User talk:Onel5969/Archive 15

Sure. Won't be able to start it until tomorrow though, will let you know when it's done. Onel5969 (talk) 13:31, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Hazelmere, Alberta

I have deleted the redirect to allow a move from AfC per your request. —Verrai 18:47, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Skip Kelly

OTRS permission has been received and banner added to talk page. You can finish this one off now. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 22:22, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Bjorklund21 listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Bjorklund21. Since you had some involvement with the Bjorklund21 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Ricky81682 (talk) 11:04, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Request on 12:32:08, 16 February 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Sconaomi

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

Hi.

I've just had a proposed article, 'IBM MQ Light', returned to me on the basis that it reads like an advertisement. It's the first time that I've written an article, and it's disappointing that despite my attempts that I have received this reply. Could you please highlight exactly what the problems were, so that I can attempt to fix it? Thank you.

Sconaomi (talk) 12:32, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi

WP:GNG and the Golden Rule to get an understanding of what is meant by notability, and how to reference to show that notability. I hope this helps. Onel5969 (talk

) 15:05, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

P.s Is there an easy way to link my replies to you to the existing message thread? I was looking for a 'reply' button, but couldn't see one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sconaomi (talk • contribs) 16:26, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

WP:TOOSOON. I did a websearch on it, and the quality references are virtually non-existent. HERE'S ONE, although it's a fringe site, but it might help you with figuring out how to word things differently. THIS would be another nice article. You simply have to keep digging. As it stands now, there is no notability established. Onel5969 (talk

) 03:23, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know here [[1]] as it indeed wasn't correct formatted English. The thing is, it also ain't correct yet right now I think. Would you mind correcting the phrase under the image so that it is in correct English? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.165.160.85 (talk) 15:07, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Flamant page

Dear reviewer,

Thank you for your review of my page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Flamant

As I have been trying to get this page online for over a year I would like to ask some more feedback.

I chatted with several reviewers in the chatbox, they agreed my sources were legit.

About the content they were less consistent. One said I should leave out info, another said I should add more history info.

As I don't have enough references for a long history I chose to keep it short and well referenced.

I don't understand your remark about the sources.

Every single one of the used sources is a respected medium.

The Ny times, De Standaard, le Soir, Cote Maison are all high profile and quality publications.

Even the website of the Belgian Monarchy is used as a source, which is about as formal and respected as it gets.

I guess I can indeed still tweak in the tone of voice and make it more formal.

But when it comes to sources I believe this is already astounding.

Or do you mean I should reference paper publications? In that case you won't be able to check the references? I figured the article would benefit from using web references from quality newspaper's and magazine's websites.

Thank you for your feedback.

Best regards,

ReubenLefevere (my username)

ReubenLefevere (talk) 15:45, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi ReubenLefevere - I'm not questioning your sources. Quite frankly, I didn't even review your sources. Before I get to that point, I look at whether an article has an NPOV issue (which yours doesn't), is written like an advertisement (which yours isn't), and is in a formal, encyclopedic tone. This last category is where your article has an issue. The lead is fine, but the History and Products sections read more like a conversational tone, rather than an article. I think the company meets the notability requirements (although I haven't looked too in-depth at the foreign language references - some of them seem to be press releases, which don't go to notability). I hope this helps. Onel5969 (talk) 16:08, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Request on 18:10:46, 16 February 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Cmewshaw

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

Hi there, first off, I appreciate your reviewing my submission, but I do have some questions. The main reason cited for the articles dismissal was that the sources fail to adequately show the subjects notability. The sources were national publications (MTV, Rolling Stone), local publications (Oak City Hustle), and international website interviews, as well as record label websites. I read and then re-read the suggested article "guidelines on notability of music-related topics" and found that the subject met at least six of the first twelve listed criteria, of which the requirement is stated to be one. Please let me know where I went wrong as based on the reason listed for dismissal, I am very confused. I am confident that the information and cross wiki-linked articles illustrate substantial notability. Thank you for your time.

Cmewshaw (talk) 18:10, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

WP:NMUSIC

, and here's what I see: 1 - no - all of the references are either primary references (interviews, bio pages on related sites like mtv), or are trivial (like the Rolling Stone piece); 2 - Nope, hasn't charted; 3 - Nope, no gold records; 4 - Nope, no non-trivial coverage; 5 - Nope, not on a major label; 6 - Nope (he's a solo artist, according to the article); 7 - Nope; 8 - Nope, no major awards; 9 - Nope, no major competition accomplishments; 10 - Nope, no indication this is true; 11 - Nope, again no indication of this; 12 - and again, nope.

References for notability must be from secondary sources (no interviews, no press releases, nothing from sites affiliated with the subject (like bios on label webpages)), and must be reliable (no blogs, etc.). Also they must be non-trivial, they just can't allude to the subject or mention the subject in passing, they have to be in-depth about the subject. I hope this helps. Onel5969 (talk) 03:38, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Mark Everist Draft

Thanks for your recent review of my (first) article on Mark Everist. I was hopeful that you might be able to help me improve the article so that it can be published. Your justification for rejecting the submission reads: 'This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability—see the guidelines on the notability of music-related topics and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing, so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia'. Other articles on similar musicologists have much less regarding referencing, for example please see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Parker and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Taruskin These articles were both published without significant references either. I have, however, referenced the largest and most authoritative music encyclopaedia in the english language, Grove Music Online (OUP). This is a source that all music academics frequently use. The information is verifiable (assuming you have a subscription or access to a local library that has a copy of this multi-volume source). What I find particularly interesting about the review is that an OUP source is not 'verifiable' and moreover, that Oxford University Press finds 'Mark Everist' worthy of a subject entry in the largest english-language music encyclopaedia but apparently Wikipedia does not. I would be most grateful to you if you had further suggestions of what may be done to improve this article. If Oxford Uni Press encyclopaedia is not a reputable and satisfactory source, could you then please point me in the right direction? Also, it seems interesting that similarly acclaimed musicologists have had articles published with much less citation. Many thanks. SPG2015 (talk) 18:54, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

WP:RS as to what establishes notability, and what qualifies as reliable sources in order to establish that notability. I hope this helps. Onel5969 (talk

) 03:55, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi

WP:PEACOCK terms. I'll do a brief edit to show you what I mean. Nice job. Onel5969 (talk

) 11:36, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

I have recently submitted an article on a Romanian company, Avangate, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Avangate. From what I understand from your comment the resources we provided are not reliable and are internally produced. I must say that all the resources we have included are from verified and trustworthy external publications that are unrelated to Avangate. Could you please explain more on this subject? Secondly, would you be so kind as to give me an example of an "advertising" sentence or paragraph and also how it should be reformulated in order to sound more neutral? We are open even to the possibility of someone else writing the article, as we want it to be approved. If you could make a suggestion on how we could ask someone to write it for us that would be excellent.

Thank you very much for your time and I look forward to your answer. Have a nice week,

Laura Gheorghe — Preceding unsigned comment added by Laura gh25 (talk • contribs) 07:31, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Laura gh25 - That's not at all what I'm saying. Your article reads like an advertisement for the software. It's is selling us the product, rather than simply telling us about it. When I review an article, I first look to see if it's a copyright violation (yours isn't). Then I read the article to see if it is an advertisement, suffers from an NPOV issue, or reads like an essay. If it gets by those issues, then I look at the citations and notability of the subject. Your article could be a promotional brochure for the software. Using terms like "helps Software, SaaS, and Online Services companies manage", "The company’s services include", "accepting 20 payment methods", "deal to increase product development", etc. are all written to entice customers/investors. In other words, they are of interest to consumers. Encyclopedia articles need to be informative, but not sales tools. I hope this helps, since sometimes it's difficult to write about exactly what is wrong with an article. Onel5969 (talk) 13:37, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

11:17:20, 17 February 2015 review of submission by Sebh007

• Sebh007 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:The 17th National Open Art Competition (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi Onel5969. Thank you for taking the time to review my submission. I understand your problem, I think, as far as notability is concerned, and I hope I have addressed it by adding in a load more external references. I'm not sure that I have added them in the best format, but hopefully they will at least go some way to addressing your notability issue. If I need to change the format, particularly of the bunch at the top, then please put me right. Thanks a lot. Sebh007 (talk) 11:17, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Sebh007 - First, you should rarely, if ever, have more than 3 citations for any one fact. If you have additional information, you can simply put the references after the "reflist" template. Second, I didn't go through all of the additional citations, but the vast majority of them seem to be in the class of press releases - in other words, they are creations of the organization itself which it is disseminating to the public - in this case "calls for entries" (btw, several of the links are dead links). There is a difference between verifiability and notability. Your references definitely show that the competition exists (verifiability), but they don't show the event's notability. That would come from "significant" coverage from at least several reliable, independent sources. I hope this helps. Onel5969 (talk) 13:48, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Onel5969. Thanks again for your input. I have dug about a bit more and found some more references which are objective. I'm sure that it is an improvement, but whether it is enough to make it notable I don't know, just because I have no real feel for just what is 'significant' as far as Wikipedia is concerned. Anyway, please be kind enough to look again and see what you think. I take your point about verifiability as opposed to notability. I was unaware of the 3 citations limit (although I had suspected it because I haven/t seen long lists in Wikipedia) but please could you expand a little on 'you can simply put the references after the "reflist" template'? I understand roughly what you mean, but please could you give me an example to look at/follow? Finally, I haven't yet checked for dead links, but I shall, obviously. Thanks again.Sebh007 (talk) 07:39, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Conscience: Taxes for Peace not War

Hi there,

You reviewed my submission for the page "Conscience: Taxes for Peace not War" but deemed it too similar to the document here: http://www.brad.ac.uk/library/media/library/specialcollections/documents/CwlPTCCLDApr2010.pdf

I have since gotten permission for use of the document from the Bradford archive and I contacted the successor organisation to the Peace Tax Campaign who sent an email using the template in order to remove any doubt about copyright usage rights.

The article has not been released yet (I know there is a backlog).

Would I still need to edit the article even with the release from the archive and Conscience?

If so, would you be kind enough to highlight what I should change as I do not wish to rewrite the entire article.

Your help would be much appreciated here.

Thank you.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Conscience:_Taxes_for_Peace_not_War

ZRay22 ZRay22 (talk) 12:48, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi

WP:NPOV issue - statements like "Conscience believes..." are advocacy statements, rather than informative. If you take care of those two issues, let me know here, and I'll take a look at it again. Nice job on the WP:OTRS, by the way. Onel5969 (talk

) 14:21, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Viva-Verdi - The main difference between Gossett and Parker is that the award Gossett won is much more prestigious (or at least appears to be). Let me just say that I don't know much about opera, so I'm just basing it on the articles themselves. Gossett has all the same types of references as Parker, but then he has two very strong citations (the first 2). Those are the two factors which make me not question Gossett, but question Parker (although I'd still like to see a couple more strong citations for Gossett). If you could come up with 2 or 3 strong articles (not interviews) about Parker, that would help. They should be from well-known national publications. To be honest, I missed two things in the Parker article, for which I'm going to remove the notability tag: the Guggenheim fellowship and his fellowship at the British Academy. Those two things alone make him meet wiki notability criteria. As you flesh it out, just make sure to cite claims. The problem with both of these folks is that most of the world doesn't care about the thing they do best, so there is very little press. Not saying that's right, but that's the way it is. Good luck with the edit. Onel5969 (talk) 03:33, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your note and the adjustments to the notices. I think that these extra refs came from me a few days ago. Anyway, I am copying your comments above plus commenting further on the Talk:Roger Parker page to see if it can generate more interest. Viva-Verdi (talk) 20:02, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

14:41:37, 17 February 2015 review of submission by 101.63.95.17

• 101.63.95.17 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:BMH Medical Journal (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

101.63.95.17 (talk) 14:41, 17 February 2015 (UTC) Please note that all the links to servers other than that of the journal are independent reputed websites, the contents of which we have no influence on.

14:55:43, 17 February 2015 review of submission by 101.63.95.17

• 101.63.95.17 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:BMH Medical Journal (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

101.63.95.17 (talk) 14:55, 17 February 2015 (UTC) You are also free to delete any part of the content which you feel as appearing like pure advertisement, after due verification.

Gordon Singleton

Hello,

Here is the article to be published https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Gordon_Singleton

I have edited he article down in size leaving most of the important information.

Gordon Singleton is my son-in-law. He had a tremendous career as a racing cyclist. I'm having difficulty creating the citations WIKI requires. I'm 84 years old and computers are not my cup of tea.

There are many references to Gordon all over WIKI, here are few links to substantiate the article. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_record_progression_track_cycling_%E2%80%93_Men%27s_flying_500_m_time_trial https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_record_progression_track_cycling_%E2%80%93_Men%27s_flying_200_m_time_trial https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_record_progression_track_cycling_%E2%80%93_Men%27s_1_km_time_trial

Scroll down to the year 1980, you will see his name for the 500m - 200m - and one kilometer. He is also listed in French language https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gordon_Singleton

Any help you can give to publish this article would be helpful, I would like to surprise my son in law

Thank you, Mary — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mary Godak (talk • contribs) 19:45, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

conflict of interest, since you are close to the subject of the article. Doesn't mean you can't write it, just means we have to be careful to keep the tone neutral and factual. He seems notable, so I'll do whatever I can to help you get the article ready. If you don't see me working on the article by Thursday, send me a gentle reminder - I get distracted. Onel5969 (talk

) 19:52, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

• Msmith626 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Enterprise Storage OS (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs
    )

--Marc Msmith626 (talk) 02:51, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Msmith626 - no worries. Article looks much better. Resubmit it and let me know, so I can move it to the mainspace. Nice work! Onel5969 (talk) 13:19, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Onel5969 - Thank you! I've resubmitted the article. Msmith626 (talk) 19:12, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Help with publishing rejected article

Hi There,

Thank you so much for taking the time to review my submission. I would appreciate some help moving it from the rejected category into a published article. Here is a link to the Draft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Luke_Harmon-Vellotti

I thought that I had added enough reliable and verified third party sources for my article to be published. If you please point me in the right direction here I would be grateful. When you have a moment, please let me know what type of sources did not count that I referenced, and also what I should source instead. I have plenty of resources as far as independent verification that I could add to my submission. Also, how would I add my subject into a particular category? I believe that there is a category just for International Chess Masters, as far as, notable subjects.

Thanks again, My user name is Sunshine Wizard Sunshinewizard (talk) 04:11, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Sunshinewizard. While the sources you list prove that this young man exists, and that he is a good chess player, none of them show his notability. There is a difference between verifiability and notability. All of your references are of the former kind. We need some independent articles about why he is notable. If the veracity of the article is unquestioned, he is notable, but we need proof of that. Also, since this is a blp, it needs inline citations (e.g. when you say he's the highest ranked player in ID, that sentence should have a citation, backing that claim up). I hope this helps. Onel5969 (talk) 13:40, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi There,

Thank you for your prompt response. I will make the citation as you recommended. However, I am not sure why all of these published articles from several verified and different newspapers do not count as legitimate sources (see below). Perhaps I put them in the wrong place.

External Links[edit] Davis, Noah "What Makes You So Smart, Teenage International Chess Master?" - "Pacific Standard". Retrieved March 19, 2014. Jerauld, Brian "Harmon-Vellotti Tops Shetty to Take Lead at U.S. Juniors" - "Chess Club and Scholastic Center of Saint Louis". Retrieved June 17, 2013. Niro, Frank "Just a Matter of Time for Luke Harmon-Vellotti" - "Northwest Chess". Retrieved August 2013. Hanken, Jerry "The Littlest Warrior" - "Chess Life for Kids". Retrieved August 2008. Prentice, George "14 and 18-Year-Old Brothers will be UCLA Roommates, begin Freshman Year this Fall" - "Boise Weekly". Retrieved July 24, 2013. Roberts, Bill "For Boise 14-Year-Old, it’s Time for College" - "The Idaho Statesman". Retrieved June 23, 2013. Cashell, Yancey "Chess Champ, 14, Looks to Revitalize Game at UCLA" - "The Daily Bruin". Retrieved July 22, 2013. Reyes, Norma "With young chess star Luke Harmon-Vellotti, UCLA students revive Chess Club" - "Chess Daily News". Retrieved May 2014.

Also, a good chess player and an Internationally titled player such as IM Luke Harmon-Vellotti is very different. In fact, Wikipedia has it's own category for them since it is such a rare achievement, especially for a young player. See FIDE titles: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIDE_titles#International_Master_.28IM.29. I did independently source this on the original submission here: https://ratings.fide.com/card.phtml?event=2030012. IM Harmon-Vellotti title is also noted at this link, which is the sole worldwide governing body for granting international chess titles. The governing body cite also notes IM Harmon-Vellotti is the #3 ranked U18 player in the US, the #4 ranked player in both Americas, and the #47 ranked U18 player in the world. Here is the list from Wiki that notes all of the other International Masters in the world with listed pages. Many of them have the singular achievement of having attained this title, even with no other notable accomplishments since it is so difficult to attain. As noted on Wiki: An International Master is usually in the top 0.25% of all tournament players at the time he or she receives the title.[7] The November 2010 FIDE rating list records 3036 players holding the IM title.

He is also the youngest ever recipient of the prestigious merit Stamps Foundation Scholarship, which is also on Wiki here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stamps_Family_Charitable_Foundation. He is also one of the youngest students ever to attend the University of Los Angeles, CA as he was granted admission as a full-time student at the age of 14, which is already sourced here in the video links: Kendall, Rebecca "14-year-old math, chess prodigy enrolls at UCLA" - "University of California, Los Angeles Newsroom". Retrieved September 15, 2013. Cruz, Nancy "Fourteen Year Old UCLA Student and Chess Champion" - "KTLA 5 News Team". Retrieved October 13, 2013. Hamilton, Dan "State's Best" - "FOX 12 News". Retrieved July 5, 2008. Branson, Serene "Top-Ranked Chess Player, 14, Starts Classes At UCLA" - "KCAL9 News". Retrieved September 24, 2013.

I would like to do the citations and proper external sourcing at the same time prior to resubmission, so I would appreciate your clarification and direction here, Thank you, Sunshine WizardSunshinewizard (talk) 16:08, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

07:11:31, 18 February 2015 review of submission by Ayanwrites

• Ayanwrites (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Ayan Pal (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs
    )

Ayanwrites (talk) 07:11, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

The website (http://www.panchjanyasolutions.in/our-books/upper-cut-a-change-india-initiative/authors/ayan-pal/) is the profile page of Ayan Pal as one of the authors of Upper Cut. The website has also been cited in the article as a reference. However, if required, the profile of Ayan Pal may be removed/modified from the source (http://www.panchjanyasolutions.in/our-books/upper-cut-a-change-india-initiative/authors/ayan-pal/) upon your suggestion. To add to the matter, both the profiles are written by the same person (Ayan Pal), which might be the reason for the reviewer to adjudge it as a copyright infringement. Looking forward to your help.

Hi

a close paraphrase of an outside source. Onel5969 (talk

) 13:54, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

If you please, why did you delete my edit on Schizoaffective disorder? I only ask because, as a sufferer, I was quite pleased to hear it mentioned in a popular setting. Colgraff (talk) 08:45, 18 February 2015 (UTC) Colgraff.

Hi Colgraff - Simply because it was uncited. If you put it back and include a citation, I'd also drop the "!" - non-encyclopedic. Onel5969 (talk) 14:04, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

09:51:33, 18 February 2015 review of submission by 2.227.212.23

• 2.227.212.23 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Emiliano Reali (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs
    )

2.227.212.23 (talk) 09:51, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

re-submitting page

Hi, my username is SpazioAlCielo and i'm the author of a page submitted in the last days. The page is about "Emiliano Reali", an Italian writer. You correctly unaccepted the page, because the Amazon page (that take the text from the "beta" of my wiki page, has not been changed before as they tell me). I want to inform you that I've contacted the author of the amazon page and he changed it. So now there's no more copyright problem (it's ironic if you think that amazon take my beta version ad for this reason you have to reject the page :-) ) I hope that there are no more problems for the page and that all links are correct (it's my second page, and the first was made long long time ago). Thank you for the attention and for your work — Preceding unsigned comment added by SpazioAlCielo (talk • contribs) 12:50, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi SpazioAlCielo - He's definitely notable, and I'm glad the copyvio issue has been resolved. There are a couple of issues still with the article, so I went ahead and did some editing on it. Nice job. Onel5969 (talk) 20:50, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you Onel15969, i'm glad you appreciated my little work, I'm trying to solve some issues, but I think I need you help: in note [1] I didn't understand what you mean when you say that you need clarification, 'cause in the article it is wrote that he won the prize montioned.

For the fight against AIDS I've found an article, at its end it's specified what I wrote.

I've inserted the word "prince" because Jonathan Doria Pamphilj is the prince of this important family of Rome (the family it's also on Wiki ;-) )

For the last note, the production was wrote on the article, but i put it in the wiki file

I hope now it's everithing ok

Have a nice day and thanks again for your help and yours preciuous advices

— Preceding unsigned comment added by SpazioAlCielo (talk • contribs) 11:15, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi SpazioAlCielo - In that first note I was asking for the name of the work for which he won the prize - e.g. "he won a literary prize from the Holden School of Turin for his short story, "xxxxxxxxx"." See? Nice job on the rest. Onel5969 (talk) 14:29, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

ok Onel15969 done, I've inserted the title of the short story as you requested ;-) thanks for your suggestions

I've got only a final question for you, at the top of the page there is this: "This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (January 2015)" what does it mean?

Preceding unsigned comment added by SpazioAlCielo (talk • contribs) 13:30, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

SpazioAlCielo - That was an old tag that an editor had inserted during the draft process (which really shouldn't be tagged like that while in draft). It's no longer needed, so I've removed it. Congrats! Onel5969 (talk) 18:57, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

IBM MQ Light

Thanks again for your feedback. I have added some links and re-written the first section. Hopefully the article will make it through review this time! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sconaomi (talk • contribs) 13:48, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Sconaomi - Not sure it will. The Inquirer article is good, but the two Websphere articles, while good articles, are niche publications. I'm not going to re-review, let's let another editor take a look at it and see what they think. If you can come up with another 2-3 good independent articles, that would go a long way. Other than that, the article, though brief, looks good. Onel5969 (talk) 21:00, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Question re: protocol for resubmitting a page

Hi -- my article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:The_Forbidden_Room_(2015_film) was declined due to lack of disparate sources, and now that more sources have appeared I plan to update and resubmit it. I'm just wondering if, when I resubmit, I should delete the comments and the submission declined code. I assume so, but I want to check before I do anything. JonathanGBall (talk) 16:18, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi

WP:TOOSOON. Onel5969 (talk

) 21:12, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Before I spend more time on this, I'm wondering if the "soon-ness" of this is outweighed by the prominence of Maddin in international cinema. Maddin is certainly Canada's most significant director, alongside Cronenberg and Egoyan, although less commercially successful -- but is possibly the most influential director in Canada's independent cinema with a reputation worldwide. As such, it seems to me that any of his major works (e.g., features like THE FORBIDDEN ROOM) deserves its own page. Anyway, I'm wondering if I should spend time improving and resubmitting by adding more detail in terms of things like the critical reception, etc., so that the page can be improved later on, or if the time is better spent waiting for time to pass. I'm a film scholar but relatively new to Wikipedia, and trying to spend free time improving the pages for certain neglected Canadian cinema figures and films. John Paizs is next, but I'd like to finish up Maddin stuff first. But also don't want to waste my time. Anyway, let me know what you think. Thanks! JonathanGBall (talk) 19:53, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

John M. Falcone Article created

Onel5969,

Thanks for taking the time to review my submitted article about City of Poughkeepsie police officer John M. Falcone who was killed in the line of duty in 2011.

I reviewed your comments and clearly saw my mistake. I have since edited the sections of the article in which you commented on. I want to resubmit the article for review if I can.

Thanks again for your expertise and knowledge and I appreciated your comments/feedback.

BTW, today happens to be the four-year anniversary of the police officer's death. His death affected a lot of people in our community, including myself. I wanted to write this article to honor the sacrifice he made.

Be well and take care.

Jeff Lambert (talk) 17:18, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Jcl6543 - Nice job. There was still an issue with the one section, which I went ahead and re-wrote before moving the article to the mainspace. Take care. Onel5969 (talk) 21:37, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

17:24:55, 18 February 2015 review of submission by 109.155.155.131

• 109.155.155.131 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Deveron Arts (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs
    )

109.155.155.131 (talk) 17:24, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Your article is not written in a neutral tone. Articles should simply state facts, not wax eloquent, nor have a POV, nor draw conclusions.

Peacock words like "unique", "global potential", "massive", etc., should be avoided. There is also a conversational tone to your article, e.g. "For some years walking has formed ...", "A new model of artistic and curatorial practice has emerged...", and "Over 20 years this has brought artists from as far afield...", are only a few examples. Once you get past the tone of the article, I'm not sure, with the current references, it meets the notability criteria. I hope this gives you enough direction to begin. If possible, when you have a reference, link to where it can be found on the internet. Onel5969 (talk

) 21:50, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

• Fresnowalldog (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Largest Painted Mural Stamp (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Fresnowalldog (talk) 17:45, 18 February 2015 (UTC) Hello I'm trying to find out why my page doesn't get published in Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Largest_Painted_Mural_Stamp I noticed WikiCommons posted it https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Largest_Painted_Mural_Stamp.jpg what is it that you need from me to have it on Wikipedia? FranCisco Vargas [email protected]

Fresnowalldog - I answered you above last week. Please see my response there. Onel5969 (talk) 21:52, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Request on 22:08:07, 18 February 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by LesleyBooth

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

With regard to your declining an article I would welcome more specific information on what was not factual and why the quoted sources which are all highly respected publications were not thought acceptable. LesleyBooth (talk) 22:08, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

User, LesleyBooth Article, Deveron Arts

With regard to your declining an article I would welcome more specific information on why you considered that this article which was not thought factual why the quoted sources, all of which are from all highly respected UK publications were not thought acceptable.

With thanks for your consideration — Preceding unsigned comment added by LesleyBooth (talk • contribs) 22:10, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi LesleyBooth - I never said your article was not factual, nor did I say your sources were not acceptable. The article was declined because it reads like an essay, rather than an article. Click on the "essay" link to see what that means. Once I see an article has one of three issues (copyright violation, is an essay, or simply is advertising), I don't continue on to the next step which is notability and verifying citations. I will say, if you have weblinks to your sources, that would be a tremendous help. But the first thing to do is to re-write this essay in a neutral, encyclopedic tone. I hope that clears it up for you. Onel5969 (talk) 14:39, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

23:35:57, 18 February 2015 review of submission by 41.206.11.195

• 41.206.11.195 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:MCskill ThaPreacha (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi there, my name is Mustapha. I'm a huge Nigerian Hip Hop follower and blogger. I wrote the article on a Nigerian Hip Hop Emcee MCskill ThaPreacha for his contribution so far to Hip Hop in Nigeria and the article got declined. Please, I would really like you to review the article again. The sources/references used are reliable sources. As a matter of fact, asides the YouTube and MTV reference, the sources used in this article are the biggest independent music/entertainment website in Nigeria and Africa as a whole.

Would look forward to seeing the article moved into the article section of wiki. God bless.

41.206.11.195 (talk) 23:35, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi. The article wasn't rejected because the sources weren't reputable, or that the subject was not notable. It was rejected because it has a non-neutral POV. I started a brief edit to clean up the article and remove some of the peacock verbiage, which is what needs to happen or it will most likely get rejected again. Onel5969 (talk) 14:52, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

13:58:12, 19 February 2015 review of submission by Cdobkin

• Cdobkin (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Craig Gotsman (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs
    )

Cdobkin (talk) 13:58, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Cdobkin (talk) 13:58, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Cdobkin - "inline", not "online". This article is a blp (biography of a living person), and therefore needs citations within the body of the article which support any assertions made. Not every line needs a citation, but, for example, you should have citations at the end of the Education section to verify everything in that brief paragraph. Then in his Academic career and Entrepreneurship sections, each fact should have it's own citation. Onel5969 (talk) 15:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

19:57:17, 19 February 2015 review of submission by Mawilson16

• Mawilson16 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Vi Wickam (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello. First, thanks for taking the time to review my submissions. It's greatly appreciated, as is your feedback. I'm writing to request additional information regarding your recent review. The page was not accepted, saying that the article did not adequately show the subject's notability. After reviewing the notability criteria for musicians and ensembles, I believe the subject of the article is notable enough to be included, and that the article displays this fact. I'll list various criteria below, and the corresponding facts that support it from the article.

Criteria: Has won or placed in a major music competition. Wickam is a four-time Colorado State Fiddling Champion, and has been a finalist four times at the Grand Masters’ Fiddler Championship.

Criteria: Has won or been nominated for a major music award, such as a Grammy, Juno, Mercury, Choice or Grammis award. While not nominated, Wickam's album "Old School Old Time" was on the 1st Grammy Ballot in four categories.

Criteria: Has performed music for a work of media that is notable, e.g., a theme for a network television show, performance in a television show or notable film, inclusion on a notable compilation album, etc. The Wickam Family Band performed from 1992-1995 on Blinky's Fun Club, a syndicated TV show recorded at KWGN Denver.

Each of these items is mentioned in the article.

I understand that subjectivity in the criteria and interpretation of them can create differences of opinion, and I also realize that I'm new to Wikipedia. But I would request a re-review of the article based on these items and, if the decision remains, additional information on why it is not being accepted on grounds of notability. I hope to be able to clarify the article as needed so that it warrants inclusion, and I appreciate any assistance you can offer toward this end.

Thanks again, and take care. -Mark

Mawilson16 (talk) 19:57, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Mawilson16 - Other editors might see it differently, for you are right, there is a certain amount of subjectivity to this. But you're best argument is on the first criteria you mention. The CO state championship I don't believe would qualify, and I'm not sure the Grand Master competition would either - there's not a lot of media about that either. In addition, that claim is uncited, so if you hang your hat on his being a finalist in that, you'll need to provide proof. Oh, and did he finish 2nd? If not, that wouldn't qualify anyway.

The second criteria he clearly doesn't meet since he neither won nor was nominated.

The third criteria would have to be about a network television show, or a show which was syndicated, not some local show.

I did some quick searches, and really couldn't find much about him. The best article I found was this: Magnolia Music Studio, but even that only mentions him in passing. Do you know of any articles about him in mainstream papers? The Denver Post? Denver Tribune? Rocky Mountain News? Or one of the Nashville papers? That would really help.

I have to say, the article is written not too badly. There are some formatting issues (section headings, raw links in the text (that's a no-no), and some prose issues (very short paragraphs). But so much better than most first time efforts. I wish I could have found more sources, but sometimes when something is so specialized it's difficult. I hope I've helped. Onel5969 (talk) 21:08, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

00:12:58, 20 February 2015 review of submission by 125.213.191.72

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

125.213.191.72 (talk) 00:12, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi there,

I'm struggling a bit with the article submission. All the contents are based on facts and backed up by numerous resources...there is no puffery that I can detect.

Can you please inform me what part reads as an advertisement so I can amend it accordingly.

Hi. Well, to start with, the entire "growth strategy" section is pure, blatant advertising. Naming all the brands is also something that would happen in a promotional brochure (although that happens in a lot of articles); lines like "each of which delivers a differentiated set of hosted voice and data communications services to wholesale, enterprise, government, business and residential markets" are wholly promotional in nature. They "sell" the company, rather than informing the reader about the company, those are the types of things interesting to prospective consumers. I hope this helps. Onel5969 (talk) 00:17, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Request on 06:11:55, 20 February 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Sebbatt

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

just wondering how can i improve the article you denied?

Sebbatt (talk) 06:11, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi

WP:CIT will show you how to format your references. There's quite a few assertions made in your article which would need sourcing as well (like the theft of the code, etc.). Once you have those issues settled, you can attempt to resubmit.n Hope this helps. Onel5969 (talk

) 19:03, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

• Lovevolv (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Alfred Büchi (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs
    )

Hello, thank you very much for your time and attention in reviewing this article. I have now edited since the initial draft to carefully remove the peacock terms, and the piece is ready for another review. Please accept my apologies for not utilizing perfectly correct formatting in the references (I used numbers in parentheses to indicate references) - I believe the references used are good and legitimate, and all necessary reference information has been included. Your support in this area is very much appreciated. Please let me know of any further improvements needed for approval. Sincerely, Charles Blass [email protected] Lovevolv (talk) 11:41, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Lovevolv (talk) 11:41, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Donald Doe Wiki

Hello,

I appreciate your review of the Wiki my friend (Padrick3) and myself put together. While it is under his name, I did the majority of the writing, since didn't have an account at the time, and he was better at formatting it here. I would like to edit it in such a way to allow it to be published. The main concern I have is your mention of the current references not being up to Wikipedia's standards. I am confused about this, I thought my sources, which are traceable. If they are not up to Wiki's standards, could you be more explicit on why? If the issue is more of a lack of sources, I can go through the list of sources I didn't use and try to put them into the Bio.

I also was unsure about the use of my external links. That is more evidence of the work Donald Doe has done, and the ownership of some of his pieces. I was hoping that it would assist in giving reference to the reality of what is written. Would it be better to reference them different, rather than place them as external links?

I understand my wiki might have been too bias. I am doing this for my father, Donald G. Doe, and with my degrees in literary theory I was having trouble finding a middle ground between essay-writing and non-biased bio writing. This could be seen in my use of quotation. Would it be best if I edit it down significantly, and then perhaps my sources would be more useful? I understand since this is a living person it might be difficult to have an extensive description without many sources. Since a lot of the sources I have, including some not listed such as Artstor, are just images of paintings with date of show and name of show, I found it hard to cite that.

Another question I have is how to be allowed to add in pictures. My father has given me images of himself and particular art-work that he would like shown here, how do I legally put it up? He obviously has ownership of these pictures, it is just a matter of proving that I have been granted the OK to put them up.

LINK to Sandbox: [[2]]

Thank you very much for your time, I appreciate any help you can offer me. -Zachary Doe (SageheartBK)

Hi Draft:NFHS Network - More independent sources, especially articles like the NYT would definitely help. Also, since it's a blp, most of the assertions in the article will need to be sourced, with citations at the end of those particular sentences. Regarding the NPOV issue, that's a trickier issue. Frankly, I think you've done a relatively decent job at attempting to be neutral. Why don't you try this. If you can provide references which I can access online, I'll go through the article and make it objective. I am working on quite a few other projects, but I could spare some time every other day or so to go over the piece. Also, since you do have a connection, you'll need to disclose that on the talk page as a potential COI. Finally, since this is an article about art, are there any photos of the work that are (or could be made) CC BY-SA 3.0 License? That would really improve the article. Let me know what you think. Onel5969 (talk) 17:51, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Thank you for your response! Sorry couldn't get back sooner. I am going to try to put more inline sources. I have already included a NYT article and quoted it I believe, but have other sources I can use. I also just didn't put the inline citation as much as I could of, some of the sources I have placed include information that was listed.

I have images, some of his artwork, others of himself, they were given to me by the artist, I am unsure how to get the legality down, I'll look that up. I have the artist's permission though.

Plan on working on it a bit tonight, and hopefully thoughout the weekend. I'll let you know if I have more questions, and when I am further along. Thanks again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SageheartBK (talk • contribs) 00:15, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Request on 02:29:34, 21 February 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by EpiSong

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

Hi Onel5969, thank you for your help in reviewing my article at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:The_PINE_Study. I would like to request for some help in pointing out which part of the wikipedia page has included copyrighted information as I am struggling with that. Thanks. Best, EpiSong

EpiSong (talk) 02:29, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi EpiSong - this was a tough one, since it wasn't large blocks of text simply cut and paste. The comparison engine I use returned THIS REPORT, which should show you what I am talking about. Onel5969 (talk) 19:20, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! :D Are those in red the one that are suspected with copyrighted information? :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by EpiSong (talk • contribs) 18:46, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi - EpiSong - Yes, that's right. Onel5969 (talk) 19:45, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Onel5969, how can i improve my article, as i think more than 50% of the red highlighted sections are all proper nouns. What is the % confidence is actually accpetable? The rest I'm on my way on editing them!~ Thanks.

Hi

WP:CIT, which will show you how to properly format your citations. Nice job! Onel5969 (talk

) 18:27, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Paul Moxon Website Editor American Printing History Association — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aphawiki (talk • contribs) 00:35, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

WP:COPYVIO). I hope this makes more sense to you now. Onel5969 (talk

) 00:47, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Gordon Singleton

Thank you so very much for your kind work helping me to get this article published,

I will work away to add the required citations,

Gordon has his own web page, www.gordonsingleton.com there are many racing photographs available there. I will be able to use some of these photo's to enhance the article

Once again, thank you and God bless,

Mary — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mary Godak (talk • contribs) 13:45, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Mary Godak - No problem, it was interesting and fun. The problem with the photos on his website is that there is implied copyright on them (as per wiki policy) - photos need to be uploaded and the appropriate permissions given to use them. Regarding the citations, if you have the information, you can give it to me and I can input it into the article. Take care, and God bless. Onel5969 (talk) 13:49, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

19:30:43, 22 February 2015 review of submission by Sbjohnsonii

• Sbjohnsonii (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Edward Johnson (Ohio businessman) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I would like to know what additional sources you require outside of the Centennial History of Franklin County and Columbus, Ohio. Would you like newspaper articles referencing the subject's notability in Columbus history? What is the preferred citation formatting? As the subject died more than 75 years prior, most sources are non-web based. Some scans are available through the Columbus Metropolitan Library. I appreciate any and all feedback you are able to provide.

Sbjohnsonii (talk) 19:30, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Sbjohnsonii - click on the links in the decline box for guidelines for notability and golden rule. It is not enough to show that a person existed, or even that he did stuff. Wikipedia has a policy that any article has to be about a notable subject. Based on the article, I'm not sure this individual meets the notability criteria. Citations do not have to be web-accessible (although it makes it much easier to check notability). Articles need to be from independent sources (e.g. not from corporate documents or organizations the subject belonged to), and should be from sources more than just in the local geographic area of the subject. I hope this helps. Onel5969 (talk) 13:54, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Standards New Zealand

You moved

Thanks for the heads-up,

Stuartyeates - don't know how I missed that one. No, I agree with you, should be deleted. Onel5969 (talk

) 23:07, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

• Svetilnik123 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Andrey Atuchin (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello! I'm sorry to take your time, but I'm really confused about second declined of this article. I read all the instructions and I argue that this text worth to be in Wikipedia. Furthermore, is it normal that person is notable enough to be in Russian Wikipedia https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Атучин,_Андрей_Анатаольевич , while most of his work was made for Museums, Journals and Publishers outside Russia? I was not the first one who created this page, but now I'm the one who wants this page to be submitted. I added some more links and proofs of notability, hope it will be enough now. So, can I resubmit the page or please tell me what do you think is wrong with it. Svetilnik123 (talk) 05:34, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi

WP:RS as to what types of references wiki is looking for. Brief mentions, lists, blogs, don't really show notability. References should be about the subject, and in-depth, from notable sources. Also, interviews, since they are primary sources, also do not go to notability. I hope this helps. Onel5969 (talk

) 14:06, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

• Svetilnik123 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Andrey Atuchin (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

To save your time, there are some reliable sources:

• this one is used in English Wikipedia on the "Paleoart" page http://www.dmoz.org/Science/Earth_Sciences/Paleontology/Art/Artists
• http://www.dmoz.org/Science/Earth_Sciences/Paleontology/Art/Artists
• interview by Dave Hone was already added

and also I've added some more awards with links that proof their reality. All the best, Svetilnik. Svetilnik123 (talk) 05:59, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

11:15:02, 23 February 2015 review of submission by Lars.chittka

• Lars.chittka (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:John Dennis Carthy (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs
    )

Lars.chittka (talk) 11:15, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Lars.chittka - I agree regarding the Nature obit. But that's the ONLY decent reference. The key to notability, as shown in the link in the decline box is "People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject." Need more notable sources to show the subject meets the notability criteria. Onel5969 (talk) 14:13, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you

Hello Onel5969

Thank you for reaching out to me.

This is my first attempt at a submission and boy oh boy did I mess up!

I feel just horrible because I'm trying to help a musician who is really accomplished and completely botched the process by lending my credentials thinking they would be helpful - add weight to the credibility of the submission. It seems instead to have hurt him and I feel just terrible. I want to try and fix it if I can.

I just last evening sent an email to Aaron Green to try and resolve things so I'm not sure if the rejection you see has come in since that time or if you are speaking about what has happened previously with the photo submission. I can't figure out how to see anything in Wikipedia's backend I'm afraid.

Essentially, I was trying to protect the artist from potential problems in the future regarding the photo submission and ran into some confusion about why that was an issue. I went with my natural instinct, which was to protect the artist. I didn't understand their was a conflict with WikiMedia Commons on that. Since sorting it out I have tried to resolve the situation by submitting a photo I took that will not likely have a "merchandising" appeal thus addressing my overall concerns.

I'm hopeful that the new photo, along with the additional resource information I sent regarding Erick Macek's career, is enough to get his entry posted.

I would love to have a mentor/guide/hand-holder through the process if you are willing.

I am terrible at coding and all things tech-based but believe this artist deserves his page and I want to do everything I can to help him get it.

Thanks for reaching out. I look forward to your reply. You can always reach me on email as well at [email protected]. I would be happy to forward you what I sent Aaron Green as well so we are all on the same page moving forward.

Sincerely, Bettianne Flanders — Preceding unsigned comment added by Flanders Publicity (talk • contribs) 14:00, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Hello! You deleted the Emerging Frontiers page because it reads too much like an ad. Before making the page I carefully read the Terms policy of Wikipedia and copied the formats used for competitors like OurCrowd and Emerging Crowd pages. I'm not sure where the Emerging Frontiers pages differs from them - in fact, we reference more third party sources than Emerging Crowd.

Any tips, suggestions, or help on making a page for Emerging Frontiers would be appreciated just so that it has a digital presence on Wikipedia, even if it's just a small note.

Thank you

Abelour1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abelour1 (talk • contribs) 14:23, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Review of submission https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Geranium_Homes

Lcamus Thank you so much for reviewing this article, I have made all your suggested changes, and omitted some content and have added outside references. I do have one question which I'm hoping you can guide me through doing this properly: The Comment: In addition, the article has a copyvio issue with THIS SITE. Onel5969 (talk) 01:16, 9 February 2015 (UTC) This article is from our website, Friday Harbour, which is part of geranium corporation the company of whom the wikipedia page is about. So I did add the reference on the end of the paragraph, is there something else I need to do? I hope these edits are complete, and thanks for your time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Geranium_Homes

Hi Lcamus - the article still has an npov issue. Phrases like, "...it became clear to Rumm and Feiner that in order to continue to grow as a home building company they needed to set their sights ...", and "under the leadership of Boaz Feiner", as well as the list of development projects, come off as promotional in nature. A better way to handle the developments would be a simple sentence, such as "Geranium Homes has dozens of current and former developments throughout..."

The copyright issue is something else. Wikipedia takes those violations pretty seriously. The builder's website clearly states, © 2014 Friday Harbour Resorts Inc. All rights reserved. Even if it didn't, Wikipedia has a policy of "implied copyright". In other words, if something has been written somewhere else, we can't use it on Wiki. Even though you did reference it, it needs to be stricken. You can include the information, but only if it is completely re-written in new, fresh words.

Finally, since you acknowledge that you have a close relationship with the subject of the article, you need to disclose that on the article's talk page, as a potential

conflict of interest. Doesn't mean that you can't write or contribute to the article, just that other editors are aware that you have a close connection. I hope all of this helps. Onel5969 (talk

) 02:53, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks so much Onel5969 those exact references help me out tons and will make these changes right away before resubmitting. However, I'm sorry but I need clarification the copyright issue, Friday Harbour Resorts is part of Geranium - owned by the same company with the same people writing the materials for both. This is approved wording by head office, and I'm hoping you can help me understand why it's a copyright if it's the same company. Should I put these as a reference? http://fridayharbourresort.com/media/press/HomesMag_June2013_Friday_Harbour.pdf and http://fridayharbourresort.com/media/press/TorontoStar_Sat_Aug.24_2013_Friday_Harbour.pdf or similiar articles? Your guidance would be gratefully appreciated. Thanks. And to make sure there is no conflict of interest, yes I do work for Geranium Homes. thanks for letting me know to do that. Lcamus (talk) 15:29, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Onel5969 I have made all the changes as per your recommendations, I do hope you can look over and fingers are crossed that it will be approved. thanks, Lcamus

16:30:14, 23 February 2015 review of submission by 184.191.179.55

• 184.191.179.55 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:DVtest (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

184.191.179.55 (talk) 16:30, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

I do not understand why do you consider that this topic is not NOTABLE as papers are published on this topic, working group of asset managers in Europe and worldwide is discussing this topic for the last 5 years, ??? The field is brand new - only the last 10 years this type of test was performed as a condition assessment of power transfromers and OLTCs, so in the elecctric power industry - especially HV utility indistry this is a very hot subject. Tap Changer University - an event presented for the third consecutive year for the engineers in the asset management field from power utilities presents this topic... If the reviewer is not familiar with the field of power engineering, maybe another reviewer should verify the Noteability??

Feel free to re-submit it, if you wish another reviewer to take a shot at it. It'll be declined again. Sources do not show notability as per wiki guidelines. Rest assured, I'll take your advice and not look at it again. Take care. Onel5969 (talk) 16:32, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Declined Article Questions - Himr12

Good Morning Onel5969,

I had a few questions on my article link below. I provided newspaper and government references for the article, what other information can I provide to get the article approved?

My Declined Article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Rafael_Him

Can my article be a stub, if not approved? Sample: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Schneider

v/r Himr12 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Himr12 (talk • contribs) 16:53, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Himr12 - There is a difference between being a Cook County Supervisor (a county which includes one of the 5 largest cities in the country), and someone who is on the Clinton County Board. Even much larger counties don't necessarily rate as notable, simply because they exist. For example, none of the 5 board members in Maricopa County in AZ, which includes the 6th largest city in the country, is notable enough simply because they are on that board. But the size isn't the only parameter, the 4 references you include in your article do not speak to the notability of the subject. If the subject of your article was notable, I would probably classify your article as "start", not stub. Hope this helps. Onel5969 (talk) 02:08, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Request on 20:25:38, 23 February 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Gfdemarest

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

Hi there,

You recently rejected my submission on the grounds that it reads like an advertisement. This is the article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:SL_Corporation_(software_company)

Can you give me a sense where the main problems lie? Looking at the guidelines, I would guess it is one of two things: 1. too much product information 2. need better sources

I think I wrote in a pretty neutral voice, but is that problematic too?

any feedback you can provide would be appreciated,

thanks,

gfd

Gfdemarest (talk) 20:25, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Gfdemarest - the article could use better sources, but that has nothing to do with the advertising tone of the article. You're right on both counts about that - too much product information, and there is a promotional tone as well. I'll see if I can explain about the latter. As an example, take the phrase: "...the company created SL-GMS (Graphical Modeling System), an object-oriented graphics engine written in C/C++ that could be embedded in large scale control systems for companies such as Hitachi, ABB, Mitsubishi, Honeywell and Orbitz". There's a lot of information of a promotional nature there. A more neutral tone might have been, "...the company created a graphics engine which could be embedded in large scale control systems." Much simpler, to the point, and without promotional info. The big problem is all the product information, however. I hope this answers your questions. Onel5969 (talk) 02:17, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you Onel5969 for your help, and thanks for all you do for Wikipedia.

Gfdemarest (talk) 03:01, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

My article "Saul Grigorievich Bron"

USERNAME: Ethersearch RE: My article "Saul Grigorievich Bron" (original title "Saul G. Bron") https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saul_Grigorievich_Bron

Dear Editor,

Thank you for reviewing and posting my article “Saul G. Bron” (“Saul Grigorievich Bron.”).

This article to a large degree is derived from my recently published, highly acclaimed, long article “The Soviet Problem with Two ‘Unknowns’: How an American Architect and a Soviet Negotiator Jump-Started the Industrialization of Russia” published by IA, Journal of the Society for Industrial Archeology 36 (2): 57–80 and 37 (1/2): 5–28, a double-blind, peer reviewed journal for professional industrial historians. This article was a result of a three-year long research and is based mostly on the primary sources and previously not published documents from the archives in Russia and USA. After becoming a victim of Stalin’s repressions in 1938, Saul G. Bron’s name was practically erased from the Russian history. Even though his name is well known to Soviet economy scholars in the West, as of today, my published article is, in fact, the main source of the biographical information about this important historical figure.

The article has been assessed as C-Class. To improve it, I would appreciate understanding more precisely why it received that rating, since the description of “C” in the Wikipedia grading scheme covers a lot of ground, saying only that it “fails one or more of the criteria for B-Class.” I’m wondering in particular whether you would prefer that I used more inline citations instead of just listing the main sources, which to a large degree is the aforementioned article, which has over 200 notes. Also, the title of the article was changed from “Saul G. Bron” to “Saul Grigorievich Bron.” I think, “Saul G. Bron” would most likely be used by anybody searching for information about this person for the following reasons:

1) Saul G. Bron is the name most familiar to English-language scholars in Soviet history and economics. It is the name on the cover of Bron’s most notable book, Soviet Economic Development and American Business: Results of the first year under five-year plan and further perspectives (New York, H. Liveright, 1930). The same name was extensively used by contemporaneous English-language newspaper and magazine articles. When you Google “Saul G. Bron”, you get 540 hits, including books, while “Saul Grigorievich Bron” returns only links to my published article and my article on Wikipedia.

2) It appears that the Wikipedia articles on similar Soviet political figures of the period, e.g. Anastas Mikoyan, Leonid Krasin, and Valery Mezhlauk, all mentioned in my Wikipedia article, follow the same format: just the first and last name of the person in the title of the article and in the Infobox, followed with the full name, including the patronymic name, in the first paragraph of the main text (Anastas Ivanovich Mikoyan, Leonid Borisovich Krasin, Valery Ivanovich Mezhlauk). Other examples include Lazar Kaganovich, Maxim Litvinov, Georgy Chicherin, Nikolai Bukharin, Alexei Rykov, Nikolay Krestinsky, Vladimir Ksandrov, in addition to numerous others.

Your help will be greatly appreciated.

Hi Ethersearch - I'll deal with the title first. I went back, because I rarely change the title of drafts, except when it's formatted incorrectly (like when an article about a company as llc or inc at the end). And indeed, your draft was entitled, "Saul Grigorievich Bron". You can go back on the history page and compare any two versions. I can't find where it was ever called Saul G. Bron. The name in the infobox does indeed say that, and they should match. After looking at it, you're correct, and I've moved the article. I created the redirect pages in case someone inputs the full name, or simply the G. middle initial.

Regarding the classification. If you go to the talk page of the article, you can click on the "quality scale" link, and see where this article is lacking. The only B criteria which I find lacking is the first one, which states: "The article is suitably referenced, with inline citations. It has reliable sources, and any important or controversial material which is likely to be challenged is cited." that's the reason I didn't give it a B. Very good article, by the way. However, you should disclose your closeness to the sources as a potential

COI - Conflict of interest, on the articles talk page. Doesn't preclude you from writing the article, or working on it, just lets other editors know how close you are to the subject. Hope this helps. Onel5969 (talk

) 02:38, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

USERNAME: Ethersearch RE: My article "Saul Bron” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saul_Bron

Dear Editor,

Many thanks for such a quick response. Thank you for correcting the title and making it consistent with the infobox. I am hugely embarrassed if the error was mine in the first place. But I am still somewhat concerned that it is “Saul Bron” and not “Saul G. Bron”, the way his name appears on his book title and the way he has been traditionally referred to in books, articles, and news at the time. What do you think?

I will look into adding a few inline citations.

Thank you again for your help.

P.S. Oh yes, when I created links from some terms in my article to other Wikipedia articles, I noticed that a title to the article at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gosproekstroi is misspelled. It is spelled Gosproekstroi but it should be spelled Gosproektstroi. I corrected the spelling in the body of the article but I cannot correct the title. Perhaps, you or some other editor can correct it?

Hi Ethersearch - After considering your earlier comments, Saul Bron is the appropriate title, per Wikipedia naming conventions. It would only add the G if there were another Saul Bron. Wiki likes to go to the lowest common denominator. I've added the redirect from Saul G., so there shouldn't be an issue for someone attempting to look him up using his middle initial. I'm taking your word on the spelling in the other article, and have changed the title. Thanks for your efforts. Onel5969 (talk) 12:44, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

voices is a newspaper

I'm still figuring out these bigger discussions, normally, i just a fix a comma splice. But: http://voicesweb.org/advertise says it's a newspaper, and if you've seen it it's a newspaper, and thus, i'd suggest letting it be called a newspaper. re: a recent edit — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.58.106.50 (talk) 04:21, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi! Although I'm not really sure what you are referring to? Onel5969 (talk) 12:47, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Enthiran Copyedit request

Would you like to give Enthiran a good c/e and sharpen it up before it goes for FAC? Please do say when you are going to begin the c/e. Thanks. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 05:30, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Ssven2 - I'd love to help you out, but I'm a bit backlogged. It'll be a week before I can get to it, and it's a pretty long article, so it would take me several days at least to do a thorough job. If you can wait, be more than happy to help. Onel5969 (talk) 20:26, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Take your time. I need a good and thorough c/e. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 05:59, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Just a reminder of the copyedit. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 06:58, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Ssven2 - Hi, it looks like another editor is doing the copy edit, so I'll back off. Onel5969 (talk) 18:08, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Copyeditor's Barnstar
		For Padayappa and also for helping Pavanjandhyala with Naayak . — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 05:30, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Manam

Bro,

talk

) 09:25, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi

Pavanjandhyala -  Done - Good luck. Onel5969 (talk

) 14:54, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Please take a look at the first paragraph here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Jack_C._Westman and let me know if those changes reflect the kind of citation you want.

Many thanks,

Vopop — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vopop (talk • contribs) 15:10, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Vopop - They are both good references, but there are two different kinds of references: those for verifiability, and those for notability. Citations for verifiability are good for verifying the underlying assertions in the article. For example, citation #3 is good for verifying his position at Wisconsin Cares. Citations for notability purposes must come from independent, reliable sources and cover the subject in some depth. To give you a blatant example, Time's Man of the Year article, is about the person, and in depth. So let's take a look at your references. 2, 4, 8 and 9 are by the subject, so they are definitely not independent, and should only be used in very limited circumstances for verifying stuff in the article. 1, 3 (which should be the same as 5, I'll make the correction), 6, 7, and 10 are all by organizations which are connected to the subject. So while they are secondary sources, and very good for verifying purposes, they are not independent, and therefore do not go to notability. What Wikipedia looks for are news sources (not press releases - which are not independent), which speak about the subject. News articles, magazines, books are all excellent, as long as they are not by the subject of the article.

Regarding the two you just added, #1 is misplaced, it doesn't really verify anything in that sentence. #2 would be good to verify the # of books he's written, but it doesn't agree with what is in the article (the source has 10, the article 11) - so make sure the article matches the source (even if you "know" it's 11). Either change the 11 to 10, or find a source which shows 11. I hope this makes things clearer for you. Onel5969 (talk) 13:51, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Together Marketing Appeal

First the page I created for Together Marketing was nominated for speedy deletion due to copyright infringement. I would like to contest this due to the fact that the administrator actually used my definition with my permission. The mix up comes because the definition on their page was immediately published while my Wikipedia page was still under review. They have since changed the wording of their definition via my request. I understand Jimfbleak was the actual user that deleted the page, but honestly I can't figure out how to use his talk page which is why I am appealing to you.

Second, you recommended that I merge Together Marketing with Affinity marketing which I also want to appeal. Affinity Marketing and Together Marketing may sound similar, but are pretty different. Affinity marketing seems to focus on a one on one relationship between affinity groups and suppliers where Together Marketing encourages working with many partners that are not limited to affinity groups in any way. From what I understand through the affinity group Wikipedia page, affinity groups are just "groups formed around a shared interest or common goal... and their purposes must be primarily non-commercial". Together marketing works with partners that are commercial and non-commercial alike. The partners can be anything from one blogger to a company as big as Nike and everything in between. So while it is not limited to affinity groups, they could also be brought in as partners along side other commercial partners. Affinity Marketing also involves some exchange of money as stated on their wiki page "But usually, affinity groups increase their income by asking a commission for example." Together marketing involves no monetary exchange between partners. The only objective is to help and get help from multiple partners to reach a bigger target audience. The working with multiple partners at once is what also separates Together Marketing from Co-branding.

As I'm sure you can tell, this is the first article I have ever submitted for Wikipedia. With that said, I obviously do not want to get myself banned or break any rules when attempting to resubmit my Together Marketing page. Any guidance on the best way to go about this process would be much appreciated. I also want to say that I had no idea how rigorous this process was and I have a new found respect for the information posted through Wikipedia as well as the extent that moderators go through to ensure quality content. Thank you for your work and for any help!

-Jess Jessmu (talk) 17:34, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi

close paraphrase. Your sources must prove the notability of the subject, not just that it exists. I think this was why I felt you should merge the article, I didn't think it was notable enough on its own. I understand your position that you feel that it is different enough from the other type of marketing, but that alone does not justify it's own article. It must meet the guidelines for notability on its own. If it doesn't, than adding to the other article to which it is similar might be the answer. Hope this helps. Onel5969 (talk

) 15:20, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi! you left me a message after the article I submitted (my first!) was denied: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Janeesussman#Your_submission_at_Articles_for_creation:_Stephen_Falk_.28February_23.29 Would you mind suggesting what I can do to get this published? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Janeesussman (talk • contribs) 19:12, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Janeesussman - Almost ready to move to the mainspace. Put references at end of the second sentence to verify the Orange and Weed claims. Same thing with the Film Pigs in the last sentence. Make sure all the references are formatted correctly, rather than just being the current raw links. This includes any references not used inline. Let me know here on my talk page when you've made those corrections, and I'll move the page to the mainspace. Onel5969 (talk) 15:20, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

RFC on film series names

Hello. You recently responded to an RFC; your input is requested on a related RFC at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (films)#RFC: Series subject as a name. —174.141.182.82 (talk) 10:30, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Douglas R. Green

Hi Onel5969, thanks for the note about honorifics on Douglas R. Green. I've added it to User:Arthur goes shopping#Things I need to remember which seems to grow ever longer. Probably it will get fixed on that particular article when it gets copy-edited. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 10:41, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Arthur goes shopping - no worries. Different folks see things differently. That's why I mentioned that I try not to re-review something I've already declined. Give a fresh perspective to it. Nice work on AfC, btw. Onel5969 (talk) 15:29, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Unsigned comment about an unknown article

Hi,

All the physical evidences for the Article is in Sri Lanka. He is a famous journalist. Please refer the www.lankadeepa.lk site for his articles. I have mentioned some links for those articles. Those are published in a newspaper in sri lanka. You can use Facebook, Internet to search about this person. Hope a good response from you.

I have collected these informations very hardly. I spent more than 2 weeks to collect his personal details. I'm certifying that the all details are true and correct.

Shaminda Ranshan Fernando

Hi,

All the physical evidences for the Article is in Sri Lanka. He is a famous journalist. Please refer the www.lankadeepa.lk site for his articles. I have mentioned some links for those articles. Those are published in a newspaper in sri lanka. You can use Facebook, Internet to search about this person. Hope a good response from you.

I have collected these informations very hardly. I spent more than 2 weeks to collect his personal details. I'm certifying that the all details are true and correct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ganishka marien (talk • contribs) 11:35, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Pittsburgh meetup

• Wikimedia:Meetup Pittsburgh

  Bfpage |leave a message  01:58, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Bfpage! What is this? Onel5969 (talk) 02:33, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Click on the link above and you will be taken away to the information page on the meetup in Pittsburgh on April 3.

  Bfpage |leave a message  10:18, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Bfpage! Onel5969 (talk) 13:35, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

14:53:46, 25 February 2015 review of submission by NRT23

• NRT23 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Paul Karger (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

NRT23 (talk) 14:53, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Hello, I am having difficulty adding the proper references to this declined article. I have three other references to add. Can you please advise as to how this can be done or if there's somewhere to submit the articles to have cited?

Hi NRT23 - It's up to the author to provide the appropriate citations in the appropriate places. Remember, there are two main types of references, those for verifying facts, and those to prove notability. The second type can also be used to verify facts, but the first type cannot be used for notability purposes. The current citation is of the second type, but the article was declined because it was the only citation. There's not a lot out there on this guy, but there are some good articles I think you could use. Add the three you've already found. Here are some others Short, but shows he is notable enough for the society pages, also good for referencing his marriage; this is another brief mention, but good information; another good article, but you have to pay to read it. If you look at a hard copy, you might be able to pull info off it, good cite anyway. Another good one. Same issue as last article. Here are two more articles, but they are only good for verification, not for notability. The first is an executive bio, and these are usually written by someone close to the exec, so they are not independent. The second, while from a reputable source, is "subscriber content", meaning that it had no editorial oversight, and therefore is less than reliable. Bloomberg and BizJournals. I hope this helps. Good luck with the article. Onel5969 (talk) 13:17, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Lee Harris Pomeroy

I received an error message saying there is an incorrect or missing CAPTCHA. Is that the title of the article? Lee Harris Pomeroy Architect — Preceding

Hi Leeharrispomeroy - Sorry, I'm not sure about that. I can't remember ever seeing a captcha message on wiki. Captcha's are those annoying little boxes which ask you to type in the figures you see, in order to prove you're not a bot. Sorry I can't be of more help, if you continue to have an issue, post it on the AfC help desk, someone with more experience with I will help you. Onel5969 (talk) 13:27, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Janeesussman question

I think I made the necessary changes - would you mind taking a look? Thanks! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Stephen_Falk — Preceding unsigned comment added by Janeesussman (talk • contribs) 17:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Oops - now it's ready, I think!! Lmk what else I should do! Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Janeesussman (talk • contribs) 17:44, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Janeesussman - Yup, almost there. One last thing, you have a bunch of raw links down at the bottom, I added a "General" subcategory in the References section, and formatted the first one for you. Simply format the rest and resubmit. Then let me know and I'll move it to the mainspace. Nice job. Onel5969 (talk) 13:41, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

21:23:13, 25 February 2015 review of submission by Jeremysgeller

• Jeremysgeller (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Ido Aharoni (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Jeremysgeller (talk) 21:23, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Hello, the submission I put in for Israel's Consul General to New York was declined on the grounds that a small section appeared to be a copyright infringement from http://embassies.gov.il/new-york/AboutTheEmbassy/Pages/The-ambassador.aspx. However, his bio is on many websites, and the aforementioned is the OFFICIAL website for the Consulate General of Israel in New York.

If the wording needs to be different, please delete the passage and publish please.

Thank you

Jeremysgeller (talk) 21:23, 25 February 2015 (UTC)Jeremy

Confused about Matt Higgins

Hello -

It said you changed some of my edits - I'm just confused about what happened.

Link here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Matt_Higgins_(businessman)&oldid=prev&diff=648833483

Can you please explain what happened? Thanks!

Qwert4321 (talk) 22:35, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Qwert4321 - Yes, you deleted the AfC comments, which have to remain in the article. I attempted to simply undo that one edit, unfortunately, you tied it in to other edits, than made more edits after it, so I had to revert all of them to get the AfC comments back. In the future, when editing, please don't delete the comments. They help us keep track of a draft's progress. Onel5969 (talk) 22:39, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

OK, thanks. I'm not trying to delete anything. Ive been through multiple revisions being told different things. I don't think there is any doubt about Matt's notability. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Qwert4321 (talk • contribs) 22:43, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Qwert4321 - I don't either. I think if you combine all of his career stuff into a single paragraph, as Kiki suggested, and format your references (I'll do one for you so you can see what I'm talking about), I'll think it's good to go. let me know when you make the changes and I'll look at. Onel5969 (talk) 22:48, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. I want you to know, however, that I was told to put everything into sections by another reviewer on wiki - hence my confusion. I will make it one section - with no paragraphs - and look for your edit with the reference, and let you know when it's done. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Qwert4321 (talk • contribs) 22:52, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

In order to avoid any confusion, can you please provide me the best link to work off of to update Matt's profile. Thanks for your help — Preceding unsigned comment added by Qwert4321 (talk • contribs) 22:58, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi

Draft:Matt Higgins (businessman). In general, sections are a good thing, but not when they are so short. Onel5969 (talk

) 23:01, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Gotcha. I made it one section with mulitple paragraphs to flow better. Not exactly sure what you mean by references, but let me know - other than that I believe this is good to go. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Qwert4321 (talk • contribs) 23:04, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Qwert4321 - I don't know what you are doing, but when you make your edits, you are deleting the comments. - now all you have to do is correct the references and you're good to go. (I've correctly formatted the first one to give you an example) Onel5969 (talk) 23:17, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Me neither - i dont mean to delete anything! But thank you so much! I am updating this and will let you knwo when I am all done with them - this is so greatly appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Qwert4321 (talk • contribs) 23:34, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Something is happening - I changed all my edits but they weren't saved? Am i still deleteing notices? I have no idea how I'm doing that. Obviously I am not doing that on purpose - i am trying to work with you guys. I feel like I'm so close, only a few references from updating away, and it looks like someone went it and was doing something. Please help!!!!! Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Qwert4321 (talk • contribs) 23:47, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Yup, Qwert4321 - you're still deleting them. I honestly don't know what you're doing with them. But you're right, you fix those last few citations, then let me know. I'll be off wiki until tomorrow shortly, but then I'll take a look at it. Don't get discouraged. Onel5969 (talk) 23:57, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

I have updated the last few citations - I think I am finally ready to be approved! Please let me know if I need to do anything else and thank you so, so much for all your help - and talking to the other editor re: my deleting issue. It is greatly appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Qwert4321 (talk • contribs) 01:46, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Nice job Qwert4321! Moved to mainspace. Onel5969 (talk) 02:35, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

04:27:45, 26 February 2015 review of submission by Michael.C.Wright

• Michael.C.Wright (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:S795 coffee (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

S795 is not an organization. It is a cultivar/variety of a coffee plant. Do I need to be more specific about that in the article, to clearly indicate it is a coffee cultivar/variety?

Michael.C.Wright (talk) 04:27, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Michael.C.Wright - No, I clicked on the wrong designation (corp is right above the general not-notable) - I made the correction on your draft, thanks for pointing it out. Good luck with the article. Onel5969 (talk) 05:04, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Great. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael.C.Wright (talk • contribs) 05:37, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

My article "Saul Bron”

USERNAME: Ethersearch RE: My article "Saul Bron” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saul_Bron

Dear Editor,

If you have a chance, please take a look at the update. In addition to some added details, please note the added references. Since the only B-Class criteria which you found lacking in the previous version was the absence of inline citations, I hope this will allow it to be upgraded to B-Class.

Many thanks for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ethersearch (talk • contribs) 06:14, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Ethersearch Hi. It will be a bit before I can do a thorough B upgrade review. As you can see, I get a few requests here. If I haven't done it in a couple of weeks (I'm a bit backlogged). Onel5969 (talk) 02:17, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

26 February 2015 review of submission by Stevegrtz

Hello Onel5959, thank you for taking the time and reviewing my article.

Regarding the submission of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:EAngel - This entry was created with the help of the respectful administrator Tokyogirl79 that helped me formalizing the text. Please have a look at the following Wikipedia entries:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ginger_Software https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_hour_translation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gengo

All of them a eligible and approved entries, and I would like to write articles about all of the notable services that can help people suffering from Dyslexia.

I would appreciate it if you could help me phrasing the Draft:EAngel entry, so it will be in the same language style as the other existing entries that I've listed above, so we can get it approved. I hope that you agree with me that we should not discriminate one service over the other, given that they are all notable and known in the world. If you help me edit it so it will not sound like an advertisement that will be highly appreciated.

Again, thank you for you precious time. Stevegrtz (talk) 08:54, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

I re-edited and added more information about the service. Do you think it's now better? Stevegrtz (talk) 13:38, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

09:40:29, 26 February 2015 review of submission by Ridodo

• Ridodo (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Evergreen Consulting Engineering (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Dear Onel5969, Thank you for your information regarding the guideline of my first submission. "Evergreen Consulting Engineering" is the structural engineer of record of the Taipei 101, which is already shown on wiki page. I believe that adding this article would clarify the information regarding that company. Therefore, I have added external links and one reference of Taipei 101 and some minor changes as well. Hopefully the modified article would meet the qualification for acceptance.

Ridodo (talk) 09:40, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Ridodo - The article does not really tell us anything about the company. As it stands, the company is mentioned in the other article, and that's what should be. This article adds nothing. Sorry. Onel5969 (talk) 02:51, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Gopala Gopala (2015 film)

Would you like to conduct a thorough c/e to this article which i am planning to take to GA status?

Hi

Pavanjandhyala - I'm real backed up. I promised Sven I'd do an article for him but won't get to that for another week or so. If you're willing to wait, I'll do yours after that. Onel5969 (talk

) 02:52, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

a few days ago we corresponded about my submission about Dr John Carthy, a notable British behavioural scientist and science communicator. The notability was questioned - you commented that a single obituary in the journal Nature, probably the world's most renowned science journal, was insufficient. I am unsure how this can be so - Nature certainly has very high standards for notability, and scientists do have to be of leading international standing to have their obituary published in that journal. However, even if more than one source is required, I had provided additional sources, but they cannot all be of Nature's standing. I have since located another one in: Journal of Biological Education; see here: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00219266.1972.9653749?journalCode=rjbe20#.VO89Ci7Pq4E

Would this be more suitable?

In addition, the authorship of the numerous books that John Carthy has authored (and which I had provided with the submission) is easily verifiable - many of them are still available on Amazon; the existence of the others can easily be verified.

John Carthy's activities as a science communicator on radio and TV are less easily documented more than 40 years after his death, but just googling his name with the word BBC turns up several find from the 1950s and 60s, for example:

http://genome.ch.bbc.co.uk/89faf4a0d85e4e898b2f684e6d52f4cf

http://genome.ch.bbc.co.uk/schedules/bbcone/london/1966-08-18

http://genome.ch.bbc.co.uk/schedules/bbchomeservice/basic/1959-10-30

Please let me know if any of these sources would be more suitable than the ones I had provided earlier. Thank you and best wishes,

Lars

Prof Lars Chittka, FRES, FSB, FLS, PhD, MSc Royal Society Wolfson Research Merit Awardee School of Biological & Chemical Sciences Fogg Building Queen Mary University of London Mile End Road London E1 4NS UK — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lars.chittka (talk • contribs) 16:45, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi

Thank you for all of your help!!! I've re-submitted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Janeesussman (talk • contribs) 17:19, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Nice job Janeesussman!

Sadyk Sher-Niyaz

Hi! You rejected the article, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Sadyk_Sher-Niyaz

Can you please help me? I have 5 in text citations, is that not enough? Please help me correct it if you can...Thanks!

Sineraji (talk) 19:35, 26 February 2015 (UTC) Rachel

Hi Sineraji - First, you only have 3 inline citations. Second, no, these are nowhere near enough. This is a blp, and virtually every fact needs a citation. Onel5969 (talk) 03:22, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

One of the articles from AKIpress- a major news organization in Kyrgyzstan- did a very long in depth article on the lift of Sher-Niyaz. Can I use this to cite multiple facts?

thanks again! Sineraji (talk) 08:26, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Sure Sineraji - And if it covers EVERY fact in a single paragraph, you only have to put it at the end of the paragraph. Onel5969 (talk) 13:40, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

20:14:05, 26 February 2015 review of submission by Bcooper87

• Bcooper87 (talk · contribs)
  • talk | history | links | watch | logs
    )

Bcooper87 (talk) 20:14, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Bcooper87 - this is one of the most common questions. Articles are to inform about a subject, not sell a product. This can be difficult to ascertain, since many things which are factual are more designed to sell, rather than inform, e.g. "The firm provides business-to-business leasing arrangements and loans for a wide variety of small- to- medium-size organizations nationwide". The only folks that care about that are potential customers. Same with the following sentence. I hope this makes sense. Onel5969 (talk) 03:30, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

20:18:02, 26 February 2015 review of submission by SOIJaySey795

• SOIJaySey795 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Sounds of Imani (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello Onel5969. I am Deloris and I received information on the decline of my submission. This is my first time creating an article for submission into Wikipedia and I will be working on rewriting the article. I do understand I must rewrite from a neutral standpoint and will rewrite from that standpoint; however, if you would be so kind as to give a few pointers that would be greatly appreciated. In comparison of other articles such as one I found on Wikipedia regarding another indie artist TolumiDE -- can you share the difference between that article and my article on indie artist Sounds of Imani. As far as references go, I did submit a reference for the U.K. online magazine -- as TolumiDE has an online magazine as well. In addition, I noticed TolumiDE article has less information. Did I put in too much info?

I look forward to hearing from you -- so that I may have additional direction during my rewrite? SOIJaySey795 (talk) 20:18, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

SOIJaySey795 (talk) 20:18, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi SOIJaySey795 - First, the use of first names throughout the article is very informal. Second, stuff like "The music of Sounds of Imani is available on iTunes, Amazon, CD Baby and other digital Internet music stores." and "See Sounds of Imani on Twitter and other social media sites" is inappropriate in an article, since it's blatant advertising. The whole first 3 sentences in the background section has nothing to do with the subject of the article (would be appropriate in an article about Carol Ervin). There are raw links throughout the article which need to be removed, as well as quite a few formatting issues, (see the cite error message in bold red). I hope this clears things up for you. Onel5969 (talk) 03:56, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

23:50:58, 26 February 2015 review of submission by Kmf22

• Kmf22 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:SystemVue (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I have eliminated all internal references. All my references point to external sources. I have skimmed it down to the bare bones. All that is left in the article is a brief history and a definition of what the product does. I am not advertising anything; I'm just telling what the software is used for. Kmf22 (talk) 23:50, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

00:44:49, 27 February 2015 review of submission by Bob nau

• Bob nau (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:RegressIt (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I've added a link to a scientific article in which RegressIt was used in the analysis (and cited as such). It is actually in fairly widespread use and is well-known: it has a #1 Google page rank for searches on "Excel regression add-in". I have also added a "features" page to the RegressIt web site (http://regressit.com/features.html) which I hope will put its contribution in better perspective. Please try it out and share it with some colleagues and get their opinions too. Thanks!

(Added 5 March 2015): Here is one more link (from the web site of the world's leading expert on forecasting) that refers to RegressIt: http://www.forecastingprinciples.com/ (See the news item at or near the top for this date, and also the software page.) I also hope you will ask whoever monitors the statistical add-ons section of the list-of-statistical software page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_statistical_packages#Statistical_add-ons) what he or she thinks of it, after taking it for a test drive. This is where a link to the RegressIt page would naturally fit, and the question is whether a user visiting this page would be better served by being made aware of an innovative recently developed--and free--product, or not. It is a practical software tool intended for use in both education and scientific applications (as opposed to a person or place or artwork or historical event), and I hope that its notability will be judged on its merits as such. Thanks for giving this your attention.

Bob nau (talk) 00:44, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

06:06:03, 27 February 2015 review of submission by Edward.sun94

• Edward.sun94 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Gowe (Musician) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs
    )

Edward.sun94 (talk) 06:06, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi again Edward.sun94 - The question then becomes: are 4 stops in 3 states a "national tour"? And believe me, this has been a debate time and again, as to what constitutes a national tour.

Why don't you resubmit, and let's see if another editor will look at it and give an opinion. If it isn't looked at in a week, give me a shout and I'll take another look at it. Onel5969 (talk) 14:03, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

09:50:35, 27 February 2015 review of submission by Echozone

• Echozone (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Gloria Joyce Lindsay Hobbs (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

My draft article on Gloria Joyce Lindsay Hobbs was declined. I have written sections of the submission. However I need suggestions on issues the reviewer raised on notability and references the reviewer indicated could have been included but was or were not. I wish to include all that could be verifiable before I make a re-submission

Echozone (talk) 09:50, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi

WP:CIT on how to format those citations. After that, it will be easier for a reviewer to help you with your above questions. Onel5969 (talk

) 14:21, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

• Insertcleverphrasehere (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Joseph Sledge (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs
    )

Noticed that you declined my submission for the new article on Joseph Sledge, no wonder, I forgot to rewrite some of the information that I had collated in the early sections when putting together information about him and a couple unchanged sentences somehow made it into the article. Apologies about that, its been fixed now. I'll resubmit it.  InsertCleverPhraseHere ^{InsertTalkHere}  12:04, 27 February 2015 (UTC)  InsertCleverPhraseHere ^{InsertTalkHere}  12:04, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

12:16:51, 27 February 2015 review of submission by Margootjepostcode

• Margootjepostcode (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Expereo (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello, Can you please explain why the submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability? Thank you in advance.

Expereo 12:16, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Sure, , although if you clicked on the link, it explains it in greater detail. In a nutshell, it says, "An organization is generally considered notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. Trivial or incidental coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not sufficient to establish notability." 3 citations from minor sources hardly qualifies. Onel5969 (talk) 14:42, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Alfred Büchi

Hello, Following productive chat with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Darylgolden today I have further edited https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Alfred_B%C3%BCchi and would like you to re-review. In particular the references are fixed and Darylgolden made some adjustments to the piece as well. According to Darylgolden it looks fine and he expects it should be approved. Please let me know if anything further is needed. (Note - the categories section at the end is not exactly correct format yet.) Thank you for your attention & reply. Lovevolv (talk) 14:50, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Lovevolv - Nice job. Moved it to mainspace. Still needs a little work (e.g. the second, short, paragraph definitely needs a citation). Onel5969 (talk) 01:03, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

15:11:39, 27 February 2015 review of submission by Danibeavs

• Danibeavs (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Samanage (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs
    )

Danibeavs (talk) 15:11, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Danibeavs - There's a difference between giving neutral information about a subject and making that information sound like you're pitching a product. For example, the second sentence, "The company’s flagship product is Samanage, a multi-tenant, Software-as-a-Service (SaaS)[2] solution for IT and enterprise service management", sounds like an intro on a product brochure. A more neutral sentence would be: "The company's most well-known product is Samanage, software used in enterprise service management." See the difference? Avoid using terms like "solution". Don't talk about customers. Just the facts, without selling the product. I hope this helps. Onel5969 (talk) 01:09, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

15:29:50, 27 February 2015 review of submission by Tung

• Tung (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Nilo Hovey (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs
    )

Tung (talk) 15:29, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Question on review of Wibu-Systems AG Article

Greetings, Thank you for reviewing the article Wibu-Systems AG (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Wibu-Systems_AG, user name: thomricci) on September 19, 2014. In your rejection statement, you mentioned that "A company may be notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources, independent of the company. Of the sources listed, only the Computerworld article provides any depth of coverage." I am hoping that you can clarify this statement so that I might improve the article and resubmit. I don't understand why the Computerworld article is more significant than the other citations and external references - all are from reputable 3rd party trade publications and industry organizations. The company plays an important role in the software industry by providing protection against software piracy and reverse engineering, secure licensing, and cybersecurity, all critical concerns in today's connected world. I appreciate your consideration and look forward to further comments. Thomricci (talk) 15:52, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Thomricci - The Computerworld article goes into depth about the company. The others are mere mentions, which are good for verifying underlying facts, but not so much for notability. Onel5969 (talk) 14:43, 28 February 2015 (UTC)