This is an archive of past discussions about User:Theroadislong. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
I can't see where it is mentioned that she has work in a permanent collection of the V&A, but if she did then she would likely pass WP:NARTIST you have not made it easy for reviewers by adding gargantuan lists of exhibitions which do not help with notability. You have also included a lot of unsourced detail, presumably you knew this person? If the draft was hacked back to the salient content it would be a much better potential article. Theroadislong (talk) 16:52, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
Hi
I am the Administrator of the Estate and until recently holder of the archive of materials from which much of the 'unsourced' material is sourced. The potential Conflict of interest is declared on my profile and the article has been written neutrally but I welcome any feedback in this area. I believe any opinions of her talent or contributions have been referenced to the source.
Experienced arts and crafts curators have been working with the Estate to synthesise the key information from her career. [3]https://www.csc.uca.ac.uk/csc-blog/26/1/2024/o9fdqfquwduxl5bd09n2l6sk2yvc1c this was recently handed over to the Crafts Study Centre, whose Director reviewed the Wiki prior to submission. Where possible and online references exist, they have been referenced but a number of institutions no longer exist ore are re-branded.
Are you suggesting that the order of works and exhibitions is reversed? Many thanks for your help, family history belongs on Ancestry or similar, not Wikipedia but it is important that pre-digital history of notable contributors to society are not lost while sources are still alive. Zaccwm (talk) 17:20, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
Since the V&A collection is what makes her notable I suggest you add it to the article, the enormous lists of works do not really help or belong in the article. Blogs are not usually considered to be reliable sources, references do NOT have to be online you can cite newspapers and magazines etc. Theroadislong (talk) 17:25, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
Thank you, I will update in the coming days, her move to the Warehouse in Boston is significant, in that this was both workshop and home for the majority of her life. Zaccwm (talk) 18:27, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for helping with the citations, I am working through the rest and appreciate the assistance you have given setting me on the right path. I am new to Wikipedias methos and so many of the help pages refer to a VisualEditor but it seems impossible to actually find. Zaccwm (talk) 12:04, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
Draft:Joaquín Arciniegas Tavera
Hi @Theroadislong Kindly, could you please remove the message/comment left for me in the maintenance section, that is in the article page, that reads "Reads like a family history project."
I believe that I have remediated this, by editing the article and deleting referencing the children's, parent's and wife's birth and death years that were in parenthesis.
Hi @Theroadislong Kindly, could you please remove the message/comment left for me in the maintenance section, that is in the article page, that reads "Please don't remove comments and previous declines and please don't add irrelevant content about his daugter."
I believe that I have remediated this, by editing the article and deleting referencing the daughter's donation in the two paragraphs that previously stated that in the Achievement section. I have also apologized to you and explained my mistake when I temporarily remove previous comments and previous declines; I was only attempting to produce a clean pdf copy of the article for third party reviews (history academy scholars) without such comments and declines. Moreover, the comments and declines were immediately reincorporated once I attempted to produce the pdf file. There was never any malicious intent on my part.
Please Fjnovoa read the number of previous replies to this question, the answer is the same..."As previously advised, comments are NOT removed until the draft is accepted". Theroadislong (talk) 15:52, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
Notability question for Julie Slick entry
Hi - you recently rejected my entry for Julie Slick with the reason being lack of "significant coverage". I included as sources 5 articles about her and her contributions to the music world from published music magazines and music journals. Was there something about those sites that was a problem? What is better than a music magazine as a source? Or did you want to see more than 5 sources? Any guidance would be appreciated - thank you. Atemys (talk) 15:44, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
I declined your draft I didn't "reject" it that has a very different meaning on Wikipedia, your draft doesn't show how she meets WP:NMUSICIAN and interviews are not considered to be reliable, independent sources. Theroadislong (talk) 16:14, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Theroadislong. Thanks for assessing the Draft:Agustín Pardella. I am sorry for seeing it declined once again. Please take a quick look at this entry in the Help Desk - DoubleGrazing stated that, in a previously submitted version, "the vast majority of the content was unreferenced: there were four citations, and they were all in one short paragraph". Inbetween I heavily edited the article, now there is a total of 17 different references.
Maybe this actor has not many awards (notably he has one from "Festival de Gramado", the most important film festival of Brazil). But recently he happens to portray one of the three main characters in the film Society of the Snow, which is very important in the Spanish-speaking world (it won 12 Goya Awards and is currently nominated for 2 Academy Awards).
Would you please be so kind and take all this into consideration...? Many thanks in advance for your kind time. Best, Fadesga (talk) 23:44, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
Request for more info about the article's clarification
Hi Theroadislong,
Thank you for your review of my article (biography). It is my first time trying to publish on Wikipedia about myself and my artistic journey. Criteria seem a bit complex for me to fully understand and follow. I would like to ask you to provide more details of how I can improve the article. It would also be great if you could provide specific examples of references to reliable sources, which I understand the article lacks of such third part or independent references.
Your draft has VERY few references, all content requires independent sources, you cannot just write what you like about yourself. We only report what independent sources say about a topic. You need newspaper or magazine articles discussing you in significant detail. Theroadislong (talk) 08:15, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
You were yelling at me and bias consistent behavior
I started going through some of the other article creations by this editor, checking the claims made in the articles against what the sources actually say. There seems to be alot of original research and/or family oral history stuff. It's slow going, since Spanish is not my first language. I appreciate the clean up that you have been doing, and for having such a keen eye. Netherzone (talk) 18:26, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
Draft:Joaquín Arciniegas Tavera
I am still in the process of editing and providing further evidence and citations for the article, after reviews and observations from @Star Mississippi and @Netherzone. Kindly and respectfully, why are you erasing my edits, if the article is still in progress of editing? You are not providing me the opportunity to take care of the issues that have been found with the article that are preventing it from being reviewed and approved.
Please reinstate my edits which are mitigating with corrections and additional information per previous declines. Or are you just blocking any edits I make to not allow me to go forward with my further changes? Fjnovoa (talk) 22:37, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
@Fjnovoa, Please use the draft talk page located here: Draft talk: Joaquín Arciniegas Tavera to keep the conversation in one place. I gave you some advice so you could try to do your own research. My comments were not the same as approving the draft through the review process. Theroadislong is a highly experienced and competent reviewer, one of the very best. Be assured they know what they are doing and are acting in good faith.
My saying that does not necessarily mean that your draft will be accepted for inclusion in the encyclopedia. There are processes and procedures in place that need to be followed, and notability standards to be confirmed. Additionally, you don't "own" the draft even though you created it. That is not how things work on this collaborative encyclopedia project. Anyone can edit a draft or an article in addition to you. No one is blocking you or your edits. Please follow the advice others have given you, be patient, and know that the draft may-or-may-not be accepted for inclusion in the encyclopedia. If this is in fact a family history project and you have a direct connection to the subject, you may be too close to the subject to realize this. Please trust the community to make sound decisions. Netherzone (talk) 23:29, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
Thank you, @Netherzone. Your points are well taken, and it is only through this that I will gain knowledge and training to make better Wikipedia articles. Let me reaffirm, that under no circumstances, I thought or even assumed that through your advice, any deficiencies or criticism noted in the article would be remediated nor implied approving the draft through the process. Secondly, I do not doubt @Theroadislong experience and competence.
It is my point of view, that when a comment is added describing it a "family history project" it places that bias in the mind of the next reviewer, and objectivity on the second and third review is lost.
Usually, it is in fact the descendants and family members the self-appointed guardians of the memory, veracity and well versed on the history of their ancestor. If we were to preclude any descendant for contributing, we would know half the story about the House of Borgia and the Borja popes. Or modern history, we would preclude any member of the Kennedy clan and descendant on any contributions about John, Robert, Edward or Joe; all Kennedy.
My point is that I have been working and attempting to satisfy all obstacles and notability standards presented in the review process. First it was regarding the officeholder status, so I edited the infobox box to focus on "writer" rather and office holder and that eliminated the office; furthermore, was moved from achievements to early life.
Now it's the issue of contributions via the 300 piece gold collection and notoriety through that. So, I have found direct linkage to a room or wing of a museum name after the subject and his work being donated to another museum. I live in the USA, so I have contacted the family in Colombia so they can help providing additional secondhand references of both museums this week. Additionally, I have prepared html copies of the article to ask for the research support and citations from third party academia history scholars. So, the two paragraphs that were deleted, are critical and belong in the article. I still do not understand why such critical facts are being reversed from the article which currently is still in draft mode. I do not pretend to "own" the draft, but I do continue to strengthen its historical value.
I would also like to know for my learning curve, that @Theroadislong could kindly explain what policy I violated by adding the two paragraphs, the citations and other edits that were done. And why they are not being reinstated. Fjnovoa (talk) 01:02, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
PS
@Netherzone When you state "too close to the subject", It is my understanding that his objection was remediated with the fact that I have placed on my page the COI disclosure. Or do I need to have any future edits be performed through an COI request? @Star Mississippi, kindly please advise tomorrow when you have a chance. Thank you in advance. Fjnovoa (talk) 01:25, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
Your edit here [4] removed all the maintenance templates so I reverted it, it would appear that you reverted at the same time, but I stand by the removal of irrelevant content on his daughter, I agree that you might be "too close to the subject". Theroadislong (talk) 07:32, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
You are free to add them back. I thought that perhaps I was being to quick to add those tags before fully checking out the claims/facts in relation to what the sources actually say. I've added OR maintenance tags instead, however these people may turn out to be non-notable as well. I agree the irrelevant daughter info should be removed. I removed some other content about his famous relatives since it was not verifiable in the source associated with the claims. Netherzone (talk) 18:30, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
Please help me
Hello, I have corrected my article and brought it into compliance with the rules. Please help me check! Thank you.
I am but a little fish in the big ocean, and my opinion on this matter likely counts for very little, but I was surprised to see that you're not an administrator. You've got the temperament, experience and (I don't care too much about this one, but others do) content creation to have a very good shot at a successful RfA. Is it something you would ever consider doing? MaterialsPsych (talk) 08:58, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
Hey, looks like an edit conflict automatically skipped your AFCH comment on Special:Diff/1208959332, just letting you know if you wanted to re-add it. Looks like we had similar positions on style but conflicted on our notability assessment so if you wanted to re-add yours I thought I'd let you know. Cheers, microbiologyMarcus(petri dish·growths)17:57, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for your help with my draft article. I've read the content policies as you kindly indicated and have rewritten the article, trying to adhere to the neutral point of view. May I again seek your advice to see if the article has improved? I'm hoping to be able to remove the note from the draft, with your permission.
Theroadislong, I don't know about you, but that article in its current state is completely unacceptable. Marilyn Fowles, it looks like you mostly copied an organizational website and calendar. Drmies (talk) 23:03, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
Thank you both for your help @Drmies and @Theroadislong. Am I allowed to submit the draft for review, whilst it shows the template about conflict of interest and paid edits? I didn't want to delete it from my draft without seeking your approval? Marilyn Fowles (talk) 11:30, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
I'm one of the editors who was seeing evidence of COI. Obiously no problem for new editors to jump into editing with a topic in which they have an interest but with which they are not themselves involved. The content and style suggested involvement, so I'm glad Marilyn Fowles has denied being involved and committed to following our content standard. But interestingly, a user "JulesFowles" also edited this topic extensively and specifically stated that some of their edits were based on request from MMP itself and its founder. DMacks (talk) 17:08, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
Good evening, as per the discussions, I confirm I do not have any involvement with MMP or its founder. I stopped working on my draft, and my wife user:Marilyn Fowles has taken on drafting for the Music Man Project article. JulesFowles (talk) 17:36, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
@Theroadislong My husband has now confirmed no involvement with MMP or its founder on his talk page and sends apologies for not replying before. Please let me know if you need any further information from either of us to satisfy any other concerns, so that we can work together towards removing the COI template from the draft. I've finally noted I don't need a heading on the page (thanks for bearing with a slow learner like myself) and will again keep working on the content to stop it sounding promotional. Thanks again for your support and patience with us! Marilyn Fowles (talk) 18:04, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
Thank you @DMacks. Yes, Jules is my husband and I offered to take it forward once I had read up on COI and many other important topics. I learned lessons from his experience and did not refer to the MMP at all. I built the new content based on facts and reliable sources that were not produced or requested by MMP or its founder, with lots of help along the way from @Theroadislong and more recently @Drmies. Very impressed how you are all supporting new editors - thank you. I confirm I am not involved with MMP or its founder. Hope this is reassuring but I completely understand your comments and welcome them all. Marilyn Fowles (talk) 17:26, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
I understand that my draft is trash, but I'm really new here and I need to help this temple to get their page up. They're a very famous temple in that village but they never had the support of rich followers to actually publish any books or anything. I have a list of articles that mentions about the temple. If you can help me identify the relevant articles, I will try and rewrite the draft. Please share your email address if you can help me.
Being "famous" is not a notability criteria for having a Wikipedia article, we need independent sources that discuss the building. You can post a list of possible sources on the talk page and then reviewers can take a look. I only communicate through Wikipedia NOT email sorry. Theroadislong (talk) 18:02, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
Sure I will post the sources on this page itself. No worries I was going to email you the same sources as an excel sheet.
These are all the mentions I have for this temple. They are mostly all mentions or about festivals celebrated at this temple. If anyone can help me identify the reliable sources i would be grateful.
Hey Theroadislong. I just processed a speedy deletion (R2) request of yours and I thought to myself, huh, that's weird, I thought they had page mover. After checking your deleted contributions, it looks like you're sometimes leaving a redirect behind when moving pages to draft space. This isn't a big deal, but I thought I'd let you know that you should be choosing not to leave a redirect behind when moving to draft space, then we can skip the whole R2 process entirely : Hey man im josh (talk) 13:18, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
Nothing to be sorry about! I understand exercising an abundance of caution by choosing to leave redirects behind. This just happens to be one of the situations where it's explicitly okay to not leave a redirect behind (WP:PMRC#6). Hey man im josh (talk) 13:26, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
After reading I think I should rename the title back to just "Blanche Grant". Also I have taken out a lot of the essay style that was in the article. Also included sources. Since you are the one who deactivated the page, is it possible for you to review it and reactivate it? Hdgknsn (talk) 16:03, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
How can I learn about appealing an editorial decision made, in my perception, utterly arbitrarily by a person with seniority. I feel very helpless and that Wikipedia is Kafka-esque protocol wise.
Please help me improve my article, precise guidelines would be very helpful. Thank you
Hello Tril,
Please help me edit my article, you put send it into draft mode. This biography is very important for historical purposes in a whole region of India and must be accurate.
Your draft Draft:T. Aliba Imti is poorly formatted see WP:MOS and is poorly referenced, although you have a lot of sources like Wikipedia which we cannot use. We don't use external links inthe body of an article and multiple photos do not help establish notability. See WP:YFA for general help. Theroadislong (talk) 09:18, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
The picture of the flag is not the same as the picture of the coat of arms. They are 2 distinct images important to the town culturally, i do get i did misplace the image of the flag but i feel it needs its spot on the wiki :) Icykenny36 (talk) 13:13, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
Alright! :) ill place it in a better spot next time i do, i just feel the flag render needs to be out there more (esp as this is the first and only one online) Icykenny36 (talk) 10:47, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
Women in Red March 2024
Women in Red| March 2024, Volume 10, Issue 3, Numbers 293, 294, 299, 300, 301
I have reviewed the reason you gave for rejecting this draft. Unfortunately, such is very hasty and diversionary because the draft in question has been improved several times with adequate reliable, third-partyindependentreferences added to support the submission. Didn't you see such improvements? Why then are you cautioning me when you elect to ignore the improvements I made on Draft: Christopher Ononukwe? Nwachinazo1 (talk) 08:56, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
It appears that you have a personal issue with me. The article is properly sourced and is notable for wikipedia just like the articles regarding other Toyota transmissions that were created 2 decades ago. 12DionneJ (talk) 16:29, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
I have no issue with you, the drafts you have been submitting simply do not show how they meet the notability requirements. That other articles exist is not a good argument, those other articles should probably be deleted too. Theroadislong (talk) 16:32, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
They do not meet requirements, as you have already been told. This means that you gravely misunderstand the requirements and I suggest you take time to learn more about them instead of spending your time harassing those you want to approve your drafts. The draft submission process is usually voluntary, if you want to roll the dice and move it into the encyclopedia itself, you can. 331dot (talk) 16:38, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
Requesting your help to improve drafts...
Hello @Theroadislong. I was sent your way by @Drmies who really helped me improve 2 of my draft articles. You took a look at my draft for podcast producer Jessica Cordova Kramer. (Thank you!) You recommended that I make it clear whether Kramer won any awards, as notability would hinge on that. She has won significant awards.... So I added those important details to that draft and also to another I’m working on (Deron Triff). Both of them have won at least one very significant award, as well as many others. Podcasting awards are not very well known the way movie and TV awards are, so I’m not sure how much detail to give or how many to include. It would help me so much to have another set of eyes on these drafts. Would you be willing to take another look? Thank you in advance! I appreciate it so much. Podcast Lover (talk) 17:03, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
I don't have any exprience about the aarticle writing on wikipedia, and how to edit it article on wikipedia. No Exprience so please help me how to do this. And how to write a good article on the wikipedia's plateform. Itissufyankhan (talk) 11:08, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
Article
Hello @Theroadislong. i create article of Saurabh Sudam Tamhane, and 5-10 min article was deleted why @Theroadislong. can you check SejalMedia (talk) 12:00, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for getting all those AfDs started. I was planning to start one today to see how it went. What a mess! S0091 (talk) 15:20, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
The "random bolding" was all for targets of incoming redirects, which h I understand should be bolded. Don't you agree? O phone so can't easily check ... Will be back. PamD16:56, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
Ok I have reverted my edit, Catherine Ross and Lynda-Louise Burrell are not redirects though and I still think it looks a mess to have so many. Theroadislong (talk) 17:06, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
Please submit for review and other reviewers will see it and comment, but unsourced content like "In 2016 the charity replicated its service in Suffolk and East Sussex, and visited a children’s home in South Africa. It continued to expand in the UK and overseas from 2017." is entirely promotional, and many of the sources are primary sources (the school ones for instance), the sources need to be independent of them. Theroadislong (talk) 15:02, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for your prompt and expert view as always. Could you advise how I can remove the COI template and comments please - if you feel appropriate of course? Marilyn Fowles (talk) 15:22, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
I understand @Theroadislong and will continue working on the draft. Thanks for all your kind support and patience in helping me get this far. Your articles are amazing and very inspiring :-) Marilyn Fowles (talk) 18:25, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
Added multiple references for the page, please verify and confirm
HI, the reason it was resubmitted was due to the previous editor commenting that he agreed with the old comments left and when I pointed out that the comments have all been fixed and the comment below his even refers to a section that no longer exists he said he didnet have enough time to go through the page deeply let alone edit history.
May I resubmit so someone can leave feedback that I can incorporate into the draft? Could you go through and review it including edit history since each comment? Luka At The Civic Caucus (talk) 16:15, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
Is there a part that gives that impression so I can fix it? It was rewritten several times to have a neutral point of view and the data is cited with those articles. Luka At The Civic Caucus (talk) 16:21, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about something, Wikipedia summarises what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a topic, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability. Please also note that blogs and press releases are not independent reliable sources. Theroadislong (talk) 16:29, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
Hello @Theroadislong, I very much appreciate your review of the Moriyama Teshima Architects page. I have been working to remove any promotional information, and will continue to do so. Thank you for your patience, and thank you for bearing with me. I am happy to make any revisions, add any citations, or remove any information, and will be doing so to ensure that it meets all the criteria. Thank you for your assistance! JLzero02 (talk) 19:28, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
Why Goodreads isn't reliable source?
Goodreads is owned by Amazon, and it is popular for databases of books, annotations, quotes, and reviews. Goodreads is an old website for book databases. I don't know how it can't be credible? Iiftekhar (talk) 18:14, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
It is user edited so not reliable, but in any case I see you have used it to verify that books were published, that is not required, but publisher name and ISBN number would be helpful. Theroadislong (talk) 18:17, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
okay I will add ISBN tomorrow. Verify other things in article, if you find anything wrong tell me I will fix it. Iiftekhar (talk) 18:20, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
unreliable source
Hi. you've put a comment in the biography I wrote - and unreliable source - is created to a linkedin web site - in PL the linkedin pages are checked and verified - question is weather a website is more reliable as a source than a linkedin page?
thanks.. Lemonidess (talk) 19:51, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
I don't know if I would say it's a hoax, since most of the people who create these do believe in them to some degree(like Republic of Molossia) and this person seems to. But I did delete it as promotional. 331dot (talk) 13:50, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
Clarification sought on references after comparison with another Wikipedia article
I am working again on my draft.
I need to remove references that are not "independent sources". So possibly I need to remove my references 22, 26, 27 and 29. These are references to journal articles about ski mountaineering climbs but written by Wyatt, the subject of the article. However, I notice that the Wikipedia entry for climber Chris Bonington includes references to two journal articles written by him.
14. Bonington, Chris (1988). "Menlungtse Attempt". American Alpine Journal. New York, NY USA: American Alpine Club. 30 (62): 275–278. ISBN0-930410-33-5.
15. ^Bonington, Chris (1989). "Menlungtse Western Summit". American Alpine Journal. New York, NY USA: American Alpine Club. 31 (63): 284–286. ISBN0-930410-39-4.
This has confused me. Is it preferable to list as many of Wyatt's ski mountaineering journal articles as I know about, under the heading "Published works" ? But not reference them in the text?
Similarly I need to remove my references 11,21, 28 and 33 which refer to the books written by the subject of the article? These are not necessary as the books are listed under "Published works"? Thank you. IonaFyne (talk) 15:52, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
That's helpful, both those links (other stuff, refbombing). So perhaps, to follow the Bonington example, cite one or two articles provided that they are relevant i.e. relate to important achievements?
I have also looked at Robert Macfarlane (see below) and there is a paragraph there of articles without sources cited, but my draft paragraph does require sources? What is the difference, please, between the Macfarlane paragraph and mine?
He published a large number of articles, illustrated by his photographs, in English and in other languages, in magazines and journals in many countries. He also sold photographs to similar publications worldwide. For example, Country Life, Picture Post, Walkabout (Australia’s Geographic Magazine), Wild Birds magazine, Animal Pictorial, Countrygoer, Le Patriote Illustré, De Spiegel, Pottery Gazette, The Vauxhall Motorist, Overseas Dispatch, Pictorial Education, The Boys’ Magazine, Vogue, The Queen, Panorama, Riding, The Listener, The Sphere, Wool Knowledge, Pinguin, The Sphere, The Motor, Maclean’s Magazine, and Kosmos. (Check if I have to quote date for all of these or better to say "many including...and quote only a few).
He has also published many reportage and travel essays in magazines, especially Granta and Archipelago, as well as numerous introductory essays to reissues of lost and neglected classics of landscape and nature writing from the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, notably J. A. Baker (The Peregrine) and Nan Shepherd (The Living Mountain and In The Cairngorms). IonaFyne (talk) 17:50, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
I suggest you submit it for review and get other reviewers comments. The draft is VERY long and rambling with unneeded extensive lists, I can't see what makes them notable, he may have published mountains of content but unless independent sources have discussed it, it is of no interest. Theroadislong (talk) 18:29, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
Thank you.
I am removing the long lists and planning to make it all shorter and tighter.
Please approve my draft of my school. It is not just the only school of Indian Expatriate in Oman, many such schools have such Wikipedia. So please don't reject my work and after its approval, my friends and I would add all the other information. Please I beg you . Pleaseeeee.....
I was just wondering why did I receive a decline for my article on HYATT REGENCY CAIRO WEST? the article has no advertising tone at all, it's just stating facts!
I hope you assist me in such matter as the business is 100% legit and is part of Hyatt corporations and many other Hyatt Regency hotels seem to have wikipedia pages for them. Mohamedmarzz (talk) 08:25, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
Regarding the Draft:Sumiko Nakano, I would like to address the concerns about the sources cited, specifically Tapology, Amazon, and Goodreads. It appears there might be a misunderstanding about the nature of these platforms and how they relate to the criteria for reliable, independent sources on Wikipedia.
Tapology is widely recognized within the mixed martial arts community for its comprehensive databases of fighters, bout histories, and rankings. While it might seem that Tapology's entries are user-generated, the information often originates from third-party resources, including fight promotions, verified media reports, and direct updates from the athletes and their representatives. This process ensures that the profiles, including Sumiko Nakano's, reflect accurate and up-to-date information about professional fighters. Given this, could Tapology be reconsidered as a reliable source in the context of documenting the career of a professional MMA fighter?
Regarding the references to Amazon and Goodreads for Nakano's authorial career, it's important to note that while authors can indeed create their own profiles, the listings of their published works and the associated reviews on these platforms are externally validated. Amazon's publication listings require verification, and Goodreads' author profiles and book listings are often supplemented with reviews from a broad user base, including critics and general readers. These factors contribute to the platforms' reliability as sources for verifying an author's published works and their reception. Could these considerations allow Amazon and Goodreads to be viewed as reliable, independent references for verifying the notability of an author's literary contributions?
I hope this clarifies the nature of the sources used and look forward to your guidance on how best to proceed to ensure the draft meets Wikipedia's standards for notability and source reliability. Kru666 (talk) 10:21, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for your fast reply and the clarification. I understand the concerns regarding the use of Amazon and Goodreads as sources, in light of the mentioned guidelines. With this in mind, if I revise the entry to focus solely on Sumiko Nakano's MMA career, emphasizing details supported by Tapology as a source, would this approach align more closely with the criteria for acceptance? Your guidance is greatly appreciated as I aim to ensure the submission adheres to Wikipedia's standards. Kru666 (talk) 10:57, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
Not really sure why every time I use Spotify, YouTube, or anything that shows the publisher, label, and distributor for a song you always say it’s unreliable, when there are so many editors that put those under artists and have those as sources. If you’re going to remove mine, remove everyone’s. Thanks!:) Davidnorco86 (talk) 17:34, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
It’s not an argument or notability. It’s just proof of label and publisher. Are you experienced at all with the music industry or how it works? I’m not trying to be rude but some of the things you mention and the way you speak about music, makes me think I’m going to have to send you a list of documentaries to watch and indulge in. For example, you complain about some of the PianobyG articles being press released or paid for but literally that’s how the music industry is. Pick up a book or turn the news on, every artist states how the Grammys, billboard placements, etc. Are all paid for. So how can you discern what’s okay and understandable to pay for when you, yourself know nothing of music or the industry? I think it would be best if you removed yourself from the discussion due to lack of knowledge. Again, I’m not trying to be rude or be mean. I just don’t think you possess the skills or knowledge to contribute anything to musical artist discussions. Davidnorco86 (talk) 17:51, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
Are you familiar with how Wikipedia functions? So what if someone pays for advertising outside of Wikipedia? We have our own policies and guidelines, and they must be followed. To use your own logic against you, if you don't have such knowledge of Wikipedia's guidelines and policies, maybe you shouldn't contribute to such discussions. ~ Eejit43 (talk) 18:11, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
“so what if someone pays for advertising outside of Wikipedia” because on the notability guidelines it states “if an artist has won a major award i.e. Grammy, MTV, etc.” That’s why. I think I can contribute to musical discussions seeing as how I actually know about music. I don’t pretend to know just because I’m an admin like some people :) Davidnorco86 (talk) 18:22, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
That point makes no sense, advertising something and winning a Grammy are not connected.
All of the press releases and such that you guys keep using against my article is absurd. You have no idea if it was paid for or just written. I would like to be able to discuss this further with someone higher up honestly. Seems like a band of friends who sit on here all day nitpicking articles. I’ve read through all of the admins talk pages, there seems to be multiple complaints on this. It’s so opinionated and I never see you guys argue or disagree. It’s so obvious that you guys collaborate on opinions. Davidnorco86 (talk) 18:26, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
That isn't how Wikipedia works. This guidelines have been developed over years, and aren't something a couple people decide to abuse to delete articles. @Theroadislong has stated they don't want to discuss with you any more, so please continue this discussion at AfD. ~ Eejit43 (talk) 18:29, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
"It’s so obvious that you guys collaborate on opinions" that is because we are referring to Wikipedia guidelines, we have no personal views on the matter we are just implementing what Wikipedia requires for articles to be accepted. In my capacity as a WP:AFC reviewer and editor of 18 years experience, I have accepted many hundreds of articles on notable musicians and bands. Theroadislong (talk) 18:32, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
but you declined my article with the same reasons than 2 month before? 37 independent Sources for the Foundation, what more? Don-miguel-de (talk) 15:33, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
Mr.Theroadislong please approve. I don't have any other choices for information on the internet. I beg you please please pleaseeeee. After it is approved, I swear that me and my friends will maintain the article to the best of our knowledge. ASR.killadi.da (talk) 12:57, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Hello @Theroadislong,
Thank you for your comment on my draft on Abubakar Sani (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Dr._Abubakar_Sani). I appreciate your feedback. I've made the corrections you suggested, and I'd like to ask if you could kindly take another look at the article to see if it's ready for main space. If you notice any further errors or have additional suggestions, please don't hesitate to let me know. Your input is valuable. Thank you. ~Ana (talk) 12:54, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
I'm sorry, the truth is that I want to definitively retire from Wikipedia as soon as posible and move forward with other parts of my life, so I just want to ensure that my last work, which is the draft of actor Westcott Clarke to be published so I can finally say goodbye to Wikipedia forerver. Byejai (talk) 14:10, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Draftifying articles
Hello, Theroadislong,
You need to notify article creators when you move an article from main space to Draft space. Please use a script like User:MPGuy2824/MoveToDraft, like many editors do, rather than doing a manual page move. In the upper menu, under "More", there will be a link stating "Move to Draft" that will not only move the draft but post a notification on the talk page of the article creator telling them where they can find the article. Please do this in the future. If you don't want to use a script, then please take the time to write a talk page notice yourself. Many thanks. LizRead!Talk!19:05, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Fjnovoa (talk) 02:59, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
