User talk:MatthewVanitas/Archive 42

Archive 35

←

Archive 40

Archive 41

Archive 42

Archive 43

Archive 44

Archive 45

Thank you... and oops!

Hi Matthew,

Thank you for reviewing my first attempt at building the User:Dbarak/David Barak page. I believe I made the change you wanted to see. However, I accidentally submitted the page twice after making the change. I don't know if you'll be reviewing the page, but I did want apologize for the double submission. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dbarak (talk • contribs) 00:06, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello Dbarak, I took a look, but it doesn't appear you added anything. The "reflist" code helps compile the footnotes, but you didn't actually add any valid sources. All you have is his IMDB page (not admissible, see WP:IMDB for why), and a link to the company he works for. Those are not at all WP:Independent sources; instead you would need to show serious media or academic coverage/examination/criticism/analysis of Barak's work. As noted in the pink box, you really need to read WP:Notability (people) to understand the benchmark to meet.

Also, if you happen to be writing about yourself, be advised doing so is a very bad idea, and we explain why here: WP:Autobiography. A page about someone is not at all a page for someone, and a Wikipedia page has no obligation to say nice things, or avoid saying negative things, about any subject so long as said facts are documentably verifiable. Seriously, read the warning page about autobiographies if that's your situation.

Hope this helps! MatthewVanitas (talk) 02:16, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi Matthew, yep, it does help. For one thing I'm learning I don't know much about editing for the Wiki.  ; ) I'll leave that page in its current pending state and maybe there will be enough supporting material for it to go live. Thanks again! - Dave — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dbarak (talk • contribs) 02:30, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Ask

Where are you from? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kwalacute16 (talk • contribs) 11:15, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Sorry @Kwalacute16:, I don't get into personal stuff on Wikipedia. MatthewVanitas (talk) 11:51, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

11:48:25, 23 June 2015 review of submission by Benswain

• Benswain (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Snipers Table Tennis Team (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Benswain (talk) 11:48, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Hey @Benswain:, did you have a question for me? MatthewVanitas (talk) 11:51, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

MatthewVanitas

Oh okay fine I'm sorry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kwalacute16 (talk • contribs) 12:25, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Notability Authors.

Hello, Matthew: I saw you sent some corrections about the article for John Kenneth Turner. I saw the list of requirements for WP but did not get what was the problem. He may not be well known in American literature, if that is the issue, because of his political views but he did have an important role during the Mexican Revolution. Nowadays some of his works are still printed and can be found in University libraries on that country. He even has an article in Wikipedia in Spanish and also in German. Also, if checking the Mexican Revolution article in English, he can be found there. Any help you can provide me to understand and correct will be of great value. Thanks!. Raul. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.170.209.243 (talk) 17:48, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Please don't forget to be logged-in when posting Talk messages, as otherwise you just get recorded as an anonymous IP address. But since you're talking about the Turner draft I presume you're Rfsumano

Hello @Rfsumano:, I see where the confusion is at Draft:John Kenneth Turner. I'm not at all saying that he doesn't meet Notability, I'm saying you have to demonstrate that he meets Notability. That is, the article needs to have citations to historians, journalists, literature academics, etc. who've discussed him, examined and analyzed his career, etc. Right now all you have is links to his own works/publisher, and a WordPress blog (WordPress is generally not admissible since just anyone can make a Wordpress page). For example, if you wanted to note the fact that Turner's socialist perspective led him to criticize US involvement in World War I, you could cite this book and page: Ross A. Kennedy (22 January 2013). A Companion to Woodrow Wilson. John Wiley & Sons. pp. 285–. ISBN 978-1-118-44540-2.

That's just one example from a second of poking around GoogleBooks, and then putting the link into http://reftag.appspot.com which turns it into a full footnote. Like it literally took me longer to write the explanation than to do it. It gets pretty easy when you get into the rhythm of it. :) In any case, the guy is certainly worth writing about, it's just we need facts cited to serious scholarship, not to casual bios, personal blogs, etc. I suggest you poke around GoogleBooks, and also any formal/official websites which are subject to peer review. Something like a fan association we can't just straight out trust because they could be selectively choosing only positive things to say, whereas an academic book from a serious publisher has to undergo peer-review, rebuttals, examination by the scholar's department, etc. This isn't to just make your day harder, it's to ensure that Turner has the strong, clearly-sourced bio he deserves, and where any reader who wants to fact-check it can just go right to the academic sources you footnote and assure themselves they're getting the full story.

Hope this helps! MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:47, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

ReSubmission of NRCC (National Research Centre for Citrus)

Hi! About 2 yrs ago I had prepared a draft for the stated article, and it was rejected by the hon'd reviewer. Not intending to sound sour, but I could not really concur on the reasons for rejection ("Notability using third party references" because as I see now I have put ample TP references, further the Centre is a notable topic: it is a nodal research institute of the Indian Govt)

I see now that the article has recently been re-submitted for review, not by me. I find it very confusing to find my way through wikipedia's extremely convoluted ruleset and have recused from making new articles ever since. I do minor corrections to improve the qualities of articles, not under this username. To that extent I wish to confirm if I can delete NRCC from to-be-reviewed articlespace for good, to preserve precious server space and prevent further notifications. Thanks! Pokedora (talk) 09:57, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

07:26:09, 24 June 2015 review of submission by Nilimam

• Nilimam (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Sundari Venkatraman; (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Greetings MatthewVanitas, Thank you for reviewing my article about Author: Sundari Venkatraman. You have marked it as Declined. Please may I know why & how can I correct it? What other information is needed or what have I done wrong. Waiting for your revert. Thank you in advance. Nilimam (talk) 07:26, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello @Nilimam:, did you read the guidance in the large pink box at the top of the draft? MatthewVanitas (talk) 12:06, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 24 June

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Kerrygold Irish Cream Liqueur page, your edit caused an unnamed parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:18, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Request on 15:02:18, 25 June 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Greenston25

• Greenston25 (talk · contribs)
  • User:Greenston25/sandbox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I have a page ready here but when I submitted it I was told it was blank so I must have done something wrong but I am not sure what. I went back to make sure it was there and it is but I must be in the wrong spot because now I do not see a submit button at all.

Greenston25 (talk) 15:02, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello @Greenston25:, the Submit button is gone because you pasted over the pink Decline box. Don't remove those, we need them to track progress; just leave them there and when you click Submit you'll get a new Yellow box showing it's awaiting review (sometimes the box appears at the bottom of the page but that's fine).

Your page might've been blank because you may have hit Preview but not Save. If you click the History tab at the top of the page, you'll see that before I declined it you'd only added a few bytes of information, not a full article at all until you pasted one in after my Decline. So make sure you hit save after making changes. Hit Preview first to make sure it looks how you want, but hit Save after that.

I've left y'all some extensive comments, so please give those a look so you know how to proceed. I did some format cleanup to and moved your draft to Draft:Le Roy Junior-Senior High School. MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:25, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	Keep up your good work, Sir. Soumyajitdawn24 (talk) 15:55, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Request on 16:26:53, 25 June 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by 76.9.231.204

• 76.9.231.204 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Back of the Dragon (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

How do I get back to the original draft to list the references?76.9.231.204 (talk) 16:26, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

76.9.231.204 (talk) 16:26, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello @76.9.231.204:, use the "History" tab at the top of the page, and you can look back on any version of the page ever saved. MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:31, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Gender equity in determining "notability"

An article I've submitted on a notable female American biblical scholar has been rejected. I note that there are numerous male biblical scholars with less prominent profiles who have been included in wikipedia. Does wikipedia track gender equity in the acceptance and rejection of new articles? Is wikipedia concerned with gender bias? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mygdonia (talk • contribs) 16:50, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello @Mygdonia:! Yes Wikipedia is concerned with gender bias, clearly, but to have any ability to comment on this particular case, you'd have to demonstrate specifically which articles you're talking about. I assume you're referring to Draft:Meira Z. Kensky? Please do WP:Assume good faith here: by submitting a draft you asked a volunteer reviewer (in this case, me) to come tell you if your draft was in compliance with Wikipedia standards. I checked out your sourcing, and two of your links are just to websites that mention that she has books out, and one to her faculty page at Coe University, which is not an impartial source since it's her employer. Accordingly, your draft as it currently stands doesn't meet WP:Notability (academics), the guideline pointed out to you in the pink Decline box.

I'm not at all saying that Kensky doesn't meet Notability, I'm saying your draft does not provie evidence of it. I'm not saying she's literally "not notable/important/significant", I'm saying the draft doesn't meet a specific policy benchmark. It's really nothing about the scholar herself.

That said, like basically any Western (or for that matter, global) organization, Wikipedia is subject to WP:Institutional bias that probably does disfavor women and minorities, and that's one thing Wikipedia is working consciously to fix. Though this is complicated by a chicken-or-egg issue, in that if mainstream academia pays less attention to female scholars than male scholars, then it could in that case artificially create a higher bar for female scholars to meet Notability due to less coverage of their work, that's also an issue.

However, in this particular case I feel confident in saying your draft simply does not currently meet WP:Notability (academics). I would strongly advise that you read that policy, because that's the first issue anyone will want to look at when deciding whether your draft passes muster or no.

So far as other scholars having articles despite weak sourcing: the standard Wikipedia answer is WP:Other stuff exists. That is, someone else's poor work on an article isn't a justification to lower the overall bar, especially since you've requested a reviewer give you honest feedback on it. If you see any bios of male theologians that are improperly written or sourced, please feel free to link them here and I will take a look and propose them for deletion if they fail to meet WP:Notability (academics), the exact same standard that your draft is being held to. Wikipedia is massive and only has so many volunteers, so I'm sure easily 5% of our articles are not properly sourced and need to be corrected or deleted, which is why it is incumbent on readers to consider the sourcing of Wikipedia articles, and, bringing us right back to the beginning, why it is so vital that drafts like yours have the strongest possible sourcing before being published. MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:37, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your response -- that's helpful. I had thought that this scholar (not theologian, by the way -- that's a different field) would be a slam dunk because she holds an endowed chair at a prominent liberal arts college. I notice, though, that the college's website doesn't have that updated information. Once the college's website does note her endowed chair, will that in itself be sufficient? Also: you note that the college's website is not impartial because it's her employer -- but what other form of evidence could there be that she holds an endowed chair? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mygdonia (talk • contribs) 17:56, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

No worries, glad to help. These guidelines can be a bit hard to digest at first, so always good to assume good faith in reviews until proven otherwise, since the vast majority of people are just trying to maintain a consistent system of standards. Again, not to be a broken record, taking the 20 minutes to read Wikipedia:Notability (academics) will save you a ton of hassle. Note especially that it's not just about meeting the criteria, it's about how you evidence their meeting the criteria. Give it a thorough look and I venture to guess your way forward will be much clearer. I think things like "having an endowed chair" can be sourced to the school itself since it's not a contestable opinion, she either has a chair or no and the school would know if she did, whereas evidence for her impact on the field would require some kind of outside observer saying "Kensky's research had a profound impact on our understanding of XYZ, and let to follow on studies by Smith and Kaplinsky which were cited by the Ecclesiastical College of Foo in their decision on..." that sort of thing.

I'm really not an expert on academic bios, I just know about about general notability guidelines to recognize your draft needed strengthening, so I suggest getting a feel for the policy, deciding how to address it, and then awaiting next review. If you feel you gain a good handle on the policy, if you want to avoid any risk that a generalist like me doesn't grasp how you meet it, in some cases on technical articles like this it helps to have, at the very top of the page, short message saying "She meets WP:Notability (academics) criterias #7 (ABC) and #9 (XYZ), as well as meets sourcing requirements #3 and #2" to make it clear that you've done the due diligence to check the boxes. Hope this helps! MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:47, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

plz acepted request

jash reem 03:16, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments. I have made the changes regarding inline references as advised by use. 

Regards and see https://www.facebook.com/umer281/info?tab=page_info 0k — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jash reem (talk • contribs) 03:43, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Link in page's history page not working

Hi MatthewVanitas,

This is somewhat a technical question. A link available in every page's history section is not working from many days: https://tools.wmflabs.org/xtools-articleinfo/index.php?article=Jhansi&lang=en&wiki=wikipedia. My query is there is any technical forum in Wikipedias where we can post his issue to get it resolved.

Thanks and Regards,

--Work2win (talk) 08:38, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello @Work2win:, I suggest Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). MatthewVanitas (talk) 11:35, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

00:53:20, 28 June 2015 review of submission by Kerrisdalian

• Kerrisdalian (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Richard Rohac (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Now that I know about auction sites etc. being not useful, I have deleted them. I considered Christie's a point in favour of "notability". The principle problem with the fame of Richard Rohac is that a book published in 1996, widely referenced by collectors and auction sites, wrongly attributes the Rohac maker's mark to a different person with the same initials. Thus the fame is not his. How does an artist begin to be notable? This man's work is sought-after (and, indeed, counterfeited) 60 years after his death. Just looking for advice!Kerrisdalian (talk) 00:53, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Kerrisdalian (talk) 00:53, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello @Kerrisdalian:, sites selling items related to the subject can't be considered impartial sources of information, so we don't generally accept those.

So far as erroneous information about Rohac's stamp, you raise an important thorny issue. If every published source of info says the RR stamp belongs to somebody else, and it's only "folks in the know" who know it's Rohac's, we can't really do anything about that until some journalist/scholar publishes a clear rebuttal.

If, however, some books say the RR is Rohac's and others say differently, you can cite the books that explain how it's Rohac's, and maybe have one sentence mentioning that the topic is disputed and cite that to a book mentioning the other argument.

Fundamentally though, Rohac himself must meet WP:Notability to have an article. Please do take a quick look at that guideline, it is distinct from just "notable/important/significant", it's an actual detailed guideline. If Rohac's work is important, surely some people have written about his work in trade/art journals, academic papers, news articles? Those are what we're asking you to cite: neutral, expert, objective discussion of his importance. MatthewVanitas (talk) 11:55, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

A question from references

Hi I am writing an article that one source used several times in the article. I added the source every time. I think that it has bad format. Is it correct?Saff V. (talk) 05:19, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello @Saff V.:, there's a great tool to simplify multiple uses of the same citation; just see WP:Refname for how to code those to be much cleaner. MatthewVanitas (talk) 11:56, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

03:16:14, 27 June 2015 review of submission by Anjumjalal

• Anjumjalal (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Professor Masud Ahmed Cheema (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

AnjumJalal 03:16, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Dear Matthew, Thanks for your comments. I have made the changes regarding inline references as advised by use. I shall add some interesting photographs demonstrating Prof. Cheema's innovative techniques of mitral valve repair once I get his copyright permission. Please re-review the article.

Regards

Hello @Anjumjalal:, this is certainly much better. As general practice, for next reviews I like to let a different reviewer take a look, so I'll hold off for now. I will say though, you do want to fix some other things in the article. The language right now has too much of what we call WP:Peacock in it, that is it has too much subjective phrasing. You need to go through and remove any emotional/laudatory phrasing, and stick to pure facts. You need to remove any words like "amazing, and any opinion words like "unfortunately". The facts need to speak for themselves without any editorializing by us. So please go make that small change while awaiting your next review. You're definitely on the right track so far, but be aware even the best articles often receive a few Declines before they are polished enough to publish. MatthewVanitas (talk) 12:00, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

RootsTrust

Dear Matthew, Thanks for reviewing my article. It is not clear to me why the article draft has been rejected? Is it just a question of building out the sources section? Or is something in the text objectionable?

Kind regards, Wayne — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wayne brooke nelson (talk • contribs) 14:59, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello Wayne, I've replied at Draft:RootsTrust. MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:05, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Joseph W. Papin

I have done a lot of work on the page since you looked at it on the 19th. Prior to 1970 books did not have an ISPN number. If I am listing all the books he illustrated to I need to link them to something? Many of the publishers have changed and no longer list the book. I can find random links on the web but typically they go to a site that is selling old books. I don't want to appear that I am selling anything, just documenting his vast amount of published works. Do you have a suggestion? Can I just list and not link each book to something? Thank you for your time. SIncerely, Janine PapinJaninepapin (talk) 18:30, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello @Janinepapin:, it's fine to just mention the title/publisher/date of books. You are correct that it is inadvisable to link them since that comes across as commercial.

There is the larger concern though that your sourcing looks pretty weak. A lot of the news articles, and a couple books, that you footnoted only mention Papin in passing, or have his name on photo credits. I strongly advise you read WP:Notability (artists) or WP:Notability (people) again to get a feel for it. For an article to publish, the person must' have been the subject of substantive discussion of them, their career, their impact, in serious published works.

This is yet another one of the many reasons we tell people not to write about organizations/people they're directly involved with. It makes it very hard to write neutrally, and also people get personally upset when an article about the charity they work for, or a family member, isn't accepted because the sourcing just isn't strong enough.

I'm not saying it's a given that Papin doesn't meet WP:Notability (people), but noting that just being mentioned in passing, even if in a large number of places, and being listed as an illustrator, does not on its own meet the threshhold to have an article. Have there been media articles that actively discussed him, interviewed him, books that spent more than just a sentence or two talking about his work? That is the sort of coverage you need. MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:18, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for getting back with me. There are articles about him from Newspapers that I have referenced that are not live links because the papers are not on line. Should I upload a copy of the paper for better proof? Janinepapin (talk) 18:49, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

I am 100 percent sure that the he will meet the Notability requirements after I make whatever corrections need to be made. The Library of Congress is accepting his vast amount of Courtrooom Art work into their collection in July. And the over 45 books that he has illustrated also probably would also qualify him. Can I upload PDF files of the articles about him as references? I wasn't sure if that is alright to do. Thanks again for your help and suggestions. Here are the articles without live links, I have PDF files of the papers if they will do. Denton-Record Chronicle Scenes of Life by Joe Papin by Ken Atkins June 1, 1979 Asbury Park Press Panorama A Fine Line in the Courtroom: Artist Draws on Human Drama July 17, 1989 COURTROOM ARTISTS The East Hampton Star, "Opinion" section, East Hampton, New York, May 23, 1985 Janinepapin (talk) 19:00, 25 June 2015 (UTC) I have linked quite a few of the books to oclc worldcat library to demonstrate that he illustrated the books. Should I continue to do that with as many as I can, or is that overkill? Janinepapin (talk) 19:44, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello @Janinepapin:, in answer to your questions:

• For how best to list the biography, see Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lists of works. Note too Help:Columns so you can list them more cleanly rather than being a huge long stack of single items per row.
• You don't need to upload the paper copies of articles, and uploading them to Wikipedia itself would be a copyright violation, so instead just make sure when you cite offline sources (which is perfectly fine provided they're reputable published sources) that you give all the clear details: the name of the paper/book, date, page number, publisher, author, all the full citation jazz. (Note that's for your references, bibliography items for his own works are far simpler).
• Speaking of copyright, I'm a little iffy on the images you have there right now. Especially the second one where it looks like it's been published by someone: if he did that for a magazine or book presumably the publisher holds the rights, not him, so that would be violating copyright. For his self-portrait, do you have some reason to believe he never surrendered copyright, was not paid by anyone else to make/publish it? If so, you need to give very clear info in the Details box for the image file, asserting that its copyright is not held by anyone outside the family, and honestly I'm not even sure how you would go about asserting that you are the particular person who has the right to its copyright. But let's set images aside for now.
• For Notability, I want to emphasize again, it doesn't matter if he illustrated 1 novel or 1,001 novels, that's not what makes Notability. What makes Notability is if other experts talked about his work. He could be listed as illustrator for thousands of books, but if nobody ever got into detail discussing his lengthy career, he wouldn't meet WP:N. Conversely, if he'd been the illustrator for just one trial, and newspapers around the country had gone ballistic over the controversy as to whether his amazing illustrations were biasing the trial, and it was in all the news, and academics and pundits wrote papers examining the role of media in affecting trials and frequently discussed him as an example case, that would meet Notability. So please do not confuse the two. And really don't just guess what Notability means, it's just way easier if you give a quick readthrough of the WP:Notability (people) and/or WP:Notability (artists) policies; I say maybe both because a journalist-artist isn't quite the same as a gallery guy, so looking at both policies would be clearest.

Does this answer the main part of your current questions? MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:25, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

I think I am finally getting it. Thanks again for your patience and help. I have added something that I believe fits the bill. I also have contacted some T.V. and Radio stations to find out the dates of some of the interviews he did. I have the years, but not the dates...yet. I am hoping the the notoriety that he received during some Mafia trials is exactly the type of thing you need to establish notability. The story was picked up by the UPI (United Press International). I do believe you are on vacation right now but I did want to touch base. Janinepapin (talk) 21:31, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

meiji kinenkan

Hello MatthewVanitas,

Thank you for taking time to read my article about Meiji Kinenkan. To be honest, I tried to copy the style of Chinzansou (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hotel_Chinzanso_Tokyo) as it was accepted before.

The problem I have regarding more serious citations from books is that mainly all of them are in Japanese. English books don't mention often Meiji Kinenkan, but prefer its headquarters Meiji Jingu.

Are Japanese citations ok if I translate them ?

Thank you so much for your help;

Kind regards

Samantha — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lassaux.samantha (talk • contribs) 04:37, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello @Lassaux.samantha:, forgive the delay since I missed your message. Your answer is right here: Wikipedia:Verifiability#Non-English_sources. Yes, you are quite welcome to use sources in any language, especially if good English-language sources don't exist. I would suggest you make sure to include the Japanese spelling of the subject next to the subject's name in the beginning (so reviewers can search more easily). Hope this helps! MatthewVanitas (talk) 12:05, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your answer, I'll start as soon as possible ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.35.84.50 (talk) 01:05, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Vijay Jaju concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Vijay Jaju, a page you created, has not been edited in 6 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:31, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

The verse of brotherhood

Can you read my new article (Draft:Verse of brotherhood) and help me for publishing?Saff V. (talk) 10:48, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

14:17:25, 1 July 2015 review of submission by Davefromlondon

• Davefromlondon (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Arthur Online (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Davefromlondon (talk) 14:17, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi, just wondering how we can make the wikipedia page more acceptable to guidelines. Can we cite back to our own blog and website as references, or do we need to have third party references?

Many thanks,

Sam

Hello @Davefromlondon:, the big pink box at the top of your draft exactly answers your question. Please check that first, and visit WP:Teahouse if you have further questions, as I am on-break for the month. MatthewVanitas (talk) 01:39, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

13:37:46, 30 June 2015 review of submission by Raghav 2313

• Raghav 2313 (talk · contribs)
  • User:Raghav 2313/Jaycees public school (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I couldn't understand the reason for it to be rejected can you please make the reasons clear so that i can make necessary changes Raghav 2313 (talk) 13:37, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

@Raghav 2313:, did you read the guidance I left in the large pink box at the top of your draft? MatthewVanitas (talk) 01:52, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Page for Keenan Wallace Dunham

Hello Matthew. It is kind of weird that you would mention media coverage. Just a simple search and its all there. https://www.google.com/search?as_eq=wikipedia&q=%22Keenan+Wallace+Dunham%22&num=50

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C4uxO1INV0Y https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yK1ShNJfGG8

This is just a few, should I send more?Gtsforchange (talk) 15:06, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

@Gtsforchange:, nothing you've offered remotely resembles a WP:Reliable source. "Some dude's webcam show" is not the kind of source we can base an article on. I took a good-faith poke around Google, and I can't find anything resembling serious news coverage of this person's candidacy. Until he gets covered in multiple sources that meet the guidelines WP:Reliable source (please take a look at this guideline), he absolutely cannot have an article until such point. MatthewVanitas (talk) 01:55, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

19:37:54, 30 June 2015 review of submission by Derrin Tanser

• Derrin Tanser (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Captain Brock: Space Badger (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Derrin Tanser (talk) 19:37, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi

Just wondered if you could tell me a little more about why it was rejected this time. The sources quoted were verifiable external independent sources. The Book Awardshttp://thebookawards.com/awards/ is an independent site. It is distinct from sites such as Goodreads, Everywriter or other sites where users write or submit the content or pay to have their work included. Similarly the Miskatonic Press is also an external independent site. The other source cited was a newspaper, which again is am independent, external site.

It would be extremely helpful to know why these sources in themselves did not help the article meet the notability requirements. The feedback you can give me will be valuable in meeting the requirements and resubmitting the article

Many Thanks

Hello @Derrin Tanser:, I took a look, and I'm not seeing any indications that Miskatonic is a widely-recognized granter of awards, nor The Book Awards. Then you footnote one Wikipedia article (please don't footnote Wikipedia articles, that's circular logic), and then one piece of local news mentioning the author. That really doesn't meet the guidelines yet. I strongly advise you read WP:Notability (books) as suggested to better understand what criteria do qualify a book for its own article. MatthewVanitas (talk) 01:57, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Adding a picture?

How do I add a picture and info to the right side of the page for my artists page?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheStudio336 (talk • contribs) 03:14, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello @TheStudio336:, see WP:Uploading images for info. Bear in mind, you must own the copyright for the image. MatthewVanitas (talk) 12:24, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks alot. The picture upload worked. Now I'm just wondering how to make the graph outline including Birth name: Born: Origin Genres Occupation(s) Rapper actor Years active Labels

Thats has become the norm for all musical artists?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheStudio336 (talk • contribs) 18:19, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello @TheStudio336:, please see Template:Infobox musical artist for the layout for such a box. They are called "infoboxes", and we have formats for all kinds of them, whether for musicians, politicians, companies, buildings, etc. They're not mandatory, but in some articles they can be a useful summary. MatthewVanitas (talk) 02:00, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

15:29:15, 2 July 2015 review of submission by TheGild2014

• TheGild2014 (talk · contribs)
  • User:TheGild2014/sandbox/TheGild2014/Business Page (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello Matthew. Thank you for the feedback on our Wikipedia page submission. Please could you tell us what we might do in order for you to deem this submission suitable for publishing? Is it simply a case of replacing the references with notable links, i.e. ones to things that have been written ABOUT The Gild, rather than BY The Gild? I look forward to your feedback so we can try and achieve something suitable. TheGild2014 (talk) 15:29, 2 July 2015 (UTC) TheGild2014 (talk) 15:29, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello @TheGild2014:, please see extensive comments added at Draft:The Gild, both at the top and in the body. MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:11, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Request on 00:33:37, 3 July 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Black Yodel No.1

• Black Yodel No.1 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Mike Johnson (yodeler) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Editing

I can remove the indentations, but I don't know how to do those other functions you mentioned. This is frustrating because a prior submission was rejected claiming I had used copyrighted material written by Matt Gallanger, or something like that. As I stated, to no deaf ears, Matt did not write that material. He copied it from my website and posted it on his! He did not write that biography, I did.

Black Yodel No.1 (talk) 00:33, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

First article - please point out mistakes

Hi Matthew,

Could you please let me know what I need to change so that I can get this article approved?

Eddie — Preceding unsigned comment added by EGuevarraZB (talk • contribs) 14:32, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Request on 16:34:16, 3 July 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Black Yodel No.1

• Black Yodel No.1 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Mike Johnson (yodeler) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello MatthewVanits First, I like the edit you did and would like to go with that. However, before I try to complete the edit I'd like to address the following. "Black Yodel No.1" is highlighted in red for having a non-existent page? This is a nickname like Merle Haggard is often called "The Hag" George Jones "Possum" and Johnny Cash, "The Man in Black" etc. There is no specific page, and if you entered it in the search browser you'll find numberous results directing you to me.

The text presented isn't a copy of my whole web site. It is original, and in Word, is about 4 pages. I've written a number of short stories and novels, and I do recall numerous passages from my writings. My official biography "Mike Johnson the Official Short Version" contains over 40 pages. I'm also puzzled by your mentions of "formally published sources" as being reliable. With all due respect, where do you suppose they obtained their information? Since I'm the subject matter of this presentation, you'd think that I'd know more about me than anyone else. Frankly, after hours of interviews and viewing of my documents, some of these sources still manage to present erroneous information. The worst of them, Eric Brace's Washington Post article. Which is why I've often been reluctant to give interviews to writers who have no knowledge of traditional country music.

Down in the Edits Section for the year 2000 you highlighted 3 phrase as having non-existing pages, yet you place a footnote [2]to the National Traditional Country Music Association's main web site here you will find a page for each of them. The correct name for the Hall of Fame award is "America's Old Time Country Music Hall of Fame" not "Old Time..." I don't understand what citation you need for the following paragraph. The 2003 spinal chord injury ended my trucking, but I'm still doing music?

The reason this is so important is because of the Bass Guitarist from Grants Pass, Oregon, Mike Johnson. He is in your data base and if you go to any online music site and enter "Mike Johnson" you will find that no matter which "Mike Johnson" it is, when you click their name, it will take you to this guy's bio, photos, and music! It's been a frustrating affair for the past couple of years trying to get these sites to unlink him from my music. I like what you did and appreciate your help. I'll wait for you response before I submit an edit.

Black Yodel No.1 (talk) 16:34, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello Mike, it'll take me a couple days to get a reply back since I have work stuff going on, but rest assured I'm interested in getting an article on you published. For the meantime, please hold off on changing anything further for the moment. MatthewVanitas (talk) 01:12, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Request on 07:35:28, 4 July 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Black Yodel No.1

• Black Yodel No.1 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Mike Johnson (yodeler) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Okay. Thanks. Black Yodel No.1 (talk) 07:35, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Black Yodel No.1 (talk) 07:35, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Declined AfC submission for Draft:Blurred Vision Music

I am not the creator of the draft, but just happen to have come across it and found out that you have declined the AfC submission for it. I am aware that it is not up to Wikipedia's quality standards, but I don't think that the reason you used to decline it was correct. The article does not exist on Wikipedia, while you advised the creator to edit on Blurred Vision. Moreover, the article blurred vision is on the medical symptom, not anything related to music. The Average Wikipedian (talk) 12:31, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

The Average Wikipedian, you are correct, I clicked the wrong one. I meant to click the one for "duplicate AFC submission". MatthewVanitas (talk) 12:34, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

20:22:13, 4 July 2015 review of submission by ElenaMertins

• ElenaMertins (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Rock Religion (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Thank you for pointing it out. What other sources of media would be accepted and how many sources are needed for

it to be considered relevant to be on Wikipedia?

ElenaMertins (talk) 20:22, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello @ElenaMertins:, the best guidelines to read would be WP:Reliable sources and WP:Notability (organizations). Those should give you an idea of what kinds of sources would help. Off the top of my head, music industry magazines/journals, news articles (though we'd need at least several non-local ones, not just all Miami-area news), respected tech journals that discuss crowdsourcing and use RR as an example, etc. Every source should be something that actually discusses RR, not just gives it passing mention, or just explains something in general about funding programs. MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:53, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

about article submission

Sir/Madam, I prepared a draft of information of my grandfather Mr. Deenanath Sewak, who was a politician and served as MLA, MLC and as minister in govt of Uttar Pradesh. I have many photographs of him which can prove the facts I have provided, but somehow I could not get any idea how that photographs got uploaded. Please help me out so that I can improve my article. Thanks a lot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sachindradnk (talk • contribs) 13:49, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello @Sachindradnk:, please do not upload any photos until the article actually publishes. There's not point taking the trouble until you know it will publish. I reviewed your article, and it does not appear this person meets WP:Notability (people) based on what you have. Please read this policy (don't just guess what you imagine it says). The draft must meet that policy to be published. It would need sourcing to serious media or academic works, absolutely not Facebook, blogs, etc. Unless Mr Sewak has been the subject of significant media coverage, and not just in his local area, he cannot have an article about him. So please either provide citations to such works (see WP:Referencing for beginners), or instead please choose a different topic to write about. MatthewVanitas (talk) 14:02, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

14:57:47, 5 July 2015 review of submission by Biosforauthors

• Biosforauthors (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Kristie Macrakis (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Dear Reviewer: I've added some references to underscore the notability of Macrakis. Could you take a look at what I've done and let me know if I should add more. There is certainly plenty of material to use and add. Thanks.

Biosforauthors (talk) 14:57, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Biosforauthors Biosforauthors (talk) 14:57, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

@Biosforauthors:, you are very much on the right track now. A few things you'll want to adjust:

• If you have more sources that are also strong, especially ones that talk a little more about her overall career rather than just her books, that would help flesh out the depiction of her.
• When you have a list of items, like works or links, make sure to "bullet" each item using a "*", just like I'm doing here. And you needn't leave blank lines between list items when you bullet.
• Carefully skim through and remove *anything* that is even slightly subjective praise that's not directly sourced to a review/commentator. That is, if the NYT says she's "splendiferous" you can mention that, mention NYT said it, and cite it. But you absolutely cannot refer to her as "renowned", "pathbreaking", "stellar", "imaginative" etc in Wikipedia's own voice.

This would likely pass just as it is, but there's no harm and much benefit to continuing to beef it up a little. Also, if her birth year is public record (i.e. mentioned on some university site, news article, etc., not by digging in city archives) then please include that next to her name.

Nice work, I think you're really getting the hang of this now. I like to avoid reviewing the same article multiple times when it's this close to passing, so I'll wait until another reviewer puts fresh eyes on it. MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:06, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rymour Club, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Geddie. 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) 18:13, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

18:20:09, 5 July 2015 review of submission by Arttoonzwiki

• Arttoonzwiki (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Fred and Frank Comics (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

REgarding your comment You're not understanding how footnoting works; footnotes are not for "I just mentioned something, here's a link to it". Footnotes are for "I just stated a fact about F&F Comics, here is a resource which documents this fact." So, for example, when you say the comic had 1 million readers, we want a citation to a Stars and Stripes article, or a book about deployed military culture, which clearly states this fact, not a link to Amazon. Does that make sense?

---

In the Fred and Frank comics article I changed it to: Overseas! Magazine was read each month by nearly 350,000 military personnel, plus military civilian workers and family members.

Arttoonzwiki (talk) 18:20, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

References

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Hey Matthew! Please help us to make the article about MTV and VEVO artist Alex Angel (BLACK ANGELS). We have all info, but we can't use Wikipedia right. We have already this verified article on Ukrainian Wikipedia. But wanna make it in English too. But we can't edit this article correctly here! Please help us! Email: alcatrazz@list.ru Alex Angel (BLACK ANGELS) (talk) 18:52, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Matthew, need your help!

Hey Matthew! Please help us to make the article about MTV and VEVO artist Alex Angel (BLACK ANGELS). We have all info, but we can't use Wikipedia right. We have already this verified article on Ukrainian Wikipedia: https://uk.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alex_Angel_(BLACK_ANGELS) But wanna make it in English too. But we can't edit this article correctly here! Please help us! Email: alcatrazz@list.ru — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alex Angel (BLACK ANGELS) (talk • contribs) 19:32, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Help for Approval: Article for Robert Hanley (unclear why it is continually denied)

Hello, I keep getting the same reason for the article being denied - it doesn't have reliable citations. I have gone through the "help list" etc. and I don't understand why we keep getting this reason for being denied? We have a ton of primary resources (both IMDB, the person's website, etc.) and added a bunch of secondary resources (anything we could fin online that relates). A lot of this predates the internet, so I do have a variety of newspaper articles/etc. that are not on the internet - but it doesn't seem as those are allowed.

Can you please help me by giving me some concrete examples/advice of what you are looking for/requiring to get this approved? I feel that I have read many articles with less resources so I am at a loss and frustrated. I do appreciate your help. Thank you!

FYI - someone other than myself added a rather crude comment below so I deleted it. In any case, any help you can give so I can get this thing accepted I truly appreciate it!— Preceding unsigned comment added by Saviodesigns (talk • contribs) 00:03, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

04:56:55, 6 July 2015 review of submission by Merise

• Merise (talk · contribs)
  • User:Merise/The Diary of a Teenage Girl: An Account in Words and Pictures (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi Matthew, I used the web citation template to format web article citations, and corrected the formatting of links to wikipedia pages. Does the submission look any better? I welcome further suggestions. Thanks! Merise (talk) 04:56, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Merise (talk) 04:56, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Draft: Verse of brotherhood

@MatthewVanitas:I wand to try move function in the Wikipedia and done this subject in one of my draft page. The page was changed with you into Draft and I moved it to main space now. I think my work was mistake. Can you help me for solving this problem?Saff V. (talk) 12:19, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

hi

Hi, um i saw on facebook that there was a draft in my name Mercedes McDonough and that i was an interest... 1- how am i an interest 2-thanks for it 3- how did you figure out about me and my band soldiers and what i did in it

-Mercedes McDonough Of Soldiers_Band_Official — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:545:C201:9499:9487:47D:9A8:CBC7 (talk) 12:47, 6 July 2015 (UTC)