Jump to content

User talk:Samuell1616/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2

Samuell1616, you are invited to the Teahouse

Teahouse logo

Hi Samuell1616! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Benzband (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse
This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 16:08, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Hradyesh (December 13)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Lor was:
This submission's references do not adequately evidence the subject's notability—see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing, so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia.
What you can do: Add citations (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners) to secondary reliable sources that are entirely independent of the subject.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved. LorChat 10:22, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Umesh Upadhyay

FYI, You had previously Proposed that Umesh Upadhyay be deleted. It was deleted and now restored as a contested prod. -- GB fan 12:17, 29 December 2014 (UTC)


Proposed Deletion of Alhassan Andani

Hello Samuell1616, I see that you work actively in BLP and I appreciate your efforts in trying to rid WP of articles that violate BLP policies. I believe you mistakenly tagged Alhassan Andani for deletion and stated that it shouldn't be a featured article even though it was never. I would entreat you to conduct Google search to be certain of the notability of an individual before applying such tags. However you are free to maintain still that the tag is appropriate, in that case we would require the opinion of the community. Best Regards.—Sadat (Masssly)❤Talk☮C☺Email☯ 14:15, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Edits to Vivek Bhaskaran

Hello Samuell1616 The edits done to this article at 13:58, 6 January 2015‎ are stripping off an important part of facts for which the subject in known in the niche of market research software. The facts presented are directly pasted as they have been presented in a known media site Seattle Times. I do not think it violates any of Wikipedia's guidelines on editing. Although further information to add a bigger perspective about the subject are welcome. Can this change be reverted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Unitedopinions (talk • contribs)

@Unitedopinions: Hi , Can you please clarify the content ? what I removed was promotional pitch talking about the ranking and big order details of one of the company associated with the subject. As the article is about the Individual we should provide more relevant information about the subject and its accomplishments. Also there are no reliable source citation in the article about the subject hence tagged the notability concern. One life to live (talk) 16:26, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Chamu Krishna Shastry

You PRODded this, and it was deleted. Undeletion has been requested at WP:REFUND, so per WP:DEL#Proposed deletion I have restored it, and now notify you in case you wish to consider AfD. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 12:43, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

@JohnCD: Thanks for the note, The article is now turned up into a advertisement, copied and indirectly promoting about subject's Sanskrit courses, style etc, tagging G11.One life to live (talk) 18:23, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Request on 08:54:59, 9 February 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Csma03


I am the author of Draft:CITIC Telecom CPC. I have already rewritten this page many times with reliable sources, I really don't know why it is still be treated as advertisement. I just briefly introduce the company with some background info. I would like to know which part(s) contain problem so that I can focus to revise that part(s), many thanks.


Csma03 (talk) 08:54, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

@Csma03: The draft have issue directly with reference to Notability, Lacks reliable reference sources and have promotional content. Currently it just an advertisement talking about the ISO certifications and the offered product / services promoting the company. The references used are annual reports, company registration details etc . First of all establish connect about the notability -why the organisation should be a part of wiki ? and then re-write maintaining Neutral point of view, supported by reliable independent reference sources. Let me know once your done will review it again.One life to live (talk) 06:13, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
@Samuell1616: I have edited the page, many thanks.

Request on 09:57:47, 13 February 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Artisan301


Hey, firstly, thanks for reviewing the article and for editing the article. Is it fit for a resubmitting now? If not, could i get your assistance on edititing it till it is passable?

Thanks

Artisan301 (talk) 09:57, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

@Artisan301: Plz share the article link.One life to live (talk) 11:16, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Lapalux

Hi, I saw your declining the submission of Draft:Lapalux, which I think the subject meets WP:BAND criteria #1. You said: "Improve the article , remove the promotional references, non reliable music reviews etc and add independent references about the subject including the newly launched album."[1] Well, I do not think the references are promotional. Additionally, according to Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Sources, websites such as Beats per Minute, Drowned in Sound, The Fader, and Pitchfork Media can be used as reliable sources. Which ones do you think are "the promotional references" and "non reliable music reviews"? 122.26.219.149 (talk) 14:02, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

The answer lies in your question itself just refer back to WP:BAND and cross check the fourteen references used currently in the article - interview, blog , xlr8r.com note pitching 2014 album launch information, RA news giving details about the US and canada tour date-sheet, fader - interview & tour dates, RA news announcing the new album (promotion). My views remain the same for the current version and leave it for another reviewer take a fresh decision.One life to live (talk) 15:21, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

19:06:21, 13 February 2015 review of submission by MetaGrrrl


Hi! I've added a clearer statement of notability at the beginning of the article—"Google Reader Founder" in Forbes Magazine's words—and an additional citation (Wired) in which he's being consulted by a major publication as an important "ex-Googler". Also added ABC News coverage of Wetherell's app Avocado. As before, the reason for this article is because Wetherell was already mentioned in half a dozen Wikipedia articles but there was no way to tell that the software developer and the musician were actually the same guy. Thanks! MetaGrrrl (talk) 19:06, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

MetaGrrrl Please share link of some of the referred articles, let me have a look if something is missed out. One life to live (talk) 19:16, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
All are in the Draft article now. Specifically added http://www.forbes.com/sites/alexkantrowitz/2013/07/01/google-reader-founder-i-never-would-have-founded-reader-inside-todays-google/ and http://www.wired.com/2013/08/20-percent-time-will-never-die/ (see under "What 20 percent time is not" sub-heading) and http://abcnews.go.com/Lifestyle/apps-couples-hug-kiss-tabs-boo/story?id=20794618 MetaGrrrl (talk) 01:43, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
Ah! Whoops. Just realized you were referring to the Wikipedia articles. One moment. ... MetaGrrrl (talk) 01:44, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
Here are those https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Reader and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dealership_(band) and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_Here_and_Abroad are main ones. He is also mentioned in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TV_Highway_to_the_Stars and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leslie_Harpold and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secret_American_Livingroom MetaGrrrl (talk) 01:49, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

09:09:18, 16 February 2015 review of submission by Remsington


Hey there,

The article I've written has been rejected because the references don't accurately prove the subject's notability. Would you be able to provide me an example? I'm writing this submission for quite a prominent Australian magician, but he's an older gentleman and many of his sources aren't online. I thought I'd given enough to prove his notability, but I'm a novice with Wikipedia, so any help you can give me would be fantastic.

Cheers.

Jeremy


Remsington (talk) 09:09, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

@Remsington: Sure , I advise you to read Notability , WP:RS , NPOV , Biographies of living persons guidelines to start up. Currently the structure needs improvement and self published references like subjects website , youtube references etc should be removed. Please improve it and I will be happy to help anytime. Cheers !!! One life to live (talk) 10:46, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Request on 19:02:05, 16 February 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by LailaArcher


Can you please tell me which of the links I have provided do not meet your criteria so I can remove them and have them replaced?

Thank you so much,

Laila (LailaArcher (talk) 19:02, 16 February 2015 (UTC))


LailaArcher (talk) 19:02, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

@LailaArcher: Please share the article link.One life to live (talk) 19:52, 16 February 2015 (UTC)


Rockman Industries

(Anilmehta9 (talk) 11:21, 4 February 2015 (UTC))

Please see my article Rockman Industries - As suggested by you I have edited the content (removed the promotional content and removed the repetitive references.)

@Anilmehta9: Work a little more to establish clear notability and better it further .One life to live (talk) 14:30, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
@Samuell1616: Please help me to improve the article. I have tried to improve the article (removed the operations section) and also removed the name of Managing Director and Executive Director, which was looked like promotional content as I think. Also, I have edited the old content and added new lines. Anilmehta9 (talk) 11:16, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
@Anilmehta9: Ok , try to resolve the main issues - "Notability" if you think it meet the guidelines; establish connect why the company should be part of wiki and provide information maintaining "Neutral point of view". let me know once your done will discuss further . One life to live (talk) 16:21, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
@Samuell1616:Hi Samuell, I read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability in details. Hope below evidences may helpful. If you search 'rockman industrues' in 'Google News' and 'Google Books' then you can found many evidences. Please see Google Books - https://www.google.com/search?q=rockman+industries&num=100&es_sm=93&biw=1366&bih=593&tbm=bks&source=lnms&sa=X&ei=vV_cVMSsIuXGygOp44HoCA&ved=0CA0Q_AUoAA&dpr=1 and Google News - https://www.google.com/search?q=rockman+industries&num=100&es_sm=93&source=lnms&tbm=nws&sa=X&ei=NGLcVOHUFteQuAST1oDADg&ved=0CAgQ_AUoAQ&biw=1366&bih=593 - Yesterday, I have tried to update the article. Please see once & suggest. Thank You! Anilmehta9 (talk) 08:19, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
@Anilmehta9: Looks like you are in a rush, the draft still have issues and personally don’t find it ready for an independent article when there's already a redirect present for the subject linking to the Herogroup. As you have already re-submitted it, ‘ll leave this for another reviewer to decide .One life to live (talk) 08:25, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
@Samuell1616: Sorry for that I think I need to save the page first. Anilmehta9 (talk) 11:11, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

14:20:35, 17 February 2015 review of submission by Arjanvangeel


Hi there, thank your for reviewing my Wikipedia article about F.O.D. (band).

Since the last review, I've improved upon the article by adding many more (10+) new, objective references from various sources, all discussing and mentioning F.O.D.

I also had a talk with the last reviewer, who stated that it's difficult for an underground punk rock band (like F.O.D.) to comply to the 'notability' guideline, but that my article was 'almost there' in getting published.

The band I'm writing about is currently one of the biggest, most prominent Belgian punk rock bands. They are playing huge festivals like the 25.000 people fesetival called Groezrock (I've added references for that), they being discussed in interviews and video interviews (I've added links too), and touring Europe (added links for that as well).

Can you -please- eleborate on WHAT I have to do to make this article official. I've been working on this for half a year now, and it getting declined all the time is getting frustrating. Especially when there's no comments from the reviewer.

I know that these reviews are there to prevent bogus information to be on Wikipedia, but I've been very serious about this article, and putting a lot of effort in it. And this has been the 4th decline in 6+ months. It's disheartening.

Thanks for your reply. Arjan van Geel (the Netherlands).

Arjanvangeel (talk) 14:20, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

@Arjanvangeel: Hi, don’t get disappointed. I know it feel a bit frustrating but as you correctly said its to ensure the forum credentials too which is an encyclopaedia. What is missing currently is sufficient independent sources establishing notability of the subject . Self published and less reliable references can be referred only once notability is established. I have not disputed the work of the band at the same time we need reliable independent sources which talks about the band and can be verified. Do revisit the Notability and WP:MUSIC guidelines. I am happy to help if you feel stuck. Let me know once you improve the article will discuss further. Cheers !!!One life to live (talk) 14:52, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
@Arjanvangeel: Wait , I just checked in last few minutes you reverted the better referencing version and also resubmitted the article again. Resubmitting the article without improvement makes no sense. Why ask for inputs when you don’t value them ?One life to live (talk) 15:02, 17 February 2015 (UTC)


16:22:35, 17 February 2015 review of submission by Arjanvangeel


@Samuell1616: Hi, I do appreciate your input! Based on your input of notability, I added another independent source, a Belgian newspaper called Gazet van Antwerpen which talks about F.O.D. Also, I'm quite new to Wikipedia, so I didn't understand why all the references were edited by you? My versions were in plain language (describing the link, even stating which language it was in), yours is an automated edit which shows page titles (?) and is a bit incomprehensible to me? Hence the revert. I appreciate your time and feedback. What I still don't understand is why my article is not notable, even though I've mentioned 10+ different independent sources, in various languages? Arjanvangeel (talk) 15:32, 17 February 2015 (UTC)


@Samuell1616: Hi again, I'm beginning to understand the formatting of your EDIT. I used the [...] and yours is using more exact markup, like: { { cite web | url = ....... Again, I'm fairly new to this, so the interface is confusing (even finding out how to talk to you was hard | I hope I'm doing it right, if not let me know!). I won't revert the References, but might clean up some of the titles, if that's okay with you? And state which language the reference is in? Anyways, on the notability ... what I've done so far is: [*] mention various independent reviews; [*] mention sources which reference the band playing various official festivals and shows; [*] mention newspaper entry talking about the new album; [*] mention video interview with the band from a large media company called Large Pop Merchandising. I thought this would be enought to make it notable? Any extra help would be appreciated!! Arjanvangeel (talk) 16:39, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

08:46:45, 16 February 2015 review of submission by Divyaallen


I have made a few edits to the page - Mistral Solutions. Two links which sounded promotional have been removed (Mistral employee authored article and a Press Release). I have also added a few references in the Partners section for companies like Freescale, Altera, ARM, Esterel etc. Let me know if this reads better now.

Divyaallen (talk) 08:46, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

@Divyaallen: Not really , Can you explain why this article is notable enough to be a part of Wiki ? Secondly regarding the Nasscom award I can’t find the details on the cited reference. The very first reference is a self published source i.e company website, another reference from www.Altera.com which is a partner profile and also a Youtube reference which again is a company youtube channel. Happy to help once you correct all these issues. One life to live (talk) 10:29, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
@Samuell1616:Hi, Thank you for your help. I have corrected the Nasscom award related links (redirected to the actual Nasscom website). I have also removed the company website link and the Altera.com partner profile reference. The Youtube reference you mentioned is from the company's youtube channel, but I think it is still relevant as the video is an excerpt of the FedEX business award program recording that was aired on a reputed Indian news channel (ET Now) and is not a direct property of the company. Is it still a problem? Do let me know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Divyaallen (talk • contribs) 10:07, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
@Divyaallen: Remove the community arm and business wire reference one is a partner profile and other is a press release. recheck the entire article and ensure the structure maintains Neutral point of view. One life to live (talk) 11:42, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Contested deletion

This article should not be speedy deleted as lacking sufficient context to identify its subject, because... it is the main disambiguation of the term New Economy movement. Jonpatterns (talk) 17:56, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Proposed Deletion of Sally Falkow

Samuell1616 I have torn out all of the promotional "resume" type stuff and made it bare bone. I aspire to build it up slowly, carefully, and fully inline with the expectations of Wikipedia Chrisabraham (talk) 18:41, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Samuell1616 this page is not unambiguously promotional, because it is not meant to be. This is the first draft and I had thought I would have a little more time than immediately to kind of work it through. I thought I would have the help and the assistance of the community as opposed to just having delete. I will try to crop down a bunch of stuff in order to make it more compliant. Chrisabraham (talk) 18:27, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Edits to Premier Boxing Champions

Hello,

I have made edits to Premier Boxing Champions wikipedia page to make it less promotional and more encyclopedic. I've added more reference material and cited more sources.

Can you advise if I have done this correctly?

Thank you!

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Davenadkarni (talk • contribs) 20:17, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Kalika Yap Speed deletion

While Mrs. Yap exceeds the guidelines for notability, upon further critical analysis, I am going to revise the entry to meet the guidelines of WP. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Siamsens (talk • contribs) 21:17, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

I edited the article. You were right, it needed revisions. LMK. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Siamsens (talk • contribs) 22:42, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Jakarta Love Story

Hello Samuell1616. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Jakarta Love Story, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not unambiguously promotional. Thank you. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 00:58, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

@FreeRangeFrog: Thanks .. Cheers !!!One life to live (talk) 10:06, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

18:24:00, 19 February 2015 review of submission by Ben.zitney


Hi Samuell1616, I was wondering if you could point out any specific areas that need reliable sources? My sources included NYTimes.com, PropertyCasualty360.com, and ibamag.com, which are all significant, reliable publications in my opinion. Am I mistaken here?

Any specific advice would be much appreciated.

Thanks so much!

Ben.zitney (talk) 18:24, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Dregs of wine

I am refusing this speedy deletion because neither of the criteria you specified fits. G5 only applies if someone creates an article if there is a ban saying they can't, or if they use a sock puppet account to create it while their real account is blocked. It does not apply if someone creates an article and later gets blocked for something unrelated, which is exactly what's happened here. If I were to get blocked today for, say, extreme personal attacks, you could not go around to speedy delete articles I created back in 2007. That would be ridiculous. I declined A7 because a colour is not "real person, individual animal, organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content or organized event", which I think is pretty self explanatory. Reyk YO! 18:36, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

@Reyk: Thanks ... Cheers !!!One life to live (talk) 18:40, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

18:59:19, 19 February 2015 review of submission by Erikauthor23


Erikauthor23 (talk) 18:59, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Hello Samuell1616

My Name is Erik Shein i spent almost 6 months putting that article together before i submitted for my publisher and studio for the wikipedia, audience and you are telling me i am not notable and my references are not correct that article is about me and i have been a children's book writer for 30 years and make my living and support my family with it so how notable is that? i would like your help with my article because we feel the children's books we write and have published are important for the wikipedia audience to learn about

thanks Erik Shein Arkwatch

Deletion of Driver Support

I am a little new to the wiki space. I was trying to be intentional in creating the business entry and following other large companies like Dell for example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dell

I just did an edits trying to take out anything that is not just pure factual information. I was hoping to start with a base like this and then grow it over time with facts about the company again similar to dell and other companies. If I am to go about this another way please let me know I would appreciate the guidance and help in making this done the right way. Boothrich (talk) 20:15, 19 February 2015 (UTC) Boothrich (talk) 20:15, 19 February 2015 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Boothrich (talk • contribs) 20:12, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Proposed Deletion of Lorex Technology Inc.

Hello,

With regards to your proposed deletion of Lorex Technology Inc., I am unclear on the criteria used to establish encyclopaedic value, and further how the content could have been considered to be in violation of the following:

(A7: No credible indication of importance (individuals, animals, organizations, web content, events))

Many Wikipedia pages that provide the history of an organization do not demonstrate any more credible indication of the company's importance or the significance of its leadership figures. I can point to other Wikis from related companies that publish facts of far lesser significance to the nature of the company being discussed let alone any kind of innate importance in general. I invite you to examine the links below and provide any excerpt that would nominate these Wikis as being somehow more important or less promotional:

I direct your attention specifically to the GoPro Wiki, which has been marked for its semblance to an advertisement but has not been deleted. I am curious why there is a division in the treatment of content when nothing on the Lorex Technology Inc. page discussed the quality or usefulness of products the company sells. Any objective history of any organization evidenced by official sources such as public press releases and financial assessments and not by promotional content or marketing-driven assessments of the product should qualify as having encyclopaedic value.

Since I've finished writing this response, someone has deleted the page. Please advise how I can proceed in getting the Lorex Technology Inc. page back online.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alex2230 (talk • contribs) 21:15, 19 February 2015 (UTC)


Request on 11:31:17, 17 February 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Pruthv


Hello Samuell1616, Thanks for reviewing and pointing out my mistakes in the article. Really Appreciate it, as it helped me to learn more about wikipedia. I've edited the Article, can you please check it in your free time and let me know if I need to do any more addition or subtraction for the authenticity of the article. Thanks a lot. --Pruthv (talk) 11:31, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Pruthv (talk) 11:31, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

-- Please share the article link. One life to live (talk) 13:01, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
-- Sorry about it. RJ Aditi is the article. - Pruthv (talk) 15:21, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
@Pruthv: Please share your views about the Notability of the subject and do you have independent reliable reference sources to support the information ? Earlier when I reviewed, the article was just promoting the subject. Happy to help once we discuss this. One life to live (talk) 15:28, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
@Samuell1616: I've add all the independent reliable sources, which I could find about the article. Previously, I've added Social media sources, which I was unaware that it is not considered as reliable source. I've also added Offline Sources which I could find. I took help from the IRC of Wikipedia helpdesk, after you rejected my submission. I've also consent some other wikipedians about improving the article. This is my first article on wikipedia which I've created from scratch, so yes maybe you'll find little immaturity. I wanted to learn more about wikipedia, so I searched a subject which doesn't have existence in wikipedia and wrote article about it. Regarding Notability, I think google shall answer you the best or you'd require to come down to ahmedabad someday. I'm still trying to improve this article and finding more reliable sources. If you can review it again and tell me how can I improve it more. It'd be great. - Regards, Pruthv (talk) 15:55, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
@Pruthv: Article still require lots of Improvement - employer website profile , subject own website , too many external links twitter, fb, blogs, non reliable / less reliable reference sources. Google more on the subject and try to find notable reliable sources for ex from Times / Hindustan times / Indian express or similar. The draft is still promotional praising the subject but don’t add any encyclopaedia information. Keep working am happy to help whenever you need me. One life to live (talk) 16:11, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
@Samuell1616: Okay, I'll dig more into this. But tell me, how this type of Wikipedia article gets approved which doesn't have any reliable sources? Articles: Harbans Singh Khurana, Manohar Mahajan, Shiv Kumar Saroj, Utpal Dutta, Sana Amin Sheikh, Ameen Sayani. I've found this articles from Indian radio personalities. At least, my article has some reliable sources from Indian Express, Asia Radio Today, Telecentre Magazine and other offline sources which can be verified. Even, I've removed all other sources which are non reliable or are prompting the subject. How can we justify this? Thanks - Pruthv (talk) 11:26, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
@Pruthv: You commented earlier you want to learn and contribute on wikipedia so why quoting examples of wrong articles ? Article not meeting the guidelines will be marked for deletion anytime by the reviewer. Choice is yours continue following the wrong examples and keep getting rejections / deletions or learn and follow the correct practices. The argument fails If the intention is just to get this one article published... Cheers !!!One life to live (talk) 16:03, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
@Samuell1616: Well, I don't give a damn whether this article gets published or not. I really don't care. But the argument states, how such a lame articles which doesn't have any citation at times, gets approved by the reviewer. It actually disappoints you, when you come across such articles on wikipedia. You spent time, do thorough research, learn things, find stuffs and do everything which is needful for the better of something. Pause, a single line by someone and flush all over your work. The Question which is still stuck in mind, unclear, is how exactly notability and reliability of a source is defined?! To be honest, I gave this 'wrong examples' because it actually doubts me about the notability of the wikipedia reviewer who approved them. I know, Wiki Community is not like that. I've been following it from quiet a sometime now, from immature wikipedians (like me) to Jimmy Wales. I've no offense against you, no brother not at all, rather I'm very much thankful to you for letting me dig more into wikipedia. It's just that I don't know where to get answer of this questions, which are giving me a small thought of not to waste time in contributing to community. Nothing more. Yes, that's all, you can delete this thread. Thanks and Cheers! :) Regards, Pruthv (talk) 08:55, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

06:37:25, 20 February 2015 review of submission by Sanjoy64


I am not a professional editor, please help me out with the edition of the draft. You had declined the draft stating it used peacock terms, please help me rectify them.

HJ000RT (talk) 06:37, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Dr.Kutikuppala Surya Rao has been accepted

Dr.Kutikuppala Surya Rao, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

One life to live (talk) 14:41, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

17:24:18, 20 February 2015 review of submission by Podchomp


Hi Samuell1616, thank you for taking the time to review my article. I would really like for this article to be published eventually so I am wondering if you could please advise on how I can improve its issues. In composing the article I tried to maintain a neutral point of view throughout - for example, I stated features (facts) rather than benefits of its services (e.g. Cogent provides power efficiency management, rather than Cogent improves power efficiency for its clients). I have also done further editing to remove a few words that suggest bias, such as "expertise." The awards that are listed demonstrate notability and are all sourced with external links (not company website or profiles) including a well-known magazine publication in the industry. I would include any minority or negative views however I could not find any. Frankly I modeled the article after a competitor's article which didn't seem to be marked with any issues: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maverick_Technologies

Again I am happy to make changes and would just like some more guidance. Your help is greatly appreciated!

Disclaimer: I used to work with this company a few years ago. I have recently decided to create articles for companies I have interacted with the past. I found this company to be notable in terms of garnering industry recognition. Podchomp 17:24, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

@Podchomp: The article still requires improvement in structure and content . The version I reviewed was more like a corporate brochure. Happy to help once you work on these issues. One life to live (talk) 17:32, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Om Swami

Dear Samuell1616,

I request you to please take the article from the Speedy deletion as the article was not written with any promotional intent. Can you please let me know which part of the article sounds promotional so that I can fix it. Your help is greatly appreciated. Srihariom (talk) 19:43, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

@Shrihariom: The entire article is just promoting the subject and its work / book, please establish WP:NOTABLE of the subject first supported by independent WP:RELIABLE sources. Happy to help anytime ... One life to live (talk) 19:57, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Dear Samuell1616, Om Swami is a published author. The general notability guideline requires significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources that are independent. The reliable source is evident by the book authored by Om Swami and published by Harper Element in December 2014. Further, the article contains verifiable statements from multiple independent third party sources covering the subject in various newspapers. The verifiable sources have been cited throughout the article by using the inline citations. A leading newspaper recently ranked the book as No.6 on the best selling non fiction book http://www.financialexpress.com/article/industry/jobs/top-10-fiction-and-non-fiction-6/40247/ amongst other notable authors. I believe that we do have adequate notability and reliable sources to support the article. Regards.Srihariom (talk) 11:23, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

@Shrihariom: Please also refer Promotion improve the article considering these guidelines including Neutral point of view. let me know once your are done will review.-One life to live (talk) 15:53, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Dear Samuell1616, Can you please review the article now. I have edited most sections of the article and improved it by incorporating the NPOV guidelines. Regards. Srihariom (talk) 20:06, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

@Shrihariom: Lots of work required in the education early career , renunciation, spiritual journey, mystic view point, literary work sections . Over all article structure require attention too. One life to live (talk) 21:22, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Samuell1616, I've just helped cleanup this article. Thank you for your assistance in helping us maintain encyclopedic quality. Please review when you get a moment and hopefully we can remove Speedy Deletion tag now. Cheers223.225.235.211 (talk) 03:45, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Thank you for , I got an alert you patrolled page I created. Thank you

Optrimes (talk) 09:28, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

06:31:51, 23 February 2015 review of submission by Divyaallen


Hi Samuell1616. Thank you for your guidance with my draft. As per your suggestion, I have removed all references and links to their company website. I have also rechecked the article to ensure a neutral point of view is followed. I hope this looks fine now. For your reference, the link to the article is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Mistral_Solutions Divyaallen (talk) 06:31, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

@Divyaallen: Better then before still some more work is required for example the company was founded in 1997 was repeated twice in article , the nascom award reference says the company was shortlisted but don’t confirm the award - mentioned in the article as winner , avoid using praising lines like - "Mistral has designed several award winning Development Platforms” A few popular ones include where lot of stuff is mentioned but only one verification reference is cited. some repetitions are seen when talking about the product and services of the subject . These should be avoided. so far good work . Happy to help anytime One life to live (talk) 11:54, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
@Samuell1616: Thank you so much for the valuable inputs. They made a lot of sense once you pointed them out. I spent some time on the pointers mentioned and have made the necessary edits. Does it look fine now? If you have any more inputs, please do let me know. Divyaallen (talk) 06:37, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
@Divyaallen: Nasscom awards verification reference still missing -(haven’t got the time to check in detail may be later) One life to live (talk) 10:42, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Please take more care with speedy deletion tagging

Please take more care with tagging for speedy deletion and make sure you fully understand the criteria. My impression is that you not. I have removed the tag from Julie Tolentino, for example. The A7 and G11 criteria were not appropriate. The article had multiple references. All it needed was {{Reflist}} added to make them appear. And it made a credible assertion of notability based on them. It is your obligation to check for things like that before tagging. It needs copyediting but was not blatantly promotional. Also, it is inappropriate to tag an article for deletion within an hour of its creation except in only the most blatant an obvious cases. I suggest you work from the back of the NPP queue. You also tagged for the wrong reasons. It was a blatant copyvio. Had it not been, an accredited university would never qualify for deletion under A7. Please re-read the criteria and go back to re-check any other articles you may have erroneously tagged today. Voceditenore (talk) 13:07, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

@Voceditenore: Hi, G11 as out of the 9 references: 1 (same ref used twice) talk about the dance review - publisher NYtimes - Ok , 2. Bblouinartinfo.com - long article but No mention at all except subject is friend and dancer of Rodart, 3 artist with aids - subject bio page (self published), 4. New museum - performance archive 5. HKW - Performance details 6. The brooklynrail -Play detail verify only participation , 7. Welcometolace - event detail section - gives no details except subject name in the participant list 8. Cartwheelart show promotion. A7 as the the references used in the article don’t support / verify further - the claims / information like - subject is a choreographer, and filmmaker or about Tolentino posed with Madonna in a series of homo-erotic photos in the controversial book, SEX, and a featured artist for an artist book by Rodarte photographed by Catherine Opie to quote few examples supporting the G11 & A7. Rest point well taken appreciate your inputs and thank you for sharing, it always help to learn - Cheers and have a good one !!! One life to live (talk) 14:03, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
No I'm afraid they do not support a speedy deletion. They support a PROD or bringing an article to AfD. You are mis-using speedy deletion tags and showing that you currently have very little understanding of the criteria. Voceditenore (talk) 16:12, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
@Voceditenore: Just read your interests at the user page - I think you are the guardian angel I was searching for since last couple of days ... I am happy to learn and will be glad if you adopt me please. Thanks for finding me :)One life to live (talk) 18:11, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Request on 15:52:17, 24 February 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by TomAFT


Hi Samuel1616,

I can see that you have rejected the article for the Academy of Financial Trading for publication. I have tries to adhere to the Wikipedia policies by writing in as neutral a fashion as I believe to be possible. I don't really know how to provide a valid description of which services the company provides with less material, and I think it to be almost impossible to provide any additional content without coming across as advertorial.

I have also provided valid links from 3rd parties such as CNBC, Yahoo!, MarketWatch, Crunchbase etc.

Would it be possible for you to provide me with any further guidelines which might see us succeed in getting this page published? If it is a case where "less is more", please do tell me and I will have no issue in cutting where necessary to help.

Thank you.

Tom

TomAFT (talk) 15:52, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

@TomAFT: Please share the article link.One life to live (talk) 17:40, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

@samuell1616 - I'm sorry, but I have no idea what you are asking me to do! I have clicked on the link, but it just brings me to your profile page. Any guidance which you can provide me with in order to get my submission approved would be hugely appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TomAFT (talk • contribs) 11:32, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

@TomAFT: Hi, before we discuss further please share what’s your reason to create an article on this subject and how do you explain its meeting the WP:Notability guidelines?... One life to live (talk) 11:40, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

@samuell1616 - Sure - thanks for your reply. More and more people are turning to Wikipedia in order to verify the existence of an entity. Wikipedia is, in my opinion, seen by the general public as a trusted, unambiguous, neutral source of information. For those who are looking for information on a company like the Academy of Financial Trading (outside of the company website), I believe that it is of huge importance to be included within Wikipedia - as long as it adheres to the Wikipedia guidelines. Other similar companies like the Online Trading Academy, or Better Trades, or Today Trader, or Trading Advantage have been listed on Wikipedia. How it falls within the WP:Notability guidelines is that it has attracted the notice of reliable sources, unrelated to the company. I am happy to edit the article further if you feel that this would be a requirement to getting approved. Many thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TomAFT (talk • contribs) 14:20, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Request on 18:37:43, 24 February 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Mouthwash15


Hi, Just saw this page was flagged for reading like an advertisement. There are some newspaper and magazine quotes included about why the subject is good or significant. Should I pull these out? If you don't mind pointing out the objectionable language, I'll take it out or rework it. Many thanks.

Mouthwash15 (talk) 18:37, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

@Mouthwash15: Hi , Please share the article link.One life to live (talk) 08:23, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
@Samuell1616:

Here it is. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Andrew_Rosen_(retail_executive) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mouthwash15 (talk • contribs) 19:21, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

You tagged my article on RHCM. My first article. I can not work out how to put it into any category? Could you do this or better still, tell me how to do it? It would fit under Injection moulding or Injection Molding. Thanks..

OK, I just entered the entire message in the subject box. Another error. I have mastered linking a word or phrase to a internal or external link. The cite button seems to do nothing?. I tried to put a signature & time stamp on the article but apparently that is just for 'talk' pages. So, I guess I should stamp this? Thanks in advance for any tips or pointers...Best regards.--Altmoney (talk) 23:49, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

@Altmoney: Article link please ...One life to live (talk) 08:25, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Samuell, I think you are asking me for the link to the page?. I thought you would have that as you tagged it. Anyway, it is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RHCM — Preceding unsigned comment added by Altmoney (talk • contribs) 09:27, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

@Altmoney: Done some corrections added - Reference and external link section , corrected the referencing style it require further improvement to learn more about reference please read more at WP:REF. For anything else am always happy to help... Cheers .One life to live (talk) 09:41, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Category

Hi Samuell, I added the article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RHCM to the category "plastics industry'. The page still reads that it is not linked to any categories? I added references, links etc. Best regards. --88.103.5.5 (talk) 09:56, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

17:11:55, 25 February 2015 review of submission by ASIrobots


I am just curious what part of the Autonomous Solutions, Inc. page read like a sales pitch? Was it a particular section? Thanks, ASIrobotsASIrobots (talk) 17:11, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

ASIrobots (talk) 17:11, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Autonomous Solution, Inc. Review

Just curious what about our page read like a sales pitch? Can you be more specific? Was it a particular section? We feel it was very neutral, and the previous review did not think it read like a sales pitch, they just wanted to see more references, which we added.

Thanks, ASIrobots — Preceding unsigned comment added by ASIrobots (talk • contribs) 17:14, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Recent Review of Draft

Hello, Samuell1616. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Samuell1616/Archive_1&oldid=1069601124"