User talk:Devonian Wombat/Archive 2

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

I am new to Wiki so apologize if I did something wrong. You rejected my draft: Wyatt Borso. You stated a lack of significant coverage. I cited 14 different references (web articles) in the draft. All are secondary, independent sources. Please advise. StefSoccerDude Stefsoccerdude (talk) 19:46, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

@Stefsoccerdude:, I was probably mistaken to decline your submission originally, but the content you've added clearly proves notability, so kudos for that. The main problem now is how the article reads promotionally, I would recommend removing the "Honours and awards" section and the last paragraph of the "Bio" section, as well as rewording the first section of that sentence to remove the reference to "Top clubs". After you've done that, the article will be ready for mainspace, so just leave me another message after you've submitted it and I'll review the article again. Devonian Wombat (talk) 22:13, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

I've been, as you can see on the talk page[1] trying to address this issue. But was reverted. --2603:7000:2143:8500:C575:4149:C023:3136 (talk) 04:38, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello, please see which endorsements are you removing - Louisiana Dems' endorsement is not primary source. Tyler Bridges is reliable source. If you think that all Tweets are noreliable, you should remove them from 800+ elections articles. I know that you may be against Troy Carter, but please, see which endorsements are you removing. Sorry for my English, I'm from Poland and I'm still learning.
Sincerely,

) 19:13, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

@

WP:ENDORSE says only people and organizations with Wikipedia pages should be listed in endorsement sections. As for the Louisiana Democratic Party, Gary Chambers has also claimed to have the party's endorsement, and since the Uptown Messenger is a tiny local paper with almost no online presence, I am not inclined to take it at it's word. Devonian Wombat (talk

) 19:23, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

• As You have said, Twitter isn't realiable source. Uptown Messenger maybe is niche paper, but had been cited few times at Wikipedia and has c. 10 000 likes at Facebook.
  talk
  ) 19:30, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

@

Qba0202:, Alright, I can accept that line of reasoning. Devonian Wombat (talk

) 19:38, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

List of Indian under 20 Records in Athletics

Hello! What is the reason for declination of Draft:List of Indian under 20 Records in Athletics???Jejsiguoa (talk) 02:55, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

@

WP:LISTN, standalone list articles, like this one, need to have multiple sources discussing the contents of the list as a group in order to be notable. Lists can also serve navigation purposes, but since this is a list of statistics, the policies around lists for navigational purposes do not apply. You could, for example, find news articles talking about under-20 athletics records in India, that is the sort of thing that would help with notability. Devonian Wombat (talk

) 04:41, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

Ok. Is that all? I will add more citations. Thank you for your reply.Jejsiguoa (talk) 5:12, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

This is to let you know that the

, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so.

For Featured Articles promoted recently, there will be an existing blurb linked from the FAC talk page, which is likely to be transferred to the TFA page by a coordinator at some point.

We suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:58, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2018 United States House of Representatives elections in Michigan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Brenda Jones.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:07, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for rewording the part about tix on Roblox. ALthough I do still feel like it should say when exactly they got removed. BUt I'm not that good at editing Wikipedia (Yet) so I'll just stick with your edit.

) 13:22, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Based on your tag, I cleaned up a few completely bogus references that didn't support the statements they were supposedly supporting and there wasn't much left. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Psy-Harmonics. Toddst1 (talk) 13:15, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the last updated to the article Mount Francisco. I will now translate it in french and Portuguese and later start step by step to improve the informations in US ES FR PT. But step by step. Anyway its a small place... where I live. Important element to consider, some stones in the zone of Mount Francisco are from de Devonian era and I really believe that this is a cute coincidence !

Pghislain (talk) 11:41, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

RE John J. Francis (musician)

I was unable to log in with the profile I set up to make this contribution.

I have set up a new profile to make the required edits.

Considering there is no entry or recognition of the Australian musician I'm happy to make the required edits.

The actions required to publish are quite broad. And will be time extensive and I require assistance.

Considering g the amount of hours gone into research and drawing up the article. I t would be a shame just to delete it.

There are limited number of articles published online hence I've had to mainly rely on an radio interview which the musician and that has been referenced for verification .

In regards to "peacock terms" can you make a specific reference.

And, How do I go about not having the work deleted?

cheers if you can assist.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:John_J._Francis_(musician)

• @
  primary sources, and therefore are not considered good for notability. If you haven’t done so already, I’d recommend a search of the Australian National library archives for articles about the bloke, and as for peacock terms, you’ve already removed them, but specifically, terms like “renowned” and “classic” are often viewed as promotional, and should always be attributed to a source if they are used at all, although considering they were mainly isolated to the lead they weren’t as big of a problem as I thought when I gave the article that initial look-over. Hope I could help, and good luck with the draft! Devonian Wombat (talk
  ) 12:49, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Your opinion

Hi. I just wanted to invite you to the discussion Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Princess Leonore, Duchess of Gotland (2nd nomination). Since you had previously participated in similar discussions, I thought you might be able to provide us with some insights regarding this article. Thank you. Keivan.f^Talk 16:15, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello. When you fill out references as you did here, could you make sure the date format matches the existing one in the article (you inserted MDY dates despite the article using DMY dates). Cheers, Number 57 11:19, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello Devonian Wombat. I need help with your analysis of the draft you judged. I have read the guidelines, but I don't see the problem you are pointing to. None of all references have value? Would you fix it if I try to get more references, or should I change them entirely? What types of pages give you relevance value for this item category? Javier Alejandro Herrera Carvajal (talk) 16:00, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

@

reliable sources, the sources you site seem to be a mix of blogs, promotional industry publications, and primary sources. None of these are considered reliable. Devonian Wombat (talk

) 22:13, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

@Devonian Wombat:All right it then. I was confused at the start. I thought you were talking about the sources don't talk deep enough. So, what do you think? Do I have to change all of them? Or some can be saved. Well, whatever you say, thanks for answering me this time, the previous editor didn't answer me at all, I was frustrated.

Hi, you recentlt accepted Draft:Vila Mutum. This is one of a series of very poor articles by a blocked sockpuppet, which you probably didn't notice. However, the article should never have been accepted on its own merits. The very first line already claims it is a "ghost village", which is "sourced" in the article to Mindat.org, a completely unreliable source (just like some other in the article).

The section "On January 7, 2014, 3 men from Vila Mutum were arrested for murder and illegal possession of a firearm in Apiacás after murdering Manoel Messias da Silva Almeida in the public roads of Vila Mutum by lynching, then being kicked, having stones thrown and being cut in the neck. The operation was named 'Vila Mutum' because this is where most preparation and crimes took place. They also killed a man named Antônio Alves Paixão with a shotgun after confirmation from Alta Floresta autopsy." not only is way too detailed for an article on the village, but it is more importantly very wrong, which is bad when one deals with serious crimes (any conviction yet?). Manoel Almeida was, according to the source, killed by the three men, but "they also killed" is false: Almeida is claimed to have killed Paixão, and was murdered in return out of revenge.

Other sentences are nonsense: "Vila Mutum's infrastructure is entirely made out of wood glued together to make houses." Right...

"Manoel Messias da Silva Almeida was generally seen as evil to the wide majority of the villagers before his death in 2014, the day he arrived in 1987 is named 'the Day of Fury' by locals." Um, what? A "Manoel" arrived in 1987, there is no evidence that he is the same as the murdered Manoel: to the contrary, the article about the murder states that he wasn't known in Vila Mutum, unlike his victim, Paixão, and that this is one of the reasons why other inhabitants of Mutum lynched this Manoel. "Fury Day" is not the day this or any Manoel arrived, but the day in 2001 when 5 people were murdered.

"Vila Mutum has a church, male health clinic" is sourced to this. An extremely dubious site, with hundreds of such clinics per province it seems. Not just male health, Vila Mutum also has an alcool detox clinic[2], an "involuntary treatment clinic"[3], and so on. Either a scam or some very optimistic descriptions there.

And so on...

Basically, nothing in the articles by this editor can be trusted, and articles with this many problems (starting at the very beginning) shouldn't be accepted.

) 12:47, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Right, thanks for letting me know. Devonian Wombat (talk) 12:50, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2018 United States House of Representatives elections in New York, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Ringer.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:55, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello Devonian Wombat,

Some time ago i wrote an article about a former Dutch traintype called

. My submission was declined because it had no reliable sources. I've searched the internet for more sources but after adding these as references it was declines again. You said "Be more specific". Can you help me with that? I have based this article on a translation of the same subject in the Dutch Wikipedia. I have searched for information on the internet to substantiate the information and found four sources.

• A website of enthusiast of this type of train who posses one of those trains, maintain it and ride it.
• A documentary on Youtube made by railway enthusiasts
• The website of the Dutch Railway museum who give an introductio on the train.
• A website maintained by trainspotters with very detailed information. And a page on the same website about the Mat '57 version.

Combined with the information on Wikipedia in the Dutch section i believe that this article is very well based on different independent sources who all give the same information. Unfortunately all the sources are in Dutch but can be translated with Google Translate. Actually i have no idea what i can do to make it more reliable.

I hope you can help me

Regards --Weetjesman (talk) 19:17, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

• @
  user-generated source, which are not considered reliable, and since YouTube videos undergo no editorial process prior to publication, they are only considered reliable when coming from a well-established source, such as a major news agency. This meant that most of your article was sourced to unreliable sources. I would recommend searching through some newspaper archives for articles on these trains, you can find a list of them here. Devonian Wombat (talk
  ) 21:19, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello Devonian Wombat,

I didn't find newspaper articles that are public accessible about the Mat '54. Instead i found a book that gives very detailed information about this train. Would you like to check if this article is now sufficiently sourced?

Regards Weetjesman Weetjesman (talk) 22:41, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Wow. Thats quick. Thank you.

Weetjesman (talk) 22:45, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello there I see you reviewed my article but rejected it on the grounds of copyright I had also written a similar article on politics.ie and inserted the following permit for the content to be used on wiki on the last post I made there "The text of this article is available for modification and reuse under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 Unported License and the GNU Free Documentation License (unversioned, with no invariant sections, front-cover texts, or back-cover texts)." I believe this addressed the copyright issue so can you please publish my article now as its been a long time waiting thanks Stephen Blackpool (talk) 17:16, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

@Stephen Blackpool:, well, you have to submit the draft first, but yes, I don't see any problems with accepting under those conditions, but in order to avoid confusion it might be best to make a note on the talk page of the article explaining this, because editors are generally very trigger-happy when it comes to copyright concerns. Devonian Wombat (talk) 20:55, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

You declined my article because "This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject."

I confess that this confuses me because:

• the first part is his official description posted at the Cultural Center of the Philippines website which is even widely used on every single page where Tots Tolentino is referenced. You can easily verify this by visiting the citations.
• ALL sources (references) ARE "independent, reliable, and published sources". As a matter of fact, I even used the tool provided by Wiki to find those sources. I even did a deep DEEP dive as information about this great man is scattered all over the place. Among the citations are news agencies, music sites, and even GOVERNMENT websites that feature him.
• the lists in the DISCOGRAPHY, SESSION WORK, AWARDS, and NOTABLE PERFORMANCES are simply that ... LISTS and all those entries are verifiable (see the citations). Can you tell me, please how those LISTS are not neutral?

I put a lot of work into putting that article together, which I am sure you can plainly see. :) So much so that I was able to find 92 LEGITIMATE CITATIONS.

I have compared this article with others that are already published and, to be honest, (and I may be biased here) this article is more formal and encyclopedic in tone than others. It is also well-referenced and has more complete content. I would appreciate it if you can be more specific in telling me what you are looking for because (maybe I am just too close to the subject as this article is "my baby", so to speak) but I am unable to see any of the issues you indicated as the reasons for rejecting my article.

I look forward to your response and clarification. Respectfully, Slvrdlphn (talk) 00:45, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

@

peacock terms

, and the fact that there are a lot of them present in your article would likely get it sent to AfD. There are also several problems with bolding and external links, the only text in the article that should be bolded is the person's name at the beginning, and the external links in the prose are also inappropriate, since they are against guidelines.

Fix these problems, which should be relatively easy, and I reckon the article would be ready for mainspace, so once you've resubmitted and fixed the issues leave another message on my talk page and I'll review it again. Devonian Wombat (talk) 02:09, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice! Those were super helpful suggestions. I will try to attend to them this week after I finish grading my students' submissions and finals. Slvrdlphn (talk) 12:38, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi I was sent here to check with you to see if my draft could be posted after editing. MarvelHarLo (talk) 02:03, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

@MarvelHarLo:, yes, you just need to click the blue "resubmit" button to submit it again, but you need to add prose. This isn't a directory website, there needs to be actual text talking about this person, and that's assuming they are notable at all. Devonian Wombat (talk) 02:08, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Dear

) 03:53, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

• Jallerso (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Qustodio (software) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi Wombat! Need your help. Your rejection says the sources are not varied and it reads like marketing. Re the sources, they include the New York Times, Wired, Bloomberg, The Washington Post. I don't know how to make it more varied than that. What do you suggest?

As for sounding like marketing, I have made the text 100% fact-based and boring (non-marketing) as I can. Can you give an example of what part of it still sounds marketing?

I have disclosed that I am paid to crate this article but I am honestly just trying to load the bare bones of a software that has existed for nearly 10 years. Not trying to sell it.

Appreciate your advice!

Jen

Jallerso (talk) 08:34, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

@Jallerso:, well, there are problems with your article, but the good news is that they are relatively easily fixable. As a start, the "Features", "Platforms", "Languages" and "Criticism" section feel like they belong on the company website, not an article, and they should probably be removed altogether. You should also probably remove the "2 million users worldwide" line from the reception section as it is not referenced, and should replace "many online safety features" with "several online safety features" in the lead. Aside from that, just remember that references go after punctuation, not before. Good luck with the article, you can leave another message on my talk page when you resubmit it and I'll review it again. Devonian Wombat (talk) 09:16, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi again Wombat Devonian Wombat, thanks for the tips. I can't remove the features and platforms and languages section because this is the page about the software/app and those are that is the most important info about the software (I tried to follow the Slack software page model), but I did change the order and put history first. Also changed the wording suggestions you gave me. For the quotes/references, I am not 100% sure I understand the change, could you give the a model to follow. I have resubmitted, fingers crossed! Tack! Jallerso (talk) 08:34, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

This is an honest question, I'm not trying to be snarky here.

I understand that politicians automatically qualify for notability but I don't understand how a four-sentence article is useful to Wiki readers. All I can learn from the article George_A._Myers is a few bits of trivia about his life such as when he was born, some of his immediate family, some places he lived and that he was somehow part of the civil rights movement. To learn anything else I have to follow the off-wiki sources—and there isn't much more to learn even there.

Is the much shorter article acceptable simply to document politicians (I saw a wiki note that there is a project to expand coverage of politics)? Michael.C.Wright (talk) 21:35, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

@Michael.C.Wright:, Well, based on my experience at AfD, these sorts of articles do get kept, so my view is that the broader editing community views articles such as this as acceptable. Generally, it is held that even if the article is destined to remain a four-sentence stub forever, that is better than having no information at all. This is especially true for Myers, since there has been an article in The Plain Dealer that talks about him relatively recently, I have seen articles on similar politicians survive with much weaker sourcing. Devonian Wombat (talk) 22:21, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanation. I think it helps. So 'something is better than nothing' for notable politicians, basically? Because I see it as even too short to be called a stub based on suitability:too short from this guide...unless I'm missing some other criteria in the 'stub vs too short' evaluation. Michael.C.Wright (talk) 03:36, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

For reviewing my drafts!!

07:44, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

) 19:30, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

• HelperGirl0102 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Triangle Park Music (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello,

I have submitted an article to be published a couple of times and both times the article hasn't been accepted. I provided tons of sources on the work done by the company I am writing the article on, but the feedback keeps saying that there isn't enough substantial information on the subject of my article. I really don't understand this. Can you guys enlighten me on the standards I'm not meeting specifically and what they mean? The reasoning seems a little vague so far. HelperGirl0102 (talk) 22:04, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

@

Peacock terms and it generally reads like a company website. Also, keep in mind that for there to be significant coverage, an article needs to talk about Triangle Park Music at some length, generally about two paragraphs is considered to be the minimum. Devonian Wombat (talk

) 22:41, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello. Please see this project. Translation of an article from the Russian Wikipedia - https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aviasales.ru. Many refuse to watch this draft because the article was written by a blocked participant. But this is a very large and well-known company. In the Russian Wikipedia, it has the status of a good article. 2A00:1FA1:41DB:98E7:131:3781:A986:C0ED (talk) 16:04, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

Thank you so much for approving the Tots article and giving me guidance when I was unsure about how to proceed with it. I don't really understand the barnstars so I hope you like pie. :) Slvrdlphn (talk) 13:23, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2012 United States House of Representatives elections in California, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page CA-38.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your refereeing of the page "Draft:IMA Lighthill-Thwaites Prize". I just had a question on what to change for resubmission. I am slightly confused by the verdict of not having reliable published secondary sources. The current references are to published journal issues in academic journals so my question is why these don't qualify? Again thanks in advance for the help. UC1994 (talk) 16:56, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

• @
  primary sources, OK for content but not good for proving notability. In order to prove notability you would need to add citations from journals or newspapers independent of the awarders of the prize. Devonian Wombat (talk
  ) 22:03, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
• @Devonian Wombat: Ah super, that makes sense, thanks. Typically how many are required? Will one or two suffice for initial acceptance? UC1994 (talk) 10:02, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

@UC1994:, generally, two is considered the minimum, but three would be better. Devonian Wombat (talk) 10:10, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

@Devonian Wombat: Apologies if this is a stupid question, but would a webpage news announcement of the winners from their academic institutes qualify? UC1994 (talk) 11:52, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

@UC1994:, no worries, just so long as the winner wasn't say, the author of the announcement or a faculty member at that institution those should be good as a source. If they were merely a PhD student at that university, for example, it would be a secondary source. Devonian Wombat (talk) 12:44, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

@Devonian Wombat: Great, thanks for your help and time! I've added four of those (just checked none of them were faculty or authors at the time) and some additional external links, so hopefully that should be sufficient.

On the

) 20:13, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	thnx for the revision! will work on the article :) Chefs-kiss (talk) 16:23, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 27

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2006 United States Senate election in Vermont, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Richard Tarrant.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

		The Articles for Creation Barnstar
		For all the hard work in a pretty thankless job. Keep it up! Onel5969 TT me 15:39, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

• Dr.Tomo3 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Sound Material-Cycle Society (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs
    )

I read your comments and added four more references to the rejected page of Sound-Material Cycle Society. This is my first experience to create a new page in Wikipedia and I have to say that I am familiar with the Wikipedia's rules. I think that four references are sufficient but if not please instruct what is missing specifically.

"Sound-Material Cycle Society" is very popular word in waste management and recycling field in Japan. And often referred to by non-Japanese for national comparisons, etc.

Thank you in advance.

Dr.Tomo3 (talk) 01:21, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi Devonian Wombat. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group. Please check back at

. In addition, please remember:

• usually
  not aware that they are doing anything wrong. Do make use of the message feature when tagging pages for maintenance so that they are aware.
• You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted. Please be formal and polite in your approach to them – even if they are not.
• If you are not sure what to do with a page, don't review it – just leave it for another reviewer.
• Accuracy is more important than speed. Take your time to patrol each page. Use the message feature to communicate with article creators and offer advice as much as possible.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you also may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In cases of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, or long-term inactivity, the right may be withdrawn at administrator discretion. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:16, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi Devonian,

Thank you for checking through the draft of the ACSF article which I have been working on. I wrote this article from my personal point of view form a neutral view. By no mean i wanted it to sound like an advertisement. I want to have article for this group because i think they do lots of valuable work in the field of architecture. My writing is what I found online about them and know about the group and I even used other approved Wikipedia article as reference to make sure i am following the outline. Would you please let me know why my article gets rejected? What can i change so it passed. I appreciate your help.

Thank you again for your time. --Nesmaeili (talk) 03:05, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

@

peacock terms, and they should be removed or replaced with just a simple descriptor like "architect". The problems are not structural, however, so they should be easy to fix. Good luck with the Draft!. Devonian Wombat (talk

) 03:24, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Russia's War: Blood Upon The Snow

Hello Devonian,

Thank you for not deleting the article - I was astonished that anyone would propose doing that. I agree that the episode summaries are very long but as I noted in the talk page "The episode summaries are obviously more than summaries. I want every person, place and preferably event mentioned in the programs to be identified and linked back to an article about them. As such, I hope this article will be a companion to the television programs to allow further research instead of a mere overview." To give just one example, the program spends perhaps one minute on Tanya Savicheva - a Soviet version of Anne Frank - and I want anyone that sees the show to be able to find her story as it deserves to be better known.

I've spent a lot of time already reviewing the first 5 episodes and finding everything that should be linked. This program deserves way more recognition that it has had so I really believe that it deserves its own page on Wikipedia. Peter4Truth (talk) 19:51, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Dear Devonian Wombat, just wanted to say thank you for your prompt review, helping with cleaning and accepting the article "Valery Alexandrovich Volkov". Much appreciated! - Otherart (talk) 15:26, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi Devonian, thank you for the taking the time to review the draft for the ASTRO Gaming page. We have been continuously working on this and making the changes as advised, but it still gets rejected. Can you provide some guidance/help on the areas in the draft of what needs to be changed? Meguatastro (talk) 16:56, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for approving the article "Marc Tyler Nobleman." How do we remove the Comment and response to that comment that appears at the top of the article itself (or just move it to the Talk page)? The issue has been fixed, it seems. I'm fairly new to Wiki procedure, obvs! Robamcnamy (talk) 02:23, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

@Robamcnamy:, the comments are not supposed to be there after the draft is accepted, either there was some formatting issue or I closed the tab too quickly while accepting, either way you were correct to remove it. Devonian Wombat (talk) 03:49, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Great, thanks! Robamcnamy (talk) 03:52, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi, URLs that contain "&Expires=<some number>" typically expire within an hour of being generated (hosted at Amazon AWS). You recently replaced one such dead URL of this type, with another URL of the same type, which of course immediately expired. I added a dead link (again). Is it possible to find a source that doesn't immediately expire? -- GreenC 20:31, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

@GreenC:, The work's listed on Google Books, and I can confirm it is searchable there, would that be sufficient? Devonian Wombat (talk) 23:18, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

out of Draft space?

Please put it back in draft space. -- 109.76.143.245 (talk) 11:48, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

@

WP:MOSFILM. Devonian Wombat (talk

) 11:55, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

It is not clear the Television series has started filming yet. -- 109.76.143.245 (talk) 12:14, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

@

WP:IAR situation. If you disagree with that, you are welcome to request the pages' deletion. Devonian Wombat (talk

) 12:21, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

I'm disappointed by the repeated ignoring of the rules and apparent willingness to approve low quality film series/franchise articles without having given any thought to it. (This case isn't too bad, there are not so many obvious deficiencies as I've seen in other cases.) Clearly you have given it some thought, and the TV series does seem imminent, that'll have to do.

It's a shame that the edit summary approving the draft didn't make the reasons for allowing the article to be approved clearer, maybe we could have avoided this conversation entirely. -- 109.76.143.245 (talk) 13:38, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Devonian Wombat. You recently declined article status on Draft: Paul Manheim, saying it was not written in “…the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article.” I’d like to rewrite it and, understanding that the comments are from a template, am not quite sure how to proceed. I think Mr. Manheim is noteworthy; you did not seem to have a problem with that. Question: should I simply re-write and re-submit? I’ve pored over the “Wikipedia: Writing better articles” supplement, but wonder if you might provide a few specifics for me. I’d hate to redo the article only to have it rejected via template again. I’m pretty new to this and can use all the help I can find. Thanks.Letita Bodicia (talk) 13:31, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

@Letita Bodicia:, the main problem with your draft is the high concentration of promotional language in the opening paragraph, stuff like “instrumental”, “renowned” etc. Remove those, and the article will definitely be ready for mainspace, so just message me again when you have done that and I’ll review the article again. Devonian Wombat (talk) 21:43, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

@Devonian Wombat: Thanks for your insight and help. I rewrote Draft:Paul Manheim in accordance with your suggestions. I hope it's improved.Letita Bodicia (talk) 19:56, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Radically rewrote it. Im a huge kevin durant fan and hoping to get this published. Think hes very noteworthy and cleaned up hyperbole considerably. Thanks for any assistance and feedback. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Rich_Kleiman_(1) Skoskoexoso122122222a (talk) 21:30, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

On April 30, 2021, you declined the article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:AOZ_Studio.

1. You stated that it doesn't show significant coverage about the subject to be deemed worthy of publication. AOZ Studio is a new, modern version of AMOS Professional, which definitely has significant coverage, primarily in the late 1980s and early 1990s (and even today in the retro community). Would historical coverage of the predecessor of AOZ Studio (AMOS / AMOS Professional) be acceptable citations?

2. I also received several comments stating that the article is too promotional and/or too much like advertising. Admittedly, I do have a declared COI, since I work part time for AOZ Studio, however, I've tried to be neutral and matter-of-fact in the article as suggested in the Wiki documentation. I asked the poster what can I do to make it less promotional, but I got no clear response. So... I'll ask you: How can I make my article more neutral, less promotional, etc.?

3. Finally, a note was added to the article suggesting that I was paid for creating it. I was not. How can I get this note removed?

Ising4jesus (talk) 15:28, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

@

peacock terms

.

However, the larger problem with the article is that there is only one reliable, secondary source listed. An example for a secondary source would be coverage in a newspaper or an established website, but of the four sources, only the Versailles Academy one could qualify. The others are an interview, which is considered a primary source, and a YouTube video plus one guys website, both of which are not considered reliable. If these sources do not exist, I would suggest expanding the AMOS to include a bit more information about AOZ page as a secondary option.

As for the paid editing, I would recommend talking to Theroadislong about removing the tag, since he was the one who placed it in the first place. Devonian Wombat (talk) 22:35, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the suggestions. They're very helpful. I have found other sources which are articles for popular magazines on AOZ, but they are based on interviews with one of the founders of AOZ Studio. So yes, they're reliable secondary sources, but the articles are based on interviews. For example: This link contains an article from PC Pro magazine (a popular PC magazine in Europe): https://medium.com/geekculture/brought-up-on-basic-try-coding-with-aoz-studio-c007c063dd6f Is this acceptable?

Ising4jesus (talk) 11:23, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

@Ising4jesus: unfortunately, no they are not, as interviews, no matter how reliable the source they are in, are considered to be primary sources for the purpose of notability. Devonian Wombat (talk) 11:24, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

O.K. I've added a reference for BASIC being easy to use, and I re-worded "significant applications" as "sizable applications", which is more what I meant anyway. Hopefully, these changes will make the article more acceptable.

I do have an additional question though, if you have time:

What if an article contains interview material, but also contains information from the article's author - which I intend to reference. Would that be acceptable? For example: The previously mentioned article from PC Pro was largely from an interview with Laurant Wiell, also contained the following, in the words of the article's author:

"So how does it fare? Well, once it’s up and running, it’s simple to grasp. AOZ Studio uses a retooled version of the desktop text editor Atom for its integrated development environment (IDE) and any code can be instantly run in a browser window or as an app in its own window, allowing for testing on the fly and giving you immediate results.

Anyone who ever created software in AMOS will also be able to import their files into AOZ and have the sprites, sounds and images extracted and exported as PNG and WAV files."

I was going to reference the above regarding AOZ being easy to understand, producing fast results, and being able to import AMOS programs and media. Since the quote is from the article's author, is this then considered to be a secondary source, even though the bulk of the article is from an interview? Ising4jesus (talk) 09:03, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

@Ising4jesus: it would depend on how much coverage there was prior to an interview. If there are a couple of paragraphs before the interview starts, that would be good, but if there's only a couple of sentences that would not be enough. Devonian Wombat (talk) 09:19, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Regarding my article" Kostka Bojana"

Dear Devonian, after reviewing my article, you left a comment about how the article appears more to be an advertisement than an actual article. As I am writing about a person I don't personally know and about her accomplishments, all the info I have on her I found from independent reliable sources, such as news articles and I double-checked if there is any PR sign on them. Considering I noticed there is not enough coverage about the nail industry and the person I am writing about is the most famous Nail artist in the world, that's why I wanted to write about this subject and this person. The same article is accepted on other language Wikipedia and it's under the license "Creative Commons". At this point, I am not really sure anymore how to proceed further and I will kindly ask you for your help. Dusan Rajic (talk) 11:39, 23 June 2021 (UTC)Dusan Rajic

@

Peacock terms to describe Bajana, which is a problem. I would recommend removing any source that does not talk about Bajana at length and cutting out anything from the article that does not seem particularly important, and trying to describe her as boringly as possible, if that makes sense. Once you think you've done that, leave another message on my talk page and I'll review it again. Devonian Wombat (talk

) 11:48, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

Midcoast Community Council

I can provide reliable secondary sources in the form of newspaper articles about the Council, and cite the original San Mateo County version of the resolution creating the Council, instead of a link to the one on the Council website. After reading the suggested articles, it's not clear to me if that would be sufficient. The council has been very active in a number of areas, so I have quite a few newspaper articles to choose from. Would that resolve the issue that you have raised? Thanks, DaveOlson-EG (talk) 05:53, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

@DaveOlson-EG:, the newspaper articles would be excellent, they are the sort of things that are considered to be reliable secondary sources for a subject such as this. Devonian Wombat (talk) 06:18, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Only fair to let you know that this article that you accepted is up for deletion, and that I have started an SPI affecting the three accounts associated with it. Thsi is just a heads up. I'm not expecting you to comment at AfD for or against the article, though you are welcome to do either Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 16:13, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

WHY did you delete my cite on

17:44, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

@

DinosaurTrexXX33: unfortunately, the reference you added didn't support the content I wanted to add to the article. Don't be down about it, the fact that you added a reliable source to the article in the first place shows that you've got a good grasp on the basics of editing. Devonian Wombat (talk

) 23:26, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

• Kathynof (talk · contribs)
  • talk | history | links | watch | logs
    )

Hi Devonian Wombat. Thank you for reviewing my AfC for Sandra L. Richter. I've made some edits and I was wondering if you might be able to have another look at it at your convenience.

Thank you! Kathynof

Kathynof (talk) 20:16, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

@Kathynof: looking over the article, it looks notable and not excessively promotional to me, so I’d say it’s ready, though moving it to mainspace would require placing a couple of cleanup tags on the article. Submit it again and I’ll review it. Devonian Wombat (talk) 22:10, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

@Devonian Wombat: Thank you! I just resubmitted.

@Devonian Wombat: Thank you so much, Devonian Wombat.