User talk:Sionk/Archive 11

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

Cardiff Wikimedia Meetup #3

Hi Sionk, would you be interested in a Meetup of fellow Wikipedians in Cardiff this Saturday?

talk

) 21:38, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, I was busy yesterday. Sionk (talk) 09:58, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello Sionk, Thanks for reviewing my Club Pop House submission. I knew as it was being written that I'd probably need to go back to my research notes to cite original sources. Virtually all of the sources are local newspaper cites unavailable in tools like Newspaper Archives or Newsbank, and not in anything as scholarly as JSTOR. BTW, I am the author of Beloit's Club Pop House which I used as my sole source for the Wiki article... thus far. As I am new to Wiki mark-up, editing is a little slow for me right now, but I'll get the hang of it. Let me know if there's more required than adding sources. Thanks again. (Hope I did this talk page correctly.) JoeyBooks (talk) 15:22, 3 June 2014 (UTC)JoeyBooks

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article SightLife is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SightLife until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. --Bejnar (talk) 23:50, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks for taking the time to review the article I have been compiling for Pascall+Watson. I am really annoyed however that the references are apparently not notable enough. I use references from Companies House, BD Online - a very reliable source within the construction sector, Architects' Journal, Dezeen - another trusted source of information within the design industry. Many other articles reference these these sources and similar. I just don't understand how my references are not good enough. There is no point in sending me any more articles about referencing for beginners or gold rules or whatever because I simply cannot see why mine do not fit the bill! Other architecture practices List_of_architecture_firms are practically identical in format and content to what I have done. I am reluctant to pick out any firm in particular because I would hate to have their pages kicked off too because they have been flagged up as too promotional or whatever my reviewers seem to think I am trying to do. The article still has lots to be added to it, and I don't want to do it all. I would like the article to be published so that other, more experienced contributors can add info to it without being told off! Am I just fighting a loosing battle here?! Should I be stripping the article back so it has just minimal info like Zaha_Hadid_Architects. Can you please give me examples of why that is acceptable, but my article is not? (Marycdrl (talk) 21:30, 5 June 2014 (UTC))

Sionk Just checking did you see the questions I asked on my user page regarding possible improvements for the Pascall+Watson page? Cheers. (Marycdrl (talk) 14:59, 17 June 2014 (UTC))

Hi Sionk,

I appreciate you took the time to review my submission, but I disagree with your main point about a fifth tier English football rivalry. There are several Wikipedia articles on English football rivalries between teams in the 4th and 5th tiers, and there's even an article on the rivalry between a 7th tier and 8th tier club.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A49_derby https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rushmoor_derby https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thanet_derby https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lincolnshire_derby

Cm 0102 huckerby (talk) 11:09, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

The artiles you have highlighted are football fancruft, unfortunately. Wikipedia isn't the place to list football stats. Wikipedia is filled with sports fancruft and I've no intention of adding to it myself. Wikipedians have drawn up

notability guidelines. All the best! Sionk (talk

) 15:41, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

"All teams that have played in the national cup (or the national level of the league structure in countries where no cup exists) are assumed to meet WP:N criteria." Both teams play in the FA Cup every year, so both clubs are 'notable' based on this. There's also an entire category dedicated to English football derbies and stats between rival clubs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:England_football_derbies. I doubt that this will change your decision though. While I'm disappointed, I still found the process of researching and drafting an article a positive experience. All the best, and I respect your commitment to Wikipedia.

Cm 0102 huckerby (talk) 17:55, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi Sionk: Thank you for reviewing my article. May I ask why you included reference to John Skipton Mulvany, architect, into this biography on John Mulvany, 19th Century American Irish Painter? I am very new at this so would you be the person to correct this or should I? How does one indicate a category as you suggest I do? (Ferryanne (talk) 20:20, 7 June 2014 (UTC)) ferryAnne (talk)

Please see

20:54, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Well, you're welcome to accept the article if you wish. But here's no evidence presented about the OTRS so I was none the wiser. Sionk (talk) 21:00, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello Sionk, You are the latest editor to deny my organization (Friends Without A Border) page for publishing. I have followed the guidelines and felt that this last time I finally got it right. I have lots of references to outside secondary sources. I am not sure what else to do to get this well respected NYC non-profit's Wikipedia page published. The page for the Friends' hospital, (AHC), was published with much less sourcing. I would greatly appreciate some specific examples of how I can make this better in order to get it published. Thank you so much, jtcheers Jtcheers (talk) 14:49, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

I gave advice on the draft article itself. I don't know what else to add. I've added a 'notability' tag to the AHC because it is effectively unsourced apart from its own webpage. Sionk (talk) 15:51, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

I'm not following why you want to move the declined draft at

21:11, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

@Sphilbrick - it is not declined, it is awaiting review. I have reviewed it and want to move it to mainspace, to John Ginty. The disambiguation can be dealt with using a hatnote. Sionk (talk) 21:44, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

OK done, I'll assume you will deal with the hatnote.--S Philbrick(Talk) 21:53, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Sionk (talk) 21:54, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi Sionk, Thanks for moving The Compleat Sculptor to Wikipedia article space. I was also glad to see on the talk page that there is a WikiProject Companies collaborative to improve coverage of companies on Wikipedia. I'm considering adding my name to that project, as the advice on articles about companies that I've seen in the Teahouse ("reads like an advertisement") is quite often not specific enough to be useful improving the articles.

I recently also worked on AlterG, a bio-medical device company. Would it be appropriate to include that article under the aegis of WikiProject Companies? Cheers! Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 21:08, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Sure, Grand'mere Eugene, no doubt WikiProject Companies will be glad of your help and expertise! You will no doubt have noticed there is a page to sign-up to the Project, at Wikipedia:WikiProject Companies/Participants. Sionk (talk) 21:22, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi Sionk,

Checking in to see if a video can be linked as a reference? If so, is it the same a other references or is there special way to do it?

Thanks, Tee (talk) 11:44, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

@Tee, sure, but normally only if the video is from some sort of reputable news source. You'd reference it in the same way as other sources, providing author/publisher details, title, date etc. Sionk (talk) 13:05, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Sionk! Done ~ Tee (talk) 11:55, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

I am wondering why you have bothered to delete most of what was written on Lindsay Seers? I mean why you bothered with a page about a nobody like me? Or even how you came across it? It is an odd world - a kind of idiot-ocracy where people see themselves as arbitrators of what they may know very little about. Art babble - is that not just an arbitrary opinion? Have you read Bergson - or even Deleuze I wonder, I am guessing that is babble to you, or do I underestimate you? But why does your opinion matter I wonder - or more importantly why do you think it matters? Perhaps you are in fact quite conversant with the language of art? Art is something that many people fail to recognise as a dense and complex thing to write about simply because it is often at the very limit of language and sits in the relationship between perception and consciousness. It is also a very conceptualised practice just as any specialism is. As for citation - well that can all be sourced... and then when it is referenced is it still babble I wonder or does that legitimise it? Someone spent a considerable amount of time and bothered to put me on wikipedia which has surprised me as I am not known - it is not my choice, I have seen it and I accept it - but quite where you come into the picture I fail to understand. You are a person I am guessing that has never seen a single work by me. So what makes you an expert as to that the text that was written about me was trying to speak of?

Thanks for stopping by! I am pretty conversant in 'art babble' but, generally, most people are not. In my view (and in the general view of Wikipedia) article content should consist largely of what independent experts and reviewers say about a subject. From what I could see, most of the new content was sourced to your website and, though I am sure you are the expert on yourself, you do not have an independent overview (which is required for an encyclopedia). Articles also need to be fairly succinct and not give undue weight to particular opinions or descriptions, so adding 5000 characters of poorly sourced prose may raise eyebrows.

If you think of something essential that is missing from the article and/or know of any good published reviews of you and/or your work, by all means raise them on the Talk page of the article. All the best with your work and your career! Sionk (talk) 21:23, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello Sionk,

Regarding the above article that you rejected earlier today, may I bring up a few things about references from independent journalism articles about him? You mentioned that the only such sources appears to be from Bloomberg. However, the following references cited for the article are from mainstream and trade newspapers and magazines, and news wire services, in addition to the Bloomberg one you saw. Perhaps you are unfamiliar with these sources but the ones below are all independent newspapers and magazines. In light of this, would you reconsider? There are extensive references cited from different sources.

1)Reuters news wire--major international news wire 2)Chicago Sun-Times newspaper-- major USA daily newspaper 3)Crain's Chicago Business newspaper -- major business newspaper in the Chicago market 4)Businessweek magazine-- major US magazine 5)Pharmaceutical Executive magazine -- major international magazine for pharmaceutical executives 6)Fierce Biotech news service/newspapers -- Fierce is a major news service

In addition, Jeffrey Aronin is already covered in Wikipedia through the wiki site Ovation Pharmaceuticals. I can put a wiki link to that existing wiki article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aileron3000 (talk • contribs) 21:28, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your consideration

Martha

Aileron3000 (talk) 21:44, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi Sionk,

Could you please help me with choosing the right license for my image.

I think I've done something wrong. I copied a template across for my logo in the info box and I picked the info for company logo. It appears that this is incorrect and hence my page was rejected.

The logo can be used generally so I'm not sure what I've done, could you please review my logo submission and let me know. I'm completely new to this.

Your help is most appreciated.

) 08:39, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi Optoscribe, I suggest you wait until your article is published in Wikipedia's main space before adding 'fair use' images. It might be 'fair use' to use your company logo in a Wikipedia article about the company, but it isn't considered fair use to use it in an unpublished draft. Hope that helps! Sionk (talk) 08:48, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi there,

How do I delete it or do I wait for it to be deleted automatically?

) 08:52, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

It's likely to be deleted imminently because the 7-day period of grace is up. Sionk (talk) 15:52, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Please could you expand on your comments:

Sources are not about Optoscribe, or are the company website. Needs independent, reliable coverage about the company. Sorry to be a pain. I have submitted several indpendent citations and papers that cover show independent and reliable coverage about the company and I've put in some info linking to the company website. I could put in independent links such as the following, would this be ok?

http://www.laserfocusworld.com/articles/2014/03/3d-optical-waveguide-maker-optoscribe-expands-moves-to-new-facility.html http://www.ict-mirage.eu/index.php/partners/84-optoscribe http://www.lightwaveonline.com/articles/2014/03/optoscribe-unveils-eight-channel-multicore-fiber-fanout-device.html http://www.optoelectronics.org.uk/members/details/144/optoscribe-ltd http://optics.org/buyers/company/C000020078

Is this the kind of thing you mean?

If you could please let me know that would be great :) — Preceding

) 09:27, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

@

notability'. Wikipedia isn't a free listings site for all companies, but only the ones that are of particular note. The other links you've listed seem to be listings on trade websites, which wouldn't count at all to proving Optoscribe is 'notable'. It goes without saying that to prove that OPtoscribe is 'notable', the reliable sources have to be primarily or substantially about Optoscribe. I notice you've added some academic papers to your draft, but they are about another project. Hope that helps! Sionk (talk

) 16:05, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Madeline Sands

Hi Sionk,

Thank you for submitting your feedback.

We reviewed the notice for deletion, added at least 19 different links to demonstrate Madeline Sand's notability, and have noticed that very few women have Wikipedia pages, compared to men. She did build and create the Google Glass Breastfeeding app trial that was successfully launched in Australia, and was featured on the Today Show in Australia twice. We have sourced and added more coverage on Madeline Sand's Wikipedia page.

We would like to note that this specific trial was based on supporting women's health in an area that very few people talk about, let alone fully understand. And it's a critical issue. In fact, the US Government supports breastfeeding and claims it's "liquid gold." If you speak to women who have given birth recently, they will tell you how difficult it is to learn the importance of breastfeeding, begin breastfeeding, and overcome the countless challenges that one will go through in the process.

It's remarkably difficult, during a time when women are also vulnerable. If and when they have trouble with breastfeeding, they often cannot get the support that they need, and essentially, give up and move to formula. I'm sure you can imagine that it's distressing for a woman to not be able to feed her baby, making her terrified that her child is not receiving proper nutrition. Early breast milk leads to countless benefits for the mother, and it's a shame to not breastfeed, and give it a fair shot before giving up.

Since Madeline Sands worked extremely hard on this project and spoke about it on TV as well as many websites, we believe that her Wikipedia would be notable. When we launched this trial, our focus was more on the stories of the mother participants, and how they were excited, scared, and successfully overcame their difficulties with breastfeeding. Maddy was the impetus behind all of these positive actions, and we will continue to add more coverage on her achievements. She will be speaking at a few more events, conferences and panels in the upcoming months, as we are in the process of launching a brand new product.

This new product will also support women, as they transition from pre-birth, birth and post-birth. It will give them as much support as they need and want to help them transition from the family life to the work force.

Our website for this product is here: http://backtobusiness.smallworldsocial.com/. Madeline Sands is once again leading this project, and incredibly important in the development of this significant endeavor.

According to Wikipedia, "for Wikipedia:Notability (people), the person who is the topic of a biographical article should be "worthy of notice" – that is, "significant, interesting, or unusual enough to deserve attention or to be recorded." Madeline Sands is an interesting, significant, unusual person in this space. No one has ever worked on this project before, and it's an incredibly important women's health issue. We are working extremely hard to make sure that all women receive the proper support, counseling, nutrition advice, overall wellness and

Also, we wanted to note that there are more Wikipedia articles on men than women, and we would like to change that.

Thank you for considering these ideas. We appreciate it.

Small World Social — Preceding

) 23:31, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I'm not disputing that

conflict of interest, which may ring alarm bells with other Wikipedia editors. All the best! Sionk (talk

) 09:32, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Confused about two versions of the same topic

Greetings, Sionk.

There seems to be two versions of Perspective projection, a subsection under Perspective (Graphics). I edited one at my Sand Box site and submitted it for review. As I understand, it was declined due to the presence the another article version of the same name. You were given as a contact person in this regard. Your help is appreciated.Pat Kelso (talk) 02:40, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Gentlemen

There are apparently two Wikipedia sites that address essentially the same topic: Perspective drawing. I edited one of these, the Perspective projection subsection under the main heading of Perspective (Graphics), unaware there was the other site of the same name. Included under this heading are other discourses on diverse types of Pictorial drawing, e.g. axonometric drawing, etc.. My edited piece was rejected on the basis that there already exists a site with the same main heading name, Perspective (graphical), which indeed there is, but which deals more comprehensively with perspective drawing exclusively, i.e., without the pictorial expositions. Alas, it seems it too could use editing as it contains some of the shortcomings as the piece I edited. Your guidance would be appreciated.Pat Kelso (talk) 14:21, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi Pat Kelso, are you sure your draft is about Perspective at all? The content seems to be about parallell projection (without a vanishing point). Most of that topic is already covered in the Axonometric projection and Isometric projection articles, as far as I can see.

You may, however, have identified a problem, namely that these different articles are not well linked to one another - maybe Axonometric and Isometric need adding to the 'navbox' at the foot of the articles? Sionk (talk) 14:49, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Sionk. Yes my edit addresses perspective projection exclusively. What you are seeing are the sections on axonometric, isometric, etc., that precede my edit of the section on Perspective projection - under the main heading of Perspective (Graphics). As I say there is another site with the heading Perspective (Graphics) that does not contain the parallel/pictorial topics and deals exclusively with perspective, and which I suggest also needs attention.Pat Kelso (talk) 15:40, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

If there is something missing from the existing article, then you are welcome to expand that article. Sionk (talk) 11:35, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Sionk.

'Back on line after Pc hiatus. 'Trying to get up to speed again. Note there is a site named

Graphical projection

.

Contents

1 Overview

2 Types of projection

2.1 Parallel projection

2.1.1 Orthographic projection

2.1.2 Pictorials

2.1.2.1 Axonometric projection :

2.1.2.1.1 Isometric projection

2.1.2.1.2 Dimetric projection

2.1.2.1.3 Trimetric projection

2.1.2.2 Oblique projection 2.1.2.2.1 Cavalier projection

2.1.2.2.2 Cabinet projection

2.2 Perspective projection

3 See also

4 References

I edited the section 2.2 Perspective projection which was declined. It seems it was interpreted as a new article rather than an edit of a subsection of an existing article. This per yours: "Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Perspective (graphical) instead."

Note there is another site named Perspective graphics

Contents

1 Axonometric projection

1.1 Isometric projection

1.2 Dimetric projection

1.3 Trimetric projection

2 Oblique projection

2.1 Cavalier projection

2.2 Cabinet projection

3 Perspective projection

4 References70.112.245.115

BTW, I seemed to have lost my Sandbox site. The templates to regain addle what's left of my brain. Also how do I change my IP signature to show my name instead? Can you fix? Thanks 70.112.245.115 (talk) 14:56, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

You'll need to log-in to Wikipedia to access your Pat Kelso account. Your sandbox User:Pat Kelso/sandbox was moved to the name Draft:Perspective (Graphics), so User:Pat Kelso/sandbox is currently a redirect page to the latter. There's nothing to prevent you editing User:Pat Kelso/sandbox (so that it is no longer a redirect) by pasting a copy of your draft's wiki code from Draft:Perspective (Graphics). Sionk (talk) 15:31, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

In fact I've just pasted a copy there for your use. Sionk (talk) 15:38, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Image

Soink, I believe I've found an error in an illustration in

) 19:09, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

I'd suggest you raise the problem on the article's Talk page. If there's agreement that the image is wrong, you can look for a replacement, or make/find someone else to make a suitable alternative image. Sionk (talk) 20:56, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Ms. Soink: Question above is now moot as it has been taken down but indulge me for another. I would like to edit an existing article in my Sandbox but dk how to upload it. Thanks. Patkelso (talk) 15:43, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

You wouldn't normally edit it an existing article using your sandbox. Though there's nothing stopping you form using your sandbox to experiment or compose a form of wording etc. I'd suggest you edit the article directly, clicking on the "Edit" tab at the top of the page. Sionk (talk) 17:25, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Just to be clear, this article is a train-wreck of puffery and oversourcing, but I would struggle to make a "delete" vote at AfD stick, and there are a few hits on a news search, so I had no choice other than to pass it through AfC. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 11:26, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Sure. I've added it to the Category:Citation overkill hidden category for someone to look at sometime in the future. These sort of articles are deliberately written to obscure the issue, but I agree there are one or two reputatable general news sources which suggest notability. Sionk (talk) 11:39, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Hey man! Thanks so much for the feedback. We do make vinyl, not plastic but there is also a product called "flexi vinyl" that we do that is different than normal vinyl records. Christian is a pirate (talk) 21:01, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Edit: I had Huon fix the references and links and such. Hopefully it's all good! Thank you again!Christian is a pirate (talk) 18:18, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Thank you Sionk for the review of

article to guide me on references.

Again, Thank you. CMS.LLC (talk) 17:01, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

The problem is they are all weak, and many are not about Bonaventure at all. I could equally have declined it again for blatant advertising. See

Wikipedia's golden rule (and bear in mind articles about private commerical organisations need evidence of general news coverage, not just specialist magazines). Sionk (talk

) 17:55, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

OK. Thanks for the comment.

CMS.LLC (talk) 18:48, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Good Day Sionk, Thank you for reviewing my draft. I am somewhere confused about how the subject of the draft can be confusing to you, as it is clearly named in the title. To my knowledge, all data in the draft is verifiable, either by link or by

) 00:56, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

@Sionk:Apparently you are either offline, or not responding at this time. Since there is no actionable suggestions in your review, the review and comments will be removed from the draft. If you would care to review again at a later time, and provide actionable responses, I would be more than happy to resolve the problems, or, if they are not problems, I can point you at the appropriate parts of the Wiki documentation that explains why they are not problems. Do not restore the removed rejection notice or comments, as your review had no actionable content.

Hi Matthew, unfortunately I am not on Wikipedia 24 hours a day. I'm not sure why you are submitting your draft via AfC if you are not willing to take on board reviewers advice. Review templates are also useful to inform other reviewers of the history of your submission. I left my comments in good faith. Sionk (talk) 14:28, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

• Matt.tennenbaum (talk · contribs)
  • User:Matt.tennenbaum (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Matt.tennenbaum (talk) 18:11, 27 June 2014 (UTC) Hi,

Can you please let me know which part is considered copyrighted so I can remove it/reword it in my own words.Matt.tennenbaum (talk) 18:11, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Matt.tennenbaum (talk) 14:23, 30 June 2014 (UTC) Hi,

Why was this deleted? I have been working with editors for a very long time now making all necessary changes to get this page up. Why was this deleted if I was complying with all requested changes to meet Wikipedia guidelines. Please restore this page so I can continue modifying it until it meets the guidelines. I have now lost almost two months worth of progress.Matt.tennenbaum (talk) 14:23, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

I had a chance to review your edits and deletion nomination to the Lemelson Capital Management page. Can we work together to resolve your concerns? Orthodox2014 (talk) 18:17, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Lemelson Capital Management for discussion. Sionk (talk

) 18:39, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Article on Bruce Mazlish

Hi Sionk,

I'm new to the Wikipedia process and trying to bring up an article on Bruce Mazlish. You rejected the first draft, saying that it needs more reliable sources. I added a couple of NYT articles and can add reviews as references for every book, he published, but frankly that seems exaggerated looking at other wikipedia sites. The fact that Mazlish has so many publications, books as well as articles in well regarded journals and publishing houses should be reliable enough - shouldn't it?! I can add a lot of reviews, if really necessary, but am wondering then, in what form. as a reference behind every book or as paragraphs in the article discussing different views on his research. Please, I'd really appreciate some more concrete advice to work with. Also, I'm actually not sure if you can look at the version as it is now after my changes. If I need to resubmit, please let me know. I just didn't want to risk looking like I barely worked on it before re-submission, that's why I wanted to get in touch with you first. Thank you for your time! I do appreciate it. Lucybell11 (talk) 21:23, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi Lucybell11, I can't remember the draft, could you give me a link to it? Sionk (talk) 21:28, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi Sionk, here it is

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Bruce Mazlish Please let me know what you think. Thank you! --Lucybell11 (talk

) 23:11, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Psychology's Feminist Voices page

Hello Sionk, thanks very much for your feedback on the psychology's feminist voices page and putting it up online! yay. prapti Praptigiri (talk) 11:08, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

No probs. You'll need to find better (i.e. secondary) sourcing for the second half of the article. Sionk (talk) 15:40, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi Sionk

Yes I did make changes to the articles on Hetti Bywater, Anne Hegerty and Danielle Harold as the date of births were incorrect as I found out by Googling those people and checking their date of births thoroughly. So there was no need to revert it. Thankyou

Hi Sionk

Yes I made changes to the article pages on Anne Hegerty, Danielle Harold and Hetti Bywater as the date of births on two of them were incorrect and Anne Hegerty's date of birth wasn't shown. Thankyou Jonathangrehan (talk) 17:08, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello Sionk

Anne Hegerty's DOB was on her page before, and I don't know why it's been removed in the past. Please add it, ok?

Thankyou.

The changes to Anne Hegerty's page were essential and infact correct.

Hopefully Sionk will see some proper sense. Aha.

The changes weren't "essential" and, more importantly, weren't

verifiable. Things on Wikipedia need to be verifiable, particularly personal information about living people, such as dates of birth. As the messages on your Talk page say, if you continue to add unsourced information like this, you're likely to end up blocked from Wikipedia. Sionk (talk

) 18:12, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

I've been kicked from the clubhouse

For expressing opinions counter to the prevailing dogma. Apparently, gender bias on wikipedia only means one thing: not enough female editors. It doesn't, apparently, have much to do with bias in the way we cover issues relating to gender issues more broadly - for example, how do we cover men's issues, transgender issues, Violence against men, and even the way we describe in events who was killed and whether they were "people" or "women and children" (see my last comment at the project page for that example). Oddly enough, this would suggest that while deghettoization of Category:American female comedians is within the pervue of the project, deghettoization of Category:Trans men or Category:Male nurses or any other combination which isn't purely female is technically off-limits. Are you as boggled as I am by this sudden change of scope? I have no problem with saying the main focus is women, that's all fine and good, but suggesting that gender is strictly limited to women is sort of missing the point that feminists have been making, I think, re: gender. I admit I may have been a bit too aggressive on the talk page but it annoyed me to have new editors who hadn't participated in the project at all showing up and telling me what these scope was, and that the work I had proposed and supported there was now, all of a sudden, off topic. Ranting here on your page, sorry, to avoid posting there further, I hope you don't mind too much.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 01:41, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Completely bizarre to me too. But on the other hand the project was fairly inactive and, if it is reactivated by editors in some form or another that must be a good thing. Reading between the lines there seem to have been arguments elsewhere which are now having an impact on the project. Considering I left the project months ago I'll leave the project pages on my 'watch list' but I don't want to get heavily involved, particularly if it becomes the haunt of militant feminists who wish to exclude male editors from the activities. Sionk (talk) 10:02, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

yeah, I have no idea what happened between Slim saying 'nice job' and Deciding that 1) de ghettoization was bad or controversial (really??) 2) that the algorithm I had proposed had no consensus. It's as if they don't understand it, and thus they fear it - even though the algorithm simply ensures that biographies aren't ghettoized...very bizarre - have you ever had anyone anywhere resist your efforts to deghettoize?--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 12:04, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Well, it's sometimes like pushing sand uphill because, like you say, most editors don't understand it (or agree with it) so continually act to move articles to the most exact/lowest tier of category. Sionk (talk) 12:22, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Sionk and Obi-Wan Kenobi. I caught the discussion at the task force too late to get involved. While I agree with the bulk of the posts there stating that the systematic gender bias in Wikipedia manifests itself mainly in the underdevelopment of articles about women, I think that if there is a place on the Wiki where other types of gender bias could become systemic, it is in the category system. Categories themselves are totally systemic, and the categorization of articles represents Wikipedia's view of what's important in articles. I'm glad that someone is keeping an eye on this, even if the editors at the task force don't feel that it comes under their mandate. —Anne Delong (talk) 12:56, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Anne. I also agree, e.g. that the bulk of the problem is re: articles about women, but I also think a significant percentage of that problem is due to systemic bias outside of wikipedia on coverage of women, thus it's a sourcing and content issue. The editor issue makes it worse, but isn't the key determining factor. I think you're involved with FA/GA articles, no? Shouldn't we ensure that all FA/GA articles have the right categories? As I pointed out, Maya Angelou was promoted to FA I think, but was still ghettoized, and newspaper articles wrote about it. We should avoid this.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 13:00, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

You'd think with all the tech wizards on Wikipedia, we'd be able to get a message to appear on the screen when a gender/race/sexuality based category was added to an article.

For good or ill, I think categorization appeals more to the type of person who is an obsessive organiser, and who maybe doesn't think about the real world implications of this activity. I decided I definitely preferred article creation and improvement, which was why I joined projects such as WikiProject Women artists. Categories can drive you mad! Sionk (talk) 13:52, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, I need to get into more content creation. Categories are driving me mad too :) As to the pop-up screen, I've thought about that for a while, e.g. would it be possible to have an algorithm that could determine when a biography was ghettoized. It's quite hard to say - during the category-gate mess, I created a quiz, the goal was to de-ghettoize a single biography. No-one passed the quiz of 6 people who took it I think. It's quite hard to do! That's why I created the algorithm, the same algorithm now being lambasted by ppl who don't even understand what deghettoization means, sadly. But an automated algorithm would be a bit tricky - there are lots of weird edge cases, etc.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 14:27, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

There are lots of secondary sources, from the Sydney Morning Herald, The Age, The Australian, etc...Zigzig20s (talk) 03:53, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your help with my submission at AfC. Sorry for the delay in this message, I was out of town for a bit and am just now getting fully caught up on Wikipedia. I've responded to your comment on the

) 04:03, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, I see you responded on the Talk page. I've left a

separate message about the Orphan tag now if you would like to help resolve that as well. If not, I can look for other editors to help. Thanks! Morzabeth (talk

) 17:37, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi again. I saw that you added Chip's name to the List of Boston University School of Law alumni article. Thanks for doing that. I also reached out to editors on the Oprah Winfrey Talk page and Chip has now been added into that article. (see here).

Do you think these two mentions are enough to remove the Orphan tag? If so, would you feel comfortable doing so? I do want to avoid all mainspace edits related to this topic. Thanks, Morzabeth (talk) 16:52, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

You can ignore my previous message, another editor has removed the Orphan tag. Thank you for your help with this article. Morzabeth (talk) 17:01, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi Sionk,

You said that you couldn't find mentions of elastic future in the articles cited. Here are the specific quotes, let me know if this doesn't make sense. I may be a novice at Wikipedia, but I'm really trying to get this citations in place in the right way.

Wired: "Some of the most exciting commissions already granted include a Google Hangout theatre experiment produced by Elastic Future. It will involve actors that have never met in real life, but rehearsed online from their respective homes in London, Barcelona and Lagos. The production, Longitude, will feature three 20-minute episodes. "It's a new way of working," said Elastic Future director Erin Gilley. "We've experienced all sorts of technical hurdles. We've repurposed Google Hangouts for something it's not designed to do. But if more people make work this way, more tools will become available and maybe it will become more stable, which will allow for control, expression and nuance. Digital is remaking everything in world, and we want to make sure theatre is not left behind."

VICE Magazine: This entire article was about our piece. Here are the first two paragraphs: "As part of this year's LIFT, a theater festival that turns London into a stage, the Elastic Future group continues its experiments in "digital theater" with the climate-focused Longitude. As with Peek a Boo (also co-commissioned by LIFT), the San Francisco-based theater troupe is again harnessing the power of Google Hangouts to film live theatrical performances. Written in collaboration with playwright Tim Wright, and designed by artistic teams working in Barcelona, Lagos and London, Elastic Future's Longitude wades into the murky global market struggle over fresh water in this time of climate change."

The National: This is the national newspaper of the United Arab Emirates - basically their equivalent of the New York Times or The Guardian. Here are some quotes from the article about elastic future, with a quote from renowned artist Lucien Bourjeilly: " Last July, Bourjeily collaborated with Elastic Future, an experimental theatre company that started in San Francisco but is now based in London, on a play called Peek A Boo for the London International Festival of Theatre (Lift). Five actors, playing spies, programmers and online peep-show entertainers, were divided between New York, London and Beirut, improvising dialogue as they interacted via streaming video. Audience members around the world watched in real-time by signing into Google Hangouts or watching the feed on Elastic Future’s web page. They also interacted with characters on Twitter and took part in a post-show Q&A. “It was a breakthrough,” says Bourjeily of the performance, which followed just a week of online workshops and involved some quick thinking from the actors when there were glitches in the internet connection from New York. “It opened my eyes to so many possibilities for how to create a new type of immersive theatre.” Erin Gilley, Elastic Future’s artistic director, says she learnt a lot from the experience and is eager to keep stretching the limits of the medium. She’s planning another work for this year’s Lift to be streamed online in July, with actors performing live via webcam from Ghana, Portugal and the United Kingdom."

Read more: http://www.thenational.ae/lifestyle/internet-theatre-immersive-real-time-shows-with-actors-from-all-over-the-world#ixzz36LigZp7W Follow us: @TheNationalUAE on Twitter | thenational.ae on Facebook

Forbes: "And, being true to their mission of art, tech and digital innovation, one of the opening performances at The Space is a special commissions of a play performed live in a Google Hangout by actors in three cities on the same longitude line. Lean in."

FastCompany: "Among the first installations are pieces from high-profile artists, including Marina Abramovic, who broadcasted live on the site at midnight last night, and Ai Weiwei, who has an interactive piece on The Space. There will also be a live, Google hangout theater project with actors in London, Barcelona, and Lagos and directed by Erin Gilley."

Let me know if you think any of these need to be edited or removed.

Thanks, Marc

Mblinder (talk) 14:53, 1 July 2014 (UTC) Mblinder

Hi

notability criteria you'll need to show they have been the subject of significant coverage in reliable (journalistic), independent sources. Out of the above only the Wired article seems to mention Elastic Future and most of the mention is the organisation's director talking about it (I wouldn't call him independent, would you?). If any of Elastic Future's initiative are subject of a lot of news coverage, maybe you need to write your article about these initiatives/events instead? Hope that helps! Sionk (talk

) 21:17, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I've added additional quotes to the Motherboard / Vice article and The National above, hopefully that helps. I'm happy to remove the reference to FastCompany or Forbes if that will help get the article finished. We also have a reference in the article from TheSpace.org which is a BBC project (pretty notable if you ask me): "LIFT, The Space, Abandon Normal Devices and Watermans have co-commissioned a world first – a live play with actors in three cities on the same longitude line - London, Barcelona and Lagos, focusing on global water shortages. All perform in a Google Hangout. Led by experimental theatre company Elastic Future from San Francisco, with the help of London’s Hellicar & Lewis, digital legends - this is experimental digital theatre in or front of an audience from round the world. It's exactly the sort of experiment to which the Space and LIFT are dedicated - a must see, and a must feed back your views. This might be a world first that turns into the norm, or a world first that you never see again!" Mblinder

See my previous reply and

WP:42. Sionk (talk

) 22:00, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Moonit Article

Hi Sionk,

Thank you for your time and to review my article. Do you think If I remove that section you mentioned My article can be published?

And are you going to review again or another user going to review?editted by bky (talk) 16:30, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi there, You reviewed my draft "Draft:Hollywood and Swine" and stated that my claims need verification. All of the information on the page I wrote comes from the articles that are listed in the References section. What other verification do I need? What other credible news sources do I need if I have The Guardian, Forbes, Variety, and LA Times? Also what more specific sources do I need for the authors?

MCelentano (talk) 18:42, 1 July 2014 (UTC)Thanks, Morgan

Hi! Thanks for reviewing my submission. I am working on creating this page as part of my University project on companies providing niche services. I chose procurement and supply chain services as the domain for my research and have found GEP to be mentioned in almost all analyst reports and reviews as among the top companies, competing with the likes of Ariba (SAP), Accenture, IBM, Genpact, etc., making it notable for professionals in the procurement and supply chain domain. Also, what's unique about this company is that it provides services (consulting and outsourcing) as well as software - I haven't come across any other company providing all three in my research.

"Mostly sourced to GEP sources, or not sourced at all." - I have used GEP sources only to specify the services provided by the company and a few links to company's press releases (since it's a privately held company, I couldn't find the company's financial details elsewhere). I would like to highlight that more than half of the references I've cited in my submission are non-GEP links (analyst reports, third-party research, business media, awards, etc.)

"Bordering on advertising, rather than a succinct encyclopedic article." - I am willing to work on editing parts that "border on advertising" (that's what my project is all about - to report about a company in an encyclopedic way).:)

"Needs strong evidence of journalistic news coverage." Since the company I've chosen (GEP) is in a very niche business, it's covered widely in the trade/business media but not in mainstream publications. A number of people from GEP have been included in the people-to-know list of procurement and supply chain publications such as Supply & Demand Chain Executive.

I request you to please reconsider my submission and suggest ways to improve it.

Thanks!

--Imranmhm (talk) 23:54, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi

notable subjects. Sionk (talk

) 00:06, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

18:06:05, 4 July 2014 review of submission by Kortárs Galambocska

• Sionk (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Várfok Gallery (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi! I am not requesting a re-review now, I just wish to find out what am I doing wrong. Could You please help me whith my references? I know I have a book rference that can not be read online-sadly it is not published online, but for the others, I don't know what is wrong. Please help me.

Kortárs Galambocska (talk) 18:06, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I saw you've been editing this article, but to me it looks a complete mess and 473 of its 539 edits have come from a single purpose account (https://tools.wmflabs.org/xtools/articleinfo/index.php?article=4INFO&lang=en&wiki=wikipedia), one which a quick google search shows the blatant contravention of COI. Just wondering if you think the article is suitable in its current form?

It's only recently been written and moved from AfC so the fact it has a single author is no surprise. True, the author seems to have a single purpose, but to say they have a COI seems to be guesswork with little foundation. Admittedly they seem to have access to many company images so may have a link. The article needs clean-up so we can get a clearer picture of the subject.

BTW you need to start signing your comments if you want to start advising other editors what to do, haha. Sionk (talk) 00:21, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

• Mdevlin54 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Amazon Malaria Initiative (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs
    )

I wanted to know if the changes and sources I added since july 5th have bettered my article.I realized I wrote in your talk page previously that was prior to finding this link. I know a good chunk of my original sources where documents from AMI partner links Media. I went out to searched for more notable sources and found a few new article and malaria journal where they specifically mentioned AMI. Im continue to look and recently added two book published by WHO , that each have a section about AMI. I know it about quality of your sources not the quantity. I wanted to see if this changes I made increased the reliability of the article or not. All advices is welcome I want to learn everything i can about wikipedia. michelle devlin 18:44, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

michelle devlin 18:44, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

23:24:38, 7 July 2014 review of submission by 216.205.235.226

• 216.205.235.226 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:First Women's Bank of California (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs
    )

216.205.235.226 (talk) 23:24, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Why was the article not accepted? I don't see a reason. Thx.

It's at the top of the article in the large pink box. Sionk (talk) 23:37, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

OK, I see the comments now, thanks. There are many "Women's Banks" all over the world, some operating currently, some defunct. I believe the first one in the US was formed in NY, not CA. There may be a way to create an article about all of them everywhere, but this is a very big project, almost at a dissertation level. I am interested specifically in the First Women's Bank of California. It had celebrity clients and a compelling business story. I have more news articles about it, albeit in hard-copy. Can I scan and upload these articles somewhere to act as primary sources? Also, can I upload the logo? Since this is my first wikipedia article, it's not letting me upload the jpg. Wikicommons rejected it bc I don't have the copyright. Aren't corporate logos fair-use? Thanks for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Woodahbase (talk • contribs) 18:42, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't sign above. Woodahbase (talk) 18:50, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Hello again Woodahbase! Bear in mind Wikipedia articles are a work-in-progess and don't need to be complete before they go 'live'. Because most of your sources were about several US Women's Banks, it seemed a tempting (and sensible) option to write a general article.

However, if you have other news/book sources available about the specific

WP:CITEHOW for a list of the sort of information we need to know about offline sources. Sionk (talk

) 18:57, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Film composers

Hi Sionk,

I'm not sure if you says the comment at the top of the William Haskell Levine draft concerning Criteria for musicians and Notability. I feel that the selection guidelines are biased against Film Composers. There is no mentions for criteria for Film Composers which is the case for William Levine. Who can we appeal to re composers otherwise this submission will get rejected again. Mr. Levine is a Hollywood,composer, a BMI member who has conducted and orchestrated for live orchestras. These works made it out to millions of people and continue to do so internationally.

Thanks.

boodabillbb 03:37, 11 July 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boodabill (talk • contribs)

Hi

WP:NMUSIC

) if one or more of the things he's personally created (piece of music or song he's written) has had demonstrable success he may meet notability criteria.

You are also welcome to raise the issue at

WP:GNG are already fairly flexible). Sionk (talk

) 08:40, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

12:52:18, 13 July 2014 review of submission by Laszlo Grof

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

1. Cannot find reviwer' comments 2 Do not know just what to correct

Laszlo Grof (talk) 12:52, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

See two reviewers comments clearly at the top of the article (one of them is in a large pink box).Sionk (talk) 13:02, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

This 'Thomas rathnam 'page is hosted in this site more than a year. It got all reliable links. The editor may highlighted the commencing projects. Any how as an achiever , we have to respect them.

(Praiswinner) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Praisewinner (talk • contribs) 16:02, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

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

Hi Sionk, thank you for your feedback re iDonate. I think I need some assistance. Maybe I am not putting my point across well enough.

iDonate is the largest fundraising website in Ireland and offers free fundraising services to over 600 charities / non-profits. It will raise over two million euro for charity in 2014. Obviously, I am not making that plain enough. I would appreciate any advise or assistance. Poshpaddy (talk) 18:46, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Well, you would think that a charitable organisation with a national scope would have been widely noticed. But, as several reviewers have said,

) 19:31, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi Sionk, thank you for the feedback. I am sure there are several secondary source articles. I will endeavor to locate them and update the article. Poshpaddy (talk) 09:40, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi Sionk last year I wrote an article about Riccardo silva but after a discussion it was merged with another page. Now I've found many surces so that I would like to write again a page about him. Could you help me? May I cancel the redirect and write the page again? https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Riccardo_Silva&redirect=no Dishv80 (talk) 16:37, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Well, hopefully the new sources are in

WP:42. Otherwise someone will simply redirect the article again. You can either (a) directly edit the redirect page or (b) write the article in your 'sandbox' and submit it to Articles for Creation (by adding {{subst:submit}} to the top if your page) for an independent expert review. Sionk (talk

) 17:52, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

thanks a lot for your help Dishv80 (talk) 09:54, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:00, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Please do not redirect the above page back to the disambiguation page. In doing so you have deleted the article about the artist. Your deletion interrupted the merge process I was busy with. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 11:11, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Rubbish, to put it bluntly. The article was not deleted (it is clearly there in the edit history). Neither is there a reason for a disambiguation page, considering there are only two articles of that name. Sionk (talk) 11:14, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Can we discuss this at the AFC page - to keep it all together. Unfortunately I must go offline for an hour or two now. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 11:23, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi Sionk,

Thanks for your reply on Cullen328's talk page. As I said there, I know nothing at all about that particular subject, so I was a little uneasy about wading into the middle and questioning the veracity of some of the things written. I also was not questioning the notability of subject matter; it just seemed that those two particular editors are closely connected to the people mentioned in that article and are unknowingly and unintentionally moving it in a certain direction. I'm sure they mean well, but it might be more appropriate if they slowed down a bit and offered suggestions on the article's talk page instead. I've already tried saying that in the answer I gave to that Teahouse question, but my advice doesn't seem to have taken much of a hold. I'm just not sure how to bring it up again without making it seem like I am assuming bad faith or biting a newcomer. This article is obviously very important to these editors, so I don't want to discourage them by waving various Wiki-policies in their faces. Anyway, thanks again for the advice. - Marchjuly (talk) 12:20, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

All the same, editors need to be discouraged from writing their autobiographies here. The COI editor has written considerably more about herself, presumably based largely on her own knowledge (though she refers to some published sources in the 'Further reading'). I've no intention of mauling the article either (it's an interesting and notable subject), but BLP's need to be well sourced and not of undue length. The editor evidently knows how to add inline citations and I hope she'll add them where they're missing. See you around! Sionk (talk) 17:38, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Sounds good. That's exactly the reason why I asked my question at the Teahouse. I'm still fairly new to Wikipedia and BLP's are typically held to a higher standard so I felt it would be better to consult with more experienced editors before trying to do something on my own. Thanks again. - Marchjuly (talk) 21:05, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Just wanted to let you know that I have made some proposals for cleaning up the "Notes" and "References" sections of the article Philadelphia Eleven. You can find these proposals at Talk:Philadelphia Eleven#Notes and references: cleanup proposal.Any comments or suggestions you may have would be most appreciated. Thanks in advance. - Marchjuly (talk) 00:37, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments. I addressed the concerns and will continue to develop based on your guidelines Hbreaux (talk) 19:12, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

• Pablodejaniro (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Dwayne Tryumf (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello, can you tell me how I can improve this article so that it won't be rejected? Thank you. Pablodejaniro (talk) 10:20, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

See the message in the big pink box, particularly the bit that says "What you can do" - you'll need to show that Tryumf has received coverage in newspapers, magazines (or books).

WP:NMUSIC are the alternative criteria for how someone might meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Sionk (talk

) 12:30, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

IMD Group

Hi Sionk

Thanks for taking the time to review my submission. It's the first time I've submitted a full page, so I can understand if I've not quite got the tone right. I'll re-write to ensure a more neutral point of view.

Please can I ask about one comment? You note that references should be from independent, verifiable sources. It may be that I've simply tagged some links incorrectly as references, being new to this. In my reference list, I have some links to sites produced by IMD and their partners. I also have seven or so links to independent, journalist/magazine sites that are highly respected in the media and entertainments industry (Businessweek, Musicindie, Mediaweek, Marketingmag, Campaignlive, Mediatel, Business Highbeam). Could I check if it's not come across that these are indeed independent, journalist-written sites referring to notable points or is the problem that I seem to have lumped together both independent sites and IMD-related sites in the same list?

Many thanks

Resubmit declined submission

Hi Sinonk,

Please review page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Aurigo_Software again. You declined it because "it appears to read more like an advertisement".

Also it will be better for me if you please point out specific line that is not correct or advertising.

Thanks!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abhigoyan (talk • contribs) 18:13, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Done Sionk (talk) 19:22, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank you so much! Please review this page again, I have added some better references.

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:02, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi Sionk,

Thanks for reviewing my submission. I would like to clarify some points from your comments on it.

As for the news coverage about the company: References #5-8 are the links to the news articles about the awards the company received.

And about online profiles: should I remove them from References then? By the way, Reference #2 is ISS Art profile as Sourcingline: http://www.sourcingline.com/profile/iss-art , which includes not only company description provided by ISS Art, but also reviews of the customers who were interviewed by the website team and gave their honest feedback.

In addition, I've taken a look at articles about other companies from IT sphere - they also provide links to their online profiles, and these articles are live currently. Here is an example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provectus_IT_Inc

So, if the removal of these links (#2-#4) is recommended, I will certainly do this.

Looking forward to hearing from you soon.

Thanks.--Olga Rekovskaya (talk) 10:48, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Thankyou for pointing that out. I've nominated Provectus IT Inc for deletion. Sionk (talk) 15:45, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. I'm about to remove links #1, #3 and #4 from References.

As for Reference #2 (SourcingLine.com) - should it be removed as well? It contains ISS Art customers' feedback about their experience of working with the company given during the interview with the website team.--91.215.84.26 (talk) 02:42, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

• Kaufman12 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:David InterContinental Tel Aviv (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi Sionk,

I added more citations to the David InterContinental Tel Aviv Draft. Please tell me specifically what should be changed in order for the page to be accepted. Thank you.

Kaufman12 (talk) 10:43, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi Sionk,

I'm still waiting for your response.

Kaufman12 (talk) 08:21, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

See "What

notable enough for a Wikipedia profile. Sionk (talk

) 08:27, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Citation and copyright issues

Thanks for your advice on this subject. Is it in order to cite a document from an archive which is open for public access?

Alan — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.129.136.145 (talk) 11:49, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi Sionk,

I received the following message from you:

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please read the comments left by the reviewer on your submission. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved. .

To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.

But when I click edit, I could't see my article. I guess my article has been removed. How can I restore my article to edit it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bktrl (talk • contribs) 20:01, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

You mean Draft:Moonit? Well, I agree the message template on your Talk page is a bit confusing, but I believe it is referring to the "Edit" tab at the top of Draft:Moonit, rather than the one on your Talk page. I'll suggest to the AfC Project the template is re-worded slightly for the future. Sionk (talk) 01:00, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

• 24.1.136.121 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:St. Peter's Episcopal Church (Chicago) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi, the article I submitted about St. Peter's Episcopal Church, Chicago was declined because it was taken largely from the church's website, stpeterschicago.org.

I am a member of St. Peter's and I am the webmaster of stpeterschicago.org. I also partially wrote the church history segment, and edited other sections of it. Additionally, I added a photo of the interior of the church from the 1890s which I received from the senior warden of the parish for use online, and it was also declined. Do you need me to add better citations?

24.1.136.121 (talk) 05:16, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi Sinonk, Thank you so much! Please review page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Aurigo_Software again. I have added some better references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abhigoyan (talk • contribs) 13:09, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:33, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

	The AFC Backlog Buster Barnstar
	Congratulations, Sionk! You're receiving the The Articles for Creation Barnstar because you got more than 175 points during the recent talk page. Thank you and keep up the good work! (t) Josve05a (c ) 23:50, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

• Clmetsfan (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Catchpoint Systems, Inc. (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I'm unclear as to what parts need additional citations.

Clmetsfan (talk) 19:52, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for helping to clean up

19:54, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Jeremy Taylor Page rejection

Hi,

I wonder if you could clarify for me which citations are inadequate, or where additional citations are needed? As far as I can see, I have several citations that make it clear that he is indeed notable.

Thanks

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Jeremy_Taylor_%28dreamworker%29

Leonard Lcuff (talk) 14:44, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I'd turn the question back on

notability criteria. You need to show he's been widely written about (not just mentioned) in journalistic sources that are independent of him (if he works for Psychology Today then that's not an arms length source). He was awarded the Lifetime Achievement Award by the IASD, but Taylor was a founder of IASD so I wouldn't consider this strong enough proof of notability on its own. Sionk (talk

) 17:30, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Well, we may have a somewhat different interpretation of the notability guidelines. I read "significant, interesting, or unusual enough to deserve attention or to be recorded". Wikipedia:Notability_(people)

He doesn't work for Psychology Today, so I consider that it IS an arm's length source. Although I agree that a Lifetime Achievement Award by IASD isn't enough on it's own to make him notable since he was a founder, the fact that he has worked in so many countries internationally, the citation in Psychology Today, the fact that we WAS a founder of IASD, the fact that he is associated with so many institutions and that it's such an interesting vocation all combine to make him notable. In previous versions of the article, I had two additional citations: [2] Margo Arrowsmith described Taylor as "the preeminent dream expert of our day", [3] and Kelly Bulkeley, former president of the Association for the Study of Dreams, says Taylor is "[t]he most experienced and insightful explorer of the dream world active today." [4] I removed these trying to comply with DDG's complaint that it was "too much like an advertisement". I really ask you to reconsider. I've spent a lot of time on this and would like to get other help on the page which will be easier if it's a public page.

Lcuff (talk) 01:17, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

hello,

i am trying to resolve issues involved with my submission of an article on paxton gate. it was rejected because the article doesn't demonstrate or prove the subjects notablily.

the draft is currently in my sandbox

when i look at the articles of creation, as was suggested in the rejection notice, it indicates the following:

Notability requires only that these necessary sources have been published—even if these sources are not actually listed in the article yet (though in most cases it probably would improve the article to add them).

The depth of coverage of the subject by the source must be considered. If the depth of coverage is not substantial, then multiple[1] independent sources should be cited to establish notability. Trivial or incidental coverage of a subject is not sufficient to establish notability.

In the citations for the article, i link to editorial pieces in a number of newspapers and magazines where the subject matter is specifically Paxton Gate and/or its owner/founder who is of course also referenced in the article. these include:

The San Francisco Chronicle The Bold Italic (An online San Francisco editorial publication owned by Gannet Newspapers) SF Gate – the online arm of the San Francisco Chronicle, owned by Hearst Newspapers The Willamette Week, the local newsweekly for Portland Oregon. The Guardian Newspaper in London Better Homes and Gardens magazine 7x7 Magazine (one of two urban glossy publications in San Francisco) KQED – the online arm of San Francisco’s Public Television Stations, which is one of the largest in the Public Television Network The Portland Mercury Newspaper Blog The Sierra Club Magazine

so, it seems to be that the above references should prove the notability of the subject matter.

please advise

KryponiteSF (talk) 22:23, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Sionk. As they second person who fails Are you Alice? (the other being MatthewVanitas, who not replied), I'd like you to take a look at the note I left on its talk page. Cheers, Gabriel Yuji (talk) 19:55, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Having had a look at the sources you've listed on the Talk page, I would not consider them 'reliable' journalistic sources, but rather fan websites. The exception might be the ICV2 article. Sionk (talk) 20:16, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Not sure if 'journalistic' but all pass the requirements to be included on

WP:A&M/ORS. Gabriel Yuji (talk

) 20:17, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

James McNulty

Pls advise why you deleted the word "innovative" in regard to this individual's contributions to maritime education? What is your knowledge and experience with this individual and subject matter that qualifies you to delete that reference and what "evidence" is needed for you to concur that reinstatement of the description is warranted, as there is plenty to reference...await yoursUser4943 (talk) 16:22, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

As I said in my edit summary, there's no evidence provided that says he was "innovative". If you can provide some independent evidence that says he was "innovative" then I'd have no problem in the word being added back.

At the moment the basis of the article is very tenuous, with most claims still unproven. Wikipedia articles need to be based largely on what independent published experts have said about the subject. To be honest, it was the fact

McNulty had received a Legion of Merit (though this seems to be a widely given service award) that made me hesitate in nominating the article for deletion discussion. Sionk (talk

) 17:11, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Jane Middleton Article

Hi Sionk, Thank you for the feedback on our draft article of Jane MIddleton. Before we begin the rewrite we would like to know if the following contemporanious newspaper sources are the type you recommend. We also plan to lessen references to Jane's personal life & focus more on her work at the Home.

Mexico NY Deaf Mutes Journal 1880 - 0174.pdf December 9, 1880, Volume IX, Number 50 The inmates at the Home for Aged and Infirm Deaf Mutes, enjoyed a substantial Thanksgiving dinner which was provided for them by kind friends who take a warm interest in the Home........Miss Jane MIddleton, the ever faithful and untiring matron, added her share of good things, which went to make up the excellent dinner. The inmates sat down to the table with keen relish and a hearty good-will.

Mexico NY Deaf Mutes Journal 1880 - 0047.pdf March 25, 1880, Volume IX, Number 13 Miss Jane Middleton had, with the help of several ladies and Dr. Gallaudet, maintained for several years a Christian home for young men at No. 220 East 13th St., NY. Circumstances led her to say to Dr. Gallaudet that she was willing to change the character of the Home and receive aged and infirm deaf mutes. This led the Trustees to assume the support of the Home for Aged and Infirm Deaf Mutes. It was a remarkable providence that a Home completely furnished, under the care of a faithful Christian woman, devoting herself without compensation to the afflicted family soon gathered together.............While the spiritual oversight of the Home will be in accordance with the Episcopal Church, no question will be raised as to the religious belief of deaf mutes seeking admission to the Home.

Deaf Mutes Journal Mexico NY Deaf Mutes Journal 1876 - 0047.pdf April 6, 1876, Volume V, Number 14 Letter from Thomas Gallaudet "Our thanks are specially due to Miss Jane Middleton, the faithful matron who has made great personal sacrifices in fostering the gradual growth of the Home."

Deaf Mutes Journal Mexico NY Deaf Mutes Journal 1879 - 0059.pdf April 3, 1879, Volume VIII, Number 14 Our Home for Aged and Infirm Deaf Mutes at No. 220 East Thirteenth Street, New York, has had during the year ten inmates. It remains under the care of Miss Jane Middleton, who gives her self sacrificing services without compensation.

Deaf Mutes Journal Mexico NY Deaf Mutes Journal 1877 - 0089.pdf November 29, 1877, Volume VI, Number 48 The deaf mutes all over the land should bear in grateful remembrance the names of Miss Jane Middleton and Miss Jane Seymour. These estimable ladies give the use of the furniture of the home, and their services, without any fee or reward, and have done so for the past five years. A glance at the condition of the home, or a talk with the inmates, will disclose the fact that they do their work as thoroughly as though they were paid high salaries. They are loved by those under their care and, I doubt not, their names will go down to succeeding generations of deaf mutes, honored and blessed.

Deaf Mutes Journal Mexico NY Deaf Mutes Journal 1877 - 0019.pdf July 26, 1877, Volume VI, Number 30 Prof. Job Turner wrote: Miss Middleton, and her assistant, Miss Fanny Seymour are, I believe, everything that Dr. Gallaudet and the Trustees could desire.

Thank you for your comments.

Bklyntonj55Bklyntonj55 (talk) 21:11, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Sharawitz (talk) 21:28, 11 August 2014 (UTC) [email protected] Sharawitz (talk) 21:28, 11 August 2014 (UTC)Bklyntonj55

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

I would at least please like an explanation as to why my Wiki piece was rejected. I only got a rejection, but no reason given in the talk as to why. Thank you.

WalkerJD (talk) 11:52, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

If you look at Draft:The Central Asia Rally you'll see a big pink review message with an explanation. Additionally I've added my own comments beneath. Sionk (talk) 12:11, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

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

Hi Sionk,

First off, really appreciate you taking the time to look at our AfC submission! Thank you for that...I know there are a ton of articles out there waiting to be considered.

We're disappointed to learn that ours reads too much like an advertisement, though we're determined to make it Wiki-worthy and I would love to get your thoughts on what edits are necessary to improve upon it and make it so. Are there any specific sections/sentences/inclusions that jump out to you as needing to be changed? Could you point to those sections that are currently Wiki-worthy so that I might have a sense of what to build on and what to change/get rid of?

Thanks again and thank you for your help!

TrevorTT (talk) 16:14, 15 August 2014 (UTC)TrevorTT

TrevorTT (talk) 16:14, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi Sionk,

I made a number of significant changes to Tasting Table's article (including reducing the content by more than 25%). I believe that I've addressed the issues with the article reading like an advertisement, so should you find a moment to give it a look over again I would love to see us join the Wikipedia diaspora. If any further changes need to be made, I'd love to get a bit of guidance, and again, I really appreciate your looking into Tasting Table's article.

Thanks!

Hi There,

It looks like my wiki entry got rejected due to citation issues.

Here is the submission: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Mindflash

Our team has read the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies and the golden rule section, and cannot deduce which citations were faulty based on these guidelines

Were there particular citations that were bad or good?

Thank you in advance for the assistance

(Austin.wm123 (talk) 19:15, 15 August 2014 (UTC))

The Arkham house, Mycroft and moran, and Stanton lee publishers should all have the same references. They are all part of the arkham house publishers imprint. The only difference is one focuses on horror, one on mysteries, and one on poetry. Either they should all have the same Wikipedia page, or they should have three different ones; either way though they will have the same references as all books written on arkham house, are actually written for all three imprints as they all belong to arkham house. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.178.250.80 (talk) 03:52, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi Sionk. I appreciate the effort that you had done in reviewing my submission Draft: Richard Wee & Yip. However, I was quite disappointed with the the decision in declining my submission. Thus, I would like to get further and clearer instruction or guideline from you to enhance my submission in the references part. For your information, I personally think that I had added adequate references in my submission. In fact, I was inspired by the other law firm Raja Darryl & Loh and I think that subject of my submission deserve to have a page in wikipedia. I had took their page as references and I'm looking forward for your reply. Thanks. User:Highlighter118 (talk) 12.46, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

I wanted to know the relevance of Charles Saatchi's untidy house in Eliasch's story? I read the article then read two others, it says she was thought to be Cartier Bresson and he also is quoted as saying that Orson Welles would have been happy to make it too by him? Isn't that more interesting? She is a good friend of the ex? There is a lot of press on this from Vanity Fair to The Times?

I am new don't want to touch it, unless I make a mistake. Can do other things just this looks 

I am happy to help, I know Eliasch's work well, saw her neon exhibition, I support all women fighting in this world. I also saw her film win in NYC, I do not know her personally but the work was spellbinding. I have just joined as I wished to write about women film directors. There are so few. They really need Wikipedia's support. Cheers your endSpikequeen (talk) 14:51, 29 August 2014 (UTC)spikequeenSpikequeen (talk) 14:51, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

appreciate it if you could help with this page. wrote it up as per your advice

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Amanda_Eliasch — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.22.228.31 (talk) 05:29, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

It's been re-submitted to Articles for Creation. I suggest you wait for a review by a reviewer that hasn't previously been involved. The article is weak, for example the "How I met..." series is mainly Eliasch talking about herself. If you know of other news articles about Eliasch I suggest you add them to the article. To be honest, it would help if you registered an account on Wikipedia. It makes everything more transparent. Sionk (talk) 17:24, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Ah, I see you've been blocked (no idea why). Sionk (talk) 17:29, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

thank you

Verydinky (talk) 19:49, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Erm, thanks for the cat. Hope it's house trained. Sionk (talk) 19:55, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for reviewing my article. Cheers! Huynhminh1002 (talk) 21:08, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi Sionk,

Thank you for reviewing my draft.

I have had difficulty in finding source details that would satisfy all the criteria set out, mainly because the record keeping at NYWO (I am connected to the organisation) in the past has not been good. I have found this article http://www.john-robert-brown.com/national-youth-wind-orchestra.htm which appears to satisfy your reservations. Would you let me know if this would make a re-submission successful please.

Thanks

@Nomad62: Unfortunately, if the orchestra hasn't been the subject of significant coverage in sources that are reliable (journalistic/expert) and independent, there's no place for a Wikipedia article about it. Sionk (talk) 20:26, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Dear Sionk I hope I am doing this right. You have accepted a Wikipedia article on the artist JANIKA FABRIKANT. Thank you so much.

There were many criticisms which I accepted and I corrected them, added citations, etc (with someone's help). But as you say in your introduction: it is all very bewildering

Could you now help to delete the nasty heading above the Wikipedia entry? Please?

My name is Ute, I am an art historian, I live in Cape Town and it was sent in by the Geographical institute of the University of Zurich, Switzerland. I think Janika's art deserves a Wikipedia entry. She has been sidelined too much but a catalogue will soon be published on her work.

Yours sincerely

Dr Ute Ben Yosef

---

Just made corrections to the article. Removed the reference to the article in Bloomberg Weekly. Will that finalize the article for publication? Peadenbrothers (talk) 16:26, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

You need to folow the advice given in the review box, particularly "What you can do". Article about companies are very rarely accepted based only on a couple of local news sources. Sionk (talk) 18:42, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

• 118.189.8.196 (talk · contribs)
  • User:Roger Wang Wei Seng (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

My post was declined. Can tell me my errors or did I miss anything? Thanks.

118.189.8.196 (talk) 08:53, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

See Wikipedia's

golden rule and "What you can do" (linked to in the big pink advice box on your draft). Sionk (talk

) 09:55, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Virtual Health Assistant - Neologism

Thanks for reviewing, Sionk.

The information in the Virtual Health Assistant submission would fit well in the

. I'll rewrite the draft for use as an edit to that page, leaving out the term "Virtual Health Assistant" and focusing on the technology's uses in healthcare.

This is my first article, and I appreciate the help.

Dave D at Next IT (talk) 17:16, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

I reviewed the submission, and did not accept it--I left a detailed explanation there. The remaining course is Deletion Review on the prior deletions, using this as an illustration of what should be included. I don't think it will succeed, but Del Rev is unpredictable. DGG ( talk ) 07:51, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Any other individual with major write ups in major newspapers over a long period, such as the Evening Standard (2001), Observer (2009), Sunday Times (2013), as well as "How we met..." stories in the Independent (1999 & 2011) would sail past

WP:GNG. I fail to see why there's such a bias towards Eliasch and can only assume it's a bias against millionaires, or women, or something else. True, the original author has been blocked, but that simply means that any potential problematic editing is being successfully monitored and controlled by the Wikipedia community. I've no connection to Eliasch (or a tremendous afinity to millionaire socialites) his is all very frustrating for me, and makes little sense! Sionk (talk

) 10:13, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

thanks for standing up for the eliasch article. i see you are trying to keep the muftuoglu article. she did not found istanbul festival but organises it as an event organiser. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.22.228.31 (talk • contribs) 14:05, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

I've added two more lengthy Stateside sources and moved the draft to mainspace. If anyone wants a full and proper AfD discussion, bring it on! Sionk (talk) 16:38, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi Sionk:

I want to thank you for reviewing my School Culture article. I'm learning the Wikipedia format and have limited computer skills, but with help I'm willing to work on the article. This is not an original idea in the United States. This is the way our education establishment has used and defined school culture for over forty years. Now how to take this well established knowledge and use pattern and make it fit into your encyclopedic format, I may need more examples of what needs to be done. I will study the comments you have given me and try to understand them.

Thanks again,

J. Curtis Jones — Preceding unsigned comment added by John Curtis Jones (talk • contribs) 04:26, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi

Original research needs to be avoided. Sionk (talk

) 21:21, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

amanda eliasch

as american fans of mrs eliasch's work, we believe she totally deserves her wikipedia page. thank you so very much for your help and fighting the good fight to save her page.

19:39:55, 26 August 2014 review of submission by WhitneyBrothers

• WhitneyBrothers (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Whitney Brothers: Company History (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Sionk, the history of Whitney Brothers was previously written and published on March 16, 1993, by our advertising agency, Church & Main Advertising of Keene, NH. If you provide me your email address, I will email you a PDF that includes the published article. As far as Wikipedia not being a suitable reference, well, I am nothing short of mystified. With all the rigorously sourced content published on this platform, why on earth would it not be a suitable reference? Please reconsider. WhitneyBrothers (talk) 19:39, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Wikipedia doesn't accept advertising and it's not a free web space service for companies wishing to promote themselves. I suggest you publish the material on your company website where it is better suited. Articles about commercial organisations such as yours are only suitable here if the company has been written about by multiple reliable, independent sources such as general newspapers, magazines or books. All the best! Sionk (talk) 21:07, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi Sionk,

I need some clarification on what kind of references are usable in the rejected Film School Shorts Wikipedia article. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Film_School_Shorts

Comment: The sources are either not independent (KQED) or about individual films, rather than Film School Shorts Sionk (talk) 11:12, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

I based the reference structure of the article on other PBS programming that is similar to Film School Shorts (Television anthology series that acquire independent films), including Independent Lens, POV, American Experience and Frontline. In these articles, the main website is used as a reference for multiple entries.

Links to their Wiki article:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_Lens https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/POV_(TV_series) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Experience https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frontline_(U.S._TV_series)

As far as the references to the individual films within the Film School Shorts, I see an instances of this in another Wiki article:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/POV_(TV_series) -> http://woainimommy.com/

I'm happy to remove references, but also don't want the article rejected for being unsupported.

Thanks Amorablanko (talk) 20:47, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi

golden rule'. Sionk (talk

) 20:58, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Amanda Eliasch

As you will see, I clarified it, and added some material. DGG ( talk ) 00:41, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

I'm posting here a reply to your comment on

by an experienced editor" (meaning me)

my position has always been that notability has to be about something. I consider the use of the GNG to justify including information on people who have done nothing much in particular because of human interest stories about the personal lives to be a misapplication of the guideline. To be technical about the policy/guideline matrix in its own terms, there is a policy that over-rides the guideline, WP:NOT, in particular the requirement that WP is NOT A TABLOID. But we typically deal with such conflicts by interpreting the policies and guidelines to yield whatever result is desired--the legalisms are just our manner of arguing, the result is what we actually care about. (Myself, I try when possible to talk about the result directly.) As for interpreting guidelines, we can use whatever interpretation we want to: we have been very flexible about the sources for notability when we want to include something, and very rigid when we do not. The consensus decides the interpretation in each case, and is based upon which of various views people decide to adopt. I have mine, and I say it, and hope others will adopt it. This sort of consensus changes: 8 years ago when I joined, we very freely admitted material like this--over the last few years, people have been getting progressively impatient with it, and consensus was moving much more towards my position.

In the last year, I see signs of a reversion to former tolerance for mere gossip. (It's always been accepted here for entertainers, which is expressed by having very loose guidelines for those fields of endeavor; to some extent this does parallel general human interest in the world, as illustrated by the popularity of tabloids.) I will continue to argue for limiting it as much as possible, and hope to continue to convince people. (Though for entertainers, I usually avoid editing in that area to avoid utter frustration.) DGG ( talk ) 01:42, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Well, I certainly agree with

WP:CREATIVE

too.

I think we're agreeing and disagreeing about nuances. Believe me, I'm as keen as you to make sure the Eliasch article is well sourced, comensurate and doesn't become a platform for miscellaneous trivia. But I get the feeling a number of editors took an entrenched dislike to the Eliasch article because it was created by a sockpuppet user (I don't understand the history behind this editor getting blocked). It has become a 'tail wagging the dog' situation, where editors become determined to block the article at all costs, regardless of its merits. Sionk (talk) 13:50, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Yes. Hear, Hear. Completely agree with you Sionk. An article should be judged and reviewed based on its merit and reliable sources, not what wikipedia editors personally feel towards the notable person the article is about. DinkyExpress (talk) 23:12, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Dear Sionk, I'm at a total loss for why the proposed page for Prospect Park Books has been rejected. It is full of third-party citations. It has far more than so many pages I see. It does not have any puffery or falsehoods. The citations are all strong, and the company is notable in its field. Would you please consider re-considering your verdict? Or give a clue as to what's wrong? The reason was lack of notability, but the company is a fast-growing publisher with more than 35 books in its catalog and many more coming, with national and international distribution. Most of its colleagues have Wikipedia pages, often with far fewer citations. thank you Madelinecj (talk) 03:55, 28 August 2014 (UTC) Madelinecj

	The Original Barnstar
	Support for women Spikequeen (talk) 15:05, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Erm, thanks :) Sionk (talk) 15:26, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

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