User talk:Goldsztajn/Archives/2022/January

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Goldsztajn. 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.

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Jeffrey Epstein on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 12:31, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Request on 23:49:05, 28 December 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Mary Evelyn

Latest comment: 2 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion

Mary Evelyn (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Patti Paniccia (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Thank you for your review. I'm hoping you might answer a few questions for me? Your comment has made me wonder whether I submitted my updated draft correctly. What you are describing sounds like the very first version of the article that I submitted, prior to extensive edits. Could you possibly tell me: did the version you reviewed have under "Career" the subheading "Surfing" or did it have two subheadings "Co-founder of Pro Surfing" followed by "Pro Surfing Competitor"? The latter is the newer version. The new version should also have 66 endnotes (whereas the older one had fewer). Is that what you saw as well? I appreciate your taking the time to read the article and look forward to hearing from you.

Mary Evelyn (talk) 23:49, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Mary Evelyn: - I did review the most recent version of the draft and also made some minor copy-edits to the page, you can see the changes I made were to the last version: [1], [2]. It's not how much material that caused me to pause, but the tone and style of the article; for example, "Paniccia is credited with helping to change the culture in broadcast news so as to prevent women from losing their jobs while pregnant" is unsourced and would seem to me to ignore the role of broader feminist movements in the 1970s, noting the courses a person teaches or that they are a frequent media commentator comes across as promotional rather than being encyclopedic. To reiterate, the person is clearly notable, meeting the criteria for an article on Wikipedia, I would just prefer a more neutral tone. I would encourage another round of copy-editing and then resubmit. Kind regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 07:23, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Thank you again for your helpful reply. I will definitely work to make the additional changes you've suggested. But first, I did notice that your edits were in fact to the older (incorrect) draft. For example, I noticed that under the "Career" subheading in the version you edited, it included only a "Surfing" heading, but my latest revision divides the surfing career into two categories: "Co-Founder of Pro Surfing" and "Pro Surfing Competitor." Here is a link to the correct draft, which should have 66 footnotes: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Patti_Paniccia&oldid=1046491774 Forgive me - I ask only to make sure that I have submitted the correct draft. If I have not, I will have to learn how to do that. Sincerest thanks. Here is a link to the current one. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Patti_Paniccia&oldid=1046491774 Could I please ask you again, is this the link you initially worked from? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mary Evelyn (talk • contribs) 18:13, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Mary Evelyn: - If you have a look at the history of the draft you can see the different edits which have been made. The version you are referring me to is from 25 September. Subsequent to that another editor (S0091) made copy-edits to the article on 26 November; as far as I can see those edits were all appropriate and in line with Wikipedia policy. As with articles in the mainspace, any editor can edit an article in draft space. Those edits on 26 November dealt with problems in the article and helped create a more neutral tone (among other things). You didn't submit the "wrong" version, I simply reviewed the the version which was the most recent. The reason there was a difference was because the edits in November took place after your submission. I don't believe reverting to the version from September would make myself or another editor more likely to accept the article (rather the opposite). If I can help any further, please let me know. Kind regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 21:28, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your guidance with regard to my article on Patti Paniccia. I have made what I hope are all the kinds of changes you advised. I've added a reference for every fact, and omitted any fact that did not have a reliable source, and taken out anything that I thought was promotional in nature. Would it be appropriate for me ask if you might take an informal look at my latest draft to give me any further input before I submit it for review? If so, I would greatly appreciate it. The draft is at 00:56, 13 January 2022, and at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Patti_Paniccia&oldid=1065331498 Thank you again. Mary Evelyn (talk) 01:17, 13 January 2022 (UTC)Mary Evelyn

A barnstar for you!

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	In my 9 years experience of Wikipedia editing, I have realized that you are one of the most thorough and effective editors on Wikipedia! My Best Regards Ngrewal1 (talk) 19:42, 15 January 2022 (UTC)