User talk:Devonian Wombat/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Your comment on Articles for creation: Xinxuan Group (January 11)

hello Devonian Wombat! Thanks for reviewing the draft article on the Xinxuan Group. As I mentioned to Idoghor Melody last year, the article on Xinxuan is part of a broader effort to cover in the English Wikipedia the very dynamic Chinese lifestreaming scene. Xinxuan is one of the four most prominent (in terms of audience and turnover) players on that market. I drafted an article for each of these four players in addition to a horizontal article on the buoyant Chinese lifestreaming ecommerce business - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Livestreaming_E-Commerce_in_China). You will find the three others on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Ruhnn and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Meione and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Qianxun_Group. These articles will provide to the Wikipedia community an easy access to all basic information on the Chinese lifestreaming ecommerce business. My intention is to provide this information without any bias in favour of any the four companies concerned. I will shorten the article on Xinxuan and delete information which may not be indispensable for the reader and re-submit. If you would have further remarks, could you identify the relevant sentences? Suggestions on how to improve would be welcome. May be it would be useful to insert a sentence in each of the four articles referring to their competitors, with embedded links to the articles concerned. What do you think? Best, Hocepch (talk) 19:33, 18 January 2022 (UTC) Hocepch

Request on 14:06:40, 3 July 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Dman1988

• Dman1988 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Todd Ellison (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

While rejecting my article on "Manoj Durairaj," you suggested to avoid peacock and be more objective. I have tried it and let me know if anything else to be done. ibk57

---

You've rejected my proposed article, saying that it doesn't show significant coverage of the subject (questioning notability). In my sources, only one citation is from the subjects official website, the rest are indeed independent sources. Notability in the world of Broadway/Theatre/Music is often measured in terms of where you are hired. It won't always be a newspaper. So my citations are often large nonprofits which have recognized the subject as indeed notable. What other kinds of sources are required? The subject is one of the most notable music directors on Broadway currently living.

Dman1988 (talk) 14:06, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

@Dman1988: the problem is that the references you have cited are either directory listings or short bios written solely to promote the subject, neither of which would contribute to notability. Quite simply, you need to cite secondary coverage, such as this, as these types of references are considered necessary. Devonian Wombat (talk) 18:37, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

The source you put in is, interestingly, the only purely negative piece on the internet about the subject. I’ll be happy to insert that. The “directories” you speak of are not intending to promote the subject, as they are not editable by the subject. They are actually historical record keepers, specifically playbill. Ibdb.com is another such “directory”. They aren’t there to promote a subject any more than a court case docket is there to promote a defendant. I checked out a few other people who do this exact thing. Very few, if any, have the sorts of independent sources you are asking for. David Loud (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Loud) is one. If anything, most of the other subject pages read as overly promotional, where as this page I created is merely listing major accomplishments of the subject. I would like to appeal your decision on this to the community, as I have seen done in the past on other pages. Dman1988 (talk) 18:49, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Request on 14:10:52, 3 July 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Ecksdfp

• Ecksdfp (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Monomorphization (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

My submission of Draft:Monomorphization was declined as not being notable. I disagree with this reasoning. Admittedly, I am new to editing wikipedia and the article's quality is questionable. That being said, I will attempt to argue that it is notable enough to be worth an article. My apologies if going to talk pages to argue about these things is considered rude; like I mentioned, I am new to editing wikipedia and am not experienced with the AfC process.

first, monomorphization is a common pass in (many) programming language compilers. I would liken it to defunctionalization in that respect, which already has an article. You can find a wealth of academic literature on the process going back to at least 1990's. Interestingly enough, there is a wikitionary article on it (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/monomorphisation). (note the spelling is slightly different, there seems to be no consensus to use a z or an s among sources I have read). Considering the word is a neologism, I think this is also evidence that it warrants an article. here is another article on it, which maybe I should have considered citing in the article somewhere.

Again, my bad if I should not be arguing on your talk page. Any help improving my draft is very welcome.

Ecksdfp (talk) 14:10, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Ecksdfp (talk) 14:10, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

@Ecksdfp: no worries, communicating about stuff like this is exactly what talk pages are for. I see your point about scholarly coverage, and if you want you can submit the article again and I'll accept it, but it would be great if you could add some of this coverage to the article first, so it can showcase notability within itself. A quick look on google scholar shows some coverage that would be easy to cite, and once you've done that the article would be on much sturdier ground. When you've submitted, leave another message on my talk page and I'll give the article a review. Devonian Wombat (talk) 18:44, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

@Devonian Wombat: Alright, very fair. I will do my best to improve the article then resubmit. Ecksdfp (talk) 00:35, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Via channel

Hi, it's insidus I'm still working on the page it would be nice if you could share it, contribute and more references to it thanks;-)

Questions

Thanks so much for all of your help on my new page Robert Waldo Brunelle Jr.

I did notice this at the top of the page

I am trying to figure out what needs to be changed or corrected in order to have that notice removed. I haven't seen anything specific identified on the talk page. If you can figure it out, please let me know ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 18:49, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Articles for Creation July 2021 Backlog Elimination Drive

Hello Devonian Wombat:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running until 31 July 2021.

Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.
There is currently a backlog of over 1000 articles, so start reviewing articles. We're looking forward to your help!

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for Creation at 21:53, 7 July 2021 (UTC). If you do not wish to recieve future notification, please remove your name from the mailing list.

Draft:Galenicum

Hello Devonian Wombat! I would kindly ask you why my draft about Galenicum has been declined. Everything I explained in there is referenced with newspapers, or different sources from different sites (independent from the company). Please, if it's possible, could you clarify me what should I change in order to be accepted? I wanted to include this article in Wikipedia since I read an article from the European Investment Bank talking about the contribution of this company during all COVID crisis, because I thought it could be helpful for users trying to find relevant articles about COVID. Thanks in advance Lluís Tintorer Jaso (talk) 11:12, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

@Lluís Tintorer Jaso: the problem with the article is that is heavily promotional, there are laudatory italicised quotes everywhere that should be removed and pretty much every link in the article is bolded inappropriately. More broadly, the article is largely not focused on explaining what Galencium does, instead it focuses almost entirely on listing all the times that people have praised it. The article also contains numerous peacock terms. Devonian Wombat (talk) 13:19, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Karen Anand

Hi Devonian Wombat, you have just accepted the AfC for this article. A previous editor raised COI concerns of the original author and tagged the article accordingly when moving it to draft. The tag remains on the article which, IMO, is a contradiction to being accepted at AfC. Can you double check if you are sufficiently satisfied COI has been addressed and the article is written neutrally? If so, the tag should be removed as part of post publication clean up. If not, it may need further work or go back to Draft. _pseudonym Jake Brockman ^talk 23:06, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

@Jake Brockman: the author of that article quite probably has a COI, but in my view the article they have written is neutral enough to remain in mainspace with the COI tag, rather than being moved to draftspace again. The article is a bit of a mess, sure, but it would survive AfD in its current form, which is the criteria that AfC reviews are supposed to be made with. Devonian Wombat (talk) 23:20, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you, with my thanks!

Thanks for saying 'yes' to having my work on this platform. I am glad to contribute! ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 09:45, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 14

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2019 New York City Public Advocate special election, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ron Kim.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:56, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Feedback on Chuggaaconroy Draft

Hey, Devonian Wombat. First off, I forgot to thank you a couple months back for accepting my article for Alpharad. It was the first Wikipedia article that I worked on almost entirely by myself, and the very first one I ever submitted on Articles for Creation, so I was pretty nervous; I made sure to follow the guidelines for sourcing and notability as much as I could, and I’m glad it could make it to the mainspace.

For my next big Wikipedia project, I’ve been working on restoring an article which was previously deleted, specifically the gaming YouTuber Chuggaaconroy. A couple months back, the article was deleted due to there not being a case for his notability, despite the fact that he had two articles which significantly covered him on Wired and the New York Times, among other sources. After a couple months I searched for multiple sources and rewrote most of the article from scratch, following the WP:BASIC criteria and WP:WEB. And while I’ve gotten a lot done, there are still a couple things I wanted to address before moving on to the next part of it (adding information for his second YouTube channel, TheRunawayGuys), which is why I wanted to message you today. Before I continue further and eventually submit the draft, I was wondering if you could take a look at it so far and leave any feedback, in terms of how the sentences flow, what seems promotional or written from an unneutral point of view, and whether or not it establishes his notability as a content creator enough. I tried to address these concerns beforehand as much as I could, but I think seeing the perspective of another editor would help me, especially one who hasn't had any involvement with the subject before (presumably).

A few notes if you do decide to look at it:

• References 2, 3, and 21 are the WP:THREE sources that cover him in at least two or more paragraphs beyond a one-sentence name drop; they’re the two sources I already mentioned along with a scholarly article from the University of Brasilia (that source is in Portuguese so you might want to translate it). I also added articles from The Atlantic, The Irish Times, and The Independent among others which covered him briefly but contained some usable detail about him, fulfilling WP:BASIC.

• I’m planning on taking off some of the puffery on it, like in the Reception section (“Critics have praised him…”), and also add what other YouTubers have said about him instead. I put three articles which featured him on a “best Let’s Play channels” list too; however if those sources aren’t considered reliable I’ll omit them. I'm also planning to remove the "and legacy" part for now until more sources arrive.

• In lieu of a Videography section, I put a paragraph listing the games he has made a Let’s Play of which have either been covered by reliable sources or used for illustrative purposes. I haven’t finished adding sources and/or deleting parts of it yet.

• I made sure to limit the amount of YouTube/self-published sources used in the article, only using ones to support basic facts about his personal life.

So if you decide to check it out, could you please leave some feedback? Either here or on my talk page would be fine.

Thanks, PantheonRadiance (talk) 06:14, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Request on 17:24:09, 16 July 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Annalisemara

• Annalisemara (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:The Pennsylvania State University College of Nursing (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello! Thank you so much for helping me review my article. I just wanted to reach out and ask a couple question is – I really believe this content is notable and deserves a space in the Wiki-world, so I want to see how to best edit it! I think I'm struggling to understand what language in my article is being portrayed as advertisement. Would you be able to point out some examples for me? Additionally, I am using many Penn State sources because those are the ones that most accurately display the College of Nursing and what it entails. Do you have other recommendations for other sources to use? Thank you so much!

Annalisemara (talk) 17:24, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

@Annalisemar: The reason the draft is getting declined as an advertisement is because it largely consists of lists that look like theyve come straight from the university website, and much of the article contains of highly promotional language, especially in the latter sections, which quite frankly read like they were written exclusively to promote the institution. The article also relies far too heaily on primary sources, while Penn State might be the most detailed source, that does not mean it is the best. In order to showcase notability, references need to be added from secondary sources, such as newspapers not based out of Penn State. Devonian Wombat (talk) 22:12, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Draft August Kiehl (review last evening)

Hi there! This morning I found my Draft:August Kiehl declined again, and decided to take a better look at it. As it turns out, two fairly important sources -- certainly no passing mention; they both cover pretty much everything that's on the page -- had somehow not been saved back when I added them. I have added them again just now, so if you could take another look at it it would be much appreciated! Kindest regards, Goran.Mont (talk) 09:32, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Can you explain, please?

Your user page says you're a deletionist (an admirable stance, if you ask me!). Meanwhile your record at the current AfC backlog drive is 52.8% accept. What's that about, Wombat? :) --DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:34, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Ha, guess I’ve just been in a good mood lately :). I find myself to be much tougher on stuff that’s already in mainspace. Devonian Wombat (talk) 12:39, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Article Review

Hi Devonian Wombat, thank you for your review and acceptance of Santa Lucia Preserve!

Rosenbergwrite (talk) 18:24, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Request on 16:01:15, 23 July 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Sean Gallen 88

• Sean Gallen 88 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Leaps by Bayer (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi there,

Thanks for getting back to me so quickly with the feedback. The client I represent wishes to try another draft so I will take all your criticisms on board and try once more. I've been looking at the Wikipedia entry for Atlas Venture for inspiration and would like to follow the same structure. If the article was written like this entry, would that be closer to the guidelines? Thank you for your time,

Seán

Sean Gallen 88 (talk) 16:01, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

@Sean Gallen 88: this version is better as it is less promotional, and there are more sources, but unfortunately I do have to echo CNMall41's judgement in that it is largely a list of investments, which is also promotional, and as such the sources given really don’t talk about Leaps by Bayer in any depth. Only reference 25 would be considered to contribute to notability in the articles current state, so if more coverage like that exists I would recommend you add it to the article. I would also recommend you shorten the article, removing most of the Notable investments section, because even if there are good sources on a draft, a reviewer who sees 20 sources that don’t really talk about the company isn’t likely to accept the draft. Devonian Wombat (talk) 22:33, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you so much for acceptance of Akshit Sukhija submission

Hi Devonian Wombat. Thank you for reviewing, accepting and publishing my AfC on Akshit Sukhija. I have registered myself and will be editing using this account Thanks a lot for your acceptance and publishing of my submission and wishing you too a happy editing!--Creativitylove (talk) 16:51, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Feedback on Chuggaaconroy Draft (part 2)

Hello once again, @Devonian Wombat:, I have mostly finished the Chuggaaconroy draft and plan on submitting it either tonight (PST) or tomorrow. If you want to read the draft once more, that would be great; otherwise I'll just leave a note about the draft on the talk page. Thanks, PantheonRadiance (talk) 03:00, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Please Coach Me!!

Oklo Adiga (talk)User:Devonian Wombat, can you please coach me on becoming a good wikipidian? i'd really appreciate. I really want to help in the development. I need a veteran like yourself to teach all i need to know on getting my articles approved. Thanks Oklo Adiga (talk)

@Oklo Adiga: I'm terribly sorry, but I cannot offer you any more advice than to follow Wikipedia's policies and disengage from a topic when it becomes overwhelming. I wish you good luck with your editing, but I do not offer coaching. Devonian Wombat (talk) 11:17, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Oklo Adiga (talk)@User:Devonian Wombat alright i understand. but can you at least be my wikipedia senior? when it comes to defending my articles from deletion. Oklo Adiga (talk)

Re-review

Hi Devonian Wombat. I have a request I recently submitted Draft:Lakshmi Ghar Aayi and Draft:Priyanka Choudhary and they got declined but I did not understand the main reasons for which they got declined because I thought I had already covered them and submitted it for review. Plus, the reviewer has also suspected me to be a sockpuppet. I'm not a sockpuppet. I myself asked for the deleted version of these articles to work upon. You can check here [1] and here [2], so I wasn't doing a sockpuppetry thing. I took the earlier deleted versions because I found it easy to work on them. I also worked my max to improve significantly these articles. You can check the refunded draft versions and my submitted versions here: [3] & [4]

• I request you can you be the person who is re-reviewing it this time and tell me more clearly what is wrong with them? Thanks--Creativitylove (talk) 05:43, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Can you guide me on how I can improve my article?

Dear Devonian Wombat,

Thank you for reviewing my Article about Ojas Oneness. I really hope to publish this article, can you guide me on how I can improve to make it approved for the wiki page? Your guidance is very much appreciated. Thank you so much.

@Trnhanct2001: in order to get the draft moved to mainspace you'll have to reword it to be less promotional. Examples of problematic wording currently in the article include "born with an artistic life force" and "transforming art master". Words and phrases such as this are considered Peacock terms, which promote the subject rather than describing them. A broad guide that you should follow is to always describe the subject of the article in boring, unremarkable language, as that will help you create an article with an appropriate tone. You should also make sure that the sources you cite are from reputable, established sources. Devonian Wombat (talk) 10:47, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 5

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Clone-A-Willy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Portland.

Draft: Unione Giovani Ebrei d'Italia

Hi, I saw you declined the draft I've submitted. Do you have any further suggestions? Is there a paragraph in particular I should change? There is already a version in Italian and in Hebrew and I believe it would be really important to add a page in English.Gibbone22 (talk) 02:54, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

@Gibbone22: there are two main problems with the draft, the first is that it is worded in a promotional manner, there are a lot of peacock terms, and in general the draft reads more like the organization's website than a Wikipedia article. The second, more minor issue is that the article's citations are primarily bare url's, rather than full references. Devonian Wombat (talk) 03:26, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi, so I made several changes in the wording, basically rewriting various parts of the draft. Also, I've added new sources. Do you believe the draft is ready to be submitted?

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 12

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2021 New York City Council election, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ellen Young.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Article on Hodlnaut

Dear Devonian Wombat,

Would you be able to give me a better explanation on why my article on Hodlnaut was declined? They have many references that meet the guidelines, and it has been written from a neutral perspective. Hope you can go into detail about why and pinpoint the relevant references that do not fit into the article.

Thank you for taking the time to review the draft for the Hodlnaut page too. I have been continuously working on this and making the changes as advised, but it still gets rejected. Can you provide some guidance/help on the areas in the draft of what needs to be changed?

13 August 2021 Draft:Hodlnaut

@Sixminseasyspace: the problem with the references you have included is mainly their reliability, as the majority of sources in the article are cryptocurrency-focused websites, which have been determined to broadly be unreliable due to numerous discussions on them. Of the references that are not cryptocurrency magazines, all but one are directory listings, which are not considered to provide significant coverage. In order to showcase notability, you would have to provide coverage from different websites that are both reliable and not exclusively focused on cryptocurrency. Also, you referred to yourself as "we", Wikipedia does not allow accounts to be shared between multiple people, so if that is occuring you should get that cleared up. Devonian Wombat (talk) 03:36, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

@Devonian Wombat: Just some questions to you then: is Yahoo Finance focused on cryptocurrency? is Vulcan Post, only on cryptocurrency? is Tech in Asia, only on cryptocurrency? is the Monetary Authority of Singapore, only on cryptocurrency? Last I researched, Vulcan Post & Tech in Asia is focused on articles and news on TECHNOLOGY IN ASIA. Other Wikipedia pages like Binance uses Yahoo Finance and they are approved, so I don't really see a problem with Yahoo?

@Sixminseasyspace: Yahoo Finance uses syndicated content from other sources for content, in this specific case they have syndicated content from another, unreliable website. Wikipedia's policy on syndicated content is that it is valuated by the reliability of its original publisher. Devonian Wombat (talk) 09:30, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Article Ilaria Brocchini

Dear Devonian Wombat. I have recently submitted Draft: Ilaria Brocchini and you have declined it. Can you please be so kind to explain me why this article seem to you to be partial. I thank you very much for your help and I beg your pardon for my mistakes. I am a young editor. I will become better with more experience. Mirabiliamira (talk) 11:38, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

@Mirabiliamira:, there are two main problems with the draft you have written. Firstly, there is the fact that it is not worded neutrally, in that a good chunk of the article is spent describing Brocchini's philosophy as if it were an objective fact, rather than her own beliefs. The other major issue is that the draft suffers from a lack of secondary sources, with the sources currently cited being primary ones. I would recommend reading through the notability guideline for scholars in order to see if Brocchini meets the criteria listed there. Devonian Wombat (talk) 11:58, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Dear Devonian Wombat, Thank you very much for your kind and helpfull answer. Brocchini's philosophy is the one she explains in her publications including her dissertation. Her thought has been discussed in the french philosophical world (see references) These should probably be called secondary sources. Her philosophy is focused on the relation existing between reason and belief. Maybe this focus brought you to the wrong conclusion that the part "philosophy" of the article concerns HER beliefs. I keep on making the article better following your suggestions. Thank you for your attention and your preciou help Mirabiliamira (talk) 15:54, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Dear Devonian Wombat, Thank you again for your help. I have made some changes following your remarks in the article about Ilaria Brocchini. I hope this make the whole worded neutrally and that you find it good enough for publication

I have to tell you that I wrote the part "Brocchini's philosophy" because the german Wikipedia required it. They wanted some words on the contents of her philosophy. The part "Brocchini's philosophy" describes Brocchini's thought as in her publications. Her thought has been discussed in the french philosophical world. I have called secondary sources some Articles and booke on her thought. Her philosophy is focused on the relation existing between reason and belief. Maybe this focus brought you to the wrong conclusion that the part "philosophy" concerns HER beliefs.

Thank you for your attention and your precious help !!!Mirabiliamira (talk) 12:08, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Dear Devonian Wombat, I have made some other changes following your remarks in the article about Ilaria Brocchini. It sounds definitely more objective. I have also worked on the secondary sources. I hope you will find better and good enough for publication. I very much look forward to read your opinion ! Thank you very much again !Mirabiliamira (talk) 09:01, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Jan Pivec

Hi, thanks for your review of Draft:Jan Pivec. I am not the creator, just trying to help it through the process. Reference 5 there is the national broadcaster's documentary of the man's life, 40 years after his death. Google translated to English. The national theatre link details his 36 year career acting there. Believe this to be more than enough for significant coverage. I additionally discovered that he has a 135-page biography written about him, which likely qualifies the subject through criterion 2 of WP:ANYBIO too. Where do we go from here? Thanks, C679 18:06, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

@Cloudz679: I would recommend using the biography or the national theatre link to cite some basic biographical information, I would definitely recommend citing the biography of him in the article, because at the moment only reference 2 is more than a paragraph long. I would also recommend fixing the website citations, they should just be the names of the website not a URL to that website. Devonian Wombat (talk) 21:21, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Congratulations from WikiProject Articles for Creation!

	The Articles for Creation Barnstar & The Teamwork Barnstar
	Congratulations! You have earned The Articles for Creation Barnstar and The Teamwork Barnstar for reviewing 150 drafts and doing 29 re-reviews during the WikiProject Articles for creation July 2021 Backlog Drive. Thank you for your work to improve Wikipedia! On behalf of WikiProject Articles for Creation, Enterprisey (talk!) 00:17, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Draft:ELEM/Youth in Distress in Israel

Hi. You declined Draft:ELEM/Youth in Distress in Israel because it seemed like an advertisement. I have no connection with the organization, but I recognize that the article is one-sided. That's because I couldn't find any criticism of it. Could you please take another look at the draft and make any changes that seem appropriate? I think that the references establish notability. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 14:46, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

@Eastmain:, the reason I declined the article as an advertisement is because it largely reads as a list of services, and it also reads like it came directly from the company website. Even though this is not the case, the fact remains that it still seems promotional. The article should give a broad description of what the organization does, not go into every small detail. Also, the article suffers from citation overkill in numerous places. Devonian Wombat (talk) 21:12, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Eleventh National Parliament

Hi, you said "the draft doesn't say what parliament this is". Should I mention the country's name in the article or should I change the name of the draft? Rsakib188 (talk) 21:39, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

@Rsakib188:, you should do both of those. Devonian Wombat (talk) 21:50, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

thanks, I've changed the title and also made change in the article. Rsakib188 (talk)

Draft: Isaac B. Bersuker

Dear Devonian Wombat, Thank you for your message. My submission (the draft "Isaac B. Bersuker") was declined, as you mentioned, due to the lack of verifiable references. I will be glad to provide the references or, if the info cannot be referenced, just remove the corresponding statements from my draft. Can you please provide an example from my draft of something in my submission that requires verification? This will make it easier for me to understand the nature of confusion and better decide what kind of work will be needed to make my submission acceptable for Wikipedia. Sincerely, vpolinger (talk) 00:42, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

@Vpolinger:, the main problem with your draft isn't the references themselves, its that they are not formatted using inline citations, which are considered necessary to verify information. You need to expand the method you used for the first two citations to the entire article. I would also rely a lot less on publications that Bersuker himself authored, as these are considered primary sources. Devonian Wombat (talk) 07:08, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Articles for creation: Ahmad Zatari

Thank you, Mr Wombat, for looking over the submitted draft page. I just wanted to ask about the idea of 'significant coverage'. Does this refer only to English-language media?

There was a reference to an Al-Jazeera story, which is a "published, reliable, secondary source independent of the subject", that gave significant coverage to Ahmad and featured him for the entire show.

Thanks again and I hope you had a good weekend.

Carlsba (talk) 15:16, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

@Carlsba:, the Al Jazeera source was actually a source that contributed to notability, the problem was that it was the only source that did so, when a minimum of two such sources are required. The ZKM source appears to be a promotional database listing, the Newsweek source does not seem to mention Zatari, and the sources in the external links section are all primary rather than secondary. Devonian Wombat (talk) 21:45, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter September 2021

New Page Review queue September 2021

Hello Devonian Wombat,

Please join this discussion - there is increase in the abuse of Wikipedia and its processes by POV pushers, Paid Editors, and by holders of various user rights including Autopatrolled. Even our review systems themselves at AfC and NPR have been infiltrated. The good news is that detection is improving, but the downside is that it creates the need for a huge clean up - which of course adds to backlogs.

Copyright violations are also a serious issue. Most non-regular contributors do not understand why, and most of our Reviewers are not experts on copyright law - and can't be expected to be, but there is excellent, easy-to-follow advice on COPYVIO detection here.

At the time of the last newsletter (#25, December 2020) the backlog was only just over 2,000 articles. New Page Review is an official system. It's the only firewall against the inclusion of new, improper pages.

There are currently 706 New Page Reviewers plus a further 1,080 admins, but as much as nearly 90% of the patrolling is still being done by around only the 20 or so most regular patrollers.

If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process or its software.

Various awards are due to be allocated by the end of the year and barnstars are overdue. If you would like to manage this, please let us know. Indeed, if you are interested in coordinating NPR, it does not involve much time and the tasks are described here.

---

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. Sent to 827 users. 04:31, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you

I want to express my belated appreciation for your trust and support in my July RfA. My first few months have been slow and uneventful but after some distractions I expect to be more a part. If I can be helpful or if you see me get out of line, I welcome you to approach me directly. Thank you. BusterD (talk) 17:24, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Is there some reason you are NOT an admin? You seem sensible and uncontroversial. Do I need to look deeper?  ;-) BusterD (talk) 17:24, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

I appreciate the thanks, but really there’s not anything I would use the tools for. Maybe if I get into AfD more I’d think about running, but not at the moment. Devonian Wombat (talk) 20:55, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 23

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2020 Libertarian Party presidential primaries, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jeff Hewitt.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:56, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 6

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2019 New York City Public Advocate special election, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Latino.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Sincerely respected colleague Devonian Wombat, this is a long-standing study on the experience of the most ancient country and the development of the classics and the family of great scientists and public figures, which are published in multiple encyclopedias. If You don’t like something, please clarify what You don’t like. God Bless You for Your friendly amendments. If You are a friendly person, correct in a friendly way Yourself - we will not be against Your amendments. Antimonopolist (talk) 19:12, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

November 2021 backlog drive

New Page Patrol | November 2021 Backlog Drive
On November 1, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Redirect patrolling is not part of the drive. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. (t · c) buidhe 01:58, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Abdulsamad Xoshnaw

Hi I edited the article and added new resources in a footnote Please check and guide if necessary Thanks Hassanvahedi1981 (talk) 02:18, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

@Hassanvahedi1981: unfortunately the problem with your draft isn't the sourcing, its the tone and wording of the text itself. The article is currently highly promotional and uses an excess of peacock terms. In order to get your draft accepted, I would recommend rewording the draft to describe the subject more neutrally and in a drier manner. Devonian Wombat (talk) 02:40, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi I rewrote the whole text and tried my best to stay away from the advertising aspects.I hope I did the right thing this time and understand what you mean Hassanvahedi1981 (talk) 21:42, 16 November 2021 (UTC) Hi I rewrote the text. Thank you for checking the text This is important to me because I will find out if my work is right or not, and this will encourage me to submit more articles to Wikipedia, as well as help correct a flaw in writing articles and gain more experience. thanks Hassanvahedi1981 (talk) 23:32, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of 2020 May Kado massacre (2nd nomination) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2020 May Kado massacre (2nd nomination) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2020 May Kado massacre (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 05:15, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Request on 15:13:44, 19 November 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Vita.cheche

• Vita.cheche (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Nassau National Cable (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi, i would like to have more insight into why this draft was not accepted by Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Nassau_National_Cable It does not rely singlehandedly on the company's websites, and gives references to sources like Financial Times and inc.com

Vita.cheche (talk) 15:13, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

@Vita.cheche:, your draft was declined because the sources cited did not provide significant coverage of Nassau National Cable, which generally is held to be around two paragraphs of journalism. Specifically, the Financial Times source only mentioned the company in a table as one member of a 500 company list, and the Inc.com source is just a directory listing with no actual coverage. Devonian Wombat (talk) 21:30, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed 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 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:55, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Help in understanding my mistake in the Darft:Teen Baan.

Hello Devonian Wombat, I am quite confused on how I should change my tone in writing to make the article reliable, and would love to be helped in pointing out the mistakes that I have done which led to your rejection. Marvelcanon1 (talk) 09:14, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

@Marvelcanon1: as the draft is on a mythological subject, it must include information on the analysis, impact and interpretation on that mythology, otherwise it falls afoul of WP:NOTPLOT. Currently, the draft also reads more like a plot summary of the legendary weapon than an encyclopedic article on it. Devonian Wombat (talk) 21:38, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

Thank you

For reviewing my first article and accepting it. I am reading the links from the item you put on my talk page. Bruxton (talk) 23:51, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Tuttle Twins

It's been over a week since the resubmission and no one has reviewed it. Faster than Thunder (talk) 03:12, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Old Skull Games

Hello Devonian, I have carefully examined the article for signs of puffery and removed them. We also added references to official sites and article journals, as well as the original logo and categories. If there are any other elements that are preventing the article from being published, please do not hesitate to point them out and I will correct them as soon as possible. Thanks in advance! CMartinNieto (talk) 09:45, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your participation in the November 2021 New Pages Patrol drive

	The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
	For reviewing at least 10 articles during the drive.

Thank you for reviewing or re-reviewing 11 articles, which helped contribute to an overall 1276-article reduction in the backlog during the drive. (t · c) buidhe 12:50, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Melting Pot (film)

Hi, regarding the above afd three reliable sources have been found and the nominator has withdrawn so can you please consider your vote in view of the extra sources, regards Atlantic306 (talk) 03:49, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Japana, Georgia

There are so many AfC submissions pending that I have to deliver this message to you directly. Faster than Thunder (talk) 06:07, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Charles Lu "Next in Fashion"

Hi Devonian Wombat, I just want to say thank you for taking the time to review my article. This is my first time writing an article for wiki. I have made ammendements and removed out any unnecessary fluff for the bio of the designer I am writing about. I have looked at other Canadians fashion designers and other designers with wiki pages and for Next in Fashion like, Minju Kim to make sure 'known' and 'noted' were used correctly. Their sources are the same kind of sources I am using since this is a considered known entity from reality tv with a career in fashion.

I have edited the piece/resubmitted the article so please let me know how it is when you can. Thank you so much.Mrblackandwhitepanda (talk) 05:35, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks and Questions about Creation of New Articles by Students

Hi Devonian Wombat,

Happy new year.

Thank you for reviewing the satisfaction equilibrium article.

I have a question concerning the following idea to improve/create wikipedia content. As part of the final exam (or even in place of the final exam) for my courses, my students might improve/create an article about a relevant topic missing in Wikipedia. I have noticed that articles in measure theory, which are relevant for both game and information theories, are either in need of work (IMHO) or inexistent. Of course, I will be behind the reviewing process before submission. Their final grade would depend on the quality of the article. These guys, are students chosen by national exams in France and ranked often at the very top. I am sure the quality would match what we need here. Nonetheless, I would like to gather a few opinions from Wikipedians before I implement it. What do you think? Do you know about other experiences of this kind?

Cheers,

Sperlaza

@Sperlaza:, There are specific programs in place to assist with creating student assignments, though I myself am not knowledgable on them. I would recommend taking a look at the WikiEdu instruction page on how to design a course and Wikipedia:Student assignments if you haven't already, and contacting the Wikimedia Foundation here in order to set up a course. If you have any problems or further questions I would recommend asking the Education Noticeboard, the people over there know far more about this stuff than I do. Devonian Wombat (talk) 07:47, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

@Devonian Wombat:, Thank you very much. My idea is nothing new and it seems the practice is quite standard. No fear for going forward with this. Thank you once again.

A barnstar for you!

		The Special Barnstar
		For your helpful edits to the mayoral election pages of Burlington, Vermont. Jon698 (talk) 13:41, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Request on 03:48:31, 9 January 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Mitchdonnahue

• Mitchdonnahue (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Darren Oved (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Good Evening Devonian Wombat,

I hope all is well with you.

You noted on my submission draft "Darren Oved" that the submission "does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article." I was wondering what you meant by that. Everything I write in the draft takes a neutral point of view, I discuss the people Darren Oved has defended, with proper sourcing for every statement. In the first part of the article, I describe what Oved does – he is a lawyer – and I then go on to describe what makes him noteworthy (i.e. the different people he has represented and the news coverage he has received). I do not take any particular stance when writing about the news coverage, I merely discuss what each page has written about him. When Oved received attention for a particular issue, I noted precisely that. When I wrote the awards Oved has garnered, I was sure not to provide any descriptive adjectives. I also do not believe I inputted any peacock terms.

Furthermore, I used a range of "independent, reliable, and published data." My sources included Page Six, the Real Deal, Bloomberg News, New York Law Journal, the New York Post, Forbes, Fuse, the Women's Health Magazine, Crain New York, the Verge, and the Super Lawyers' website.

There is no doubt that if there is a problem, it should be fixed. So, if you can please point out where the not neutral point of view is, I would greatly appreciate it so I can speedily fix it.

Thank you so much for your time in reviewing my submission; it is greatly appreciated.

Sincerely, Mitch

Mitchdonnahue (talk) 03:48, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

@Mitchdonnahue: the problem with the article is simply that the article serves primarily as a list of the times Oved has been quoted in the media, rather than any actual coverage of the man himself, I did a spotcheck of several prominently cited sources and they mentioned the man only in passing. Because of this, in addition to the baseline notability concerns, the draft in its current state promotes Oved by attempting to tie him to as many events as possible, even when these events are of little relevance. Devonian Wombat (talk) 07:52, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

@Devonian Wombat: Good Morning Devonian Wombat,

Thank you very much for your response. I was wondering how might I fix this problem. The part where I write about "Celebrity Representation," Oved is the focus of the articles. Maybe instead of writing "media attention" in the paragraphs that follow, I should write that he was cited in articles? Would that be better?

Thank you. Mitch Mitchdonnahue (talk)