User talk:Sylvan1971

Welcome!

Hello, Tbliss558, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, like Fund for wild nature, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for page creation, and may soon be deleted (if it hasn't already).

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Ravenswing 00:34, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Fund for wild nature

A tag has been placed on Fund for wild nature, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Ravenswing 00:34, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

November 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:

editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. -- Rrburke (talk) 02:53, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Robert Piser for deletion

A discussion has begun about whether the article Robert Piser, which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert Piser until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. -- Rrburke (talk) 03:28, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of The Daily Palette for deletion

A discussion has begun about whether the article The Daily Palette, which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Daily Palette until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. -- Rrburke (talk) 03:35, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you must sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 03:04, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

December 2010

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you must sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. Dloh cierekim 01:51, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Sylvan1971. You have new messages at Rrburke's talk page.
Message added 02:15, 10 December 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Daily palette prefix:Wikipedia:Deletion review

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and the page that you created has been or soon will be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button that looks like this: which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Reaper Eternal (talk) 00:23, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Daily Palette, afd,

Hello, Sylvan1971. You have new messages at Dlohcierekim's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Disambiguation link notification for November 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Robert Piser, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Berkeley. 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) 11:31, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: director) (December 1)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by TJH2018 was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of people, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

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.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Richard Levine (writer/director) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

TJH2018 talk 17:10, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Tbliss558, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! TJH2018 talk 17:10, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Richard Levine concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Richard Levine, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:33, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Richard Levine (writer/director) concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Richard Levine (writer/director), a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:33, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 30

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Imagine (John Lennon album), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Imagine (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 10:18, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problem on Imagine (John Lennon album)

Content you added to the above article appears to have been copied from https://www.aetv.com/specials/john-and-yoko-above-us-only-sky, which is not released under a compatible license. Copying text directly from a source is a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policy. Unfortunately, for copyright reasons, the content had to be removed. Content you add to Wikipedia should be written in your own words. Please leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:43, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Richard Levine (director) has been accepted

Richard Levine (director), 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. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

DGG ( talk ) 08:21, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Palmer Report

Please seek consensus, rather than making the same edit against consensus every few months. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 00:22, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

These use of descriptives such as “fake” are not supported by the references. If you review my changes instead of simply rolling them back, you will see I did not delete or change the opinions of the sources. What I changed was Wikipedia’s statement of fact that some content is “fake.” This is far from the neutral dictionary Wikipedia is intended to be. It smacks of political bias. Please undo your undo. Tbliss558 (talk) 23:33, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is a strong consensus to use that label. The are numerous discussions with analysis of sources in the talk page archives. The onus is on you to get consensus for the change you'd like to make. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:36, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have any evidence of this supposed "consensus"? The onus is on you to provide it - if it exists.

My edits reflect the fact that I am simply looking for a neutral tone. You appear to have an axe to grind.

Where do you derive your authority for inserting personal opinion into an article? Tbliss558 (talk) 17:58, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Palmer_Report/Archive_3#Semi-protected_edit_request_on_22_August_2021

Talk:Palmer_Report/Archive_4 - Pretty much that whole archive

Talk:Palmer_Report/Archive_5 - Most of this archive

Talk:Palmer_Report#Would_appreciate_certain_editors_stopping_the_personal_attacks_like_calling_Palmer_Report_Russia-phobic_and_Nazis.

Any further discussion should take place on the article talk page. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:56, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No “consensus” found. Opinion only. Tbliss558 (talk) 15:19, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Palmer_Report Tbliss558 (talk) 15:28, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

American politics discretionary sanctions

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:41, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bruce Ryan (May 31)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Robert McClenon was:

The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you.

The comment the reviewer left was:

See Referencing for Beginners and the instructions on footnotes. In-line citations are required in biographies of living persons.

Please revise this draft with properly formatted footnotes before resubmitting. You may ask for advice on references at the Teahouse.

This draft has no references. Notability cannot be established without references.

Do not resubmit this draft without references. You can ask for advice about references at the Teahouse.

The title of this draft either has been disambiguated or will require disambiguation if accepted. If this draft is accepted, a hatnote will need to be added to the primary page to refer to this page. If there is already a hatnote on the primary page, please review whether a disambiguation page is in order instead.

The primary page is Bruce Ryan.

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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Bruce Ryan and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Bruce Ryan, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Robert McClenon (talk) 02:30, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

working on citations; didn't expect it to be reviewed immediately Tbliss558 (talk) 23:53, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bruce Ryan (June 1)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by KylieTastic were:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Note IMDB is not a reliable source see WP:IMDB - please remove and replace

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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Bruce Ryan and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Bruce Ryan, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

KylieTastic (talk) 17:35, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

IMDB is user generated and edited; it's just as reliable, for better or worse, as wikipedia. Tbliss558 (talk) 19:20, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bruce Ryan (production designer) (November 1)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Greenman was:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Please don't waste reviewer's time by resubmitting without addressing previous concerns. The Early life section is still entirely unsourced. Personal life section, entirely unsourced. Since there is unsourced personal life info, please also address WP:COI.

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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Bruce Ryan (production designer) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Greenman (talk) 12:22, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bruce Ryan (production designer) (January 4)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by TheChunky were:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
reliable
secondary
independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Bruce Ryan (production designer) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

❯❯❯ Chunky aka Al Kashmiri (✍️) 14:12, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bruce Ryan (production designer) (May 6)

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Rusalkii was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: No improvements since the previous decline. Every source is either a trivial database entry or has Bruce Ryan mentioned in one line - there is no substantive coverage here at all. If you don't have any additional sources with at least 2-3 paragraphs about Bruce Ryan, specifically, it will just continue to be declined, wasting your and our time.

Rusalkii (talk) 18:20, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Bruce Ryan (production designer)

Hello, Sylvan1971. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Bruce Ryan (production designer), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 19:02, 6 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Sylvan1971. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{edit COI}} template);
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest § How to disclose a COI);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam § External link spamming);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. S0091 (talk) 20:53, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Bruce Ryan (production designer)

First, you need to be transparent about any WP:COIs you have and make the appropriate declarations on your User page. I do think Ryan meets the notability criteria given the awards but it needs a lot of clean up to remove all the puffery and statements that fail verifiability thus violates WP:BLP so is not in an acceptable state. If you do these things, leave a note on my talk page and I will review the draft. And, yes, Wikipedia is inconsistent for various reasons and in many ways that is a feature rather than bug (i.e. policies/guidelines/norms change, we are humans, etc.) yet also can be unfair or at the very least annoying. S0091 (talk) 21:38, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the helpful suggestions and advice you gave with respect to the Bruce Ryan page. I endeavored to make the changes you suggested, removing unverifiable or subjective information (based on IMDB credits which Wikipedia chooses not to recognize). Please review at your convenience and let me know if you think it needs additional revision or can be moved along the publication process. Thanks again. Sylvan1971 (talk) 22:20, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also address your COIs. For the draft there are still unsourced statements and Def Poetry Jam was not his show. IMDB is not a reliable source because users can update profiles and they do not fact check (same with Discogs). I will use IMDB for hints (not as source) when looking for potential sources, though. For example, I research a particular claim to see if I can find a reliable source like the AFI catalog or news sources. S0091 (talk) 22:37, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reply. Ryan indeed designed the Def Poetry Jam. I’ll add an appropriate source. Sylvan1971 (talk) 16:16, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello - Last November you suggested "Ryan meets the notability criteria given the awards but it needs a lot of clean up to remove all the puffery and statements that fail verifiability thus violates WP:BLP so is not in an acceptable state." I believe I have made all appropriate changes. I plan to move this to mainspace (no, there is no COI) but wanted to give oyu another opportunity to comment before doing so. Thank you. Sylvan1971 (talk) 23:02, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your prompt reply. Ryan did indeed design the Broadway (and touring) Def Poetry Jam. The source I noted (not IMDB; as I wrote earlier, I know IMDB disallows this source) indicates this. I have 5 other sources confirming this. Perhaps you are thinking of the tv series. Please advise regarding "unsourced statement." Thanks again. Sylvan1971 (talk) 01:43, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Bruce Ryan (production designer) has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Bruce Ryan (production designer). Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 17:02, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comments. I have addressed them by removing/replacing sources to which you objected. Sylvan1971 (talk) 19:24, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Bruce Ryan (production designer) has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Bruce Ryan (production designer). Thanks! S0091 (talk) 19:31, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is no COI with respect to this page. (There is a COI with respect to another article I am editing and I will address that separately.) Your accusation of a "history" of "multiple COIs" is without foundation and borders on libel. Please retract it. Sylvan1971 (talk) 19:48, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Be careful about using language like "libel" as that could be construed as a legal threat (read that) which is a blockable offense but I don't think that is your intention. I could lay out your history, the connections across articles you have edited and another account which dates back to 2008 (not your name change, another account which shares the name of an article you created) but I don't want to to do that. I engaged with you in good faith, stated you needed to disclose three times yet your ignored it time and again. You do not need to disclose who you are or the specifics behind the COIs, only that you do. First confirm you have read WP:COI and relating specifically to Bruce Ryan, please confirm you do not know him/have any affiliation with him that meets the definition. S0091 (talk) 20:41, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As I wrote in my message directly above, there is no COI relating to Bruce Ryan.

I am not aware of a COI dating to 2008 or elsewhere (except one, as noted above). If you are, please let me know and I will do my best to address. Perhaps you are referring to Fund for Wild Nature, a 501(c)(3) I briefly and modestly supported 15 years ago ago and was surprised at that time to find Wikipedia did not have an article about. So I submitted one, which has been reviewed and edited by other editors 45 times in the 15 years since that time. In good faith, I have no connection with the organization and do not believe there was ever a COI.

I do not have another Wikipedia account so please let me know what you refer to by "another account which shares the name of an article you created."

Finally, my name change was simply to become less identifiable, as are most editors including yourself. It's no secret; it's obvious to any editor who chooses to look at my history.

In closing, I do appreciate your engagement and hope we can move forward with the Bruce Ryan article, one issue at a time. This dialog is intended to demonstrate I am trying to meet Wikipedia's standards. Thank you. Sylvan1971 (talk) 00:39, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Laura A. Bliss (July 21)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by SafariScribe were:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Laura A. Bliss and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 00:18, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for your prompt review. It would be most helpful if you would provide me with examples of which references you view as unverified. That will help me make necessary revisions. Sylvan1971 (talk) 04:26, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Awaiting your reply. My sources appear to be reliable as defined by Wikipedia. They are certainly verifiable. Please advise so I can address. Thank you. Sylvan1971 (talk) 21:17, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Laura A. Bliss (August 30)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by SafariScribe were:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Doesn't meet WP:NJOURNALIST. Sources appears to be WP:SELFPUB.

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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Laura A. Bliss and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 09:59, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate the prompt response but, with respect, you are mistaken. Every source is reliable, the coverage is significant (this is a subjective point) and none of the sources are self published. Please reconsider. Sylvan1971 (talk) 18:25, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mistaken? There is nothing to consider. Please familiarize yourself with WP:N. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 18:29, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Laura A. Bliss (October 14)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by ThadeusOfNazereth was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Sourcing does not establish either WP:GNG or WP:NJOURNALIST. Most of the sourcing here are just articles written by the subject and are used to say "she wrote an article here," which isn't great. The discussion around Quarantine Atlas could potentially be used to meet the second criteria of WP:NJOURNALIST, but that isn't clearly established in the article itself.

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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Laura A. Bliss and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 15:48, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your prompt review. I do want to push back a bit: Regarding WP:GNG, there is no question that the sources are reliable, secondary and independent. Presumed and significant are objective metrics and we simply disagree on these points, particularly if we look at most Wikipedia biographies of living persons. Regarding WP:NJOURNALIST, the subject is cited in Wikipedia at least 5 times (which of course I don't cite). A subject cited in several Wikipedia articles deserves explanation and, as such, is a strong candidate for an article. The subject's MapLab series has in fact garnered a large community of followers among both cartographic and general audiences. The book, as you acknowledge, satisfies criteria #3.

With respect, I ask that you reconsider your rejection. In the meantime, I will endeavor to strengthen references to "Quarantine Atlas", per your helpful suggestion. Thank you. Sylvan1971 (talk) 16:25, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Laura A. Bliss (October 15)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by OlifanofmrTennant were:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Several bare URLs as well as reading like a reseme.

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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Laura A. Bliss and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 17:59, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your prompt review. Perhaps it was a bit cursory? The sources cited in my draft are all reliable. Please point out any which you find to be otherwise. In the meantime, I will fix any bare URLs I can find.

While this is somewhat subjective, compared to most Wikipedia biographies of living persons, the references do show that this subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article; they do show significant coverage about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject.

Please take another, careful look. Thank you. Sylvan1971 (talk) 21:32, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed all the bare references, thank you. Sylvan1971 (talk) 22:37, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Laura A. Bliss (October 22)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Snowman304 was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

still reads like a resume/press release; still has bare URLs

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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Laura A. Bliss and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Snowman304|talk 02:11, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]