User talk:AlphaBetaGamma/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Question from MaahirSehgal (06:49, 29 September 2024)

Hello sir, I am currently working on editing a film's Wikipedia article titled Bhool Bhulaiyaa 3. There is a senior editor user:Krimuk2.0! I take knowledge from other Wikipedia film articles, and I take my time to edit the article, and the edits are genuine, not breaking any rules, guidelines, or anything; no one has objections with those edits. If something is there that needs to be corrected or improved, some senior editors come and do that, but he just comes and reverts all the edits. In fact, he indulges in edit wars with us all editors working on the project; he just reverts all our edits and keeps his own; if someone reverts his edit or makes changes to it, he reverts again and insults us. He is acting like he has ownership of that article. Many editors are not liking his writing for that article, and when we are like writing it in a format/pattern that has been followed/used in the other popular or similar film articles, he is calling it poor writing. Even when I write something accurate with proper citation, he reverts that. What should I do, sir? Can you please help out!? Can you please check that and please take some necessary actions and let us editors work on and contribute to that article/project freely. It is really becoming very disheartening when this happens, like there is a fear that all our time and work will be wasted, whatever we write or edit will be reverted by him. I don't know whether I should write this to you or not, seek help for this or not. I am sorry if this is wrong, sir, but if possible, please help sir, Thank you! --MaahirSehgal (talk) 06:49, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

There's always an option to seek consensus on the article's talk page. By the way, are you editing under multiple IP addresses? ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 07:25, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

@AlphaBetaGamma Sir, I edit with both my mobile and my laptop, and sometimes on wifi and sometimes on mobile data. Is there any problem with it? Is it creating any issues? MaahirSehgal (talk) 12:27, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

AfC Draft:List of breakaway republics during the dissolution of the USSR

It says there aren't enough reliable sources, but I've linked quite a few sources there and as references to the text. So, can you explain where to improve my article for reliable sources Scratchinghead (talk) 14:31, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

"Kazakhstan was the last republic to secede from the Soviet Union."

"Lithuania was the first republic to secede from the Soviet Union."

Date of independence of all republics without texts are all unsourced. ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 23:07, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Shibayama Railway

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Shibayama Railway you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of MetropolitanIC -- MetropolitanIC (talk) 06:24, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Question from Haris.khan123456789 (06:23, 1 October 2024)

New to wikipedia - just wanted to say hello :) --Haris.khan123456789 (talk) 06:23, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Hello :) ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 14:10, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Can you review my page?

It’s called “Draft:Hurricane Kirk (2024)” and please review it pls. HurricaneKirk2024 (talk) 01:58, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Please don't use AI to write wikipedia articles. ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 10:57, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

DCWC closing update

The 2024 Developing Countries WikiContest has come to a close! After a thrilling finish to the event with a slew of submissions on the final day, we have our winners. With 608 points, Thebiguglyalien (submissions) comes in third with his series of Kiribati and Botswanan submissions; BeanieFan11 (submissions) flies into second place at the last second with 771 points after a string of good articles about sportspersons; and after leading for much of contest's three months, Generalissima (submissions) finishes with a whopping 798 points to take home the Gold Belt Buckle. Congratulations to our winners!

In addition to his spot in the top three, BeanieFan11 (submissions) also wins the special awards for submitting under the most countries (44 countries) and for writing the most articles about women (15 Did you know? nominations)! Magentic Manifestations (submissions), after making 16 submissions under the Indian flag—15 of them good articles—receives the awards for most submissions for a single country and most featured or good articles promoted. For their submission of one FAC review, five FLC reviews, and 20 GAN reviews, Simongraham (submissions) wins for most article reviews.

The results of the contest have far exceeded any expectations the coordinators had for it at the beginning: among the submissions to the event were 3 FAs, 10 FLs, 88 GAs, dozens of article reviews of every kind, and more Did you know? submissions than we can count! Regardless of your level of participation, every contestant can be proud to have contributed towards a major step in countering the systemic bias on Wikipedia. Every year, millions of readers and editors around the globe use Wikipedia to educate themselves and communicate with others about parts of the world that often receive less attention than they deserve. Thank you for participating with us in the contest and contributing to this effort. The DCWC will return next year and we look forward to seeing you contribute again! However, before that...

We need your feedback! Join the conversation on the talk page to discuss your reflections on the contest (even if you didn't participate!) and help us make it better.

If you have any questions, please leave a message on the contest talk page or ask one of the coordinators: Ixtal (talk · contribs), sawyer777 (talk · contribs), or TechnoSquirrel69 (talk · contribs). (To unsubscribe from these updates, remove yourself from this list.) Sent via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 19:02, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Shibayama Railway

The article Shibayama Railway you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Shibayama Railway and Talk:Shibayama Railway/GA2 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of MetropolitanIC -- MetropolitanIC (talk) 02:02, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

Attention: My first page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Timothy_Adebayo

I tried as much as possible to cite sufficient and reliable sources for this page, but it was declined for "not adequately supported by reliable sources". I have made the necessary adjustments and added more sources. So, can you point out which area I need to improve on? Opyquad (talk) 16:24, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

As this draft is a WP:BLP, I really want to see citations after every single claims.

P.S. Here in Wikipedia, "Rejected" drafts cannot be resubmitted. However, I "Declined" your draft instead so you can improve it and eventually have it as an article. I'm informing you that using the term rejected can cause AfC reviewers to be confused since it's useful to know that. ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 23:41, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

Noted.

Your recommendations have been implemented. Opyquad (talk) 10:57, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

Draft: DIALux

Hello @AlphaBetaGamma, at first thanks for reviewing and the feedback on the dialux draft article. Now I need some help on improving it. At the moment there is an introductory text followed by some detailed examples of what you can do with the software. There are also some screenshots. After that the historical details are described and some of the supported regional standards are listed. References are provided in many places and there is a long list of further literature. Incidentally, this article has long been available in some other languages ​​in a less comprehensive form. Could you please give me more details on where the references are missing, poor or unreliable? And my last question: Shouldn't a short description of the range of functions be included in the dictionary entry for a software product? I really appreciate your help. 37.201.193.229 (talk) 13:00, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, I have been outside my house for the most of the day yesterday, and I was barely able to edit. Apologies. I have a memory of a literal goldfish so I forgot about this review, but I can tell my concerns were already stated out more clearly on the help desk. ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 23:32, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

Well done. It was a good idea to catch some sunshine at the end of the year. I have made some changes and removed some links to the manufacturer website. Some are left but I think it's a good thing to link things like the FAQ section right after the mention. Thanks for your help. I will resubmit the draft now.

I really appreciate your comments on improving the article. 37.201.193.229 (talk) 12:43, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

Draft: Tonewoodamp

Thanks for reviewing the draft article. Added a criticism and feedback section if you are interested in reading. Apriltools (talk) 20:53, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

What the?

Hello, ABG, I'm totally flummoxed why you would leave a review comment like this: "Comment: I ain't reviewing allat ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 09:22, 8 October 2024 (UTC)" on Draft:Mary L. Hamlin, please explain. If you did not want to accept the draft, or wanted to reject it, do that. But to add a comment like "I ain't...." only resets the clock for six more months of a seriously flawed and poorly sourced draft to hang around, which just wastes other editors time. It also does not add anything useful/helpful for other reviewers or editors. Perhaps you had a reason that I don't understand, so am curious what your rationale was rather than simply declining or rejecting it. Netherzone (talk) 21:53, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

Don't know what my sleep-deprived self was doing there, but I was doing something completely unnecessary for some reason. However, it's kinda true that I don't have the stuff to review greghenderson drafts accurately as I'd be forced to look in many pages for a full review, and my attention span can't hold doing a review that long while making sure not to mess up at the same time. ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 22:31, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

OK, I get it, we all have days like that. I'd like to kindly request that in future, it you encounter a draft that is fatally flawed and makes your brain explode, just pass it by and let it expire in 6 months. The Greghenderson2006 drafts are particularly problematic. (long, long backstory on ANI, he's now indefinitely blocked.) Cheers, Netherzone (talk) 22:35, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

I've been aware of the greghenderson issue for months already but the backstory is as long as some marvel villain I really am not willing to read every single ANI he got in before being indeffed+TPA revoke+email disabled. ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 23:09, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the time to review and accept my draft article

I worked very hard on it, and it is my first article. Thanks a lot! Skratata69 (talk) 19:08, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Trouted

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

You have been trouted for: Beliving that I can get a more differentiated reply on my question related to an afc review of my recent article, by clicking on this fish...Merged account (talk) 04:25, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Request on 08:15:20, 8 October 2024 for assistance on AfC submission by Merged account

• Merged account (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Correns Corporation (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I am trying to publish this article on Wiki but face some challenges with "reliable" sources. After reading the Wiki definition of "reliable sources", I do not see a conflict with the article, despite, that the sources are in Japanese, English and German. It is certainly not easy to review, and they are not a dissertation with peer review or the like, but from my understanding, all sources that are in the article are reliable. Thus, it would be a great help if you can pinpoint the particular sentence which is not sufficiently covered with a reliable source.

Merged account (talk) 08:15, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

I forgot to specify like I often do when I decline for reasons like this - the "presidents" list seems to have unsourced information from what I can tell, so I've speedy declined it. "v (improperly sourced)" reasons are usually used in this way from what I can tell, but I get how this is extremely confusing. For existing sources, they seem reliable and independent enough, so nothing else to say. Happy editing! ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 04:33, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

I have been working on a Wiki page for months and it keeps being turned down

I really don't get it. This is a New York band that's been around making records and playing shows for 12 years now. They get radioplay and they've won awards and both of the primary musicians/singers have robust careers as artists and actors as well as the band. I have found 25 references to prove that they exist and that their music exists, and fine, if Wikipedia, a crowd-sourced site, doesn't want to accept IMDB, one of the most respected resources in entertainment, to show that one of the singers did the music for a film soundtrack, I can understand that, but I've been working on this page for months ON MY OWN TIME for no money, and I am puzzled that this Wiki rep refuses to actually LOOK at the page and all the work I've done and just keep getting declined, and in this case, it was three months after last turning it in (and continuing to work on the page and adding references in that time). I feel like I might have to find someone higher up at Wiki and get this decision repealed, because I don't think it's a correct and fair assessment of my work... with no specific explanations of why my references aren't acceptable. Edouglasww (talk) 08:30, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

I also heard that after the page was declined the first or second time, someone reached out to the band and offered their services to get this page through the system for a HEFTY FEE. I have no idea how this person even knew I was working on this page, so clearly, whomever is declining these submissions is connected to people who are then profiting from the spurious behavior by those reviewing these pages in order for them to be accepted on Wikipedia. In other words, this is a scam, and the fact that Wikipedia is constantly begging for contributions to pay people like this ABG to make such rash decisions makes them culpable. (My previous comment was "Trouted" for some reason... what does that even mean?!) Edouglasww (talk) 08:34, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Draft:CO2-Plume Geothermal

Hello @AlphaBetaGamma

I am not the author or submitter or any kind of expert but I am a bit confused what the problem is with the sourcing on this draft. Can you explain in more detail? Chidgk1 (talk) 18:46, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

"One drawback of CPG is the need for additional well penetrations through the reservoir caprock." seems to be missing a source. ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 21:59, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Mark Ginzburg

Greetings! Please tell. The sources cited are leading ukrainian media outlets and some international ones. What other sources are needed? Yevrowl (talk) 07:07, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

Let me cite the past decline comment from CFA: "Comment: Press releases, YouTube interviews, random blogs, etc. are not reliable sources for a biography of a living person. C F A 💬 16:00, 5 August 2024 (UTC)"

While I see no remaining footnotes to blogs, the claims in the biography is still being cited by a single Youtube interview, and I see that the problem has persisted. PR Newswire is generally unreliable, and probably should not be used for these kinds of articles (There is an exception, but it does not apply to this case).

Sorry for being late to respond; I was hella busy on Saturday.

ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 05:32, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the answer. Removed the early part of his biography, known only from his interviews. Can now ask to check the result? Yevrowl (talk) 13:44, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Taketoyo Line

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Taketoyo Line you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of DoctorWhoFan91 -- DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 08:03, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

Deletion discussion about 33-4

Hello, AlphaBetaGamma

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Significa liberdade and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I've asked for a discussion about the redirect 33-4, created by you. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 15 § 33-4.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Significa liberdade}}. And don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 00:57, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

Seeking Guidance on Improving My Draft

Hello, I hope you're doing well! First, I want to sincerely thank you for taking the time to review my draft on 8Seneca. As the company is relatively new, finding sufficient third-party sources has been a challenge. Could you kindly advise me on how to structure the article to align with Wikipedia's standards, despite the limited availability of such sources? I want to assure you that my goal is purely informational, and I’m not aiming to promote the company. Any guidance you can provide would be greatly appreciated. Thanks again for your help, and I hope you have a great day! ApocalypticDreams (talk) 02:26, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

...Maybe try waiting until the company gains significant coverage? ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 02:48, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

Question from Charlene Broy (23:02, 15 October 2024)

Hi, how much notoriaty do i need to start my own Wikipedia page? i am a musical artist with singles out on release. --Charlene Broy (talk) 23:02, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

Notoriety? You'd have to do something horrible to gain WP:SIGCOV in that way. (ex. Tetsuya Yamagami) ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 23:13, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Taketoyo Line

The article Taketoyo Line you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Taketoyo Line and Talk:Taketoyo Line/GA2 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of DoctorWhoFan91 -- DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 07:40, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Article about Kioomars Musayyebi

Dear AlphaBetaGamma,

You just declined the article about the musician Kioomars Musayyebi. It was the second time this happened with the article. The reason given this time is: "This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources."

Please explain why this should be so. There are 36 references at the moment, which is more than average for an article of similar length and relevance. The only point of criticism I could think of would be that a few of the references are in German language; however the majority are English.

Looking forward to a quick resolution of this issue.

Thank you and kind regards

Uli Eberhardt Ulrich Eberhardt (talk) 13:10, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

Hello, are you User:Oss687? If so, I'm a bit concerned about you editing under a different account with no paid editing disclosure... ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 05:38, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

Dear AlphaBetaGamma,

I am User:Oss687. I have written the Wikipedia page for Kioomars Musayyebi and as far as I remember, I disclosed that I was being paid for writing the article. Ulrich Eberhardt is my colleague who wrote the German version of the same Wikipedia page. I hold similar concerns as Ulrich Eberhardt, as there are several primary and secondary sources, and the page has been declined twice (I did a significant edit on the second submission with additional sources). Could you please clarify what needs to be done to get the page published. This is especially confusing because the German version has been published with a nearly identical layout and sourcing. Oss687 (talk) 13:55, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi, Ulrich Eberhardt! After taking a look at the page, it looks like it's mainly sourced through primary sources, which are considered less reliable on Wikipedia and do not establish notability according to Wikipedia's guidelines. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 15:54, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

Hello Significa liberdade,

Thank you for having a look. I am not sure whether a lack of reliable sources can be the reason here.

I am the author of the German version of this article, which has been published earlier this year.

The notability of the artist Kioomars Musayyebi has been clearly established, since he is one of the most active Iranian classical musicians currently working in Germany. He has released several albums both under his name and with ensembles, one of which has recently received the German Record Critics' Award. He regularly performs internationally, he has played important festivals, and his works are regularly being performed by various orchestras and ensembles. This can all be clearly seen from the sources.

My German article is currently documented by 49 sources, plus some direct weblinks. The author of the English version has used the English versions of many of these. Examples include pages from

www.qantara.de

www.schallplattenkritik.de

www1.wdr.de

Regarding “primary” sources: I understand that the artist’s website alone cannot suffice, but I would like to know whether and why the information on websites from, for example, labels and venues is not considered trustworthy enough?

The article is currently supported by 32 sources, plus direct weblinks. It would be helpful to know how many more sources are needed – other, similar articles are regularly supported by much less sources.

Kind regards

Uli Eberhardt Ulrich Eberhardt (talk) 10:26, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

P. S. I just saw in Wiki's notability guidelines that sources do not even have to be in English necessarily. Ulrich Eberhardt (talk) 10:35, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

Hello AlphaBetaGamma,

Thank you for your reply. I am indeed not user Oss687, I am user Ulrich Eberhardt.

Oss687 is apparently the username of my colleague who took charge of the English article about K. Musayyebi. I am the author of the German Wikipedia article, on which the English one is largely based.

I do not know if Oss687 has followed all the rules and recommendations regarding the disclosure of paid writing.

Since it came to my attention that there were some issues with the publication of this article, I decided to inquire, because I want to help. I am not getting paid for this part. I would still like to know the reasons.

Thank you and kind regards

Uli Eberhardt Ulrich Eberhardt (talk) 09:50, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

Okay, sorry for jumping to the suspection. Going to assume good faith that you're not lying. You see that, in the reference tab there is a lot of tags. This is the issue that I forgot to mention. ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 00:40, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi AlphaBetaGamma,

Thank you for your reply.

For me it is standard practice not to primarily assume other people are lying. The fact that a person contributes to a discussion about a Wikipedia article that another person wrote should, in my view, not already constitute a suspicious fact.

Ultimately my identity is actually not even relevant here, as the main question remains: Why could this article not be published? Subtantial reasons should be given. As the author and me have already pointed out, the article is modelled on the German version, which has been published months ago. It is not evident at all why there should be a problem with its English version.

Please explain what you mean by “in the reference tab there is a lot of tags”.

Please also explain further how the mechanics of Wikipedia work, i. e. why you in particular have authority to, for example, decline the publishing of an article.

Thank you and kind regards

Uli Eberhardt Ulrich Eberhardt (talk) 08:03, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

@Ulrich Eberhardt: Hey, forget about German Wikipedia; this is English Wikipedia, and it has its own notability standards. Regarding the issue, as far as I can see, the article cites PRIMARY sources, which cannot establish notability. To address your second question about how ABG has the authority to decline: your article is in draft space, and there are two ways to publish articles from the draft space. One way is to submit it for review, where an AfC reviewer (which ABG is) will evaluate it. If they believe the article meets English Wikipedia’s notability guidelines, such as WP:GNG, WP:MUSICIAN, and others, they will accept it and publish it. However, if they find that it does not meet these notability guidelines, they will decline it and provide a reason. I hope this clarifies things. Please cite SECONDARY reliable sources to demonstrate the notability of the subject you wish to publish. GrabUp - Talk 08:37, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Hello GrabUp,

Thank you for your contribution. As has been pointed out sufficiently above, this is not my article.

Kind regards

Uli Eberhardt Ulrich Eberhardt (talk) 09:12, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Energy Efficiency Best Practice programme

Thanks for reviewing the most recent edit of this page. After it was rejected by SafariScribe back in June, I was able to identify and use additional references. The key ones are all from academic and peer-reviewed publications, just as required by Wikipedia guidance on referencing: Rigby; Mallaburn & Eyre; Birtles; Jackson & Hartles. The last reference, Boyle, is from the organisation responsible for managing the programme, but I cited this for completeness, for readers to follow up if they wish, without repeating any claims it may have made about impact. In my humble opinion, the four key sources are all reliable and, surely, meet Wikipedia guidelines for referencing? In particular, the paper by Rigby is extremely informative and detailed, while also being independent and peer-reviewed. Or am I missing something? Sebastian Macmillan (talk) 13:36, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

The main reason for the decline is because most statements were missing a citation after claims. ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 06:55, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

Noted thanks. I've added further references to support claims and extended the Background section. Observations welcome. Sebastian Macmillan (talk) 20:30, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

DYK for Yumeshima Station

On 18 October 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Yumeshima Station, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the extension to the Yumeshima Station was originally supposed to be opened in 2008 for when the Osaka Olympics was being bid for? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Yumeshima Station. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Yumeshima Station), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:03, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

A little note about Memphis Villarreal - gan canny the day, wor AlphaBetaGamma

@AlphaBetaGamma, Luks25, Cavanaughs, Quarl, Finn Shipley, MysticCipher87, Deb, Liz, GhostOfDanGurney, and CycloneYoris: Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Memphis Villarreal from August 2023. The outcome of that discussion was "delete". The article has been WP:G4'd a number for times since then. You were not to know this, as you don't have the magical admin spectacles to see deleted content. You opinions about this? Shirt58 (talk) 🦘 10:30, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi. Having just looked at the two versions, I see substantial differences. The only thing that concerns me is that User:Cavanaughs talks about "we" as if s/he is editing in collaboration with others (apart from the general community, I mean). There's no reason the article can't be recreated as long as it's done properly. People can grow in notability over a period. However, I don't know anything about NASCAR racing so my opinion is not of great value in this case. Deb (talk) 13:31, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

This really should not have made it through AfC at this time, and I'd argue that recreating the draft was inappropriate as well. The subject is an occasional entrant in a third-tier racing series (think AA Baseball, NCAA Div III, or EFL League One for our European friends) and therefore does not pass WP:NMOTORSPORT, while there is nothing substantively new that would tip this subject into passing GNG. The only real updates are that he raced in two races (out of 19 so far) and subsequent WP:ROUTINE coverage from primary sources (press releases) and industry press. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk)  14:22, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

Trouted

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

You have been trouted for: YOUR REASON HERE Dededfrfggh (talk) 00:55, 22 October 2024 (UTC) what did i do

Please stop yelling (ex.ROLL TIDE ROLL) in articles. Such act is considered vandalism and continued disruptions can end in a block. ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 01:19, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Taketoyo Line

The article Taketoyo Line you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Taketoyo Line for comments about the article, and Talk:Taketoyo Line/GA2 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of DoctorWhoFan91 -- DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 06:01, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Editor's Barnstar
	Congrats on getting Taketoyo Line to GA! XtraJovial (talk • contribs) 08:54, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Love lots!

Royiswariii has given you a kitten! Kittens promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Your kitten must be fed three times a day and will be your faithful companion forever! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a kitten, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Spread the goodness of kittens by adding {{subst:Kitten}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or kittynap their kitten with {{subst:Kittynap}}.

Just appreciation to all your contributed here in Wikipedia! Royiswariii (talk) 12:16, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Improving draft for Beckman Foundation

Hello, thank you for reviewing the draft for the Arnold & Mabel Beckman Foundation entry. Would you be willing to provide more context on your decision not to accept? I want to make sure I'm clear on what constitutes an acceptable source so I can find more of them. To me, the Thackray book chapter and the LA times article are the strongest, but it would be helpful to hear your thoughts.

Also, in addition to adding sources, I am wondering whether it would help to remove some of the sources that deal primarily with the founders—for example, by trimming the Founders section. Editorialalex (talk) 14:20, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Well, do the strongest sources talk about the foundation itself? The main concern is how the article is going into the founders a lot despite it being an article about a foundation, hence one of the reviewers left comment "A company/organisation should not inherit notability of its founder. Most of the sources, though some unreliable were all about the founders. Please find sources that are independent and significantly covers the organisation!". ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 23:25, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

UAA

Thanks for the report at WP:UAA but please note that some wikis allow organisation accounts - see Commons policy for an example, the German wiki is another. Please don't report users at WP:UAA if they haven't edited on this wiki. Cabayi (talk) 07:39, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Improving draft History of Key West

Greetings! Thank you very much for you help with the drafts (History of Key West) submission process. I am slightly carious as to what extent the sources used in the draft are unreliable or inadequate to meet Wikipedia's verifiable sources criteria? For the most part, I believe that sources such as the National Park Service on information regarding the history and purpose of Key West's Fort Zachary Taylor and Fort Jefferson, American Battlefield Trust on Key West significance during the American Civil War, and the NOAA official, verifiable website on Hurricane Wilma's effects on Key West, etc..., are all sources that I believe are third party, reliable, and verifiable. Additionally, papers and books such as records from United State Congress Committees and published, reliable authors including John Viele and Jerry Wilkins, have been used in the in-line citations throughout multiple paragraphs in the article and have also been used throughout many articles related to the Florida Keys. I apologize if I seem slightly forwards or eager (or openly dismayed), however, I am admittedly new to writing Wikipedia articles so I would be very appreciative of any advice you could offer me. I do believe that the draft contains in-depth information on the subject matter and very much hope that the article could be considered. Bronson Fotiadis1 (talk) 15:13, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Interstate 59 in Alabama

I moved the draft to Interstate 59 in Alabama. You might like to check if any other steps are needed. Regards — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:04, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

Trouted

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

You have been trouted for: Root Cause Analysis Iamsdbhosale (talk) 05:39, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Editor experience invitation

HI AlphaBetaGamma :) I'm looking for experienced editors to interview here. Feel free to pass if you're not interested. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 03:23, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Welcome to the drive!

Welcome, welcome, welcome AlphaBetaGamma! I'm glad that you are joining the November 2024 drive! Please, have a cup of WikiTea, and go cite some articles.

Fix a random page lacking sources

Cielquiparle (talk) 11:51, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Question from CharmanderTheDev (19:59, 1 November 2024)

Hello, I joined originally to edit the page on Factorio and improve information about the Space Age expansion, and was wondering what could be improved with this page to increase its content rating? --CharmanderTheDev (talk) 19:59, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, the article seems to be at C-class, and getting it to GA (Good Article) status has the following criteria. Skipping B-class as criteria for it can vary on Wikiprojects, making it confusing.

• A good article is:

1. Well-written:
   1. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and
   2. it complies with the Manual of Styleguidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
   1. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
   2. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose);
   3. it contains no original research; and
   4. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
3. Broad in its coverage:
   1. it addresses the main aspects of the topic;and
   2. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
   1. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationalesare provided for non-free content; and
   2. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.

As this is copy-pasted from the content assessment page, this may be difficult to understand. Please let me know if you have any of the criterias that you want me to explain it in a nutshell. ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 05:59, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

Question from Darrenisback232 (16:22, 2 November 2024)

Hello, very nice to meet you that's for sure. --Darrenisback232 (talk) 16:22, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello! ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 22:53, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

Question from Jplugz (14:41, 2 November 2024)

Hi AlphaBetaGamma, My name is Jplugz, please I need your kind assistance to create a tabular profile and insert a picture in my article. --Jplugz (talk) 14:41, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

I looked at your draft, and it's really promotional in tone. You might wanna read WP:WTW and rewrite some sentences. ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 22:53, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for advice. Very much appreciated. Jplugz (talk) 19:23, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Yes,I think you made a mistake

Jim Hunt's wife and daughter and son all have their own articles. There's no shortage of sources there and no responsible cause to doubt the bare notation of their existence without which his article feels incomplete. 71.105.190.91 (talk) 05:09, 5 November 2024 (UTC)