new to Wikipedia, and I’m just trying to my best. Id prefer that you help or teach me - being that you are apparent a teacher/processor, rather than delete work that took me 8 hours on a sleepless night to organize. Where I had reference, it was solid and accurate. I know a lot about this and much more than I even put in the article. So will explain to me what you know that I don’t know, i.e. my sources/ references are appropriate. It seems clear to me that you didn’t take the time to read them before removing them. If you had, you’d not have done all that. I feel belittled more than I do helped. In the future can please leave me a note asking me to correct things with more than just a judgement, and please explain explain why you came to conclusions like my edits being poorly sourced. If you understood this artist, you would have not have said that. May I suggest that you yourself do your own research before criticizing mine. Those references were accurate; if you want me to fix them they should go back we’re they belong. I can fix the promo stuff. If you’d like to go ahead and put in the hard research on this artist and source it better than I did - by all means go ahead but until then I would appreciate if you did not criticize my work. I’ve been very familiar with this artist life and work for years. Now I just want to get it right. I think it’s unfair for somebody that apparently knows nothing about her step in and dismiss my knowledge and hard work. No offense but I feel that’s disrespect to her and to me. No I want to fix the promotional stuff I’ve unintentionally added. Can explain the wiki tags or fix them yourself without taking away from the credit this artist deserves. I know you’re being very particular but to be frank the page looked fine. If you can help me tidy it up I’d appreciate that. I’m the one putting in the time and the care because I appreciate this artist and her work. I see people judging me but not helping, teach or contributing. Do you see how that’s not fair? Again I mean no disrespect, I’d appreciate any help. I’d like to put those references back where they belong and if you go ahead them all and do some thorough research - you see that my work has been accurate. This artist is not a one night study. I’ve worked hard to understand her, life, career and work because I appreciate good artistry. So if you can please explain the wiki tags. The seem to pop as source code but not in the actual article. If you have anymore problems or complaints about my contributions I’d appreciate more explanation and help. Also if you do not agree with a reference - after reading the whole thing, please let me know and explain public ally why. I know this artists work. Can you say the same? Again I mean no disrespect. I believe I’ve a reason to be fristrated and I’d appreciate your understanding, patience and that you yourself do more research before dismissing my sources or references. Do you see the artist complaining about my edits. No. Thanks.


ILLAH.David (talk) 16:25, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Lauren Hoffman Edits[edit]


Hi, I apologize if I seemed rude or too frustrated. That wasn’t my intent. I try to be a level headed, reasonable guy. So, I see where some things with my edits have unnecessary like me making some words bold. I’m not putting direct links to albums, as if to direct people to buy the artist financial. You’ll find that almost every reference you, yourself can find that is associated with this artist will have some sort of link where people can buy material. That’s nearly unavoidable. Her website includes those kinds of links but is also a main reference and source. I’m trying to help contribute that’s all. I’ll take a deeper look, and do my best to farther remove anything that could be too promotional. If you can give me any other advice or help do this right, I’d really appreciate that. I respect this artist, so I want to be careful and accurate. Last night before you messaged me, I tried to remove the wiki tags in the source you mentioned. I’m a computer tech and should be more familiar with such languages like HTML. Could you help explain anything else about these tags. I could do some research on here. I’ve not had the chance to see if you removed them or not. They didn’t seem to appear on the page - only the source coded text. I’ll be more careful. If you have the chance could you read all the references before claiming citation is need. People have given me critizm with little helpful contributing advice. So I’m just asking you to read ALL of the citation pages because it was very accurate from legitimate sources. If I’ve to expound on that by including the typos articles, authors, etc. - I will do so to show my edits are accurate, if need be in the future. For the size of the page I’ve included plenty of reasonable and legitimate source material. I’m sure the artist would agree because she supports the source material herself, as she plays a proactive role in telling her story to the public. She keeps up with her material and even knows HTML herself, did you know that? So if she disagrees with I’m sure she’ll make that clear. ILLAH.David (talk) 17:37, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi ILLAH.David and thanks for your messages. I'm sorry you have felt frustrated. Part of the problem seems to be a misunderstanding of what wikipedia counts as reliable sources - theses should be independent and secondary, so anything directly connected to the person or a blog for example is not acceptable. You can read more here. It is also worth saying that wikipedia articles are not owned by anyone, including the person they are about, this is not the place for her to keep up with material (she can do that on her own website) and in fact she would be strongly discouraged from editing the article due to the conflict of interest policy. I hope that helps explain a bit further. Melcous (talk) 18:00, 10 April 2018 (UTC)


Hello Melcous, Can you remove the maintenance tag you put on this article thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ectech2000 (talkcontribs) 18:28, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Ectech2000 Why bother asking if you are just going to remove it yourself four minutes later? Also please note in the future that new messages should go at the bottom of the talk page. Melcous (talk) 20:04, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for getting back so soon. I can understand the point of me being unable to add new content, which I am happy to abstain from doing because of the conflict of interest. However, the information that you removed from the page had already existed before me, and it is perfectly common among similar pages to have a section listing notable alumni of a group and for what purpose they are notable. Nothing about this is promotional. For example, all of these pages (for similar organizations) list their notable alumni: The_Spizzwinks The_Whiffenpoofs The_Society_of_Orpheus_and_Bacchus The Duke's Men of Yale Mixed_Company_of_Yale

These pages (and many more) have this exact type of information displayed, the exact kind that you removed. If I post this information in the talk section of the page in question, could you please review it and reinsert it? Thank you. Sradgowski (talk) 05:56, 23 April 2018 (UTC)Sradgowski

Unwarranted reversion[edit]

Please refrain from randomly reverting the edits of your fellow regulars as you did here. If you feel the literature I referenced was somehow unreliable, then that can be discussed on the article's talk page. However, the fact of the matter is that my edits added citations where an uncited tag had sat since 2015. Any source short of a fringe theory or hoax article would be an improvement.
Also, the sources cited aren't mine. Please don't accuse other editors of self-promotion unless there's clear evidence of that. MezzoMezzo (talk) 03:42, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

My apologies MezzoMezzo, it seems there was an edit conflict/time issue - I was attempting to revert the edits of the previous editor who was linking to his own theory on "motivationism", I'm not sure what happened there sorry. Cheers, Melcous (talk) 03:45, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
I feel like a bit of an overreacting nitwit now...I'm sorry, too. Good work on remaining vigilant on actual self-promotion. (No hard feelings...?) MezzoMezzo (talk) 03:49, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
Oh, no hard feelings at all MezzoMezzo - there was a time gap of over 10 minutes, so I'm guessing I opened that page to edit and then got distracted or something, and I can totally see how if you thought my edit summary was directed at you it would seem harsh and unfair. All good, keep up the good work. Cheers, Melcous (talk) 03:51, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

A short note...[edit]

Hi Melcous. Just thought I’d point you in the direction of an edit request which has been addressed to you as I think you’ve previously been involved in this article - see Talk:Simon_Greenstone_Panatier_Bartlett#Edit_Request. — JamesR (talk) 06:51, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks JamesR, I had seen it previously when I didn't have time to respond, so thanks for the prompt to do so now. Melcous (talk) 07:11, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Regarding Leslie Jones (conductor)[edit]

Hello Melcous, Thank you for review regarding Leslie Jones (conductor). Footnotes have been added. Orphan status has been fixed. Can you be more specific in what way this article may not be consistent with "Wikipedia's general notability guideline"? Peterappelros (talk) 19:52, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Hello again Melcous, As I have received no further input, nor from you or from anyone else at the article talk page, I'll remove the notability template within the next few days. OK? Peterappelros (talk) 12:08, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
Thanks Peterappelros. I would suggest you read through WP:NM and make sure Jones meets the notability criteria outlined there. You might also see the general notability guideline which basically says there must be significant coverage in independent, secondary sources, which I'm not sure at this stage has been met. Cheers, Melcous (talk) 12:17, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Greg J. Marchand[edit]

Please revert back your undo on my photo. I own the photo, that website and all rights to it until I released them under CC0. You can email us at our website if you need to verify further.ClaraBell89 (talk) 06:44, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

ClaraBell89, As you have been told previously, the release needs to be provided to wikimedia to show that the work is not under copyright, particularly given that is being used on the subject's website. See here for further details. Melcous (talk) 08:18, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Gangal Awan Revision as of 14:02, 3 May 2018[edit]

The village named Gangal is one Village They call themselves Jutt. But All other Villages In Pothohar Plateau Call Them Self Gangal Awan.Like Gangal Village Mujahid Gangal.village Sud Gangal,Village Lama Gangal,Village Mora Gangal,Village Mack and Town Samote all call themselves Gangal Awan

Gangal Awan Is a tribe In Pothohar Plateau not a Village name we can Put next 2 Gangal (Jhelum)(is the home of many Gangal Awan, although they call themselves Jutt] But not in Front of tribe Gangal Awan. Plz Help me 2 fix it Thanks --User talk:Saadat Malik 21:27 5 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi and thanks for your message. Unfortunately it is difficult for me to understand what you are asking for. I have removed some more content from the article because it was unclear and was not verifiable by reference to a reliable source. I have also added a stub tag to the article which perhaps might attract other editors who know something about the topic to help out. The best thing you can do is suggest any changes on the article's talk page but you will need to be a bit clearer in your English to make sure we can understand exactly what you are suggesting. Thank you, Melcous (talk) 23:10, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

Gangal Awan is a Tribe not a village if you think translated from urdu is wrong plz remove the page in English because its given information on English page is about one village not about A tribe and i cant see any reliable sources about the village Gangal And we cant ignore 100 other villages because of one village. its best not wright anything rather than wrong information--User talk:Saadat Malik 15:55 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Dar Al Shifa Hospital Article[edit]

Hi .. I created an article talks about Dar Al Shifa Hospital a very well known hospital in State of Kuwait and it is the oldest private hospital in the country. The hospital's website was added as a link inside the article and the content does not contain any advertisements or promotions. Just the hospital's history and services. This English article is similar to the one that was approved in Arabic. Could you please help me to review it and publish it. If you have any changes on it, please apply it. Thanks Hana S. Zaki (talk) 10:06, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Hana S. Zaki, the problem not so much that it is that it is unsourced, but it's promotional, some of it is copied from another website, and you have a WP:Conflict of Interest. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:32, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Bach House (Eisenach) Article[edit]

Greetings, Melcous! You just flagged my update (translation) of Bach House (Eisenach), both with a COI and an advert flag.

I feel the advert flag is misplaced. Just describing what a 110 years old publicly funded museum currently exhibits is not an advert. Lots of people are interested in Bach and in the history of the two big Bach museums in Leipzig and Eisenach, and the page is telling them that for our institution in a detail that can not easily be found elsewhere, certainly not on any webpage. Such detail obviously may make people curious to visit the museum themselves but that can't be helped. Otherwise, the new edit certainly had no promotive content, and regarding the old version I believe at least my own edits have been neutral. Please point out what made you flag it as advert.

As for the COI flag, here is what I was told in 2011 when I realized that while the museum had been redesigned in 2007 the old German Wikipedia still presented the old 1973 exhibition (quoted from the discussion on de:Bachhaus Eisenach):

  • Zunächst: Ich bin der derzeitige Leiter der Einrichtung. Überprüft also bitte mit mir, ob mein Änderungsvorschlag so neutral ist, wie er sein soll. (...) Bachhaus.eisenach 12:57, 20. Nov. 2011 (CET) First, I am the present director of the museum. Please check if my proposed changes are as neutral as they ought to be. (...) Bachhaus.eisenach 12:57, 20. Nov. 2011 (CET)
  • Ich finde die neue Version des Artikels sehr gelungen, besonders die Beleg-Situation scheint mir relativ vorbildlich. (...) Da der Artikel gut gegliedert ist, ist die (relative) Länge kein Problem. Man findet sich ja schnell zurecht, wenn man nur etwas Bestimmtes sucht. Trotzdem meinen besten Dank für die Mitarbeit. Meistens höre ich nur die Variante "der Wikipedia-Artikel über unser Haus ist ja so schlecht und so falsch", ohne dass etwas an eigener Initiative gezeigt wird, obwohl niemand über ein Museum und seine Geschichte so gut bescheid weiß, wie einer der Mitarbeiter/Forscher selbst. Natürlich kann man diese Qualität nur schwer erreichen, wenn man Artikel aus leicht verfügbaren Quellen (Reiseführer, Populärliteratur, Websites, Zeitungen etc.) zusammenklauben muss. Grüße --Michael S. °_° 17:45, 25. Nov. 2011 (CET) I find the new version is a tremendous improvement, in particular the citations are quite well done. (...) The article has a transparent structure, so the length is not a problem. When one is looking for a certain fact, it is easy to find. Still, many thanks for the collaboration. Mostly I just hear "the Wikipedia article on our institution is so bad and so wrong" without showing any own initiative, even though nobody else is as well informed about a museum and its history but their staff themselves. This quality is hard to reach by just copying material from easily accessible sources (travel guides, popular literature, web sites, news papers etc). Cheers, --Michael S. °_° 17:45, 25. Nov. 2011 (CET).

After (all) my edits, the article was refereed (by different referees), as is standard for German Wikipedia; most writers can only propose changes here, not put them in effect themselves, it is a good method to keep conflicts o. i. at bay without barring good content.

The German version of the article was confirmed as "good" in 2014 and was Wikipedia article of the day on 21 March 2014.

So I am a bit at loss here as what to do. Refrain from updating the article even thought the exhibition has changed? It can take years until someone else finds the time to work on it, see the time lapse between the complete redesign 2007 and my edit of 2011. In between the article is false. Even roll back the article before a person working at the museum (me) started to edit it? That would be to 2011. Shall we put the translation flag then back up as well? ("you can expand the article by translating...").

Please help me out. I know that there is a potential COI, and have been open about it and tried to keep that in mind in all my edits, so just telling me that would not be helpful. I believe this is in line with the COI guideline which does not completely bar professionals from contributing, but asks them to consider their COI carefully, which is what I have done. Not further caring about what Wikipedia writes (wrongly) about the museum I am helping preserve is an option, and I could then spend my private time on other things, but it may not be a good option. Best wishes, Joerg Bachhaus.eisenach (talk) 14:07, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Hello Bachhaus.eisenach and thanks for your message. The first thing to understand is that the rules here at English wikipedia are different to those at the German counterpart. So, yes, the conflict of interest guidelines are pretty clear and you are requested not to edit the article directly, but instead to use the Template: Request edit on the talk page instead. So thanks for doing that already! I would suggest content like opening times, admission prices, disability access etc is promotional and belongs on the organisation's own website, not here in an encyclopaedia. Content that is written basically like a tour guide through the museum is also in my opinion problematic for both the reason that it reads as promotional as well as the fact that it is largely unsourced and unlikely to be able to be sourced - all content should be verifiable by reference to reliable, independent sources (i.e. not the museum's own website). If you are able to take some time to read and understand the policies and how they are different to what you are used to, and as you have done request edits on the talk page rather than edit the article directly, then I think this should be able to be resolved relatively easily. One final thing that I do not know the answer to is about your username. I assume this is a global account across the different language wikipedias, but the rules here do say that your username cannot be that of an organization, company or group - see WP:USERNAME - so I'm not sure if that could possibly be a problem. Thanks, Melcous (talk) 21:51, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Biblical cosmology[edit]

@Melcous: You want to talk POV, how about the existing POV? It's incredibly biased and even I as an impartial 3rd party to the matter realize that. Also, I did discuss it in the talk page, and you did not. Explain which parts are POV issues. For example when you say that it "reflects internal shifting patterns of belief" you are now introducing a secular POV without backing it up with a Jewish or Christian or even agnostic perspective. FreeThinker2018 (talk) 21:59, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Marcel van Hattem[edit]

Dear Melcous, I've removed the BLP prod you on the above article. The article subject has a pretty decent article on the Brazil Wikipedia, I think, well it it pt domain, I think that is Brazilian. He seems to have 50 references. Some of them are bunkum, but there is decent ones in there. I have put a BLP refs tag on it. scope_creep (talk) 15:19, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

Hughes Communications Page[edit]

Hi, I work for Hughes, a telecommunications company located right outside of DC in Maryland. I wanted to draw attention this this draft that I prepared. Link is below. I had submitted it about a month ago and was hoping for some feedback. We wanted to updated the accuracy of the page to better reflect our corporate history and product offering. Please let me know if I need to make an edits or updates to the copy.

Thank you.

Jschurtz (talk) 18:46, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

Pino Rucher[edit]

Dear Melcous,

I think that the article on Pino Rucher does not contain any wording that promotes the subject in a subjective manner without imparting real information. In truth, it does impart real information. After all, it is now rich in 36 references.

I added three links to regarding three orchestra RAI concerts in which Pino Rucher played (with the presence of Gil Evans, Albert Mangelsdorff, Misha Mengelberg and Enrico Rava).

Besides, the references regarding Pino Rucher (see References) are mainly based on the following publications:

  • Michele Apollonio, Manfredonia: Le intitolazioni a 14 concittadini simbolo: Vie e nuovi nomi nel quartiere «Algesiro-Gozzini», in La Gazzetta del Mezzogiorno (Bari), December 15, 2005, p. 11
  • Maurizio Becker, C'era una volta la RCA, Roma, Coniglio Editore, 2007, [Pino Rucher mentioned among RCA guitarists on p. 299]
  • Maurizio De Tullio, Pino Rucher, in Dizionario Biografico di Capitanata, Foggia, Edizioni Agorà, 2009, pp. 252–3
  • Fernando Fratarcangeli, Pino Rucher, in Raro!. Mensile di collezionismo, cultura musicale e cinema (Roma), XXI (2010), n° 217 (January), pp. 42–45
  • Adriano Mazzoletti, Il jazz in Italia: dallo swing agli anni sessanta, vol. II, Torino, EDT, 2010, [Pino Rucher mentioned on pp. 321, 348, 458]
  • Mariantonietta Di Sabato, Pino Rucher, il musicista manfredoniano che suonò con Luis Bacalov, in (Manfredonia), VIII (2017), n° 23 (December), p. 3

I want to highlight that the above mentioned article published in Raro! is based on Franco De Gemini’s written declaration (needless to recall that De Gemini played the harmonica in Italian westerns and many other soundtracks) and on other documents, among which those released by lyricist Franco Migliacci and jazz guitarist Franco Cerri.

The Municipal Authority of Manfredonia decided to entitle a street to Pino Rucher. A special event to commemorate our guitarist took place in Manfredonia’s central square in 2008; this event saw the participation of Giuseppe Mastroianni (sound technician in many films with soundtracks by Ennio Morricone). Besides, in 2010 the Municipal Authorities of Manfredonia and of San Nicandro Garganico dedicated a special evening to Pino Rucher. In the course of the evening a few famous soundtrack themes were performed by the following artists: Edda Dell'Orso, vocal soloist in such movie soundtracks as The Good, the Bad and the Ugly; Nicola Samale, orchestra conductor and composer, flute soloist in The Good, the Bad and the Ugly.

Yours faithfully, Emilurex (talk) 17:33, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Emilurex thank you for your message. Unfortunately there are still multiple issues with the article. For example, words like "famous", "so successful", "noticeable" and "well-known" are just a few examples of the kind of language that is problematic - not neutral and puffery or 'peacock' terms, and the article remains full of that kind of language. There are also so problems with the excessive lists and certainly not all the references are independent, secondary sources. For just one example, CHITARRISTI ITALIANI, currently footnote 24 and used 4 times within the article is a source based on wikipedia articles, which is not acceptable. There is still plenty of work to be done on this article. Melcous (talk) 22:36, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Dear Melcous,

I made the changes you suggested some time ago.

Kind regards, Emilurex (talk) 17:09, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Dear Melcous,

I have not received any replies yet. I do think that the article on Pino Rucher imparts true and real information.
Consider, for example, Le corde del West, a TV service by Mr. Enzo Del Vecchio:

Extract of the interviews released by some professionals on Pino Rucher and included in the TV service Le corde del West:

Interview of Roberto Pregadio:
“Pino Rucher era un uomo riservatissimo nella vita, bravissimo musicista, bravissimo chitarrista, generista, perché lui amava il jazz e quindi, praticamente, quando capitava di fare delle registrazioni di brani dove c’erano delle improvvisazioni… lui improvvisava benissimo, benissimo, in maniera… proprio era pignolo perché si preparava, aveva già in testa gli accordi, ma era pignolo perché proprio cercava di perfezionare sempre più la sua esecuzione.”

Interview of Adriano Mazzoletti:
“Pino Rucher è stato uno straordinario strumentista, assolutamente, uno dei migliori strumentisti nel campo specifico della chitarra, della chitarra elettrica, che ci sono stati in Italia, nel senso che lui era abilissimo nel riproporre temi, arrangiamenti, assoli desunti dai grandi del jazz. Era famosissimo perché era l’unico in Italia capace di proporre la musica di Barney Kessel, per esempio; Barney Kessel è un chitarrista molto importante americano.”

Interview of Silvano Chimenti:
“Indimenticabile, nove mesi di lavoro insieme accanto nella buca del Teatro Sistina, lavoravamo insieme per la commedia musicale “Alleluja brava gente”, quindi, si suonava insieme, si mangiava il panino insieme, scherzavamo insieme, lui giocava al lotto, mi trascinava con lui a giocare, a venire al lotto…”

Interview of Dario Salvatori:
“Pino Rucher aveva una valenza in più perché era un appassionato, intuì per primo la capacità della chitarra elettrica, la capacità di fraseggio e la capacità di creare qualcosa di diverso, e praticamente iniziò a suonare la chitarra elettrica poco tempo dopo l’invenzione, l’introduzione della chitarra elettrica nel mondo del jazz e della musica leggera.”

Interview of Carla Boni:
“Ho conosciuto Pino con l’orchestra Angelini, dove abbiamo fatto Sanremo, abbiamo fatto il Festival di Venezia, molto importante, dove l’Italia ha vinto per la prima volta, sì, con “Vecchia Europa”.”

Interview of Aura D’Angelo:
“Io so che è stato uno dei più grandi chitarristi che abbiamo avuto alla RAI, poi con lui ho fatto Sanremo, Canzonissima…”

Interview of Giorgio Consolini:
“Ben volentieri, mi lascio prendere per Pino, per Pino, Pino.”

Kind regards, Emilurex (talk) 10:28, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Simon Greenstone[edit]


I’m wondering if you could help me out please.

I’m Mark Annick, the COI editor affiliated with Simon Greenstone. I’m posting this note here as a follow up to one I previously posted to the Simon Greenstone page, which you can find here:

If possible, I’d like to request a couple of things please:

Previous Note – I don’t know if it’s possible to take any action based on the note I’ve mentioned above. If there are any questions or concerns about it, I’d be happy to provide answers.

Name Change – Since I wrote, the firm name has changed to Simon Greenstone Panatier. Would it be possible please to make that change to the Wiki page as well?

Overall – I note that Wikipedia has classified this page as Stub class and indicated it is of low importance. While that may be the case in the Wiki world, it’s also true that for the firm, what appears on this page is quite important.

Given that, and given this page was created by someone who now effectively is banned from offering any content or editing any Wikipedia pages, I’m asking again whether it would be possible to update the RICO portion of this per our request please. If not, I would ask that you consider removing the RICO portion altogether.

Please let me know if I can answer any questions on this. And thank you, in advance, for your attention on this.


MarkAnnick (talk) 20:44, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

You deleted my page[edit]

Hello Melcous, Thanks for reviewing my page. My intention to create wikipedia page is to share the company history of Print-Rite which I admired! But I have no idea why it was deleted by you so soon. Could you restore my draft that I can make it better — Preceding unsigned comment added by ReginXu (talkcontribs) 09:28, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.11 25 May 2018[edit]

Hello Melcous, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!


  • WP:ACREQ has been implemented. The flow at the feed has dropped back to the levels during the trial. However, the backlog is on the rise again so please consider reviewing a few extra articles each day; a backlog approaching 5,000 is still far too high. An effort is also needed to ensure that older unsuitable older pages at the back of the queue do not get automatically indexed for Google.

Deletion tags

  • Do bear in mind that articles in the feed showing the trash can icon may have been tagged by inexperienced or non NPR rights holders. They require your further verification.

Backlog drive:

  • A backlog drive will take place from 10 through 20 June. Check out our talk page at WT:NPR for more details. NOTE: It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing. Despite our goal of reducing the backlog as much as possible, please do not rush while reviewing.


  • There will be a large increase in the number of editathons in June. Please be gentle with new pages that obviously come from good faith participants, especially articles from developing economies and ones about female subjects. Consider using the 'move to draft' tool rather than bluntly tagging articles that may have potential but which cannot yet reside in mainspace.

Paid editing - new policy

  • Now that ACTRIAL is ACREQ, please be sure to look for tell-tale signs of undisclosed paid editing. Contact the creator if appropriate, and submit the issue to WP:COIN if necessary. There is a new global WMF policy that requires paid editors to connect to their adverts.

Subject-specific notability guidelines

  • The box at the right contains each of the subject-specific notability guidelines, please review any that are relevant BEFORE nominating an article for deletion.
  • Reviewers are requested to familiarise themselves with the new version of the notability guidelines for organisations and companies.

Not English

  • A common issue: Pages not in English or poor, unattributed machine translations should not reside in main space even if they are stubs. Please ensure you are familiar with WP:NPPNE. Check in Google for the language and content, tag as required, then move to draft if they do have potential.


  • Development is underway by the WMF on upgrades to the New Pages Feed, in particular ORES features that will help to identify COPYVIOs, and more granular options for selecting articles to review.
  • The next issue of The Signpost has been published. The newspaper is one of the best ways to stay up to date with news and new developments. between our newsletters.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:34, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi melcous, you deleted my edit. Do you know megan davis personally or were involved in the big twitter fight today? you should recuse yourself from editing if you were personally advolved. signed — Preceding unsigned comment added by Valiant Patriot (talkcontribs) 13:19, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

Edits to Cogewea and Request for Advice[edit]

Hello Melcous, thank you for jumping in on Cogewea and un-doing one editor's removal of the templates without due reason. I have reason to believe the changes made to Cogewea by two new accounts, AmlitProf and Shepherd660506 are simply the friends of the page creator TrentProf doing as she has asked. The creator has told me on my user talk page that "scholars" are "keeping a close eye" on the page. I'm new to Wikipedia and unsure of what to do if such vandalism continues. Do you have the time to advise me on what should I do? Thanks in advance.TrentStudent20 (talk) 20:45, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi TrentStudent20, you will have seen that the article has been protected for a time due to what appears to be coordinated editing. I have also left messages on the talk pages of the two new accounts about this. So at this stage there is nothing else to do and hopefully some productive discussion can be had on the talk page. I would advise you to make sure you are familiar with the 3 revert rule as well so that you don't get yourself into any trouble (as far as I can see you have not broken this, but if you had reverted one more time you could have) - this is a 'bright line' rule in that it doesn't matter if you are in the right, you can still be blocked for this. If you have other questions, feel free to ask. Cheers, Melcous (talk) 00:25, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your guidance Melcous, I really appreciate it. I have found that there are many more rules about editing Wikipedia than I was ever aware of and am reading up--it's a good thing. Thanks again! TrentStudent20 (talk) 00:27, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Conflict of Interest Guideline[edit]

Hi Melcous,

Thank you for the update on the conflict of interest Guideline! I understand the situations. I will change the topic. Also, I recommend that during sign up processes and before the invitation to post a new subject, Wikipedia highlight its list:

  • avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, company, organization or competitors;
  • propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
  • disclose your COI when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
  • avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
  • do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.
  • In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).
  • Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Melcous (talk) 08:15, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

In that way, Wikipedia will inform users like me, that are interesting in using the platform for the first time! Because at this moment I feel that I lost my time selecting the incorrect tool to develop my personal project. Also, with the correct information on time, all the research process that I made could be invested in a subject that meets your ethical policies!

You cannot point out an unethical behavior without be sure that your ethical policies were well promoted and understood by your community! I disagree that you point out an unethical behavior after using Wikipedia tools when after the signup process your platform promotes and invites to create and publishes without any warning related to your ethical policies!

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by AndresMPerea (talkcontribs) 21:30, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

AndresMPerea thanks for your message and for taking the time to read and understand the policy. With regards to your feedback on the signup process, please be aware that wikipedia is run by volunteer editors, of whom I am just one of many, so this is not something I have any control over. Melcous (talk) 00:27, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Emil Wolf page[edit]

Hi Melcous, I am contacting you as you removed a reference to Prof. Wolf's death, since no source was given for the information. I did the same thing twice for the same reason. However, I have now found a respectable reference for this from Rochester University [1]. I cannot, however, figure out how to add this to the page, so am passing on the information to you in the hope that you can do so. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:52, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, I have added it to the article. Melcous (talk) 21:21, 4 June 2018 (UTC)


removing a COI Template[edit]

Hi! I have been working on the Leo Burnett Worldwide page to help clean it up. Other people got rid of much of the promotional looking content. What I did was come back in and add a very brief history of the company and expand on the notable clients. Since it looks like you are the one that tagged it, I think the procedure is for you to look at it and if you agree that it now has a neutral point of view because the other stuff is all gone you will remove the tag. if that is not the procedure, please let me know the right procedure or point me to the right link. If you think the page still needs more work, let me know what else you think will help. Thanks so much Not Wilkins (talk) 14:38, 5 June 2018 (UTC)NotWilkins

I am sorry, I forgot to embed a link to the page. I think that is why you didn't respond. Is this better? Not Wilkins (talk) 15:31, 21 June 2018 (UTC)(talk)

Hi Not Wilkins, sorry for not responding, I just missed this in among some other messages. Can you clarify, what is your relationship to the subject of the article (i.e. do you have a conflict of interest)? Thanks, Melcous (talk) 22:22, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for for quick reply. I have no relationship except that as any other person of my era that grew up watching Charlie the Tuna, the Jolly Green Giant and the lonely Maytag repairman on the TV. I don't even buy that brand of tuna or frozen vegetables, but back in the early 80's I did own a Maytag washing machine. No conflict here. Not Wilkins (talk) 14:12, 22 June 2018 (UTC)NotWilkins Not Wilkins (talk)

IBM Champion page[edit]

hi i see that ibm champion names for ICS remains but the names of other technologies were removed. Should the same edit be applied to ALL names/lists on that page ?

Cheers — Preceding unsigned comment added by Josephamrithraj (talkcontribs) 22:35, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Requested article name change[edit]

HI! A COI editor has requested an article name change at Talk:Simon Greenstone Panatier Bartlett. I responded with instructions, but as I have only done a requested move with discussion only one other time, I was wondering if you could take a look and let me know to be sure if my response to them was correct. Specifically, I was unsure whether OTRS can be performed on an entire organization, and if this is not so, I would need to alter my instructions to the COI editor. Thank you in advance for any input you can offer, its much appreciated!  spintendo  02:13, 9 June 2018 (UTC)


Hi Melcous! I see that you have been removing post-noms while citing WP:POSTNOM in your edit summary. You seem to be removing almost all post-noms from article opening sentences. For example, while LRCP and LRCS are academic post-noms and don't belong there, why did you remove OSS from Sybil Lewis? Like wise, you (wrongly in my opinion) removed FRSE and FMedSci from Joanna Wardlaw. I re-added the latter before seeing that you have been doing this in a number of articles. Could you please explain your reasoning behind emoving the likes of FRSE from the opening sentences? Thanks, Gaia Octavia Agrippa Talk 22:01, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi Gaia Octavia Agrippa and thanks for your message. My reading of WP:POSTNOM is that only a national recognition (e.g. OBE) or one specifically closely associated with the person should be included in the lead - academic and society fellowships should be mentioned later in the article. I would agree that I should not have removed the OSS from Sybil Lewis as that is a national recognition, I missed that sorry. But I would still remove things like FRSE as royal societies are more like academic recognitions. (Plus I personally think it just clutters up the lead to have the kinds of long lists of post nominals that some editors have been adding, and while WP:POSTNOM doesn't define a 'large number' I have seen articles with ridiculously long lists including things like PhD, MD, BSc etc al). Cheers, Melcous (talk) 00:11, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
Your reading of WP:POSTNOM would result in a huge number of removals. Learned society fellowships are not academic degrees ("other than those denoting academic degrees"), they are national level honours: while not awarded by countries/the state, they are awarded by "widely recognizable organization[s]". WP:POSTNOM could be made much longer than it currently is, as the current consensus throughout articles is that the post-noms of national level learned societies are included in the opening sentence. For example, the Society of Antiquaries of London is the UK-wide national level society related to history and archaeology, whereas the Royal Society of Edinburgh is the national academy for Scotland. The fellowships of learned societies are not degrees nor membership indications but honours. "PhD, MD, BSc etc" are clearly ruled out, that we can agree on. Thank you for not continuing these removals while we discuss this: although you did revert my re-additions at Joanna Wardlaw citing "Academic post nominals". Gaia Octavia Agrippa Talk 11:43, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
While I am here, on hand. I agree with Gaia Octavia Agrippa. In most cases, regarding these honours, you’re elected to the fellowship. There are not achievable without that process taking place, and because of that, tend to be sought after and considered exceedingly prestigious as a result. And then you have sites like [Munks Roll] that archive their obits, and they always list then, in order. scope_creep (talk) 17:19, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
Just to let you know, User:Melcous, I have gone through your recent edit history and re-added any post-noms that were incorrectly removed. Gaia Octavia Agrippa Talk 23:08, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
No worries. Personally I still think it looks cluttered and would be better explained in the article, but I understand that's not the consensus :) Cheers, Melcous (talk) 23:52, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for understanding. Gaia Octavia Agrippa Talk 18:54, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Dominic Lam (physician)[edit]

Dear Melcous, I had a look at the article last night. I think is notable. I have watched the page, and I will update it with some good quality citations in due course. Another one for the todo list. scope_creep (talk) 17:17, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Scope creep. He may well be notable, the problem I have found when looking at the sources is that most of them trace back to Lam himself, and a number of the claims (most of which I have removed from the article) do not seem to stand up to independent verification - e.g. there is no such thing as a "US Presidential Medal of Merit", while he is mentioned as attending an event there is no evidence provided that he actually won the Asia Society's "Man of the Year", Time Magazine does not seem to have had a list of the 10 most important inventions of the 21st century, etc etc; but all of those claims are for example found on the Monash University bio. Appreciate your work on sorting it out. Cheers, Melcous (talk) 01:15, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
I noticed that. I had a look at the The High Tech Entrepreneur of the Year award is one of these huge number of category awards, which makes it meaningless and non notable. I'll take another look at it proper look at it today.scope_creep (talk) 07:11, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Just dropping by to randomly express gratitude on your works against undisclosed paid editing. Please feel free to ping me whenever something needs to be done; I'd like to do the best I can to save unnecessary time wasted for editors like yourself. Regards, Alex Shih (talk) 17:53, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Alex Shih, I appreciate it and will definitely keep that in mind - its always good to feel like there are others working together. Cheers, Melcous (talk) 01:17, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Improving the Sellma Kasumoviq Wiki Page[edit]

Etrithaxhiu (talk) 12:34, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
Hey Melcous, I have been tracking changes you have been making to the Sellma Kasumoviq page. I thought it'd be nice to discuss here. Although I consider myself a capable writer, I must admit I am a bit of a newbie to Wikipedia (I did attend a WikiAcademy back in 2014 but my knowledge is still limited.)

I removed the "Orphan" tag from the page after adding external links and a "see also" tab to the article which links to related Wikipedia articles - is there anything else I that needs to be done so the page is not considered an "Orphan"?

Please can you elaborate on the tag you added stating the page is written like an advertisement - this was not my intention. I am from Kosovo, which is a fairly new country with a population of about 2 million. There are many Kosovar Albanians doing great work and I believe it is advantageous for the world in general to have a place to find these people - thus the reason I want to write articles such as the one for Sellma Kasumoviq. I want the facts to be out there - that a make up artist from this war-torn country is thriving and working together with globally recognized artists and celebrities. Please help me through this process, and try to be specific about what should be changed and/or removed.

Regarding the "notability" tag - please elaborate and tell me specifically for which reasons Sellma Kasumoviq does not meed the criteria.

Again, thanks for your hard work and dedication to making Wikipedia a credible place for information. I look forward to your comments, and let's improve this article!

Hi Etrithaxhiu and thanks for your message. The orphan tag is about the fact that there are no other articles that link to the page, so it can only be removed if there are other articles where Kasumoviq should legitimately be mentioned and links to this page have been added to them. If there are not obvious places where that would happen, that may be an indication that she does not yet meet wikipedia's notability criteria. In terms of the advertising tag, things like listing the names of celebrities she has worked on, which is basically "name-dropping" gives it a promotional/advertising tone; as is an unsourced comment like "working alone, but growing her business ... she now employs 10..." These are the kinds of things you would expect to read on her own website. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, so what we are looking for is neutrally worded, independently sourced facts and information. Thanks Melcous (talk) 13:13, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Hey Melcous thanks for the feedback! I will be taking your comments into consideration and make changes to the article in the coming days. Let's stay in touch through this talk page, or is it better to make a talk page for the actual article where others can contribute also? Regards Etrithaxhiu (talk) 15:10, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

NPP Backlog Elimination Drive[edit]

Hello Melcous, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

We can see the light at the end of the tunnel: there are currently 2900 unreviewed articles, and 4000 unreviewed redirects.

Announcing the Backlog Elimination Drive!

  • As a final push, we have decided to run a backlog elimination drive from the 20th to the 30th of June.
  • Reviewers who review at least 50 articles or redirects will receive a Special Edition NPP Barnstar: Special Edition New Page Patroller's Barnstar. Those who review 100, 250, 500, or 1000 pages will also receive tiered awards: 100 review coin, 250 review coin, 500 review coin, 1000 review certificate.
  • Please do not be hasty, take your time and fully review each page. It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 06:57, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

I'm wondering if it needs to be reverted to a old and better sourced version, before COI accounts got hold [1]. Minus the large photo, of course. Your thoughts welcome. 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 11:51, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, it's hard to find the non-COI version for all the blatant promotion. I'm wondering about reverting to a short version from before the current COI editor got onto it for now? Melcous (talk) 12:04, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
Yes. And consider this a placemark for a barnstar. 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 12:07, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in study[edit]


I am E. Whittaker, an intern at Wikimedia with the Scoring Team to create a labeled dataset, and potentially a tool, to help editors deal with incivility when they encounter it on talk pages. A full write-up of the study can be found here: m:Research:Civil_Behavior_Interviews. We are currently recruiting editors to be interviewed about their experiences with incivility on talk pages. Would you be interested in being interviewed? I am contacting you because of your involvement in Wikipedia’s Women in Red project. The interviews should take ~1 hour, and will be conducted over BlueJeans (which does allow interviews to be recorded). If, so, please email me at in order to schedule an interview.

Thank you Ewitch51 (talk) 20:23, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Wilson Cleveland article[edit]

Hello! I've just placed a newer version of the Wilson Cleveland article into main-space and wanted to get your input on it, if you have a spare moment to take a look, I'd appreciate it! The biggest change made was that the most-noted entries from the various tables which were in the article were converted into prose, leaving the less notable items in the tables. The two questions I had specifically were (a) whether you think the tables should be removed entirely and (b) the maintenance templates, can you look at one of them and see whether any of the changes I've made have made a difference (the notability template only; the other one speaks to different issues, so I'm not concerned with that one.) In any event, thank you in advance for any input you can offer! Face-smile.svg  spintendo  22:00, 20 June 2018 (UTC)  

Thanks for your work on the article Spintendo. Looking at WP:FILMOGRAPHY I wonder if the tables should be removed, credits that cannot be sourced should be removed, and then the notable roles that are sourced included in prose (as you have done)? I think notability has probably been established. Thanks, Melcous (talk) 22:56, 20 June 2018 (UTC)


Editors Barnstar.png The Editor's Barnstar
As promised. For exceptional discernment on matters of copy editing, especially the removal of inappropriate content. 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 12:08, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
Thank you, gladly received from someone like yourself, who does such a great job in these areas. Melcous (talk) 07:06, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

Edward Hallowell (psychiatrist)[edit]

Looking at the history of Edward Hallowell (psychiatrist), do you think Kevinasp and Adderallhead are the same person? There is certainly an unlikely overlap in the articles they edit. Deli nk (talk) 11:53, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

Deli nk yes I have certainly wondered the same thing ... both seem to edit sporadically but with the same kinds of edits, generally designed to slowly make the article more negative towards the subject. It has been going on for a long time so might be worth a check user request? Melcous (talk) 11:55, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
I'll file an SPI, and see what happens. Deli nk (talk) 11:57, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kevinasp. Deli nk (talk) 12:04, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
Thanks Deli nk - I see the sock has been blocked. Hopefully that also slows the master account down too. Melcous (talk) 03:59, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

Kenneth Tran[edit]

Hey Melcous, you recently added a hoax tag on the article Kenneth Tran, which I was curious about. Tran appears to exist, at least based on the content I've seen. For instance, there's been a lot of articles published by RS about "NCGP", the organization that he apparently founded. Would you be willing to let me know why you believe the article to be a hoax? There have certainly been high-profile hoaxes about individuals who have never existed, though, so for all I know he might not be real, but I'd like confirmation if possible. Notability is another issue altogether, and I have to agree with your use of the notability tag in this case, it's just the hoax tag that I'm unsure about. Thank you very much! Nanophosis (talk) 00:25, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi Nanophosis, thanks for your message. It is not Tran's existence that I would question, but the claims he makes. (The tag refers to 'some or all of its content' - the person can be real but their claims hoaxes). Even the sources cited within the article note that the claims are unlikely to be serious or verifiable. E.g. Forbes says "At this point, the NCGP appears to be nothing more than a bizarre attempt to hoodwink the gaming press." I have just removed the claim to have formed an NGO with the UN which was not verified and again seems doubtful. I think the article should probably be nominated for deletion. Melcous (talk) 03:50, 23 June 2018 (UTC)
Oh alright, thanks for the explanation! I'll put the page on my watchlist in case of a deletion discussion so I can comment. Nanophosis (talk) 21:22, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

Dear Melcous,

Thank you very much for your kind remark. I do not have any experience with Wiki. Thus please forgive me my mistakes. I prepared additional information relater to Helena Rasiowa. As result you suggested me as follows: "Please do not add or change content, as you did at Helena Rasiowa, without citing a reliable source." There are some sources for this information in Polish (in particular I have added this information to Polish version of Wiki. Hopefully now we have aslo a source for this information in English:

A. Jankowski, A. Skowron. Helena Rasiowa (1917-1994). In: A. Garrido, U. Wybraniec-Skardowska (Eds.), Lvov-Warsaw School. Past and Present. Studies in Universal Logic series (ed. Beziau, J.-Y.), Birkhaüser Publishing Ltd. (Springer), Basel (2018), World Scientific, Basel. 2018, pp. 703–709. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-65430-0, ISBN: 978-3-319-65429-4.

Is this citation sufficient to publish my changes? If yes could be so kind and suggest me how to do it?

Best regards, Andrzej Jankowski WarsWiki — Preceding unsigned comment added by WarsWiki (talkcontribs) 14:54, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Jamm Studios[edit]

Hi Melcous, thanks for your review of the page Jamm Studios but understandably I would like to re-edit the page if possible to allow for re-submission to the site. I had no intention of advertising in any way, and simply wish to create a reference for the school in a similar vein to Liverpool Institute for Performing Arts or Royal Northern College of Music Thanks

Christianlylefox (talk) 11:45, 25 June 2018 (UTC)