User talk:Theroadislong

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30
31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40
41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50
51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60
61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70
71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80
81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90
91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100
101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110
111, 112

This page has archives. Topics inactive for 20 days are automatically archived 1 or more at a time by if there are more than 4.

Welcome to my talk page. Click here to leave me a message

.

Request for reconsideration: Draft:Galloni.net

Women in Red - January 2026

Women in Red | January 2026, Vol 12, Issue 1, Nos 357, 358, 359, 360

Online events:

New: Sports (year-long initiative) | Alphabet run - countries starting with A
Continuing: #1day1woman ( year-long initiative) | Women who died in 2025

Announcements from other communities

Wikipedia turns 25! Celebrate Wikipedia Day on Jan 15, 2026.

Tip of the month:

Consider becoming a new page reviewer to help reduce the huge backlog of women's biographies.

Other ways to participate:

Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications.
Join the conversations on our talkpage.
Help us plan future events and add any general ideas on developing the project.
Follow us on social media:

Instagram | Pinterest

--Rosiestep (talk) 23:33, 26 December 2025 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

New pages patrol January–February 2026 Backlog drive

January–February 2026 Backlog Drive | New pages patrol

New Pages Patrol is hosting a one-time, two-month experimental backlog drive aimed at reducing the backlog. This will be a combo drive: both articles and redirects will earn points.

The drive will run from 1 January to 28 February 2026.
The drive is divided into two phases. Participants may take part in either phase or across both phases, depending on availability.
Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled during the drive.
Two-month drive-exclusive barnstars will be awarded to eligible participants.
Each article review earns 1 point, while each redirect review earns 0.2 points.
Streak awards will be granted based on consistently meeting weekly point thresholds.
Barnstars will also be awarded for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive.
Interested in participating? Sign up here.

You are receiving this message because you are a New Pages Patrol reviewer. To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself from here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:23, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification of Reliable Sources

Thank you for your December 8 feedback on my draft submission for an article on Peter E. Pylipow. I need help in better understanding the comments regarding "reliable secondary sources that are independent." The draft has many (20 or so) references to technical peer-reviewed professional journals (Quality Progress, Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers Journal, and Quality Magazine). How is it that these peer-reviewed journals are not reliable or sufficient? They are the leading technical journals of the profession. Thank you in advance for your explanation. ~2025-32432-34 (talk) 17:40, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

22 of your sources use "Expert Answers" none of them are verifiable, others are NOT independent since Pylipow wrote them. Theroadislong (talk) 17:54, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Pylipow wrote the articles. The purpose of the draft Wiki entry is to give recognition to an expert in the field, thus the many citations of the articles written by the expert/author. Regarding "independence," that is established by the status of these publications as peer-reviewed journals - independent experts in the profession have to review and accept the articles. That is common practice to establish reliability/credibility for professional journals. Regarding verifiable, I see that some of the links for Quality Progress do not immediately get to the electronic version of the articles any longer unless you become a member and login or become a registered visitor. That is unfortunate as ASQ used to be more open with their content. Try to become a "Registered Visitor" and see if you get better access. Nevertheless, hardcopy versions of the magazines are available in many major libraries and thus are verifiable. And of course I could send you pdfs of each to prove they exist, and we could remove the hyperlinks to the ones that are no longer open access electronically. Would that work for you? ~2025-32432-34 (talk) 22:41, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

NO... we require independent sources that cover him in-depth and your purpose "to give recognition to an expert in the field" is against all Wikipedia guidelines. Theroadislong (talk) 22:54, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Request for clarification on declined draft: Youverify

Hello,

Thank you for taking the time to review my draft article titled “Youverify.”

I understand that the draft was declined, and I would appreciate your guidance on the specific reasons for the decision.

Any clarification or direction you can provide would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you again for your time and assistance. Victoriawrites&edits (talk) 13:58, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft tells us everything the company would like us to know about them, that is just advertising, it fails WP:CORPDEPTH and WP:NCORP and you have used AI to generate content against Wikipedia's guidelines. Theroadislong (talk) 14:13, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mark O'Leary

Thank you for taking the time to review my draft article titled Mark O'Leary. I understand that the draft was declined, and I would appreciate your assistance on the specific reasons for the decision. Any suggestions would be appreciated. You seem to be rejecting me quite a bit. I hope its not personal or you have a vested/conflict of interest, if you do please recuse yourself and stop rejecting my articles. ~2025-44190-69 (talk) 17:43, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please remember to log in before editing. Your draft is being declined by multiple reviewers, you do not appear to pass the criteria at WP:NMUSICIAN. As for me having "a vested/conflict of interest" please don't be so absurd. Theroadislong (talk) 17:47, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mark O'Leary

Yes, I would like to reiterate, if you have a conflict of interest or personal issues, please recuse yourself and stop rejecting these drafts, you are very wrong and perhaps are not qualified to hold such a position. This kind of ignorance is eroding wikipedias legitimacy. If you have personal issues go to another platform. Mark O'Leary 44 (talk) 17:49, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is petty coming from the subject of the article they are trying to make of themself.... — Trailblazer¹⁰¹🔥^{(discuss · contribs)} 22:49, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Long time!

@Theroadislong, I just decided to check up on you, I mean, I haven't been active at AFC lately since I went for "Christmas" holiday in my village, and a typical Nigerian will tell you how network problem prevail. Well, I just saw few of your edits here, and would like to say: I understand your point but I, in another sense think it will pass AFD. I also wanted to clarify that you haven't join the league of "certain editors" who rejects the need for AFC as well as our acceptance of stubs. I just participated in that on-going discussion, and to be blunt, I am not happy how people couldn't appreciate AFC. It is well regardless. How are you doing? Happy Christmas and New Year too! SafariScribe^{Edits! Talk!} 16:08, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Happy new year to you too, can you point me to the "on-going discussion". I see pending AFC submissions are going up again already! Theroadislong (talk) 16:16, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

this SafariScribe^{Edits! Talk!} 16:28, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

ahh yes I'll keep out of it...though I have to say I am often irked by the VERY poor quality of experienced user FAs hastily created drafts, even though I accept many of them. EG: Moore House (Mandeville, Louisiana). Theroadislong (talk) 19:32, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Notification of Help Desk discussion

Hello. I wanted to let you know that I have opened a discussion at the Articles for Creation Help Desk regarding the recent changes to the Ryan Kavanaugh biography. I am seeking a neutral third-party opinion on the inclusion of industry milestones and historical wealth data to ensure the article remains balanced. You are welcome to join the discussion. Luciee254 (talk) 09:52, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Luciee254 that is the wrong venue, which is for new articles, you might be better off asking at the Wikipedia:Teahouse. Theroadislong (talk) 10:15, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Thanks Luciee254 (talk) 10:40, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from comments

We have far too much history. I would appreciate it if you refrained. Ldm1954 (talk) 18:21, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds rather threatening. Theroadislong (talk) 18:30, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

No, it is a polite request. Ldm1954 (talk) 18:31, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ldm1954 I have no recollection of any "history"? The draft about your wife would be acceptable if the external links were removed together with most of the primary sourced content. Theroadislong (talk) 21:02, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The external links are a minor issue. Let's discuss what are acceptable primary, secondary and tertiary in terms of WP:PSTS.

Using the current version, being conservative

Secondary: 2-5, 7, 18, 19 (established secondary source for not-for-profit information), 21, 25, 29-31, 34, 46
Secondary as a library copy of a PhD thesis (NPROF standard which not everyone may know) 6
Permitted primary which verify facts in the draft 1, 8-17, 20, 22-24, 26-28, 32-33, 35-45, 47
Standard award citing by a source, also a permitted primary use 48-54
Tertiary source 10

Summarizing, 14/54 are secondary, 32/54 are permitted primary, 7 are award verification and 1 is tertiary. All are allowed by policy under WP:PSTS.

Note 1, per WP:PRIMARY, noting the phrase A primary source may be used on Wikipedia only to make straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source but without further, specialized knowledge.

Note 2, a case could be made that 7 and 46 are also Tertiary as the list the Who's Who awardees. Ldm1954 (talk) 22:03, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh Ok, it's coming back to me now... the bludgeoning, Wikilawyering I will take your advice and refrain from further comment. Theroadislong (talk) 22:19, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Kindly check sir

Sir can you kindly pls check once Prasadpaturi (talk) 08:17, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Please help

Kindly review other two Villages Draft:Mohina and Draft:Kamarkuchi. SaTnamZIN (talk) 08:34, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Internal sources

I deleted that students union AI slop.

Did you notice? On the bottom of the drat it said

💡 Tip for Wikipedia:

Wikipedia prefers reliable third-party sources. Internal sources are good for draft, but the article will be stronger if media coverage, news reports, or official publications are cited.

"Internal sources are good for draft", WTH? This AI really isn't quite as 'I' as it seems to think. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:42, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

laughable! Theroadislong (talk) 09:44, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted edit

@Theroadislong

curprev 09:37, 6 January 2026 Sohom Datta talk contribs 27,057 bytes −167 Undid revision 1331444228 by Johnwilliamsiii (talk) not AFC reviewer/NPR undo thank Tag: Undo
cur prev 09:33, 6 January 2026 Johnwilliamsiii talk contribs 27,224 bytes +167 No edit summaryundo Tags: Reverted Visual edit:

Is this correct ? Am I not allowed to comment? Thanks Johnwilliamsiii (talk) 11:28, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The comments are reserved for WP:AFC reviewers, what leads you to want to comment I wonder? Theroadislong (talk) 11:39, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I came across the article, which led me to your page, where I noticed the threats made by its creator. I believe the article violates WP:NOTNEWS, and the threats directed at you are completely unacceptable. While it appears you have some prior history with the editor, that's beyond the scope of my concern. I have been away from WP for a long time, so maybe policies have changed. Johnwilliamsiii (talk) 14:05, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Policies have not changed, the draft probably does violate WP:NOTNEWS but I am keeping out of the hornets nest. Theroadislong (talk) 14:09, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Do tell! I love hornets nest. Any support needed? Dangerous grounds? Johnwilliamsiii (talk) 14:12, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Does it have anything to do with this: Draft of Maisie Myra Marks? Johnwilliamsiii (talk) 18:47, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry I have no idea what you are pursuing here, there is no Draft:Maisie Myra Marks? Theroadislong (talk) 19:22, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

04:11, 7 February 2023 diff hist +49 User talk:Theroadislong →Draft:Maisie Myra Marks: Fixed typo, minor clarification. thank Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit
00:52, 7 February 2023 diff hist +46 m User talk:Theroadislong →Draft:Maisie Myra Marks thank
00:51, 7 February 2023 diff hist +556 User talk:Theroadislong →Draft:Maisie Myra Marks: new section thank Tag: New topic

Johnwilliamsiii (talk) 22:09, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Are you hounding me or User:Ldm1954? Either way please stop. Theroadislong (talk) 22:47, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I thought there was a pattern. Bye Johnwilliamsiii (talk) 22:52, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

06 January 2026

Hey

can you please recheck my draft and say if it deserves to go to the mainspace

Korean Catholic Association TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 15:57, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Editing while logged out

Hi, thanks for reaching out, however I haven't made any edit on Ryan Kavanaugh's page while logged out, I have seen the edit from the other editor and Yes! Variety is a notable source for Film, television and entertainment subjects and therefore that information should stay there. Thanks 2026-10154-2 Luciee254 (talk) 10:09, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

On the contrary it is a primary source (there is no such thing as a "notable source") and the award is NOT notable so should not be mentioned in the lead. Theroadislong (talk) 10:28, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I don't want to look like I'm getting in a push and pull with you but can you stop accusing me of engaging in an editing war. Between me and you who did the revert as soon as it was posted? And again where else should the information come from if not from the primary source for film and entertainment? If the primary source from the film and entertainment recognizes Ryan Kavanaugh what creates the difference or bars it from being added in the free encyclopedia? Luciee254 (talk) 10:52, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It is in the article already, it doesn't need to be in the lede because it is NOT a notable award! Theroadislong (talk) 11:16, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Draft: Priya Punnoose

Hello! I’ve added multiple independent and reliable secondary sources that provide significant coverage of Dr. Priya Punnoose’s congressional campaign, including a profile with direct quotes (Patch), local election coverage (Annandale Today, Virginia Scope), and participation in a candidate forum (WJLA). The article should meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines for people in politics. I’d appreciate a re-review with these sources in place. Thanks! ~2026-14946-5 (talk) 07:12, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Draft: NOCCO (energy drink)

Hello, I saw that you did not accept my revised and improved version of the article Draft:NOCCO (energy drink), which was drafted back in August 2025 and I made some substantial changes to the article with the purpose of having a more encyclopedic writing style and tone, more references and more sources. You mention the article lacks in-depth, reliable, secondary and independent sources and information. Unfortunately, it is hard to find much information about the drink that comes from accepted verifiable sources. I understand it is not widely known, but it is not a small brand and sells to different countries. I am by no means associated with the enterprise themselves, I am just a casual enjoyer of that drink sometimes and it was the reason I wanted to write an article about it, and it is absolutely not meant as an advert to attract more people into consuming that drink.

If you could guide me on how I could improve that article to make it more suitable as a Wikipedia article, I'd be glad to hear your thoughts on this.

Thanks. Ristando (talk) 12:31, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

December 2025 AfC backlog drive award

		The Order of the Superior Scribe of Wikipedia
		This is awarded to Theroadislong for accumulating more than 656.5 points during the December 2025 AfC backlog drive. Your dedication and contributions to Wikipedia's content review process were crucial in reviewing over 9,000 drafts during the drive. Thank you for your participation and helping to reduce the backlog! ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 15:29, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

December 2025 AfC backlog drive re-reviews award

		The Teamwork Barnstar
		Many people review drafts. You review the reviewers. You peer-reviewed the peer reviewers and supported your fellow Wikipedians. :) This is awarded to Theroadislong for completing more than 50 re-reviews during the December 2025 AfC backlog drive. Thank you for your efforts and teamwork! ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 08:23, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

WP:GNG

hi there, you recently gave me some advice regarding WP;GNG on draft I have, I was wondering if you would able to assess the changes I have made. many thanks. Dr.micahel (talk) 13:35, 14 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Draft:Patrick Casey (cyclist) it would be helpful to wiki-link the races and awards, if they have Wikipedia articles. Theroadislong (talk) 13:46, 14 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

would you be happy to assess the changes i have made in response to this ? thanks Dr.micahel (talk) 14:50, 14 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]