User talk:Theroadislong/Archive 85

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 80 ← Archive 83 Archive 84 Archive 85 Archive 86 Archive 87 → Archive 90

Multitude of Voyces

Hi Theroadislong, thanks for your advice on this. I'll go back and find some further sources, but I'm kinda confused as to why this is getting such criticism when other pages are sourced much worse. I largely modelled this on the Stainer & Bell page which, as far as I can see, has 0 independent sources... Anyway I've replaced the MoV website and youtube sources so hopefully it'll be ok now. Cheers. Foodopera (talk) 18:44, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

The Stainer & Bell is appalling and should probably be deleted, see other crap exists. Theroadislong (talk) 18:46, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
Fair enough! When I find some time I'll see if I can improve it. Have updated MoV so I hope it's now sufficiently sourced; let me know if there's anything further I need to do. Thanks for your help! Foodopera (talk) 18:57, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Dear Theroadislong.

I am not sure how to do this but will make the attempt.

You will see that the draft Hume's Pass has been radically altered from its original arrangement and resubmitted. As far as I am able to tell it now consists of independent original historical documents from the past that provide the whole of the factual evidence about the location "Hume's Pass. The reference to a published research paper in the refereed literature is solely that I assembled these documents. If necessary I can take that out also.

Are you able to advise me as to what to do next.

Incidentally, it does not fit into the Hume and Hovell wikipedia article as it is separate information, though I do appreciate your thought. Also that page has a great deal of relevant and very well documented historical facts missing from it and I do not have the time nor inspiration to rewrite it. I can only make that comment because I have researched very deeply into this particular historical journey.

Thank you in advance for you assistance.

Martin

Mwill66

Mwill66 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 06:49, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Hume's Pass

Sorry. You need a title.

Draft:Hume's Pass Dear Theroadislong. I am not sure how to do this but will make the attempt. You will see that the draft Hume's Pass has been radically altered from its original arrangement and resubmitted. As far as I am able to tell it now consists of independent original historical documents from the past that provide the whole of the factual evidence about the location "Hume's Pass. The reference to a published research paper in the refereed literature is solely that I assembled these documents. If necessary I can take that out also. Are you able to advise me as to what to do next. Incidentally, it does not fit into the Hume and Hovell wikipedia article as it is separate information, though I do appreciate your thought. Also that page has a great deal of relevant and very well documented historical facts missing from it and I do not have the time nor inspiration to rewrite it. I can only make that comment because I have researched very deeply into this particular historical journey. Thank you in advance for you assistance. Martin Mwill66 Mwill66 (talk) 07:02, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

You will need to reference the the last two paragraphs, which read like original research and then re-submit for review. Theroadislong (talk) 08:17, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Need some help with a draft...

Hey!

My draft submission 'Flanquette' was rejected by you.

You wrote: "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."

Thing is, this page already exists in German, this was just a translation... I just don't know how to link them together.


I'd appreciate your help - what are the changes I need to make to get this approved?


Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by LoanLiKnowledge (talk • contribs) 10:58, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

You have misunderstood how Wikipedia works. Wikipedia summarises what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a topic, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable topic. The fact that there is a german article is irrelevant the English Wikipedia has much stricter guidelines for inclusion. Theroadislong (talk) 18:56, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Submission declined: misunderstanding

Dear Theroadislong,

Thanks for having take care of my draft here:

[[1]]

I noticed you declined the article but authorize myself to contact you to understand the notability issue.

Indeed, my draft, copied here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Bob_isat/Anticor is full the translation of a Wikipedia in french webpage here, which passed the notability test:

[[2]]

The goal of the page in en.wikipedia is to understand the fights, history and purposes of this interesting NGO (Anticor) worldwide.

Can you please help me understanding the issue and the progress to be done to pass the notability test?

Maybe there is a confusion with my draft (full translation) and the partial translation from december 2021 that you originally saw ?

Kind regards,

--Bob isat (talk) 16:58, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

The draft appears to be largely unsourced, you have re-submitted, another reviewer will no doubt look at it soon. The fact that there is a French Wikipedia is irrelevant as English Wikipedia has a much stricter inclusion criteria. Theroadislong (talk) 19:00, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Draft:George Weinstein

Hello I just read your message regarding what wikipedia requires for an Author in the link you provided..... Initially I had to address the [citation needed] which the first Editor asked me to do, which I then did with the source from the Southern Literary Review. Then the article that Editor Gusfriend suggested I created a citation for, but the next editor didn't agree with Gusfriend. All total I've found about seven or eight articles which include this author, obviously I can't include all of them because you can't have eight citations for an article that is one paragraph with a small infobox. Should I just keep resubmitting this with different combinations of these eight articles, or should I include all of them. It's just that it was a bit confusing that Editor 1 said do this, and I did that but Editor 2 said no that's not good enough do this, then I did that but Editor 3 said no what Editor 1 and 2 says isn't good enough either do this.

Should I include every article I've found as a citation? Or just remove all the citations and redo it entirely by only using the ones that the Editors either suggested or asked for? Raleigh80Z90Faema69 (talk) 16:00, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Raleigh80Z90Faema69 I would suggest adding more content from the reliable sources and remove anything not sourced, where for instance did you find that “He lives with his wife and her two daughters in Marietta, Georgia" ALL personal details need solid sources per WP:BLP. The list of books requires publisher details and ISBN numbers.

The fact that a book cover of his won an award is irrelevant unless you are suggesting he designed it? You need to show how they pass the criteria at WP:NAUTHOR.Theroadislong (talk) 16:11, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

ok fair enough, but seriously I included the list of the books, publishers, publishing dates and ISBN's and was basically told to remove them.... So I need to take all of the sources and put them back in, again, and make sure that every book is cited, again?
In regards to the book cover yes ok that's perfectly understandable the only reason I included that was because there is a link to the Indie Book Awards and I thought it would be worth including a link to something being as it is a Wikipedia page and there weren't many things to link for George Weinstein aside from the town he is from.... That I included because it was at the bottom of his author website page, but I didn't include a source to the author webpage because I didn't think that was a reliable source..... Should I include his webpage in the infobox then?
Is there enough sources here for this page assuming I include the ISBN and publisher information for each book? Or being as hi
His best known book does not have its own Wikipedia page should I create a page forinstead that since it seems as though the acceptable source articles mostly only pertain to that particular book.
Also, I see your point how it is kind of irrelevant to mention an award for a cover but I thought it was relevant in the sense that it is a source that mentions a different book than the other sources. I thought since it is his book that won an award, even though it was likely a pro cover designer who won the award (I am assuming this, he might have done his own cover I honestly do not know) it still seemed relevant in that it was his book and without the book there certainly would never be a cover thanks--- Raleigh80Z90Faema69 (talk) 22:13, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
@Theroadislong hello, did you not get the chance you review my post up above from May 10th... Or do I have to tag your name otherwise you won't see it?
I've been a Wikipedia editor for a few years, but you'll have to excuse me as I don't really know as much about editing as serious Wikipedia editors who work here every day.
I generally only edit when I see a typo or for serious writing contributions to Tour de France articles and only really know how to edit pages and make citations, but when you get the chance could you reply to my post above.... Thanks Raleigh80Z90Faema69 (talk) 18:26, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
Raleigh80Z90Faema69 If there are multiple sources that cover the novel Hardscrabble Road in significant detail, you could try a draft on that, the criteria is here Wikipedia:Notability (books). I see the George Weinstein draft has been declined three times so probably not worth pursuing that. Theroadislong (talk) 18:40, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
@Theroadislongyes actually all of the sources cover Hardscrabble Road, there were no sources that included the other books aside from the passing mention for the Indie book cover award. The sources regarding Hardscrabble Road were written specifically about that book so they do have significant detail.
So it would be better to delete the page for George Weinstein and create a page for Hardscrabble Road? Then if I want to create a George Weinstein page in the future I'll have to wait until I find another source, for example if he releases a new book and does an interview with Publisher's Weekly or a newspaper or local tv station or something?
Thanks Raleigh80Z90Faema69 (talk) 19:19, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
Please note that interviews are not considered reliable or independent though. Theroadislong (talk) 19:25, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
@Theroadislong will do. I'll go back through the sources I've collected and read them again and make sure I only include the ones that are relevant. Then also take a look at the notability for books link you left. Raleigh80Z90Faema69 (talk) 19:59, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
@Theroadislong hey there, I went back and re-read the sources I have. It turned out one of them is an "interview" but the other two sources are both "reviews", both of which appear to be from literary magazines and exclusively cover the book.
As such when I create this "Hardscrabble Road" page will including these two "reviews" from the literary magazines as well as the ISBN and publisher information meet the requirements?
I also looked up some other Wikipedia pages of novels to learn what a Wikipedia page for a 'novel' should look like. The only thing I noticed that I will not be able to do is upload a picture, I noticed that most novel pages have a picture of the book cover in the infobox, but being as I only edit from my phone I don't know how to upload a picture from a mobile device. Of course that is something that can be added in later by someone else I suppose.
I created the infobox and am going to write/create the article tonight or tomorrow when I get an hour or two.
Thanks,
Raleigh80Z90Faema69 (talk) 17:54, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
@Theroadislong - I created a page for Hardscrabble Road and I don't know if you can just look into article you want, but I'm having a bit of trouble with the reflist, I think I did the other few times I've added one, but it appears at the end of the last section, not under its own section for some reason.... If you can help thanks-if not nbd
Thanks Raleigh80Z90Faema69 (talk) 20:25, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Just some help needed !

Hi there, I've started using AFC tool from today, so when someone create blank draft article, is it good to reject the submission or proceed CSD? Just wanted to know better. Owlf 📪 21:36, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Neither is appropriate, you should decline the draft for being blank. Theroadislong (talk) 21:47, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) Hi @Owlf, first check to make sure there is no cruft making it appear to be blank when there is actually content by editing in source mode. If truly blank, then there is decline for blank submissions in the Invalid submission section. As a shortcut, you can try typing "blank" for the reason. For example, typing "nn" brings up the general non-notable option. There is no reason to CSD it, really. S0091 (talk) 21:47, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
Thankyou both of you, i was totally confused but thankyou for the help, I'll remember it. Regards, Owlf 📪 21:53, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Hume's Pass

Hi Theroadislong Thanks. Brilliant. You will see that I have done that. Reference has been removed. Martin aka Mwill66 Mwill66 (talk) 23:57, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Hume's Pass

Draft:Hume's Pass Hi Theroadislong, I finally get it. The second last paragraph is not original research under Wiki definitions because it has already been published by the Royal Historical Society of Victoria, an eminent internationally recognised historical society. The Society owns the copyright, and subjected it to double blind independent peer review before publishing it. That means two independent professorial level colonial historians unknown to me or each other critically analysed it, then submitted their analyses in writing. I was obligated to adhere to their analyses. It was original research when submitted to the Royal Historical Society of Victoria but ceased to be that when it was first published by them. It is now neutral, is citable, and is so by anyone. You have recognised that the paragraph does require a citation, so that the neutral citation, fully peer reviewed under international standards, logically must go back in, because it is the only source of the now proven historical facts. This must be an advantage for Wikipedia. Wikipedia is entirely safe in itself using that citation because it is not an isolated individual attempting to publish “original research” for the first time in Wikipedia, and placing Wikepedia at risk with the hope that someone else will establish its veracity. There is no conflict of interest either because there is no personal benefit whatever in citing what has been verified entirely independently of Wikipedia. The last paragraph does indeed require a citation as you point out and now does have one. I have amended the draft accordingly, trusting that this makes sense for you. This is immensely helpful and I appreciate your assistance. Thanks. Martin Mwill66 Mwill66 (talk) 01:14, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter May 2022

New Page Review queue March 2022

Hello Theroadislong,

At the time of the last newsletter (No.26, September 2021), the backlog was 'only' just over 6,000 articles. In the past six months, the backlog has reached nearly 16,000, a staggering level not seen in several years. A very small number of users had been doing the vast majority of the reviews. Due to "burn-out", we have recently lost most of this effort. Furthermore, several reviewers have been stripped of the user right for abuse of privilege and the articles they patrolled were put back in the queue.

Several discussions on the state of the process have taken place on the talk page, but there has been no action to make any changes. The project also lacks coordination since the "position" is vacant.

In the last 30 days, only 100 reviewers have made more than 8 patrols and only 50 have averaged one review a day. There are currently 818 New Page Reviewers, but about a third have not had any activity in the past month. All 859 administrators have this permission, but only about a dozen significantly contribute to NPP.

This means we have an active pool of about 450 to address the backlog. We cannot rely on a few to do most of the work as that inevitably leads to burnout. A fairly experienced reviewer can usually do a review in a few minutes. If every active reviewer would patrol just one article per day, the backlog would very quickly disappear.

If you have noticed a user with a good understanding of Wikipedia notability and deletion, do suggest they help the effort by placing {{subst:NPR invite}} on their talk page.

If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process and its software.

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.
Sent 05:18, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Hume's Pass

Hi Theroadislong. This I believe is the Wikipedia confirmation of what I am asserting. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Attribution Wikipedia:Attribution. Citing yourself. You may cite your own publications just as you would cite anyone else's, but make sure your material is relevant and that you are regarded as a reliable source for the purposes of Wikipedia. It is a reliable source by definition because it has been refereed entirely independently of Wikipedia by the eminent international history publication the Royal Historical Society of Victoria, as explained. All the Best. Martin. Mwill66 Mwill66 (talk) 00:09, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Lubna Marium

Thanks for your comment. My writing style may be wrong but what I am writing is true. Well, I'm going to remove it. Lubna Miriam the famous dancer of Bangladesh, i am search his name on google and so I tried to write , maybe I have a mistake in writing, but she is a very famous dancer. Ayatul nish (talk) 16:30, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia has no interest in "truth" we base articles on what the reliable sources say, and we report that in a neutral tone, no adjectives, flattery or puffery. Being "famous" does not mean they deserve an article topics need to be notable. Theroadislong (talk) 16:57, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

I understand. Would you please tell me if it's okay now? I deleted that line. Now is it likely to go to the main page? And thank you for your advice.-- Ayatul nish (talk) 17:55, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Hume's Pass

Hi Theroadislong I have rewritten the second-last paragraph to demonstrate that it conforms with the explicit rules of Wikipedia as follows. "The independent Royal Historical Society of Victoria demonstrated in its double-blind refereed journal in 2021 how to correct the error in the Hume map and thus revealed the true location to be 1260 metres south of Arkell’s Lane Wandong." This now seems to be legitimate. I appreciate your help. All the Best, Martin Mwill66 Mwill66 (talk) 02:18, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Looking much better, I suggest you submit for review for others to see. Theroadislong (talk) 06:32, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Hume's Pass

Hi Theroadislong. Thanks again for you help. Can you tell me how to submit for review for others to see as you recommend. All the Best, Martin Mwill66Mwill66 (talk) 02:20, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi Theroadislong. I am pretty sure that I have re-submitted the page correctly. I hope that the next reviewer can see your various items of advice so that it can be seen that they have been addressed. And maybe the original way-too-long article to see how much it has been amended to conform with Wikipedia standards. Thanks once again for you guidance. It is very much appreciated. I have learned a lot. Martin Mwill66 Mwill66 (talk) 02:49, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Request on 08:24:01, 26 May 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Reckon Her


Hi Theroadislong, looking for clarification/assistance on the Paddy McMahon draft. I've read the wikipedia section for notability, but I had cited an independent reliable secondary source that was a biographical piece on the man in question (from the Irish Times). Is there something that is still lacking from the article? The man himself had published a series of books, a few which were considered bestsellers. And was interviewed over a number of years on prominent radio shows and has a writing career spanning over about 20 years. I'm unsure of how to represent that in the article with citation.

Reckon Her (talk) 08:24, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Publisher's profiles, blogs and interviews are not suitable sources. Theroadislong (talk) 08:40, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
Two of the sources I used were a blog and profile but the other two sources were from two of the largest newspapers in the country. If I took the other two out and backed up the claims just using info from the Irish Independent and the Irish Times would it then be a suitable article? Reckon Her (talk) 08:45, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
We usually look for three good sources which cover the topic in depth with significant coverage. Theroadislong (talk) 08:51, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

2Sure Article

Hello, Theroadislong,

Thank you for the quick review of the 2Sure Wikipedia page. My name is David. I currently work as the Community Marketing Manager for the 2Sure brand in Nigeria. It's my first time creating an actual article since I made this account in 2019. I am trying to learn how to use Wikipedia properly and also position the 2Sure brand online since it already dominates its category in the Nigerian market.

Could you please assist me with the parts that I am not getting correctly in the article? I would sincerely appreciate your input.

Many thanks.

Damilosky (talk) 12:58, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a place to "position the 2Sure brand online" Your draft Draft:2Sure is nothing but advertising and you have still failed to correctly disclose your paid status. Theroadislong (talk) 13:03, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello

Hi, I was editing an article for Katie Flood. I am not Katie Flood. I made the account under her name, how can I get my article accepted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kfloody (talk • contribs) 15:44, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

In which case you need to request a name change, because you are impersonating someone else. Katie Flood does not appear to pass the notability guidelines, interviews are not independent reliable sources. Theroadislong (talk) 15:47, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Jaix Chaix article

I understand I may have submitted this article improperly and admittedly, it's more about his dissertation than the person.

The analysis in Dr. Chaix' dissertation is simply paradigm shifting. How can I help make this more well known?

Chaix refuses to talk about religion in public or give papers about it, or even answer questions about it during lectures. So how I can I help call attention to his analysis of The Revelation?

Should this be a footnote on The Revelation article instead?

or an article about the dissertation?

Any help would be appreciated! This phenomenal aspect of the Revelation has been undiscovered for far too long!

Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.110.246.28 (talk) 20:37, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

I'm not sure you even read this reply. Never mind. 65.110.246.28 (talk) 20:48, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not a place to call attention to anything I'm afraid. In order to demonstrate notability, you need to provide multiple references to in-depth articles written about Chaix in unrelated, independent journals, magazines, books or online. If there are no sources then we can’t have an article about him. Theroadislong (talk) 20:51, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Page Submission: Shawn Collins

Hello,

I recently posted a page submission for candidate for Governor Shawn Collins and it was rejected due to his lack of notoriety. I am confused as to what needs to be done to prove his notoriety, as he is already recognized as one of the top gubernatorial candidates in the state. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KelliCarr123 (talk • contribs) 21:39, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

KelliCarr123 Merely being a candidate does not merit a person an article, see WP:NPOLITICIAN. If he is elected Governor of California, he will. If he is notable for something else, like his military career, he would meet the broader definition of a notable person. You would need independent reliable sources that discuss his military career or whatever makes him notable. 331dot (talk) 22:39, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Fujisan Winery

Hi Theroadislong,

I have made the article much more neutral, and removed descriptions of what attractions the winery has for visitors.

Can you see if this addresses your concerns?

Thanks, BruceThomson (talk) 04:06, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Orchid Conservation Alliance

Information icon Hello, Theroadislong. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Orchid Conservation Alliance, 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) 19:01, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Hume's Pass created

Hume’s Pass Hi The roadislong. This article has just been approved by Stuartyeates with this note “Hume's Pass, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.” As you know this was approved after substantial rebuilding with your advice during which all of the issues shown in the Template [inserted below] were resolved. I attempted to follow the instructions for removal of a template but I cannot even see these words below when I open edit source and attempt to follow the instructions to remove them. Template: "A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject. It may require cleanup to comply with Wikipedia's content policies, particularly neutral point of view. Please discuss further on the talk page. (December 2021) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)" If you are authorised to do it can you remove the words or otherwise advise me. Thanks again for all of your help. Matin Mwill66Mwill66 (talk) 02:04, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Notability of Draft:Fujisan Winery

You suggested that the article might not pass WP:NCORP.

I am certainly no expert on this, but there are in-depth articles from Decanter and iNTOUCH about the winery. There are also long articles about the winery before it was incorporated, so they mention the founder's name instead of the company name. These are from the New York Times and The Japan Times.

There are many shorter mentions such as Oz Clarke's wine book, but I deleted such references to avoid being viewed as advertising.

Let me know if you can shed any light on this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BruceThomson (talk • contribs) 09:07, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

You are here to promote a winery, the rest of us are trying to build an encyclopedia. Theroadislong (talk) 09:11, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
I asked for comments on this on the draft's talk page.BruceThomson (talk) 06:22, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Lubna Marium Review

Draft:Lubna Marium It has been commented here that I have removed it and added some more info. Can it be reviewed now?Oky and Please let me know what else can be improved. I will google and try to find out more about him. Ayatul nish (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 17:53, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Tiny Legs Tim evaluation request

Can you have another look at the page of Tiny Legs Tim draft page please, Thank you Wackotaku (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 00:42, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Can you advise, please ? Wackotaku (talk) 00:41, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

We have seen this see also section on many biography so we add them to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Jasmeet_Singh_Ahluwalia

We have seen this see also section on many biography so we add them to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Jasmeet_Singh_Ahluwalia — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.188.241.246 (talk) 07:17, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Who is "we"? user accounts are strictly single person use. The see also section contains two links to articles already linked in the body and two which are far too general (hospital and surgeon) to be of use. Theroadislong (talk) 09:37, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
ok we removed it soon thanks so much for suggestion. Please help me with More Improveents 180.188.241.246 (talk) 06:17, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

June events from Women in Red

Women in Red June 2022, Vol 8, Issue 6, Nos 214, 217, 227, 231, 232, 233


Online events:


Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 09:22, 31 May 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging

link

I do not know how to add the link! from google https://twitter.com/kingofhits/status/1302938849270693888 178.249.184.66 (talk) 09:33, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Recent Rejection

Hello Theroadislong,

I would like to thank you for the speedy response, but I would like to discuss why it was rejected. I don't quite understand.

-Sky. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skybailey1573 (talk • contribs) 21:10, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Your draft Draft:DraftCBw/coi has no independent sources and no evidence of being a notable topic Wikipedia really isn't the place for family history projects. Theroadislong (talk) 21:13, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Joanna Gomulka

Hi there, Yes. I m working on it. I will add more links shortly x — Preceding unsigned comment added by Comlife (talk • contribs) 06:19, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Request help to correct page

Hey! i saw that you reviewed page Soufia Taloni Please i just finished the code source and articles in Draft:Soufia Taloni all its correct ? I will now continue to ask for upto move a draft merga a page Thanks! 160.161.232.190 (talk) 13:28, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for reviewing the Draft:Operation_Bajrang. Though I worked hard for it, I was trepidatious about acceptance through AFC. As I had never created such a long article for AFC, I was worried too. Thanking you again. Regards - Signed by NeverTry4Me Talk 11:17, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

Boss baby

Can you review Draft:The Boss Baby: Back in the Crib since the series is already out in Netflix? BMA-Nation2020 (talk) 00:24, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for reviewing the draft Draft:2019 Deben Dutta mob lynching and accepting it. I'm happy that it is accepted. - Signed by NeverTry4Me Talk 08:24, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Pinnacol Assurance Draft

Hi Theroadislong, I believe the source of Colorado Revised Statues is sufficiently independent and published to serve as a source for this article. Czarking0 (talk) 18:03, 6 June 2022 (UTC).

Added another section and two more references from the mediaCzarking0 (talk) 18:35, 6 June 2022 (UTC).

The two Westword sources don't mention Pinnacol? Theroadislong (talk) 18:59, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Yes good catch. I had the wrong links. I updated those and added a non-westword source.Czarking0 (talk) 20:32, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Article biography about Jordan Blackmore

Hi,

I was looking to see what else I can included to help with my sourcing to this [[3]], thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gwcheung7 (talk • contribs) 22:21, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Benjamin Jerabek Miller page rejection

I'm just trying to write about my colleague. Why was my entry rejected? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.195.84.253 (talk) 11:13, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

Because he does not appear to be notable. Theroadislong (talk) 11:15, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

Reverting AfC submission of Draft:Schoolhouse.world

Thank you very much for you help on the Draft:Schoolhouse.world page.

The user who started the article is now unable to finish it, but User:Owais456 has volunteered to do so. He is a brand new Wikipedia user, and so I have volunteered to help him learn the ropes. While doing so, it would seem very useful to be able to publish updates in small increments, but I do not wish to bother you or any other AfC reviewer with each such small change. Therefore, I would like to revert the AfC submission until we are ready to resubmit. Is this possible?

I am guessing that deleting the first line from Draft:Schoolhouse.world might do the trick, but dare not try this without asking for your guidance or permission.

GreenEyewash (talk) 03:30, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

unjust decline

you declined the article in respect to artist represented in more then 20 major museum collections. All links proving that do work at the author's site:https://kopystiansky.tumblr.com/

Works by Igor and Svetlana Kopystiansky are represented in permanent collections of the Museum of Modern Art, Metropolitan Museum and Whitney Museum of American Art in New York, Art Institute of Chicago, Museum of Fine Arts, Houston, Smithsonian American Art Museum, Washington D.C.; Henry Art Gallery in Seattle; Zimmerli Art Museum, Rutgers University, New Jersey; Musée National d'Art Moderne Center Pompidou, Paris; Musée d'Art Moderne de Saint-Etienne Métropole, France; Tate Modern, London; Art Gallery of New South Wales, Sydney; Museo Nacional Reina Sofia; Folkwang Museum in Essen; Ludwig Forum for International Art, Aachen; Berlinische Galerie; Museum für Moderne Kunst, Frankfurt am Main; MUMOK Vienna, Austria; Centre for Contemporary Art Luigi Pecci, Prato, Italy; Frac Corsica, France; MOCAK, Museum of Contemporary Art Krakow, Poland; Muzeum Sztuki Lodz, Poland.

I request a review — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.91.243.66 (talk) 13:26, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

He is notable but you have zero indpendent reliable sources, his own website is not acceptable as a source. Notability of a topic is judged by looking at the depth of coverage in independent, reliable, secondary sources.

Novice editors are commonly advised to cite at least three independent, reliable, secondary sources containing significant coverage. 

Theroadislong (talk) 14:01, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

hlw , Thats all I have been added please create this page I'll edit further — Preceding unsigned comment added by 007Ranjeet (talk • contribs) 01:37, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

please guide me to publish this page i ll add more details with confirmation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 007Ranjeet (talk • contribs) 10:29, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

what is the problem with article why you declined it?

i had added reference enough details too please point me out the rejection reason. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 007Ranjeet (talk • contribs) 10:37, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about something Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a topic, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability. Please also review conflict of interest. Theroadislong (talk) 10:42, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

then how to publish this ?don't say what is wrong kindly give idea what to do

or how to delete one article

I suggest you find another topic to edit and abandon trying to promote this college. Theroadislong (talk) 10:49, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
this is my own college there other private and new college are there in Wikipedia 007Ranjeet (talk) 13:38, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

Request on 15:25:07, 12 June 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Quodprod


Dear Theroadislong, you assert that the article does not reference independent sources and refer mostly to material generated by either myself or PanaBIOS. Even a casual review of the article will not bear out this claim. The article is sourced to more than 30, overwhelmingly independent, credible, and highly reputable sources, including Bloomberg, UN Agencies, ADF, and numerous news reports and government statements. Please be specific as to which specific passages are not written in a sufficiently neutral tone. And which specific facts lack sufficient referencing integrity. I don't think merely asserting is enough feedback for an author to improve an article.

Quodprod (talk) 15:25, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

No? I asserted that it reads like an advertisement. Wikipedia has little interest in their "Aims & Objectives" for example and have you read WP:SOLUTIONS? Your draft has been created multiple times under different titles and also speedy deleted multiple times. Theroadislong (talk) 15:32, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

Ashfaque Nabi

helloo, also provide another reference : https://www.mid-day.com/brand-media/article/meet-ashfaquenabi-the-man-making-a-prominent-difference-with-his-work-in-the-political-world-23230530 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dcmpedia (talk • contribs) 16:21, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

Novice editors are commonly advised to cite at least three independent, reliable, secondary sources containing significant coverage, you have only one. Theroadislong (talk) 16:26, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

Reworked - Draft:International_Professional_Security_Association_(IPSA)

Hi, I have just completed it. Can you please review and share your thoughts with me? Also, if you still find it problematic, could you please indicate the sections and portions of the article that I need to work on to make it better?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:International_Professional_Security_Association_(IPSA) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ihsnavihs (talk • contribs) 08:32, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

Request for further guidance regarding AfC rejection

As mentioned elsewhere, I am mentoring a new (and potentially eager) Wikipedia user, and am also trying to improve my own understanding in the process. I have a few questions:

  1. Is my approach in interacting with you appropriate, or is it (frankly) annoying? If annoying, my apologies; I will welcome suggestions for change.
  2. Have we now dealt adequately with the "paid contributor" issue? If not, may I ask what is still concerning? If so, might the complaint box be removed?
  3. Does the article still sound like "advertising" to you, or is it now adequately "matter of fact" and descriptive of what Schoolhouse.world is? If it still seems "promotional", I would appreciate help in understanding how so, as I am struggling to understand. If the tone is now OK, might the complaint box on tone be removed?
  4. Finally, we come to the stated reason for the submission rejection: failure to demonstrate "significance". Here was my thinking:

The fact that the founding of the organization was announced on the first page of the NY Times (ref #1) by someone once ranked by Time as among "the 100 must influential people", and by Forbes as "The Most Influential Person In Education Technology", suggests potential "significance". I agree, however, that it doesn't demonstrate that this particular initiative has succeeded. And the announcement was an op-ed, and not a news article.

Your rejection note states:

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.

It would be helpful to understand whether sources such as ref #4 and ref #22 are individually adequate, but there just weren't enough of them to demonstrate "significant coverage", or if you found the sources themselves individually wanting. Both articles are solely about Schoolhouse.world, and are therefore not "just passing mentions". Is Forbes (ref #4) sufficiently "reliable" and "independent", or is it (like most rags) too susceptible to article placement? I can't vouch for "The74" (ref #22), but it claims to be a "non-profit, non-partisan news site covering education in America". (I see that the name "The74" is missing from the reference, and should be added.)

Is the issue that these articles do not address the organization's impact? At my suggestion, Owais removed the sentence "By June 2021, schoolhouse.world learners had reached 1 million 'learning minutes'.", as I feared this sounded "too promotional". Perhaps this was a mistake. Is evidence of this sort of impact needed?

Many thanks in advance for your further guidance.

GreenEyewash (talk) 00:51, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

There seems to be a cabal of conflicted editors trying to get this accepted.
  • Passing mentions [11],
You can get other opinions here Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk. Theroadislong (talk) 07:52, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Abandoning our efforts. User:owais456 and I have decided to abandon our efforts on this page, and wish to disassociate ourselves with any further effort to initiate a page for Schoolhouse.world. We greatly thank you for your assistance.
As far as being a "cabal", which has strong negative connotations, and is typically used as a pejorative, we think use of the term is a bit unwarranted for us, as it insinuates that we are a furtive clique involved in intrigue to further our secret organizational motives. We have openly disclosed our COIs, I disclosed my mentoring relationship with Owais, and I openly stated that it was our intention to mediate our COI via the AfC process. GreenEyewash (talk) 15:20, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
I agree, and also thank you. Owais456 (talk) 15:21, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello! having an issue with an entry.

In an entry, i have added many external links but it keeps being refused. Can you help me to figure it out? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.16.188.235 (talk) 19:46, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

I have no idea what you are referring to? Have you created a draft? Articles require references that cover the topic in depth NOT external links. Theroadislong (talk) 20:00, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

Draft:AOZ Studio

Back in January, you rejected my draft submission: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:AOZ_Studio

You said it was "contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia". I read the 5 pillars. I don't understand why this is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia.

The article is similar to other articles describing computer languages. (I understand that it needs to be more fully developed, but I think it's at least a good start.)

What would I need to change to make my submission more acceptable so I can re-submit it?

Thank you! Ising4jesus (talk) 07:15, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

It was just blatant advertising. I suggest you ask for further advice here Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk. Theroadislong (talk) 07:24, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

review of Draft:Clément Bérini

Hello Theroadislong, Thank you for checking the article.

I've read the creative professionals notability [13], and to my mind three or four out of the four items apply to this artist. It seems to me that each of these points is addressed in the article itself, with sources that are either from professional journalists in mainstream newspapers of reference, academic articles about the arts dedicated to him, monograph about the artist and his artistic impact written by an art professor, as well as interviews and articles in specialised arts publications. This artist received a provincially and federally funded prize, played a major role in creating the main arts organization supporting francophone artists in the province, and is on a path to inclusion in the provincial art collection (Art Gallery of Ontario) along with a few other artists of his cohort.

What are in your opinion the failing notability criteria? Which criteria are "not clear how they pass" based on the sources of the articles? Or are there sources that don't make sense? What is a good way to present the notability of this artist? Should I write to you a detailed response with supporting sources for each of the four notability criteria? Should I bring in more sources about his life, his work, his region, his historical context, etc.?

Thank you for your attention, cat (talk) 16:07, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

The Prix du Nouvel-Ontario does not appear to be a notable award, like wise the “arts organization supporting francophone artists in the province” is not notable and being “on a path to inclusion in the provincial art collection (Art Gallery of Ontario)” really doesn’t cut the mustard. You can of course get other opinions at the Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk.Theroadislong (talk) 16:18, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
Hello, well, how to go about this. I'm not sure what is the best process for responding to your comment. Perhaps I should not bug you with this conversation and go to a more specialised forum (the AfC?). For a quick sense of where I'm coming from: the Prix du Nouvel-Ontario is one of the main achievements for the recognition of francophone culture in Ontario. As suggested in the article the situation of this community has been an ongoing major social and cultural issue in the XXth century, described and studied academically (per some of the academic sources, more available). The birth of the organization supporting francophone artists, is likewise a historical milestone in the province (I can bring up much more academic sources on this, but it seems beyond the scope of this article). Inclusion in the official art collection of the province (along with acknowledgements by the national art gallery and official art catalogues, aka "catalogue raisonné" per art tradition) is a key recognition for inclusion in official heritage publications and funding (Canada Heritage funding is explicitly shown, but other notable national and state funders can be brought up). All of those items (properly documented) seem to me to satisfy the four items of notability.

Which specifically of the four notability criteria (and sub-criteria) do you find not satisfied for this article? I can bring out documentation for each of the four criteria (and several sub-criteria). What is the proper way to respond to the notability questions? Or, should I rather ask this in the AfC forum you suggested? I also looked at pages such as Pierre-François_Laurent and Marek_Laczynski and found these persons quite comparable to Clément Bérini, though they have less professional exhibitions, less recognition by their peers (per sources), and less impact on their artistic and cultural communities (nothing comparable mentioned in their sources). So I wonder how to understand or weigh the differences among these artists' notability.

Thank you for your help, cat (talk) 17:00, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

Please ask for further advice at [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk I see no comparison whatsoever between Pierre-François_Laurent and Marek_Laczynski and Clément Bérini, but even if there was other stuff exists would apply. Theroadislong (talk) 17:25, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
Ok, will do. Thank you for your attention, cat (talk) 14:30, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

The Night Watcher Article

Can you please tell me which references need added and which one need removed — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:CB00:2611:6C00:6DB2:ADBD:1E8:20F4 (talk) 09:12, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

Your draft needs more content, a single sentence is not enough to warrant an article. Theroadislong (talk) 09:20, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
I added more content into the article, and also more sentences also an image 67.140.248.188 (talk) 03:47, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the thank! Question to you, as someone who is of long tenure here, why do people at AFC decline the nonsense spam drafts but not CSD them? I've noticed that everything I tag for CSD gets deleted, so I must be doing something right, but is it normal to tag the spam drafts/user pages? I don't want to overkill or annoy the admins monitoring the CSD nom log. I guess if they are deleting my tags, they must be ok...cheers MaxnaCarta (talk) 14:10, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

If I have rejected a draft, I will tend to leave it for another pair of eyes (like yours) to suggest deletion, seems like you are doing a good job cheers to you too. Theroadislong (talk) 14:13, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Help With Article

Hi I've just submitted an article on a musical theatre actor, Alexander Hogg for submission and you rejected it saying it needed more references to prove notability.

What would you recommend I use to cite to improve the article's chances?

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by PerformerWiki (talk • contribs) 16:28, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Another source with significant coverage of him would be good, not passing mentions or profiles, he will need to pass the criteria at WP:NACTOR. Theroadislong (talk) 16:32, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

help

Hello Theroadislong,

Thank you for keeping Wikipedia clean.

You mentioned, "We are asking for multiple in-depth coverage in independent sources, not their websites."

There are independent sources and I have cited them later. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Siuraya7 (talk • contribs) 09:10, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

No you haven't? You have a single source [14] which appears to be a very promotional press release and of no use whatsoever in establishing notability.

Did you mean to do

... this? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:15, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

DoubleGrazing Oh my goodness...No! Theroadislong (talk) 10:26, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

False accusation of paid editing.

Good afternoon,

Thank you for reviewing my entry for the Next Century Foundation. As stated elsewhere, this was categorically *not* a case of paid editing. I am a volunteer associated with the organisation, and believe that I have duly declared my COI on the relevant article's Talk page.MLWD69 (talk) 11:32, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Volunteers or interns in organisations are considered to be paid editors, you will need to make the required disclosure on your user page. Theroadislong (talk) 15:25, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

My Content is getting rejected number of times kindly assist me as soon as possible

Hello Sir,

This is Zawahir, I m a creative content writer who want to start contributing articles related to retail & fashion brands on your platform. I've seen some retail brands like Foot Locker, who have published their bios on your platform. I've read your policy and guidelines and curated my content accordingly. But still, I'm unable to publish content on your platform. Let me give you an overview of the reason behind publishing this content.

Tops and bottoms is a USA Based retail brand that accommodate its customers with the branded apparel collections which was started in 1990 as a small business ranging from head to toes at that time. The concept was something new at that time which clicked me to write this article. The brand is quite popular in Chicago, and reviving it's strategy to go digitalize. Therefore, I decided to write an article on your platform because the brand name is often referred to something else, but still they are using this name which is quite astonishing for me, So i reached the person in the store and asked for the owner permission to let me write about their business. Luckily, I was granted permission from the owner. I've personally interviewed the brand owners, as well as visited their sites (location of their retail store).

I respect your policies that are made to avoid scammers getting space on your platform. You can find their customer reviews on Google, and I personally checked everything before writing for them. Although I've concerns regarding your reference links policy. How i can write content related to a brand who doesn't have any solid digital presence, however still popular and serving the community? kindly assist me here. Thank you.

Regards, Zawahir Kashif. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ZawahirKashif (talk • contribs) 22:06, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

We don't need permission from the owner and interviews are not reliable sources. Your blatant advertising was rejected and deleted. Theroadislong (talk) 08:03, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
@ZawahirKashif: Foot Locker did not write their own article. Assuming that Wikipedia works like Cision is a very good way to get blocked, as we have zero tolerance for promotional content written by the company or its PR flacks and delete it on discovery if there's no realistic way to reword it to be dispassionate. Editing Wikipedia strictly for the purpose of promoting your subject is also a very good way to see your editing privileges revoked. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 20:32, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Carlo Alessandro Landini page rejection

Hi Theroadislong. I am writing you about the submission, and rejection of your part, of the draft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Carlo_Alessandro_Landini

The draft was already declined once (by Robertsky on February 22 of this year). Then I modified the inline citations as recommended, or at least I did my very best to comply (as you can notice comparing the two versions of the same draft).

Before resubmitting it, I would politely ask you how you would suggest and recommend me to fix the still existing problems and hence to proceed.

What exactly doesn’t meet, in your eyes, the proper standard for inline citations? I’ve cited all the possible sources using footnotes, as suggested. There aren’t other sources to be possibly cited (it is not customary to cite sources for Prizes and Contests won or awarded, in fact they do not exist in the widest sense of the term, except for the paper certificate given to the Prize-holder himself).

A hint of your part, a suggestion or advice would be greatly valuable and important to me. Thank you so much! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paolutus (talk • contribs) 09:26, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

The draft was declined NOT rejected, the biography section has 5 paragraphs none of which are sourced. Theroadislong (talk) 09:33, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Theroadislong/Archive_85&oldid=1098083423"