User talk:Timtrent/Archive 33

Archive 30

Archive 31

Archive 32

Archive 33

Archive 34

Archive 35

→

Archive 40

Lenny Balkissoon back to draftspace

Hello, I'm not sure why the article Lenny Balkissoon was moved back to Draft. It has 25 references about his activities from city and national Dutch published newspapers and a book about his work. These are not press releases nor adverts. However, is it because these references are in Dutch and I wrote it in the English Wikipedia? GigGama (talk) 16:06, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

GigGama, It was either that or remove the banners form WP:AFC and let the community consider it for deletion. My view is that it would not have survived that. I left a comment on Draft:Lenny Balkissoon showing what I believe needs to be improved. Maybe I am in error? It is nothing to do with their being in Dutch. The coverage has to be significant. If you like I will move it back to main space again?

My attention was drawn to it by the banners that you left there. They alert us to a page that was moved to main space without review. While a review isn't compulsory, leaving the banners there suggests that the draft was not ready Fiddle Faddle 16:21, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

1) How do I write in visual editor...I have asked for help on my Talk page. Is this the right place? 2) What does "banners" mean? 3)I have read your suggestions to improve my page. As you suggested WP:BOMBARD I took out some references. Yet on the otherhand I have been asked to add more WP:RS. None of the articles are self-published and are all about the person's work. Thanks for help on verifying what I think I already verified.GigGama (talk) 17:58, 15 July 2020 (UTC). For now I'll keep it in Draft, as you suggest. Thanks!GigGama (talk) 18:00, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

GigGama, 1) No idea. I use the old style interface, sorry. 2) Banners are the big formatted thigs at the top or bottom of a page, the standard looking things. 3) Looks a lot better. Fiddle Faddle 18:00, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the comments and a request to review

Thank your for your comment. Could you very kindly review this article? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Geoffrey_Aori_Mabea Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ombongi1 (talk • contribs) 14:04, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Ombongi1, That was, effectively, my review, but I did not wish to delay it's eventual outcome. I try never to review any draft twice.

Are you the gentleman in the article? in the edit summary at this diff seems to suggest that you are. Fiddle Faddle 14:08, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you. sure I am but I inadvertently included it. I don't know how to remove it though! Thanks for your support. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ombongi1 (talk • contribs) 14:17, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Ombongi1, Removing such things is fairly challenging. The help of an admin is required. The thing, though, is that has identified you as the gentleman in the article. That means that, as soon as it is accepted, you may not edit it further, but must use {{Request edit}} to request further changes. Wikipedia is very strict about matters of conflict of interest Fiddle Faddle 14:22, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

FYI, I've hidden the edit summary.--regentspark (comment) 14:25, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Great. lets wait for the outcome. The queue seems to be growing every minute I do any edit! let me stop here and wait. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ombongi1 (talk • contribs) 14:28, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Ombongi1, making edits does not affect when the draft will receive its review. The queue is a kind of amorphous blob held in Category:Pending AfC submissions. Some reviewers pick old submissions, new reviewers tend to learn their trade on new ones where the decisions are obvious. some pick random drafts. All one can do is to be patient Fiddle Faddle 14:44, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Check Back

Hi Timtrent. I have done recheck and re-edited back the article Draft:Fomalhaut TV for many times now (you can check the edit history page) but I didn’t submit it yet. Is the page correct so I could submit again to you or is there any corrections again? By the way, the company is not mine. It was my friend’s boss, yet the name almost the same lmao. Thanks again! (Also check your Wikimedia Commons account) Danialhalim680 (talk) 06:36, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Danialhalim680,  Done and commented. I am very unsure that this will pass WP:CORP. The strength of the references will make the key differences Fiddle Faddle 06:53, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Ooh okay. Thanks again. Danialhalim680 (talk) 06:55, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Hey Timtrent, it’s me again. It is about the Wikipedia Commerce. https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons_talk:Deletion_requests/Files_uploaded_by_Danialhalim680&action=edit this is the proof of the image. Danialhalim680 (talk) 07:42, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Danialhalim680, It is not up to me, it is up to the Commons admins. Reading Commons:Copyights will help you into the correct track Fiddle Faddle 07:46, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Danialhalim680 I have left a note on the discussion that you have posted on the talk page. It does not look to me to be proof, but I am not an admin, not there not here.The discussion iOS there on the project page, and that is where you need to make your case Fiddle Faddle 07:50, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Moving Article Link prediction back to user space

Hello Timtrent,

Me and my colleagues were working on a draft of the article on link prediction, originally located at a user sandbox page on my account User:CCLevy/Link prediction. This article was not intended for submission at this time. It is currently nominated for deletion (I believe) due to lack of sources, which I was going to add before submission.

Is there any way to either move this page back to my sandbox, or from the main article space? Also, what is the proper procedure to follow in this situation in the future? I think I may have prematurely submitted a draft version of this article along with my sandbox page. Should I not have done that?

Many thanks! CCLevy (talk) 22:37, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

CCLevy, The challenge is that you had submitted your sandbox for review. The reviewer who looked at it accepted it. Fairly obviously we need it to be supported with references, but they expressed the view to me that it was sufficiently notable.

You could aways ask (them) that they move it back to Draft. They may wish to ask that I withdraw the deletion process before they are willing to do that. My answer if they suggest is that I am wholly willing to withdraw the deletion process if you wish it moved back to draft.

The problem is that this has escaped into the wild too soon, as I am sure you can see Fiddle Faddle 22:40, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

CCLevy, that was the first answer in order to let you set in motion your request to the reviewer who accepted it.

In the future all you have to do is not to click the submit button until you are ready.

I moved it from your sandbox into Draft space because the sandbox's status alerted any reviewer who cared to look that it had been submitted. Draft space is the preferred incubation location though it is 100% valid to use your own sandbox.

The sole issue that's created the discussion is the submit button having been clicked. Now I have complicated that by nominating it for a deletion discussion. With goodwill (you have mine) this can all be undone.

Luckily the accepting reviewer is also an admin and can thus use a bucket and mop that I have no access to, not being one Fiddle Faddle 22:45, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

CCLevy, If you now look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Link prediction I have done all I hope ought to be necessary at the discussion to allow this to be migrated back to Draft: space for you to continue to work unassailed by the vagaries of main space necessities Fiddle Faddle 22:51, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, it is very much appreciated! I am not sure how it got submitted, as I do not recall clicking the box requesting a review. Perhaps I made a mistake. Anyway, thanks for your help! Me and my collaborators are planning to add lots of references over the weekend (we do academic research, so we definitely understand the importance of this). Once those edits are done, I will resubmit for review.

Should I add comments about this on the AfD:Link prediction page, or have you done everything that's needed? Apologies if I have created a mess! I am still a bit new to editing Wikipedia.

Best wishes! CCLevy (talk) 22:59, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

CCLevy, We all create messes as we go through life! They happen.

I think you may need to draw Calliopejen1's attention to this discussion and the deletion discussion (AfD) since they seem best situated both to close the AfD and perform the move. I've just pinged them so they should see this, but feel free to contact them directly.

Meanwhile edit the article (which is destined to become a Draft:) with impunity Fiddle Faddle 23:03, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Even though I'm an administrator, I don't know how to close AFD discussions!! Sorry... Hopefully someone else does it soon! Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:42, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

I see someone else closed it, so I moved the article back to draftspace without leaving a redirect. That's one admin task I actually know how to do! @CCLevy: you can edit the article at your leisure now. Resubmit when you're ready. Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:51, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Edited to neutral and factual tone.

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

Kindly please have a look at the above link. I have further made edits this morning and request your review. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Narangaarti (talk • contribs) 07:33, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Narangaarti, I try very hard never to review the same article twice. Thank you for making the edits. I see there is at least one red error in the references, Please correct that it will hinder any acceptance.

Please continue to make constructive edits to the draft while awaiting review Fiddle Faddle 07:39, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

A description of painter Leendert van der Vlist

Dear Timtrent, RE your remark: "Please look at your work. Ask yourself if you would accept it in this condition, please." You're right. I'm sorry, but I'm just an amateur on Wikipedia. I adapted the article on Leendert van der Vlist. I'm assuming that's better. Yours sincerely, Ido Poelman — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ido Eliza Poelman (talk • contribs) 08:07, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Ido Eliza Poelman, We are all amateurs, and we all improve. Years ago there was no draft process and it was a very harsh learning curve.

Thank you for the work you have done so far. There is more to do. I only reviewed it a second time because it seemed churlish to let it wait for another reviewer, but I almost never review more than once. Fiddle Faddle 09:15, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Ido Eliza Poelman, As you will see, I have done a little work t help you with the draft Fiddle Faddle 09:32, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Dear Timtrent, I put a reference at the article of the painter "Leendert van der Vlist" in which visitors of this page can check the story about Leendert van der Vlist. The reference webpage (https://rkd.nl/en/explore/artists/81511) is in Dutch and in English. In the article I put a photo of a painting from Leendert van der Vlist. I own this painting. I got it from my mother and she got it from her father (my grandfather). My gandfather and my mother were members of the sailing club "KWV De Kaag", the club mentioned in the article. Every year I sail a regatta at this club. Kind regards, Ido Poelman — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ido Eliza Poelman (talk • contribs) 09:19, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

@Ido Eliza Poelman:, Excellent work. It is strength of referencing that will get this draft accepted. I also sail. I volunteer for http://dartsailability.org where I tech sailing and powerboating. Fiddle Faddle 12:33, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Pleasant DeSpain

Dear Timtrent...

You responded to a message I left with the Help Desk regarding submission rejection for Draft:Pleasant DeSpain. You wrote, "They will be able to pinpoint what they pushed the draft back to you for." I've been waiting to hear something specific, but no luck. Perhaps you could help me pinpoint. Although I'm not sure about the help process, I did post this message below on talk page (Draft talk:Pleasant DeSpain)...

I created a page a year ago for a living author. I didn't hear that its submission had been rejected until about a week ago for these reasons:

1) This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

2) This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

I have removed some of the statements that cannot be verified via the internet. I have removed bios/post from the author's publisher's web page. And I have changed the reference to the National Storytelling information to mirror others accepted references on another Wiki page.

Someone, please give me some advice as to what else I should alter. Perhaps it's this quote [...refers to DeSpain as “a pioneer of the American renaissance in storytelling.”] Or perhaps reference to the author being awarded [“Seattle’s Resident Storyteller” by the city’s mayor.] The award was in 1975. The other quote from probably the same era. Pleasant has been around "forever".

I'd rather not submit this again until I get a bit of specific guidance on what should be changed. If anyone would help, I will be eternally grateful!

Sincerely, Ben Ben Airdunat (talk) 02:44, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Ben Airdunat, below is a table that shows my analysis of the referencing. I have placed this in the draft as a comment. I;d also like you to take a look at this essay which may provide a useful grounding for you.

Source assessment table:

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://www.storytellingcenter.net	Mentions the association, but not the subject of the article	Primary source	Unmentioned	✘ No
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jimmy_Neil_Smith&oldid=889498518	Is about anothe person	Wikipedia articles may not be references WP:CIRCULAR, an WP is not a reliable source	WP:CIRCULAR	✘ No
https://www.motherearthnews.com/nature-and-environment/national-association-for-the-preservation-and-perpetuation-of-storytelling-zmaz85zsie	Not mentioned. It is th association's reference, not the gentleman's	~ Does to spring to mind as a reliable source	Unmentioned	✘ No
http://www.reginaress.com/articles/the-storytelling-revival-in-the-united-states		404 error	404 error	✘ No
DeSpain, Pleasant (May 31, 1980). "Old One-eye, a folktale". The Seattle Times.	As far as I can judge form the reference, this is authored by the gentleman	The Seattle Times. is a reliable source	Self authored pieces have no significnce	✘ No
DeSpain, Pleasant (December 8, 1979). "Godfather Death, A Russian Tale". The Seattle Times.	As far as I can judge form the reference, this is authored by the gentleman	The Seattle Times. is a reliable source	Self authored pieces have no significnce	✘ No
http://www.rambles.net/despain_sweetland.html	A review of some of the gemtleman's body of work	? I think this is likely to be reliable	A review by a probable RS of the gentleman's work	? Unknown
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

Please come back to me directly if anything is unclear. Fiddle Faddle 07:16, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

question. about your comment CITE KILL for draft: accelerated experiential dynamic psychotherapy

Hi Timetrent, thank you. for your input. I put all those citations in so that if someone wants to see the references for the topic they have it on hand (for example, the references for diversity issues - I cite each one so that a reader can see them if interested. Its a lot of work to gather and organize all the references into categories. I thought that doing so for the reader would be helpful. Is there another way to provide this assistance to a reader? Perhaps a bibliography at the end. I also, at the end of the article note the citations that are research citations. I don't think what I did is the right way to do it, so I'm hoping for some ideas. Thank you. If you wouldn't mind reading on for more critique, I would be very grateful. Carrieruggieri (talk) 14:22, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Carrieruggieri, It's hard to offer hugely specific advice since I am not a topic specialist. "Please choose the very best in each case of multiple referencing for a single point and either drop or repurpose the remainder." is the best advise with regard to Citekill. The problem as I see it is that you have found citations to suit your drafted words. Instead find words to suit the facts in your references.

I'll try that differently.

1. Start with the references
2. See what they say
3. write the article about what the references say

This essay may be of service to you on that topic.

Now, here's a tough part. Papers written by contributors to the project are products of the project, so do not enhance its notability. Let me try to explain. If the project manufactured vacuum cleaners, the cleaners would be its work. A vacuum cleaner could not be a reference for it, simply because it is the product it makes. So it is with research, writings, etc. However, a review of it and its contributors' work by others tends to be a review of them and their methods, so is a reference, as is a peer reviewed paper a reference for their work. You may find WP:ACADEME of some use in seeing how Wikipedia and Academe differ hugely.

Papers may form a bibliography. Generally it's best to choose the most significant as single line examples and then to use something like Worldcat as a references for the remainder of an enormous bibliography. Overwhelming Wikipedia readers with a list of papers tends to be tl;dr. They get turned right off.

Where you have a note rather than a reference, look at {{efn}} and its friend {{Notelist}}. Knowing what is a note and what is a reference can be an arcane skill.

I'm happy to read on once you've refined it, but, once refined, submit for a review anyway. Fiddle Faddle 20:40, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi, But, actually I really did gather all the references and wrote based on the references. Of course I had to educate myself from primary sources, but the references to document my statements are largely 2cd and 3rd party sources. If you read the articles I reference you will see that what I say is directly in the referenced article. Also, there is not a lot of leeway to create my own ideas and then find references to support them - I wish I was that smart! Most of the references are 3rd party references. I think if only someone from WP:PSYCH would review the article they could confirm that I've used references properly.

Carrieruggieri (talk) 21:28, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Carrieruggieri, I started by telling you I am not a topic specialist. I see you have asked for help at the Psychology project. That is good. Yoy have also worked from the references. That is good.

Now turn your attention to this section and read again the first two of the last three paragraphs I wrote above. Fiddle Faddle 05:56, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you fiddle faddle. One reason for that section is for me because if I delete a reference I’ll get confused. Carrieruggieri (talk) 23:43, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

I see you are an AFC member, I was wondering if aside from cite kill if you agree with critique that the article isn’t written in encyclopedic style and if you could give me an example of what is not encyclopedic. This critique is holding that article back from publication and I really can’t see what those editors offering the critique see. I re- wrote it dramatically twice thinking I’ve addressed the problem and I keep getting the same critique. I thought I fixed the problem by adding a critique section and changing some language- a critique that caused the article to be taken Down after being published. But it still got rejected for not being encyclopedic. I did look at other psychotherapy articles and those articles don’t help me see why mine is not. I really want to solve this problem. It’s not a content problem- it’s apparently stylistic, so you don’t need to know the topic area to help me. Thank you in advance. Carrieruggieri (talk) 11:12, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Carrieruggieri, I have no difficulty with the tone. Other reviewers may have a different view, If they do then you need to ask them to explain clearly what they mean.

The only problem remaining for me is 'Outcome research references' which you need to attend to prior to resubmission Fiddle Faddle 11:17, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Timetrent, Thank you. Yes. I will attend to that collection of references before I submit. I appreciate your input. Carrie Carrieruggieri (talk) 17:09, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Carrieruggieri, it is always useful for further eyes to look at a submission. One have given the opinion now that work should cease and has rejected the draft. They and I disagree over the route forward for the draft, but that is absolutely fine in Wikipedia sense. They make a set of useful points for you to consider.

Reviewers rarely get into public arguments over drafts, and I and they will not over the one. This keeps the onus upon you to create the draft that will be acceptable.

A question is raised about conflict of interest. That needs to be answered fully and firmly. If you have a COI, fine, declare it. If not, also fine, declare it. I haven't checked your talk page, but I assume you have been asked the question there.

I'm going to step away from advising you in the draft, but I'm happy to advise you on wikipedia technicalities Fiddle Faddle 07:32, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for responding. I did address the COI on the talk page - there is a tag Carrieruggieri (talk) 11:46, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Carrieruggieri I found it. It looks like a gray area. I’d ask at the conflict of interest noticrboard to get a consensus. Once that exists then you know and it can be referred to Fiddle Faddle 16:51, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Ok I did it. Carrieruggieri (talk) 18:54, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Carrieruggieri, Wow. I looked at the reception you got. That was unexpected. It feels as if you have somehow kicked Schrödinger's Cat's Box, though obviously, we can't be sure util we look at the bx, which changes the whole exercise.

It depresses me to suggest it but perhaps a different editor from you may be needed here. This does happen sometimes. I'm sorry, because it feels to me to be a useful article on a notable topic Fiddle Faddle 22:31, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you Timtrent: It's been this way since the beginning. I you. browse through the talk pages you'll see that some of it is downright rude. I have a thick skin and I am so tenacious toward a goal that I think that might un-nerve people? I don't know. I can't begin to guess. But I did ask again for someone from PSYCH to take it over. It's so polished that all someone has to do is maybe shorten it (not everyone thinks its too long) or just submit it under a different name. But I have gone over every word, every reference (read every reference - should have included page numbers in articles, I did in books but not articles). If you know. someone in PSYCH maybe you can suggest they have a look. nOt many psych people in wikipedia world. There seems to be a dislike for psychotherapy as "quackery" or "pseudo-science". But lots of people need it and want to know about the various types of therapy. Shouldn't someone be able to google and find what they are looking for on wikipedia? I do it all the time. Carrieruggieri (talk) 23:09, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

But some people have been really nice and helpful. Especially in the teahouse. And you have been kind and helpful. I appreciate it! Carrieruggieri (talk) 23:13, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Carrieruggieri, I suppose each of us has things we dislike. Even if there is a trend, though, there is little point in trying to chase it down. I looked, look, at the draft on its merits. I see a draft that ought to be an article. Others seem to find differently. I don't really want to delve into talk pages. I try to keep away from that sort of stuff, it reminds me too much of real life. I use this as a hobby to get away from it. Here I can bask in glorious arcane inanity.

You could go through all the various wikilawyering processes. Alternatively, as what I imagine to be a good therapist yourself, you might advise yourself to walk quite away from the creature, trying not to disturb it.

People will have to search the net and find web sites, some of which are quackery, others of which are worthy. Searching for a therapy, a therapist, I found to be a different kind of shopping. I found it hard. this article describes my own search. The editor put some daft punctuation into it, so try to punctuate t as it was written! She learned that I punctuate correctly, and effectively, and she did not. If you like what you are reading, I write an occasional column for Bob. Go to [this page and start at the bottom, working up and to prior pages.

I write the I'm angry enough to be spurred into writing, or have a 'thing' I need to get rid of, as the second box down on my user page shows.

I digress. I never looked for the therapy, but selected the therapist. Me? I find tha more important. I want to be challenged by a therapist, and not spoken to in a therapist voice. But what, precisley, they do, how they do it, concerns me not at all. I just want to be shown how to walk down a route that I choose form the roadmap they provide.

Hmm, that was more than I expected to say! Fiddle Faddle 06:26, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the supportive words Timtrent, but I’m not chasing it down so much as correcting false assumptions and mid-understandings. After the years I put in this - (partly because I kept fixing what was suggested I fix- and then told to fix something else - et.,, and also the hours invested in hunting down articles and the expense in paying for services to access and read the articles, the translation of highly technical language... I can’t throw my hands up because someone feels like it’s promotional... I’ll look forward to reading your article a little later today. Carrieruggieri (talk) 11:11, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

👍🏻😀 Fiddle Faddle 11:23, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

@Timtrent: During further discussion of Draft:Accelerated experiential dynamic psychotherapy (at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Psychology § could someone within PSYCH take over the draft: accelerated experiential dynamic psychotherapy), the draft was accepted by Megaman en m and by me. Neither Megaman en m nor I see any problem with the article's current length; as was pointed out in the discussion, this article is considerable shorter than Cognitive behavioral therapy. Other objections of previous decliners were addressed in that discussion. You also expressed support for accepting the draft in that discussion (if I'm not mistaken). Carrieruggieri made the remaining requested changes. I was involved in the original deletion discussion that lead to the article's move to draft space, and I can attest that this version is considerably better than the version that was initially moved to draft space, and is comparable to Wikipedia's other articles on psychotherapy. Since you are an AFC participant, would you be willing to approve this draft? (I would do it myself but I am not an AFC participant, and this case is complicated because the existing redirect in mainspace needs to be deleted.) Biogeographist (talk) 16:46, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Biogeographist, I would but for two issues:

1. I am not an admin so cannot clear the path
2. I have recused myself from further reviews of this draft, feeling I was now involved with it

Yes, I do agree that the draft should become an article. Once in main space it may takes its chance. I'm truly pleased that other editors are involved. Fiddle Faddle 16:51, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll try a requested move. According to policy, any editor without a COI is permitted to create the article; the only obstacle here is admin powers. Biogeographist (talk) 16:57, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Biogeographist, When moving AFC drafts the normal helper script clears up guff, fluff and clutter and loads projects etc on the talk page. This will have to be monitored and done by hand.

I've chosen never to be an admin! Fiddle Faddle 16:59, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

I understand. I once approved an AFC manually without being an AFC participant, but in that case there was no redirect to remove. Biogeographist (talk) 17:02, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Biogeographist, do consider participating. It gives a useful toolkit and is as restful or as challenging as one desires. Even occasional work there helps reduce the backlog Fiddle Faddle 17:04, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I was just having second thoughts about the requested move idea. I guess I will join AFC instead and try something new. Biogeographist (talk) 17:07, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Adcom India

What block was in place when Draft:Adcom India was created for it to be subject to WP:G5? I see no allegations that Adcom India (talk · contribs) was anybody's sockpuppet. Cabayi (talk) 11:24, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Cabayi, Commercial/promotional Name, as far as I can tell Fiddle Faddle 11:25, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I'd agree with that, but that's not a blocked user creating something in defiance of their block. Cabayi (talk) 11:28, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Cabayi, mea culpa. What do we do with those? Fiddle Faddle 11:30, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

WP:G11, advert? Cabayi (talk) 11:32, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Cabayi, Had a senior moment! Of course! Fiddle Faddle 11:47, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Message from Harmander brar

Hi why are you rejecting my article. This is mine own created article. Please approve my article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Harmander brar (talk • contribs) 15:54, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Harmander brar, Wikipedia may not be used as a self publicity tool. Further, you are using this account to evade a block, which is not allowed. You fail WP:BIO Fiddle Faddle 15:58, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

ICSA Men's Singlehanded National Championship moved to draftspace

Thanks for writing to me. I get a little lost in that process. I am sorry if I did something wrong, and I thank you for your help and understanding.--Banderas (talk) 07:42, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Banderas, No problem at all. I message every few people whose moves I clear up. You were just the one I chose. All you need to do if you choose to abort the AFC process and move the draft to main space before a reviewer accepted it (often a risk of deletion, but your choice) is to remove AFC banners and comments Fiddle Faddle 07:44, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Banderas, If you examine Category:Pending AfC submissions in article space you will see how AFC reviewers are alerted to moves with banners still in place.

The AFC script also ensures than categories are "proper" categories, and populates the wikiprojsects on the talk page Fiddle Faddle 07:48, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Help For Draft:Priya_Shah

Can you give me proper references and can I remove previous comment by Theroadislong on 16 July 2020 as I have remove the content that have poor sourcing! Iamsouravrana (talk) 07:00, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Iamsouravrana, I cannot. If you wish the draft to be accepted it is up to you to prove the person's notability. This process is not about being given a fish it is about being taught to fish Fiddle Faddle 07:05, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Timtrent, Okay, please can you tell me that what references should I add? Iamsouravrana (talk) 07:18, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Iamsouravrana, Please confirm that you have read my comment on the draft, my answer to you elsewhere on the help desk, and the decline reason Fiddle Faddle 07:20, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

UPE

I noticed that in several AfDs today, you cited "UPE" as a reason to delete. If there was undisclosed paid editing on these articles, I recommend providing a more detailed explanation, for example, who was doing the paid editing and how you know that they were doing so. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 17:24, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Metropolitan90, each article has been tagged as UPE by others. Fiddle Faddle 17:25, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

You are correct. Sorry about that. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 17:26, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Metropolitan90, no probs at all. I think I trust the editor who tagged them. They have wide experience. It was perfectly reasonable of you to ask the question. Fiddle Faddle 17:28, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Wilbur Little

Your revert of my recent edit, with references supplied to reliable sources at the very center of this issue (the local newspaper - with both the historical text and a very recent reprint from that publication indicating the same facts to be valid) is an attempt at POV pushing. The allegations presented in this article are disputed by a number of contemporary reliable sources, and should not be presented as factual. This article should be withdrawn from DYK until the entire circumstances can be known. And you should not delete reliable source information, and my edits, which disagree with your opinion. More than happy to refer this to neutral third party administrators for an impartial review. Gulbenk (talk) 22:39, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Gulbenk, I resent your accusation of POV pushing. I have started a discussion on the talk page of the article which you are invited to participate in. I felt your change to be incorrect in the manner in which you presented the information and reverted what you had said but respect why you had said it. It is very interesting that the source you chose presented Little as being alive.

I have no horse in this race. Please pull your horns in Fiddle Faddle 22:43, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

You reverted a reliable source, The Early County News, which was at the very center of the alleged events. It is that newspaper that the Chicago Defender cites as a source for their article about Little. The Defender even goes into some detail naming two white suspects, and details about the way they carved their initials into Little's possessions. Except, the Early County News never wrote an article about Little being murdered, and went to some lengths to dispute the allegations. Going so far to say that Little was very much alive and working for a local jurist. The Early County News is still publishing. They recently ran a excerpt of their article on Little, with no retraction. That is the information and reliable source that you deleted, while retaining the proven-to-be-false information of the Chicago newspaper. This is a VERY troubled article, and should have never made it this far in our process. We need a police report, or a grave marker, or at least a confirming (and reliable) local historian to support this supposed event. So far, we have none of those. Gulbenk (talk) 23:24, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Gulbenk, At AFC our brief is that an article should be accepted if the reviewer's opinion is that it has a better than 50% chance of surviving an immediate deletion process. And it had, and still has, a better than 50% chance, the more so because good editors like yourself have taken an interest in it.

We are not asked to review drafts until perfection, indeed we cannot. We have to trust the community to take articles of any age, new or old, by the scruff of the neck and make them what they truly can be. I think you stand a very good chance of achieving more than the creating editor even dreamed of with this one.

Most of the discussion ought to take place on the article's talk page. Here, I accept that you believe I was incorrect to accept it. I hope you recognise the rationale for my acceptance. The topic of the article is a hateful one if the gentleman died, and bizarre and worth highlighting if that s not the case. The media mismatches you have highlighted are important, but truly I am not the one to argue this case with. I apologise that I have upset you, that was never my intent. Fiddle Faddle 23:33, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for your work on getting my article about an old stock car race published. - Buckaboob Bonsai (talk) 14:44, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Buckaboob Bonsai, It's always good to be able to accept a draft, even a short one. Keep up the good work Fiddle Faddle 14:46, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

I'm somewhat disappointed that my much more comprehensive article about Price Benowitz was recently deleted without my having a chance to weigh in (I've been away from Internet and very busy with career for the past weeks). Do you think there is any chance to resurrect that article, or should I just let it go? - Buckaboob Bonsai (talk) 14:50, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Buckaboob Bonsai, Go to WP:REFUND and make a case for undeletion into Draft space. That case must be based on what you will do in order to address the concerns expressed int he deletion discussion.

Wikipedia can be a brutal place. We have to learn to have very thick skins. I have has a couple of articles dear to my heart deleted. I have learned not to mind except for a couple of minutes Fiddle Faddle 15:02, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Buckaboob Bonsai, if you want to see an example of needing a thick skin and strong restraint, look at the thread above this one! Fiddle Faddle 15:06, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Rishi Kumar

Dear Timtrent,

Thank you for taking the time to review my piece - I was the first to attempt to get a Wiki article for Rishi published. He is my local candidate and I feel given his local importance, he should have a wiki page. I’m not sure why other people are submitting articles at the same time - I’ve given them all a look and mine seems to be the best and most extensive - hence why I believe mine should be considered for submission rather than the two others.

Thanks a lot for taking your time to look this over - please let me know of any next steps you’d like me to take or wether you believe re-submission would be ok. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Usademocrat12 (talk • contribs) 16:08, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Usademocrat12, Honestly no idea. I perhaps the AFC helpdesk (shoudl be a link in the decline note) is the best place to ask. It has all become a bit circular. Fiddle Faddle 16:13, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you - when I went into live support they told to just resubmit with a note saying that was the final version of the given wiki page. —Usademocrat12 (talk) 16:56, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Just resubmitted - apologies for the back and forth. —-Usademocrat12 (talk) 17:06, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Usademocrat12, I've done some tidying. There si work to do. I'll comment on the draft. See Draft:Rishi Kumar (most complete article, preferred submission) Fiddle Faddle 17:33, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Timtrent, Thanks a lot - I will be looking at the feedback soon and make given changes based off of it. This is my first time making a Wikipedia article, and I like the community - I’ll likely try to get more involved in the community after this. —-Usademocrat12 (talk) 17:37, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Usademocrat12, Make no mistake, you need a very thick skin to enjoy editing here. Read the thread above on Wilbur Little when you get time, then click though and look at the talk page there. It shows the huge diplomacy you learn editing here Fiddle Faddle 17:42, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Timtrent, Oh wow - that discussion is quite absurd. Looks like the page for Rishi wont become anything - ill give it a couple months i guess haha. Thanks a lot for your help and introducing me to Wikipedia - I’ll still do my best to get involved. Thank you!

Request on 15:59:47, 28 July 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Jaglak123

• Jaglak123 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Shehara Herath (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi - this is in regards to article Draft:Shehara Herath. You have declined the article for lack of notability. I have added additional references, could you please review and tell me what else I am missing?

Jaglak123 (talk) 15:59, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Jaglak123, tell me why he deserves an article. Then put that in the article with a citation that proves it. More references really ought to say "better references" southing we are discussing right now.

Right now he seems to be a candidate for election. Fiddle Faddle 16:02, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Initial biography Mathew James Burrows- conflict of Interest

Dear Timtrent,

In answer to your question regarding the conflict of interest, I have stated a COI because Mr Burrows is an indirect acquaintance and from what I understood this falls within the scope of a COI (it's a WP:COISELF if I understand correctly). However let me state unambiguously that I do NOT benefit financially in any way from making this page, this was done purely on a volunteer basis.

I hope this clarifies things.

In any case, thank you very much for taking the time to look at this page. Kind regards

Arnaud Stevins — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arnaud stevins (talk • contribs) 17:25, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Arnaud stevins, Thank you. I have logged this on the draft talk page, and noted it in your talk page. Wikipedia is under siege in some areas from WP:UPE and many of us do our best to seek to ensure that the organisations values are correct. Your confirmation is appreciated. Fiddle Faddle 17:54, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

follow up on your comment

First of all what is this paid unpaid ? i'm not paid for this. why i'm accused to be paid for this submission ? can someone explain to me please? Do you or any other editors have any evidence me being paid ? Second: I can send you hundreds or pages on wiki which are not even close of the requirements you are talking about. So I do not understand your logic behind this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MAKANYC (talk • contribs) 14:09, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

I leave many comments. Please (a) link to the place I left it and (b) sign your comments on talk pages with ~~~~ Fiddle Faddle 14:12, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Submission from user:AranyaPathak

Respected Sir, Fiddle Faddle, this is regarding your comment that you have left in the page Draft:Mahamba (creature), which I have created few days back. Following your advice, I have added exact citations along with quotes from the concerned physical copy book.--AranyaPathak (talk) 12:39, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

AranyaPathak, no needs to address me so formally, my new friend. I am just an ordinary perosn Fiddle Faddle 19:49, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

JCM48 -- Jeannette Marie Ludwig

Dear Timtrent, Thank you for pointing out that some of the text I used is under copyright. I thought referencing was enough. I would like to resubmit the page after I re-write it. Again, thank you for your quick response. [[User: talk:JCM48/talk]] (talk) 19:47, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

JCM48, many new users fall into this trap. I did. Just enjoy writing it in your own words. I suggest you start a 100% new draft Fiddle Faddle 19:48, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

Timtrent,

Rewriting is exactly what I am going to do! It will be a lot more fun, too. Thanks for your reassurance. [[User: talk:JCM48/talk]] (talk) 19:55, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

JCM48, so often folk find an early pushback to be discouraging. I'm glad you have the grit to see past that. The best editors here made big mistakes at the start. This essay may be of some help. I hope so. Fiddle Faddle 19:59, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

Environmental Law in New Jersey

Hello Timtrent, Thank you for approving my first wikipedia article! I was prepared for a long wait, so I was pleasantly surprised. Now I plan to keep expanding it and maybe adding more specific sub-articles. Thanks again, -Whatamwhatam — Preceding unsigned comment added by Whatamwhatam (talk • contribs) 15:53, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

Whatamwhatam, Excellent. Just remember to be its father, not its mother!

Sometimes we ask for a random submission to review and folk get the winning lottery ticket Fiddle Faddle 16:10, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

Request for one more review of Draft:Pleasant DeSpain before I resubmit

Dear Timtrent Fiddle Faddle...

(So far I have never met anyone with the last name "Faddle", but perhaps yours is "Trent".)

A belated thanks for your response to my request for help on this project!

As per your advice, I have altered the Draft:Pleasant DeSpain. I have found additional references, deleted some of the original ones, and rewritten the text to follow the references as you suggested. I could not find a "a global works catalogue" of his books, so I have kept them as they were. To me, the titles are an important testimony to his multicultural and multifaceted research and retelling of traditional tales from around the globe.

During my research of DeSpain's fellow storytellers, I came across this Wiki page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Offutt_Irwin) which is live and accepted. I modeled some of the new wording/style after this one because it has more of a "story" feel with pertinent quotes from the subject.

Before I officially submit it again, I would really appreciate you looking it over to see if I have honored your advice, and to learn if the reference I have kept now are acceptable in this new form.

Thanks in advance for your help!

Ben Airdunat (talk) 11:34, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Ben Airdunat, I think it is 51:49 to be accepted as it is. Let's get that higher. I've left some notes within the test. One I have not is "All inline links must be removed, please, and turned into references if appropriate, Wikilinks, or external links in a section so named. See Wikipedia:External links"

If his books have ISBN I commend {{ISBN}} to you

These things will push the probability of acceptance higher, but do not stop improving it even when submitted Fiddle Faddle 11:59, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Thank you for your candid advice.

Ifiesimama Melvin Sekibo (talk) 22:54, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Ifiesimama Melvin Sekibo, I like kittens. Thank you. If you can find what makes the gentleman notable that will move your sandbox article forwards. Fiddle Faddle 22:56, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

+ I have completed as much of your advice as possible at this time. Maybe give it one more quick look, please. =

Dear Timtrent...

Thanks for your amazingly quick response to my last request regarding Draft:Pleasant DeSpain. Good suggestions and I have done the best I can with existing references and a couple of new ones I found. As you suggested, I have added ISBN numbers except for two books which I couldn't locate.

I cannot find any supporting online references for the book awards given to Pleasant over the years. In all of his interviews, he chose to talk about other concepts and issues instead of awards. And I can't find any lists of book awarded in those past years.

I am not sure if I have the "External Link" concept/execution correct. A couple that I included before were "repeats" of inline references. Maybe I should remove some? I see some Wiki pages with External Links AFTER References, but I don't know how to position it there. I see some Wiki pages with none, some with many. I'm a bit confused as to which direction to take. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ben Airdunat (talk • contribs) 06:41, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Do you have any final suggestions? Otherwise, I will submit this once again. Your help has been invaluable and timely. Thank you so much for your assistance!

Ben Ben Airdunat (talk) 06:21, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Ben Airdunat, I've made some minor titivations. I'm in two minds about the awards. I am 60:40 in favour of removal until references can be found. I think it is submittable either way.

As you can see, I have made the ISBN magic word work harder for you!

When a reviewer accepts a draft it is on the basis that it has better than 50% chance of surviving an immediate deletion process. My view is that this stands that chance. I think the TV picture us unlikely to be retained by Commons since it lacks permission of the copyright owner. It is likely to be the TV company or the photographer who owns it, not the uploader. That is a process there, though, not here. Fiddle Faddle 07:25, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Timtrent...Thanks again for your quick response and advice. I didn't realize that ISBN immediately become links! I will resubmit this the way it is. FYI: I know that Pleasant commissioned or owns these photos, but he is currently out of touch to communicate about them. MY TWO FINAL QUESTIONS: 1) I'm not sure what "titivations" means or where you made them? And 2) I see your first comments at the top of the Draft:PleasantDeSpain page, but I don't see your most recent suggestions that I have followed. Should those be there or not? Or should I just submit it as it stands?

You're my hero for the day, well, behind Chance the Siberian Husky who rules my life.

Ben Airdunat (talk) 08:13, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Ben Airdunat, Titivations: tiny changes to make it appear better

Just submit as is. Go for it

I used to have English Setters. Dogs are in charge (or so they think) Fiddle Faddle 08:23, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Help For Draft:Davo

why are you denying Davo's page. He clearly has all the citations, all the media and the social media numbers to back up why he should be on wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Christinagirgis (talk • contribs) 20:33, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Christinagirgis, I am sure you will do what you wish. You are mistaken, however. Fiddle Faddle 19:37, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

More info about that Eugènie Jeanne Devoir Draft.

As earlier you have sent me a message on my talk area. You asked me whether Coco Chanel’s mother was notable on her own right. She may not be, but she brought up one of the most famous fashion designers . She must be a great person in her life. Yours Sincerely Wiki-Nihaal (talk) 11:23, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Wiki-Nihaal, Indeed she must have been significant, but, unless you can assert notability outside her progeny then she has no place on Wikipedia Fiddle Faddle 11:26, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Essam_al-Emad

welcome Fiddle Faddle can you help me in this page Essam_al-Emad that you moved it to Draft:Essam_al-Emad, in the last edit i applied the Required notes but you moved it to draft, I need help if you can do it.--Amrahlawymasry (talk) 07:50, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Amrahlawymasry, I moved it back to draft because it would not have survived as an article (0.9 probability). I cannot read Arabic so am unable to help.

You tell me that you applied the required notes, but I reinstated the comment from DGG and it does not appear to me that you have done a great deal to address that. Their opinion may differ from mine.

In any case please solve the WP:CITEKILL problem I may be able to help after that. Fiddle Faddle 07:56, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Amrahlawymasry, the references you have chosen so far do nothing except verify that the gentleman exists. We cannot accept articles with only Primary or Self Published sources.

For a living person we have a high standard of referencing. Every substantive fact you assert, especially one that is susceptible to potential challenge, requires a citation with a reference that is about them, and is independent of them, and is in WP:RS, and is significant coverage. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources. Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact cited, that meet these tough criteria is likely to make this draft a clear acceptance (0.9 probability). Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the person is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today. Fiddle Faddle 08:08, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

All the sources are reliable and approve that Majid Pousti is an Iranian musician

I added many sources that contains reliable information about Majid Pousti as an Iranian musician... most of them are in English and France. there are more sources in Persian that I did not added. Would you please help me about this issue ?Pedomedolin (talk) 10:10, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Pedomedolin, I have left what I hope is a useful comment on the draft for you Fiddle Faddle 10:25, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Thank you! Thank you! Thank you!!!

A very belated thank you for helping with the post for Tedd L. Mitchell. I aspire to be proficient at this Wikipedia thing, but alas my limited skills and time make that difficult. I sincerely appreciate your help and patience. I promise to pay it forward one day when I get the hang of this thing! Be well! Jody Venturoni 15:52, 4 August 2020 (UTC)jventuroni — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jventuroni (talk • contribs)

@Jventuroni: It's a pleasure. Take baby steps. It takes a good while to get the hang of this crazy place. Fiddle Faddle 16:07, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Jeannette Marie Ludwig

Hi! I wrote a new bio for Jeannette Ludwig. Can't believe how I could have submitted the other one. I'm an editor! I welcome any comments/suggestions you have for me. Thanks so much! JCM48 — Preceding unsigned comment added by JCM48 (talk • contribs) 20:59, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

JCM48, I suppose the answer depends on what you would like to achieve? I'll try telepathy, but I'm not awfully good at it 👀 Fiddle Faddle 21:11, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Chevalier de Meude-Monpas

Hi - you declined my article on Chevalier de M-M, but did not give any precise reason why, and didn't make any suggestion as to how I can improve my submission. Could you please give me more info, please ? Thanks.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Chevalier_de_Meude-Monpas#Chevalier_de_Meude-Monpas — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a01:e34:ec68:5c0:a820:2814:ff2d:7a4c (talk) 21:56, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

Yes I did. Please confirm that you have read my detailed comment on the draft Fiddle Faddle 20:57, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

You wrote : An IP editor, below, has asked what is not neutral. Thank you for the question. It is not lack of actual neutrality. There is no true lack of neutrality. The issue is the phrasing. "Another thing we know is that he was" is written in a style excellent for a report, but needs flattening for an encyclopaedia. "Another important source on Meude-Monpas" - is it? If it is an important source we use it as a reference to the fact we're stating. We don't tell the reader it's important. They know it is because it's a reference. These are simply two examples thatythe draft lacks the formal tone required. Please click that link in the box where I left the major part of the rationale for pushing this back to you Fiddle Faddle 07:35, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

If this issue is a PHRASING, and you object to such a horrible phrase as "Another thing we know is that he was" or "Another important source on Meude-Monpas" - and I do understand that everybody should be absolutely shocked - then, why don't you improve these sentences rather than refuse my submission ? Isn't Wikipedia supposed to be collaborative ? Btw I'm not new on WP, and being an IP is NOT supposed to stop anyone writing in WP. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:E34:EC68:5C0:A820:2814:FF2D:7A4C (talk) 22:07, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

Your draft, your choice. Fiddle Faddle 22:12, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

It is not my choice to make Wikipedia collaborative, and neither is it yours. People who don't want want it to work this way shouldn't be on WP at all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:E34:EC68:5C0:8D78:152A:7C61:1C34 (talk) 13:50, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

As you say. Now, I have no interest i continuing this conversation with you. Fiddle Faddle 13:52, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Msg from Florin

it does not matter anymore, you can delete. Florin (talk) 19:58, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Island House, Laugharne

Thanks very much for taking an interest in my doings Tim, I've tried to tickle up the citations as you suggested but suspect there are still many errors. Thinking it may be time to launch this page onto main space but I'd still like to flag it up for editors experienced in this field to correct and improve it. Your own thoughts on next practical steps would be very welcome. Horatius At The Bridge (talk) 13:22, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Horatius At The Bridge, To me it looks like a fine and main space ready article. I suggest, if you're confident, that you migrate it there yourself a dn add relevant Wikiprojsects and assessments to the talk page. Don;t forget to add categories, too.

Then be its father. Let it graze its knees and take its chances. Don't be its mother and expect it to give yo presents every time you meet!

I do that with articles that I start as drafts, too Fiddle Faddle 13:27, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

At the risk of revealing even greater expanses of my ignorance, how do I migrate it to mainspace? This task has been performed by your good self for my previous sandbox drafts.I think I can remember how to restore the categories and als alert some projects that might be interested - not sure about the assessments bit tho' Horatius At The Bridge (talk) 13:33, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Horatius At The Bridge, I'll do this one for you, then. There is a "Move" function in the toolbar under "More" which ought to produce a drop down list. Move is effective "Rename"

Standby and it will be done Fiddle Faddle 13:35, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Thank you again for your help, it may be needed again here Talk:Laugharne#Caleb_Rees ;-) Horatius At The Bridge (talk) 09:53, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Horatius At The Bridge, I have commented there as the uninvolved editor that I am. Thank you for the compliment of asking me for an unbiased opinion. Fiddle Faddle 10:06, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Graeme McLagan

Hello Timtrent, I read your message rejecting the draft entry and am afraid I need help in gaining approval. I'd be grateful if you can advise how to proceed. In summary, a friend of a friend, (James Reynolds, who has a Wikipedia entry) was surprised that there was nothing for me. He prepared an entry and submitted it, but apparently failed to get it properly reviewed. So I attempted to do that myself but as a novice on wikipedia ran up against obstacles that I did not follow. I was advised to keep it simple, not put too much in, the reasoning being that further information can be added once an entry was accepted. If I have read your message properly it appears to be saying that I am notable for only one event - the libel case that I won. However, I have authored three non-fiction books, at least one of them a best-seller. All three were so successful as hardbacks that they were brought out in paperback too. Those books are already referenced but what was to be added later included the winning while with the BBC of Royal Television Society Awards - 1996: won Home News category with Newsnight for coverage of the Arms for Iraq affair, and also nominated for TV journalist of the year for a scoop in obtaining an advance copy of the Scott Inquiry report which was critical of the role of the Foreign Office minister William Waldegrave. After it was broadcast the year before, the Evening Standard was full of praise for it in 'The Beeb's Big Bang' (7.6.1995) In 1998: Nominated in RTS Current Affairs (Home) category for 'Bent' a Panorama programme on Metropolitan Police corruption. I would hope that just the above would help a review. But there are other references which could also be added. Googling the name Graeme McLagan comes up with a mass of material. The problem is that as I've already said, I'm a novice and do not know how to make them, although I have tried previously. Please help. Thank you, Graeme — Preceding unsigned comment added by GeeMcLagan (talk • contribs) 11:50, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

GeeMcLagan, It is not rejected. "Declined" means pushed back to you for more work.

As a writer you may find writing for Wikipedia either very easy or very hard. Concentrate on the references first. Reading User:Timtrent/A good article may assist. Find the references that pass muster and use the facts they speak of to create a storyboard. Then write, fully referenced, what the storyboard says. I suspect this is broadly the same as putting a good TV documentary together.

Tell me, please, if you need further help Fiddle Faddle 11:59, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Do keep it brief and factual, but more than bullet points. The objective is to get it up there, not to create the finished product. Fiddle Faddle 12:01, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Publication of Fabrice Burgaud

Hi, I see you have moved this article into mainspace and tagged it as a rough translation. However the article is almost incomprehensible - I've read it several times and I can't understand the person's life and achievements. Strongly suggest it's put back into draft space and someone bilingual improves the English so it can be understood. MurielMary (talk) 10:00, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

MurielMary, I'm happy with whatever you choose, but I recommend asking a French speaker first. If you follow the link to Wikidata you can see that the person is notable (0.8 probability). We do often log articles as rough translations and allow them to stay as articles. It may get more attention in main space than as draft. The creating editor obviously went as far as they could

Google translate suggests:

He first joined the Institute of Political Studies in Bordeaux, before working in a consulting company. He was admitted to the National School of Magistrates (ENM) in January 1996, and graduated in 2000, 91st out of 161.

Appointed on September 1, 2000, investigating judge at the Tribunal de Grande Instance of Boulogne-sur-Mer, he inherited the investigation into the so-called Outreau pedophilia case by the chance of the duty table, a few months after his arrival .

Before the Outreau case became a scandal, Fabrice Burgaud was appointed to the Paris prosecutor's office, where the Paris prosecutor Yves Bot assigned him, in July 2002, to the anti-terrorism section. As a result, the magistrate is transferred to Paris while the investigation of the Outreau case has not yet been completed. It is his successor who will sign, on March 13, 2003, the order of indictment before the Assize Court.

In 2004, when the Outreau scandal broke out, the prosecutor Bot had him accompanied by a magistrate specializing in communication, when he testified at the Saint-Omer trial.

As the scandal grew, the same year he was transferred to the section for the execution of sentences. Tracked down by photographers, insulted in anonymous letters, Judge Burgaud is under police protection and takes two lawyers, Jean-Yves Dupeux and Patrick Maisonneuve. In front of his interlocutors, he maintained that he had only done his job and intended to remain in the judiciary. Fiddle Faddle 10:05, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

There is more in the French article.

I am content with the outcome you choose. Fiddle Faddle 10:05, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Response to Unblock

i was adding a coverart/artwork for an Album article, all album articles included the artworks so i thought it's ok, i don't know why but it says i can't upload images anymore cause i'm blocked, could anyone please help me add artworks without getting blocked? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gabriella Grande (talk • contribs) 16:28, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Gabriella Grande, I have no idea. I suggest Wikipedia:Help desk. I almost never upload pictures Fiddle Faddle 16:31, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

I did a little looking. Gabriella Grande had her Commons account blocked for copyright violations and Flickr washing—see c:User talk:Gabriella Grande for more details. —C.Fred (talk) 21:20, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

C.Fred, That explains it. Thank you. I never thought to dig there, which is odd since I am often on Commons offering out of scope material for deletion.

Who knew you could wash Flickr? 👀😂 Fiddle Faddle 21:22, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

The user has not uploaded any files here and has no deleted contributions. That's what led me to check Commons.

And you can launder money, so why can't you wash Flickr? :) —C.Fred (talk) 21:25, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

C.Fred, Ironic that I was at the commons copyright talk page mentioning that people were using Wikitia to launder copyright away from pictures a couple of weeks back. I htink I even used the term. Go me!! I have been known to be naïve and wise at the same time Fiddle Faddle 21:28, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

C.Fred Timtrent does that mean i'm gonna be unblocked or...?🙂

Gabriella Grande You have to apply on Commons, which is a separate place with separate rules. Fiddle Faddle 12:11, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Ismael Lares

Finding sources is a nightmare, but I’m submitting it. If there is a method to improve it, let me know. Eternal Shadow Talk 21:21, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Eternal Shadow, Sometimes the community will do a better referencing job than the individual because it has the resources somewhere, somehow. I see >50% chance of immediate survival, so time till tell Fiddle Faddle 21:27, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Eternal Shadow, I've linked him to his Wikidata item. No references there at all. Maybe you can add yours to Wikidata? I find that EVIL to edit Fiddle Faddle 21:32, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Timtrent, I’m working on that, plus adding a photo (I have one). Eternal Shadow Talk 21:36, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Eternal Shadow, It was a good call to use AFC. There is obviously nothing objectionable in the article, but it means you cannot be thought of as being silly Fiddle Faddle 21:38, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Timtrent, I figured being safe was better. I don’t typically use AFC as some reviewers take forever and I don’t want to add to a backlog I don’t fully need. Eternal Shadow Talk 21:42, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Contributor banner

Hi

You kindly helped me remove the contribution statement banner on this article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Marcellus_Baz) before and i have now added the appropriate connections to the subject noted on my talk page i believe. Is there a way for it to be taken off again or for the article to be reviewed to check it is neutral as i believe it is? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rosethorn1984 (talk • contribs) 09:59, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

Rosethorn1984, generally these things await an editor's discretion. Since I have helped previously I can be seen to be involved. Perhaps asking at WP:Teahouse will be the best route Fiddle Faddle 10:25, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

Ok, thank you for your help — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rosethorn1984 (talk • contribs) 10:30, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Regus workshop has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Regus workshop. Thanks! Nathan2055^{talk - contribs} 01:40, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Nathan2055, That has to be a WIkifoible. It isn't mine. Fiddle Faddle 05:34, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Roy Wales page

Dear Tim, thank you very much for your approval of the page for Roy Wales, I really appreciate it, as it has been months of work and I have been on a big Wikipedia learning journey in the process! Many thanks, Simon — Preceding unsigned comment added by Simon Wales (talk • contribs) 04:50, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Simon Wales, Your learning is not over. Now your challenge is to sit n your hands over thsi article on your father, for two important reasons:

1. You have a full conflict of interest over this article and ypu now must only edit it by making requests to others on its talk page. See {{Request edit}}. While you may correct small factual matters, this is the only thing you may correct
2. All wikipedia articles are now "ours" and it is no longer yours. We may rip it apart, lengthen it, shorten it, change it radically. Your job is not to care. Save what you've done so far as a pdf for the family, because the article will change. WP:OWN is import here.

So your role is to be the article's father, not its mother. It can now graze its knees without your worrying. Fiddle Faddle 05:41, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Tim, that is helpful advice - Simon — Preceding unsigned comment added by Simon Wales (talk • contribs) 08:37, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Thank you and possible re-review

Hello! Thank you for reviewing Draft: Henry Maguire. My colleague and I have made some changes as you suggested, and we wondered if the article was now suitable for creation? Many thanks indeed! KerstingFan (talk) 09:35, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

KerstingFan, Thank you. I or another reviewer will get to it in due course Fiddle Faddle 09:36, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Timtrent Thank you! KerstingFan (talk) 09:43, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Timtrent Thanks so much for following up with the comment about the links to places not being correct. I hadn't spotted this! They have now all been corrected and the article is resubmitted. Of course understand it won't necessarily be you to review it again - but thank you so much for the guidance! I'm helping people who are brand new to wikipedia (and I'm not an expert myself!) so lots of these sorts of mistakes are expected :D KerstingFan (talk) 14:17, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

KerstingFan, I try very hard not to re-review. Other eyes tend to be better as the process continues Fiddle Faddle 14:19, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Help Needed!

Hello Faddle, first I want to thank you for replying to the Help Desk and then for asking for help on WikiProject Albania for my article. Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Albania#Draft:Dejzi - eyes please. I just wanted to inform you that I have not received an answer yet, I have asked some other administrators also before but they have not answered me. I am relatively new to Wikipedia and I really wanted to learn how things work and develop in this community, which I think I am not too bad right now :). I also help the Wikipedia Albanian community a lot by illustrating and designing the things we need to enrich Wikipedia as much as possible with good and accurate things, I normally do this as a volunteer work as I am a digital artist by profession. This article that I have submitted, even after the improvements I have made, I am feeling desperate as now I see no reason not to approve and at the same time I have not even received help until it is presented to you. Thank you again--Arjanhalili (talk) 14:23, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

Arjanhalili, I feel for you. I have no answer for you. I can translate the references, but cannot tell if the sources are reliable. See WP:RS. We could gamble and approve it, to risk deletion, or you could ask your Albanian friends for help Fiddle Faddle 14:36, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

Dear Tim, thank you for the honest answer. Can you approve this article? I have made all the changes that have been requested. I do not know how to get help from the Albanian community as I do not know anyone else who can help me in this regard. I really appreciate your contribution and help that you are doing on wikipedia and I believe the other administrators have the same opinion.

All sources are direct to the person in question and are from portals with very good reputation in our country, thank you.--Arjanhalili (talk) 17:29, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Arjanhalili, in which case we will let the community decide. You can do no more. I will pop over and approve it Fiddle Faddle 17:30, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

thank you so much for the prompt reply and help, much appreciated!--Arjanhalili (talk) 17:44, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Arjanhalili, There is no guarantee that it will not be deleted Continue to work on it to show that she is notable. She is borderline at present. If there is a deletion discussion I take no part in discussions on drafts I've accepted Fiddle Faddle 17:46, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Roman Catholic Diocese of El Paso

Hi--that article the other day, did you use some automated function to "fill in" references? If so, you reckon you can do that for the "Sex abuse" section of this article? (Maybe other sections have bare URLs too...) Thanks for your help! Drmies (talk) 20:44, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

Drmies, Easy to do. I use reFill from User:Zhaofeng Li/reFill since Reflinls vanished and citation bot os blocked Fiddle Faddle 20:56, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

Haha easy for you, maybe. Thanks for helping out. The ONLY thing I want is for that editing tool, RefCite? to be working again. I am SO F***ING TIRED of typing out citation templates. Oh, the DYK for Islam in the Arctic is progressing, I think. Take care, and thanks again, Drmies (talk) 00:39, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Drmies, Grab access to reFill. Citations are a right royal pain Fiddle Faddle 07:00, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

I finally got around to trying it, but the the little thing that it did wasn't very helpful. I saw a bunch of citations in that article that I think were done with the same tool, so I've been cleaning up the dates (wrong format) and some of the parameters ("website" instead of publication or publisher--very irritating). I think it often adds the unnecessary language parameter also. Next question is, if I find one where it adds (types) more parameters, if it's helpful to correct what it does, or just do it from scratch. Thanks again! Drmies (talk) 20:23, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Drmies, I think it might have some foibles. It's not as good in my view as the blocked one, but it's better than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick. Try it on a draft with truly blank URLS and form a view from that. Fiddle Faddle 20:26, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. Nice working with you. Ima have a look at the Arctic article. Drmies (talk) 20:27, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Drmies, I hope ot did it right. There were so many references flying about I just trusted it Fiddle Faddle 20:28, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Oh I wasn't going to check for that--there's too many, and life is fleeting. I looked at the DYK nom, to see if that was ready. It's not; I need another reviewer. Thanks again, Drmies (talk) 20:44, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Drmies, The one ref in that that misses in it for me is the spreadsheet. It needs a pedigree, and is susceptible to being edited at source

Life is far too short to check more than a 5% sample of those Fiddle Faddle 20:46, 11 August 2020 (UTC)