Wiki mark-up link
Hi! You might find these handy:
Cheers! — | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| — 22:35, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
Other useful links
Links for new editors
If you're leaving a question regarding an article you're attempting to get onto Wikipedia, here are some links you might find helpful:
Hi Onel. I'm sorry that your RfA didn't succeed. I just wanted to say that I stand by what I said in my nomination; you're an incredibly valuable contributor to the encyclopedia, and I hope this experience doesn't put you off. I consider it a shame that you were required to withdraw. Best, Sam Walton (talk) 12:00, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
- No worries. Thanks for your support. Sorry to have caused you and Melanie so much trouble. Onel5969 TT me 12:01, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
- Absolutely no trouble whatsoever :) Sam Walton (talk) 12:13, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
I'd also like to say I'm sorry about the way it went. I still think you would make a fine administrator. --MelanieN (talk) 15:40, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks. And thanks for your support. But the consensus did not agree, and I think I made it abundantly clear how I feel about consensus. Onel5969 TT me 15:46, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
Ditto. That was total bull[****]. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:52, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
- Well, you know what they say IJBall... sometimes **** happens. Regardless, thanks. 18:41, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
I agree. I had hoped the opposers were a spent force and that more supporters with a proper perspective and view of your overall contributions would appear. Perhaps they would have, but RfA can become a crapshoot at the percentage of support you had at the time. So I understand why you might not want to see any more pile-ons and would give it a rest. Please keep you chin up and keep up the good work. I've seen a few good contributors driven off by the experience and would not like to see another. Perhaps if the atmosphere is a little different down the road, another candidacy may succeed if you wish to give it a try. Best wishes. Donner60 (talk) 04:17, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks Donner60 - Going through something like that, with that level of vitriol, does make one consider why they might bother with contributing to such a project. But another run? Not gonna happen. Not a scintilla of interest. Anyway, thanks again. Happy editing. Onel5969 TT me 12:55, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
May I just add: I admire the way you have handled this. I always did think you were a class act and you have confirmed it. --MelanieN (talk) 15:46, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
- I second, third and fourth MelanieN's sentiments. Your value to WikiP cannot be easily measured O and I thank you for all that you have done in the past and will do in the future. Best regards. MarnetteD|Talk 17:30, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks MarnetteD - It's always been a pleasure working with you. And to you MelanieN, again my thanks. Onel5969 TT me 20:51, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
- Sorry to see the RfA didn't work out, but I'd like to echo the voices above—I think you've done lots of great things at AfC and on Wikipedia in general, and that's something you can definitely be proud of. I hope you keep it up! /wiae 🎄 23:48, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks for the kind words, Wiae. While I'm still evaluating, it's looking like I'll be winding down my activity in the project. All the best. Onel5969 TT me 00:03, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
- Remember that the users who considered you experienced and sensible enough to wield some of the most powerful tools on the project outweighed those disagreeing with a few edits you made in the past 3 to 1. If you're still feeling disheartened as a result, then take a short wikibreak. Just go and do something else for a while, and come back in a week or a month with a fresh outlook. There are more important things in life, but you're a valuable contributor to the project, and it would be worse off without you. Sam Walton (talk) 00:41, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
you removed the page on billy ruane..
Why? there were 9 citations.. do you know him or anything about him, or do you just appoint yourself anyonomous god on the internet? why not provide helpful information and help improve the page... — Preceding unsigned comment added by YesI'msure (talk • contribs) 19:27, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
- Please read the guidelines on notability and reliable sourcing. You can find them at: WP:GNG, WP:BIO, and WP:RS. He simply doesn't pass the criteria for notability, and the sources provided did pass the criteria for reliable sourcing. If you want to work on the article, might I suggest you ask an admin to draftify it for you, and then you can perhaps take it through the AfC (articles for creation) process and get help from more experienced editors. Might I also suggest you not take a confrontational tone. Onel5969 TT me 19:33, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
Draft:The Travelling Church
Hello. I just resubmitted Draft:The Travelling Church for WP:AfC review. I think that the WP:NPOV issue that you were concerned about has been adequately addressed. —BarrelProof (talk) 03:05, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
- Hi BarrelProof - I agree that the NPOV issue is gone, although there is still an informal tone to the article (but I wouldn't decline it for that). I'm not going to offer an official review at the moment, because there are still some significant issues with it. First, there are a couple of issues with your reference style. Please take a look at WP:CIT to see how to properly format citations/footnotes. You'll need to convert any raw links (hyperlinks inserted as simple web addresses) into the body of the article, into proper footnotes. Get rid of stuff like "see Marker 25 in situ at", simply create a footnote. Second, any fact which is not sourced should be removed. I didn't check the sources, but at a glance it looks like you included information but didn't source it. Anytime you include a quote, like from Dames of Kentucky, that must be footnoted. A road marker is not really a reliable source. It's sort of like using Find a Grave, also not a reliable source. Third, take a look at MOS:LAYOUT to see how to properly format your article, you need a lead, and then to break it into sections.
- I think this is a great start, and you definitely have an article that will be moved to the mainspace, it just needs some work. Onel5969 TT me 19:54, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you very much for your service to the community by reviewing this draft article (both times) – probably only one of countless many times you have provided such help. I'm not actually the primary author of the article – I was just trying to help clean it up, since I think it is a notable topic and not a bad start on describing it. I don't think I really added anything to the article – just moved things around a bit – except perhaps bringing in a couple of details from other related articles. I agree that the article would still benefit from improvement, and your comments are good, although I think the article is good enough to move it to mainspace and let the improvement take place afterwards. I hope you will not mind if I copy your above comments to the Talk page of the article, so they will be seen by others who may help to improve the article. The primary author seems to have strong opinions about stylistic issues, and especially about citation style, and has already reverted a couple of my attempted improvements in that area. —BarrelProof (talk) 20:34, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
- I have no worries about you putting this on the talk page of the article, and you can add this: reference style is not an issue of opinion. While there are a few different citation styles which are acceptable, the references must conform to one of those styles - this article sorely likes that conformity. You also might point the article creator to WP:OWN - once it gets moved to the mainspace, the community will decide by consensus style issues. Onel5969 TT me 20:53, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you again. (When copying your remarks to the article's Talk page, I took the liberty of correcting "likes" to "lacks" above, as it appeared to be a mere typo.) —BarrelProof (talk) 21:16, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
- Yup, good catch. Happy editing. Onel5969 TT me 21:58, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
||I am sorry for the RfA - as you know, I understand how you must have felt. You made the right decision and if you go for it, you'll surely pass in the second round. I wanted to leave a message earlier but exams have severely limited my time on Wikipedia. Anyway, I hope that you aren't discouraged. Happy New Year and enjoy the cookie :) — Yash talk stalk 18:22, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
- Hi Yash! - Thanks for the words of encouragement. But there will be no second shot. Wasn't really looking to be an admin, but thought I could help out on some of the backlogs. But the treatment I received, especially the mis-categorizations and lack of AGF have really left a sour taste in my mouth for the whole project. But as I said, I'm in the process of evaluating what, if any, participation I'll have in the future. Regardless, have a great year. Onel5969 TT me 19:59, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
- A lot of users have parted ways with the project because of harsh treatment at their respective RfAs. What I believe is that an RfA isn't really a true evaluation of how good of an editor you are and how valuable your contributions have been for the site. In no way does a failed RfA undermine your contributions to Wikipedia, which are undoubtedly pretty noteworthy. There can be no doubt over how important your edits have been to the project and a failed RfA cannot change that. It would be another bad loss to the project if you were to leave. Then again it's your choice but I hope that you stay. Regards, — Yash talk stalk 05:43, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
Creating requested biographies
Hi there. You flagged my short biography of the Chinese astronomer Luoxia Hong for speedy deletion because--at the moment of creation--it consisted only of the subst:bio template. I was actively editing the template, and had a reasonable stub up in its within the hour. Previously, I had started such stubs in my sandbox, and when they were finished I "submit"ted them to an editor. The editors on two of these articles wrote back to say that if the biography had been requested on the community portal, I could just create the article and didn't need to bother getting approval. So that's what i was trying to do here.
In the future, should I create the article in my sandbox, then copy-and-paste the source code into a second tab where I just create the page?
Just trying to add some content without making extra work for you guys. Oceanchaos (talk) 19:31, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
- Hi Oceanchaos - Yup. That's exactly what you should do. Your original post looked like a test, which is why I tagged it. You've done a nice job on the article since. But create it in your sandbox, then create the page with the proper title, and cut and paste. Or you can create a stub, as long as there is some content and valid references. Either way works. Onel5969 TT me 20:02, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
What are your criterias for an article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by UnitedPhilippines (talk • contribs) 07:23, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
- Here are some links to help you:
Request on 12:29:11, 9 January 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Quokka123
Hi Onel5969, thanks for reviewing my article on the software Silverstack. Can you give me any assistance on how to enhance it? Regarding the sales brochure, is it referring to my tone of writing or rather the content? Thanks in advance!
Quokka123 (talk) 12:29, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
- Hi Quokka123 - First, you've done a lot of nice work there. The draft is nicely structured, and the technical stuff (formatting, references, etc) are done well. Now, on to the bad news, virtually everything after History needs to go. The features section is simply a sales brochure, and the versions are just about the same thing. Then in the history section you need to cite any assertions you made. Be careful of the long quote as well. Depending on the length of the article, it can't dwarf the rest of what's there. Especially since the quote isn't about the software itself. The issue with articles like this, outside of promotional material, there's very little to write about them. Take a look at Final Draft (software), one of the premier screenwriting software programs. See how short that article is? You can also use the Final Cut article you wikilink to in your article, although I wouldn't use sections which have tags on them, like the interface section. But see how short the features section is? Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 16:04, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
Now is NOT a Disney Channel Netherlands article anymore.
Every is about Disney Channel Flanders in Disney Channel (Flanders) article. I think time to bring Disney Channel (Netherlands) article back. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 20:45, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello Onel5969, thank you for taking the time to review my article Draft:Rebecca_Ma, could you please provide more detail on the issues of the article or areas where it may not conform with NPOV or tone. Thank you! BarretKPCN (talk) 01:48, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
- Hi BarretKPCN - a couple of comments above this I posted a bunch of links, you can read those to help you. In a nutshell, you've written a promo bio of someone. Some fixes are easy, after the initial mention of the name, always use the surname after that. Then get rid of subjective stuff like "received the initial inspiration ...", as well as promo stuff like "which was featured on a TV interview ...". You also need better references. Facebook is not a valid reference, and the MIT reference is okay to support underlying facts, although the current fact it is supporting is promotional in nature. Of the two Asian links, the first one does not appear to be from a reliable source, I can't evaluate the second one. You should also avoid self-serving quotes by the article's subject about one of their projects. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 16:12, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
I sent you a Signpost-related email. Thanks, Go Phightins! 04:13, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
- Hi Go Phightins! - I'm backing away from the project, so won't be participating. Good luck. Onel5969 TT me 15:57, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
A thank you then, now and for the future
Hello O. I wanted to let you know that your post here has added something to the way I watch films, TV shows and plays. Last Friday is the most recent time I applied it. John Huston's last film The Dead (1987 film) is a Twelfth Night viewing tradition for me. This year I focused on watching the actors who weren't speaking - much easier to do with our day and ages wide screen TVs. There is an interesting mix of those fully engaged and others who are less so. Words can't really express how much I appreciate what I have learned from you but I will close by saying that I have always wanted to have a business card that reads "Professional Member of the Audience" - you have increased my enjoyment of that ability. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 16:11, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks MarnetteD - I had forgotten about that post. But it is so true. It's funny, I was watching a film last night with an actor who I think is very talented, but very hit or miss in his performances, Al Pacino. But last night's film was, imho, his finest performance, and a clinic on the concept of listening on film/stage: Donnie Brasco. And then I started thinking about the finest performances of different actors, and it reminded me of something. Many years ago (in the early 80s) I had the privilege to have dinner with Laurence Olivier. It wasn't just him and I, but he had come to see a play I was in, and took about 10 of the cast out to dinner afterwards. I could relate at least 5 stories from that single dinner, but the one that really stood out was him relating a time from the late 50s or early 60s when he, Gielgud and Guinness were in repertory at the Old Vic. They were taking turns, alternating performing the lead in Hamlet. One night, Gielgud gives the performance of a lifetime. By the end of the second act, every actor who wasn't on stage was watching from the wings, by the end of act 3, all the understudies had come back to watch, and by the end of act 4 even the stage hands were having difficulty remembering to do what they had to do. When the curtain came down there were thunderous applause and several curtain calls, after which Gielgud makes it to the wings and collapses onto several sandbags and starts crying. Guinness and Olivier rush to his side and Alec says, "Johnny, Johnny, what's the matter?" Gielgud just looks up and shakes his head. The two friends looked at one another, and then Olivier said, "John, that was the most amazing performance we've ever seen". Gielgud looks up and says, "I know". To which Olivier responded, "Then whatever are you crying for?" Gielgud looked up one more time and said simply, "Because I don't know what I did."
- There are so many talented actors out there, sadly, very few young ones who understand this concept of listening (and the vast majority of them are English). And there is a difference between simply listening for your cue, and listening and reacting to what your fellow performers are saying, as if its the first time you've ever heard it. Thanks for the kind words. Onel5969 TT me 17:21, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
- That is just marvelous O. I get to imagine two different wonderful evenings! Well three if I include your watching DB. Have you ever seen Isabel Leonard? Now there are lots of wonderful opera singers out there but only a few of them are good actors. IMO IL's acting is every bit as glorious as her singing. The fact that she is stunningly gorgeous makes my crush on her that much more intense :-) I am tempted to pay the extra to get the Met's streaming service just to see her performances again and again. Thanks so very much for sharing these memories. MarnetteD|Talk 19:49, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
- No, I've never had the pleasure. I'm a Neanderthal when it comes to opera and ballet. Although I did go to high school with two kids who both made it to the Met (though neither one is now pursuing an operatic career). My interests rest solely in theater and film these days, although there is a dearth of theater here in the desert. Anyway, good luck on WP in the future. All the best. Onel5969 TT me 20:10, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
- (talk page visitor, invited by MarnetteD). That is the greatest story, O! (About Gielgud and Olivier.) Thanks very much for posting it, and thanks to M for notifying me. Not at all on the same level, but it reminded me of a much later production in their careers: Brideshead Revisited (1981). Olivier seethed the entire time that Gielgud was given the better and much more interesting part of the protagonist Charles's father, while Oliver was cast, against his express request, as Sebastian's father. While I think everyone can agree the correct casting decision was made, Olivier never got over that LOL. I also recall from somewhere (the DVD commentary?), that Olivier was drinking on a rather too regular basis by that time in his life. Between set-ups he would take to his bottle, which he referred to as "Daddy's nom-noms". :) OK, not quite as good a story, but it's always great to hear about the intersection of these two actors. Cheers, Softlavender (talk) 07:04, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
- No worries, Softlavender... thanks for your contributions above and on WP in general. Having worked in the industry for years, I have quite a few of those stories. Regarding O's drinking, during our dinner, which lasted well over 3 hours, I think he was the only one at the table who didn't over-imbibe. And one other quick story about that night... I wasn't the quiet one at the other end of the table, just listening to all these actor types trying to impress Olivier. After about 45 minutes or so, he looks down the table and says, "Young man, you are awfully quiet. Isn't there a question you would like to ask me? Anything? Anything at all?". I had been waiting for just such an opportunity, and shot back in my best New York accent, "Well, I've heard that you can ad-lib (I might have said improvise, honestly I can't remember anymore) in iambic pentameter, is that true?" He smiled, looked at the other guys around the table, and said, "Mind if I order for everyone?" Who was going to say no? Then he called the waiter over and ordered dinner for all of us... in iambic pentameter. Simply amazing. Onel5969 TT me 12:24, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
Viva Hypnosis Help
Thank you very much for letting me know in advance that you are thinking of deleting the Viva Hypnosis page due to 'advertising'. It mentions on your comments to delete the text that says 'proposed deletion' but I can't seem to find any within the edits.
I really need to know what can be done to edit the page to remove 'advertising'. As there are tons and tons of references and citations for 'Viva Hypnosis' and facts of notability, which will still be remaining should this 'advertising' be removed. But I don't know which are the bits that are deemed 'advertising', so don't know which bits to remove in order to keep the article. Please can you help?
Biggest thanks and kindest regards,
(Seachelleangel15 (talk) 20:03, 11 January 2017 (UTC))
Thanks for informing that page doesn't have notability on Edelweiss Group Page. Kindly have a look at Edelweiss Group Page under Subsidiaries section. It is very well mentioned that Edelweiss Broking Limited is a subsidiary and it was launched in 2008. Also, you can view https://www.edelweiss.in/aboutus for reference which I got from google. If you require more citation, kindly let me know.
Thanking you in anticipation. Piyushpanc (talk) 05:34, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
- Hi Piyushpanc - No one is saying the subsidiary doesn't exist, just that it is not notable enough on its own for its own article, and should simply be included on the parent company's page. In addition, as it exists, the article is simply an ad for the subsidiary. Onel5969 TT me 12:26, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
- Hi Onel, Thanks for the information. Can you please help me with the information which makes it an ad for subsidiary, such tahat I can make it more neutral? Edelweiss Broking Limited is an independent entity. Someone should update Edelweiss Group page to make it more prominent. Meanwhile, kindly have a look at any Indian Financial services company page e.g. Zerodha, Motilal Oswal Group, Angel Broking . Compared to them, this article is not even 5%. This article just gives the company information. Please help me. Piyushpanc (talk) 13:12, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
- Hi Piyushpanc - As I said earlier, there are two issues with your article: notability and promotion. First, regarding notability, you need to come up with about 3 in-depth sources from independent reliable sources (usually major magazines, newspapers or books), which talk about the subsidiary. Passing mentions, listings, press releases, interviews don't apply, which is currently all your article has in it. I did a news search and didn't find anything which actually meets the criteria. Most are simply interviews with folks who work their, or are about the company's "picks" (which is usually derived from press releases), etc. If you can find the type of in-depth coverage, please add to the article. Take a look at WP:GNG for general notability guidelines, and WP:CORP for notability about corporations, specifically take a look at WP:CORPDEPTH, which is an extra parameter corps must pass. Your argument regarding other articles is understandable, however it isn't a valid argument. Just because an article exists on Wikipedia does not mean it is necessarily a good model to base a new article on. Wikipedia is monitored by volunteers, so it's not unusual for an inappropriate article to slip through the cracks. See Wikipedia:Other stuff exists. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 15:35, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
Hi User:Onel5969 , greetings. As mentioned by you that notability is missing. Here I am presenting few URLs which you can review for notability. http://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapId=128483696 https://www.bloomberg.com/profiles/companies/0285631D:IN-edelweiss-broking-ltd , http://www.vccircle.com/bizcircle/company/company_details/Edelweiss_Broking_Ltd.--81462 , http://forbesindia.com/article/boardroom/how-edelweiss-built-a-business-for-the-long-run/39907/1 , http://www.sebi.gov.in/sebiweb/home/pmd_mb.jsp?PmdIndxName=Edelweiss&listCode=C ,
Bloomberg is the top website in finance sector. VCC Circle is independent news website. SEBI is the Indian Government Exchange Regulatory Body. Kindly suggest if it is still not sufficient. Thanks for your time and patience. Piyushpanc (talk) 11:27, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
The Wild Eternal, regarding deletion
Thanks Onel5969 for clueing me in to the expectations of a Wikipedia article. I am new to the contributing sphere and am open to assistance in navigating this world.
I reviewed the Article inclusion page at your recommendation so as to understand what I am in violation of. Seemingly the demand is for additional sources and notability, and I recognize that and will work to better source the content. At the same time, I do think that the page will require room to grow.
I think understanding why I added the page might position you better to understand the situation and maybe provide further guidance on what action I should take. I am one of the developers of the title in question, and we are preparing to bring it to launch in the next month. The conditions for gaining exposure in this industry and thereby notability has shifted from traditional press to new media (content creators on Twitch, YouTube, etc.). While attempting to better position ourselves with the YouTube content creators, I came across this article: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/6150676?hl=en-GB, which states that, alongside internal website data, YouTube references Wikipedia articles for managing their internal database. Naturally, this looks to be creating a chicken-or-the-egg situation, where to gain notability we need to work within the system and its expectations, but to do so we need to already be notable. This probably suggests a required greater effort to expand the base article itself, and if you agree then I can put in more time there. Yesterday, I just wanted to get a basic handle on contributing and get the page added. I can certainly add additional content and reference some external sources where we have had coverage.
If you advise anything else I'd love to hear it. I hope I've adequately explained the situation, please let me know if you have any questions that could provide further clarity. Scottgoodrow (talk) 23:26, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
- Hi Scottgoodrow - Just a heads up, on Wikipedia whenever you leave a message, either on an article's talk page or a user's talk page, always "sign" it by placing four tildes (~~~~) at the end. Now on to your question. First, please read WP:COI. Since you are involved with the subject of the article, you really shouldn't write about it. While not prohibited, it is strongly discouraged. If you do write about it, please follow the instructions on how to declare your COI. Second, Wikipedia isn't a place to advertise your product. WP requires that a subject have a degree of notability. Some things have inherent notability, like politicians of a certain level (WP:NPOL), but for the most part, every article's subject should pass Wikipedia's general notability guidelines, which means that they should have at least several references which are in-depth about the subject, and come from independent, reliable sources. Most unreleased things (be it software, some foreign films, books) don't meet the criteria. If you look several comments above this one, I printed a list of links to different Wikipedia pages which might help you. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 22:11, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks for the patience, apologize for continuing to not know the correct protocol. I understand precisely where you're coming from regarding conflict of interest. I'll read the information you've provided. Thanks again. Scottgoodrow (talk) 23:26, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
Request on 20:18:30, 12 January 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by JMonisolaO
I wanted to speak about the Hannah Bayer page. Hannah was a part of TEDMED will that article highlighting her and her company be sufficient enough along with the other sources that we submitted? Or do we still need more sources? If so, do you have any recommendations?
JMonisolaO (talk) 20:18, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
- Hi JMonisolaO - In a word, no. Notability is not inherited. But not to worry, I'm pretty sure she passes the notability criteria. Right now the entire article is unsourced, except for her publications. BLP (bios of living persons) need to have footnotes to cover every fact you assert. Those types of footnotes can be either primary or secondary (in other words, regarding her Ph.D., you could cite her bio at NYU (if there is one) - that's a primary source, but valid for proving the validity of a certain fact, or you could cite a newspaper article about her which states where she got her Ph.D. - that's a secondary source). However, try to find 2-3 solid in-depth articles about her from independent, reliable sources, which will help establish her notability. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 22:19, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
Request on 13:10:40, 13 January 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Ajurisic
Thank you for reviewing my submittion.
Main argument for declination of my Wikipedia article on Jovan Golić: “The submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources.”
Questions: Does this mean that the quoted sources are not reliable or that the given reliable sources are not adequately cited? Which given sources are not reliable and why? What is wrong with the rationale given below? What should be improved?
Rationale: In essence, Jovan Golić is being proposed for inclusion in Wikipedia:
(1) for his world-recognized contributions to cryptography, most notably in the area of widely used stream ciphers, which are covered by several articles in Wikipedia and where he is known as a world leading expert, and
(2) for his prominent role as the Action Line Leader for Privacy, Security & Trust in the European Institute of Innovation and Technology (EIT), where EIT is already covered by an article in Wikipedia. Item (1) is formulated by three statements:
“He introduced many cryptanalytic methods for stream ciphers…”,
“He pioneered cryptanalytic attacks on many widely-used stream ciphers…”, and
“He is known for his work on…”.
The statements are supported by:
(i) wikilinks where his work has been referred to (A5/1, RC4, Bluetooth, MUGI, time-memory tradeoff),
(ii) selected publications of Jovan Golić in reputable international peer-reviewed journals and conference proceedings,
(iii) two independent peer-reviewed publications referring to his work on RC4,
(iv) citation reports by Google Scholar and Semantic Scholar, and
(v) DBLP publications list.
All these sources appear to be independent, objective, verifiable, and hence reliable. More precisely, the used formulations “many cryptanalytic methods” and “pioneering cryptanalytic attacks” are undoubtedly supported by selected peer-reviewed publications in premium-class journals and conference proceedings and citations of these publications. In particular, please note that his prominent publications on stream ciphers A5/1 and RC4 presented at EUROCRYPT 1997 contain first published cryptanalysis of these widely used stream ciphers.
Item (2) is supported by an announcement on the EIT Digital weblink and one external weblink, which are certainly verifiable and thus reliable.
Ajurisic (talk) 13:10, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
- Hi Ajurisic - as I said when I declined the article, "None of the sources are independent of the subject. To show notability, you need several (about 3) references which go in-depth about the subject, which are from reliable independent sources. Also, please see WP:CIT on how to properly format citations." Almost every single source is either by the article's subject, or from an organization he's associated with. The other two are articles about the cypher, not about Golic. Onel5969 TT me 16:00, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
I am confused why you have added deletion tag to this article. Previously it was deleted because the contents were poorly sourced and were not updated. Now I have added credited references and all are from newspapers such as The Express Tribune, The Pakistan Daily, BBC, Gulf News, The News On Sunday and BizAsia etc. Nauriya (Rendezvous) 21:29, January 14, 2017 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Film#"Lists" vs. prose about lists. Pyxis Solitary (talk) 11:40, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
(Notification per WP:CAN.)
Hi there. Very consciencious of you. I meant to bring over a translation of the text from the Spanish version, which, as you can see, is fully referenced. I haven't used this site for about ten years, and am not familiar with the ref system, so gave up. Dave (talk) 02:15, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
- Hi Dave - On English Wiki, blp's (bios of living persons) have some pretty strict standards regarding referencing, particularly when an article which is pretty negative is posted (such as this one). I'll be more than happy to help you with formatting the citations if you need it, but it really needs citations. And in the future, don't hesitate to ask if you need help translating articles to English wiki. Onel5969 TT me 03:57, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
PIDC Revision history ?
Hello, I am note a native English speaker. Could you explain what you meant ? > per WP:DAB, only a single target
Yours sincerely,--Pascal Boulerie (talk) 16:23, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
- Hi Pascal Boulerie, and thanks for contributing on English Wiki. Whenever you see WP:, that means it refers to a policy or a guideline or an essay. It's a way of pointing someone to the appropriate place on Wiki to find out why a change was made. So in this instance, you could type in WP:DAB in the search field, and it would take you Wikipedia:Disambiguation. This is a guideline page, on what is or is not normally considered acceptable. In this instance, dab pages (disambiguation pages) are used when there is more than one already existing wiki pages with similar titles. You created a page with only a single target, so no dab is necessary, a simple redirect will suffice. If an article is at some point created about the other entity, that is the point where a dab will be needed. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 16:33, 19 January 2017 (UTC)