User talk:WikiDan61/Archive20190326

Archive created 2019.03.26

11:54:55, 10 April 2018 review of submission by Crazyangel83

• Crazyangel83 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Praveen P Gopinath (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello, I have edited the content as much as possible to suit wiki requirements. But Im still a bit confused. I have added new citations and changed the content to sound neutral as well. If you could please let me know if this looks okay or what exactly needs to be changed. Crazyangel83 (talk) 11:54, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

Crazyangel83 (talk) 11:54, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

@Crazyangel83: The Mangalam.TV source that you've added appears to be a sign of significant coverage, but that is the only valid source in your article. Citations to Gopinath's own books is not useful, as this only verifies that he published, not that he is considered a significant or notable author. And the various blogs you've linked to do not appear to have the necessary journalistic rigor and editorial review process. Please review Wikipedia's guidelines on reliable sources. Finally, the citations should be attached to the facts that they verify. For help with this, see Wikipedia's Referencing for Beginners guide. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 12:09, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

Thank you WikiDan61! So if i put in another citation similar to the mangalam.tv one should it suffice? Crazyangel83 (talk) 12:26, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

@Crazyangel183: It would be a good start. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 12:27, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi WikiDan61, I have changed the citations and the content too. Would you please be kind enough to have a look and tell me if its fine now. Crazyangel83 (talk) 15:53, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

@Crazyangel183: Looking deeper into Gopinath's career, I see that he has self-published all his books. We'll need evidence that these books have made some impact. (Local interviews aren't really helpful, as news sources often interview local interest stories.) WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 18:10, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

Rejected Horne Reactor Article

Hi WikiDan61, I am working on the rejected Horne Hybrid Reactor page and found a source in a newspaper, here is a clip. I can add that to the citation, would that be sufficient for approval? Ron3000001 (talk) 17:11, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Fusion Newspaper clip.png

@Ron3000001: First, don't post images of newspaper articles; that's a copyright violation. (The image has been so tagged.) Second, no, I don't think that is sufficient. Horne is making some exceptional claims about their fusion reactor technology, and exceptional claims require exceptional sources. In this case, Horne should submit technical papers to the relevant journals, and when those journals have peer-reviewed the material, then we could accept the article, citing those peer-reviewed articles. I'm concerned that Horne chose to display their product at a Makers' Faire; that is hardly the technical forum one would expect for such a revelation, and it makes me wonder whether they have actually achieved anything at all. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 17:40, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

@WikiDan61: Sorry I did not think it would post the newsprint to commons. I think the article is correct but a bit misleading, the only claim is that it is the first to use REBCO superconductors and that is clear from the video if you know about the technology. There is no possible way to generate a field strong enough for visible plasma manipulation for that length of time with conventional electromagnets. If someone could help me reword that to make it more clear and less exceptional that would be great, I don't know how to get community to contribute to a draft article.

I also follow Lockheed Martin's Compact Fusion device which has never published in any peer-reviewed journal and still has a wiki page. I am just trying to get the info out there so any help would be appreciated. Ron3000001 (talk) 18:15, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

@Ron3000001: I would argue that the press that Lockheed's project has received (from The Engineer, Aviation Week & Space Technology, and Technology Review) exceed the level of independent coverage shown in the Horne draft (limited to the Silver State Post). I would also note that the Lockheed project is clearly identified as developmental, whereas the write up of the Horne device would lead one to believe they have achieved a working prototype fusion reactor. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 19:05, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

WikiDan61, I did not intend the draft to indicate the device was not developmental. I made many changes to it, do you mind taking a look? Do you have any other suggestions? Also I see there is no article on Rare earth - Barium - Copper Oxide (REBCO) superconductors. I will start on one of those as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ron3000001 (talk • contribs) 15:47, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

I'd still like to see more coverage in reliable sources. The fact that Horne has created their own cryptocurrency to collect investments in this technology leaves me highly skeptical. As for the REBCO article: have at it! WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 16:04, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

WikiDan61, How about a criticism section on that article? Ron3000001 (talk) 17:08, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

@Ron3000001: Only if it can be reliably sourced. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 17:45, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

Declined post - IDMB Advisory Ltd

Hi

Thanks for the feedback... but it would be virtually impossible to meet your requirements for an initial post other than the copious references in D&B and other business directories.

You should be aware that there are several similar posts with similar names already in Wikipedia and none of these are any better referenced or notable.

At the moment, if you try and search IDMB, it reverts to IMDb (the movie database). I know that there are several different usages of IDMB around the world... NONE of them are IMDb. At the very least you should be allowing valid alternatives and CORRECT searches, even if you don't publish this one.

I realise that you are a volunteer, applying WP rules, so nothing personal, but I think in this case this is undermining the point of an encyclopedia (where you can look things up and get relevant/right answers).

Regards

Ian — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ibatey (talk • contribs) 14:18, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

@Ibatey: References in business directories would not be useful. Wikipedia requires that the organization has been the topic of multiple significant instances of media coverage (and business directory listings are not considered significant coverage). If it is "virtually impossible" for this company to meet the requirements to be covered at Wikipedia, then it shouldn't be covered. Wikipedia is not a compendium of everything that is. Also, it is not Wikipedia's mission to solve your company's SEO problems; if your company can't be found in an internet search, please seek the assistance of a professional SEO consultant. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 14:53, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, I wasn't clear... the search is within Wikipedia and has nothing to do with SEO... I was simply pointing out that IMDb is NOT IDMB... the letters are in a different order. Apart from this company it is also several abbreviations and a type of card reader. so the search within Wikipedia is wrong.

No need to reply, I'm not looking to change the decision... I was simply trying to add something to the repository. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ibatey (talk • contribs) 17:12, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

list of Political Parties in Pakistan

i upload complet list that is enlisted in ecp.list of political parties in Pakistan miss many political Parties — Preceding unsigned comment added by ملک محمدعبداللہ (talk • contribs) 12:46, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

@ملک محمدعبداللہ: So fix the existing article, don't create an entirely new article with duplicate (and extensive non-English) content. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 13:01, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

BPLA page flagged for deletion

Hi WikiDan61,

I'm the web administrator for the Boston Patent Law Association, and saw today that after bringing our page up to date you've flagged us for deletion. This is my first time managing a Wikipedia page, and I'm concerned that my updates today led to the flag. If you have a moment, can you please help me understand how we can mitigate this situation?

Thanks in advance! -Constance Bostonpatentlaw (talk) 21:04, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

@Bostonpatentlaw: Your editing on the page brought it to my attention (I'm suspicious anytime I see a single large edit to a page, especially when the editor is clearly associated with the organization), but your edits are not the reason I nominated the page for deletion. The article was overtly promotional before you edited it, and the notability issue reflects the organization itself, not the article's content. (Basically, my argument, and you are free to disagree, is that the organization is simply not notable enough to merit a Wikipedia argument, no matter what content the article actually contains.) : By the way, you need to consider changing your username, because it's presently a violation of Wikipedia username policies. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 21:40, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi WikiDan61,

Thanks for your rapid reply! The Board have supplied me with a list of links to BPLA mentions by the USPTO, UNH School of Law, and other entities. Would creating a section of "Press and References" for these links be sufficient to prove our notoriety? I appreciate your assistance in helping me improve our page. As for my username, this was the first thing I tried to register which was not banned outright for being in violation of the username policy. The account exists for the use of the current BPLA administrator, specifically to manage our one page and no others, so it is not misleading but purely descriptive. Thanks for bringing it up though, I appreciate Wikipedia's position on transparency and authenticity. Bostonpatentlaw (talk) 13:08, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

@Bostonpatentlaw: Notability, not notoriety. (Criminals are notorious; organizations are notable, and hopefully not notorious!) The press and references section might be helpful; I won't be able to say until you've added it and the sources can be evaluated. As to your username, it still represents an organization rather than an individual, and so is a violation of Wikipedia username policies. You could pick a name such as "JimAtBPLA", but the current name implies that you and any number of other people at BPLA might use the account, and that's not allowed.

Networking For Hope

Hi WikiDan please how do i do it then because there are a lot of credible website that proves its truth — Preceding unsigned comment added by Macdrey (talk • contribs)

@Macdrey: First off, you need to rewrite the entire article in the third person (see WP:FIRSTPERSON). Next, you need to rewrite the entire article so that it is not promotional. (See WP:NPOV and WP:SPAM). Third, you need to reference reliable sources that demonstrate that this organization has been the subject of significant coverage. Given that the organization appears to be so new that they have not yet bothered to write anything in their boilerplate website, that last part seems like it might be difficult. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 19:14, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Macdrey Don't forget to disclose if you're being paid, if you work for the company, etc. Vermont (talk) 21:15, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

@Vermont: I've updated your comment above with a piped link. I find that new editors are often confused by the WP:XXX shortcuts. Piping the link with a standard English term helps. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 14:35, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Rakteswari Draft

the information represented in the draft is personally gathered by me. Rakteswari is a lesser known but powerul goddess. Please rereview. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Srikalahasti23 (talk • contribs) 17:22, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

added more references from the books published. pls re review — Preceding unsigned comment added by Srikalahasti23 (talk • contribs) 14:50, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

@Srikalahasti23: Sorry. I was able to decline the submission in the past based on rather simple criteria, but I am not able to evaluate your new sources to ascertain whether the article now meets Wikipedia guidelines. Perhaps someone more versed in Hindu mythology would be a better reviewer. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 15:00, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Andreas von Wernitz Salm-Kyrburg

Hi WikiDan 61

After the last rejection, (we already submit 2 requests) concerning Mr. Andrés von Wernitz Salm-Kyrburg, you ask us for a: “proof that he is a noble”. We have as a proof, first, in a wikipedia page, with this URL: https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alvear_Palace_Hotel this URL, property of Wikipedia Foundation, names Mr. Andrés von Wernitz Salm-Kyrburg as a Baron and being a Baron is already a noble title. If you precise of official documentation which states that Mr. von Wernitz, is a noble, we can send you Official Certificates from: Reino de España, Magyar Királyság, Bundesrepublik Deutschland, République française, Republica Argentina, Repubblica Italiana, also we can send URL from Hello! Or other yellow press in noble’s parties. Mr. von Wernitz is a Baron a Duke, a Count and a Prince. Please, if you are unable to manage this situation, escalate the problem to your Head. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by David876 (talk • contribs) 11:42, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

@David876: The contents of es:Alvear Palace Hotel are irrelevant. While the Wikimedia Foundation owns the servers on which Wikipedia is hosted, it is not responsible for the user-generate content contained therein. Wikipedia guidelines disallow the use of Wikipedia as a source because Wikipedia articles, being editable by anyone who happens to come along, are not a terribly reliable source of consistent truth. As for the other documentation: it's unclear to me why all of those countries would have generated certificates attesting to the nobility of Mr von Wernitz, whose claim to nobility refers to an Empire that ceased to exist over 200 years ago, but let's assume for a moment that they all have produced such certificates. Possession (legitimate or not) of an obscure title of nobility is not a sufficient claim of notability for inclusion in Wikipedia. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 11:53, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

If you could review....thanks...

Dan61 -- Good afternoon. I updated the "Jonathan Perkins" draft page. I addressed many of your suggestions and added many other citations/references. I originally was trying to be brief and succinct. But after reading your comments added several other case histories and references. (Of course, there are many more I could add...but I am still trying to be concise).

Anyway...thanks for reviewing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jwilliamson11 (talk • contribs) 20:49, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

@Jwilliamson11: You've added some citations (three by my count) since the article was last declined, but they don't help your case. They are again either local coverage for cases Perkins has won, or for his charity work in raising money by climbing Mount Kilimanjaro (impressive, but not notable), or a notation of an award granted by an organization whose own notability is questionable. All in all, I'd still decline this. As it is, I'll leave that to someone else to avoid the appearance of "piling on" to your submission. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 21:13, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Questions about revisions

Hello,

Thank you for the feedback on the Optherium Labs draft. I am in the process of editing it. I removed any language that didn't appear netural, but I've run into an issue that I fear will result in another rejection. We are in the process of securing media placements in a number of publications, but many of these articles are not yet published. Therefore, there are few external citations we can rely on.

What is your best advice? Is there anything else we could do besides wait until we've amassed some external media placement that covers the nature of our solutions? Please advise.

Thanks again for your feedback. I appreciate your help in refining this entry to meet Wikipedia's standards.

Cheers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AdamOPEX (talk • contribs) 20:24, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

@AdamOPEX: Securing media placements means that you are providing copy for magazines to print about you, which would then not be considered reliable sources because they are not independent. If no one has yet taken the opportunity to write about your company, it is not yet ready to have a Wikipedia article. Also, as you appear to be closely connected to the company in question, please carefully review Wikipedia's conflict of interest guidelines and perhaps consider letting someone else write the Wikipedia article about your company. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 20:39, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia as a Significant, Relaible, independent ans Secondary Sources

Can Wikipedia pages be used as references for sources?Rotimibean (talk) 05:37, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

@Rotimbean: No. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 12:02, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

19 AR 87

Hey Dan, thanks for your message, where can I post my fiction so that it SEEMS it was on Wikipedia? Like is there some kind of fiction-style Wikipedia clone? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Macacio87 (talk • contribs) 15:30, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

@Macacio87: I'm not sure what you mean. Are you looking to make it seem as if your writing is an actual Wikipedia article? If that's the case, I don't know of any place to do that, and I wouldn't encourage that anyway. We are trying to make Wikipedia a source of reliable factual information. Attempts to produce fiction and pass it off as Wikipedia content runs counter to Wikipedia's goals. If, on the other hand, you are just looking for a free venue to publish your fiction, I might suggest Wikia, or try Googling "fiction publishing websites". Good luck with your writing. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 15:38, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Vidbuild page updated

Hi Dan,

I am not sure if I resubmitted my second draft properly, but have added another citation from an authoritative external site which should help with my reference section.

Many thanks,

Shelley

Grish068 (talk) 14:33, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

@Grish068: You do not appear to have resubmitted your draft, but I wouldn't rush to do so. The source you added appears to be from Authentic Storytelling, one man's (Christopher Trappe) "how to do marketing" blog. I wouldn't call that source "high authority". And the post isn't really about Vidbuild, it's about Trappe's experience trying to post a promotional video he had created for Vidbuild on different platforms. Yes, it mentions the name Vidbuild, but it really isn't about the Vidbuild platform at all, and even if it were, Trappe was trying to sell Vidbuild, so we can't really consider that a reliable source. You'll need to find actual independent media coverage of this company/product before the article can be accepted. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 16:13, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Draft:CarBuzz

Hello WikiDan61,

As a website that publishes news stories, car reviews, and that provides research tools for car buyers, we are widely known in the industry and car-loving community yet perhaps not significant enough to have a full story written about us. You point out that we are a source of information, and that is essentially what we are.

I can provide dozens of citations where stories we have scooped, via interviews with car executives for example, have been used by other publications to create news stories for their readers. We are established enough for carmakers to loan us cars to review, conduct interviews with top execs, and we recently appeared on prime time TV on a Kia commercial, using our quote for the Kia Stinger.

Millions of people read our car reviews and use our shopping tools to make car buying decisions. We are a source of daily car news too. Is that not enough to be included on Wikipedia?

--Adamwiki777 (talk) 13:55, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

@Adamwiki777: You could cite your website's Alexa ranking to verify its significance, as a start. Or you could provide evidence that the website has received a significant award, such as the Webby. See WP:WEB for more detailed information. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 15:50, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi Dan,

Thanks for the information. One of our closest competitors is a site called motor1.com, which has managed to successfully create a wiki page. The references they used are predominantly from their owner company. I see nothing in line with what you have requested of us. We haven't won a Webby, but nor have hundreds if not thousands of sites that appear on Wikipedia. Our Alexa ranking is also misleading as we recently relaunched the site in January, which negatively affected our ranking plus a lot of our readers find us using the iOS and Android app, as well as through Apple News and Facebook. It's very important for the integrity of the company that we manage to establish a wikipedia page. Is there anything else we can do to set this up? Best wishes, Adam.

--Adamwiki777 (talk) 06:40, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

@Adamwiki777: It sounds an awful lot like you're trying to use Wikipedia to promote your company. Please don't. Wikipedia is not a business directory, nor is it to be used as a tool in your SEO strategy. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 10:43, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi Dan,

I'm surprised you interpreted my message that way. I honestly have no ulterior motive for wanting a page. I've been at the company for a few years now and simply felt it was time we appeared on Wikipedia. I wouldn't even know where to begin with SEO! We've been an established brand for a while now (in certain circles at least), so I didn't think creating a page would be so problematic. I'd appreciate your assistance in helping me to solve this.

--Adamwiki777 (talk) 10:57, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

@Adamwiki777: You literally said: "It's very important for the integrity of the company that we manage to establish a wikipedia page." That's promotion. That's not what Wikipedia is here for. I've given you what advice I can on how to improve your draft. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 12:02, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.11 25 May 2018

Hello WikiDan61, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

ACTRIAL:

• WP:ACREQ has been implemented. The flow at the feed has dropped back to the levels during the trial. However, the backlog is on the rise again so please consider reviewing a few extra articles each day; a backlog approaching 5,000 is still far too high. An effort is also needed to ensure that older unsuitable older pages at the back of the queue do not get automatically indexed for Google.

Deletion tags

• Do bear in mind that articles in the feed showing the trash can icon may have been tagged by inexperienced or non NPR rights holders. They require your further verification.

Backlog drive:

• A backlog drive will take place from 10 through 20 June. Check out our talk page at WT:NPR for more details. NOTE: It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing. Despite our goal of reducing the backlog as much as possible, please do not rush while reviewing.

Editathons

• There will be a large increase in the number of editathons in June. Please be gentle with new pages that obviously come from good faith participants, especially articles from developing economies and ones about female subjects. Consider using the 'move to draft' tool rather than bluntly tagging articles that may have potential but which cannot yet reside in mainspace.

Paid editing - new policy

• Now that ACTRIAL is ACREQ, please be sure to look for tell-tale signs of undisclosed paid editing. Contact the creator if appropriate, and submit the issue to WP:COIN if necessary. There is a new global WMF policy that requires paid editors to connect to their adverts.

Subject-specific notability guidelines

• The box at the right contains each of the subject-specific notability guidelines, please review any that are relevant BEFORE nominating an article for deletion.
• Reviewers are requested to familiarise themselves with the new version of the notability guidelines for organisations and companies.

Not English

• A common issue: Pages not in English or poor, unattributed machine translations should not reside in main space even if they are stubs. Please ensure you are familiar with WP:NPPNE. Check in Google for the language and content, tag as required, then move to draft if they do have potential.

News

• Development is underway by the WMF on upgrades to the New Pages Feed, in particular ORES features that will help to identify COPYVIOs, and more granular options for selecting articles to review.
• The next issue of The Signpost has been published. The newspaper is one of the best ways to stay up to date with news and new developments. between our newsletters.

---

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:35, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Hello.

None of the sources you saw are advertisements as we don’t have one. The website is sourced once and linked in just to show the owner profile is consistent. Everything else is independent third party. The economist, the ARMY, CNG media. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Defensecontributor (talk • contribs) 15:45, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

As of this moment, Draft:Taurus Defense Solutions has 12 references to eight individual sources, viz:

1. Mysite Taurus Defense Solutions Official Site : Obviously the company's own website. (And, by the way, if you want to convince people that this is a legit notable organization, a Wix.com website with the default title left in place is not the way to do it.)
2. Taurus Defense Solutions LLC on LinkedIn.com : Obviously, advertising. (If you don't realize that LinkedIn is basically a site to advertise oneself, you don't know what LinkedIn is.)
3. Rsvooyugoexport Formation Documents : Self-published documents documenting the original formation of the predecessor company (whether self-published or not, formation documents are not a sign of notability)
4. "Serbia's Arms Industry". The Economist. 6 Jan 2011. : Admittedly not a primary source (although one could be fooled into thinking so by virtue of using scan of the article loaded to Issuu.com rather than the direct link to the article). Still, barely mentioned in passing.
5. This tidbit from Global News Wire, which basically mentions that the company has been re-formed, but says almost nothing else about it. (Again, not an ad, but also not a sign of notability.)
6. This state filing document, a primary source providing no indications of notability
7. This item from CNG news that, again, basically just says the company exists but that not much is yet known about it
8. This ad from Zyne.com, that is basically just a copy of the company's website.

So, that. Also, your use of the term "we" indicates that you are associated with this organization. I urge you to read Wikipedia's conflict of interest guidelines, and perhaps ask that someone else write this article for you, at Requested Articles. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 17:01, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

I am from Soviet Union my English not good but I can assure I am not associated with business but I am one of few still alive who remember it before Rsvooyugoexport and rosoboronexport were taken by government. Also I did not mean to delete I am unsure how to use this, you can relax. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Defensecontributor (talk • contribs) 17:46, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

June 2018 GOCE newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors June 2018 News Welcome to the June 2018 GOCE newsletter, in which you will find Guild updates since the February edition. Progress continues to be made on the copyediting backlog, which has been reduced to 7 months and reached a new all-time low. Requests continue to be handled efficiently this year, with 272 completed by the end of May (an average completion time of 10.5 days). Fewer than 10% of these waited longer than 20 days, and the longest wait time was 29 days. Wikipedia in general, and the Guild in particular, experienced a deep loss with the death on 20 March of Corinne. Corinne (a GOCE coordinator since 1 July 2016) was a tireless aide on the requests page, and her peerless copyediting is a part of innumerable GAs and FAs. Her good cheer, courtesy and tact are very much missed. March drive: The goal was to remove June, July and August 2017 from our backlog and all February 2018 Requests (a total of 219 articles). This drive was an outstanding success, and by the end of the month all but eight of these articles were cleared. Of the 33 editors who signed up, 19 recorded 277 copy edits (425,758 words). April blitz: This one-week copy-editing blitz ran from 15 through 21 April, focusing on Requests and the last eight articles tagged in August 2017. At the end of the week there were only 17 pending requests, with none older than 17 days. Of the nine editors who signed up, eight editors completed 22 copy edits (62,412 words). May drive: We set out to remove September, October and November 2017 from our backlog and all April 2018 Requests (a total of 298 articles). There was great success this month with the backlog more than halved from 1,449 articles at the beginning of the month to a record low of 716 articles. Officially, of the 20 who signed up, 15 editors recorded 151 copy edits (248,813 words). Coordinator elections: It's election time again. Nominations for Guild coordinators (who will serve a six-month term for the second half of 2018) have begun, and will close at 23:59 UTC on 15 June. All Wikipedia editors in good standing are eligible, and self-nominations are encouraged. Voting will take place between 00:01 UTC on 16 June and 23:59 UTC on 30 June. June blitz: Stay tuned for this one-week copy-editing blitz, which will take place in mid-June. Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators: Corinne, Jonesey95, Miniapolis, Reidgreg and Tdslk. >>> Participate in the June elections! <<< To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:26, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Vidbuild

Hi Dan,

I am writing to you, as you provided me with helpful, constructive feedback for my first submission. I made some amendments and resubmitted it, and got some pretty rough feedback by RobSmith which I felt were a bit unfair.

Thread below:

Comment by RoySmith

Popular? By what measure? Award nominated? The award itself is some random meaningless award, and being nominated for it is even more meaningless. There's nothing in the article that says anything more than, "this is a generic video app".

This is actually really rude. I have read the rules of communication on Wikipedia, and myself abide by these rules. As a staff member, I find his feedback incredibly disrespectful. My reply and justification below.

Comment by Grish068

Hi Roy, Thank you for your feedback on my submission. A couple of points I wanted clarification on. My submission is being made to aid the representation of online tools under the Wikipedia encyclopedia. Similar submissions have made reference to 'popular' without citation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slidely).

Your reference to the award nomination - did you have a look at the award and link? The tool was actually selected as a finalist for a Kent Business Award. They aren't meaningless, random awards, Kent is one of the largest regions of the United Kingdom, and relevant to millions of people.

I am very much interested in constructive feedback to ensure all my future submissions and contributions are as neutral and helpful as possible. The other points I will be re-researching and actioning as soon as I am able, but I do feel the points mentioned above need to be reconsidered.

Kind regards,

Shelley

Any help you can offer Dan would be much appreciated. At the moment I've just been left feeling very deflated and a bit angry at the 'support' I received from him.

Kind regards,

Shelley — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grish068 (talk • contribs) 13:19, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

@Grish068: RoySmith's comments might have been a bit gruff, but on substance I'd agree. The site you linked to indicates that Vidbuild was nominated for the Maidstone city category of the Kent Business Awards, making this recognition very local (and without even a win, really not even worth mentioning). I recognize that to the owners and employees of Vidbuild, this nomination may have seemed like a nice pat on the back, but to the rest of the world, it's kind of a big "meh". You haven't really added any significant coverage since I rejected the draft in the first place. The coverage from Business2Community is sketchy: it looks like a paid product endorsement to me. And Roy is correct in questioning the popularity of Vidbuild. Just calling an app "popular" is meaningless. That word should be removed from the lead. Instead, you should point to real, verifiable user counts to assert any claim of popularity.

I'm concerned about the statement you've made above, to wit:

My submission is being made to aid the representation of online tools under the Wikipedia encyclopedia.

Since Vidbuild is the only tool you've written about, it appears that your submission is being made to aid the representation of this particular tool, which is just another way of saying advertising, which, of course, is not allowed.

I can't offer you any further suggestions on improving your article than I've already provided: find the significant sources, if they exist. If they don't, I can't help you. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 16:23, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Help Me

Hi there thanks for the review ive been trying to unsuccessfully submit this article for some time now. i need your help — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eujoe (talk • contribs) 21:59, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Minor Issue

Most Of his interviews are not covered in online articles. instead there are multiple videos with various tv stations that showcases this. the articles online only mention his works, or stuff that he is currently doing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eujoe (talk • contribs) 22:48, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Request on 22:54:21, 14 June 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Eujoe

• Eujoe (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Alex Chamwada (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

hello.. Please help me in identifying the articles that can be used to prove notability. unfortunately we don't have the new York times to cover some of our stories. please give me a guidline so that i can use the correct articles and fix the notability issue.

Eujoe (talk) 22:54, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

@Eujoe: Articles do not have to be available online to be referenced. Any article published in a major newspaper would do. (Although I find it hard to believe that any major newspaper, even in Kenya, would not have recent content available online.) Specifically, your article claims several awards for Chamwada: these need to be verified by sources better than SoftKenya.com. If an organization presented Chamwada with an award, that organization's website should have some mention of it. In general, though, a person needs to be more than just a "media personality" to be notable by Wikipedia standards. Chamwada does not appear to be notable from the description you've provided. The problem I see is not so much that you need better references to verify the information you have, but better information (verified by sources) to indicated that Chamwada merits inclusion at all. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 12:17, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! Thansk alot for your help ill do my best to get the best articles Eujoe (talk) 23:34, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

NPP Backlog Elimination Drive

Hello WikiDan61, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

We can see the light at the end of the tunnel: there are currently 2900 unreviewed articles, and 4000 unreviewed redirects.

Announcing the Backlog Elimination Drive!

• As a final push, we have decided to run a backlog elimination drive from the 20th to the 30th of June.
• Reviewers who review at least 50 articles or redirects will receive a Special Edition NPP Barnstar: . Those who review 100, 250, 500, or 1000 pages will also receive tiered awards: , , , .
• Please do not be hasty, take your time and fully review each page. It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing.

---

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 06:57, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Ævar Örn Jósepsson

Hi. I would like you to reconsider the draft article Ævar Örn Jósepsson. Or at the very least explain your reasoning in detail. I consider that Ævar is notable according to the guidelines, for example according to WP:AUTHOR #3 an author is notable if:

The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of an independent and notable work (for example, a book, film, or television series, but usually not a single episode of a television series) or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews.

With this article, the author clearly meets this by his series of crime novels (listed in the article), one of which was made into a film series (cited in the article), and which have been reviewed by Iceland's major newspapers. It is also likely that Land tækifæranna and Svartir englar both pass WP:NB criteria on their own, but that is another matter.

I do also consider the subject to pass WP:BASIC. I have included five substantial citations (not counting the worldcat links), which include a citation to a published encyclopedia where this individual has a two page biography, and a citation to the bokmenntaborgin site where there is another substantial biography. Plus coverage in visir, Iceland Review and Morgunblaðið.

Frayæ 21:22, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

@Frayae: Ok, I'll trout slap myself on this one. I had not noted the award or the film series. I'll undo my decline and approve for publication. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 21:40, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

@Frayae: I can't accept the draft, because there's already a redirect at the target page. I'll have to wait for that to be deleted. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 21:42, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Ah yes, that one is my fault, I had trouble figuring out the move tool. Thanks for the quick reply. Frayæ 21:48, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

• The draft has been approved by Shadowowl now. Frayæ 14:17, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

HI this is for the John Kredrevreich Rejection's draft

Hi Dear , i'm "new" to wikipedia i just decided to make a page of me on it . It is in italian because in the Italian's wikipedia there is a problem which they are arguing against a law which is banning commons sense information around the world so it is impossible for me to do that until 3 days thats why i decided to make one now just to not forget to publish it in the italin wiki which i'm not able to do now because its obscured. thanks in advance for your reply if you want to give me some hints. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnKredrevreich (talk • contribs) 17:59, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

@JohnKredrevreich: Well, you've translated the article to English, so it won't be much use on the Italian Wikipedia. It's not much use here either, because you have not made any claims that would indicate that you are in any way notable and meriting inclusion in Wikipedia. You have also provided no citations for your article, which are absolutely necessary for a biography of a living person (see WP:BLPPROD). Finally, you've written about yourself, which is strongly discouraged. I recommend that you wait until the Italian Wikipedia is again open for editing, and create some useful content (not about yourself) there. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 20:00, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

PKH Das

Hello Dan,

I am trying to create a page for my boss PKH Das.please let me know what i should do to make it go live. Currently regardig the awards its been mentioned already in Wikipedia by other sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mouriyarvind (talk • contribs) 14:12, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

@Mouriyarvind: You should not be creating a page for your boss. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 14:52, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

PKH Das

Let me rephrase it sorry may be my line wasnt right.I am trying to create a page for this acclaimed cinematographer/director from south india PKH Das.I have tried to add most articles and newspaper sources available online.Initially i had not added enough references but now i have added around 10 extra references.Please let me know what else is needed to get this article live ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mouriyarvind (talk • contribs) 15:08, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

@Mouriyarvind: Acclaimed or not, he's still your boss, so the conflict of interest remains. That being said, I have already noted on the draft itself that verification of his awards is required. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 15:11, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

@wikidan61 So i have added some references for the awards.The references are various newspaper articles mentioned about him winning the awards.Is it enough? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mouriyarvind (talk • contribs) 15:13, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Wellington College International Hangzhou

I edited Draft:Wellington College International Hangzhou to make it neutral and I removed the speedy as well. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 12:37, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

Yeh Un Dino Ki Baat Hai

I think that giving the serial a very brief plot will make no sense. Because so many events have happened and it is necessary for viewers to know about this show fully and not as a half. Also, this is a show, which is very popular in India and can't insult this show with such a minor plot. Also, I have put in a lot of efforts to write this and I am not letting this go as waste.See, basically, I don't want to get involved in any of the disputes. But if you allow me, then I will trim it and make it more presentable. I have put in a lot of hard work in this and have left out many small points which were required but did not think it to add in it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Santsaxena (talk • contribs) 07:27, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

@Santsaxena: I've copied your response to Talk:Yeh Un Dinon Ki Baat Hai and responded there. I asked for the conversation to occur there so that other members of the community can join if they choose. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 11:44, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

DYK nomination of History of the Jews in Atlanta

Hello! Your submission of History of the Jews in Atlanta at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 12:33, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Dixon rings:Draft

Hello, thanks for reviewing my page, you have said the sources are not reliable and need changing however this could very difficult as all the sources of information on Dixon rings come from people who also happen to produce them, all this may seem like advertising these are scientific papers which have been produced to show the performance principles of Dixon rings and are scientifically accurate, if had researched very thoroughly and cant find anything else on Dixon rings that I can reference, what should I do, also the paper written by Mohamed Abdelraouf has been given to me by hand, so that it why you cannot find it, as it hasn't been published yet Thanks for editing my as well, that has been a great help — Preceding unsigned comment added by JoeRavenscroft4 (talk • contribs)

@JoeRavenscroft4: Sources written by the device's manufacturer cannot be considered reliable sources, and an as-yet unpublished paper is not acceptable as a source because it is not available for other editors to read and verify the contents of the article. That said, you appear to have found some other, more reliable sources. I'll have another look at the article and see what I can do. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 12:27, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Would it be best for me to leave the sources that are written by the devices manufacturer in or just remove them from the page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by JoeRavenscroft4 (talk • contribs)

@JoeRavenscroft4: I've marked the draft with which sources are unreliable (look for the ^{[unreliable source?]} note next to the questionable sources). I've also marked sources that failed verification (i.e. the source did not include material that verified the article content being cited). Those referencing issues should be addressed. In general, I would recommend you remove sources published by Dixon ring manufacturers, leaving only those sources published independently. I've also removed the reference to the unpublished paper, as noted above, and a reference to a Physics World article that describe the phenomenom of random packing, but not with any reference to the use of randomly packed structures in column distillation. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 12:59, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

So once the un-reliable sources have been removed is that all that needs changing ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by JoeRavenscroft4 (talk • contribs) 13:05, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

@JoeRavenscroft4: It would be a good idea to see if you can find reliable sources to verify the statements that are presently verified with unreliable sources. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 13:19, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

I have attempted to find reliable sources to verify the statements, I have now added another source which covers quite alot of the content not already covered, however that is all I can find as there isnt much out there about Dixon rings that doesn't come from the developers of Dixon rings — Preceding unsigned comment added by JoeRavenscroft4 (talk • contribs) 13:48, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

I have since be able to add some very interesting reports from Lancaster university which cover what was said in the un reliable sources I was using before — Preceding unsigned comment added by JoeRavenscroft4 (talk • contribs) 14:19, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

@JoeRavenscroft4: One of the references you added (which you linked mysteriously to the Lancaster University home page, with no title) appears to have been a reference that was already used (with a full and complete citation), so I have removed that. I have formatted the other new citation you added. You appear to be well on your way.

PS: Please sign your talk page posts, using the four tildes (~~~~) or the signature button () at the top of the edit box. Thanks! WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 15:01, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Where do I go from here then, is the page ready ?JoeRavenscroft4 (talk) 15:03, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

I think so. Resubmit the draft and let's see if anyone else reviews it. (I'd like a second set of eyes on it before I approve it, but if no one else steps up, I'll look again in a few days.) WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 16:06, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Would you be able to look at my other page that I have submitted on random column packing or can you not do this ? Thanks JoeRavenscroft4 (talk) 08:19, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

<Moved to user page>

@JoeRavenscroft4: Thanks!

Random column packing

Hi I have now sorted out the referencing for the page on random column packing, and have now re-submitted

Also, thanks for the help with the Dixon rings page! JoeRavenscroft4 (talk) 07:59, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Hi would you be able to take a look at my re-submission on random column packing pleases Thanks JoeRavenscroft4 (talk) 07:39, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know about the duplicate!

Hi Dan,

Thanks for letting me know about the duplicate? Do you know how I delete the draft spelt: Tressie Mcmillian Cottom (missing the capital McMillion). Thanks for your help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cbratbyrudd (talk • contribs) 02:14, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

@Cbratbyrudd: You can replace all of the content at Draft:Tressie Mcmillan Cottom with the text {{db-author}}. That will inform an administrator that you wish to have the page deleted. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 11:48, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Help

Sorry for my over eagerness. I saw that the uploader had a few previous images deleted and I didn't do enough research. I've reread the photo guidelines for 2 hours today and I will continue to read. I only put the Rita Catolino things in from her site as a placeholder until i found more secondary sources. But i forget to remove it and that's why it was copyright

It really shouldn't have been CSD'd after I removed the copyrighted phrasing and website link.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Credible_claim_of_significance "two, if there is no evident claim of significance in the article, check the references provided within the article. If the references within the article discuss the subject or provide a possible claim of significance as discussed in #1 above, then too the A7, A9 and A11 tags should not be applied. For example, if the new article contains just one line: "John Doe is a fitness trainer", the initial view might be that there is no claim of significance. But if the sources in the same article discuss the subject, chances are, more coverage may exist; and in this case too, the A7, A9 and A11 tags should generally not be applied (except when it's clear that this is all the coverage this subject will ever get)." She also got coverage for being a fitness cover model and a fitness show competitor and host. It should at worst be AFD'd .JC7V7DC5768 (talk) 21:12, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

@JC7V7DC5768: The article was tagged as a copyright violation before you removed the content. Having removed the content, your proper course of action was to make a note at the article's talk page that you had addressed the copyright violation. You could also have argued for Catolino's notability in the same manner (a discussion at the talk page). In no case are you, the article author, supposed to remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, even if you think you've fixed the problem. I agree with you that the number of sources you provided were sufficient to avoid a speedy deletion. However, I don't think the coverage provided is sufficient to count as "in-depth". (The articles all have the feel of a promotional campaign taken up by local press eager to fill some column-inches.) But that's my opinion. We'll see what the AFD turns up. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 21:27, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

PS: Have you considered a new username. Yours is rather confusing. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 21:29, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. I will apply it in the future. I'll consider changing my username in the future if others express a will for me to. Thank you.JC7V7DC5768 (talk) 21:36, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

saggu Perfect ingormation.

Please understand that .saggu is ramgarhia caste surname not a jatt or jat clan or caste or blah blah. You can search any where 'ramgarhia caste surnames' you will get the saggu surname in every ramgarhia link or pages..

Some people make fools to everyone by edit wrong information about 'saggu' on big and famous website 'wikipedia'.

 Harvinder singh saggu (talk) 12:43, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

@Harvinder singh saggu: You'll need a valid source for that change. "You can search anywhere" is not a valid source. Do the search, find a source, and then use it. Also, please keep your editing neutral. Text like "A very proud and fiercely independent people, they are amongst the wealthiest and most educated clans of the Punjab region" is not neutral. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 12:45, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

Random column packing

Hello, Would you be able to take a look at my re-submission of the page on random column packing as I have worked on the comments you gave me and believe that the referencing is now correct and neutral

Thanks JoeRavenscroft4 (talk) 14:40, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

 Done Nice work. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 15:00, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

Fischer/Presser works

Regarding the following comment: "Don't use Presser's or Carl Fischer's online shop as a citation, as this violates Wikipedia's reliable source and external links guidelines. Our purpose here is not to drive traffic to music publishing sites."

According to Wikipedia's guidelines on Vendor and e-commerce sources, inline citations may be allowed to e-commerce pages such as that of a book on a bookseller's page or an album on its streaming-music page, in order to verify such things as titles and running times. Journalistic and academic sources are preferable, however, and e-commerce links should be replaced with non-commercial reliable sources if available.

In this case, the links to the Publisher product sites are used to VERIFY the name of the work in relation to a composer, not to sell a product. Therefore, the citations are valid. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Internscarlfischer (talk • contribs) 15:23, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

@Internscarlfischer: A single link to a publisher's catalog page would suffice for verification; a link to the specific page for each piece appears to be overkill, and given your obvious conflict of interest regarding the subject, it's easy to interpret your actions as more of a sales technique than anything else. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 12:26, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you!

Thanks for all the help ! JoeRavenscroft4 (talk) 08:05, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

@JoeRavenscroft4: You're welcome! WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 12:27, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

Hungary

what is the problem? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fisoz92 (talk • contribs) 14:54, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

@Fisoz92: The problem is that you have made edits to Hungary that have been reverted, and then you have restored those edits multiple times. That's called edit warring, and it is prohibited at Wikipedia. If you and another editor disagree on the content of the page, you are to discuss the matter at the article's talk page. Continuing to make the same edits that have already been reverted multiple times can get you blocked. So, discuss. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 15:02, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

one of the users uses un-official sources for the topic I keep editing it. I have the credible source. Is it acceptable for him/her to put false information? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fisoz92 (talk • contribs) 15:08, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

I explained the situation — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fisoz92 (talk • contribs) 15:09, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

@Fisoz92: I don't care who's right or who's wrong. I have no knowledge of the topic. You and the other user must resolve the issue between yourselves. Enter the discussion at Talk:Hungary, or you will likely find yourself blocked. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 15:11, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

I am unable to chat with you. Never mind, that's why your page is not recomemded for students, they can not find credible information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fisoz92 (talk • contribs) 15:27, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

Help Review Draft

Hello,

Can you kindly review this article Draft:Mangamu Primary School. I made some changes to it.

Best regards Joseph Kalimbwe (talk) 06:48, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

WP:3RRN

I think you need to sign your report on wp:3RRN#User:InterCity(IC) and User:Fisoz92 reported by User:WikiDan61 (Result: ) Still continuing to EW... Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 08:38, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

well, first you should investigate the issue before you warning to block me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fisoz92 (talk • contribs) 14:13, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

PKH Das

This is regarding my draft ,where you said you need more articles to verify the article.Kindly please take it up for review again as i have added more references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mouriyarvind (talk • contribs) 06:55, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.12 30 July 2018

Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months. ()

Hello WikiDan61, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

June backlog drive

Overall the June backlog drive was a success, reducing the last 3,000 or so to below 500. However, as expected, 90% of the patrolling was done by less than 10% of reviewers.
Since the drive closed, the backlog has begun to rise sharply again and is back up to nearly 1,400 already. Please help reduce this total and keep it from raising further by reviewing some articles each day.

New technology, new rules

• New features are shortly going to be added to the Special:NewPagesFeed which include a list of drafts for review, OTRS flags for COPYVIO, and more granular filter preferences. More details can be found at this page.
• Probationary permissions: Now that PERM has been configured to allow expiry dates to all minor user rights, new NPR flag holders may sometimes be limited in the first instance to 6 months during which their work will be assessed for both quality and quantity of their reviews. This will allow admins to accord the right in borderline cases rather than make a flat out rejection.
• Current reviewers who have had the flag for longer than 6 months but have not used the permissions since they were granted will have the flag removed, but may still request to have it granted again in the future, subject to the same probationary period, if they wish to become an active reviewer.

Editathons

• Editathons will continue through August. Please be gentle with new pages that obviously come from good faith participants, especially articles from developing economies and ones about female subjects. Consider using the 'move to draft' tool rather than bluntly tagging articles that may have potential but which cannot yet reside in mainspace.

The Signpost

• The next issue of the monthly magazine will be out soon. The newspaper is an excellent way to stay up to date with news and new developments between our newsletters. If you have special messages to be published, or if you would like to submit an article (one about NPR perhaps?), don't hesitate to contact the editorial team here.

---

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 00:00, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Types of circuit training

Hi WikiDan61. If you search on the bibliografy that I was referenced, you can see that those circits are different and has specific sturcture or objerives. So, we can conlude that are the main types of circuits. I can explain all the type of circuits, but the article would be very long. So, I decided to resume schematically. I can make new articles about each of circuit type and its effects and benefits. What do you recommend me to do? Acarbe92 (talk) 15:52, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

I recommend you create the individual articles first, and then list them with their Wikilinks in the main article. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 15:59, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

To show the opposite

I'm waiting for you to show the clear and sharp opposite.Not days.Hours.Thank you.Maxim3377 (talk) 14:50, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

ping

In case you don't know: If you change a ping, it works only with a new signature. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:02, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: I did not know. Thanks for the info! WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 13:41, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

List of TV programs using outside broadcast (1950-90)

You stated that this article had no sources, I have included eight sources to websites that deal with information about this subject, located at the bottom of the page, as well as three sources/ references in the 1st paragraph. I don't understand how this means, I have't included any sources in my article when I clearly have. I've written articles in the past where I have included references/ sources, so why all the sudden does this has to happen?

The eight sources appear as "external links" not as sources. They may or may not verify the facts that you have listed in the list; it is preferable to cite each fact with an inline citation (see WP:REFB). And the three references listed in the first paragraph were added after I applied the "unreferenced" tag. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 13:23, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

I did include sources in this article, however they were not properly displayed as I'm still inexperienced with using Wikipedia. I have since corrected them, and now the sources display in the appropriate format. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goldmic90 (talk • contribs)

@Goldmic90: I'm not sure which sources you are talking about. Reviewing the page history, I see that you have added sources, but sources that did not previously exist. I cannot access all of the sources you've listed (company firewall prevents access), but sourcing and verification are not really as big an issue as whether Wikipedia needs such a list in the first place (hence the AFD nomination). Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information, and this particular collection of information, specific only to the UK as it is, appears to me to be not generally useful to the project. But I'll let the AFD discussion decide that. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 17:41, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

Oh, PS: don't delete content from my or other users' talk page, even if its content you've added. See WP:TPG. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 17:41, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

DYK for History of the Jews in Atlanta

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

August GOCE newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors August 2018 Newsletter Hello and welcome to the August 2018 GOCE newsletter. Thanks to everyone who participated in the Guild's June election; your new and returning coordinators are listed below. The next election will occur in December 2018; all Wikipedia editors in good standing may take part. Our June blitz focused on Requests and articles tagged for copy edit in October 2017. Of the eleven people who signed up, eight editors recorded a total of 28 copy edits, including 3 articles of more than 10,000 words. Complete results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Thanks to everyone who participated in the July drive. Of the seventeen people who signed up, thirteen editors completed 194 copy edits, successfully removing all articles tagged in the last three months of 2017. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are here. The August blitz will run for one week, from 19 to 25 August. Sign up now! Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators, Reidgreg, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95, Miniapolis and Tdslk. >>> Sign up for the August blitz! <<< To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:25, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Precious

help with first steps

Thank you for quality articles such as Alan Wilkins (playwright) and Clouds (film), for reviewing hundreds of articles for creation, for explaining encyclopedic standards to newcomers, for nominating DYK for others, such as History of the Jews in Atlanta, for service from August 2008, - Dan, you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:50, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

Um, thanks! WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 00:57, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

article Philip Zepter

I am not familiar with messages in "Wikipedia". Coming to a consent means what? The data is correct and verified to the court in the US. Judgments are available and linked. What is expected?Cons1966 (talk) 10:59, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

@Cons1966: Coming to a consensus means discussing a topic until an agreement can be reached that most (not necessarily all) people agree with. Court documents are often not considered reliable sources at Wikipedia. Since your changes have been disagreed with, you must discuss the matter. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 04:16, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Binaural unmnasking

Couldn't work out how the chat works.

Certainly there is more recent science - these effects have been replicated to death. I can put more in. I just thought that such a major area of research deserved to have the basics described, and the original discovery is an obvious starting point. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CullingJ (talk • contribs) 13:30, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

@CullingJ: I agree that including the original research is useful (especially as it verifies the timeframe of the discovery of this discovery), but including more recent research will help to establish that the older science has not been proven wrong by more recent discoveries. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 11:59, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.13 18 September 2018

Hello WikiDan61, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

The New Page Feed currently has 2700 unreviewed articles, up from just 500 at the start of July. For a while we were falling behind by an average of about 40 articles per day, but we have stabilised more recently. Please review some articles from the back of the queue if you can (Sort by: 'Oldest' at Special:NewPagesFeed), as we are very close to having articles older than one month.

Project news

• The New Page Feed now has a new "Articles for Creation" option which will show drafts instead of articles in the feed, this shouldn't impact NPP activities and is part of the WMF's AfC Improvement Project.

As part of this project, the feed will have some larger updates to functionality next month. Specifically, ORES predictions will be built in, which will automatically flag articles for potential issues such as vandalism or spam. Copyright violation detection will also be added to the new page feed. See the projects's talk page for more info.

• There are a number of coordination tasks for New Page Patrol that could use some help from experienced reviewers. See Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Coordination#Coordinator tasks for more info to see if you can help out.

Other

• A new summary page of reliable sources has been created; Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources/Perennial sources, which summarizes existing RfCs or RSN discussions about regularly used sources.

Moving to Draft and Page Mover

• Some unsuitable new articles can be best reviewed by moving them to the draft space, but reviewers need to do this carefully and sparingly. It is most useful for topics that look like they might have promise, but where the article as written would be unlikely to survive AfD. If the article can be easily fixed, or if the only issue is a lack of sourcing that is easily accessible, tagging or adding sources yourself is preferable. If sources do not appear to be available and the topic does not appear to be notable, tagging for deletion is preferable (PROD/AfD/CSD as appropriate). See additional guidance at WP:DRAFTIFY.
• If the user moves the draft back to mainspace, or recreates it in mainspace, please do not re-draftify the article (although swapping it to maintain the page history may be advisable in the case of copy-paste moves). AfC is optional except for editors with a clear conflict of interest.
• Articles that have been created in contravention of our paid-editing-requirements or written from a blatant NPOV perspective, or by authors with a clear COI might also be draftified at discretion.
• The best tool for draftification is User:Evad37/MoveToDraft.js^(info). Kindly adapt the text in the dialogue-pop-up as necessary (the default can also be changed like this). Note that if you do not have the Page Mover userright, the redirect from main will be automatically tagged as CSD R2, but in some cases it might be better to make this a redirect to a different page instead.
• The Page Mover userright can be useful for New Page Reviewers; occasionally page swapping is needed during NPR activities, and it helps avoid excessive R2 nominations which must be processed by admins. Note that the Page Mover userright has higher requirements than the NPR userright, and is generally given to users active at Requested Moves. Only reviewers who are very experienced and are also very active reviewers are likely to be granted it solely for NPP activities.

List of other useful scripts for New Page Reviewing

Twinkle provides a lot of the same functionality as the page curation tools, and some reviewers prefer to use the Twinkle tools for some/all tasks. It can be activated simply in the gadgets section of 'preferences'. There are also a lot of options available at the Twinkle preferences panel after you install the gadget. In terms of other gadgets for NPR, HotCat is worth turning on. It allows you to easily add, remove, and change categories on a page, with name suggestions. MoreMenu also adds a bunch of very useful links for diagnosing and fixing page issues. User:Equazcion/ScriptInstaller.js(info): Installing scripts doesn't have to be complicated. Go to your common.js and copy importScript( 'User:Equazcion/ScriptInstaller.js' ); into an empty line, now you can install all other scripts with the click of a button from the script page! (Note you need to be at the ".js" page for the script for the install button to appear, not the information page) User:TheJosh/Scripts/NewPagePatrol.js(info): Creates a scrolling new pages list at the left side of the page. You can change the number of pages shown by adding the following to the next line on your common.js page (immediately after the line importing this script): npp_num_pages=20; (Recommended 20, but you can use any number from 1 to 50). User:Primefac/revdel.js(info): Is requesting revdel complicated and time consuming? This script helps simplify the process. Just have the Copyvio source URL and go to the history page and collect your diff IDs and you can drop them into the script Popups and it will create a revdel request for you. User:Lourdes/PageCuration.js(info): Creates a "Page Curation" link to Special:NewPagesFeed up near your sandbox link. User:Writ Keeper/Scripts/deletionFinder.js: Creates links next to the title of each page which show up if it has been previously deleted or nominated for deletion. User:Evad37/rater.js(info): A fantastic tool for adding WikiProject templates to article talk pages. If you add: rater_autostartNamespaces = 0; to the next line on your common.js, the prompt will pop up automatically if a page has no Wikiproject templates on the talk page (note: this can be a bit annoying if you review redirects or dab pages commonly).

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:11, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi, Thanks for looking at my binaural unmasking page. I have just extended the page with more material and links and additional more recent citations. John — Preceding unsigned comment added by CullingJ (talk • contribs) 11:41, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Those Winter Sundays's copyright problem

Dear Dan, Thank you very much for pointing this problem out to us! Very much appreciate it!

We think it's essential for us to include the full poem on our wikipedia page. Do you have any advice on how we can do this?

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leti1218 (talk • contribs) 13:08, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

@Leti1218: If you can contact the copyright owner, they might grant you permission to use the text within the article. Then you'd have to follow the procedures for donating copyrighted material. It's unlikely they would do so, however, since doing so would severely limit their ability to continue to make money from the publication of the work. (Remember, everything published in Wikipedia is freely available for anyone to use for any purpose, including publishing books containing the material found here.) Other than that, I don't know how to help you. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 13:23, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

Held & Hines Rejection

Please explain how I need to edit the page for approval. I am attempting to create a company page, it was modelled under other law firms with similar published pages. I am having a hard time understanding how this is considered an advertisement when others are accepted, it is meant to be a platform for general information on the firm, please let me know how to resolve this issue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dbababytseva (talk • contribs) 14:39, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

@Dbababytseva: The article reads like an advertisement because it appears to serve no purpose other than to promote the law firm. Relying solely on the law firm's own writings about itself for source material, the article does nothing but parrot the firm's own boasts. You'll need to find sources in independent media that cover this firm in depth, and you'll need to tone down the self-congratulatory language of the article. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 19:02, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Draft: Allan Aziz

@WikiDan61: Hello this is Tyler_mack13 regarding about the article about Allan Aziz,

His soundcloud is on there and also you won't be able to find Allan on KRBE because they don't have a page in which they talk about artists. I only refrenced that to show which radio station his album was played on.

This is my first time doing a musicians wikipedia article it would be helpful if you could co-write with me, help me edit, and give some advice on what i need to do to get my client's article to be accepted.

Sincerely, Tyler Mack

@Tyler mack13: First and foremost, before you further edit the draft, you must disclose your status as a paid editor. See WP:PAID. Once you have addressed that, you must be able to provide evidence that Aziz has been the subject of significant coverage in multiple independent media outlets. His own soundcloud page doesn't count (and, your soundcloud link was to the soundcloud homepage, not to any page that mentioned Aziz). WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 12:08, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

regarding ayatollah sheikh ayad al rikabi

I am making a wiki page for a family member who doesnt know how to use wiki, and honestly its my first time making a page of wiki. i am arranging his information in arabic but i dont know how to use the arabic wiki commands that why i'm on the english wiki commands and editing the content in arabic. if you have nay suggestions to making it easier let me know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by يقظان الركابي (talk • contribs)

@يقظان الركابي: I can't help you with the Arabic Wikipedia as I don't speak a word of Arabic. However, if you are able to write this extensive biography in Arabic, you should surely be able to read the ar.wiki instructions. The formatting characters are likely the same in Arabic as in English; the only difference might be in the captions on the buttons and links, and the names of the templates that you might try to invoke. (As a beginner, I doubt you have invoked any templates, so that should not be a problem.) In any case, you should be able to work on the draft here at en.wiki, but you must submit it as an article on ar.wiki, since all content here is supposed to be in English. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 17:08, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

reply @ WikiDan61 I did not write it i am just compiling it for him by using the english wiki commands. — Preceding unsigned comment added by يقظان الركابي (talk • contribs) 04:00, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

reply @wikiDan61

how come I cannot upload a photo on this as well and when I go on ar.wiki the whole page disapears. let me know what I need to do. — Preceding unsigned comment added by يقظان الركابي (talk • contribs) 04:19, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

reply @WikiDan61

I am just compiling it I did not write it. I dont understand the command in arabic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by يقظان الركابي (talk • contribs) 04:11, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

@يقظان الركابي: I'm sorry, I can't give you any help regarding the Arabic Wikipedia. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 11:47, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.14 21 October 2018

Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months.

Hello WikiDan61, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

Backlog

As of 21 October 2018, there are 3650 unreviewed articles and the backlog now stretches back 51 days.

Community Wishlist Proposal

• There is currently an ongoing discussion regarding the drafting of a Community Wishlist Proposal for the purpose of requesting bug fixes and missing/useful features to be added to the New Page Feed and Curation Toolbar.
• Please join the conversation as we only have until 29 October to draft this proposal!

Project updates

• ORES predictions are now built-in to the feed. These automatically predict the class of an article as well as whether it may be spam, vandalism, or an attack page, and can be filtered by these criteria now allowing reviewers to better target articles that they prefer to review.
• There are now tools being tested to automatically detect copyright violations in the feed. This detector may not be accurate all the time, though, so it shouldn't be relied on 100% and will only start working on new revisions to pages, not older pages in the backlog.

New scripts

• User:Enterprisey/cv-revdel.js^(info) — A new script created for quickly placing {{copyvio-revdel}} on a page.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 20:49, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

asking for help

Hi Dan,

This is the first time I use wiki, as a result I know nothing about these policy things. I'm sorry if my doings caused you guys any troubles. I have something that I need your help. I want to create a wiki site as a tool of teaching writing (it was just for my group presentation in my teaching class, I planned to delete this after use). I know that according to the policy, I am not allowed to use wikipedia as such a site like that. Can you give me some advices about which site I should use to create such a site?

Thank you,

Catastrophic leviathan.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Catastrophic leviathan (talk • contribs)

@Catastrophic leviathan: There are a number of alternatives you can pursue:

1. Google Docs offers free web-based document editing facilities, including the ability to have multiple editors collaborate in writing. This seems like the best solution to your problem.
2. If you absolutely must use a Wikipeda-like interface, the Wikimedia software is free to use on any server. This requires a fair amount of technical expertise, however, and may not be an ideal solution.
3. Several commercial webhosting services (FatCow and Dot5Hosting are two that I know of) offer a turnkey Wikimedia solution for you to start your own Wiki page. You still might have to get some technical expertise as you will essentially be the sysadmin for that Wiki, but at least you don't have to figure out hot to configure a server and install the software. This option will probably run you some money though.

Good luck with your writing class. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 17:56, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

References The Performeasure® Assessment

Hello WikiDan61

The references I used to describe The Performeasure® Assessment are two books which are going about it. Please let me know why does books are not good sources for the wikipedia article.

Kind regards, TomKaal

@TomKaal: The books you listed are two books written about the assessment by its creators. That does not indicate that the assessment is notable. For that, we'll need evidence of someone writing about the assessment who was not involved in its creation. (See WP:Primary sources.) WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 11:46, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Review for English/French speaker / Urgently need your support

Hello WikiDan61. I am contacting you because you are a speaker of both English and French. I have created the page Draft:Pierre_Jovanovic nearly 2 months ago, and I am waiting for a review. Could you please consider having a look at it ? Please excuse me if my request is improper. I am learning the ropes. Best regards. Micha Jo (talk) 08:24, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

@Micha Jo: The page has not been reviewed because you have not yet submitted it for review. If you place the template {{subst:submit|Micha Jo}} at the top of the page, that will submit the draft for review. I can take a look at it before then, but it cannot be formally accepted or declined until you submit it first. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 12:34, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

@Micha Jo: My mistake. I note that the draft has been published (just today!). Nice work! WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 12:39, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

@Micha Jo: Thanks for your support! You know very well that the first page of a beginner represents a lot of work. It takes time to discover all the functionnalities and richness of Wikipedia! Kind regards. Micha Jo (talk) 14:56, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

@WikiDan61: Please, I need your help. My first article, which was approved after a 2 month review process was submitted for deletion by user Bradv. See here Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pierre Jovanovic. I presented strong arguments in the talk page Talk:Pierre_Jovanovic, but they were not considered. Could you please have a look, and support my page if you like it ? Also note that Bradv is the infamous editor which deleted the Wikipedia page of Mrs Strickland who later won the Nobel prize in physics: [[1]] and [[2]]. Thank you and kind regards. Micha Jo (talk) 02:59, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Request on 16:57:13, 7 November 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Mlanni98

• Mlanni98 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:George Russell (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

You recently reviewed my article for submission, regarding George Russell, Worcester District 3 City Councilor. I was wondering why Worcester City Councilors are not considered notable but Boston City Councilors are. Do I need to edit the sources? Any help would be appreciated. Thanks!

Mlanni98 (talk) 16:57, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

@Mlanni98: Boston is 5x the size of Worcester, and, given its prominent role as the capital of Massachusetts, receives much more national attention than does Worcester, so its city councilors tend to receive more widespread press. I would point you to the discussion of common results of deletion discussions about politicians. Certainly, this is by not means a hard and fast policy, but a discussion of results based on policy, that policy being that a subject (person, place, thing, idea, etc.) must be the subject of significant coverage that is independent of the subject. For politicians, this generally means that they have been covered by press outside of their immediate city or region (i.e. at the national press level). WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 19:05, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

User:Austin crick

Hey WikiDan61, I saw you posted a message on User talk:Cullen328 about Austin crick's block but copyright violation is not the only reason for his block there is also edit warring and disruptive edits.Denim11 (talk) 14:45, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

@Denim11: I understand the problematic nature of Mr Crick's editing (I was the first editor to point out his problems to him). But @Cullen:'s block was specifically for copyright violation for the questionable file (an odd choice as that violation occurred on Commons, not here on Wikipedia). He did not mention the edit warring or disruptive editing in his comments on the block. And my question to Cullen was not about why he blocked Crick (a questionable choice, but not one that I am willing to challenge) but why, having blocked him for a contribution on Commons, he did not take the further action of actually tagging the file on commons as a copyright violation. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 15:14, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

@WikiDan61 you are right if a user does copyright violation at commons then there is no point in blocking him at Wikipedia specially without tagging the file as copyright violation.And Cullen did not mention the edit warring and disruptive editing by blocking him.I understand my fault and sorry for misunderstanding you.Denim11 (talk) 15:24, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Thank you

@WikiDan61: Thank you very much for your feedback on the entry for Alliance for Contraception in Cats & Dogs. This is my first time doing an entry, so I appreciate any help I can get!

Thank you

@WikiDan61: Thank you very much for your feedback on the entry for Alliance for Contraception in Cats & Dogs. This is my first time doing an entry, so I appreciate any help I can get!

A barnstar for you!

	The Technical Barnstar
	Thanks 💯 Adamcohen88 (talk) 19:05, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

@Adamcohen88: Thanks! WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 19:26, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Request on 19:20:06, 14 November 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Revolutionary-panda

• Revolutionary-panda (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Biconical pot (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

The article was taken from German wikipedia, and I deemed it of international interest. Anyway, I have now added the information to another article on Reihengräber civilization.

Revolutionary-panda (talk) 19:20, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

@Revolutionary-panda: I would argue that the German article also probably shouldn't be a standalone article, but I'll let them manage their own shop. In the future, if you choose to translate pages from foreign language Wikipedias, please remember to add the {{Translated page}} template to the talk page to give proper attribution to the original article's authors. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 19:25, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Stratten’s Notability

Time Sculpture could be seen as Mitch Stratten's most notable work in terms of commercial projects, although his album Nodern Loves You and the film OCP are still notable works because:

– the album Nodern Loves You was released on a serious record label with a long standing reputation (Sub Rosa) and received positive reviews and airplay from reliable sources as quoted on the Sub Rosa website . I also found an archive audio recording of the BBC 3 Radio show Mixing It where Robert Sandall talks about the confidence and intensity of the album and an article from Dazed and Confused magazine writing about the "viral" aspect of the promo video .

– the video art project OCP was released on the leading online video art platform Sedition where it is curated together with many of the most high profile names in the art world . OCP received a special feature article in the Arts and Culture section of Dazed magazine on the accomplishments in making the film, where it also shows a behind the scenes video and NTS radio spoke highly of the film on their "Synth Hero Show" . In addition OCP was also shown as part of at least three (that I can find) established curated institutional arts programs: "Transparency, Fluidity and Mediation" at The ASAB Faculty of Arts in Bogotá , “Cinedans, Performative Film" at EYE Filmmuseum in Amsterdam and "DANCE@30FPS" at The Wexner Center for the Arts in Columbus — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adamcohen88 (talk • contribs) 23:20, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

References

NPR Newsletter No.15 16 November 2018

Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months.

Hello WikiDan61,

Community Wishlist Survey – NPP needs you – Vote NOW

• Community Wishlist Voting takes place 16 to 30 November for the Page Curation and New Pages Feed improvements, and other software requests. The NPP community is hoping for a good turnout in support of the requests to Santa for the tools we need. This is very important as we have been asking the Foundation for these upgrades for 4 years.

If this proposal does not make it into the top ten, it is likely that the tools will be given no support at all for the foreseeable future. So please put in a vote today.

We are counting on significant support not only from our own ranks, but from everyone who is concerned with maintaining a Wikipedia that is free of vandalism, promotion, flagrant financial exploitation and other pollution.

With all 650 reviewers voting for these urgently needed improvements, our requests would be unlikely to fail. See also The Signpost Special report: 'NPP: This could be heaven or this could be hell for new users – and for the reviewers', and if you are not sure what the wish list is all about, take a sneak peek at an article in this month's upcoming issue of The Signpost which unfortunately due to staff holidays and an impending US holiday will probably not be published until after voting has closed.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)}18:37, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Regarding Draft:Alex Krizhevsky

I cannot agree that the subject is not notable enough. Many sources refer to his work. His advisor Geoffrey Hinton does have a Wikipedia article. He was originally resistant to the idea of his student Alex Krizhevsky. Today, however, the advisor's numerous recent citations are mostly for the work of his student. If the advisor is notable, then why not the student? Here some sources:

• "Alex Krizhevsky" - Google Scholar - many results
• "Alex Krizhevsky" - Google News Search
• "Alex Krizhevsky" - Google Search with preview selected
• Results for 'au:Alex Krizhevsky' [WorldCat.org]

Please reconsider your decision.

Uf11 (talk) 20:26, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

References

@Uf11: In the article I reviewed, you spoke of Krizhevsky as the inventor of AlexNet and then proceeded to list all of the accomplishments of AlexNet. If Krizhevksy is only notable as the inventor of this technology, then he falls under WP:BLP1E and should not have an article of his own. If he is notable for other accomplishments, expand the draft to let us know. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 20:39, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

In fact, Krizhevsky is notable for many other accomplishments. It would be easy to add the following 11 heavily cited works of Krizhevsky at Google Scholar:

1. Imagenet classification with deep convolutional neural networks A Krizhevsky, I Sutskever, GE Hinton Advances in neural information processing systems, 1097-1105 31432 2012 2. Dropout: a simple way to prevent neural networks from overfitting N Srivastava, G Hinton, A Krizhevsky, I Sutskever, R Salakhutdinov The Journal of Machine Learning Research 15 (1), 1929-1958 8988 2014 3. Improving neural networks by preventing co-adaptation of feature detectors GE Hinton, N Srivastava, A Krizhevsky, I Sutskever, RR Salakhutdinov arXiv preprint arXiv:1207.0580 3220 2012 4. Learning multiple layers of features from tiny images A Krizhevsky, G Hinton Technical report, University of Toronto 1 (4), 7 2936 2009 5. Learning hand-eye coordination for robotic grasping with deep learning and large-scale data collection S Levine, P Pastor, A Krizhevsky, J Ibarz, D Quillen The International Journal of Robotics Research 37 (4-5), 421-436 424 2018 6. One weird trick for parallelizing convolutional neural networks A Krizhevsky arXiv preprint arXiv:1404.5997 279 2014 7. Transforming auto-encoders GE Hinton, A Krizhevsky, SD Wang International Conference on Artificial Neural Networks, 44-51 272 2011 8. Using very deep autoencoders for content-based image retrieval. A Krizhevsky, GE Hinton ESANN 235 2011 9. Factored 3-way restricted boltzmann machines for modeling natural images A Krizhevsky, G Hinton Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Conference on Artificial … 219 2010 10. Convolutional deep belief networks on cifar-10 A Krizhevsky, G Hinton Unpublished manuscript 40 (7) 198 2010 11. Real-Time Pedestrian Detection with Deep Network Cascades. A Angelova, A Krizhevsky, V Vanhoucke, AS Ogale, D Ferguson BMVC 2, 4 118 2015

But it makes more sense to add only the link to his Google Scholar page. In fact, I simply added the following statement to the article: Many of his numerous papers on machine learning and computer vision are frequently cited by other researchers, with reference to Google Scholar. That should suffice to establish his notability. Uf11 (talk) 17:54, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, WikiDan61. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Arturo Lomibao

Hello WikiDan61! When the article was first published, it was rejected with the reason:

"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;"

along with the additional comment, "Other than Lomibao's dates of service, none of the information in this article is cited."

Since then, I have included several reliable resources, namely to archived published newspaper articles on websites. I read today that the article was again rejected 2 days ago.

Please recommend what other steps I can take for the article to be up to spec. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Acdlomibao (talk • contribs) 09:42, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

@Acdlomibao: You appear to have provided some good references. Others appear to be personal interviews published in blogs and forums, so they might not be as reliable. I don't have the time now to assess all of the sources, but there are other editors who also review AFC submissions, so someone will get to yours eventually. Also, I don't see evidence that your draft was rejected a second time. I appear to be the only one to have reviewed it. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 13:06, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, @WikiDan61:. As for what I assumed was a second declination, I read "Declined by WikiDan61 2 days ago." This is perhaps system generated and not a reflection of a direct action by you. In any case, I'll wait for further review. Thanks again! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Acdlomibao (talk • contribs) 09:33, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

Request on 16:49:23, 21 November 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Ldt6v8

• Ldt6v8 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Cheryl Pruitt (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

You rejected an article of Cheryl Pruitt, citing a lack of published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. The articles cites CBS, Times of Northwest Indiana, and Chicago Tribune with publications specifically centered around the subject. These are well-known, independent news organizations.

What am I missing?

Ldt6v8 (talk) 16:49, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

@Ldt6v8: Pruitt is not notable as the CEO of Chicago Virtual Charter School, because this does not appear to be a notable institution. Nor is she notable for her legal issues, because the coverage of these did not rise above the local level and her actions did not result in lasting effects. (See WP:CRIMINAL.) WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 16:58, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

@WikiDan61:

My questions: Is she not notable as the former Superintendent of Gary Community School Corporation? If not, what is the intent of categories for 'American school superintendents' and 'Heads of educational institutions?' Do references from the Associated Press raise news coverage above the local level?

Ldt6v8 (talk) 17:08, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

@WikiDan61:

Also your link to notable organizations excludes educational institutions. "The scope of this guideline covers all groups of people organized together for a purpose with the exception of non-profit educational institutions, religions or sects, and sports teams."

Ldt6v8 (talk) 17:17, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

@Ldt6v8: The category Category:American school superintendents is for notable school superintendents. In this case, she is only notable in that role based on her legal troubles arising from her tenure in that position, and as such, the guidelines of WP:CRIMINAL come into play, and she doesn't meet those guidelines. And my link to WP:ORG is appropriate, as it only excludes non-profit educational institutions, whereas charter schools are generally for-profit organizations. And regardless of the notability of her current employer, the article is almost exclusively about her tenure in Gary, which does not appear to be notable. This, of course, is my own opinion. You are free to resubmit the draft and have someone else review it. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 17:55, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

@WikiDan61:

With all due respect, there is entirely too much subjectivity and lack of verification above. Can you direct me to a firm set of guidelines that define the threshold/weights for 'notability' or firm considerations administrators shall use to confirm/reject?

Ldt6v8 (talk) 18:17, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

@Ldt6v8: The relevant guidelines: WP:CRIMINAL for people notable solely as criminals; WP:BIO for people in general; WP:GNG for general notability of any topic. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 18:42, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

Ahmed Al-Hassan

Hello,

I am knowledgeable on the individual and that is the main reason why I am editing his page. I am including sources after every sentence and image with complete detail. Not only that but I am including every minor detail with justification. As a result, please keep my version with undoing all my verified hard work. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by InZain11 (talk • contribs) 20:23, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

Please discuss the matter at Talk:Ahmad al-Hassan so that a centralized discussion may be conducted. For convenience, I have copied your response to that page. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 20:27, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

Ahmed Al-Hassan

Using words like "whitewashed" makes you sound like an ignorant individual. The page is filled with non-factual information and bogus references to make the individual look "bad". I am here to clear everything up and use VERIFIED sources from his website that explain the mess that was on the page before and clarify any misconceptions. I am doing what is right and am using images and the website that I cited has SOURCES in it so its not like information is fictional. I expect you now to put back my changes because you're the one in the wrong because I still have more than 75% of the page to edit and clean up. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by InZain11 (talk • contribs) 20:36, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

About my recent article.

Hi: Thanks for the reviewing my content. I am a person who love to contribute to wikipedia. For a start, I had created an article(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Katting_Creative_Club(KCC) ). But unfortunately, it did not approve.

Could you give me some simple suggestions to improve the article? Also I need to know how to add the logo, address etc to the article so that those will shown on the right sidebar.

Thanks in advnace.

Regards,

Vishnu Jayan Software engineer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vishnujayadhevan (talk • contribs) 11:30, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

@Vishnujayadhevan: You'll need to provide evidence that this group has been the topic of significant independent coverage in various media. So, a local newspaper article about the club probably won't do, but a state or national newspaper covering the group might help. For help in creating the right sidebar, see the documentation for the template {{infobox organization}}. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 12:52, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

Reverting back to potential vandals

Respected sir, I am trying to undo potential vandals done to the Wikipedian page for Jainism There are many things removed such as pilgrim sites and historical events.However there were some good edits also which I had to undo to revert back to original version I was done but you reverted back to bot's edit please undo old vandals and keep the good things as I don't know how to directly remove vandals and keep good edits. Hoping to be obliged Sincerely, Rishabh.rsd

@Rishabh.rsd: My reversion of your edit was mostly intended to restore the better map that your edits removed. However, I don't find that the other edits you added significantly improved the article, or addressed any specific vandalism. They appear to be a case of you preferring different wording in some sections, and different images in others. You are free to redo those edits, but please don't restore your version of the map without discussing the matter, as your version seems to be significantly less useful than the version to which I reverted. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 17:32, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

t Articles for creation: Agata Nowa (November 9)

Hello Dan! Thank you so much for reviewing my article. I am really grateful for your comments and effort to go through my work. Unfortunately the article was declined, so I have added new paragraphs and also more reliable refferences. Please chceck my new Draft and let me know what you think.

About your comment "Sources do not provide evidence of significant coverage of Ms Nowa as a model. The "national beauty contest" does not appear to be a significant contest (i.e. of the Miss Polonia variety) but rather a film talent search." I understand your subjective understanging however it was a beauty contest with national range. The title Agata Nowa was given was Miss of photomodel category. Film talent search does not give Miss title but rather ~ Most promising actor or so :)

Oh and you also have assumed that I am miss Nowa creating article about myself. Please let me correct yourself, as I marked on the beginning of article creation I am close her businness circle. If you have more comments for me about improving the article please do so. We really want it to be publish as that can help many Wikipedia readers to recognize the significant fashion business individual.

Kind regards Editoer 7070 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Editor7070 (talk • contribs) 09:23, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

@Editor 7070: Perhaps I am still misunderstanding the nature of the "national beauty title" but this title was not conferred by the recognized national-level beauty pageant of Poland (the Miss Polonia contest), but rather by some other organization (the Holly Model Look catalog?), and so does not confer the same level of notability. The other sources you've added are just the websites of the agencies that represent her, and thus do not give evidence of the required independent coverage. (And I can't for the life of me figure out why you cited this reference!)WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 13:47, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

@WikiDan61: Okay so you disregard the national beauty title, is this one point enough reason to discredit the entire article? Other references are absolutely independent and since my first article project there came up couple of other facts and sources that id like to include in the article

1) http://mcnatura.pl/index.php/2018/10/27/warsztaty-fotografii-z-udzialem-top-modelki-anny-piszczalki/ 2) https://www.imdb.com/name/nm10255840/ Let me know what else we can include. Maybe we can somehow suport Wikipedia besides workin on its content :)

Kind regards Editor 7070

@Editor 7070: I'm sorry. Reference 1 is an invitation to a photography workshop where Nowak was going to be the model. Not exactly independent coverage. Reference 2 is her IMDb entry, and IMDb is not considered a reliable source. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 14:57, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

@WikiDan61: That is correct Reference 1 has invitation form however in the host desctiption are included significant facts about Nowa (not Nowak please), IMDb in many many Wikipedia articles is used as reliable source (i can send you examples) so I dont understant why you reject this source at this time? Please advice me what else i can do so the article appears in Wikipedia??

Regards Editor7070

@Editor 7070: Apologies for the misspelling of Nowa's name. Although the invitation does include an extensive description of Nowa's career, it can't be considered a reliable source because the point of the invitation is to bolster her reputation in order to entice people to come to the event. As for IMDb, I linked you to the relevant Wikipedia policy about that source. You may find many pages on Wikipedia that use it as a source, but this is generally considered contrary to Wikipedia policy, and as editors review such pages, such citations are often removed, or marked as unreliable. (This is not to say that we don't often include the IMDb page as an external link, but we should not rely on that source because, like Wikipedia itself, it is edited by its users with little to no editorial oversight to assure that the material is accurate.) WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 13:04, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

December 2018 GOCE newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors December 2018 Newsletter Hello and welcome to the December 2018 GOCE newsletter. Here is what's been happening since the August edition. Thanks to everyone who participated in the August blitz (results), which focused on Requests and the oldest backlog month. Of the twenty editors who signed up, eleven editors recorded 37 copy edits. For the September drive (results), of the twenty-three people who signed up, nineteen editors completed 294 copy edits. Our October blitz (results) focused on Requests, geography, and food and drink articles. Of the fourteen people who signed up, eleven recorded a total of 57 copy edits. For the November drive (results), twenty-two people signed up, and eighteen editors recorded 273 copy edits. This helped to bring the backlog to a six-month low of 825 articles. The December blitz will run for one week, from 16 to 22 December. Sign up now! Elections: Nominations for the Guild's coordinators for the first half of 2019 will be open from 1 to 15 December. Voting will then take place and the election will close on 31 December at 23:59 UTC. Positions for Guild coordinators, who perform the important behind-the-scenes tasks that keep our project running smoothly, are open to all Wikipedians in good standing. We welcome self-nominations, so please consider nominating yourself if you've ever thought about helping out; it's your Guild and it doesn't run itself! Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators; Reidgreg, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95, Miniapolis and Tdslk. >>> Sign up for the December blitz! <<< >>> Participate in the Coordinator elections! <<< To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:05, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Request on 16:19:25, 4 December 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Liam Óg Ó Nualláin

• Liam Óg Ó Nualláin (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Cyriopagopus Minax (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I’m confused as to why my article wasn’t allowed. That book was a scientist confirmed book. The Tarantula keepers guide is a great book filled with true facts. And I understand the petbugz care sheet, but Mike knows his stuff. Please give it another chance! It’s my first articke about my favourite tarantula! Thanks, Liam

Liam Óg Ó Nualláin (talk) 16:19, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

@Liam Óg Ó Nualláin: I presume you're speaking of The Tarantula Keeper's Guide by Stanley Schultz? That appears to be a hobbyist's guide, and while it may contain some useful information for the tarantula hobbyist, it hardly contains the kind of peer-reviewed science that we generally rely on for articles about specific animal species. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 16:46, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Good tarantula info sources?

Do you have ideas as to where to get info on that specific species? I know my info is true, but i have no proper references Liam Óg Ó Nualláin (talk) 20:22, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

You might look to the sources used by Schultz. If his book lists a bibliography, there would probably be good information in those sources. (He has probably distilled down some valid scientific journals into laymen's terms, which is useful for a hobbyist but not so much for an encyclopedia.) WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 20:34, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

@Liam Óg Ó Nualláin: Maybe you missed my advice above. Your addition of more "sources" to your draft has not helped. The sources you've added include more hobbyist sites, and vague references to arachnology sites that do not point directly to information about C. minax. I'm afraid I've had to decline your draft again. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 13:18, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

It is hard finding sources. I added a link to the end of the draft. I have no doubt the subject merits an article (generally any article on a biological species is considered encyclopedically relevant to the community) but I would like to see inline citations to a couple of reliable sources. ~Anachronist (talk) 15:21, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

@Anachronist: I would imagine any species merits an article, but it has to be based on reliable sources. If no one has yet taken the time to study this species sufficiently to create a peer-reviewed scientific journal article on it, we may not yet have valid source material for a Wikipedia article. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 15:48, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Google Scholar showed me exactly one hit, which I cited just now. But that journal article says this species is "rare and poorly known." So it's unlikely that significant coverage will be found. That said, the article would still serve as a stub if if were moved to main space. I have no problems with citing a specialized blog for general information about appearance and pet keeping, if it looks like it demonstrates expertise, but right now the draft only lists some external links without actually citing anything. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:04, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Can you help with the the sources? I’m struggling to find any good ones! I checked the ones the Tarantula Keepers Guide used, but they weren’t good

Liam Óg Ó Nualláin (talk) 17:36, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Northwest News Rejection and Deletion

@WikiDan61: Hi, I am an instructor at Indiana University Northwest participating in the Wikiproject: Newspapers, which you can find here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Newspapers/

The book that is not found in Google Books is a reference that was published in 1986. You can find out more information about it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Newspapers/States/Indiana

We are working with Mr. Pete Forsyth at the Wiki Foundation. We are attempting to close a hole in the verification system for fact checkers against fake news and disinformation by bad actors around the world. Many of our newspapers are tiny, boring, and have hardly any circulation at all. Yet, they are notable in that they are a source of news for a local community and their name could be used to write fake news which would be distributed across the internet.

So, I would like to undo your rejection and ask you to let us work this draft through the system with the WikiFoundation.

Thanks, Fr. K.+ Indiana University Northwest, Gary, Indiana, United States of America. Mkurowski (talk) 03:50, 7 December 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mkurowski (talk • contribs) 00:47, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Personal knowledge is not verifiable, either by an editor or one of our readers and therefore not a citable source, even if you're an expert. Also Wikipedia does not cite itself. - FlightTime (open channel) 00:49, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Pete Forsyth here, I am indeed working with Mkurowski and thank him for the work he's done getting his students to do quality research for Wikipedia articles. But apparently I haven't introduced the AfC process very well or other parts of Wikipedia's process. I'll circle back with him tomorrow and hopefully we can sort through the various issues here. One small correction, we don't have different guidelines for this project, all of Wikipedia works by the same guidelines; but I don't think they'll ultimately be an impediment to getting this article properly sourced. -Pete Forsyth (talk) 01:00, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

@Peteforsyth: Thanks for shepherding this, Pete. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 01:48, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Just a quick note, this is not forgotten. Mkurowski and I have not had a chance to talk yet, but plan to revisit this after the holidays. -Pete Forsyth (talk) 18:22, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

@Peteforsyth: I trust that the matter is in capable hands! WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 20:31, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Edited again

Dear WikiDan61,

Thank you for reviewing my submission. According to your comments, I edited again the draft and I made correct on sections that you suggested. I published again and I would be grateful to reconsider again my submitted draft.

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Julietronic9 (talk • contribs) 16:43, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Recent Review of The Digitome Article (12/10/2018) - comments and concerns addressed

Dear (@WikiDan61:), Thank you so much for your review of the Digitome. I would like to address, and learn from, your concerns of the article. To have all of the information in one place, I have posted your response and reasoning for the deletion of this page here: Product of the Medable company that has not been shown to be notable. Citations in the article generally verify facts not related to the actual product (such as facts about why the product was created). External links appear to be exclusively press releases by the Medable company. Note stated COI of article's author.

I would like to address each point.

Product of the Medable company that has not been shown to be notable. Thank you for this comment. I included a list of selected and notable awards the Digitome has won since 2017. What additional type of information or awards do I need to include?

Citations in the article generally verify facts not related to the actual product (such as facts about why the product was created). External links appear to be exclusively press releases by the Medable company. This is good feedback, thank you for highlighting this. The external links are unbiased press releases that were not produced by Medable, but were written about Medable and/or the Digitome based off of a Medable staff's presentations at conferences and/or interviews. I removed the link to the Digitome video.

Note stated COI of article's author. Is there a problem with being connected to the topic? I thought it was required to state this but did not realize this was a negative.

Again, thank you so much for your time and effort in reviewing this article. I look forward to your responses and to better understanding how to make this an acceptable article for Wikipedia.

Kindly, Jena — Preceding unsigned comment added by JMedable (talk • contribs) 22:37, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

bioshotcrete

Dear WikiDan61, Can ou please provide the reasons why the article on bioshotcrete was rejected and could you please give a few tips on how to resubmit and improving the wikipediaçs standards? many thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paul reed Lluis (talk • contribs) 14:01, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

@Paul reed Lluis: As mentioned on the draft page, I do not see in this draft how bioshotcrete is significantly different from normal shotcrete. The draft speaks of a novel method of application (using a drone to maneuver the shotcrete hose) but does not speak of how the actual material is different. Presumably, because it is called bioshotcrete, there is a biological component to the mortar, but this is not mentioned anywhere in the draft. As the draft presently stands, I do not believe that this product is sufficiently different from any other shotcrete to merit its own article. Rather than create a new article, I would recommend that the existing shotcrete article be expanded to note the novel application methods outlined in your draft. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 14:07, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

@Contributions/WikiDan61 and ReadMe!!: Many thanks WikiDan61. the bioshotcrete as can be read in many scientific papers uses clay mixes 8combined with other biomaterials such as limes sands fibers and oils instead of concrete and the use of drone to spray the mixtures over light formworks allows the construction to happen with less heavy trucks, cranes or labour intensive scaffoldings than in the more conventional applications of shotcrete. can you please advise wether to resubmit the article integrating this additional information or propose to incorporate bioshotcrete in the existing shotcrete pages? many thanks (talk

@Paul reed Lluis: The papers cited in your article are noticeably vague about the composition of the material in question (possibly due to trademark/patent issues) so they are not terribly helpful. Your description of clay mixes combined with "biomaterials such as limes sands fibers" is also not terribly clear. The one paper I found among your citatons (this one) indicates that the bioshotcrete uses clay fixed with biocement. As you'll notice, the biocement link is red, meaning that article does not yet exist. My suggestion relative to your present draft is to do some research and see if there is sufficient information to create an article about biocement (and if not, perhaps add a section to the cement article), and then add a section to shotcrete about the use of bioshotcrete (as shotcrete with biocement). It seems that the unique nature of bioshotcrete is that it is lighter than normal shotcrete, allowing the hoses to be manipulated by drones rather than requiring human handling. This could be added to the shotcrete article (if a proper reliable source can be found to verify this fact). WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 12:53, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.16 15 December 2018

Hello WikiDan61,

Reviewer of the Year

This year's award for the Reviewer of the Year goes to Onel5969. Around on Wikipedia since 2011, their staggering number of 26,554 reviews over the past twelve months makes them, together with an additional total of 275,285 edits, one of Wikipedia's most prolific users.

Thanks are also extended for their work to JTtheOG (15,059 reviews), Boleyn (12,760 reviews), Cwmhiraeth (9,001 reviews), Semmendinger (8,440 reviews), PRehse (8,092 reviews), Arthistorian1977 (5,306 reviews), Abishe (4,153 reviews), Barkeep49 (4,016 reviews), and Elmidae (3,615 reviews).
Cwmhiraeth, Semmendinger, Barkeep49, and Elmidae have been New Page Reviewers for less than a year — Barkeep49 for only seven months, while Boleyn, with an edit count of 250,000 since she joined Wikipedia in 2008, has been a bastion of New Page Patrol for many years.

See also the list of top 100 reviewers.

Less good news, and an appeal for some help

The backlog is now approaching 5,000, and still rising. There are around 640 holders of the NPR flag, most of whom appear to be inactive. The 10% of the reviewers who do 90% of the work could do with some support especially as some of them are now taking a well deserved break.

Really good news - NPR wins the Community Wishlist Survey 2019

At #1 position, the Community Wishlist poll closed on 3 December with a resounding success for NPP, reminding the WMF and the volunteer communities just how critical NPP is to maintaining a clean encyclopedia and the need for improved tools to do it. A big 'thank you' to everyone who supported the NPP proposals. See the results.

Training video

Due to a number of changes having been made to the feed since this three-minute video was created, we have been asked by the WMF for feedback on the video with a view to getting it brought up to date to reflect the new features of the system. Please leave your comments here, particularly mentioning how helpful you find it for new reviewers.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:15, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

McCarkiss

Thanks for your comments, any help would be appreciated given the article is factual, neutral and written with extensive external and independant referencing..... Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mccarkiss (talk • contribs) 15:53, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

@Mccarkiss: You'll need to provide evidence that your club has been the subject of significant independent coverage. Listings in various race result sites isn't sufficient; you need to show evidence that your club has been the subject of several full-length articles written by authors who are independent of your group. (I.e. press releases and advertorials won't do.) WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 16:16, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Define significant, is that not subjective?

I will go about adding references in a list then? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mccarkiss (talk • contribs) 16:20, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

@Mccarkiss: The relevant guideline is WP:ORG. In this context, significant is understood to mean something along the lines of a full-length feature article in a newspaper or magazine whose scope of coverage is more than just the local community. And yes, in order to verify such coverage, you should add references cited from such significant coverage. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 16:23, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Paid contribution

Hi Am writing an article related to the company I work for and you (plus another editor) kindly left me a note that I needed to add my affiliation on my user page. I have done that but must have gotten it wrong somehow - did I use the wrong template or placed it wrong? Please help - much appreciated. All the best User:Anna.nicklin — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anna.nicklin (talk • contribs) 22:06, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

@Anna.nicklin: No, this edit placed a valid disclaimer on your user page. You are covered in terms of Wikimedia Foundation's requirement to disclose paid editing. That doesn't mean that your new draft will automatically be accepted. It may still have problems. (I haven't looked at the new one yet.) WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 22:12, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

@WikiDan61: Ok, thanks. Not sure why I got this extra note to fix it them, but will check with the other editor Thanks for you assistance.

Deletion of Page...

Hey there! Hope you can help me figure this out. I created a Wikipedia page years ago with general information about Phoebe Putney Memorial Hospital. We would like to delete that page as the content is out of date and there seems to be some discrepancies with the current username making it very challenging to do anything with the page that is visible to the masses. Not sure how to access it to update it, so we would like to just delete it and start from scratch. Any suggestions are welcome, thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jalm77 (talk • contribs) 16:35, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

@Jalm77: Perhaps you've misunderstood the concept of Wikipedia. You may have created the page, but once you did so, you gave up all control of the content. (Wikipedia is a collaborative platform, and other editors will work to improve your original article so that it meet's the sites guidelines for verifiability and neutrality. You don't get to just blow it all up if you don't like the direction the page has taken. Your recent edits have been reverted because they appear to be blatantly promotional, which is not allowed. If there are edits you'd like to see on the page, I suggest that you open a discussion on the article's talk page and request the changes you'd like to see. It will help if you can provide citations as to why you think the present information is incorrect and needs to be updated. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 16:52, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for info! I will work then to update what is there with more relevant and informational — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jalm77 (talk • contribs) 17:17, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

New York Restoration Project

Hi WikiDan61,

Thank you for your message. What kind of additional information do you need to verify? In addition to the outside links that I provided, I have several news articles from the time that I would be happy to send you for verification. They are files that I can email. There are also numerous photos posted on the Facebook link that I provided. I also have all of the administrative and tax records here from 1995 through 1997 when NYRP was a program of ours. The links provided on my edit are to both photos and several articles relating to both California Environmental Project and the New York Restoration Project.

Thank you for your assistance.

(Nebula B (talk) 17:28, 3 January 2019 (UTC))

@Nebula B: The links you provided are not reliable or useful sources.

1. This link is a list of all articles in the LA Times that mention Scott Mathes. A more specific link to an article about his activities with the NYRP would be useful.
2. This link from the Bootleg Betty blog is not reliable because it's a blog, not a journalistically edited site.
3. This link is a Facebook page (also not a reliable source)

To verify the content you want to add, you'll need to cite reliable sources (actual published newspaper or magazine articles, books or book chapters, reliable websites that exercise editorial control (such as HuffPo), etc.) WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 18:20, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Delete My Page Gulf International School

Hi I would like to delete my page. If you can kindly help me with that — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zhb1999 (talk • contribs) 18:42, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Vecna Robotics

WikiDan61 - Thank you for reviewing Draft:Vecna Robotics. I've worked on improving the draft. Any feedback you can share regarding the revisions would be greatly appreciated. E-Stylus (talk) 00:35, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

Page not submitted

Why have you rejected the request of my draft:amit jain jugnu. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pbcongress (talk • contribs) 15:15, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

GOCE 2018 Annual Report

Guild of Copy Editors 2018 Annual Report Our 2018 Annual Report is now ready for review. Highlights: Overview of Backlog-reduction progress; Summary of Drives, Blitzes, and the Requests page; Membership news and results of elections; Annual leaderboard; Plans for 2019. – Your project coordinators: Miniapolis, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95, Reidgreg and Tdslk. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:31, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Nemer

Hi, you took this bio to AfD back in 2015 and I closed it as "delete". Since then, a DRV has allowed draftification and the editor who created that draft asked me to review it. I'd rather not get too involved in this, so perhaps you could have a look and see whether it is not TOOSOON any more and now establlishes notability? Thanks! --Randykitty (talk) 10:48, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

@Randykitty: Thanks for the heads up. I don't remember the original article, but the new one appears to pass muster. Nemer appears to have established himself as a recognized expert in his field. I've edited the draft for some minor style issues, and removed the extensive external links list, and I've contacted the draft's author to have them review the pared down work before I accept it for publication. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 13:55, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Request on 14:57:21, 13 February 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by VindevogelTaho

• VindevogelTaho (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Triangle Factory (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello, I have submit this article multiple times now and it keeps getting declined although I have added multiple references I have used in the article. I fail to understand what is wrong with the article at this point in time and would like some help.

VindevogelTaho (talk) 14:57, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

@VindevogelTaho: The references in the article are almost exclusively links to the company's own website. We need evidence of extensive coverage of this company in independent media (i.e. things written about the company and its games by others, not things the company writes about itself). WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 15:11, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Jerico M. Cruz / Response

@WikiDan61: This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because it meets the general guidelines and policies of an article that is being posted and concurrently edited in your encyclopedia in accordance with Wikipedia:List of policies. This article is based on Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons or BLPs; it strictly follows and upholds all applicable federal statutes of the United States of America and three core contents of Wikipedia's policies; that is, neutral point of view or NPOV, verifiability, and no original research or NOR. The contents of this article will be written in NPOV with credible claim of significance, or importance. By following the basic criteria of Wikipedia:Notability (people), this article will significantly follow an independent, reliable, and verifiable sources of information without violating the copyrights laws and exclusive rights of primary sources that are not mentioned in this statement when sourcing credible information about a subject. For instance, the subject of this article will follow the policies of Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Notability guide without inventing and fabricating the significance of his military service history; the subject of this article had at least one verifiable and notable external source of information from External links of his page. Furthermore, the author, User:Simplywriter, will continue to uphold a high standard of conduct of his actions inside the Wikipedia community to prevent libelous revisions; the author will maintain civility to prevent commotions, or disputes that may arise in the horizon; the author will definitely report any predatory contents that could endanger children's rights with inappropriate levels of writing and reading materials.

P.S.: User:Simplywriter is the original author and editor of this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Simplywriter (talk • contribs)

@Simplywriter: You posted what was essentially an empty draft. It provided no details of Cruz' life nor made any credible assertion of notability. I had contacted you when the article was still a draft inquiring on where you intended to take the draft, since it had no chance of being accepted as an article at that point. You chose not to respond to my inquiry, but to publish the draft anyway. I recommend you review WP:BIO and WP:GNG to understand what content is acceptable for inclusion at Wikipedia. If you have more facts to include in the draft to indicate how Cruz is notable, I recommend you request undeletion and continue to develop the article in the draft space, where satisfying notability is not a requirement to keep the draft around while you develop it. However, once the draft is published to article space, it must meet the criteria for inclusion, and this article did not. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 18:15, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

@WikiDan61: Draft:Jerico M. Cruz was a work-in-progress like other articles in your encyclopedia. When the article, Jerico M. Cruz, was posted online, the template and codes were completed. However, the contents needed to be typed and eventually new files and contents would be added in the article. Your advice to undo the deletion is acceptable.

P.S.: User:Simplywriter is the original author and editor of this message/article.

@Simplywriter: As a work in progress, it should have been left in the draft space. Once you moved it to article space, it became subject to the same inclusion guidelines that other articles are subject to. The correctness of the templates is certainly not the issue (although there's a discussion to be had there should you choose to reintroduce this material). WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 19:17, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

Powerday Page / Response

@WikiDan61: Hello, I have read your edit and that is fine, thank you. Has the draft gone to the article space? (Johnc 1990 (talk) 17:41, 12 February 2019 (UTC))

The People's Brexit

Hi WikiDan61,

I found this very interesting and informative article in a draft format and edited it as recommended by a previous reader. I think it very much has a place on Wikipedia and many UK users will wish to read it. Perhaps you could suggest how it could be changed to be suitable for you? For my part I have learned a lot from it and it would be a shame if it could not be published so that all may benefit from it.

Regards,

Diggerty Diggerty (talk) 13:33, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

@Diggerty: "The People's Brexit" is clearly a movement of some nature (whether it is a single person or hundreds or thousands is unclear from the draft). The draft must discuss the movement: its foundation, history, and impact; rather than attempting to promote and communicate the movement's manifesto. If the movement has a message to communicate, it can get its own website for that purpose. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 13:44, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

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

Hello WikiDan61,

Good morning. I'm confused to your reasons for denying publishing the article on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Siegmund_and_Marilyn_Goldman_House

Under Cite 1 "Weekly List 20190208". National Park Service, it lists the Siegmund and Marilyn Goldman House FLORIDA, ORANGE COUNTY, Goldman, Siegmund and Marilyn, House, 1670 Huron Trail, Maitland, SG100003411, LISTED, 2/4/2019

As you probably know, the National Park Service does not honor properties and place them on the National Register if they are not architecturally and historically noteworthy. On that basis, the architecture description in the article draft is accurate. I actually used the precise description from congratulatory letter I received in the mail from the the State of Florida Historic Preservation officer, Ruben Acosta.

Thank you for any assistance.

KaiserJohn (talk) 14:04, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

@KaiserJohn: I thought I was pretty clear in the comment I left on the page. The problem isn't about notability, but verifiability. The draft makes several claims, and cites them with specific references, but those references do not verify the claims made. As for the language about the architectural description of the house, the letter you received from the State Historic Preservation Officer is not a valid source for citation because it is not publicly available for other editors to review. You'll have to find a valid, publicly available source that describes the home in order to cite your description of it. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 14:14, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

I made the changes I believe that were needed. Thank again for your advice and guidance. KaiserJohn (talk) 15:23, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

The People's Brexit Campaign page

Hi WikiDan61,

I wrote a new page based on your advice being as the article that I edited was so objected to by you and I felt so bad about changing someone else's article that ended up in this way! I was only trying to make amends for this by taking your advice and writing a new neutral article. Under the rules of Wikipedia, The People's Brexit IS entitled to a Wikipedia page as it is an established Campaign that is just new so there is not much Google coverage yet but it has a website at www.thepeoplesbrexit.org and it is a National UK Campaign, non profit and fulfils all the Wikipedia criteria just as 'Leave Means Leave', 'People's Vote', 'Get Britain Out' etc. Of these examples the page for 'People's Vote' cannot in any way be described as neutral if you were to look at it for a comparison, but no-one is wanting to delete this page!

I think that it is very unfair that you are objecting to the new page I have written as I have gone to great lengths and spent a lot of time to rewrite it in a neutral way from scratch based on your advice and using information and references from the original article and I feel you should be supportive of this instead of critical as all of your advice was followed to the letter and I would have thought it was obvious to you that this was the case. As I said I was merely trying to make amends to the original author for my initial editing that was done in good faith but was so badly received by you. It had since occurred to me that they may have wanted to edit it further themselves but I have now stopped them from doing this, hence I thought I had no option but to rewrite it! It also just came up as a page instantly and did not go in a draft format for some reason. It was not an attempt to by pass the system if that is what you were thinking!

Please can you support the page staying and either edit it yourself or suggest some edits but under the rules of Wikipedia The People's Brexit SHOULD have a page of some description.

Regards,

Diggerty

Diggerty (talk) 21:47, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

@Diggerty: The existence of the campaign, or even its legitimacy, is not the question here. The question is twofold:

1. is the organization notable enough for us to find reliable neutral sources that have covered it to uses as references to verify facts about the organization; and
2. is the article written in a proper neutral tone so as to describe the organization without serving as a means of publishing the organization's manifesto?

Point 1 is the reason for the Articles for Deletion discussion. If the organization is not notable enough to have received sufficient coverage, Wikipedia will not want an article about it. If the AFD resolves as keep, then point 2 can be addressed by rewriting the article in a neutral tone given the sources that (presumably) will have been found to have supported the keep resolution in the first place. As for the present neutrality of the article: while it is true that you have cited facts that are verifiable based on the existing sources (presumably; I don't have access to the British Hansard, and you might want to include actual web links to make it easier for others to find your sources), you have used these facts to argue for the illegitimacy of the UK's membership in the EU, which is a highly non-neutral conclusion based on the opinions of your campaign, but not a statement of fact. In order to write a neutral article, we will need to discuss the founding of the organization (who, when, where), its history (what has it done? what has it accomplished?), its current status, and briefly a synopsis of its positions, with clear indications that the positions are opinions of the campaign, and not hard fast facts. And all of this would need to be based on reliable sources which circles us around to the first point: the organization doesn't appear notable enough for reliable sources to yet have been generated about it. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 22:16, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

PS: You are permitted to make known your own opinions regarding the deletion or retention of this article by editing the Articles for Deletion discussion. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 22:18, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

You seem to be losing track of two facts, one that under Wikipedia no article is a finished product and that it can always be improved upon and edited in the future and few articles start out 'perfect' and also that this is currently a new Campaign with not much history that will grow with the page as time goes on but in the meantime it is still important to enough people in the UK (I understand you are in the USA) to warrant a page now. Your comment regarding Hansard not being acceptable as a source for the purposes of this article is not valid as Historic Hansard is available on line and the references are all provided, as all the other references cited are available on line. Further, Hansard is the best reference that it is possible to cite in this instance. Also, the article is written in a neutral tone just as you advised and I actually went to the trouble of rewriting the whole thing to satisfy this issue. It is impossible to get it any more neutral without losing the meaning of the references cited. Many existing articles on Wikipedia are far from neutral, maybe you should be targeting those instead?

Diggerty (talk) 01:48, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

@Diggery: I am not losing track of that fact at all. I've been an editor at Wikipedia for over ten years and am well aware of the developmental nature of articles. But articles can only develop if there are sources available from which to build the information, and that is not the case for this organization. And I never said Hansard is not an acceptable source; it is clearly an acceptable source to verify the record of Parliamentary discussion, but it is not a valid source for you to draw conclusions regarding the legitimacy of UK involvement in the EU. The illegitimacy of that decision is an opinion held by "The People's Brexit", not a historical fact.

If you wish to debate the issue of this article's deletion further, do so at the AFD. Please do not argue with me about it here any further. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 13:03, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

Article for deletion resolution

Hello, any resolution on Camille Kostek's page? Thanks. Maxen Embry (talk) 01:24, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

@Maxen Embry: The AFD discussion remains open for seven days at least. It was opened on 25 February (and so should close today), and the overwhelming opinion appears to be Keep. It is likely that an administrator will close the issue within a day or two. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 12:43, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Betty Ongley Article

Hello,

About an hour ago, you turned down my article submission for Betty Lee Ongley, a community activist and the first (and only) female mayor of Portage, MI. While I understand the concern that maybe her contributions are for a small town and may not warrant a Wikipedia page, I was hope you'd reconsider or give me some pointers as to what I could do to show how important she is to the town's history.

You see, I'm currently working for a firm called West Wing Writers and one of the side projects the firm has picked up is making Wikipedia pages for women - seeing as they're underrepresented on the site. The company gained some notoriety for this when an article of our project in the Washington Post was published. After reading the article, a reader emailed the firm requesting that we make a Wikipedia page for Ms. Ongley.

Please let me know,

Sean

The article: https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/history-has-a-massive-gender-bias-well-settle-for-fixing-wikipedia/2019/02/15/b2537640-3163-11e9-86ab-5d02109aeb01_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.45eca0d32100

My username: SeanSaldana — Preceding unsigned comment added by SeanSaldana (talk • contribs) 16:54, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

@SeanSaldana: Your motives are laudable: Wikipedia does need better representation of women's biographies. But only notable women. Ongley doesn't strike me as that. But, if you can find evidence of significant coverage of her life and / or career outside of the local (Portage/Kalamazoo area) media, you might get me or another editor to come to a different conclusion. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 17:48, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Fabrizio Palermo - Redirect per WP:BLP1E

Dear Dan61, I saw your revision BLP1E about Fabrizio Palermo but I didn't understand it. Might you please explain it to me?

Fabrizio Palermo is CEO and general manager of an important Italian institution: an investment bank with many international projects and with an important role in the international market. Here some examples: https://en.cdp.it/what-we-do/sustainability/our-commitment.kl

Thank you very much for your attention, looking forward to hearing from you.

Have a good day! Silvia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Silviafantin (talk • contribs) 09:54, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

@SilviaFantin: Per Wikipedia's WP:BLP1E policy, people who are notable solely for a single event or fact generally do not merit inclusion at Wikipedia. In this case, Palermo is notable solely as the CEO of a notable company. All of the available coverage of him is related to his role as CEO. In these cases, it is not appropriate to have an article about the person, but rather a simple redirect from the person's name to the article about the company or event with which the person is associated. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 12:31, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Ali bin Fetais al Marri

Wiki Dan 61.

I am not sure how to go about corresponding with Wikipedia. My complaint is with the Page on Dr Ali Al Marri.

This page is poorly researched with a number of flaws and information that is libellous and also rather damaging to a young girl. For example its says Dr Ali maybe the father of the child of R Dati, however on a simple check you will note the french court never names the father but says business Tycoon.ex-ministers-paternity-case-finally-put-to-bed; https://www.thelocal.fr/20141008/ex-ministers-paternity-case-finally-put-to-bed.

Other matters including alleged family members being members of Al-Qaeda, yet no evidence, or how these people are related? gives the wrong impression.

Reference either do not exist or are in french or simple not available to the public.

I do not wish to issue proceedings against Wikipedia, but wish to come to an understanding which allows the changes to be made on this page.

Many thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by IAACA4 (talk • contribs) 10:24, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

@IAACA4: First off: do not make legal threats against Wikipedia or any of its community members. Doing so will surely get you blocked. Now, moving on to the substance of your question: if there are specific facts in the article that you dispute, raise the issue at Talk:Ali Bin Fetais Al-Marri. Mention in a separate list item each fact that you dispute, and provide evidence as to why you think your version of the facts is more correct. You may also list negative, unsourced information in the article, and argue that it should be removed solely for being unsourced. Once you have done this, other editors can review your issues and either agree or not, in order to reach consensus. If no other editors join the discussion (wait at least three days; seven is better), then feel free to make your changes, referencing the talk page discussion in your edit summary. That way, you will have demonstrated that you at least attempted to reach consensus on these changes. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 12:40, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

@IAACA4: I've started the discussion for you, and taken a few steps on my own. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 13:09, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.17

Hello WikiDan61,

News

• The WMF has announced that Google Translate is now available for translating articles through the content translation tool. This may result in an increase in machine translated articles in the New Pages Feed. Feel free to use the {{rough translation}} tag and gently remind (or inform) editors that translations from other language Wikipedia pages still require attribution per WP:TFOLWP.

Discussions of interest

• Two elements of CSD G6 have been split into their own criteria: R4 for redirects in the "File:" namespace with the same name as a file or redirect at Wikimedia Commons (Discussion), and G14 for disambiguation pages which disambiguate zero pages, or have "(disambiguation)" in the title but disambiguate a single page (Discussion).
• {{db-blankdraft}} was merged into G13 (Discussion)
• A discussion recently closed with no consensus on whether to create a subject-specific notability guideline for theatrical plays.
• There is an ongoing discussion on a proposal to create subject-specific notability guidelines for chemicals and organism taxa.

Reminders

• NPR is not a binary keep / delete process. In many cases a redirect may be appropriate. The deletion policy and its associated guideline clearly emphasise that not all unsuitable articles must be deleted. Redirects are not contentious. See a classic example of the templates to use. More templates are listed at the R template index. Reviewers who are not aware, do please take this into consideration before PROD, CSD, and especially AfD because not even all admins are aware of such policies, and many NAC do not have a full knowledge of them.

NPP Tools Report

• Superlinks – allows you to check an article's history, logs, talk page, NPP flowchart (on unpatrolled pages) and more without navigating away from the article itself.
• copyvio-check – automatically checks the copyvio percentage of new pages in the background and displays this info with a link to the report in the 'info' panel of the Page curation toolbar.
• The NPP flowchart now has clickable hyperlinks.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – Low – 2393 High – 4828
Looking for inspiration? There are approximately 1000 female biographies to review.
Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.

---

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:19, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

March GOCE newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors March 2019 Newsletter Hello and welcome to the March newsletter, a brief update of Guild activities since December 2018. All being well, we're planning to issue these quarterly in 2019, balancing the need to communicate widely with the avoidance of filling up talk pages. Don't forget you can unsubscribe at any time; see below. January Drive: Thanks to everyone for the splendid work in January's Backlog Elimination Drive. We removed copyedit tags from all of the articles tagged in our original target months of June, July and August 2018, and by 24 January we ran out of articles. After adding September, we finished the month with 8 target articles remaining and 842 left in the backlog. GOCE copyeditors also completed 48 requests for copyedit in January. Of the 31 people who signed up for this drive, 24 copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Blitz: Thanks to everyone who participated in the February Blitz. Of the 15 people who signed up, 13 copyedited at least one article. Participants claimed 32 copyedits, including 15 requests. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Progress report: As of 23:39, 18 March 2019 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have completed 108 requests since 1 January and the backlog stands at 851 articles. March Drive: The month-long March drive is now underway; the target months are October and November 2018. Awards will be given to everyone who copyedits at least one article from the backlog. Sign up here! Election reminder: It may only be March but don't forget our mid-year Election of Coordinators opens for nominations on 1 June. Coordinators normally serve a six-month term and are elected on an approval basis. Self-nominations are welcome. If you've thought of helping out at the Guild, or know of another editor who would make a good coordinator, please consider standing for election or nominating them here. Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Miniapolis, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95, Reidgreg and Tdslk. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:12, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

on Emil Gampe draft

Dear WikiDan61,

Thank you for your response. I followed your advise on the contribution about Emil Gampe (currently existing as a draft) to redirect his name to the Launch My Line event. But I could not submit this change for approval (in order to turn this from a draft into the online-wikipedia). How can I do so?

Thank you in advance and best regards,

Daniel — Preceding unsigned comment added by Puravida03 (talk • contribs) 17:20, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

@Puravida03: I have created Emil Gampe in main article space as a redirect to Launch My Line. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 17:53, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

/* AfC notification: Draft:David Sawin has a new comment */

Thank you very much for your input. I am not sure how to do a citation for gallery exhibits where the only record might be a print announcement. I can scan them, but does that qualify as a citation? I will do some research into the exhibits that may have an on-line reference.Eugenia Sawin (talk) 11:45, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

@Eugenia Sawin: If the gallery exhibit was reviewed in a local publication, a citation to that publication would be suitable. Barring that, if the material is not independently verifiable, it may need to be removed from the draft. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 12:01, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Chris Grosso page

Hello WikiDan61,

You have flagged a page I created, for deletion. The page can be found at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Grosso

While Grosso might not be a notable musician, I believe it is fair to say he is a notable author, given all of his books have been released by major publishers, and, along with the anthologies, have all received great reviews across the board.

All the best, Clandestinediplomat — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clandestinediplomat (talk • contribs) 19:00, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Antonio Bonke Mbashe

You rejected this draft. Yes. Sockpuppeteer. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Bonke mbashe.

Sometimes a reviewer's first judgment is right. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:15, 25 March 2019 (UTC)