Jump to content

User talk:Theroadislong/Archive 30

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 25←Archive 28Archive 29Archive 30Archive 31Archive 32→Archive 35

15:13:55, 6 January 2018 review of submission by Hhpop

Hello, Re: the Esmee Visser article submission - the content is a carbon copy of the Dutch page for Esmee Visser. The Dutch version, incidentally, is also sourceless. (Edit: someone has inserted an ISU source, by the looks.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hhpop (talk • contribs) 15:16, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

The fact that there are poorly sourced articles on another Wikipedia is not a good argument, and you or I watching a programme is NOT a reliable published source, somebody else has helped out and added a source so it will be accepted soon. Theroadislong (talk) 15:23, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Draft for Shehab Khan

Hi,

I hope you are well - you have not replied to last few messages.

As you requested I removed the links from The Sun and Facebook and have provided other external sources about the entry which include the BBC, Press Gazzette, Manchester Evening News and LBC.

Could you please read over the entry, would be great to hear from you and happy to make any other changes you deem necessary. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Asda3991 (talk • contribs) 20:05, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Just wanted to say thanks

As a new wikipedia user I appreciate the assistance. Shawn M. Kent (talk) 20:19, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Draft for Shehab Khan

Hi,

Thanks for the feedback - unfortunately that's the best I can offer at this time in terms of sources.

I am very disappointed but no bother, maybe there will be more sources in the future.

Would just like to thank you for your time and feedback.

Best wishes, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Asda3991 (talk • contribs) 20:35, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Thanks for reviewing Banglar Bodhu, Theroadislong.

Unfortunately Winged Blades of Godric has just gone over this page again and unreviewed it. Their note is:

None of the sources mention the film.How did you pass it without any tag?

To reply, leave a comment on Winged Blades of Godric's talk page.

Winged BladesGodric 07:03, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

The film has a notable award, I assumed with good faith that the foreign language reference confirmed this. My mistake. Theroadislong (talk) 08:32, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

12:24:07, 7 January 2018 review of submission by JoeyFeeni

I think the page now meets Wikipedia's standards

I will leave it for another reviewer to look at. Theroadislong (talk) 12:32, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Sherry Sufi

Hi @Theroadislong ,

In regards to the submission for Sherry Sufi, given that we have articles such Karina Okotel and Avi Yemini, who have similarities with Sufi in regards to being right-wing former or prospective candidates who have a public profile, hold political positions, and were featured in interviews and write opinion pieces, I believed the article is sufficiently notable. He has multiple television appearances both related and unrelated to his political candidacy. The original draft wasn't mine, but I've taken it up for consistency's sake. Thanks, Judeti (talk) 15:16, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

I didn't decline the article? I pointed out that no changes had been made since the previous decline. Theroadislong (talk) 15:29, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Tai Lopez (Entrepreneur) declined

Hey Theroadislong, I saw you declined this draft on basis of notability. I'm not sure that was a fair assessment, given the three reliable sources I added to the article yesterday (Forbes, Vice, HuffPo) which are mainstream media outlets that have significant coverage of the subject of the article. Could you please take a moment to look over the article again? I think it easily meets WP:GNG. Thanks, AdA&D 14:45, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

My decline was before your addition of sources, I'll let another reviewer take a look. Theroadislong (talk) 15:27, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
Ah, I see that now. My mistake! AdA&D 15:58, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Donovan J. Greening

Hi, please give me a call I have a few questions on how we can adjust the Donovan J. Greening wiki page so that it can be more reliable and remain on wikipedia. 248-225-0882 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.70.133.170 (talk) 16:07, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

No thanks you can tell me here. Theroadislong (talk) 16:16, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Request on 18:41:05, 7 January 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Camdavis


I don't understand. I made the mechanical fixes requested. Then the article was rejected for a completely different and more fundamental reason. I would not have made the mechanical fixes requested had I known earlier about the newest and different reasons for rejection. A lot of us understand that Wikipedia relies heavily on volunteers. All the more reason that respecting people's time is paramount.

I'm not sure what to do now. And even if these latest problems are fixed, whether Wikipedia will reject the article again for completely different reasons.


Camdavis (talk) 18:41, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

The article is entirely unsourced? No articles are ever accepted without sources. The first decline was for being poorly sourced, the second was because it doesn't show why the subject is even notable enough for an article. WE need reliable secondary sources that discuss the subject in-depth. Theroadislong (talk) 18:50, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your quick review

I appreciate your quick feedback on the draft page for thank you for reviewing the draft for "Krishan A. Canekeratne". He truly is an interesting man from the creation of several major companies, receiving the Sri Lanka Sikhamani Honor to being the number 1 ranked under-16 table tennis player in Sri Lanka. I would love to be able to get this page up there for him. I have removed all in-line external hyperlinks as you requested to improve the overall readability.

I look forward to your re-review!

Greenough Ben (talk) 12:59, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

Liz Hannah

Hello! I saw back on the 14th of December, you reviewed my Liz Hannah page. I have added three sources, so I think it should be fine now! I am just telling you because it has not been reviewed again in around 24 days. Thanks for your initial review, and will accept and change anything that you point out. Thanks a ton for the help!

DrChicken24 (talk) 15:25, 8 January 2018 (UTC)DrChicken24

Gerhard W Goetze Draft

Thanks for the heads-up on the YouTube. Will try to contact CBS directly since we probably have the only tape of that time period. Also, just FYI made a donation to Wikipedia Foundation with gratitude for your work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rgroman (talk • contribs) 20:47, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

Request on 11:35:18, 9 January 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Orlando Murrin


Hello, thank you for your comments. No I didn't create this page, it was done by an academic at Exeter University but he asked me to check it for accuracy and provide citations, and then I ended up posting it myself because he found the publishing system confusing. It seemed to me was disproportionately long and detailed. Regarding notability and verifiability, a lot of the facts in the biography are recorded: e.g. books and articles published. Would you suggest I ask him to try again, sticking only to these 'published' facts? Would you rather he actually published it, rather than me? Thank you again Orlando Murrin (talk) 11:35, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Orlando Murrin (talk) 11:35, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

16:07:57, 9 January 2018 review of submission by Bgrandone80


Hello, can you please help me with the edit of my article? I've tried to follow all your notes and I've quoted each time certain peacock terms are used. It's my first time here, I'd love if you could point out more specific edits I can do to improve the article! thanks Bianca — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bgrandone80 (talk • contribs) 16:07, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for giving feedback on my article so quick! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nimbo.lo (talk • contribs) 20:48, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

11:01:59, 10 January 2018 review of submission by JWegel


Hello, I don't know what I have to change in this article that it can be published. Could you please tell me exactly what I need to change or give me examples in the text? I do not quite understand why this article is considered advertising. What is exactly the problem?

I look forward to your reply. regards

Do you work for the company by any chance? Wikipedia has essentially no interest in anything the company has to say about themselves. It is only interested in what people who have no connection with them have chosen to publish about them. Your article has no sources except the company website and so is not acceptable. Theroadislong (talk) 13:37, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

01:36:45, 10 January 2018 review of submission by Sparx.kfukui



Hi Theroadislong,

I updated the sparx group draft page and resubmitted for publishing. I had originally not done enough citing; I found 5 or so articles that directly discuss Sparx group. There are many more articles in Japanese than English, wondering if I should add Japanese references as well.

Would appreciate if you could take a look when you get a chance.

Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sparx.kfukui (talk • contribs) 01:36, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Japanese references would be fine, I will not be advising you further though, because you are being paid to edit. Theroadislong (talk) 18:51, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Can you edit my BeepBox article?

If you find more about fixing my references, please let me know! — Preceding unsigned comment added by StinkerB06 (talk • contribs) 18:58, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion

Hello,

I'm new to Wikipedia editing and I accidentally deleted the template for speedy deletion that you put in the Tammie Shannon article I am working on. I want to finish the page and contest the speedy deletion properly—not trying to play dirty here—but can't figure out how to reinsert the template, can you add it back? Sorry to bother you

here's the link to the page I'm talking about

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tammie_Shannon

PJ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Evan07x (talk • contribs) 22:07, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

You seem to have found more sources so speedy deletion wouldn't be right now, I have tagged it for notability. Theroadislong (talk) 22:14, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

23:03:11, 10 January 2018 review of submission by Rossmoody88

Please tell me what exactly about Discogs makes it an unreliable source, so I can re-do the article with sources that will be considered reliable. Also please let me know what exactly (if anything) needs to be changed about the article besides what you mentioned in your comment.

Thanks.

The Discogs links merely confirm the existence of the music. You need to provide detailed references showing the subject has received in-depth significant coverage, in reliable sources that are independent of the topic. The essay, Wikipedia:No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability, may explain this better. Theroadislong (talk) 23:11, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

01:11:13, 11 January 2018 review of submission by Sparx.kfukui


Hi Theroadislong,

My apologies, I didn't see you last response. I do work for the company, I attempted to disclose that according to the guidelines.. but perhaps I did not do it right. The citations and references I made were all second party articles, and I did not use anything the company publishes. Please let me know if there is anything I can do.

Hi again, just read up about COI and sounds like I should not be publishing this article. Would it be allright if I ask a non-affiliated friend to start this page? Thank you

Thank you Sparx.kfukui (talk) 01:54, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Sparx.kfukui (talk) 01:11, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Things I should improve

Hello.. I have unsuccessfully edited the article. bt I need help. I cannot seem to reference well and put everything in order. In short I am not able to fix the notability part of the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eujoe (talk • contribs) 09:48, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Kouneiher

Hey,

I gave enough external links to support everything, I have mentioned.

So what's up with that page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shyam.alex (talk • contribs) 12:22, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

The sources you added were to his books plus one commercial link to buy his book these are notreliable sources for establishing notability. Theroadislong (talk) 12:49, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Vashmere Valentine

Would any of the several interviews that Vashmere has done be acceptable? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael Johnathan Katz (talk • contribs) 16:20, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Not really no. I'm afraid that, like many others, you have misunderstood what Wikipedia is about. We only summarise what reliable, independent published sources say about a topic, we have no interest in what Vashmere says about himself. You need to establish his notability by adding references that show there is widespread coverage of him in reliable sources. Theroadislong (talk) 16:23, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Focus Investment Banking - Page Deleted

Hello, someone named Hut 8.5 deleted a page that I made for the investment bank that I work for (Focus Investment Banking). It is a real company with about 50 people who work there (www.focusbankers.com) I added it to the pages for "list of investment banks" and made it a page -- based on a number of pages for other banks. However the code is now gone, and I am afraid if I create it, Hut 8.5 will just speedy delete it again. What should I do?

FrozenMan (talk) 19:32, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

I suggest you read the conflict of interest guidelines. Wikipedia is not the place to promote your bank. Theroadislong (talk) 19:35, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Why did you remove the Article Geoeges Deicha? He has a sufficient notoriety in the French German and Russian Wikipedia.

Why did you remove Georges Deicha? He has a sufficient notoriety in the French and German edition. Bestr regards Alfons Helbert Alfons Helbert (talk) 06:51, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

I didn't remove Draft:Georges Deicha? I left you a comment about help with formatting sources. Theroadislong (talk) 09:11, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Masthaven

Hi Theroadislong, yes this is the first article i created on Wiki. Following the reaction from the first attempt in December, we tried to keep the article as clean from marketing as possible. This is 100% factual now. Can you point me to what's wrong please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Reubenv01 (talk • contribs) 10:03, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

@Reubenv01: Who is "we" Wikipedia accounts are strictly for single person use, if you are editing for your company you will need to read and comply with WP:COI. Advertising terms include… "Masthaven offers specialist property finance, mortgages and savings products" "Masthaven has formed a strong team" "It has the philosophy of "Human Digital Banking" to offer customers personalised and flexible solutions." plus a list of non notable awards. Theroadislong (talk) 10:10, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
@Theroadislong: by we - the MD and I sat down and removed what we thought was promotional material. Sorry - should have been clearer. reading the WP:COI shortly. re the advertising terms above, that's who we are, that's what we do and we are definetly not considering that as advertising :(
I don't mean to intrude on this page but I would state that the fact that you don't see how the terminology you are using is promotional would suggest that you aren't able to write an article with the objectivity and neutral point of view required. In order to successfully write an article about your business, you need to forget everything you know about it and only write based on what independent sources state. 331dot (talk) 10:26, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Growth Capital Venutres Amendments

Hello Theroadislong

Thanks for taking the time to review the submission. May I ask what sections you think come across as an advertisement so that I can amend and resubmit. Furthermore I do work for GCV, however, I decided to submit this article for educational purposes not because I'm being paid to do so.

Kind regards,

Luca — Preceding unsigned comment added by LucaPeterson (talk • contribs) 14:06, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

If you work for them then you are considered to be a paid editor. The entire draft reads like an advert not a neutral encyclopedia article. From the very first spam link in the first sentence to each unreferenced section afterwards. Please read WP:42. In short: Wikipedia has essentially no interest in anything that a subject says or wants to say about itself: it is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject have published about it, in reliable places. Theroadislong (talk) 14:18, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Changes done, help please!

Dear Theroadislong,

I wanted to let you know that I have been working very hard on this article and I have made all the changes you requested. I have also been studying how other wikipedia articles look like and I think that finally my article is starting to look like it should to be approved by you. I also added some citations, by the way. In conclusion, I have been doing my research and homework and I think you will find this new article to be much more aligned with the wikipedia style articles.

I wanted to ask your advice on something. I have found some relevant foreign language articles about the doctor. Do you think I should include them?

Finally, I wanted to ask you if I could get the article publishsed as is and then I can continue to add on it over time.

Can you let me know? :-)

I look forward to your feedback, and thank you for everything!

SaraGWik (talk) 20:14, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

See here]

You posted a COI notice. I would note that user has been scruplous in noting his paid editing. Just sayin ... 22:09, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Yes I know he has, but I would still strongly advise them not to directly edit the article as per best practice. Theroadislong (talk) 22:13, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
please help. Lacypaperclip (talk) 10:34, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
Happy to help, but what with? Theroadislong (talk) 11:35, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Re: Revelstoke, Devon

Hello Theroadislong. Thanks for accepting my draft so very quickly, especially as it says there is a two month waiting list! Could you also look at my other similar articles Draft:Pathfinder Village and Draft:Monkokehampton? They are also places in Devon. Thanks. Ilyina Olya Yakovna (talk) 11:34, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks so much :) Ilyina Olya Yakovna (talk) 11:38, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Some issue with the curation review toolbar

Hi Theroadislong. I was reviewing Charles Akinyele Akindayomi, and had decided to nominate the same for Afd using the curation toolbar. When I clicked on the button to nominate, I got the message that the page was already up for nomination, and that the curation script was cancelling my nomination. But strangely, it went ahead and actually created the nom page. Just wanted to apologize for the inadvertent inconvenience this might have caused you. Thanks, Lourdes 17:59, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

No worries I think we were both editing at the same time, I've never managed to get the curation toolbar to show up despite having it installed? Theroadislong (talk) 19:56, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
You could follow the instructions I've given at User:Lourdes/PageCuration (check the trouble shooting link). Lourdes 07:09, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for that!!! After 11 years I have found the curate this article link! Theroadislong (talk) 10:10, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
You're welcome :) Lourdes 12:08, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm Nick Moyes. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Kifanga, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

Nick Moyes (talk) 13:23, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, it was a close call so I erred on the side of caution and tagged it with notability. Theroadislong (talk) 13:53, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Kifanga

Hello Theroadislong, you recently reviewed my page kifanga and am looking forward to rectifying the issues you highlighted.But another editor tagged my page for speedy deletion.Am asking if you would please write to him informing him to reconsider my page as it is work in progress and that the notability issues highlighted can be sourced elsewhere is only that i have not yet referenced in the article yet. Let me know of the outcome.I would really appreciate your help on this one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Patpatrick (talk • contribs) 16:03, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

You should create the article using the WP:AFC process which gives you all the time you need to work on it. I do agree with Nick Moyes though, the article still doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia. Theroadislong (talk) 16:12, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Dear Theroadislong Thank you for your input I have made some changes to page Sina Ghanbari, adding more independent sources.Please see if you like them. Thanks.Alex-h (talk) 22:17, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Reply to list of CEDM artists edit

Hello,

I am replying to your message sent to me earlier. I do not understand why you revised my edit back to your previous redirect. I clearly explained why I was taking down the redirect and that I was going to revise the page. I went to submit 8 hours' worth of edits just now only to have them completely erased due to your edit in the meantime. The current redirect is to a page that lists artists who claim to be Christian whom have produced EDM-type music. The redirect page is not a list of CEDM artists. These are two different things. The page that this is redirecting to is a mess anyways. Many of the listed artists are decades removed from their last production of Christian EDM music. Many of the listed artists are even improperly categorized under what that page does represent. The redirect page has completely outdated sources too. This page would be better off taken down than redirected there because, as of currently, it is spreading false information by redirecting the readers there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Newens (talk • contribs) 23:21, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Your edit here [1] added nothing at all? None of your edits were erased because all you did was remove a redirect. Theroadislong (talk) 23:23, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Assistance at AfC

Greetings Theroadislong and please forgive my intrusion to your talk page. I am a newbie AfC reviewer and I stumbled upon your name as an AfC reviewer on countless AfC submissions. I recently encountered an AfC submission and would be in need of your help and judgement. Hope you won't find it all too uncomfortable. My apologies if you do.

I declined the submission as I thought the list was redundant per WP:LISTCRUFT and not a legitimate encyclopaedic topic. Thanks in advance. EROS message 15:23, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

I'm no expert on list type articles but your reasoning seems sound enough as per Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Theroadislong (talk) 15:31, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
Thank you User:Theroadislong. Have a great day. EROS message 04:04, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Awesome articles!

Hi!

I checked out some of your articles. Great stuff! I have been doing my research for some time and finally ready to submit. I just submitted my first one for review. I saw that someone else tried to start it. Any advice or suggestions for this and future articles?

I look forward to hearing from you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fabian0821 (talk • contribs) 21:24, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Nancy Wilson (basketball coach)

I am interested in the history of Nancy Wilson (basketball coach), plus I want to see if I screwed something up by interrupting.

I do a fair amount of editing, but I haven't been involved in the review process, so I don't know the protocols.

I stumbled across this for reasons I'm not now remembering, but I wanted to work on it because of my interest in the subject matter.

I see that you initially rejected this when it was in a sandbox, but, to your credit, you quickly apologized when you realized you misunderstood the subject of the draft.

I confess I am puzzled that you decided to move it to draft space (was there a request that I missed?) and then immediately rejected it. I agree it wasn't ready at the time for article space, but it isn't clear to me that moving it to draft space was useful. Am I missing something?

The original editor clearly did not (initially) know how to do refs, but figured it out and largely fixed them, but did not know how to remove the redundancies. Unfortunately, the editor hasn't edited since then. I hope they aren't disillusioned, but they did not enable email, so I don't know how to contact them.

I did some minor editing, and checked just about every reference to make sure it supported the text. IMO, it is fine now, so I moved it to artivle space. However, I see a template suggesting it is still part of the review process – am I right you are the reviewer? So Im writing this to determine next steps.

FYI, I'm traveling, and may have limited online time until Weddnsday.--S Philbrick(Talk) 15:51, 15 January 2018 (UTC)--S Philbrick(Talk) 03:57, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Sphilbrick, just a few comments; we almost always move drafts from the user sandbox into the Draft space; it had been submitted for review, so Theroadislong did not "move and immediately decline". As far as I can tell it was never in the article space until you moved it. As far as "the editor hasn't edited since then" goes, they resubmitted the draft for review, and many draft-submitters do not edit after they have done so. As far as you moving it to the article space, you should remove the various AFC templates after moving a draft to Article space; if you add yourself to the AFCH list you'll be able to use the script which does it automatically.
Also, to address your very first statement, I don't see that you've "screwed anything up", if anything thanks for moving an acceptable article out of the draft space. Primefac (talk) 15:59, 15 January 2018 (UTC) (talk page stalker)
Thank you Primefac I don't think I have anything to add to your excellent answer. Theroadislong (talk) 16:21, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
@Primefac: Thanks to both of you. I was worried when I saw the templates, which I am not used to seeing, that I was doing something out of process, which is why I wanted to ask rather than simply remove them. Thanks for the detailed answer.--S Philbrick(Talk) 03:57, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

CSD of Truebil

Hi Theroadislong,

I removed your CSD template on Truebil. I originally found and cleaned up a lot of the COI in the article, and warned the user for COI - however, I don't feel that the subject is suitable for CSD A7: it has credible references (e.g. India Times) to indicate notability, even with the initial COI.

Feel free to put it in for AfD if you disagree.

All the best! | Naypta✉ opened his mouth at 10:36, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Help Please!

Hey can you help me create this page for this director. I found out about her back in October. It was around for a bit that she is the first Jamaican filmmaker to have her work distributed. I think that is an amazing accomplishment.

I would appreciate your help. Thanks man.

Here's the link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Toni_Morgan_Haye — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fabian0821 (talk • contribs) 00:28, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Dan Poole

Hey Theroadislong,

Thank you for reviewing the Dan Poole page. Can you please provide me with some help on what I need to do to get it into the mainspace? I've added external sources and sourced everything, so any help would be much appreciated.

Thank you in advance,

Niki Awaywithwords.ink (talk) 21:29, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Motty Steinmetz deletion and general criteria for musicians

Hi Theroadislong, you put up my page Motty Steinmetz up for deletion. I'm a bit confused about what the criteria is for weather a person is notable or not. Could you explain this please and what was wrong with the page Motty Steinmetz. Thank you very much Adam Bernstein — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adam Bernstein (talk • contribs) 17:28, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Notability explains it, we need multiple secondary sources that discuss him in depth, your article did not have these. Theroadislong (talk) 17:33, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Thank you very much. Would it be possible for you to have a look at a draft when I've changed it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adam Bernstein (talk • contribs) 13:29, 17 January 2018 (UTC) Hi can you take a look at this, does it meet all the necessary criteria? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Adam_Bernstein/sandbox Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adam Bernstein (talk • contribs) 15:03, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Do you think he passes the criteria set out here Wikipedia:Notability (music)#Criteria for musicians and ensembles ? Theroadislong (talk) 15:08, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
I see that you put the article into main space and it has been tagged for deletion. If you want to be able to work on an article it is best to use the WP:AFC process. Theroadislong (talk) 18:42, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Thank you very much, I dint realise you could get articles reviewed before they went up. Adam Bernstein (talk) 17:04, 18 January 2018 (UTC)Adam Bernstein

21:49:22, 18 January 2018 review of submission by Wilson 8297


Hi There, My name is Alex Wilson and I'm trying to publish my friends Theodore Salisbury Wikipedia page but some reason got declined. If you could inform me of why and how to improve it that would be great. Wilson 8297 (talk) 21:49, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Your draft has no in-line citations, see WP:REFB for help, it was previously declined because of poor sourcing it looks like you have improved the sources somewhat. You have included a large quote from Theodore R Salisbury but Wikipedia has very little interest in what the articles subject says about himself, only what reliable sources have reported. You have two copies of the draft one of which has used IMDb 10 times and Facebook 4 times as a source neither of these sources can be used. Finally if you know the subject you have a conflict of interest. Theroadislong (talk) 22:22, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Sina Ghanbari

Dear Theroadislong Thank you for your input I have made some changes to page Sina Ghanbari, adding more independent sources. Please see if you like them. Thanks. Alex-h (talk) 00:51, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Conflict of Interest

Thanks Theroadislong for your concern, but I can assure you there is no Conflict of Interest from me. I contribute to my interests only, and I am not affiliated with any page I have contributed to. I am still quite new to contributing so I have stuck to only 2 pages as I improve my skills with Wiki syntax, rules, and reference building. I hope to be a good asset here on Wikipedia with the hope of creating pages. I haven't contributed any information that does not follow the rules and is backed by credible sources. Best regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sadsignal (talk • contribs) 14:03, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Help

Every time I contribute to the University of the People page, user Adrin10 reverts my work. Why and what can be done about this? I provided information about Transfer Credits, with proof, and it has been removed. Also the I removed the Criticism section as the only reference is from a propaganda website, which I am lead to believe Adrin10 is affiliated with as much of his page contributions lead to this propaganda reference. As I am new, perhaps you can help me?

You need to discuss your concerns on the talk page here Talk:University of the People. Theroadislong (talk) 14:25, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm CASSIOPEIA. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Patrik Kincl, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

CASSIOPEIA(talk) 14:52, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Why? Theroadislong (talk) 14:54, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Klara Kazmi Bio

Hi,

I've just tried to submit a Artist Bio page after a request from the artist, and it has been deleted?

Can you assist ?

Kind Regards

Kevin Klara Kazmi (talk) 21:39, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

You submitted a draft article Draft:Klara Kazmi which I declined because it reads like an advert, it hasn't been deleted. Please be aware that writing a new article is difficult, and start by reading your first article: you first need to show that she meets Wikipedia's requirements for notability - Wikipedia is only interested in what people unconnected with her have published about her in reliable places such as major newspapers. Theroadislong (talk) 22:14, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

07:21:23, 22 January 2018 review of submission by Bookbinder 01


The article about child protection in Canada, can you request it? Bookbinder 01 (talk) 07:21, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

I'm sorry I don't understand your question. I declined the draft because 12 of the references are to their own website, we require independent sources. Please also remove all in-line external links we don't use them. Theroadislong (talk) 09:00, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

University of the People

Hello,

I read your note on why you undid my edits on University of the People. I do not understand what is considered "promotional material" that I have referenced. My edits referenced 3rd party news sources (i.e. New York Times) as well as primary sources. My additions reflect factual articulation agreements that have been made between the University of the People and UC-Berkeley, University of Edinburgh, and NYU-Abu Dhabi. This is not promotional, but explain how it is in your opinion?

Additionally, you undid an edit which I added the fee for transfer credit under the Tuition section. What is wrong with that?

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cnelsonii (talk • contribs) 13:44, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Your addition started with the statement "University of the People has a rich diversity of academic partnerships with several world-renowned institutions" how is this anything but promotional? You should also declare any conflict of interest. Theroadislong (talk) 14:14, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Request on 16:06:51, 24 January 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Diogopedrol


For your information the picture I put up on the DJ VIRGIN page, it was me who took it, and with her permission so it is mine and not copyright


Diogopedrol (talk) 16:06, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

It was deleted from Commons by User:Túrelio because it was a Copyright violation, you will need to take it up with them. Theroadislong (talk) 16:14, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Novares Group

Hi Sir,

I'm Leo, I'm working for Novares Group in the digital communication of the group.

I'm sorry, I don't speak very good english and I don't undersatnt what is the problem with the Novares Group page.

Can you explain me? I don't want to see this page deleted so if I have to modify some sentences, I will do it.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LeoFermin (talk • contribs) 16:21, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

I have nominated it for deletion because it is an article about a company, corporation or organization that does not credibly indicate the importance or significance of the subject, it is also written in a promotional manner and you have a conflict of interest as a paid editor. Theroadislong (talk) 16:31, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

RE: Article on Susan Merdinger

I am writing to get some clarity on why the citations of "COI" and "Payment" for this article have appeared above the Article on Susan Merdinger. I represent Susan Merdinger, as Wikipedia user SusanGreene. However, neither I nor Ms. Merdinger created this article, or paid for it and have no relationship to whomever composed it. I did, however, make a recent very minor correction/addition to the article at the request of Susan Merdinger to honor a notable musician who was omitted from the list of collaborators by the original Wiki editor, and do not feel that the article should be flagged or taken down as a result, when clear notability of the subject of the article is established with verifiable sources. The addition of these flags or citations at the top is a source of concern for the subject of the article, Ms. Merdinger, because it is potentially damaging to her reputation and integrity. It would be better not to have the article at all. However, I have no idea how to remove either the citations at the top of the article or the article itself. Now, the article is reduced to a stub and most pertinent biographical and career information has been removed, which is what I think may have prompted the flag about "notability" to be inserted automatically. Please advise and make a recommendation. SusanGreene SusanGreene (talk) 18:32, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

I removed unreferenced puffery and added the notability tag because the article doesn't make it clear why she is notable. Wikipedia has essentially no interest in anything you want to say about your client. It is only interested in what people who have no connection with her have chosen to publish about her. Theroadislong (talk) 18:50, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Teamwork Barnstar
Thank you for your contributions on multiple pages and for your instruction on proper editing techniques! Sadsignal (talk) 06:56, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

In regards to the update to Ken Ham

Dear Mr. Theroadislong,

The Reason for my update to the page on Ken Ham was to remove information that gave away an obvious bias of the writer, as "what science(supposedly)" tells us has nothing to do with what Ken Ham believes. It is an evolutionists attempt to propogate his beliefs as something other than what they are (certainly not science), as such defining factors of (macro)-evolution, to which he is referring, are not repeatable or testable. As the theoretical physicist Dr. Michael Ebifegha specifically states in regards to those studying evolutionary ancestry, the study of the origins of DNA ¨do not (fall under the purview of science), because this event is not testable and repeatable¨ (xii). My reason for looking at the page in the first place is because I am writing a "Thesis" (not actually that long) on "Evolution in the Public Schools", and it deeply disturbed me that someone would so blatantly blur the lines between relevance and irrelevance, science and philosophy. What is sad is how many ignorant people are deceived by these claims that Macro-evolution is a scientific fact. It matters not if a large majority of specialist scientists agree with the model, it is still a belief. 75% of Americans are Christians, according to a recent poll, but it is still a belief- faith, the defining factor of religion.

In know you are dedicated to the informational quality of every page on wikipedia, and this addition lowered such vastly.

Anyways, thank you for your concern. I recognize I should have explained myself more fully originally (rather than just saying "removed irrelevant information".

Good day, sir. I hope you will consider returning what I edited.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.11.109.96 (talk) 00:01, 25 January 2018‎ (UTC)

User talk:Johnuniq reverted your edit with the summary “an encyclopedia has to record the facts as known,” I'm afraid Wikipedia has a bias for reality and mainstream science, by policy and we adjust the weight of articles according to the mainstream and scientific views of relevant experts in the field, supported with reliable sources (WP:RS). Macro-evolution is a scientific fact it has absolutely nothing to do with "belief". You might be better off editing at Conservapedia. Theroadislong (talk) 07:30, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Stub

Hi Actually I wanted This Particular article I'm writing and others that ill do soon to be under the stub category. can you help with that?

If the article is accepted a stub category can be added then, but at the moment you need to read the link I gave you on formatting sources at WP:REFB and find some more reliable sources. Theroadislong (talk) 21:44, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Azeez Shobwale Shobola

Hello Theroadislong. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Azeez Shobwale Shobola, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: playing for Al-Hilal Club (Omdurman) and winning a national league and a national cup with your club is a sufficient claim of significance. Thank you. SoWhy 12:39, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Tommy Cecil

Hello Theroadislong. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Tommy Cecil, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: writing songs for notable musicians is a credible claim of significance. Thank you. SoWhy 17:27, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) So, SoWhy, you saw a page about a songwriter signed to Sony/ATV Nashville, written by an editor called Sonyatvnashville whose only edits are to promote that business, and you declined speedy deletion? Didn't a tiny bell ring somewhere? It is an unmistakeable G11, and should be immediately deleted as such (please correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that once nominated for speedy, a page can be deleted under any applicable criterion?). What's the next step here? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:13, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
@Justlettersandnumbers: Unfortunately, no. WP:G11 is only for text that is exclusively promotional. It does not cover promotional intent, because intent is sometimes hard to prove and thus easy to abuse. The next step is blocking the editor for the username violation and taking the article to AFD if you believe the subject not notable enough to warrant an article. Deletion of articles on notable subjects merely because they started out as part of promotional editing violates WP:PRESERVE and would be against the interest of our readers who don't care how an article started as long as it now neutrally informs them about the subject. Regards SoWhy 19:25, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for your considered explanation, we live and learn. Theroadislong (talk) 19:27, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
Well, yes, sort of ... except that that is not how the G11 criterion is defined: "This applies to pages that are exclusively promotional and would need to be fundamentally rewritten to conform with Wikipedia:NOTFORPROMOTION". That doesn't say anything about text, nor does it say that advertisements shoved into Wikipedia by commercial interests are not "exclusively promotional" – in fact, our definition exactly describes the page you declined to delete. Anyway, I've already reported the editor and an apparent sock, Sonyatvnash, to WP:UFAA, and will doubtless send the page to AfD if no-one beats me to it. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:46, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

00:32:49, 28 January 2018 review of submission by Innocent Cuty


Dear Reviewer (The road is long) Kindly have a look of the modified form of the page, you reviewed earlier. Will wait for your kind suggestion and approval to review this as soon as possible, as it has been in the reviewing queue for over two months.

Thanking you in anticiaption

Regards Innocent Cuty (talk) 00:32, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Feburary 2018 at Women in Red

Welcome to Women in Red's February 2018 worldwide online editathons.

New: "Black women"

New: "Mathematicians and statisticians"

New: "Geofocus: Island women"

Continuing: #1day1woman Global Initiative

(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 14:32, 28 January 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Westbrook University entry

Hi,

I wrote to Doc James two weeks ago saying I believed his Jan. 15 revision of the Westbrook University entry was incomplete and biased. He has not responded. I had written an earlier entry, which he superseded with his.

Are there any steps I can take to get an agreeably accurate, fair and thorough entry for the university?

Thanks very much!

Gerryharrington (talk) 02:54, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Feminism on Reddit

Greetings once again, Theroadislong. I was wondering if it'll be just to reject this submission under "what wikipedia is not" as it is to me that the submission is original research. EROS message 12:20, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Yes I would have thought so it reads rather like an essay and the sourcing isn't independent either. Theroadislong (talk) 21:09, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
Thank you Theroadislong for your help. Have a good day. EROS message 02:53, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Thomas Harvey Butler

Can you please tell me where you found the picture of Secretary Butler? I've known one existed, but I've been unable to locate one. I've written a book on Tennessee's secretaries of state, and Butler is one of the few I don't have a picture of. Thank you so much!

```` — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carolyn gregory (talk • contribs) 15:51, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

I didn't find it, user:TN615RNB added the image they uploaded it here [2] Kind regards. Theroadislong (talk) 16:32, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Black Coffee (Beth Hart and Joe Bonamassa album)

So sorry to disturb you again, I was wondering if my declination on this album was logical.. What are your thoughts? Seems to me it has vague notability, poor sources and the tone is somewhat editorial. EROS message 08:33, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

It looks borderline doesn't it, it has a few reviews but as you say vague notability. I'm having a bit of a break from Wikipedia because my wife has been seriously ill but hope to come back to more useful editing in the near future. All the best. Theroadislong (talk) 10:18, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
So sorry to hear that. I hope she gets well soon. EROS message 12:49, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

UCTV Page

Hello, I'm the assistant operations manager for UCTV and one of my tasks is to update our long neglected Wikipedia page. It appears you removed the majority of the page claiming it was promotional. A list of our departments and their series hardly seems promotional to me and I'm very confused as to why it was removed. Thanks UCTVOpsAssistant (talk) 21:11, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

You should restrict your edits to suggestions on the articles talk page, you have a conflict of interest as a paid editor. Wikipedia is not a means to promote UCTV, Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject have published about it in reliable places. Theroadislong (talk) 21:15, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
(talk page watcher) @MikeyFromUCTV: Just to add to what Theroadislong posted above, it's very important that you and everyone else at UCTV understand that UCTV (University of Connecticut) does not belong to the station; in other words, it's not "your long neglected Wikipedia" page, but rather a Wikipedia article written about the company. Nobody at UCTV has any final editorial control over what content is added and what content is removed as explained in Wikipedia:Ownership of content.
So, what I suggest you do is to follow Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide and Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure and use Talk:UCTV (University of Connecticut) to propose any major changes you'd like to make to the article. (Please note that by "major changes", I am referring to how the term is defined by Wikipedia in Help:Minor edit#When to mark as minor changes and Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#Making uncontroversial edits.) You can use Template:Request edit to proposes changes; after that you just wait until someone responds. Since there are only so many volunteers going around assessing these requests, you can help them out by clearly wording your request and keeping things as simple as possible as explained in Wikipedia:Edit requests; in general, long wordy requests asking for multiple changes tend to take more time to reassess, but short "Change A to B in Section C using this website as a supporting source" types of requests tend to take less time to evaluate. If you post a request and nobody responds within in a reasonable time (say about a week), don't assume that means you have a green light to make the changes yourself; in such a case, ask for further help at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard.
Even though COI/PAID editing is not something expressly forbidden, the Wikipedia community expects that such editors comply with certain policies and guidelines because unmonitored COI editing often quickly leads to other more serious problems. Your best chance of having the changes you'd like to make accepted by the community is to follow these established policies and guidelines because doing so will help you avoid any problems with other editors. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:32, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
I get what's being said above and how I have a conflict of interest. But I wasn't trying to use the Wikipedia page to promote us I was simply trying to update it so it would be accurate. My view on this is that only someone from within the organization is going to know anything about updating it so if we don't who will? I feel removing the section about our various departments was totally unnecessary. It doesn't promote us in any way it just says what departments there are. The conflict of interest rules seem a little bit silly to me in this case because I actually know the facts to be updated and that's all I was trying to do. MikeyFromUCTV (talk) 05:54, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
We know this Wikipedia page doesn't belong to us but at the end of the day it's reflective of us and we just want the information to be accurate. MikeyFromUCTV (talk) 06:01, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
Please don't take this the wrong way, but even though your "view" may work fine on UCTV's own websites, it doesn't work well when it comes to Wikipedia. It's not really what you know which is relevant per WP:VNT, but only what can be found in reliable sources (preferably secondary sources) which matters here. A person doesn't need to have inside information on UCTV to edit the article; what matters more is that their edits are in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Moreover, Wikipedia is a collaborative editing project which means that disagreements over content inevitable and when they aoccur they are supposed to be resolved through discussion per WP:DR. Not everything that is verifiable or factual about a subject needs to be added to an article per WP:NOTEVERYTHING, article content is determined through consensus. Now, if you feel the guidelines regarding COI are too restrictive, then you can propose changes at WT:COI. My sugestion to you still is that if you feel the article written about UCTV requires updating, then make edit requests on the article talk page in accordance with these guidelines. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:12, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Rowboat Film- und Fernsehproduktion

Hello Theroadislong, you've deleted the filmografie of the page mentioned above and I don't understand why. You've said, that Wikipedia is not a directory, but it is common to list the filmografie of an actor, a director, producer and so on. So why has it been deleted? I would like to restore it. KatharinaRB (talk) 13:37, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

The content was entirely sourced to their own website. We only summarise what reliable, independent published sources have to say about a subject. Theroadislong (talk) 13:44, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your quick reply. The filmography is important to show the show the subjects notability so I would like to add it again. And if I do so without the sources of the own website - how it is common on every other wikipedia page of an actor, director and so on - is that ok with you? KatharinaRB (talk) 14:03, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

If you insist, but I fail to see how adding a list of non notable work will help establish notability. Theroadislong (talk) 14:14, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

@Theroadislong the production company won an won an International Emmy in New York for one of their films A Day for a Miracle - which is very very rare for a German production company. Winning an International Emmy, which along with the Oscars are the most recognizable entertainment award worldwide. And the TV serie Murder by the lake was last year the most successful TV series on the broadcasting channel ZDF. So I think that should be enough to show the notability of the company. I will add the filmography again. KatharinaRB (talk) 14:29, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

I am aware of that, it was the other non notable film list cruft I was objecting to and also your motives being a paid editor. Theroadislong (talk) 14:33, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Newark Renaissance House

I appreciate the comments as I am relatively new to Wikipedia editing. However, there seems to be an aggression you are displaying. I am trying to add content that I truly believe a) I have a right to add and b) the Wikipedia community will enjoy and from which it will derive benefit. Please give me a chance to fix things before you pull everything down! Now my photos are gone? All of them from the gallery? Is your goal to winnow the field of content providers because I am becoming discouraged by this process.DocSavageNJ 16:40, 7 February 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by DocSavageNJ (talk • contribs)

You appear to have an undisclosed conflict of interest and you are adding promotional content to an article and pointless photographs which add nothing to a topic of dubious notabilty. Theroadislong (talk) 16:44, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Theroadislong/Archive_30&oldid=1212159394"