User talk:Sulfurboy

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

Please do the following when posting on my page (I will ignore your comment if you don't follow these simple rules):

1) Post new sections at the bottom of the page.

2) PLEASE LINK TO YOUR ARTICLE, I go through a myriad of pages a day, I won't know what you're talking about unless you link your article.

3) Please don't request me to re-review your article unless I've specifically asked you to do so. AfC is incredibly backlogged and someone will get to it when they can.

AfC reviews[edit]

Feel free to mark articles that you move to the mainspace through AfC as reviewed, especially articles which unambiguously meet an SNG. Although if you do so, make sure that they're properly tagged with all relevant WikiProject banners. signed, Rosguill talk 00:03, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Rosguill I'll do that for sure for the ones that are SNG, but if you don't mind I think for the GNG ones I'd still like it to be seen by NPP in case I missed something glaring, at least until I get back in the groove of things from my extended absensce. Sulfurboy (talk) 00:34, 15 February 2020 (UTC)
That's fair, and if it's a subjective SNG (like NACTOR or NACADEMIC) feel free to also send those for a second review, but for clear yes-or-no SNGs (like most of NSPORTS) it's going to almost always be unnecessary. signed, Rosguill talk 00:44, 15 February 2020 (UTC)
Rosguill, thought I'd run this idea by you. I still don't feel comfortable reviewing my own pages that I approve. Feels a little too much like a fox watching the hen house. So instead I'm just going to keep a rough count of articles I approve in a day and then go review at least that many articles in NPP (and a few more) so that at least my contribution to the NPP queue is a net negative. Sulfurboy (talk) 00:45, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
I think that's a good idea, although I'm not sure I see why you feel more uncertain about articles you approve out of AfC than articles that you come across at NPP. Unless you're making significant edits to the AfC articles in order to bring them to an acceptable state, there really isn't any conflict of interest. signed, Rosguill talk 01:32, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

Tony "UNK^6" Reynolds[edit]

Tony "UNK^6" Reynolds From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Submission declined on 12 February 2020 by Sulfurboy (talk).

First, thank you for reviewing this submission! That is sincere, and I'm definitely not mad, just trying to understand.

Please try to help me understand clearly what you are saying?

So do you feel that because the other co-author of the book is mentioned in greater detail (James "Buster" Douglas, the co-author being mentioned less is not notable?

I disagree with the passing title because one co-author is greater than the other, should not delineate the fact that this book was co-created by Tony "UNK^6" Reynolds. This book, "Buster's Backyard Bar-B-Q," would not have been created without both authors. (actually Tony Reynolds was the original creator...but that's not going in here.)

Although I will agree to disagree, feeling that being co-author of a book mentioned in numerous national publications is not just a "passing" mention. If Reynolds was a ghost-writer, I would most likely agree, but even ghost-writers get credit in Wiki.


Second, before this is updated again

Tony "UNK^6" Reynolds is the primary feature of the story (and his creation), but of course, President Reagan will over shadow Reynolds in these stories.

What do you think?

Akickincrowd (talk) 21:30, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

Draft for Review, Young Henrys[edit]

Hi Sulfurboy,

Thanks so much for reviewing my draft and suggesting edits. As requested I have added reliable sources, including a journal article, published book and SBS news feature. I would really appreciate if you could re-review the article. Thank you for your interest and time. Draft:Young Henrys

OleWriter2020 (talk) 02:23, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

You need to resubmit the article and then I can approve it. Sulfurboy (talk) 02:33, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Draft for Review, Didier Gazagnadou[edit]

Dear Sulfurboy, I read carefully what you suggested to improve the page I wrote about D. Gazagnadou: Draft:Didier Gazagnadou and I would like to thank you.

For the notability issue (for academics), I just added Authority control that constitutes to my opinion published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Moreover, D. Gazagnadou has been cited in Nature (journal).

Actually D. Gazagnadou belongs to famous professors from University of Vincennes in Saint-Denis where Gilles Deleuze, Jacques Lacan, Bernard Maris, Helene Cixous and many others still teach or taught.

I would really appreciate if you could re-review the article. Thanks for your time.

Etoiledeneige (talk) 03:37, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

God father 2020 movie[edit]

May I know why God father 2020 edits declined by you Firstclap (talk) 06:33, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Review of draft on Alex Jawdokimov[edit]

Dear Sulfurboy, Thank you for reviewing my draft on Jawdokimov. Please check his prominence by doing a Wikipedia search on his surname. You will see that he is mentioned as Alex or Alexei Jawdokimov in several existing Wikipedia articles. Please let me know if I should refer to these articles in my draft in order to prove his prominence. I already referred to his filmography on IMDb. I have been following his work for some time. Although I did not know him in person, when I learnt about his death, I thought he would deserve an article. I don’t know the exact date of his birth and his death, but I’m trying find it out in order to make that information more precise. Best regards, Budabe Budabe (talk) 19:52, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

I would recommend reading the provided links in the message about the draft's decline. There are links to explain what is needed to show notability along with what is considered a good source to use. Sulfurboy (talk) 20:41, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Review article again[edit]

Hi my Sulfurboy, I'm new to this wikipedia, I fixed the article you denied me. I arranged well and left the article as natural as possible. Take a look please, and sorry for wasting your time but I want you to consider my article since I took hours to do it and also arranged it as you requested. This is the article:

I accept your suggestions to remove or put some words

Eltiguere300 (talk) 03:17, 18 February 2020 (UTC)Eltiguere300

Review one more time, added references[edit]

Hello Sulfurboy, thank you for reviewing my draft article Daniel_Sonenberg. I'm still new at this, and published it too soon, but much later than I had hoped! I have just added some outside references and would like to have your advice as I relearn the Wikipedia way after a couple of years away. I am still editing the draft, and will continue to add to it in the coming weeks until it will hopefully be accepted. Lori Arsenault, Gorham, Maine (talk) 05:31, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

It's unclear what your question is...Sulfurboy (talk) 05:35, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[edit]


I must admit that I do not understand the rejection.

Cuis Smalltalk is frequently mentioned along with siblings Squeak and Pharo, both of which have web pages.

Searching GitHub for "Cuis-Smalltalk-*" shows ~30 repositories.

There are a number YouTube videos of Smalltalk conference talks on Cuis (ESUG, FAST).

There is at least one university with its own Cuis development image and Google group [1].

There is an active, vibrant development community using Cuis Smalltalk.

Cuis has different goals from Squeak and Pharo which has resulted in a significantly different dialect and technical structure. For example, the visual artifacts (Morphs) have origins relative to their containers rather than the screen origin, x@y positions use floats not integers, Features check their requirements and autoload them. IDE tools differ. Cuis is a different dialect of Smalltalk and deserves respect and attention in WIkipedia.

It is not like Cuis Smalltalk does not exist. Why allow Squeak and Pharo pages but not Cuis?

Please help me understand this, -Mike — Preceding unsigned comment added by MikeFilmore (talkcontribs) 16:10, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

I never stated the subject isn't notable, I stated the sources don't denote notability. I would highly recommend reading the articles that were linked in the decline message. Some of your comments indicate to me that you haven't done so yet. If after reading those articles, in particular WP:GNG and WP:RS, you still have questions I will be happy to help with any further questions. Sulfurboy (talk) 17:12, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

Stasher Brand[edit]

Hi Sulfurboy,

I wanted to get your feedback on the Stasher page you declined and said it came across as too promotional. If you had any feedback, comments or edits that I can work off of that would be extremely helpful.

Here is the link: (talk) 18:57, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

I would recommend reading the pages that were linked in the decline message. Sulfurboy (talk) 19:04, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

My draft “which is always rejected”[edit]

all sources come from (national news websites in Indonesia)? Kebajikan111 (talk) 19:54, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

I think that's accurate enough, without having to look at other sources. all sources come from trusted website "local languages" because these foods are still poorly known outside the country Kebajikan111 (talk) 19:57, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

itu bukan “cookbook” tapi penjelasan tentang makanannya Kebajikan111 (talk) 19:58, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

it's not a "cook book" but an explanation of the food Kebajikan111 (talk) 19:59, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

obviously that's an important topic! Kebajikan111 (talk) 20:03, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

This food is known in Indonesia. but not known in the outside world. that's normal, foreigners don't even know our national food like rendang sate (maybe it's quite well known), but Gado-gado? unknown but that's our national dish. Kebajikan111 (talk) 20:22, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

btw, that food is already listed in local Wikipedia (wikipedia bahasa indonesia) Kebajikan111 (talk) 20:25, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

Draft:The Goes Wrong Show[edit]

Hi, just letting you know that I started this article, and not JHIMarket (who you left a message for when you left a comment). However, he did accidentally submit it previously, so it is an understandable mistake. Thanks, Thatoneweirdwikier Say hi 21:19, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

Draft:MasterCard Foundation[edit]

Hello, I started this new article and it was declined by another reviewer, I discussed with him and he suggested that I resubmit and find(wait) for another person to review it, would you please take the time to read through and review the submission?. Thanks! LilaMorillo (talk) 23:10, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletions declined[edit]

Hello, Sulfurboy,

I declined several pages you had tagged as "uncontroversial speedy deletions" because they didn't include much information to justify a page deletion. If you want to delete a page because a different page needs to be moved to that location, please state which page needs to be moved. "Uncontroversial housekeeping" doesn't state a reason why a page should be deleted unless there is an obvious misspelling or mistake. Please be more specific in your deletion rationales and only use CSD G6 for pages that are uncontroversial and obvious deletion candidates. Otherwise, please use one of the other established CSD criteria. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 00:02, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Liz, Hmm, can you point me to an example or two? I haven't run into anyone having issue with my G6s before. Is the problem just that I'm not giving the name of the page? I always state that it's to move in an article from AfC, I just assumed it was pretty inherent which page was being moved in since they would have to share the same name. But I can just start directly putting in the draft link, that's no biggie. Sulfurboy (talk) 01:32, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
I'm not on a computer that is great for editing so I'll ask that you look at my contributions. There are 3 that I declined. Admins vary in how strict they are about speedy deletions and I'd guess I'm medium strict (or I just request fuller information with requested page moves). Others rarely raise any questions and just delete so you might not have encountered questions in the past, it depends on how much tagging you do. Let me know if you have any other questions. I just thought since there were 3 CSD G6 I declined, I should drop you a note. It's a especially tricky criteria because it requires the tagger to state why the page should be deleted where with the other criteria, they are more self-explanatory. Liz Read! Talk! 02:05, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

page about Efim Levitin[edit] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tweenata (talkcontribs) 02:55, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Dear Sulfurboy,

Thank you very much for your review and for the comments on

I am not asking you to re-review the article by any means, but just wanted to emphasize that Efim Levitin had published many books on radio engineering which were very popular in USSR. Many had a very large circulation, some were printed 2 or 3 times, and one of the books, printed in 1960s is still listed in an online book shop as a antique hardcopy (out of print) ;) His books were used as reference materials by all the repair personnel as well as amateurs. His books were also translated into several languages.

He did a lot to popularize radio engineering in USSR and some amateur radio engineers even now are still using his books.

Just wanted to add that since, according to, having published books counts (although I admit that I do not know whether his books were actually used in any Soviet higher education institutions).

He is not very well researched, and therefore at this point I do not have any additional secondary sources to be listed. I will keep looking, but unfortunately I do not have access to any Soviet archives. Perhaps, having this article in Wikepedia would allow people who have the information to come forward and add it.

Thank you again for your consideration.


tweenataTweenata (talk) 03:23, 19 February 2020 (UTC)