User talk:SwisterTwister

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

Please sign your messages with four tildes ('''~~~~''') and please be as specific and concise as possible. If I reviewed your Articles for Creation submission, please read the message(s) at the draft page clearly before adding a message here. As this has happened multiple times, please ensure your message is only posted here once (not doubled).

PLEASE ADD YOUR MESSAGE AT THE BOTTOM and generally, I will reply here so please watch this page for a response. Unless it's an AfC page, where I'll usually comment there and you will get a notification for that. If I have taken time reviewing your draft, please be patient and I will get to it as I am quite busy with other tasks but am certainly willing to look at it and will not need reminding.

New users: If you want to learn the basics of Wikipedia, my page for new users here contains useful information. Information such as citing sources, submitting images and changing & deleting username. If that page hasn't answered your question(s), contact me here.


As promised[edit]

The soft bunny of happiness and tranquility.

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 04:19, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hakka Americans[edit]

ST, I'm a bit curious about this. Shouldn't this have been closed as a "no-consensus" rather than a clear keep? --Lemongirl942 (talk) 07:31, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

The basis overall was to keep though, it would have been NC had there been equal amounts of delete. SwisterTwister talk 15:21, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
I'm a bit curious about this ST. I'm not sure about the equal "keep" and "delete" reasoning. A redirection is essentially a kind of deletion - it is proposed more as an alternative to deletion. A similar one Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hokkien and Hoklo Americans was closed as NC. If you don't mind, could you reclose this as NC? --Lemongirl942 (talk) 12:54, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Kindness Barnstar Hires.png The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
Thanks for reviewing my article Legend Cinema, request you to suggest best practices to make it better. Contibutions are invited too :) Thank you. NutJob12 (talk) 16:13, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Kindness Barnstar Hires.png The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
Thank YOU, ThanK YOU, THanK YOU, THANK YOU! for reviewing my article KRKW-LP !!! I kindly request you to suggest best practices to make it better. Contibutions are invited too :)

Thank you once again. (Grovel, grovel, grovel.) GeorgeV73GT

01:36:02, 2 September 2016 review of submission by Mothrbrain[edit]

Hi there, just wanted to say thanks first and foremost for your review and for your feedback. I've taken it on board and significantly expanded the third-party criticism and sources section, adding just what was requested to the point that it is now the longest section in the article. Hopefully that should satisfy the reviewer. If it's possible to proceed with the re-review, I'd be grateful. Thank you!

Request on 16:38:12, 2 September 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Jhannafin[edit]

Hi! Looking for help on why this page keeps getting rejected. The page I created for indie director and writer Logan Sandler's first feature film, Live Cargo, was accepted. All the sources I use in Logan Sandler's page are independent from the artist himself. What is lacking in notability? Thanks!

Jhannafin (talk) 16:38, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

20:14:49, 2 September 2016 review of submission by[edit]

I am requesting a review as the source material is unavailable online from an independent source. The only existing material is a scan from a newspaper article taken from the subject's own website. I have outlined where the original article was first published but all attempts to verify it from an independent source have met dead ends. Please advise on the exact steps needed to get this article approved. I appreciate your help with this matter. I look forward to your response. (talk) 20:21, 2 September 2016 (UTC), perhaps I can help out here. The simplest way to put it is that, based on the available sources, he is just not yet notable. There is no real chance of an article until his performances or recording have been reviewed in major publications of national reputation. ' DGG ( talk ) 07:19, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

The prediction...[edit]

... absolutely nothing will happen on Julius Gbabojor Pondi and the substandard article will stay forever. The Banner talk 20:08, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

call for help[edit]

hay swister, i called for help because, as i said its way too late for me to be editing. additionally i'm not planning on doing any editing just now but don't want to leave this article. i've a neuro disorder & not real confident with my old & barely functioning computer. i simply don't want to spend 3 hours trying to delete a sentence only to get scolded. & yes, it can take me 3 hours. so i wanted a second opinion. its disheartening to think someone has responded to find that i've been told to ask my question somewhere else. i have done some reading & added more info at the treahouse. if you're able to help, thnx in advance.Mausbug (talk) 05:21, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Help for creating page[edit]

Hello dear,

I have just this information for Ermine(Organisation) which is:-

"Ermine is a British educational management organisation.

Ermine's Motto: δῶς μοι πᾶ στῶ καὶ τὰν γᾶν κινάσω

It is distinguished affiliate of The Pimley Foundation, UK and also the Institutional member of the College of Teachers, UK and abides by their Code of Professional Practice.

It has been founded by Mr. Colin Wrigley, MBE and Lt. Col. The Hon. Osborne Wrigley-Pimley-McKerr III.

Ermine Owns and manages Pimley School, Austrey School and Albert Polytechnic."

Please help me for creating Ermine's wiki page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aopsermine (talkcontribs) 06:37, 5 September 2016 (UTC)


Thanks for tagging your AFD close as (NAC) on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Julius Gbabojor Pondi. But many folks won't know what NAC means. The template {{subst:nac}} (or {{subst:non-admin closure}}) is better to use, as it will display the full wording "non-admin closure" on the page and will help stop any misunderstandings. -- 1Wiki8........................... (talk) 08:23, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

19:24:36, 6 September 2016 review of submission by Jackguitarfan[edit]

Dear SwisterTwister I have made the corrections you suggested. Could you please review them and allow me to resubmit this for approval.

Thank you, Jackguitarfan (talk) 19:24, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Aaron Chang Draft Update[edit]

Hi SwisterTwister! I did as you suggested and kept digging for more notable references for Aaron Chang, and I found out that he is indeed featured in a permanent exhibit in a museum! The bathing suit from his clothing line, Aaron Chang Clothing, that he gave as a gift to Bethany Hamilton, famous surfer and shark attack survivor, is featured in the exhibit titled Courageous Inspiration: Bethany Hamilton at the California Surf Museum. So this totals 3 exhibits, 1 permanent, and 1 art critic review of one of his galleries, along with multiple other references including his entry in the Encyclopedia of Surfing. I also found the article on Forbes about him, but I don't think it has relevant info to add to the Wikipedia page specifically, so I just included it as an addition. Could you take a look at the draft and see if you consider him notable now that I've added the new info?

Thanks! Explorethatstore (talk) 22:55, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Susan Hawk (district attorney)[edit]

Susan Hawk resigned as district attorney today. Should her Wiki article name be changed to "Susan Hawk (attorney)" or "Susan Hawk (politician)"? (talk) 00:03, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

User talk:Amili1313[edit]

I note your comment on the above. There still seems to be an issue, wondered if you could take a look? Thanks. Paste Let’s have a chat. 12:25, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

17:57:20, 7 September 2016 review of submission by Sbjumper21[edit]

Hi SwisterTwister,

I understand Wikipedia's notability guidelines but wanted to present the below argument on why our references should be considered significant, given that a competitor of ours, GolfNow, has been granted a Wikipedia page.

Within the golf industry, the biggest golf publication has under one million unique visitors a month. We've been covered and interviewed by major publications such as The Examiner (2.5 million unique visitors a month), USA Today affiliate, Argus Leader (120K+ unique visitors per month), Dujour Magazine (47K+ unique visitors a month), GolfNewsNet (55k+ unique visitors a month), ESPN Radio, CBS Radio, Golf Channel Sirius FM and Golf Channel (video). These are major hits within the golf industry, but they aren't going to be covered by the Huffington Post/Forbes, which I believe what Wikipedia is looking for. The Huffington Post also mostly covers the professional game and lacks golf technology coverage.

Lastly, I wanted to mention that a majority of the coverage that GolfNow received from major publications (Forbes/GolfWeek - no longer active/Business Insider) was about either their competition with a slight mention to GolfNow or acquisition by Comcast. They have no coverage other than that in major publications. Their Forbes piece was focused on EZLinks and had some mentions of GolfNow being a competitor.

Comcast Buying Booking Golf Tee Times Gradually Shifting To Online Marketplace (focused on EZLinks):

I'm hoping to discuss this further, and I would be happy to jump on the phone and explain this further. Let me know if you need any further info.

Thanks Sbjumper21 (talk) 17:57, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

About Victor Anoul[edit]

I just edited a draft you accepted on August 30th, Victor Anoul, and I just wanted to give you some unsolicited bits of advice, if you don't mind. I'll try to make this as painless as possible.

  1. Always fill out the living= parameter of {{Wikiproject Biography}}. As a specific example, if the person isn't living, put in living=no. This reduces the workload on people like myself who go through Category:Biography articles without living parameter, and also helps us keep track of how many BLPs we have.
  2. Biographies have to have more information than non-biographical articles to not be considered stubs.
  3. If someone isn't alive, make sure categories like Category:Living people and Category:Date of birth missing (living people) aren't on the article.

Thanks in advance,

 I dream of horses  If you reply here, please ping me by adding {{U|I dream of horses}} to your message  (talk to me) (My edits) @ 08:25, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

02:54:33, 9 September 2016 review of submission by[edit]

Question about short film drafts[edit]

Hey, as you're a draft guru, I wanted to shoot you a query. I have a draft under development at Draft:Cul-de-Sac (2016 film), which concerns a brand new short film by an Oscar-winning film crew and a cast featuring an A-lister. Though I personally don't believe it is suitable for mainspace inclusion yet, I wanted to hear your thoughts for when it would be suitable. I anticipate it will win a vast multitude of awards and may even be an Oscar contender, so please give me input! I hope you're doing well! :) DARTHBOTTO talkcont 21:57, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Partial AN/I close on ibans[edit]

Hi SwisterTwister, I have closed this section of the ongoing AN/I discussion with the following warning:

User:SwisterTwister is prohibited from trying to impose "interaction bans" or "keep-away orders" against other users, and from implying that such interaction bans exist unless a ban has been formally enacted through a community process. This does not apply to requests that users not post on SwisterTwister's user talk page (see WP:NOBAN). Violations of this will result in temporary but escalating blocks.

If you need any clarification or have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me personally. While reading the comments there I got the impression that there were editors "in your corner" who want you to succeed, but who couldn't support you saying that bans exist when they don't. Best of luck in your editing, and I hope you have some less-stressful times ahead of you. ~Awilley (talk) 01:53, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[edit]

Dear SwisterTwister,

Thanks for reviewing my article.

I need your help to understand why my article does not match the notability criteria. I have given the reference link from below

1. References of books where his name is mentioned. 2. Reference of news papers where he was in focus. 3. Reference of his all international concerts is also given. 4. Also note that achieving "Pandit" title itself is greatest achievement in Indian Music. 5. His name is also referred in other Wikipedia articles but I understand this does not match to your criteria. 6. Wikipedia also has database of flue players which are less notable than him in terms of achievement. but I understand I can not use this as a argument to publish the article as per Wikipedia guidelines.

Please let me know what exactly I have to do to proceed with my article. I found your comments are very useful and helpful in many other articles. So looking for your help in fixing errors in my article.

Looking forward for your reply and help.

Best regards, Amit Wikiuser music (talk) 15:18, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Could you take a look?[edit]

Hi SwisterTwister, I reached out to Sh33na, who recommended I contact you. I'm new to wikipedia and found Sh33na's name as an editor on the Duodenal Switch page - as someone who had the DS, I'm curious to help edit medical articles too. I just got my start with and was wondering if you could check out my work? I would really appreciate it. Thanks so much!! --Lisacatherine (talk) 03:26, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Gala Wilton F.C. for deletion[edit]

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

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Joe Roe (talk) 12:33, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Software MacKiev prod[edit]

Hello SwisterTwister, I'm informing you that an article you nominated for proposed deletion, Software MacKiev, has been restored as another editor contested the deletion via PROD. Please feel free to offer your input at the AfD discussion if you wish to do so. Seraphimblade Talk to me 17:38, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Article for review Rattan1912 (talk) 03:51, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[edit]

Just re-posting for review

Hi David,

How is it going? Rattan here again. Can you please review this article for me? This is one of the very popular online shopping website of New Zealand based on daily deals concept. Let me know what changes need to happen in order to get this approved. I hope the references from news websites would be enough for notability.

Regards, Rattan

22:43:19, 14 September 2016 review of submission by 2600:1012:B04E:C7D4:7C28:B3C4:2D98:5368[edit]

Hi there,

Thank you for reviewing my submission but I do not accept this. Jihan is first and foremost a proven notable artist, and designer. Her balloon designs have sparked many companies all over to copycat her. Her company Geronimo has now become a coined term for her particular balloon design as well. If you google Geronimo Balloons you will not only find her company but also a multitude of online stores selling "Geronimo balloons", not on behalf of Jihan's company but as the style of balloon. I am happy to add more references to support her and her companies notability but if that is not enough would you suggest I develop a page for the company with a section on the creator that is Jihan instead? I do not believe her talent is not acceptable under Wikipedia Standards.

2600:1012:B04E:C7D4:7C28:B3C4:2D98:5368 (talk) 22:43, 14 September 2016 (UTC)


Thanks for your help with Kai-Tai Fang. (talk) 09:56, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Gregory Bernard[edit]

Hello SwisterTwister :) Thanks for reviewing my article. You said that there was nothing to suggest the GB's independent notability - please can I just confirm what you need to resolve this? I submitted a couple of interviews with him around film's he's directed, is it that you need something that is not film-related or something that is in relation to him in general and not just one thing? How about this? Thanks very much for your help LittleGold (talk) 12:44, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Recent article[edit]

Hi I was Curious why the article I posted was not accepted. There were no notes written on it. Sports0516 (talk) 21:54, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

About Rashad Bukhash[edit]

Thank you for reviewing the article, your comments are well noted, wikipedia source has been removed and more citations and references were added as well, thank you for your support. Laithabdallah (talk) 12:55, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Please Reconsider: Durreen Shahnaz[edit]

Eddie Hartman (talk) 13:48, 16 September 2016 (UTC) Durreen Shahnaz, whom you rejected for lack of notability, won the Asia Game Changer award today:

Would you please give me some indication of what would stack up to notability?

Request on 15:02:17, 17 September 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Hrosato[edit]

Please provide more specificity as to why the article about Theresia Gouw was declined for lack of notability backed up by significant sources. Theresia Gouw is widely considered one of the leading venture capital investors in the technology industry. In an industry with few female investors at all, she is a standout regardless of her gender. The sources used in this article are highly reliable--New York Times, Fortune, Forbes, CNBC, Time, etc. There are other Wikipedia pages about similar people in the tech industry--Aileen Lee (, Diane Greene ( Please provide some insight as to how these profiles meet the notability standard whereas Theresia Gouw's does not. I appreciate any specific guidance you can provide. Thank you!

Hrosato (talk) 15:02, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

18:16:46, 17 September 2016 review of submission by Sbhagwandin[edit]

Hey, just got your feedback on the Leanplum page. To clarify, are funding rounds not relevant to the notability criteria? I've seen many other tech startup pages whose main citations are funding rounds and product announcements (see Appboy, Apteligent, Mixpanel, etc.), so I was under the impression that these citations were valid.

Hello Sbhagwandin, thanks for showing me those articles, I have now listed them for deletion as not only was the news simply for company activities such as funding, but I was unable to find any actual better sources; the thing is that for a Wikipedia article, there needs to be better coverage aside from funding, because funding usually means (and this is common here) that the company is still so new that it's searching to gain and establish capital (which includes the company obtaining news to search for said capital) therefore it's not yet established and notable. If you find any other articles, please let me know so I can examine them. Thanks. SwisterTwister talk 18:30, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
No problem, glad to have a better idea of how this works. What would you say about a more established company like Optimizely, in that case? Many of the citations are the usual press releases and (possibly) paid news coverage, but the founders were listed on places like the Forbes 30 Under 30, and I see that the company was on some sort of "Best Places to Work" list. Are those the sort of citations that establish credibility? Sbhagwandin (talk) 15:23, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Request on 18:36:37, 17 September 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Ekay514[edit]

Ekay514 (talk) 18:36, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello David, I would first like to thank you for taking the time to review my article. With that being said, I'm finding it difficult to believe that the information provided does not sufficiently account for Credico's notability. It's, of course mentioned in the article, but in terms of its size and controversy, Credico is a 400 firm company, spanning 19 countries, with a current class action involving hundreds of opt ins, and an extreme level of notoriety in the UK. Aside from this I believe, I believe the article is rather unbiased and factual. As a point of reference, the Cobra Group, a direct marketing firm of almost identical construction, save its East Asian base of operations, achieved publication and its size and controversy were not really as notable from an objective point of view. Again thank you for your review, but I feel you are have a difficult time understanding the scope and influence of the company.

Thanks! Elijah Kay Ekay514 (talk) 18:36, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Request on 00:15:17, 18 September 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Mek457[edit]

Hello David. Thank you for your review of my piece on Daniel Noah. I know you receive this question all the time, but I would appreciate some advice. Respectfully, you say Mr. Noah is not notable enough to receive his own Wikipedia entry, yet the movie (Max Rose) he created, wrote, and directed has its own page, and the company (SpectreVision) he co-founded has its own page as well. I am truly at a loss as to why Daniel is not deemed worthy enough as the projects he created. I would truly appreciate it if you could share the thought behind this, and if there is a way for me to revise that might make you reconsider. Sincere thanks, Michael.Mek457 (talk) 00:15, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Mek457 (talk) 00:15, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Review of ThreatModeler page[edit]


Please note that the section entitled "Additional Outside References to ThreatModeler" does, in fact, contain a press release. It is mostly filled with outside/non-related mentions of ThreatModeler from verifiable secondary and tertiary sources. Overall there are 21 references used in the article, 15 of which are outside / verifiable / notable sources. I was in the process of making the links in the "Additional Outside References to ThreatModeler" live when I received notification that the article was declined. Since you didn't notice the press release about ThreatModeler or notice that the article was about Argawal's contribution to threat modeling, I am resubmitting in the hope that you will actually take time to review the article and its references. This is not, as you suggest, an advertisement. It is an article about moving the field of threat modeling forward. If you have specific, helpful comments I would be very happy to receive them; the general template comments I've received thus far simply do not seem to apply in a helpful way....

Thanks Bbeyst (talk) 18:47, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Brian

Thanks for the specific input. I'll see what I can do to address the noted issues in a timely manner. Bbeyst (talk) 19:54, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Review of Draft:QForm page[edit]

Hello Dear, You have declined the article i've prepared with the comment "the company is not yet notable because there's simply not yet enough substance for a convincing notability". But in fact, the page isn't about company, it is about one of the mostly used FEM (CAE) software on the plants around the world. So, please, put me on the way i should edit the article so it could be published. Thanks a lot, have a nice time. Mskpetrov (talk) 08:17, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Request on 10:27:13, 19 September 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Slim cop[edit]

Hi - I'm struggling to understand what else I need to do in order to have this article approved. You say "For the best enhancements, this would still need all [sic] additional amounts of in-depth third-party news sources overall which also includes reviews; please no press releases, interviews or trivial passing mentions." Yet I have included citations from Time Out, The BBC, The Guardian, The Telegraph, The Spectator, and the Evening Standard - are these not "third-party news sources"? As for reviews, the word 'review' appears six times amongst the citations! So please, can you tell me clearly and specifically what more I need to do to get this article published?


simontcope (talk) 10:27, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

15:36:52, 19 September 2016 review of submission by Matt Secord[edit]

Hi SwisterTwister, I just wanted to reach out and get a bit of clarity on why the Draft was rejected based on notability. I added a lot of very credible references (Wall Street Journal, Barron's, Reuters, New York Times, etc.) throughout the Draft to help solidify Rafay's notability, also, added extra references at the bottom. Thanks!

23:21:17, 19 September 2016 review of submission by Pollyst[edit]

hi, this page was modeled somewhat after Marketo's, and we did include several reputable third party references to the info. So, just trying to understand the rejection, aka why this is not noteworthy/credible, while that of Marketo and other tech firms is...thanks for the help. Pollyst (talk) 23:22, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 20[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Justice Zakaullah Lodhi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page BRILL (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:53, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

13:25:19, 20 September 2016 review of submission by PriyankaD[edit]

Hi David,

I would need your serious support here cause I am unable to understand which links are referred as press releases. The article tone is also very neutral and shares only information about the developer. Can you help me understand which statement is referred as a advertisement.

Also, all the references shared are news articles released by respective publisher and is not a PR. Can you highlight which references are considered as PR.

Further, I was checking few other developer articles to understand what wrong I am doing and was suprised to see a similar article with less relevant references being approved. You can view the same here:

It would really grateful, if you can share exact changes required. PriyankaD (talk) 13:25, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

15:31:23, 20 September 2016 review of submission by Brafordrm[edit]

Hey there! Can you help me? I tried to resubmit my article and I'm not sure if it went through.

Request on 18:24:44, 20 September 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by JTNwriter[edit]


Re: Thank you for your review. You wrote, "Let me be frank and say this is still too soon for any actual notability, I would not resubmit because there's simply not going to be enough substance for establishing both a convincing and notable article."

I have tried to follow earlier guidance from reviewers to stick to just-the-facts, neutral language. I included a reference about Inspire in this most recent submission from a Mayo Clinic cardiologist who is known nationally. I included cited references to Inspire's work--presented at medical meetings--with Novartis and GSK, two of the largest pharmaceutical companies in the world. It is information like this I believe demonstrates the noteworthiness of Inspire, without peacock terms. I cited an NPR story that described how lung cancer patients on Inspire self-organized to literally change a specific national cancer treatment guideline -- again, something I believe is noteworthy, and described in a neutral tone with a link to the NPR piece.

As I wrote earlier to a reviewer, I have identified approved Wikipedia entries of private companies close in mission and business model to Inspire, and I have tried to follow those entries closely. Here are three examples:

The Inspire submission demonstrates as much if not more noteworthiness, and has as many or more and better sources than the above company-focused articles. In the case of HealthBoards, its single source is a dead link. Am I missing something? I respectfully suggest that if HealthBoards, MedHelp and Daily Strength are in Wikipedia, then Inspire should be. My boss, Brian Loew, was one of the only healthcare social network execs invited to meet in closed session with VP Joe Biden in June at the Cancer Moonshot Summit, and we are involved in Moonshot-related projects. Inspire and Loew are finalists currently in two categories of a major digital health contest run by a premier conference company and publisher, Health 2.0. This past Saturday, Loew just presented alongside GSK at Stanford Medicine in a session devoted to innovated social listening for pharmacovigilance. Those are just 3 recent examples that I believe demonstrate noteworthiness literally over the past few months, not 10 years ago.

I welcome any guidance, and I appreciate your feedback.

JTNwriter (talk) 18:25, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

JTNwriter (talk) 18:24, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

WP:OWN and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Appboy[edit]

Your actions on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Appboy are troubling and seem to me to be a violation of WP:OWN. -- 1Wiki8........................... (talk) 20:08, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

20:47:05, 20 September 2016 review of submission by Fiachaire[edit]

First, thank you for taking the time to review the proposed article.

I was hoping to clarify and ask for guidance on how I might improve the draft. My interest is in writing a decidedly neutral article, and if I have written an 'advertisement' focused on 'puffery' I have overcompensated for my personal bias. While most viral marketing strikes me as mild or irritating, devoid of interest, the marketing at Priceonomics is remarkably, perhaps uniquely, widespread. Personally, I consider this a terrible thing, and not something I would advocate. A small failing startup pivots to advertising how viral it can be, and is then widely used as a notable source in every respectable news org except the BBC. They explicitly say their blog is self-promotion, and yet that self-promotion is quoted as meaningful research by NYT and others, is a reliable source for Wikipedia articles (are reliable sources inherently notable?), and (though I haven't put this into the article yet) is used in academic journals, law journals, and even pre-med courses. News organizations generally have a strong motivation not to confuse journalism with advertising, it continues to be a very contentious issue. At Forbes, Priceonomics is a listed contributor with a 'full bio'. Priceonomics, in my mind, has found a back door to hack the press, because, presumably, their advertisements are "data-driven" and journalists also need to be viral.

Let me give you an example of the data driving the articles, the example that introduced me to the company. Wikipedia has a list of selfie-related deaths and injuries. In my opinion it deserves to be deleted, but no consensus has been found so I (now) often edit for accuracy and completeness and avoid deleting content or sources. Historically, many reliable sources (CBS, The Guardian, CNN) used in the lead to justify the articles existence ultimately link back to an article Priceonomics wrote on the topic. The article features various graphs, which represent data gathered from a google news archive search and Wikipedia. The data-driven article used numbers which, at that time, matched what a few wikipedians had posted. The list then decided to cite major news sources who cite an advertisement which cites the list. Not only is this circular, every part of it is questionable/unreliable.

It is not notable that Priceonomics is a viral marketer, it is notable that Priceonomics produces adverts which get printed as reliable research in mainstream news. If I was a web developer who posted a blog post about bees to advertise my skills as a web developer, that's not notable. If Reuters cites my self-promotion as input from a qualified source on bees or anything else I want to write about, that's notable...even if I, personally, find it deplorable.

Please advise me on how I might edit the article to move away from puffy advertising without moving out of a neutral point of view. Thank you again for your time and efforts. ~ Fiachaire (talk) 20:47, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) User:Fiachaire: to help you get a better idea of what is acceptable for wikipedia articles, I rewrote Draft:Priceonomics. Please see my comments there. -- 1Wiki8........................... (talk) 21:59, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
Thanks, that was helpful. I rewrote from your stub and found more structure doing so. I am still interested in User:SwisterTwister's understanding and reasoning. Indeed, moreso now, building up from your stub I don't want to hit my head again on puffery and advertising. ~ Fiachaire (talk) 13:53, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 20 September[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:18, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Request on 07:05:54, 21 September 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Ritesh.bang[edit]

I am not associated with Quadewave Consulting Pvt. Ltd.

Ritesh.bang (talk) 07:05, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

ANI discussion[edit]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. North America1000 10:02, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

September 2016[edit]

Information icon Hello! Thank you for your recent contributions to John Cupido. I did have one note for you. I am working on a maintenance project to clean up Category:Pages using infoboxes with thumbnail images. In the future, please do not use thumbnails when adding images to an infobox (see WP:INFOBOXIMAGE). What does this mean? Well in the infobox, when you specify the image you wish to use, instead of doing it like this:

|image=[[File:SomeImage.jpg|thumb|Some image caption]]

Instead just supply the name of the image. So in this case you can simply do:


There will then be a separate parameter for the image caption such as |caption=Some image caption. Please note that this is a generic form message I am leaving on your page because you recently added a thumbnail to an infobox. The specific parameters for the image and caption may be different for the infobox you are using! Please consult the Template page for the infobox being used to see better documentation. Thanks!! Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 19:06, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

21:03:39, 21 September 2016 review of submission by Hornlaur[edit]

I have made updates to the Gabrielle Kurlander draft page and would like to request a re-review. Per your direction, I have updated the language used to read more like an encyclopedia entry from a neutral point of view. I have also removed all external links in the body of the text and have updated the references used to include external sources. I feel very strongly that Gabrielle Kurlander, President & CEO of the All Stars Project, should have a page up on Wikipedia and appreciate your consideration of this request. Thank you. Hornlaur (talk) 21:03, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

@Hornlaur: The proper way to request another review of your submission is to click the resubmit button at the top of the page, rather than asking on the reviewer's talk page. Pppery 22:09, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Close reason[edit]

Hi, I noticed you closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tons of Rentals as "Speedied". The reason's was edited now by someone else. This isn't a rare mishap but just letting the word get out to people that bots can't parse "speedied" as there is also speedy keep, so if possible refer to speedily deleted or something like that. Thanks. Mr. Magoo (talk) 04:18, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Similarly here Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Intercultural Alliance of Artists & Scholars, Inc. (IAAS) (2nd nomination). Mr. Magoo (talk) 04:30, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Ralf J. Radlanski[edit]

Hi SwisterTwister, i was looking at the above mentioned page as its one of very old pending drafts, and it seems like they addressed many of the concerns from when you last reviewed it. So i wanted to approve it, but am new to AFC and didn't want to overstep. :-) Would you mind to take a look and let me know if it can be approved? -- Ntb613 (talk) 06:33, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

ANI notice[edit]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. -- 1Wiki8........................... (talk) 22:12, 22 September 2016 (UTC)


Kitten (06) by Ron.jpg

An ElGatoSaez for you, meowing.

Havana Brown - choco.jpg ElGatoSaez | Meow me 04:39, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia article[edit]

Hi SwisterTwister!

It's me Screamborn. I have decided to re-post/recreate my article in a new page, so basically it will be a new account, will remove the current page later. Reason for this is, I just realized how all my previous edits even the oldest ones show up in view history, and I didn't know that, it simply annoy me to see those alterations at hand, visible enough to those who wish to edit the article. It's very unprofessional indeed. May I ask you a favor, and hopefully you will approve the same article once made in a new page, as you can see nothing much has changed, just minor changes has been done. From now on, I'll be very careful of my edits. So, how can we get this done? I'll be waiting for your response. Thank you. -Screamborn (talk) 05:18, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) This cannot be done. The article's history is legally needed to maintain attribution as required by the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. — JJMC89(T·C) 09:33, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

NPP & AfC[edit]

A dedicated venue for combined discussion about NPP & AfC where a work group is also proposed has been created. See: Wikipedia:The future of NPP and AfC --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:56, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Invitation to Women in Architecture & Women in Archaeology editathons[edit]

Lady Elizabeth Wilbraham by Sir Peter Lely.jpg
Anne Stine Moe Ingstad (1918-1997).jpg

October 2016

Women in Architecture & Women in Archaeology editathons
Faciliated by Women in Red

Women in Red logo.svg

(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 20:05, 24 September 2016 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Request on 01:17:21, 26 September 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Verity (the retired Prof)[edit]

I just resubmitted the page on Anil Kashyap that you rejected with the comment "Certainly notable, but please also add third party sources such as reviews for his works." If you search Anil Kashyap inside Wikipedia the first five hits are the subject of the proposed page. Also, anybody reading the proposed Kashyap page will realize that the journals he has published reviewed work in and also been chosen to edit are the tops in the field. I don't think the Kashyap page is the place to benchmark those journals and use them as a validation of his importance -- the publication acceptances and venue speak for themselves. He is a chaired professor at the University of Chicago, which is also a review of his work. The last section of the proposed Kashyap page lists External Awards and Activities, which are both numerous and important. Also, Kashyap (an American) was recently appointed to serve on the Bank of England's Financial Policy Committee, which is a huge external validation of his impact and policy relevance. (This is why I sought to have a Wikipedia page on him -- he is of interest to a relatively wide audience. Not Robert Plant, but a wide following for the unique combination of an academic economist and an applied policymaker.) If you do a Google search of "Anil Kashyap citations" you will find a staggering number of published papers referencing his work -- but it would be tacky to put this citation count in the Wikipedia piece, and it would be wandering afield to reference the papers that cite him. I have included references to several prizes for his research in the new Kashyap page text as explicit reviews of his work, along with the implicit reviews I have itemized above.

Verity (the retired Prof) (talk) 01:17, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

06:32:48, 26 September 2016 review of submission by PriyankaD[edit]

Hi David,

I need your support in understanding the criteria for the reference links and press releases. As per the previous comment shared by reviewer Abdullah, the tone of the content has been changed to a neutral tone. Also need your help in understanding which part of the content looks like advertising.

The changes mentioned by you are very broad in terms of understanding. Request you to give some examples or suggest exactly what needs to be changed.

Hope to hear soon from you on this.

Arytenoid granuloma[edit]

You accepted this draft, yet all the wording is copyvio from this textbook. Some of the sentences have been moved into different sections, but the whole thing is theft. It's part of a pattern of very poor articles from a student course - this is one of last year's. I had a heads-up from knowing the course, so Googled a nice obscure group of words, "aspect of the larynx which is worse on phonation", and got a direct hit. PamD 13:12, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

ATM Industry Association (ATMIA) submission[edit]

Dear David

Following yesterday's chat and previous comments, I have updated the submission by

a) deleting mission statement (although note that this is present in the Futures Industry Association 's wikipedia entry)

b) Removing URL's to Linkedin, pr notes and most of the links back to the ATMIA website (only left those such as membership which require update through own content).

c) Made sure there is third party content to demonstrate its its own independent notability by:

c.I) Sources in which ATMIA features notably span for several years and include several sources from

c.I.i) ATMmarketplace c.I.ii) Finextra

c.II) Sources of high repute but where there is only one or to references include

c.II.a) Wired c.II.b) NY Times

c.III) As noted in the article, ATMIA has been active in coordinating member's action in Australia, Canada and the USA as well as the annual benchmarking study with Accenture. There are URL to freely available third party sources supporting these statements/documenting these activitiies.

c.IV) As I explained yesterday, a number of ATMIA members already have an entry in Wikipedia and make specific mention of their ATMIA membership (e.g. KAL Software). Most of these have been named in the member section of the proposed entry for ATMIA. Having a Wiki entry will enable to cross reference back to these entries.

Hopefully this will satisfy your requirements and you will be able to approve the contribution — Preceding unsigned comment added by CIM2014 (talkcontribs) 13:56, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Request on 15:27:07, 26 September 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by MBouch16[edit]

Hi there. The Bentley Systems page was deleted by SwisterTwister talk back on July 2016. This same admin also rejected the new article where I provided many examples of notability through the outside references I provided.

I disclosed that I am an employee of Bentley Systems and went through the existing article and found references to outside resources and provided citations for everything. I am not understanding how a $600+ million company who has been referenced in books and news articles is not considered notable. Every single citation/reference in the article references an outside source not related to the company and should prove notability.

I would like to kindly ask why exactly the page is not considered notable. Supplying links to the Wikipedia guides on notability is helpful but I really would like to see how this company is not considered as notable. Real examples, please.

I'm not trying to be difficult, but the Bentley Systems article was up since September of 2004 and suddenly gets deleted after being on Wikipedia after 12 years? I worked on this for weeks to make sure that every reference was verifiable and accurate. I would like to take the next step and request a formal appeal of the deletion of this page and also kindly ask a different admin review this please.

Could you please advise on how I may move forward with the appeal process?

Thank you.

--MBouch16 (talk) 15:27, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

MBouch16 (talk) 15:27, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

  • (talk page watcher) @MBouch16: You should talk to the admin who deleted the original article: this was not SwisterTwister but @MBisanz:. I'm not sure that it's appropriate for the editor who nominated the article for deletion last time round to be the one reviewing it at AfC this time, as he is clearly WP:INVOLVED in the topic. It also seems strange to suggest "wait a few years" for a company established in 1984 whose article has been in the encyclopedia for 12 years. PamD 15:50, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Hi, PamD. Thank you so much for your response. You are right, @MBisanz: deleted the page back in July and has been very helpful in this process for me. He/she brought back a copy of the page for me to work on and was kind enough to respond to all of my questions. He/she even helped me resubmit this article for review. It was SwisterTwister talk that reviewed the updated AFC and rejected the article. I'm just so confused as to how I can help get this article back up. I don't want to break any conflict of interest rules. I took the old article, fixed a couple of sentences, updated everything on that article with citations and references to external sources so there were verifiable resources. I just find this whole thing to be so odd. I'm just trying to help restore a page that mysteriously disappeared after 12 years. So, I'm not sure what @MBisanz: can do for me at this point. I am new to all of this and really tried hard to make sure I followed the Wikipedia guidelines. Would you suggest that I ask @MBisanz: to approve this article or should I go to an appeal to have it reviewed by others who are not WP:INVOLVED? Thanks!--MBouch16 (talk) 16:08, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
Ah, I hadn't realised MBisanz's involvement since the original deletion. I guess they'll come along to this page now after the pinging, and they can best advise how to proceed. Good luck. PamD 20:54, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
Thanks again for responding so quickly, PamD. This Wikipedia stuff has been a learning experience for me. I appreciate you responding. It helped just to get another person's opinion :-). --MBouch16 (talk) 21:03, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • PamD Hi, again. This is the recent response I received from SwisterTwister [[User talk:SwisterTwister|talk]: "Regardless of whether I was involved at the deletion, which I only then noticed when it alerted me the article had been deleted before, this is still quite unlikely to be accepted, because articles that were deleted so recently, are quite unlikely to be any different, and in some cases, anyone who would restart it after it's been deleted, would suggest they perhaps either simply want it restored or added again without considering why it was in fact deleted. SwisterTwister talk 16:42, 26 September 2016 (UTC)".
Does this seem fair to you? I cannot update the article with the citatitions and references that they couldn't find with a simple Google search? So, that's it? I'm not allowed to ask for reinstatement of the article because it is "too soon"? This response is unacceptable and seems very opinion based. All I want is someone to review the article with the updated references and citations which PROVE notability. So this company was notable for 12 years on Wikipedia and all of a sudden isn't? Any thoughts from an experienced Wikipedian like yourself? Thank you :-) --MBouch16 (talk) 13:16, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gundu English Secondary School, Suryavinayak, Bhaktapur[edit]

Hi SwisterTwister, Could you reopen and relist Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gundu English Secondary School, Suryavinayak, Bhaktapur as I'm not seeing any consensus to keep nor delete at the moment, There's been alot of discussion on schools lately and one thing that's been cropping up is that these schools should be reliably source regardless of SCHOOTOUCOMES,
Only one source was provided for that article which was a PDF - It's a source which is great however within the next year or 2 that source will become unavailable and we'll all be back to square one,
Thanks & Happy editing, –Davey2010Talk 00:47, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Deletion review for Gundu English Secondary School, Suryavinayak, Bhaktapur[edit]

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Gundu English Secondary School, Suryavinayak, Bhaktapur. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. –Davey2010Talk 09:04, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Your close of the Mount Airy High School AFD[edit]

You speedy closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mount Airy High School on the grounds that high schools are de facto notable. This close was erroneous on two fronts: First, it plainly contradicts the applicable guidelines, NSCHOOLS and ORGSIG| ("No company or organization is considered inherently notable. No organization is exempt from this requirement, no matter what kind of organization it is, including schools."). Second, "speedy keep" closes are only permissible in certain highly limited circumstances; it is not at all apparent that this is such a situation. Therefore, I request that you revert your close. Thank you. Rebbing 04:59, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

This is Speedy or Snow Keep, whichever, in that the Keep vote largely outweighed the Delete votes, and thus it was quite unlikely any other consensus would have formed; the one Delete vote simply stated "per above", whereas the Keep vote stated clearly and fluidly what their thoughts were. SwisterTwister talk 05:13, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
A snow keep is not a speedy keep. Please re-read WP:SK#NOT, which states this explicitly, and consider amending your close to state "snowball keep." There are important policy reasons why these two should not be conflated. That aside, I believe a snowball close was itself inappropriate: the discussion had only been open four days, and the voting was 8–2; that's clear consensus, but it's not a landslide, and there is no reason the discussion should not have been allowed to run its course. Thank you for your consideration. Rebbing 05:40, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Draft:DJ Greenguy[edit]

What does the DJ Greenguy article need to get published? I don't see what's missing when I look at the draft page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Apgforxceo (talkcontribs) 04:14, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

AFD request[edit]

You commented in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matt King (producer) on September 18 with a delete vote. However, there were two people batched in the nomination, but fully half the commenters (including you) only addressed one of the two — with the result that while one of the two articles has been deleted, the other one is still open and has been relisted another two times because nobody else has participated in the discussion since. Could you please return to express an opinion one way or the other about the remaining article? Thanks. Bearcat (talk) 07:45, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Request on 13:43:29, 28 September 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Vijayraj S Nadar[edit]

Vijayraj S Nadar (talk) 13:43, 28 September 2016 (UTC)