User talk:MatthewVanitas/Archive 54
 | This is an archive of past discussions. 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. |
| Archive 50 | ← | Archive 52 | Archive 53 | Archive 54 | Archive 55 | Archive 56 | → | Archive 60 |
You've proposed articles on a large number of Indian clans be deleted giving "WP:CRUFT" as the reason. Do you care to elaborate on this? ~Kvng (talk) 15:21, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
- Sure @Kvng: a number of years ago one single editor (who was very non-compliant with feedback on their sourcing and presentation issues) produced a very large number of articles on Maratha clans and sub-clans of India. Fact-checking of their work turned up a ton of issues with non-RS, original research, etc. In the WP:INDIA world the term for this is "caste-cruft", basically using Wikipedia's voice to promote a bunch of internal community legends as serious objective knowledge. I got tired of dealing with that editor, and figuring the pages got very few views anyway I left them alone.
- Years later, some major WP:INDIA players were commenting on trying to clear out some of the serious caste-cruft, and said editor has stopped editing some years back (they publicly stated back during their peak that they were very elderly, so may have retired from Wikipedia or died), so I decided to re-engage the issue since there is no longer one very tendentious editor keeping the cruft alive.
- I realize some of the articles have valid lists of people using that surname, but 90+% of the stuff in the articles is just the equivalent of blog content and not academically valid, and/or taking passing mentions from quasi-RSs and weaving it into a narrative. Does that help explain? MatthewVanitas (talk) 22:54, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
- Yes it does. I stumbled into a vein some of these Indian clan or caste articles at some point and found it an odd and contentious corner of WP. Happy to stay clear. ~Kvng (talk) 23:00, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
- @Kvng: you are wise to do so, caste issues raise a considerable amount of passion, largely from inexperienced editors who don't want to play by the rules. We used to have several "caste warriors" who unfortunately were also very conversant with Wikipedia procedure and really gummed up the works playing devils-advocate everywhere, but they appear to have wandered off so 95% of the time we're just dueling with angry people with no sense of the rules who can at least be blocked or the pages frozen. Though speaking of Marathas, the article Sambhaji (a famous Maratha king) gets literally daily attempts to either add honorifics or remove unsavory details. The admins added "pending changes" but we still need to drop in daily and deny pendings, but it's really remarkable how relatively niche subjects garner such passion. So you have a handful of people working the topic, most significantly our hero Sitush who have zero ties to India but are perversely drawn to police the content. MatthewVanitas (talk) 23:05, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
- Yes it does. I stumbled into a vein some of these Indian clan or caste articles at some point and found it an odd and contentious corner of WP. Happy to stay clear. ~Kvng (talk) 23:00, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Combined Habitat Assessment Protocols, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.
If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.
You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.
If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.
Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:31, 24 March 2018 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Combined Habitat Assessment Protocols, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.
If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.
You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.
If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.
Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:31, 24 March 2018 (UTC)
hi buddy how do i get started on creating this artist page — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.157.173.117 (talk) 01:23, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
Shivaji GAR
Hello, MatthewVanitas. I noticed you nominated the article on the greatest of Marathas, and of course, Indians, for GA. May I review it if that's alright with you? 
— Ssven2 Looking at you, kid 17:25, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
- Hello @Ssven2: I'm open to anyone but I note Vanamonde93 has also shown interest in doing the review. Maybe you two should speak briefly as to who wants to do what? MatthewVanitas (talk) 02:29, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
- If so, then I'll allow him to take it up. Good luck with your GA.
— Ssven2 Looking at you, kid 06:48, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
- If so, then I'll allow him to take it up. Good luck with your GA.
Draft: Isabella Matambanadzo
Resubmitting, I hope all has been fixed. I have learnt a lot already. Will also send another for Rumbi Katedza as soon as I am done.
Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Siza Mukwedini (talk • contribs) 10:37, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
undoing my work
How many times will you undo my input? you say you welcome input but clearly, you only want things your way. I even took information from your very very very biased book and put it there, nearly word for word, yet you don't like it. I read other pages in that book and it's an atrociously biased book blatantly stating that the Thkakuri caste, of a region in Nepal, deem themselves superior. That is a personal judgement, almost as stupid as saying all white people think they are superior. Do you see why I have a problem with you removing my efforts to show the input of Thakuri's in other sectors in Nepal? You surely cannot be Nepali otherwise you would know that Farming is a livelihood of every caste and not one exclusively for the Thakuri, therefore your insistence on placing that statement there with no mention of the huge impact the Thakuri caste has made in other sectors is downright disrespectful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thakuriii222 (talk • contribs) 22:56, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
Edit - Artist
Hello Matthew. I think that the articles I provided are enough to prove the notoriety of the subject. Can you tell me which one of the articles you think doesn't belong? Or what edits you think I need to make? Thank you. Kurt
Rkurtosenlund (talk) 15:32, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
- Hello @Rkurtosenlund: as an initial step you need to formst your cites as footnotes. See WP:REFB for how. Please fix this first and then ping me. MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:16, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
New Page Review Newsletter No.10
ACTRIAL:
- ACTRIAL's six month experiment restricting new page creation to (auto)confirmed users ended on 14 March. As expected, a greatly increased number of unsuitable articles and candidates for deletion are showing up in the feed again, and the backlog has since increased already by ~30%. Please consider reviewing a few extra articles each day.
Paid editing
- Now that ACTRIAL is inoperative pending discussion, 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.
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. A further discussion is currently taking place at: Can a subject specific guideline invalidate the General Notability Guideline?
Nominate competent users for Autopatrolled
- While patrolling articles, if you find an editor that is particularly competent at creating quality new articles, and that user has created more than 25 articles (rather than stubs), consider nominating them for the 'Autopatrolled' user right HERE.
News
- The next issue Wikipedia's newspaper The Signpost has now been published after a long delay. There are some articles in it, including ACTRIAL wrap-up that will be of special interest to New Page Reviewers. Don't hesitate to contribute to the comments sections. The Signpost is one of the best ways to stay up date with news and new developments - please consider subscribing to it. All editors of Wikipedia and associated projects are welcome to submit articles on any topic for consideration by the The Signpost's editorial team for the next issue.
To opt-out of future mailings, go here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:06, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for March 31
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Pagoda (coin), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fanam (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:11, 31 March 2018 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Original Barnstar |
| Thanks for reviewing my article! I will definitely use the tips you gave me! I always like editors that are very down-to-earth. TheRealWeatherMan (talk) 14:54, 31 March 2018 (UTC) |
14:34:56, 30 March 2018 review of submission by Bill C. Cobbs
I've review briefly reviewed your other work, you do an excellent job keeping facts straight, and I thank you for that because I use Wiki regularly myself.
I humbly request you to please reconsider your original position
Bill C. Cobbs (talk) 14:34, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
- Hello @Bill C. Cobbs:
- Have you read the comments left at the Pink box at the top of your draft?
- You appear to be writing mostly to promote your governorship campaign, but Wikipedia strongly frowns on using our site as "social media" or advertising.
- It is strongly discouraged to write your own autobio, see WP:Autobiography for how this can easily backfire and get results that you don't want.
- You have provided zero WP:Sourcing whatsoever for the many claims you make in the article.
- However, I don't think adding sourcing would really help, because honestly you don't appear to meet WP:Notability (people). While you've had a great career, it doesn't appear to have notoriety as being exceptionally unusual or distinctive. Being an LEO is good, being a CEO is good, but I'm not seeing anything indicating your career has been remarkably unusual compared to the many people that have done those jobs.
- Again, if you win the governorship you're definitely getting an article, but if you win you won't need to write your own article. Bluntly, if nobody on the planet is more interested that you in writing about you, that's a good indication that you don't need an article yet. MatthewVanitas (talk) 23:28, 31 March 2018 (UTC)
Your question at Teahouse
Hi. First, I'd suggest moving the entire thread to WT:Teahouse, as it is somewhat off topic on the main Teahouse page. Realistically, new editors are not going to have either meaningful input for you, nor will the discussion provide any meaningful benefit for them. You're obviously looking to engage the hosts, and the talk page is the place for that.
Second, it has been suggested in the thread that you engage Wiki Education. I'm not sure about that. Perhaps a better route might be to consult with someone that has experience in the Adoption program, which unfortunately is fairly dead. Nick_Moyes is trying to revive it, but Worm That Turned has done more probably than anyone historically with it.
Third, as one of the coordinators of WP:WPSCH, I engage many high school students coming to Wikipedia initially. From my perspective, specific advice might vary depending on where you are going to be doing this. But certainly, an emphasis on sourcing, NOT FACEBOOK, NOTNEWS, OWN, and the need for formal language, grammar and punctuation are good. One thing I use frequently is a discussion of how, since we are now the 5th most accessed website in the world (and the largest that is dedicated to the truthful unbiased dissemination of information), we are putting the more traditional encyclopedias out of business. Since (due to our dynamic nature, not our inaccuracies) we can never be cited as a source and we are eliminating our competitors who can, we have a moral responsibility to provide good sourcing.
Last, no matter how you do it, or how well it goes, please document what you do. Although I'd have no interest in teaching a how to Wikipedian course to kids, it might be fun to teach one to seniors. Good luck, and feel free to ping me or drop me a note anytime. John from Idegon (talk) 06:25, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
Category:Ghost tours has been nominated for discussion
Category:Ghost tours, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:30, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
Re: page submitted Qmoog(Musician)
Matthew,
Thank your for your suggestions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neypar9 (talk • contribs) 21:06, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
Response to DubaiEditor Userpage
Thank you Matthew, that is also what I assumed. I just wanted to ensure it wasn't self-promotion. DubaiEditor (talk) 20:42, 2 April 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by DubaiEditor (talk • contribs) 20:41, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
- @DubaiEditor: it would only be self-promotion if for example you post a resume (not just a description of your skills and interests) or try to send people to your social media site or something. As long as the Userpage is based around your work here on Wikipedia, you're fine. MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:09, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
06:18:48, 3 April 2018 review of submission by Cityloop
I have added the requested references including external third party sites including Australian government film funding bodies.
Remix Awards
Regarding your review of Draft:Remix Awards, you said this was a duplicate of an existing article, but I don't see any evidence that Remix Awards ever existed. Could you clarify what you had in mind? -- RoySmith (talk) 17:19, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
Twenty_four_Manai_Telugu_Chettiars-Clan (Kulam/Gotra/Veedu)
Hi,
I have given the proof for the clan (modern and old). The old clan been taken from the copper plate inscriptions dated 1622 A.D - http://tagavalaatruppadai.in/copper-plate-details.php?id=jZY9lup2kZl6TuXGlZQdjZY9
The Sathu Vandlu is the alternate name for 24 Manai people. The exact name of Sathu Vandlu in tamil is Sathu Vanigar/Chetty.
Sāthu vāndlu, meaning a company of merchants or travellers, occurs as a synonym of Janappan.(Ref Castes and Tribes of Southern India Vol. 2 of 7 Page 450)
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/42992/42992-h/42992-h.htm
Title: Castes and Tribes of Southern India Vol. 2 of 7 Author: Edgar Thurston Contributor: K. Rangachari Release Date: June 21, 2013 [EBook #42992] Language: English
Gonigas-The Mysore Tribes and Castles Volume -III Page 250
http://www.bcmbcmw.tn.gov.in/bclist.htm Our government (tamilnadu) webstite,
108-Sadhu Chetty ( including Telugu Chetty, Twenty four Manai Telugu Chetty)
The Sadhu and Satthu are same.(சாத்து செட்டி in tamil).
As per the copper and stone inscriptions, Irupattunankumanaiyar(இருபத்துநான்கு மனையார்) is the original caste name.
The alternate name of Irupattunankumanaiyar is Sathu Vanigar/Sadhu Chetty/Sathu Chetty (சாத்து செட்டி).
Please approve the content as mentioned above.
You had reverted back my changes dated 01:08, 25 February 2018 without knowing the details.
I have given the proof from copper , stone and sangam literature.
Regards, Anil Kumar V, +91 9343405666. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anilvellingiri (talk • contribs) 11:23, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
Approval For JACC Draft
Hello Matthew Vanitas, I have made another edit to the JACC draft. I really tried to follow your guidelines and feedback. Whenever you get a chance can you take a look at it and let me know if it can get approved or not. I'd really like to get this approved. Thank you for all your help and consideration thus far. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BDavid3490 (talk • contribs) 11:26, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
on saini caste
brthr yu have vandalised the saini caste wikipedia as before yu someone had edited the page by providing some unreliable info. it is hurting the sentiments of saini caste.i can provide yu reliable material .pls edit the mali word associated wid it Inderjatt13 (talk) 16:46, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
|
The Original Barnstar |
| Thanks for accepting my article -Lutheran Church in Strand Street Barry Ne (talk) 05:00, 8 April 2018 (UTC) |
Name of Sambhaji's wife
Sambhaji's wife's name was indeed Jivubai and not Jivabai. Please correct on page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sambhaji.
Your claim that Jivabai gets more hits seems wrong. https://www.google.co.in/search?hl=en&tbm=bks&ei=U67JWqecN8aCvQSW_paQAw&q=jivubai+sambhaji&oq=jivubai+sambhaji
I think you are confused with his grand mother's (Shivaji's mother) name "Jijabai" Please correct if you're not convinced and have. Vikram-dattu (talk) 06:01, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
- @Vikram-dattu: I'm following the same Google link you gave me, and I'm seeing 181 hits for "Jivubai" and 272 for "Jivabai", but the latter seems to have more mixed and unclear hits, so I don't object to changing it as long as you do so consistently. MatthewVanitas (talk) 06:50, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
- Hello, thanks! I will change this to correct name Jivubai. Vikram-dattu (talk) 07:21, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
Various artists
Hi, Matthew, I'm not sure if you saw my post at Wikipedia:Teahouse. I'm just wondering if you were aware of the conflict of interest and previous copyright infringements by this user when you accepted Draft:Julie L. Green? Deb (talk) 13:52, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
- @Deb: I only saw your Teahouse post after I'd approved the article. It seemed to pass basic sniff test, and without a comment being added to the Draft page directly it's pretty hard to cross-reference Drafts with other Wikipedia presence considering our massive backlog. MatthewVanitas (talk) 23:55, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
|
The Original Barnstar |
| Thanks for accepting the article on Ballie Wahl Barry Ne (talk) 11:30, 10 April 2018 (UTC) |
Draft:Àkin Added necessary corrections
Thank you so much for all your inputs and corrections which is a great help for me and has helped me improve so much and understand Wikipedia Better. I have made all outlined corrections and if there is anything yet to be corrected to aid my learning please help in pointing it out. I look forward to having my first work published.
Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Delords (talk • contribs) 07:45, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
Select Survey Invite
I'm working on a study of political motivations and how they affect editing. I'd like to ask you to take a survey. The survey should take no more than 1-2 minutes. Your survey responses will be kept private. Our project is documented at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Wikipedia_%2B_Politics.
Your survey Link: http://uchicago.co1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_9S3JByWf57fXEkR?Q_DL=56np5HpEZWkMlr7_9S3JByWf57fXEkR_MLRP_6JU4xNnKaFNGZU1&Q_CHL=gl
I am asking you to participate in this study because you are a frequent editor of pages on Wikipedia that are of political interest. We would like to learn about your experiences in dealing with editors of different political orientations.
Sincere thanks for your help! Porteclefs (talk) 01:08, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
My first article
Hello, I just wanted to thank you so much for your help in getting my very first Wikipedia article out there in the world: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirill_Medvedev
So glad it's able to exist now as a reference for all, and that you were of help in getting it fixed up and approved to be published. Thanks again!
Underground notes (talk) 02:12, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
A beer for you!
|
We ec'd in reFILL-ing Scott and Sid's 18 bare references. You were just a tad bit faster than me at it. I thought I would give you this WikiLove as a token of my appreciation for all the work you do (in general) and your helpfulness to new editors. (You accepted Video game walkthrough just over a year ago, my first article. Since then it has become a GA & I have 4 others )
I initially thought of making it a barnstar, but in writing this, I discovered that the "beer" is a perfect unintentional pun for the edit conflict |
- @SandDoctor: Thanks, and congrats on your GA! MatthewVanitas (talk) 08:11, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
Stubs
Please note that Category:Stubs should never be added as such, but only via {{stub}} - it's another bit of cleanup needed before the draft went into mainspace. Thanks. PamD 07:25, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
about the Paul Bertelson article
Hi there,
Thank you for your review. I don't know why the main content, with several sections, was not part of what I submitted before. I hope the revised version will be OK. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Synapseabruxelles (talk • contribs) 14:21, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
Request on 19:48:05, 13 April 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Capital W
Thank you very much!
I've notated your comment on my talk page. All points are valid, I'll wait for a bit more to be formally published in the media, although I think the links to background issues are important - but should probably have their own wikipedia page, which this page could refer to. I'll see if I have rthe energy to wtire that page too. There seems to be a lot of references out there and literature to review.
Please give me some time!
Thank you
Hello sir and thank you about your notes and review concerning my topic. I would like to ask a question, because I'm new at this. Is the draft going to be deleted or am I going to be able to edit it in the future in one or two days? I'm trying to collect all the needed information you left on your review. One more question I would like to ask is, isn't there a way to save the changes periodicaly without having to submit the article? Thank you very much for your much needed help!HaRoS 12:19, 14 April 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnsyra (talk • contribs) 12:15, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
- @Johnsyra: usually your Draft is totally safe unless six months go by without any changes, so no fear. And yes, you can continue to update your Draft as much as you like. Just use the "publish changes" button below your editing screen but do not click Resubmit Draft in the Pink box until you are ready for a review.
- For a website to have an article, the site itself has to be the subject of outside expert coverage like news media, gaming magazines, etc. Not blogs, Twitter, FaceBook, but actual serious publications. If you aren't sure what qualifies, take a look at Wikipedia:Notability (web) for guidelines. And the ultra-short version of the whole Notability policy is:
| Articles generally require significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic. |
- MatthewVanitas (talk) 13:18, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
Dear sir, thank you! Your help is much appreciated! I'm gathering all of these information, but they are scatered and some are from 2012 or 2013. That's the reason I had concerns about the draft's deletion. Thank you again. You're very kind and helpful. (now let me see if I can do the sign right) HaRoS 13:56, 14 April 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnsyra (talk • contribs)
Slides for presentations
Hi Matthew. I saw your question at the Teahouse the other day about putting together a presentation to give to student. Like you, I'm also currently preparing a 2-hour session, including a live editing demonstration - although mine's for a librarian association. I thought your ideas there seemed very sound, but I wanted to ask if you could help me find a suitable image I would like to include?
I'm putting a PowerPoint together and want to add or create a good visual image showing the inter-relationships between all the various tasks and groups like AFC, NPP, RCP, CSD, AFD, WikiProjects and Helpdesks, all of which connect and converge upon a Wikipedia Article as the central focus. I don't suppose you've come across anything like that have you? I'm pinging @Victuallers: as I know he's done similar things (but is in the middle of moving house, so probably rather busy to assist). Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 01:52, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
Draft:Runo Lagomarsino
Something quite strange happened to this draft - Draft:Runo Lagomarsino. I created the draft, but didn't complete the work. Actually I didn't even start the work and User:Vexations submitted it for review, which was definitely wasn't my intention. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 12:47, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
- @Arthistorian1977: huh, odd they'd do that. In whatever case, no harm done, just click Resubmit when it's ready for review. And I do advise you read WP:Notability (artists) as a general guide as you build the article. MatthewVanitas (talk) 14:23, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
- Arthistorian1977 Sorry, I had been looking at a list of 2000 notable artists I had created and noticed that not all of them had articles. Then I made a list of all the drafts for those same 2000 to see if there were any that were having a hard time getting through AfC. I thought I'd accept some, resubmit some and add a template to (re)submit where one was missing. I simply used the wrong template for Draft:Runo Lagomarsino and accidentally submitted yours where I should have used {{AFC submission/draft}} in stead of substituting submit. Totally my bad. Vexations (talk) 15:00, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
Street.alex
Hi, I have some questions about your recent review of this draft. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Against_The_Grain:_A_Deep_History_of_the_Earliest_States
You wrote: "Here's the issue: a Wikipedia article isn't meant to be an exhaustive summary of the book, it's supposed to show why the book matters. We don't need 25 citations to the book itself, we need citations to news articles, reviews, academic papers etc that say why the book matters."
Some specific suggestions would be helpful. 1. What do you mean by "matters"? I did not find that word used in the Notability_(books) page. 2. Should we expand the sections on "background" and "reception"? Those include some of the citations and reviews that you mention. We can find more, though it is likely still a little early for reviews in peer-reviewed journals since they have such a slow turn-around. I guess I thought it would be good to get this page started and then add to it as those reviews come in. Is that the wrong approach? Why? 3. Should we reduce the length of the chapter explanations? The sections on each chapter are far from exhaustive. Most are just a paragraph long. But should they be shorter? How much shorter? Or should we write more, to be more explicit about the implications for other issues? Is that what you mean by "why the book matters"? 4. Would it help to include more links from other Wikipedia pages, to this page? I see plenty of potential for that. But the problem is I don't see how to do that, until the page is published. I am pretty new to this so please tell me if there is a solution I'm missing. 5. Should we reduce the number of citations to the book itself? I am reluctant to do that, especially for direct quotations.
Hope this is the right place to pose these questions. If not please let me know. Street.alex (talk) 16:43, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
- @Street.alex:, you don't necessarily have to remove the content of the books, but it comes across as disproportionate when the article cites only three or so reviews. The problem is when the the article is just quoting/citing the book, it isn't telling us the bigger picture of the book. Your reception section is pretty heavily relying on two reviews, but is citing them at-length which again seems kinda disproportionate.
- Academic works aren't my specialty, so if you want to try a different reviewer, you can just leave a comment at the very top of the page, and click Resubmit. The article isn't terrible, it's just that the very high proportion of direct cites to outside cites is concerning. Like the simplified slogan says:
| Articles generally require significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic. |
- MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:10, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
- @MatthewVanitas: OK thanks for your quick response. We'll add some more outside reviews and profiles and will resubmit in a little while. Street.alex (talk) 18:39, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
Bárbara Giménez Weinbaum
Hi Matthew, I will add 3 articles in different languages under "External links". Hope that convinces you. To be honest: I don't believe it's easy to win this red dot award. There are not so many Spanish designers out there in the world. Best regards, Ignacio — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iignacio45 (talk • contribs) 11:48, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
Hi Matthew, Can you please have a look at this? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iignacio45 (talk • contribs) 08:39, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
Dear Matthew, If your argumentation was true then there cannot appear anyone on Wikipedia below the age of 50. Everybody needs to start with soomething; in this case it's about the recognized development of a design classic. PLease let me know how to create these footnotes or tell me whom I have to talk at Wikipedia. Thanks, Ignacio — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iignacio45 (talk • contribs) 14:28, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
- @Iignacio45: I can assure you that while "Everybody needs to start with soomething", just starting is not enough to rate an article. And on the other hand, most people go their entire lives without doing something that meets Wikipedia Notability. We have tons of articles about people under 50, because they are people that have received a significant amount of media and/or academic coverage.
- Even if the award is significant, I don't know that one Red Dot award is enough to justify an entire article. If you think I'm one incorrect opinion, you're welcome to click the Resubmit button to see what another reviewer thinks, but my concern is that one chair and one award, with no other significant media coverage given in the Draft, just doesn't add up to an article. But feel free to click Resubmit and hear someone else's opinion. MatthewVanitas (talk) 14:51, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
Hi, This sounds good. To my knowledge these three (why one?) awards are the top prizes you can win in Europe. Will resubmit. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iignacio45 (talk • contribs) 15:56, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
A few clarifications/questions re: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez draft
Thank you for the prompt review of my draft! I added a whole bunch of new citations which I hope address your concerns regarding national media attention and relevance. The candidate's national media includes recent articles in Politico, Wall Street Journal, The Nation, and Splinter. To give you a couple related published pages that I used as models/precedents, here is Suraj Patel's page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suraj_Patel) -- another NY congressional candidate. And there is a whole bunch of similar examples of somewhat minor candidates listed here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justice_Democrats. Many of these candidates have comparatively less media attention, so I'm hoping my changes will be sufficient. Thank you again for your help!
-Jeff — Preceding unsigned comment added by Richcomeyquan (talk • contribs) 22:33, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Shivaji you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. 
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ajitgore26 -- Ajitgore26 (talk) 08:40, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
Hi Matthew, about the Hazarajat page
Hi Matthew, about the Hazarajat page under the demographics label, I want to say that Hazara people only makes up 9% of the afghanistan's population instead of 28%. Also, the demographic label in the Hazarajat page is for the population of Hazarajat, not the whole country, afghanistan. Is ok for you edit that page? If there is anything wrong, please notice me — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.178.118.50 (talk) 12:14, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
Understood and complaint removed
Thank you for the editing suggestions and help!
Thank you for the editing suggestions and help with how to format the references. I'm new to this so I appreciate the help! I've made the changes you suggested and hopefully the page is on the right track! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yum4eva (talk • contribs) 05:11, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
14:03:01, 19 April 2018 review of submission by Yum4eva
Yum4eva (talk) 14:03, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
Hi! I made the changes you advised and added some more detail and edits that should be helpful, including an author photo. Would you mind reviewing the page again? I think I answered all of your concerns but let me know if more edits need to be made. Thank you very much.
Disambiguation link notification for April 21
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ndiaga Ndiaye, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Wolof (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:21, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
11:21:01, 21 April 2018 review of submission by Gibinjames2018
We have made changes. The movie is releasing next month. Can you review it again?
Gibinjames2018 (talk) 11:21, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
Thank you
Dear MatthewVanitas, You have assisted several of the students in our Berklee class, A Vision of Music's Future. We appreciate your help! Sincerely, Ijmusic (talk) 22:16, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
Your draft article, Draft:Combined Habitat Assessment Protocols
Hello, MatthewVanitas. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Combined Habitat Assessment Protocols".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 12:01, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
Updated total operating characteristic article
Hi Matthew,
I appreciate your time to review the total operating characteristic article. Not sure this is the appropriate place to address you because I am a Wikipedia noob, but I added to the introduction. Hopefully, this addition was sufficient for removing the template message.
Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crobbins5 (talk • contribs) 01:27, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
- Hello @Crobbins5: this is indeed the way to contact me. If you feel the intro issue is satisfied, you're free to remove the template as you did, but if someone disagrees and puts it back you'll want to discuss it with them. My only recommendation now that you have an intro, is to make it clear in the first sentence, to an absolute layman, what field all this is happening in. Like is this a mathematics term, statistics term, logic term, etc? If you can add just a word or two to the first sentence to very broadly clarify what sector of knowledge this is all about, that's always helpful. MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:56, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
00:11:39, 24 April 2018 review of submission by 82.32.116.221
I have fixed all reference links. Was that the problem? Thx for your reply
82.32.116.221 (talk) 00:11, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
- @82.32.116.221: here's the problem, you aren't actually sourcing anything you say in the article. You're just saying whatever you think is correct, then at the very bottom putting a few links and citing those links. The entire article is supposed to be sourced; anything you say about Becker should have a clear source attached to it. Please read WP:REFB which explains how to go about sourcing. In short, anything you can't cite, you can't say. For any given fact or series of facts in the article, there needs to be a clear footnote telling the reader where they can find that fact documented. MatthewVanitas (talk) 02:00, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
09:03:28, 24 April 2018 review of submission by Cowmanonemanband
Hi Matthew - Many thanks for reviewing the EBSN article and your helpful comment. I have 2 points to raise: 1. Can you please clarify the problems with the external links formatting, I thought I followed all the guidelines. 2. The issue with sources that 'seem really tangential'. That has been an issue I have been working to address, but is seems more an issue of semantics regarding the EBSN's notability. The EBSN is a network, defined by and existing only because of its membership and main function - conferences. It is mentioned in sources directly by members, including the founder, often in positions and publications independent of or prior to their membership. Membership is also defined in very informal terms. So issues of independence and tangential references seem to be grey areas because the network is EBSN members and EBSN events.
Is there any way to resolve this?
-Ben
Cowmanonemanband (talk) 09:03, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
Request on 00:59:39, 25 April 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Capital W
Hi Matthew,
I've reviewed your suggestions on the above. Two other users have viewed, and the page is getting more than expected traffic. I'm sorry I didn't link to the yachts detail pages - I assumed everyone knew that all ships have to be registered and publish their detailed information on global tracking databases (like aircraft).
Are you able to take another closer look at the article now?
Many thanks.
Capital W (talk) 00:59, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
- @Capital W: thanks for the update, but I'll leave it to another editor to get fresh eyes on it. MatthewVanitas (talk) 02:51, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
14:50:38, 25 April 2018 review of submission by Stein Collection
Hi, thank you for reviewing! Does a hotel have to be "renowned" in order to exist on wikipedia? It's not that historic, but it is locally owned and has character. It is ranked by the national Forbes Travel Guide. Can you suggest a way to make this page possible, or is the hotel not unqiue enough to warrant a wikipedia page? Thank you! I'm new to wikipedia and just trying to understand.
Stein Collection (talk) 14:50, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
- Hello @Stein Collection:, a good summary of the core requirements:
| Articles generally require significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic. |
- So to have an article for the hotel, it would have to meet the basic WP:Notability policy, summarized above. If the hotel gets written up in architecture magazines, for example, or if books about the hospitality industry, or magazines covering regional businesses (not just profiles, actual articles with analysis).
- To give an example of a hotel that unquestionably meets the above, see Hotel Inter-Continental Kabul. While a lot of the coverage is about attacks, there's also some non-attack coverage of foreign affairs as pertains to the hotel. Similarly, we have articles on hotels that are famous for architecture, notorious disasters, the center of controversies, etc.
- So far as "ranked" by Forbes, that alone doesn't mean too much unless they're like #1 or something, since a lot of hotels are "ranked".
- Just from my initial impression, it doesn't appear that this hotel meets Notability, unless you can find more serious coverage, and not just routine local news, or routine business coverage like "bought by, new manager is", but something distinctive about the hotel that professional in some field have found to discuss. MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:53, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for the clarification. I greatly appreciate the time you spent to provide this explanation!
Lazy Nigerian youths
Hi, can you review the page again, I have a feeling it is worth deleting. Alexplaugh12 (talk) 21:07, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
- It's not ideal, and has some POV issues, but the hashtag trend appears to have gotten coverage in serious national media. I don't have strong feelings either way, but it's head and shoulders above most of the dreck we Decline at AfC, but if you want to AfD it and see what the consensus is, I have no objection. MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:18, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
QMoog
Matthew,
Hello again, A.s.o.G here on behalf of my colleague "Neypar9". We are seeking a second opinion on an article submitted that you had reviewed and requested additional reliable sources. Those sources have been supplied and cited one of which being The New York times article that mentions the subject. Unfortunately, it appears the other editor does not regard The New York times as a "reliable source". The Subject is an American recording artist known as Draft:Qmoog(Musician). Thanks again for your time. Best regards!
- Don't forget to sign your posts, either by typing "~" four times or hitting the sign button at the top of your editing window.
- @Neypar9: it's not that the NYT isn't a reliable source, it's just that the article you're citing says zero about QMoog other than mentioning that such an act exists. You need substantive discussion about the subject, not just a passing mention.
- If you want fresh eyes to review you can go ahead and click Submit. But before you do so, have you taken a look at WP:Notability (music) to make sure QMoog meets any of the requirements there? And if he does, make sure it's very clear in the article that he does meet them.
- So far, you have the pHinn listing (which is reliable-ish since it's one man's blog but he seems pretty famous), one mini-review in Muzik (which is good) and one passing mention in Muzik. The man has been performing for 25 years; if you can't find more media coverage of his work, you can see how it's hard to justify an article? MatthewVanitas (talk) 01:49, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
Matthew,
Thanks for responding. There are a number of sources out there that we are looking to add to the article,unfortunately many of them are from European magazines that covered his initial works and are now archived and it's taking some time to gain access to them. We have knowledge that the subject has recently done at least three radio interviews within the last year regarding his most recent work and we are hoping to get links to them. I have reviewed the Wikipedia criteria regarding Notability and I'm satisfied that this subject meets at least two of them to qualify for an article. As far as making that known, we have attempted to make the article as clear as possible thus far, I don't know how it could be more to the point.
Thank you for publishing my article (Dragone Company)
Dear Matthew Vanitas, thank you for publishing the article that I submited Dragone (company). Actually it's the English version of the article in French published in the French Wikipedia. As I told in my presentation, I am an employee of the company. But it's very very important for me to be neutral and to respect all the rules of Wikipedia. If you think that I can improve the article, don't hesitate to ask me. Best regards, Asdesas4 (talk) 08:05, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
- @Asdesas4: no problem. If you want to link the French version to the English, look at the left side of your screen (below the Wikipedia globe) and scroll down until you see "Languages". There you can enter in the corresponding page in another language, and it will link the two articles. MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:48, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
Request on 22:18:42, 26 April 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Fichtennadel
- Fichtennadel (talk · contribs)
Thanks for requesting a clarification on the proposed article on 'Clinical Forest Therapy'.
While Clinical Forest Therapy is a clearly-defined domainin the area of physical medicine (e.g., some 120+ experts from over 20 countries validated overwhelmingly the theoretical framework for Forest Therapy and endorsed the 'International Core Curriculum of Forest Therapy' as the international tertiary medical training standard), you may like to compare Clinical Forest Therapy as a rather specific (and well-defined) domain of its own with Kneipp-Therapy (as mentioned in the draft article). Kneipp-Therapy is another well-defined medical approach which, if you like, also falls under the rather broad category of 'nature therapies'. The problem with nature therapies is that empirically and methodologically, as well as medically, it is rather difficult to define 'cut-off' points, i.e. which nature therapeutic approach to include, and which not. The current state of research in medicine is blurred with some approaches lacking sufficient evidence-based research foundations, while others are rather well-defined, with sufficient scientific underpinnings.
It would, from a structural point of view, be more advisable to have separate articles for each of the many different nature therapies and, within the Wikipedia article on nature therapy, indicate that there is little clarity on most 'therapies' whether those are evidence-based and medically effective.
My intention was to bring about exactly this differentiation between a rather blurred concoction of nature-based approaches (therapeutically effective or not) and clearly defined, evidence-based approaches accepted as effective for Public Health (as shown, for instance, in Japan, South Korea or Taiwan).
Thus, I would appreciate if you could grant the permission to publish the proposed article. Thank you kindly for your understanding and time. Fichtenwald ----
Fichtennadel (talk) 22:18, 26 April 2018 (UTC)