User talk:Jmcgnh/Archives/2017/08

Draft:Digital Science

Hi, I have improved the draft.Kamsgeber (talk) 10:11, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Draft of Jing Wen

Hi, I saw your comment and I know a lot of the references go back to her former modeling agency but I didn't realize that was promotion because some of the verifiable facts of models such as height, their portfolio, etc. come from the agencies. A lot of the designers she worked for were more unknown than the prominent ones and I didn't have the discretion to remove which work she did if there were photos of it somewhere. Anyway, I'll try to fix it and thanks for the review.Trillfendi (talk) 15:09, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

Min-on draft

Move discussion to Draft talk:Min-on Concert Association

In March DrStrauss left the following comment on the draft page: Comment: Advert tone fixed but still needs more independent references. DrStrauss talk 14:32, 9 March 2017 (UTC) This was followed by another editor who went back to the “advertisement tone” view. Then in July DrStrauss contradicted his previous point and returned the “advertisement tone” view. Submission declined on 9 July 2017 by DrStrauss (talk). This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. I have read the link to “reads more like an advertisement.” I have read the draft for Min-on over and over and cannot find evidence as such. Please specifically inform me what “reads more like an advertisement.” I have scoured the Internet and there is very little in English on Min-on. I used what is available. First footnote is from Jamaican publication The Gleaner. Jeaneane and Merv Fowler are scholars at University of Wales, Richard Seager is a professor at Hamilton College in New York David Machacek, is a lecturer at University of California at Santa Barbara. Bryan Wilson is Reader Emeritus in Sociology at University of Oxford in England Tokyo International Competition for Conducting. Although the competition is organized by Min-on, it is supported by the Foreign Ministry of Japan, the Agency for Cultural Affairs of Japan, Tokyo Metropolitan Government, and Japan Broadcasting Corporation (NHK). Judges for the competition come from Austria, Russia, Korea, and Netherlands as well as Japan. Olivier Urbain is a Swiss poet and writer. He has a Wikipedia page (without any sources.) I am at an impasse here, if you can help, I would appreciate it. I think a large international concert association like Min-on deserves to be included on Wikipedia.Stgrlee16 (talk) 22:14, 7 August 2017 (UTC) Hi, Stgrlee16 and thanks for opening up a discussion. I can't respond in full right now, but when I get a bit more time, I'd like to move this message and discussion to the talk page for the draft. There's a gap between "deserving" and "can be adequately documented" that we have to bridge. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 22:22, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

followup re FNQ politics

redirect all further discussion to WP:AFCHD#10:48:08.2C_13_August_2017_review_of_submission_by_Skinduptruk

You: Resubmitting without addressing the problems already pointed out is unlikely to get a different result. Lots of reviewers have looked at this submission by now and, as evidenced by their lack of action, agree with the initial review by Primefac. Me: Inaction is not evidence of agreement. You: In your discussions at the Teahouse and Primefac's talk page, you have made the general claim that Pudnicks meets a notability standard other than the one for political office holders. Me: I have made no such claim. I look at NP-POL. If you assert I did make a claim, it might help your case, if you can please quote the text where I did that? Note: I have asked for review at top link. Skinduptruk (talk) 10:52, 13 August 2017 (UTC) Sorry Skinduptruk, I'm going to bow out of this particular discussion. I don't disavow my review, but I'm finding that I can no longer be neutral in dealing with you and would prefer to let other AfC reviewers deal with your submission and its issues. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 22:03, 13 August 2017 (UTC) I see, ok, thanks for your review to date.Skinduptruk (talk) 10:04, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Thanks for everything!

Cloudcityline1017 (talk) 17:23, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Draft: Chicago Toy & Game Group

I was thinking that we could change the article title to Chicago Toy & Game Fair because that was what the article was about. If we cannot then do you think it would be best to create a new article. Additionally, in regards to the licensing of the image, Chicago Toy & Game Group commissioned a graphic designer to create the logo so they own the license. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dberks (talk • contribs) 19:02, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

@Dberks: You should be able to change the name on the draft by moving it. See WP:MOVE. Let me know if you need help with this. I think your article has a better chance if it is primarily about the event and only incidentally about the organization.

As for the logo: When you uploaded it, you claimed it was your own work and that you were releasing it under a very generous license that allows anyone to use it, including selling it. I suspect that's not right. There's a different procedure to allow non-free copyrighted works to appear on Wikipedia, but it involves making a fair-use claim that its use in the article is for identification or critical commentary. See WP:NONFREE for more about that.

That still leaves the question of your connection with ChiTAG, since you use the terms "they" and "we" in a way that might possibly be interpreted as you working on their behalf. There's a policy called WP:PAID that would apply if that is the case.

Sorry if this all seems bureaucratic. Creating a new article on Wikipedia can be a pretty difficult task and writing the article in the proper style is only about half of it. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:16, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

I'm not working or being paid on their behalf. I know the people who run the group and am assisting them as a friend. At this time, I have no professional connection to the Chicago Toy and game group. So I will move the article and reach out to them regarding the ability to use the image. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dberks (talk • contribs) 19:32, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer granted

Hello Jmcgnh. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group, allowing you to review new pages and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or in some cases, tag them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is a vital function for policing the quality of the encylopedia, if you have not already done so, you must read the new tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the various deletion criteria. If you need more help or wish to discuss the process, please join or start a thread at page reviewer talk.

• URGENT: Please consider helping get the huge backlog down to a manageable number of pages as soon as possible.
• Be nice to new users - they are often not aware of doing anything wrong.
• You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted - be formal and polite in your approach to them too, even if they are not.
• Don't review a page if you are not sure what to do. Just leave it for another reviewer.
• Remember that quality is quintessential to good patrolling. Take your time to patrol each article, there is no rush. Use the message feature and offer basic advice.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In case of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, the right can be revoked at any time by an administrator. Alex Shih^Talk 00:52, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

Dallas McCarver

Just a quick note, Everipedia says that its content is under CC-BY-SA 4.0 [1], which is compatible with Wikipedia's licensing requirements, as long as a link is provided. So the copyright issue could have been fixed by noting the URL of the Everipedia article in an edit summary. This isn't normally the case, but if the website copied from looks like a wiki, this is definitely worth checking. In this case however, the article subject, like many new articles on Everipedia, does not meet our inclusion standards, so I've nominated it at AFD here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dallas McCarver. Thanks, ---- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 23:49, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

@Patar knight: OK, it looks like I completely misread the situation. The URL copied from was included at the bottom of the article as its only reference originally, so strictly speaking, everything the original copier did was within normal rules. It just looked bad and it wasn't apparent that that editor had any idea what they were doing. I'll keep this incident in mind for the future. Thanks for the note. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:46, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

No worries. I messed up as well, turns out that per the table at WP:COMPLIC, CC-BY-SA 4.0 is a free license that is incompatible license with Wikipedia's CC-BY-SA 3.0, so your original tag was correct, in a roundabout way. :D ---- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 04:00, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

@Patar knight: yes, I saw all of that. I was "correct" technically, in the end, but my understanding of the situation was two steps away from being knowingly correct. I'll accept it all as a lesson learned. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:06, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

Ah okay. Thanks for your contributions! ---- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 05:05, 26 August 2017 (UTC)