User talk:MatthewVanitas/Archive 39

This 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.

Hi there,

Thanks for your work at

Hello Ryan (Wiki Ed)! My understanding is that there's no particular problem removing old Decline notices, modifying AFC templates, etc. provided its being done for legit reasons in good faith. As in, removing them so reviewers wouldn't see you've been declined 9 times would be sketchy, but removing one because someone used the wrong tag would be fine. I'd say just leave a clear edit summary when you swap tags. MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:55, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

That's what I figured, but didn't know if there was some AfC category-based recordkeeping that necessitated keeping those templates. I'll go ahead and remove them and swap out the template. Thanks. --Ryan (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:57, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bilston Town Hall, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page West Midlands. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:00, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Hello Matthew,

I just received a decline on my WIKI but would like to know more specifically where I need more reliable sources. I would like your help on how I can improve this article please.

WriteaboutArt (talk) 23:26, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Hello

WP:Notability (artists)

first so we can be on the same page? That guideline should answer about 80% of your questions, and it'll save us a lot of time if I only have to answer the remaining 20%. :) Please take a quick look, and then let me know what parts you're unsure of how to address.

The very short answer to your question is: for any given fact in the entire article, imagine a reader saying "oh yeah, says who?". If you don't have an answer for that fact, clearly cite there, the fact can't be in the article. For example: his love and knowledge of art were very evident from an early age.. Okay, who has this opinion? If it's just your personal take, we don't care, you (and I) are just some person on the internet. If, however, a serious journalist, art historian, etc has specifically written about Lord's early promise, then you can cite that person's book/article which says so to this fact. Fundamentally, everything in the article has to be a fact that is explicitly established somewhere else, not your personal embellishment, interpretation, etc. That's how an encyclopedia works; it doesn't break new ground, rather it bring together existing documented facts. Make sense? Scope the guideline and let me know what your specific questions are. MatthewVanitas (talk) 05:02, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply Matthew, yes it does make a lot of sense and I have read the guide and will continue. I am a Theatre Reviewer and reviewing is very much about personal embellishment. So I clearly need to take a very different, matter of fact approach.

I will do my best. Thanks again.WriteaboutArt (talk) 01:08, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Hello matthew I recently posted a page in telugu. which was rejected by you. I actually want it to link it to the English page "Thiruvidanthai" How can I do it? Currently there are only English and Tamil versions of that page.

Regards Hydkarthik

Hello, please see

Wikipedia:Language links. What you do is click the "Language" link at the bottom of the tools column on the left side of your screen. Directly below the "Wikipedia globe" and at the bottom of the list. That will allow you to add links between equivalent articles existing on different language Wikipedias. MatthewVanitas (talk

) 07:13, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

(To unsubscribe, remove your username here.) 03:11, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

1. REDIRECT Elsa Cladera de Bravo

Thank you for your cooperation on the 9 September 2014, when Article Elsa Cladera de Bravo was accepted and has been created. Nadezhda Bravo Cladera (talk) 07:00, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

It's a sense or concept not suitable for writing. See you later. Jianjun Yang (talk) 08:12, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

• Ronniemenassa (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Mariam Michtawi (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi - would it be possible to advise why the article was rejected, and what advice you could give to be able to get this page up? Many thanks Ronnie

Ronniemenassa (talk) 11:30, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Hello

WP:Notability (writers)? Please take a look at that guideline, and it should answer 90% of your questions. Please post back here if you are still unsure what to do after reading the guideline. MatthewVanitas (talk

) 17:15, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

I did, and I have checked, but being new to wikipedia, I am still unsure what I can do to be able to update or change to be able to have the page published? Many thanks, Ronnie Ronniemenassa (talk) 17:31, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Hello Ronnie, essentially what you need to do is demonstrate that people are discussing Michtawi. Not that her name is listed in a program or website, not a bio from her employer/school, not her Facebook page. You have to show that art critics, journalists, art researchers, etc are substantively writing about her and her work. If nobody is doing so, we don't really have anything to put on Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not just a place to quote someone's Facebook; if it were, you and I and just anyone could make a page. To merit being in an encyclopedia, you must demonstrate that the subject has had an impact on the field which has been noted by other experts. Does that make sense? For the 10-second summary, check out the guideline

WP:42

:

MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:25, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

• Katherinecraw (talk · contribs)
  • User:Katherinecraw (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I require more of an overview of exactly where the term 'lexical' needs to be clarified such that your use of it to justify a word in the English language does not include the assumption that doing so simply determines its validity without first establishing merit.

Just because lexical more specifically relates to taxonomical structure, when further explaining what it means to be an 'English word without a vowel' you cannot continue to claim that old-English standards should still be considered enough to substantiate modern credibility. They are not.

To allow the above mentioned views to formulate the basis of establishing presence is to improperly prioritize a clearly defined parameter of definition based on cultural preference. A word must either reflect the culture to which it belongs or fail to adhere to an adequate degree of responsible regulation. The moral implications of cross-cultural contamination with regard to an abundance of terms using letters like q, x and z for example contribute to its loss of identity.

A moral sense of obligation when establishing these limitations speaks to a level of maturity that is quite capable of incorporating modern definitions of something like an 'acronym' into the English mainstream by using an appropriate distinction. Re-approaching the methodology behind maintaining the integrity of a language also enables one to re-asses the scale of change that might be necessary in order to adequately maneuver through every incremental pass.

I had further intended to draw attention to another discrepancy over the use of the term 'class' verses 'category'. This is once again something that requires re-purposing from either a bottom up or top down perspective to the extent that doing so results in structural consistency, and I currently lack an empirical analysis of range within your construct. In addition, I would have to re-assemble all citations in order to reflect an adequate consensus - Knowing that an important aspect of differentiation also means relating to a generational sense of comprehension.

A final note... The complexity of multifaceted arrangements underlying linguistic terminology should not permit a spelling mistake to exist as a brand new word by default at any position in Wikipedia's flow-chart, regardless of the ease with which it has become to assume the right to do so. For example, to the best of my knowledge the letter 'w' has never before been credited with belonging to our set of vowels, and I would at least expect an English versed encyclopedia to maintain a similar historical perspective for the purpose of maintaining its cultural authority.

Something to be wary of is an under-estimation of our ability to re-create the alphabet using the kind of whispered undertones that have the potential to infiltrate common practice within a non-removable format.

Kat Craw 20:08, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

I cannot even parse your question; you are not making your intentions any clearer by this screed. In whatever case, the draft you submitted is not appropriate material for an encyclopedia, and much like your question above, is not even particularly intelligible. I do not wish to be involved any further with your work, so please refrain from contacting me again on my Talk page, and I will refrain from any further reviews of your work, though I assure you that other reviewers will agree that what you have submitted in your Draft simply is not publishable. MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:27, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

• Jbruno999 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Joseph J Bruno (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Jbruno999 (talk) 16:32, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Hello Jbruno999, what is your question? Did you read the comments I left at the top of your draft? MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:33, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

		The Articles for Creation barnstar
		For all the hard work you do reviewing (and improving!) AfC submissions, I hereby award you this Barnstar. Keep up the good work! --ThaddeusB (talk) 17:10, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

• Ivorcivor (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:ZW HR Consulting (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello Matthew,

You rejected my entry yesterday on the grounds that it read too much like an advertisement. I have had this happen before and so I was very careful to leave out all hyperbole and subjective evaluations of the company. I didn't use words like "excellent" or "best" and tried to keep the entry factual. It is impossible for me to find outside sources that confirm dates and times of the company being set up as they are Chinese and only recently hired any kind of marketing team.

I want to know what I can do to get this page uploaded, I have checked and all of our competitors (Robert Walter, Korn Ferry, Michael Page etc.) have Wikipedia entries. If you could help me to understand better what steps I need to take that would be really helpful.

Ivorcivor (talk) 06:19, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Dear MatthewVanitas Thanks a lot for helping with my article on Mascha Mioni by moving it out of the sandbox "status". Now I plan to add an article "Yoshiko Iwamoto Wada" https://yoshikowada.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/yiw_brief-cv11_2.pdf who has and still is conributing enormously to textile art advancement and research. I would try to do it in my sandbox first, but am afraid I'll change Mascha Mioni's article if I edit anything in it ? ( If I go to the sandbox I see: "Mascha Mioni From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 (Redirected from User:Bonu/sandbox)"

How do I proceed to start a new subject (BLP) in my sandbox? Can I just delete what I see when clicking on sandbox??

Please let me know soon - I wanted to do it while I have some time :)

Thanks a lot again for your help! Bonu (talk) 20:33, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Dear MatthewVanitas I did some further research, but could not find a way to remove the link from the sandbox. But I found the place to create aa new draft for later submission and started working there: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Yoshiko_Iwamoto_Wada&action=edit So no need to take your valuable wiki-time to answer my request anymore. I'm launched :) Thanks again for your engagement in wikipedia. Bonu (talk) 08:37, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you for your helpful suggestions for my most recent start-class article. Mitzi.humphrey (talk) 18:35, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Matthew: I'm contributing Seibner et al (Limner Group of Artists) pages, all reference material in University of Victoria Special Collection archives. Is there an easy way to place a single reference, showing all original docs are in the archives? Thanks Cian Cian Yyj (talk) 18:57, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Are you serious? Not evidence that the album is FAMOUS?? Did you see who the album is by? The first Rap Group to win an OSCAR!! If that's not an album by a famous person then undone know what is. Please further investigate your decision to decline my article cause your reason is NOT a good one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheMann1989 (talk • contribs) 16:28, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Your draft doesn't say anything about awards, and has no footnotes to any news article confirming the album is award-winning, Oscar or otherwise. It's not my job to do research, it's your job to present and cite the facts about the album. My job is just to make sure you do your job, not to go read up on every one of the hundreds of topics I review each week. If it's not immediately clear why a given album/person/band/company is famous, with clear citations, then it can't publish until the submitter fixes that. MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:34, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Just because

WP:Notability is not inherited

. The album has to be shown to be famous on its own, not just made by a group that itself is famous. Otherwise, all the new album gets is a mention on the overall page for the band, since it would be the band that is famous, not the album. Now, if the album drops and gets a bunch of media coverage and awards, then it would need an article.

If you'll just read the guideline

WP:Notability (albums) like I suggested, that'd answer 95% of your questions. MatthewVanitas (talk

) 16:37, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

I do appreciate your input. Also, u are a VERY quick responder. That in itself deserves kudos on here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheMann1989 (talk • contribs) 18:50, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

No worries, sorry if I was a bit snippy, I've just been dealing with some people bugging me to approve their blatantly unqualified articles. The album you're writing on might well qualify a few months down the road, so once you have a handle on what accomplishments qualify an album for an article, you can watch for those and them add them as citations into the Draft and launch it. Thanks for your patience. MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:08, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for all the work you did on my Draft:Edwin L. "Uncle Ted" Raub. I was only expecting to be told what to do but your help was invaluable. Following your example I inserted the other references you found and was able to garner a tidbit or two from them as well. I'm also in the process of getting permissions to use some photos. Will the draft still be considered or do I need to resubmit the now (and referenced to the hilt) corrected copy? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jhm795 (talk • contribs) 14:53, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

No worries, I did some more cleanup and published the article. Image rules take some getting used to, Wikipedia is very strict about copyright. My main suggestion: if nothing else, you can include one photo of Raub automatically under

WP:Upload wizard and very specifically chose the options for "copyright image, used under Fair Use, deceased person". Just click the options that lead to that as you go down, and fill in all the fields/check-boxes it asks of you. If you have trouble with it, check in at WP:Teahouse

to speak to volunteer mentors.

Beyond Fair Use, see WP:Donating copyrighted materials for the steps folks would need to take to release copyrighted photos of Raub. Big note: there is no "we release this just for usage on Wikipedia" license! If folks want to "release" a photo, it very nearly as strong as saying "I, the owner of the rights, relinquish all rights to this image and release it to Public Domain". So unless the person/company who owns the rights to the image is fully releasing it, it can't go in the article, except you (or another editor) are allowed to add one image, regardless of copyright, under Fair Use. It's the same clause that, for example, lets newspapers show the poster for a movie in a review, a limited allowance made to "show what you're talking about" in situations where there is no copyright-free alternative.

Glad to help on this page, it's an interesting topic. We get a scattering of submissions for TV/radio hosts that just aren't publishable because the person never had fame outside of their immediate area, but in Raub's case his career did leave ripples on the national scene, so I wanted to make sure this article made it through.

If you want to submit more articles in the future, that'd be great! My main suggestions would be to mind the conversational language (Wikipedia writing is rather dry/formal), so "it's not surprising that", "the interesting thing is..." etc are always cut out during editing as being just filler, or adding opinion. Kind of "don't tell the reader a fact is interesting, make it interesting and let the reader decide". But overall you seem to have the idea down pretty well.

Nice work, hope you'll stick around to write new articles and improve existing ones! MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:37, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:26, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

(To unsubscribe, remove your username here.) 18:20, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

I added a note at User talk:CalvinBeza § Your submission at Articles for creation: Perimeter Church .28Johns Creek.2C Georgia.29 .28February 7.29, saying:

Apparently, an article already was created in February 2014 at

Perimeter Church (Johns Creek, Georgia). It appears that Duluth, Georgia and Johns Creek, Georgia are nearby suburbs of Atlanta, Georgia

. None of this says anything about the notability of the church.

Just wanted to let you know so you didn't think I was subverting the AfC process. YBG (talk) 22:38, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

What is the point of decline my personal sandbox User:Yejianfei/sandbox? It's so rediculous! After all it is only a sandbox, i.e. a place for experiment! Moreover, it is not a public or shared sandbox. It is only my personal sandbox. What is the point to decline it or accept it????? -- Yejianfei (talk) 17:47, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Hello Yejianfei, you clicked "Submit", putting your Sandbox in line to be reviewed for possible publication. I'm a reviewer, so I checked out your page and it wasn't ready. If you don't want to be reviewed, don't click Submit, and you can feel free to practice and experiment in your sandbox. MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:13, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

• 166.216.130.174 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Florida's National Historic Bridge (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

The submission was declined becuase the site that I was going to get my reference from was not working. However, once the website was working again, I posted a key reference. Do I need to have more than one reference? If so, why didn't you say so in the 2nd decline message. The 2nd decline message comment was BLANK!

166.216.130.174 (talk) 12:52, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Hello 166.216.130.174, the issue is that the site you're posting doesn't even function as a real link, and I can't tell what on earth it's even a link too, but it certainly doesn't look like a link to a serious book or newspaper. You must provide sourcing, and some website that doesn't even work right doesn't really inspire confidence. Surely this bridge is covered in news media, books, etc? Why not cite those? MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:15, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Here's why in the world it was not finished. I took several months to write a comprehensive scientific article on Aerodynamic Whistles. A subject that I originally wrote for Scientific American. I submitted it and it was rejected. I was supposed to add the material to an little existing article called "whistle" Not only was the title incorrect, but it was a short description of a few police type whistles not a scientific article. A web search of whistle showed clothing, videos, and other items not relevant to my article. A search of "Aerodynamic whistles" however was the location the article should be. So I did all that work for nothing just because there was a little article with a similar name.

Now I am writing about a subject that I am expert on, and have written a book about, and wish to get it on Wikipedia. But I am not going through the drill of doing all the work just to have it rejected because there is some similar article nearby.

The resolution is to tell me the title and subject is worthy of an article and there are no conflicts and I will complete the draft.

Would appreciate hearing from you.

Bob Chanaud — Preceding unsigned comment added by BobChan2 (talk • contribs) 00:34, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Matthew, Thanks for your quick response and suggestions. I will get with the museum director later this week and work on the sources!

Thanks

kholance — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.204.241.226 (talk) 02:45, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi

Can you tell me that what you found similar in http://metroindia.com/Details.aspx?id=21920 and Shraddha Kadakia Article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shraddha.kadakia.83 (talk • contribs) 09:40, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Category:Vishwakarma, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Redtigerxyz ^Talk 10:36, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi, I have not aired my grievances but a real fact.All I want is to Highlight about the temple which I have mentioned in my articles.This is 100% fact and I can prove by picture taken.Which way u want me to re present the article so rejected I am not familiar with this site . 10:44, 10 February 2015 (UTC)10:44, 10 February 2015 (UTC)10:44, 10 February 2015 (UTC)~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by S.vijay raghavan (talk • contribs)

Hello S.vijay raghavan, I strongly suggest you read the following:

• WP:Your first article
• WP:No original research

As the latter link notes, we do not accept things like photos, personal testimony, etc. We can only accept documented, published evidence in sources like newspapers, academic articles, government sites, etc. If this temple is writtten about in formal sources, then we can have an article about it. But we cannot have any facts unless they are clearly documented in WP:Reliable sources, and we absolutely cannot have allegations of wrongdoing unless such has been explicitly documented by media, government, and/or academics. To accept otherwise would risk defaming individuals or groups based on someone's online claims, so sourcing is mandatory. MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:54, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

• Ezra percolab (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:The Art of Hosting (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello Matthew,

Thanks for your review! I have made changes to the draft Art of Hosting page, removing content that appeared non factual and added several different sources.

I am unsure of the next steps - once edits have been performed, does the article automatically get reviewed by yourself or another editor?

Thanks,

- Ezra

Great comments, will work on it : ) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ezra percolab (talk • contribs) 17:39, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Ezra percolab (talk) 17:05, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Hello Ezra percolab, I've left extensive comments at the top of your draft. And generally I like to let fresh eyes take a look, so I'll leave your next review up to another reviewer. MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:32, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

talk

) 01:55, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Demonic spiritual manifestation

Mr. Vanitas Thank you for reviewing the article I submitted. I know it is little more than a definition, but I hope to expand it into an article. It would touch upon psychology and sociology, and explain why human beings have committed atrocities in the past and present. If you have other comments, I am open to criticism, for I would love to contribute to the subject on Wikipedia

Regards, Jarasx — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jarasx (talk • contribs) 04:30, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Hello Jarasx, if by that you mean you're going to write about how people are inspired to commit atrocities by demonic manifestation, I'm really sure that'll fall under

WP:Fringe and not be something we cover. You might want to inquire at a different Wiki that's devoted to such things as demons, angels, and other supernatural issues. MatthewVanitas (talk

) 04:50, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

06:26:28, 11 February 2015 review of submission by TechnologyExplorer

• TechnologyExplorer (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:StoneFly (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

The company is buzzing a lot on LinkedIn and has fetched a lot of customers through it. When enquired, it' s credentials are up to the mark and the reviews on Yelp are also valuable. Infact, i bagged a NAS appliance for one of my photo studios from this company via Yelp. It has a good SMB customer base in silicon valley and is said to be in business from 2006. So, i thought, that this company needs to have a wiki page.

When i surfed through their facebook, Twitter and google search engine, i found only three reference links as archives. From the past few years, the company has created a good identity of itself on Google. But in the past, i think it only used to promote its achievements through some websites.

So, i thought that of writing an article on it by quoting those references. Like its inclusion in CRN magazine and so on.

Hope, you understood what i want to say.......G'day mate! TechnologyExplorer (talk) 06:26, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

02:31:22, 10 February 2015 review of submission by 96.19.147.91

• 96.19.147.91 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Gas cabinet (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs
    )

Could you please take a look at my 'gas cabinets' re-write. I'm new to this and the reason for posting this article is because i couldn't find anything on it on Wikipedia. 96.19.147.91 (talk) 02:31, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Hello, is this User:Tyankee? If so, please make sure to log in to your Wikipedia account before editing/posting so that we can see where you are and know where to respond to you.

In any case, as noted your topic is a very valid one, we should indeed have an article on gas cabinets. Your article is better now, but needs a few improvements:

• Your
  WP:Lead section
  needs a little more clarity. Right now you just say A gas cabinet is a metallic enclosure which is used to provide local exhaust ventilation system. Okay, cool, but what for? Is it used in factories, in agriculture, for hobbyists? What kind of gases is it helping to vent? Keep it in layman's terms, for someone who doesn't already know what a gas cylinder is. You don't need to overexplain, but give a sense of where one would find a gas cylinder, and why people use them. If there's any clearly documented history of when people started using them, or what company was first to make them, that'd be useful historical context for the intro. But the intro should be just 2-3 sentences, nice and concise.
• Your tone still needs work: encyclopedias don't use "you" to address the reader, and don't offer opinions like "you should" or "it's important to note", etc. Absolutely no "it is recommended" unless you're explicitly citing someone, like "The Office of Safety and Health reccommends that...", etc.
• Encyclopedia articles absolutely do not have "Conclusions". Facts should be filed under a section that fits the facts.
• Last point, the gov't and university citations are good, though you should flesh those out to be full WP:Citations rather than just the title (i.e. the footnote should show what organization produced the report, and if applicable date and author). What you should also do though is check GoogleBooks for books of industrial practices which discuss gas cabinets. Fortunately you can make citations to GoogleBooks with just one click using http://reftag.appspot.com

Good concept for an article, making some steady improvement, so keep pressing. If you are Tyankee, when you're editing make sure you replace the IP address in the AFC Submission template with the name "Tyankee". Otherwise the notifications for Accept or Decline will go to that IP, not to your Talk page. Keep improving the article and this should eventually get through, though it might take a couple more tries. MatthewVanitas (talk) 03:28, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. Yes this was tyankee, thought i was logged in. sorry. i will take note of these points as they all make perfect sense.. i'm confused though about how to reply to messages on 'talk' pages. i used to the simple 'reply' button. Is this the correct way? I'll add below what i think is my signature.

Tyankee (talk) 03:48, 10 February 2015 (UTC)tyankee

please have another look. I've added more new content as well as references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tyankee (talk • contribs) 04:52, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Is my article now 'live' at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gas_cabinet. Looks like it is but didn't hear back from you. Thanks, Tyankee (talk) 21:48, 11 February 2015 (UTC)tyankee

Request on 09:31:03, 11 February 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Dyna music

• Dyna music (talk · contribs)
  • User:Dyna music (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Dear Matthew Vanitas,

First and foremost, this article wasn't written to plug or advertise a company. This is an information, tracking the history of one of the most renowned recording company in the Philippines up to its recent activities. Under what grounds is this article subjected for deletion? or under what grounds could you say, it's a form of advertising? A narrative is different from an advertising script. It's a company profile. If anybody wishes to look for it's root and beginnings, it will be readily available. Kindly review the article again. It's just the same article as those of associations and companies which have been already published in wikipedia.

Dyna music (talk) 09:31, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Hello

WP:Neutral

article.

If you want your article returned to you so you can work on it off Wikipedia to improve it, post a request at

WP:Refund. However, if you post it back on Wikipedia and it is still an advertisement, it will be deleted again. Wikipedia is not a place to promote your company, and "telling your story", at least the way you have done so, is clearly advertisement. Take a look at surviving articles on other record labels to see what a Neutral article looks like. MatthewVanitas (talk

) 16:48, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Dear Mr. Vanitas,

Thank you kindly for helping me out with DJ Marfox's english wiki. As for the query you have raised regarding "Further Reading" — I am not sure how to solve this problem and would like to ask your advice.

As you have noticed there are not citations, nor references these are simply further information that has been published concerning this artist. In academia we would call this bibliography and list ALL the information possible to be able to retrieve it. Obviously this would not be the case in a wiki so I have decided to state only what appears to be the MOST relevant information:

title of the article + name of the author (when known) + place of publication + date of publication (when available)

thus assuring that authors are credited as well as the place and date of publication and allowing reader to select from the title what they may be interested in reading further

If you have a better suggesting than the one I am proposing, could you let me know? I will be delighted to change it according to your guidelines.

Sincerely, Mariana Raposa — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mariana Raposa (talk • contribs) 14:44, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

QUESTION

im sorry but are you literary a hater because i have create a article which took me hours to write and then you give me this Horror--Timmy blackbush (talk) 20:03, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Dude, I politely explained exactly why we aren't accepting your article. Wikipedia is for famous acts, not ones just starting out. Also, frankly you shouldn't be writing about your own band; if you have to write your own article, that probably means you're not famous.

Mos Def

didn't have to write their own article, fans that never even met them did.

If your act gets famous, then journalists will write about it, and some fan will write your page. Have some faith in your own potential, don't try to force it through by running around writing about yourself for an encyclopedia. Focus on your music and let other people make you famous for it.

Until you're famous, we don't need a Wikipedia article for you. That said, you may be able to just copy-paste your Wiki page onto some hobbyist music/rap wiki that accepts "press release" articles from acts. Plus it's a good learning experience in whatever case.

But if you want to be rude about it, I'll just recommend you read this: Wikipedia:No one cares about your garage band. MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:05, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

sorry --Timmy blackbush (talk) 20:10, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

i get that but please will you submit my article ive been trying to make one for months--Timmy blackbush (talk) 20:12, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

(talk) i am sorry for my launguage but please will you submit the article dude ive been trying for months--Timmy blackbush (talk) 20:18, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

No worries, we all get a little short sometimes. But in any case, no, your article can't publish. If you read WP:Notability (music) it clearly explains the level of fame a musician must have to merit an article. You don't appear to meet that at all, so the article can't publish. Simple as that. Seriously, read that policy and it'll make this way clearer.

Stick to making music and promoting in appropriate venues; Wikipedia is just absolutely not the place to promote your act. MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:21, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

MatthewVanitas (talk) Can you edit the page for me. Dude it will be great i beg you--Timmy blackbush (talk) 20:24, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Tim, again, read WP:Notability (music). You are not a valid subject for an article at this time. Period. End of story. My whole role as a (volunteer) reviewer is that I help identify which topics are valid, based not on my personal opinion but on very clear benchmarks, and help people clean them up to standards. You are not yet a valid topic for an article as a musician on Wikipedia. That's all there is to it. MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:26, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

MatthewVanitas (talk) Im sorry to say but i dont think this is promotion if it was promotion then it would be different and if promotion is what you said it is then why are all these articles submitted--Timmy blackbush (talk) 20:29, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Tim, writing about your own musical act is promotion, no matter how you cut it. And your article is written nothing like a proper biography for a rapper. If you look at bios of famous rappers on Wikipedia, they're all cited to sources like Spin magazine, New York Times, books of rap history, books about social change, all kinds of people not at all involved with them have found their work worth writing about. That's why they have articles. A ton of people, like yourself, submit Draft articles for acts that are not yet famous, so we Decline those articles unless someone can show serious coverage of the act and its significance.

Trust me on this one, you are not yet a topic for Wikipedia, and that's all there is to it. I feel like I'm giving you very specific advice, but you're just ignoring it to ask me the same thing over and over. No, I absolutely will not publish your article. If you publish it yourself, I guarantee you it will be deleted very quickly by other editors. MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:33, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

I do understand if you could find the time can you get some editors to help fix up the article with me--Timmy blackbush (talk) 20:39, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

No, you don't understand. It's like I'm talking to a wall here:

There will be absolutely no article about Viral D (or any of his alternate names) until such point as he meets the requirements described at Wikipedia:Notability_(music)#Criteria_for_musicians_and_ensembles. He so far shows no signs of meeting any of those requirements, so no matter how nicely you ask, and how smooth your page layout is, the very *topic* of Viral D does no yet merit an article. MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:47, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

MatthewVanitasoh ok yeah i will and thanks for the feedback — Preceding unsigned comment added by Timmy blackbush (talk • contribs) 21:08, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

can i have a redirect to my page--Timmy blackbush (talk) 20:50, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

and not to be rude can i see you write an article (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 20:56, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean by "redirect". You have your draft on a draft page, what is it you're wanting different? What page (or search term) are you asking to have redirected to which other page?

Are you asking about the article Viral D (Rapper) that got deleted today? It's exactly what I told you would happen, isn't it? I'm not Declining your article just for kicks, I'm doing it because it would never survive as an article since it doesn't meet our most basic requirements for WP:Notability. You have a Draft page, it's not going to get any further than that.

So far as articles I've written, here's an example of one I did recently from scratch, just threw it together in about an hour or so. Look at how basically all the info in it is specifically footnoted to a published source that verifies the material: .41 Special

For an example of a much bigger article that I didn't write from scratch, but helped supervise the cleanup and improvement of, see Shivaji. MatthewVanitas (talk) 03:07, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Matthew, I'm sorry you had to spend so much time and patience on this, about his twentieth sock. If you get any more about "ViralD", or his other names "Yung Rhymes" or "Dao Leo Ranaldo" (with spelling variations), see WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Dao2k. JohnCD (talk) 21:39, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

16:04:23, 13 February 2015 review of submission by Silviatriolo

• Silviatriolo (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Legance – Avvocati Associati (2) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Silviatriolo (talk) 16:04, 13 February 2015 (UTC) Dear All, How can I improve the profile of my company?

Thank you

Lily Goodman Child Model

Hi Matthew First, I'm not sure when you will get this but if you are taking time off, I hope it is relaxing. I want to thank you for your patience. I am not technically savvy and seem to be having a hard time with links etc. I have been trying to creat a wikipedia page for Lily Goodman. Lily is the child model who helped change the law in NYC that will give young models protection that they never have had in the past. Forever child fashion model were left out of the laws protecting other entertainers but now they are protected. She has been featured in numerous newspapers, tv talk shows etc. I'm not sure how to get all of the link in but please let me know what else you may need. Thank You Joan Davis — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonidavis (talk • contribs) 13:06, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:FreeCinc

Hello MatthewVanitas. It has been over six months since you last edited your

WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "FreeCinc

".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia

mainspace

.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by one of two methods (don't do both): 1) follow the instructions at

WP:REFUND/G13, or 2) copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Draft:FreeCinc}}, paste it in the edit box at this link

, and click "Save page". An administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. JMHamo (talk) 22:45, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

I have tried to improve the article according to the guidelines provided. Could you kindly let me know if there is more to be done. Thank you, Cristina — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mariana Raposa (talk • contribs) 18:19, 17 February 2015 (UTC)