User talk:KylieTastic/Archive 2020

Active discussions

Draft:Pierre Honnell

I was working on more references when Draft:Pierre Honnell got declined. Well, after reading all the comments and rereading what I wrote, I see that only the publication history can be documented by Wikipedia standards. I am in possession of Pierre's personal papers which are, of course, not in the public domain. Some of his early life can be found online but not much. I donated the transistor version of the Matric Computor to the Computer History Museum in California and his original professional papers to the Washington University St.Louis Library Archives. I am working on his personal papers and correspondence. I see that Wikipedia is not the place for a summary of this information.

Question: Is it worthwhile to slim this bio down to a few biographical references and his publication and patent history? Towhee19 (talk) 01:01, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Towhee19, just a quick answer as I'm still recovering from being sick. He definitely appears to be a notable person so I would be sad not to get some article up about them. It would be nice if those two organisations you have kindly donated to made the information available online then it could be used as additional verification. I would just keep adding as many references as you can find, and then remove any information that cannot be referenced at this time... remember that unlike other places a biography would be written and rarely be changed, Wikipedia articles are evolving entities. There is some repetition such as twice it says about him getting the "Legion of Merit and the rank of Colonel". There are details in some sources I could not see mentioned such as being an associate professor in the University of Illinois (from the caltech alumni news). Please also remember a decline is not a rejection, its just that it needs more work, articles are like scientific work - an iterative process to get to the final desired outcome. Finally as DGG said in their review they would be notable "as a fellow of the IEEE" but I can't find any proof of that... the IEEE bio page does not say fellow. So a source for that is key. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 13:06, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. I think I have already deleted this bio but have not checked to see if it has happened. I explicitly retained the copyright to this bio at Washington University but was not savvy enough to do it with the Computer History Museum, but they did not request that I turn over the copyright to them. I was motivated to write Pierre's biography after reading Max Tegmark's Our Mathematical Universe as I suspect that the original idea behind the Matric Computor is an example of Tegmark's thesis but have no contact with Tegmark to verify my assumption so have not mentioned this in this version of Pierre's bio. There is not much independent information about my father that I can find. I can find this amateur radio call letters in a book published in 1930 but it looks like he acquired the letters in 1923 or thereabouts. An amateur radio buff also posted a copy of a postcard with his call letters on the Find a Grave memorial at the National Cemetery of Arizona much to my amazement. I can find a couple of early independent announcements of his computer also. I was careful to include a negative comment also. Yes, I see the repetition now. I am sure I can find a source for his designation as Fellow of the IEEE. All the early history, name change, etc., will have to be deleted. It appeared to me from the comments that this was not the best place to try to revive interest in his work. I still retain all his personal papers and correspondence at this time. Only the original copies of his professional papers and corresponding correspondence are now at Washington University. Thank you for the encouragement. If the bio has not already been deleted, I will continue.Towhee19 (talk) 04:08, 5 January 2020 (UTC)


Dear Kyle, I am not intending to write just something about my father. I intend to create a page about a person who played a very great role in Dutch muslim community in The Netherlands. He is the author or the best-selling Quran translation in the country. Besides that he was a politician in Indonesia. This person happens to be my father. He needs and deserves a wikipedia page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:53, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Article Revert

Hello, I just saw you reverted/rejected my article submission on Taylor Thorne (2004). Now, I'm not here to bug you or anything, but I had a few questions based on your reasoning. Now I may be just a dumb American, but if you could simplify it down, that would be great. So here is my issue with your issue:

The information is available to research on the actress only numbers three articles, however, said three articles are packed with information that I believe is enough to qualify for an article. Now again, I could be wrong and it isn't enough, and then I will delete the article but the whole source issue confused me. Now, not to butter up or anything, but I feel that this actress deserves this article because she is certainly not an amateur actress.

To conclude, I was very confused by your reasoning for rejecting the article, if you could simplify it, that would be great.

  • Hi Typhoon Kong-Rey, firstly there was no revert or reject (a term we use for hard rejections), but just a decline that may just indicate that the sources do not yet show notability, either because they have not been added or are not available. As to the three sources you have: The CBC source is from there own media centre, and as such a non independent source as they will put out bios for all actors/actresses on their shows; source looks independent but it is just about a single role; rottentomatoes is just a basic listing. For the criteria for an article see Wikipedia:Notability (people) and the sub section WP:NACTOR. Hope that helps explain a bit further - Regards KylieTastic (talk) 20:17, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, i edited my draft page. Can it be accepted as an article?

I put references at my footballer wiki page.Please can you review it again?

Alin869 (talk) 16:30, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Alin869 to be fair to all submitters I don't re-review on request, I just pick new and old submissions at random, so it may or may not be myself who reviews it next. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 12:58, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Barik card

You declined my submission of Barik card Draft.

Is my first article in wikipedia in English. In the article I writed many data. Since the submission I added some cite news in Spanish. How "Verifiability" is required? One cite for each data?

I followed examples than Pasmo, Suica or Oyster_card — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:56, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Piers Bijvoet

Hi Kylie, thanks so much for your advice on the Piers Bijvoet wikipedia page. I will continue to work on it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ActingMovie (talkcontribs) 20:15, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

want help for publishing my article on internet

hello KylieTastic

I am just new on Wikipedia

I want to publish my article created on the internet can you please help me with it to publish — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahmed chudahry (talkcontribs) 12:27, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Barry's article - rejected

Hi, you just rejected my article because it did not have enough additional sources. If I add additional, objective, journalistic sources, can I re-submit it for review? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Djb2183 (talkcontribs) 18:06, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, KylieTastic for letting me know. I'll get to work on a new article with enough independent reliable sources!

Draft:Joseph A. Camp

Hello. My article has been pending draft for a while now, and I am aware that the candidate subject has substantial notoriety and I would love to see my first article posted on Wikipedia. Please can you review the article for publication? Thank you so much. 2601:282:500:750:8D80:C686:B124:89B5 (talk) 20:42, 16 January 2020 (UTC)DenverNativ

  • Sorry no, to be fair to all submitters I don't re-review on request, I just pick new and old submissions at random, so it may or may not be myself who reviews it next. KylieTastic (talk) 12:21, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Request on 03:16:19, 18 January 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Panditdevjyotisharma2020

Dear sir, My page in Sandbox got deleted but that Pagebelongs to me, there is no any copyright violation, I i.e. Dr.Pandit Devjyoti Sharma,has developed "Yoga Psychotherapy" , you can confirm from following links of India's known daily newspapers.

Here are the links :

You can also get more information at

Hence you are requested to restore page from deletion of my page.

Panditdevjyotisharma2020 (talk) 03:16, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Dragon 2

It is a NASA image that I tried to import, without success. Can you do it for me? Best regards.2001:18C0:61C:700:10BE:C201:4FF2:7087 (talk) 19:46, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi, thank you. Best regards. 2001:18C0:61C:700:8438:F5BD:8554:BB58 (talk) 21:15, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
Hi, Can change the title from Samos (satellite) to SAMOS (satellite)? I do not know how to do. Best regards. 2001:18C0:61C:700:8438:F5BD:8554:BB58 (talk) 09:46, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Draft: Banpará

Updated with lots of reporting from a Brazilian newspaper of record. Also with financial data. Draft:Banpará — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:32, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi, nice to see work being put into it - thanks - however to be fair to all submitters I don't re-review on request, I just pick new and old submissions at random, so it may or may not be myself who reviews it next. Unfortunately there is a large backlog and not enough reviewers. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 19:30, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Regarding Posting an Article about a Company (Pentagon Information Technology LLC)

Hi Kylie how are doing today.

I have posted an article about a pentagon information technology llc. I have also mentioned a few references like from mirror review and other. Can you help me regarding this article. I would be great full. I understand you are busy but your help would mean a lot to me.

Thanks in advance Regards, Saba — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sabagull777 (talkcontribs) 07:29, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Unable to Add a Picture of our Professor

Hi Kylie Tastic ,

This is to bring in note that i have been trying to add a picture of our Professsor in the page i created but i am unable to do so .

Can you please help in this regard .

Regards, Rahul — Preceding unsigned comment added by Singh sunny88 (talkcontribs) 15:24, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

User:Se pinya/sandbox

I'm writing about an artist, but I get this message that I write about myself, what does that mean, and how many citations do I need for my article to be notable? What thing is a reliable source? Is this a good site to write? Se pinya (talk) 22:55, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Se pinya I see no message about you "write about myself" - but you added the Wikipedia:Conflict of interest tag on the article. None of the current references are links to anything about the artist, they are all just links to the roots of websites some like that do not even exist. See Wikipedia:Reliable sources for what a reliable source is, but it starts with being an actual source that talk about the subject that is not linked to the subject. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 23:04, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

My draft page was deleted several times but with no even a word written in it,it was just plain, what is the meaning of that? I can't futurely see my articles created now! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Se pinya (talkcontribs) 23:26, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

And roots that link to artist, I used them before, but a message came and told me I'm self writing or advertising, some sort of that, that's I changed those. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Se pinya (talkcontribs) 23:30, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Persistent reversal of Spaniards page

Hi User:KylieTastic, For the past 2 months, my edits on page: [[1]] ( are consistently reverted by one particular user who has engaged on edit wars with me before. They have an obsession with trying to understate and minimise the 800 years Muslim presence and legacy in Spain. They also tried to exacerbate the same topic in the equivalent Portuguese people’s page until they were blocked. I don’t think it ethical of Wikipedia to allow users to try and manipulate historical events and facts as they please. This user User:NormanGear resorts to predictable tools like “repetition”, “saturation” or alleged “improvements” (when their English is grammatically not always correct either), in order to revert all my edits which are fair and sourced. An Administrator/Third party intervention is much appreciated. Best wishes, Melroross (talk) 17:07, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Could you have another look at...

I have added several citeable references to some points in his life. Do you think it's ready for (re)submission?

Riventree (talk) 00:03, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
  • Hi Riventree just a quick answer as I'm just home from work and got a cough and headache so not going to be doing much Wikipedia tonight. Style wise it needs a lead/introduction section (see MOS:LEAD). Basically a summary of the subject, see other articles, especially similar subjects for reference. Also you need sources for some of the things such as DOB/DOD - note sources do not have to be online (just preferable) but they do have to have enough to be checkable in theory - i.e. what is "Nottinghamshire BMD". Saying that I'm not sure there is enough coverage in independent reliable sources to show notability independent of the Heaton process, but maybe being a member of Institution of Mechanical Engineers may be enough to swing notability. If you can find any other information on him any anything notable outside the Heaton process that would help. Note that even if it turns out enough cannot be found for a stand-alone article, it could still be added as a section to the Heaton process article. Hope that helps. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 19:24, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

A320 numbers and history.

Thanks for the hint.

This is afaics more of a history handling thing than something specific to that page. If you go back in history you the the proper text revision but apparently embedded table data is provided by the current database and not the state as it was for the moment in time looked up.

i.e. I called up 2016 version and got data current to dez 2019. I'll have to experiment on some other pages if the effects limited or not. ( and understand how such tables are embedded.)

not valid for data that is inline obviously. ZwergAlw (talk) 19:23, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

Full article about Shaji Choudhary a TV actor.

Hi sir, I write this article after talking on phone call with this actor name is Shaji Choudhary. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anishjustoficial (talkcontribs) 12:58, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

Sir there are more than 10 wikipedia pages of movies and web series, where the name of this actor is written already. Some are Mirzapur (TV series), Pk film, Jodha Akbar, Action Jaction. I already included the sources. While this is not fully original research. Things are different that for verification of IMDB and other sources. I had to contact with the person too. So please allow this article. After publishing i can fix more than 10 broken links in other movies and series wiki articles. Thank You! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anishjustoficial (talkcontribs) 13:16, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Anishjustoficial just because they were an actor in movies, TV shows, and web series does not make them notable. What would count would be if they were major roles, which has been written about in independent reliable sources. If sources exist find and add them, if not then they are many just not notable enough for a Wikipedia article. Regards KylieTastic (talk) 15:40, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:1926 Sir John Sandeman Allen, Unionist.jpg


Thanks for uploading File:1926 Sir John Sandeman Allen, Unionist.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:22, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

Request on 13:14:01, 29 January 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by

Thanks for the feedback on the entry. As I have a COI, I would be keen to get an independent view on Cazoo to build out the significant coverage the brand has. How would I go about requesting this? (talk) 13:14, 29 January 2020 (UTC) (talk) 13:14, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi well you can create drafts with a WP:COI but it is discouraged as it's very difficult to be neutral even with the best intentions. The first thing to do is look at the criteria for notable companies Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) and see if it qualifies. As a startup before launch that is much less likely. Also trying to get a page up just before launch does look more like promotion/validation than encyclopedic content. If you think it does meet the criteria I would suggest first adding as any good independent reliable sources to the draft article. You could then either submit again; you could ask for input/help at the Wikipedia:Teahouse to see if anyone want to help; or you could list on Wikipedia:Requested articles linking the draft. However first is notability and all-though it has a number of 'news' articles on a google search a lot look like being generated from a marketing push you would expect pre-launch. However saying that there is a good chance more will be written post launch, so if not notable now maybe sometime this year so worth extending the article. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 14:09, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you KylieTastic, it is much appreciated. I don't know if this changes anything, but we have launched already (December 2nd) and are well under way. Perhaps I could add some of these pieces (below) to the citations and also ask for input from the Teahouse? Is that a decent approach? (talk) 15:48, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi well you could do with updating the article and adding a source for the launch if you have it because at the moment it says "due to launch in February 2020". But yes add some more with refs especially big name papers and websites and then ask at the teahouse. You'll then get more than just me or another reviewer seeing it and see what people say. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 16:13, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
  • Hi KylieTastic - no idea how that crept in there! We launched last month and I have added a source for this. I'll build this up over the next couple of weeks and then add this to Tearoom. Once again, thanks for your help. (talk) 14:16, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

Draft:St. Gregory Nazianzen Catholic Church

Hi KylieTastic, can you please take a second look at this when you have a chance? I am trying to hone the reliable source aspect of this article. It's a little unclear where the bar for pseudo-historic and worthwhile notability is.Cashewseed (talk) 22:48, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Cashewseed to be fair to all submitters I don't re-review on request, I just pick new and old submissions at random, so it may or may not be myself who reviews it next. However your correct notability for such topics WP:NBUILDING is not an easy one to judge. I tend to think historic buildings are much more acceptable with less sources, new buildings often are semi promotional. I'm not sure I would accept, but I would not decline either, in its current state its in the grey zone and I'd leave to another reviewer. If you can find anything more, especially historically about the building that would be good, or use the Wikipedia:Teahouse or use the "ask us a question" on the decline note to ask a wider set of editors and maybe get a consensus. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 16:42, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

Mikail Emre Çalışkan

hello, i would like to ask you. I have real information but why you can not put my name on wikipedia. Kindly asking from you to what to do give more information can be published on wikipedia. pls mail me: — Preceding unsigned comment added by Qdigitalagency (talkcontribs) 16:34, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

Basically... "Articles generally require significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic" (see WP:42)
Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 16:46, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for information.

COI and Candidacy

Thanks for the prompt edit Kylie.

I see your point that candidacy in and of itself is not notable, and that seems fair. Though there are news sources that are covering the candidate (and other candidates), I understand that the Wiki rules prohibit it, and that is fine.

However, regarding the conflict of interest, I am confused. I am not employed by the candidate or campaign. I am a constituent in the district. If constituents of political personalities pose possible conflicts of interest, who edits political pages? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chris.jaramilloforcongress (talkcontribs) 17:11, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Chris.jaramilloforcongress we have to guess as COI with regard to behaviour and username, and your username looks like the sort of name a campaign staff would use. Note you do not have to be being paid/employed to have a COI, being a volunteer for the campaign would still count. Also note this semi reversal was made by another editor as we do not have inline external links as readers expect blue-links to keep them in-wiki. Again it's also seen as promotional, trying to get people to the campaign website. You can continue to add to Draft:David Anthony Jaramillo as more news comes out, but it has to have some substance and not just a dozen links just saying they are running. Normally I would expect someone running for congress to probably generate enough interest that they would meet the WP:BIO guidelines. Hope that help - Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 17:21, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
  • Chris.jaramilloforcongress also if your not related to the campaign to avoid issues you may wish to consider getting a more neutral username - see Wikipedia:Changing username. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 17:23, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) @Chris.jaramilloforcongress: See WP:POLITICIAN to view the criteria for makes for a politician notable. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 20:50, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

adding sources for Lelo for Georgia


thanks for your friendly comment re

I did add three additional sources, including Al Jazeera. Is there a way one could reconsider this? In other cases, where I started with a fairly short stump, it developed into a full fledged article. Note also that a party that was previously covered on Wikipedia merged into this new party, which is where my venture to create the page started

Thanks for your consdieration... Hundnase (talk) 18:26, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Hundnase, just had a very quick look as I just got back home and have to get on with some other thing... It does look much improved with the additional reliable sources. So I would say that unless you can find any more information/source to add then yes please re-submit (blue button at the bottom of the decline notice) and someone will review properly (reading things more thoroughly then I just did). All the best KylieTastic (talk) 19:07, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
  • Hi KylieTastic thank you for your quick response, will add a bit tonight and then resubmit, thank you!!! Hundnase (talk) 09:26, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
  • Hi KylieTastic, so it has been rejected again. If I get this right: if you are a small country that does not get covered by BBC, CNN, NYT, and the like, then essentially it is very hard to provide information via Wikipedia, since even if you bring multiple credible independent sources, it just falls below the threshold? You can sense my frustration. I am not saying the article is perfect, but I think it was an entirely reasonable start. Hundnase (talk) 17:08, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
  • Hi Hundnase, I'm not editing/reviewing tonight as I'm exhausted from work but thought I'd post a quick response. To a degree yes smaller countries may have less coverage about some subjects which makes sourcing difficult, however I would not expect that to apply to any serious party in a countries parliamentary elections. I admit to knowing nothing of the politics of Georgia but Politics of Georgia (country)#Political parties and elections has a lot more parties than I was expecting (although List of political parties in Georgia has less?). So although I would expect if they do become a serious "Third Option" as your source says they will be covered in international big media (BBC, CNN, NYT,.. as you say) nearer to the election. Before that I would expect that there would be serious cover in the Georgian media - reliable sources on English Wikipedia do not have to be in English - I'm assuming there are probably Georgian and Abkhazian sources. I would say look for any non English reliable sources that have significant coverage (if you can depending on our language skills); to assist you could ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Georgia (country) - not sure how active it is, but someone may be interested in helping; You could ask for help/advice at the Wikipedia:Teahouse which at least means several experienced editors and admins are likely to see, and maybe add more input. That's all I can think of to say for now, I need to go relax. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 22:00, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
Hi KylieTastic, thank you for your response. The party was now covered by Foreign Policy, so hopefully that will make it easier... I will keep trying. Hundnase (talk) 19:16, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

Request on 14:40:35, 1 February 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by CloD

Hi. The article includes links towards the Object Relational Mapping Wikipedia page and towards other referenced concepts, what else should be added for it to be considered as providing a significant coverage about the subject? Thanks for your help and your time.

CloD (talk) 14:40, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Sessão do Conselho de Estado wikidata

Hi, I saw you changed the old image to be preferred here: wikidata:Q43485263. Could you please tell me why? The new image I just cropped has larger size, larger resolution, comes from the official museum page and in my opinion the colouring is better because you actually can see the coats have different colours. Is the wikidata item used somewhere that prefers the old image or I'm missing some disadvantage? Thank you. --Inteloff (talk) 22:58, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Inteloff I just picked an image to be preferred as if one is not preferred is causes issues on articles that use it (it tries to display all as one image and fail). Happy for you to change the other image to be the preferred one. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 23:46, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
Inteloff I have just changed the preferred rank to the other image. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 23:48, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
Thanks, I thought marking one as deprecated and the other as normal fixed the issues --Inteloff (talk) 23:57, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Gaurav Gaikwad

The blog in reference to blogger Gaurav Gaikwad and is purely a natural article written taking in mind all the news references and it contains within Wikipedia guidelines Please check on google by typing Gaurav Gaikwad Info Google has mentioned Gaurav Gaikwad as featured Snippet Recheck this article taking in mind all the referneces provided Itspirantee (talk) 12:24, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

  • Yes there are lots of google hits probably because the only thing that "Gaurav Gaikwad" appears to be good at is spending a lot of time and probably money in self promotion. KylieTastic (talk) 14:02, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Hamdard Public School

Hey, you declined my submission earlier because it was not supported by sources. I have added references now. Is it good enough to become an article now? Mishraanoopam98 (talk) 13:25, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Mishraanoopam98, to be fair to all submitters I don't re-review on request, I just pick new and old submissions at random, so it may or may not be myself who reviews it next. However good job on going from zero to 5 sources, definitely heading in the correct direction. Regards KylieTastic (talk) 14:05, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

England and St George etc

Has it been debated anywhere which form of saint should be used. The switch to Saint George is still in progress. Has it been discussed anywhere at all? I hoped I might start something. Eddaido (talk) 23:38, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Eddaido, I don't know if Saint George's Day has been discussed anywhere in particular but per MOS:SAINTS WP:COMMONNAME generally applies, and also Saint George is also the full Saint. Such a change would normally be discussed first on the talk page as it would require a move to match the new lead. I've seen editors randomly assert full Saint, or St or St. on topics before - so in general such changes should be discussed with reasons and sources to stop flip-flopping between styles. From personal experience I would say I've seen it used as in the article now: i.e. full Saint when in the title or the focus of a sentence (such as the lead), but shortened for convenience to St in other places. However the reason I originally noticed, and I chose to assume good faith was the random changes of "saint" to "ggg" in your first edit. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 20:22, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
    • What! and I thought I got all the coffee off the keyboard. There's a moral here somewhere. Maybe its "look at the pictures as well as the text". Stupid of me. Thanks, Eddaido (talk) 21:33, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

st lawrence park

So can you explain to me why the article was rejected saying no reliable source even though there isn't one anywhere to be found? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yacko69 (talkcontribs) 15:53, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

Since there are no sources how do you expect it to be reliable? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yacko69 (talkcontribs) 15:59, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

so if i stick a facebook link or something in it will work? i think i put the website for the place that owns the park isnt that enough? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yacko69 (talkcontribs) 16:05, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

Thevansh-Article Denied for creation


Just received that my Article for creation(Thevansh) has been denied I really appreciate your time from reviewing my page but I am really confused as I have put independent sources that show how the new artist has been recognized in different countries. It would be really helpful if you guide me and help me with what was missing. As said before I have put independent sources and it would be really great if you acknowledge them and publish the page.

Looking forward to your response — Preceding unsigned comment added by Archit03 (talkcontribs) 18:50, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

John Poysti Ping Pong Tournament


This is not a local school tournament. - the event just takes place at a school.

Anyone can join, the tournament is for everyone.

I added the published sources, such as scoreboards with we have in physical shape

Kind regards Jonashgs (talk) 23:53, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi again

1. It is a public tournament and anyone can join - the tournament is for everyone. Next year it will be located at a gym, and not at the school - So next year it's more public.

2. Just because there aren't google results, doesn't mean it doesn't exist? - We have scoreboards from the last 9 years - an official instagram which pictures from the last 2 years - 3 volunteer staff - I also have alot of pictures from the 2014 edition i can share as prove.

3. The tournament is not fantasy i can get you in contact with John Poysti himself if you dont believe me?

4. It is NOT a hoax - it is NOT a student who invented it! The founder is a former basketball coach named Danny Stephens - I can get you in contact with him too, if you don't believe me

5. And please - what is reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject? All our sources and scores are on psychical paper and not online - how do i fix this? - tell me what to do, and i will meet your criteria im sorry english isnt my 1st language

Kind regards

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonashgs (talkcontribs) 12:28, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

  • Jonashgs firstly your English is great even as a second language. All new articles on Wikipedia have to show they are notable (See WP:N) which in most cases requires significant coverage in multiple independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS) to show notability. Just because the event also allows people outside the school to join it is still a minor event. It's own scorecards are not independent. Even if you had some of the top table tennis players in the world play but no independent source covered it it would still not be notable. There are probably thousands of minor table tennis tournaments in the world. KylieTastic (talk) 20:07, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Hello again

This is where my english falls short.

What does it mean? All new articles on Wikipedia have to show they are notable (See WP:N) which in most cases requires significant coverage in multiple independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS) to show notability?

What should i do to get verified? Tell me what to do, instead of telling me what i do wrong - please — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonashgs (talkcontribs) 10:16, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

  • Jonashgs I can't really simplify it much more - you need multiple people to have written about the subject, and those people are independent i.e. not linked to the subject. All other notable tournaments are written about in many newspapers, websites and maybe even books. KylieTastic (talk) 21:29, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi again

Thanks for your reply - so i need someone not connected to the tournament to write an article and put it online? or can it be in physical form?

Kind regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonashgs (talkcontribs) 08:54, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Jonashgs, it has to be someone who's writing will be viewed as reliable, or published in a source that is deemed reliable. So in general if would have to be known journalists, or known publications (newspapers, magazines, etc), or a published book or official documents. However to be considered "notable" multiple sources are required. The reason being that once a article subject (in this case this tournament) is "notable" enough it will be written about. Officially recognised tournaments would also be notable, such as any recognised by these Table tennis organizations. KylieTastic (talk) 20:27, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Hello Thanks for your reply. What if the towns newspaper write an article about the tournament or mentions the tournament in physical form. Will this be accepted, or does it have to be posted online? We have a very small local newspaper in Holsbybrunn, which is by part-time employees and volunteers. Kind regards Jonashgs (talk) 17:55, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Jonashgs, well technically a local newspaper does count as a independent reliable source and sources do not have to be online (just preferred). I'm doubting if this is really a newspaper or more of a village newsletter/magazine. As Holsbybrunn only has a population 729 (c. 2010) if would seam unlikely. I live in a place where the local newspaper does 25,000 copies weekly and would be a reliable source, but the local village magazine is quarterly for a village of 5000 people and is not. However, even if it did count, in general a minimum of three sources is required for a subject to be notable enough for an article. Otherwise even local village event would qualify if all it needed was an article in the village newsletter/magazine. KylieTastic (talk) 12:11, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

So now I need 3 independent sources? Before I only needed 1? Why the sudden change?

I can connect you to 3 people independent of the host venue and the tournament organizer.

How come wouldn't that be reliable?

Jonashgs (talk) 18:47, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
  • No Jonashgs no one ever said you "only needed 1" see above... 4 time it says multiple - and no you can't just get 3 random people. It's really not a complex idea - the standard for a Wikipedia article is the world has noticed the subject, not just the locals. Any more questions go ask at the Wikipedia:Teahouse or the Wikipedia:Help desk KylieTastic (talk) 20:36, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

The people are not random - it's the founder and the player who the tournament is named after.

I can get you in contact with them if you want? Jonashgs (talk) 11:32, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

Deborah Baltzell article

Hi KylieTastic

Can you help with my Deborah Baltzell article please, it's my first article and i want a bit of guidance


Dom — Preceding unsigned comment added by DomWig (talkcontribs) 17:24, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing the computer armoire pic

Thanks for the fix!--AlainV (talk) 21:59, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Ezra Bayda page update

Hi! I have updated the Ezra Bayda page with new information. I did so previously but it was removed because there was no verifiable reference given. Would you be willing to check the citation to make sure it is the correct form? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mizeditor (talkcontribs) 23:45, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Mizeditor (talk) 23:47, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Mizeditor I see it's already been reversed, as you cannot just claim an email exists expecially as this is about a living person (See WP:BLP) sources for such things must be verifiable (WP:V). Also don't spam the same question to many people - If your question is not for a particular editor you should post a question to a help group such as the Wikipedia:Teahouse or Wikipedia:Help desk. Regards KylieTastic (talk) 09:43, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Request on 13:47:20, 10 February 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by BRidley66

Thanks for the prompt feedback on my proposed page on the Society of Cosmetic Scientists, I am very disappointed that this has been turned down again, as I have looked at similar societies, such as the Society of Cosmetic Chemists, and used this as a template. I have also used the Royal Society of Chemistry page as a template and then cut out much of the equivalent content after comments from other reviewers. Neither of these has any significant secondary sources and the sources used are similar to what I have included in my page. I do not understand why these pages are allowed to be part of Wikipedia whilst my page does not. We are trying to increase the visibility of cosmetic science to show how relevant science is to our everyday lives. There isn't a page on cosmetic science, and I think this is an omission, but this is also a huge subject that would take me a long time to write and cross-reference. Showing that there is an organisation that promotes the science of cosmetic products in the UK is important when there are pages to show that there are similar societies elsewhere, and can also give a positive view on research, development and manufacturing within the UK. There are very few mentions of the SCS in general literature but there are active groups on Facebook and LinkedIn and increasing the visibility of a learned society can only help to increase the understanding that cosmetic science is an important branch of science. Please let me have some feedback on what I need to do next. Many thanks and Best Regards, B

BRidley66 (talk) 13:47, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Draft:David James Austin

Hi, Got your note about rejecting the item I created for David James Austin.

Could I ask how it was rejected when pages such as these exist:

This pages was purposely created as a stub so that his agents and other professionals can expand the page

I simply do not see how it should not be included give the above?

Do I need to create the page differently? there wasnt anything in the article that could be challenged that would need verification

I have read over the documents you sent and I still do not see ho it does not qualify.

Your help appreciated

Regards James — Preceding unsigned comment added by Logicness (talkcontribs) 19:47, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Logicness your correct and those articles should be checked to see if sources do exist to see if they are notable and if not they should be flanged for deletion see Wikipedia:Other stuff exists. This is why new users can no longer directly create new article and all new articles in mainspace (unless you have a certain permission) are marked to be patrolled by another trusted editor to accept or not. If any of the subjects work has been notable then someone probably wrote about it so you can use those as sources. You need to find independent reliable sources and add those. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 21:50, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
Note that a second look at Damian Humbley the article is not good but the source does say they stared in an Andrew Lloyd Webber production which is quite a notable part. KylieTastic (talk) 21:56, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for you reply, I see what needs to be done now. I will compile the balance of the sources. I wouldnt have thought the "internet wayback machine" would be a reliable source; but I see what the policy is doing... thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Logicness (talkcontribs) 22:29, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Logicness the "internet wayback machine" is a trusted source of old sites some are reliable source some are not, but yes its a very useful tool for sources no longer live. Writing articles is an iterative process - so see what you can add - I would focus on there most major roles. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 22:37, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

I have added 3 references which highlighted our brand. Please check it. There are 3 mentioned that I have added in the reference. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:37, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer newsletter February 2020

Hello KylieTastic,

Source Guide Discussion

The first NPP source guide discussion is now underway. It covers a wide range of sources in Ghana with the goal of providing more guidance to reviewers about sources they might see when reviewing pages. Hopefully, new page reviewers will join others interested in reliable sources and those with expertise in these sources to make the discussion a success.


New to NPP? Looking to try something a little different? Consider patrolling some redirects. Redirects are relatively easy to review, can be found easily through the New Pages Feed. You can find more information about how to patrol redirects at WP:RPATROL.

Discussions and Resources

Geographic regions, areas and places generally do not need general notability guideline type sourcing. When evaluating whether an article meets this notability guideline please also consider whether it might actually be a form of WP:SPAM for a development project (e.g. PR for a large luxury residential development) and not actually covered by the guideline.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 7095 Low – 4991 High – 7095

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here

16:08, 13 February 2020 (UTC)


Dear Sir, I dont know why the article about Emil Pirchan was declined?

It already exists in German: and he was an important artist having had exhibitions in Essen (Museum Folkwang) and briefly in Vienna (Leopoldmuseum)

yours sincerely Beat Steffan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emil Pirchan (talkcontribs) 12:33, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Emil Pirchan the article does not have any references - see Help:Referencing for beginners and I would start by transferring the sources from de:Emil_Pirchan. However note that English Wikipedia has different standards to other language versions, so just because the article exists in another language doe not mean it will be acceptable here. So add the references and resubmit. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 12:38, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
  • (talk page stalker) Emil Pirchan also the tone was unencylopaedic, more like a fan page eg a trailblazer of modern set design in Germany, his achievements culminating in the famous productions... pioneering stage décors... exercised an influence on many other set designs... quite successful as a set designer... the enormous successes. It's just a string of opinions, what we need is facts Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:28, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Magpas Logo.png


Thanks for uploading File:Magpas Logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:41, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Sources of Launching 1Sports channel

Hi, The article I'm creating got declined because of no source of launch of the sports channel. Then I've add the source with the official website, then published, but it still under review.. Now I've added the official logo from the official website and added the official social media handle. I know it's a new channel that's why there's no buzz of the channel, but it airs one of the BIGGEST soccer league of India, so that's why I decided to create this wiki. I hope it'll be reviewed & published under — Preceding unsigned comment added by IamTRoy4 (talkcontribs) 12:26, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

Who To Blame

Hey Kyle,

Could you please tell us what we could do for the page created for "Who To Blame" feel more authentic in some way?

Cheers, we appreciate you taking the time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnypietro (talkcontribs) 06:01, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Johnypietro, all new articles on Wikipedia have to show they are notable (See WP:N) which in most cases requires significant coverage in multiple independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS) to show notability, for music topics there are other criteria that can be used such as having a record certified gold - see WP:BAND. Draft:Who To Blame currently has no independent reliable sources. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 12:23, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Princess Damarea Ogbuewu

I've tried creating a page for Princess Damarea Ogbuewu but it keeps getting rejected. Can you do it? AmericanDirectory (talk) 14:23, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

  • She does not appear to be notable, at least at the moment. KylieTastic (talk) 14:26, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

Crangonyx floridanus

First, do you have a script that changed the headings to proper second-level markup, and that replaced the manual taxobox with a species box?

Second, does the species box go to the article for the genus? It seems to be displaying the higher-level taxons, and I can't see where it is getting them from unless it is looking them up in the genus article.

Third, thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:19, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

  • Hey Robert McClenon, no I don't have a script for the headings but I often use the search-replace tool in the Advanced edit bar (far right) to do such tidy ups. As for the Speciesbox it gets the data from Template:Taxonomy/GENUS taking the GENUS from the paramater on the article - so in this case Template:Taxonomy/Crangonyx. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 18:30, 20 February 2020 (UTC)


you have been dragged into the tri - multiple weevil saga! not sure which way to go, commiserations, or what... how or why an insect gets described into hundreds of variants post 1990 say, suggests someone with microscope or dna technology, it is truly flabbergating that weevils get separated into so many variants at this stage in history. You might have noted there is the ultimate test of geographically challenged editing on some talk pages of some items of weevils, I wont spoil the plot, you may have encountered them... it in itself is quite... whichever way one might take such an inventive placement of Indonesia... JarrahTree 23:34, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

  • JarrahTree :) I wasn't expecting to find so many weevils invading AfC on a Friday night, there are so many you wonder if they have confused species with name "Hello I'm Bob an Indonesian weevil"... Riedel: "Ah ha... a new species!". Still they don't outnumber the "influencers" and "entrepreneurs" crying out for recognition and acceptance in AfC. KylieTastic (talk) 11:09, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
not enough good emojis to respond to that... :| - as for Indonesia being located in south asia, I was watching a particularly blood thirsty movie on tv at the same time, the on going slaughter coincided with my editing and resolving my disbelief that indonesia could be located in south asia (thinks it is all solved now) - as for weevils, 100 + less said the better.. JarrahTree 11:17, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
the big problem is that there is unlikely any guideline or understanding of biota issues and general understanding of the larger issues imho - usually articles for review seem to have little or no adequate project tags that are relevant JarrahTree 12:11, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
JarrahTree Frankly AfC is a nice idea that fails in so many ways - it often comes down to individuals making a call, unlike the consensus in other places - and if you get it wrong you'll be jumped on by the masses (or as in a recent RfA - a single slipup will cost you your chance at adminship). It would be better to have the wikiprojects review the drafts in their topic areas, but most projects don't get involved. I have tried to tag more project to drafts recently but it hasn't made much/any difference. KylieTastic (talk) 12:18, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
your good sense of humour will keep you safe. I have said all I can on wp en re the issue, my editing simply says more than I can actually articulate... JarrahTree 12:34, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

BREL Apologies

Hi Kylie, apologies for the poor edit you had to fix in BREL... my system went down in mid edit, it was a honest edit, but thank you for fixing it... glad there are good peeps (such as yourself) watching out for vandalism. thank you and take care  The Emperor of Byzantium  (talk) 00:10, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi The Emperor of Byzantium no worries, it did look like a serious edit so I did check your uploads and look for images of similar names. It all works out in the end :) Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 11:57, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

/* Cambridge Centre for Christianity Worldwide */

Thank you for helping me with my first Wiki article! I'm a historian--but I'm new writing for wikipedia. One small note--the Cambridge Centre for Christianity Worldwide is attached to the University of Cambridge in England and therefore uses the spelling of "centre" (British) rather than "center" (American). Thank you again for your help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leo Dei III (talkcontribs) 20:55, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Hot Pink Tour

There are not many sources to choose from but it was confirmed by the artist herself and it's literally on Ticketmaster. How can I get the article submission accepted? Artursilva0220 (talk) 21:49, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Artursilva0220 it's not about not being a real event - Wikipedia is an Encyclopedia about notable subjects, it is not for promotion (that what social media is for). So if the sources do not yet exist, then it's just too soon. Regards KylieTastic (talk) 21:53, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Better Finance (copy/paset copyright)

Thank you for your comments.

Please note that regarding the potential copyright issue: the link you provided as a copyright concern was from a member organiation of Better Finance and largely giving a generic summary / copy past of the self description of Better Finance available on their website. As such, it can't really be considered a copyright issue, merely being derived from the same source. Added a reference to the relevant section of the website into the draft article on. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MatisJ (talkcontribs) 12:09, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Request on 14:19:54, 25 February 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by AlanJayToo

I'm looking to fill out the FOSDEM speaker links of Thorsten and Steven. Given both writers have popular articles and/or books I thought this would count as notable. Do I need to reference each work? Most major ones? Amazon links and reviews?

There's also links to existing wikipedia articles representing work that they've been involved in. Should these be marked differently to show the connection?

Thanks - AJ

AlanJayToo (talk) 14:19, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi AlanJayToo, it does not matter how "popular" a subject is unless that popularity has been enough for them to get significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources to show notability. Many people write popular books/articles/programs/videos/social media posts/etc. but no one writes about them. Notability is not inherited - creating "popular" and/or notbale things does not necessarily make the creator popular/notable. However most people who do create multiple popular 'significant' things are written about in many places and thus notable. Hope that explains the point of notability, in the way Wikipedia mean anyway. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 20:55, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

  The Barnstar of Diligence
Hello, KylieTastic. Just wanted to reach out and say thanks for all you do! ArdenKAberly (talk) 21:57, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your feedback on GM Games

Hi Kylie, I'm trying to understand which bits of content are the biggest culprits for our decline?

I am willing to do whatever is necessary to ensure third party validation from reputable spots. Would you have a second to let us know which statement(s) had an immediate red flag in your mind?

We would really appreciate it. I'm Chris. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cvalius (talkcontribs) 18:07, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Chris, all new articles on Wikipedia have to show they are notable (See WP:N) which in most cases requires significant coverage in multiple independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS). They also need enough sources to back up the claims, but Notabilty is the big issue. Draft:GM Games has three sources from so not independent, and the 2 sources from "" are not reliable sources as just a forum. Hope that explains things. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 18:30, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Ryan Ruby

I hope I've made the right changes.

(Wpearce1983.k (talk) 20:56, 27 February 2020 (UTC))

  • Hi Wpearce1983.k, trying to improve an article and add sources is always a good thing so thanks - if you think it's enough to show they are notable then resubmit and it will be reviewed. Regards KylieTastic (talk) 21:33, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

I think I have, but I am not sure. Every time I think I've submitted properly, it seems like there's some issue.

Wpearce1983.k (talk) 21:52, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Wpearce1983.k, it's an iterative process, a decline is not a reject, so as long as your trying to improve (which you are, others just re-submit) hopefully you get to a conclusion it's acceptable, or maybe it's just WP:TOOSOON. You could ask for a pre-opinion from the Wikipedia:Teahouse or just submit for review and accept or feedback. Creating new articles is probably one of the most difficult things to do on Wikipedia, so don't be disheartened. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 22:30, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Unlawful edit

Would like to know why I was notified you edited me out of The Binge Movie cast Rerik10 (talk) 22:45, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

  • Rerik10 so your promoting yourself - see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest - Wikipedia is an Encyclopedia not social media - If you become a notable actor then someone will create a Wikipedia article about you, but don't edit about yourself. KylieTastic (talk) 22:50, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Tottenham article

pfft, might of helped if Sumanuil used an edit summary!! :/ Also I am really mad at Explicit who deleting images without regard, and completely destroying the project I worked hard on. Govvy (talk) 10:16, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Govvy, yes edit summaries do save a lot of misunderstanding. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 10:21, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Boroughs and Census Areas in Alaska edit

You reverted an edit I made removing the Valdez-Cordova Census area and adding the Chugach and Copper River Census areas. This was in line with a change made on the website over a year ago. [1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Togomojoo (talkcontribs) 11:01, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Togomojoo, I reverted because your edit for multiple reasons: you removed data (if now historic); added two new lines, but not complete, no data or reference; as you did not include a source or an edit summary it just looked random. However, thank for the source, I have fixed up as best I can for now and created redirects on the articles until enough data/sources are available. If you can find any of the missing info that would be good (largest town; density; population; area) Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 11:58, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

Please assist quickly with personal page

Good Day Kylie,

We just submitted for Brandon Scott Mason's approval on his member page profile. Can you please assist us to get this approved. We are currently adding more information and history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BrandonScottMason (talkcontribs) 17:25, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi BrandonScottMason firstly you said "we" - Wikipedia accounts should be used by an individual not a group, second see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and WP:PAID. Wikipedia is not for promotion, it is not for "member page profile"s it is for Encyclopedic articles. If "Brandon Scott Mason" becomes notable enough then someone will probably write an article about them, but you, especially as a "we" should not - as Wp:COI says "COI editing is strongly discouraged on Wikipedia. It undermines public confidence and risks causing public embarrassment to the individuals and companies being promoted". Regards KylieTastic (talk) 17:35, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

  The Editor's Barnstar
Thank you for all the feedback! Much appreciate the help in helping me with my first article! Amitavinod (talk) 18:48, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Draft Crail Ranch Homestead Museum

Thanks for revision. This is my second article. I developed in sandbox, used wizard to set up draft page, and then copied from sandbox (in visual edit mode) to the draft page. Is there a better way to convert the sandbox page to a draft page? How do I clear the sandbox page? Appreciate any advice. Thanks! Aflockw12Aflockw12 (talk) 18:24, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Aflockw12 normally we just move pages (assuming the target name is not already taken) and I believe you should be able to do that even as a new user, if not submitting to AfC will often get someone moving it to draft for you. There is reasons for doing a copy-paste rather than move if you have a very messy history, but others like to keep all the edit history so a move is better. I'm not a Visual Editor user, but you should be able to just select everything, delete and save. If there was a reason to fully delete, i.e. make the history not acceptable to non admins etc. then you can add {{Db-self}} to the top, or from the Visaal editor I think that appears to be Insert Menu > Template > Template name: Db-self. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 18:45, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Working on Robert Fulghum updates

Will add sources as I figure out the sourcing code. A little rusty. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:200:4580:ED20:F91A:938E:E8EC:BF9 (talk) 18:28, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Revised draft for: Adonis Kapsalis


Hi Kyle, per your suggestion i have added several notable references to the aforementioned new article/bio. Could you please review when possible? Thanks! GP75S (talk) 22:00, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi GP75S I'm just off to bed and also to be fair to all submitters I don't re-review on request, I just pick new and old submissions at random, so it may or may not be myself who reviews it next. However I did submit again for you, so the other reviewers will see it on the list to be reviewed. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 22:11, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi Kyle hope you are well. When possible could you kindly check a resubmission I made yesterday for actor Adonis Kapsalis. I believe all has been corrected and addressed properly. Thanks in advance!! GP75S (talk) 19:02, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi GP75S yes I am well, and I hope you are too in these troubling times. However I have a job that means I have more to do now so I've not got the time for Wikipedia (apart from the odd edit while on conference calls) - however I'm sure there are some stuck at home and doing more editing - so try the links to the "AfC Help Desk" or "live help" on the decline notice or ask at the Wikipedia:Teahouse where lots of experienced editors and admins try to help. Keep safe, all the best KylieTastic (talk) 19:17, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks so much for the quick reply. Much appreciated. Stay safe too and best of luck GP75S (talk) 21:29, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Outlasted the Invasion Award

  For surviving a swarm of weevils
For surviving the grand weevil invasion of 2020. Sulfurboy (talk) 20:26, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
:) KylieTastic (talk) 20:32, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

You are ironically vandalizing people's factual statements by undoing their work

This is a factual statement: Chris Chibnall destroyed the long running series Doctor Who.

Why are you undoing this? This is a factual statement which can be proven by looking at the ratings and the number of views. This show has tanked. If you consider censoring free speech, as "vandalism" then you have a twisted mindset. (talk) 23:35, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Feedback on scamadviser

Dear KylieTastic,

Sorry if I am using the wrong way to approach you. I wondered if you have been able to look at the page on scamadviser. Feedback is very welcome.

Best regards,

Jorij Abraham — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jorij Abraham (talkcontribs) 08:34, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Jorij Abraham, I see your writing with a Conflict of interest - the reason this is "strongly discouraged on Wikipedia" is because it's almost impossible to be neutral. Even though you have included a "Criticism" section, which is better than most, it still reads mostly like marketing. Apart from the content there still lacks significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources to show notability (WP:WEBCRIT) Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 15:21, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Expanding article on Jonah Jones (sculptor)

Hello KylieTastic,

I have also posted the following message on Drm310's User talk. Sorry if I am doubling up but it is hard to keep up with who is who at Wikipedia. Three of your editors have now been on our case in the past 36 hours.

Jonah Jones was a figure of sufficient importance in Welsh, and indeed British, late-twentieth-century culture and education to merit an article on Wikipedia. He was not, though, important enough to motivate a range of scholarly publications, academic articles etc that can be cited as corrobating sources. The task of recording his life fell to a member of his family, as frequently occurs with public figures who are not considered, for whatever reason, to belong in the very first rank.

In 2008 the University of Wales Press's Seren Books imprint commissioned his second son, Peter Jones, to write a biography. Peter was well qualified for the task: he was a historian and former BBC journalist with the BBC Monitoring Service in Reading, from where he was seconded for three years to the UK Foreign Office, who in his early twenties worked for six years at Jonah Jones's studio where he was taught to engrave letters on slate to a high standard of excellence.

Peter Jones worked from many sources, all of which were cited over three pages at the end of the biography (Jonah Jones: An Artist's Life, 2011, ISBN 978-1-85411-556-0). He also drew extensively on private papers and letters and on archives held at the BBC, the Oxford Bodleian Library, the London Metropolitan Archives, the National Archives at Kew, the Tate Gallery in London, the Welsh Arts Council, the minutes of the Academic Council of the Dublin National College of Art and Design, the record of parliamentary questions in the Irish Dail Eireann, and the digital archives of The Irish Times newspaper.

The biography, in other words, was a thoroughgoing exercise in historical scholarship, not some hyped-up job designed to pour glory on its subject. If the manuscript had not passed this elementary test it would never have been accepted for publication. And, of course, the manuscript passed through all the usual editorial processes employed by any serious book publisher.

However, as far as Wikipedia is concerned, the central problem seems to be the lack of sufficient secondary sources to corrobate all the facts presented in the expanded article. If secondary sources do not exist - because, as I said at the beginning, other writers have not written much about Jonah Jones - then, according to your editors, all our efforts to expand the article to provide a fuller FACTUAL picture are doomed. You say you cannot accept the facts we have added because we (probably) cannot cite third-party corroboration for each added fact.

I say "we (probably) cannot" because, knowing Peter, I would not be altogether surprised if he dug up this and that from heaven knows where to cite as corrobation. He might be able to do so - he is, after all, a historian and a researcher, and disinterring well-hidden sources is what he does. He may therefore choose to rise to the challenge of proving to Wikipedia that every bit of his research was authentically truthful and that he was not a lying huckster.

For my part, I am so exhausted and disillusioned by the whole self-defeating pointlessness of all this that, together with my wife, I have decided to cancel my monthly financial support for Wikipedia. We have supported Wikipedia financially for many years because we believe it is one of the bulwarks of human civilisation and possibly the very best thing to have emerged from the internet. But after this despair-inducing experience, we turn away in sorrow. Good luck to you all.

Davidtownsendjones (talk) 17:49, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Davidtownsendjones firstly you have updated Jonah Jones (sculptor) with this edit which although it appears you have a Conflict of interest the edit was not reverted. You then posted to the article talk page to explain your post, a good idea and shows your good faith, but you said "All my contributions had been undone" which is not true. Jeff G. replied pointing out "Your additions were not removed". You can see from the article history here that your edit was not removed just a WP:COI tag added, this just means someone independent should reveiw. You said you believed Wikipedia was "one of the bulwarks of human civilisation and possibly the very best thing to have emerged from the internet" which is why so many of us volunteer so many hours because we do as well. I would hope you would understand it is how it is because we do have policies and procedures to folow, if not it would be like the so much of the rest of the internet... garbage.
When you submitted User:Davidtownsendjones/sandbox/Jonah Jones to Articles for creation there was no statement that this was related to the article Jonah Jones (sculptor) and as we review hundreds of submissions a day we do not have the time to delve into users histories - as such I'm sorry that I missed the context it was posted in, or that it was about an existing subject. From your point of view it was obvious, but I hope you can see that from mine it was lacking context. However as your original edit stands, and your article talk page post is there for any discussion no further action appears to be needed.
On your user page you state "I don’t agree about a conflict of interest, because I was only a tool and not the originator of any of the content." but you have said you are "one of Jonah Jones's children", and the content was from "Peter Jones" also the subjects son. Note that conflict of interest just means linked to the subject, not paid and it does not mean that your edits are wrong or bad - just that it is human nature that people with a WP:COI are naturally going to find it more difficult to be neutral. Also most people with a COI are not historians and journalist, I'm sure you can envisage the types of biased edits that get posted by other people with close links to subjects. Please note again that due to the amount of messages, edits and articles we have to review many responses are just standard templates, so they are not personal or accusations.
To reiterate your edit to Jonah Jones (sculptor) has not been removed, and you have clearly been acting with good faith, and I'm sure Peter has done their best to be professional and accurate in their work. I'm sorry that the standard templated responses and our polices has left you felling "exhausted and disillusioned". They are tailored to cope with the thousands of biased and bad faith edits we get daily that do get reverted and accounts blocked. I'm sure also that neither Jeff G. or Drm310 meant in any way to make you feel we have been on your case. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 10:49, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
  • Hi KylieTastic. Thank you. It feels like good sense has re-entered the discussion. As a fellow editor I can appreciate what it feels like to constantly be in the eye of a torrent of incoming submissions, many of them biased or in poor faith. You have my respect for stepping up to the plate and submitting to the torrent. So I do understand if there was some confusion - as appears, if I follow you correctly, to have been the case - about whether I had submitted a wholly new article or amendments to an existing one.
As I have already said in so many words, we cannot help being Jonah Jones's children. But if we do not accept responsibility for keeping an objective, balanced account of his life and work in the public eye, our experience over the past 16 years since he died is that no one else will. Inevitably this leads to remarks about conflicts of interest. You and your colleagues are not the first to challenge us on the matter. Our only defence is to be able to demonstrate that we apply the same objective and neutral standards to the subject of 'Jonah Jones' as in all other areas of our professional practices as historians, writers, journalists, editors and researchers. It was in this spirit that we approached these revisions to the existing Wikipedia article.
If, taking all of this discussion into account, you and your colleagues are satisfied with the outcome, would it now be possible for the template message at the top to be removed?
Also, please could you point me at any advice published by Wikipedia about how to replace an existing image with another one? Although not easily phased by backend editing systems, I have to say that some of Wikipedia's methodologies are a whole new level of challenge!

Davidtownsendjones (talk) 15:30, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Davidtownsendjones, I've had to step back from doing much editing as real-life decided to throw a few issues at me, but I wanted to get an answer out. I'm not sure about the template message - the way things work here is either being WP:BOLD and then discussing if someone disagrees or getting a WP:Consensus. I don't have a problem with the additions, but I haven't been involved in such a case before and I don't feel like being bold at the moment as just exhausted with life, work and being sick. I'm sure some editors review these tags as they appear in automatically generated maintenance categories. So you can either leave is and see, or ask some others. I don't think there is a noticeboard for COI like other issues, so options to seek others input would be to add a {{help}} and question to the talk page, or to ask at the Wikipedia:Teahouse or Wikipedia:Help desk
on the issue of images that depends - if you have pictures that have not been published and you are happy to freely donate it's quite easy, however if they have been published or someone else has the copyright, or you aren't happy to donate on an open licence it's not easy. If it's the first then your account works on Wikimedia Commons our sister project for 'free' media. Any images uploaded there are usable on all language Wikipedias so any translations of the article would also be able to use. On commons you see "upload file" on the left had menu to this wizard. However, I just checked and see you already tried and run into an issue c:Commons:Help_desk#Changing_a_photograph where they did leave a reply. As I said if you have any photos of your own it should be easy if you use the commons wizard - it just appears the "Cross-wiki upload from" in the summary stopped your first attempt. If you do want to use images from another photographer a they say you have to go though the Commons:OTRS procedures. A real pain to get actual licence/copyright holder to do and frustrating if you know it's with permission, but they have to legally protect copyright holder from fraud - from just my little experience on Commons there are a lot of people uploading stolen files from the internet claiming as there own, which just means people like you have to deal with more procedures. Hope that helps a bit KylieTastic (talk) 18:37, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Request on 17:54:07, 6 March 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Nicolas Dalmata

Dear Kyle, thank you for your message. Of course this is a draft and requires thorough elaboration. Being a non native writer, I will be grateful for any help to revise the page. I will also invite other wikipedians to work on the draft. As you can see in the text, there are several references that need to be added and cited properly. The page also needs a more consistent table of content. Please le me know if you have ideas on how to structure the paragraphs. My point in creating this page is that the recent surge of regional as well as transnational forms of crime narratives or crime sub-genres in Europe (e.g. the Nordic or Mediterranean Noir) invites the creation of a specific article presenting the history of this genre in Europe from a comparative angle, addressing its multilingualism and cultural plurality as a major defining feature.

Nicolas Dalmata (talk) 17:54, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Looking in here,Nicolas Dalmata because I was about to review the draft also, the problem isn't that the concept isn't likely to be notable , but that you need to show this by actually having references. Unfortunately, our form notices don't really differentiate between a draft that just needs to be referenced, and a draft about something that probably will never be able to be adequately referenced. Unfortunately, we're reliant on notices because eveything needs to be reviewed, and we have insufficient reviewers to do it more individually. DGG ( talk ) 09:29, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
  • Hi Nicolas Dalmata as DGG said I'm not sure the subject would be notable enough for an Encyclopedic article, certainly the lead section is very much like an essay rather than Encyclopedic. Also for the rest it wasn't clear if it was based of sources or if it was original research (see WP:NOR). Unfortunately its not a subject I'm familiar with to be able to assist, and we still have thousands of other articles waiting for a review. You could do with finding editors with an interest in the subject... you could try Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/Crime task force, or look at edits on similar subjects to find active editors with an interest, lately you could post at the Wikipedia:Teahouse to see if anyone has any suggestions. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 11:06, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Review of Count Von Aubel's Article

Dear KylieTastic; thanks for the review on my article.

I understand only partially the policy of the reliable sources, I tried now to reference the journal as far as possible.

Anyhow, I do not understand how my article should be rejected when other similar ones have been approved i.e. Forum Geometricorum. Could you help me to work out the article's weakness if I am doing something very wrong?

Best Regards;

Count Von Aubel (talk) 18:20, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Count Von Aubel over time the polices and standards of English Wikipedia have got stricter, so yes sometimes articles exist that if submitted now would not be accepted. Most often the Other stuff exists argument get the existing articles improved or deleted, and never helps drafts get accepted. As you first submitted you only had one reference, and it's multiple independent reliable sources that count to our notability guidelines - that are the basis of the main decisions to if a subject qualifies for an article. However you have already done the correct thing and added more references and resubmitted, so no your doing nothing wrong. Someone will review and get back to you, maybe myself or probably someone else as I have a drink and a curry to enjoy. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 18:36, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
  • Dear KylieTastic; thanks for the fast reply and clarification. Best Regards; Count Von Aubel (talk) 18:43, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Request for submission

Hi KylieTastic, thank you for taking the time to review the draft upon your review does the article merit it being able to live for submission as it meets the requirements?. In the first draft, I was befuddled at the article being declined, as the comment mentioned the player did not play in a fully professional league, but I corrected it by adding that the player had indeed played in a professional league which is Segunda B and added his appearances, would this article be able be in for submission? Thanks Vivalionel1 (talk) 21:02, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Vivalionel1 I didn't do a complete review, but I noticed the double submission and that as they had played for Real Zaragoza they were playing in a league on the list Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Fully professional leagues. So they are partially notable, but there has been some issues that some think WP:NFOOTY is not enough and WP:GNG is also required... and I didn't look deep enough to decide either way. Someone will do a full review, maybe myself, but if you can find any other sources that have significant coverage of the subject that will help. All the best KylieTastic (talk)

JFrog Draft

What was wrong with the draft JFrog? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abhijoshi90 (talkcontribs) 10:10, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

  • Abhijoshi90 Firstly notability as the comment says subjects require significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources - currently none. Secondly it looks more like marketing - such as all the products listed twice - and I picked one sentence "JFrog's end-to-end solution—from Development to Distribution—is a vital part of a faster, more efficient application development and release processes" and googled, and no surprises it is a direct copy from marketing here see WP:COPYVIO. KylieTastic (talk) 10:45, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Question about rejection of page draft: The Elephant in the Brain

Hi! Apologies in advance if I'm messing up Wikipedia etiquette and/or wasting anyone's time - I'm still getting to grips with Wikipedia!

You reviewed my draft of the page for the book 'The Elephant in the Brain' and flagged it for notability. I did read the notability page before I started the draft and thought that 'The Elephant in the Brain' satisfied notability requirement 1)"The book has been the subject of two or more non-trivial published works appearing in sources that are independent of the book itself. " To make this clear, I cited both of the 'non-trivial published works' about the book in the 'Reception' section of the draft. The two works were both reviews, one in the Wall Street Journal and one in Quillette. I wanted to ask you more specifically why this does not meet requirement 1)? Is it because Quillette is an online magazine? (though apparently Quillette itself is non-trivial enough to have its own Wikipedia page)

If you could clear this up, I would really appreciate it. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alfredsph (talkcontribs) 14:56, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Alfredsph asking a fair question should be considered by no one as "wasting anyone's time" and welcome to Wikipedia. Although WP:NBOOK says two or more in general for subjects to be deemed notable with only two they would have to be very solid, reliable, and in-depth. The Wall Street Journal is definitely a very reliable source, but yes Quillette is flagged by the review tolls I use as "Generally unreliable" as listed here. I'm not aware of the site myself but the author "Samuel Hammond" is only listed as writing two reviews, so it's difficult to tell if they are promotional or biased. So although I would not discount the review it leaves more than enough doubt that if this was accepted into mainspace it could be nominated for deletion as only having one reliable source. Our job as reviewers is to accept articles that have a good chance of surviving any Wikipedia:Articles for deletion nomination. Look to see if you can find some more reviews/coverage and also I would drop the first source as the OUP one has the ISBN and makes it look like source padding. Hope that helps, KylieTastic (talk) 15:51, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
  • Hi, thanks for taking the time to answer. This clears up my confusion. The link you provided to the list of sources and their status as 'reliable', 'Generally Unreliable' etc. is particularly helpful. I've made the suggested changes and resubmitted. All the best, Alfredsph (talk) 18:42, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

  The Teamwork Barnstar
Thank you for reveiwing my artcile and giving such great feed back Quantum squid88 (talk) 19:32, 9 March 2020 (UTC)


Hi, I had my page decined when i tried to publish it due to there not being referneces. But i'm slightly confused as to what I need to reference, please could you helo me with this DanielCoen123 (talk) 11:45, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for editing

Hi Dear editor / administrator (KylieTastic)

Thanks for correcting the grammar mistakes i am thankful to you. is there a possibility to approve this page earlier ? as the lady (Ayesha Chundrigar) Draft:Ayesha Chundrigar is a notable person and she is now showing and coming in television daily since last week.

Thanks Memon KutianaWala (talk) 08:13, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Memon KutianaWala I'm not an administrator, and sorry I'm not doing much editing at the moment due to real life issues. "Articles for creation" does have a backlog so you'll just have to be patient. If you want to ask others for advice/feedback on your draft you could try asking at the Wikipedia:Teahouse. Regards KylieTastic (talk) 10:23, 17 March 2020 (UTC)


actually reading [2], and looking at the details about school and so on, this is an inappropriate posting and I think delete would have been better than decline, so I did it. I may be oversensitive about this, but I can imagine the problems it might cause. DGG ( talk ) 08:55, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi DGG, sorry I don't remember what that was about - sorry if I missed something. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 10:20, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
sorry, I forgot you were not yet an admin & couldn;t see it--bio of a young person giving too much detail. DGG ( talk ) 10:44, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
  • Hi DGG I think I vaguely recall the article, was it about a girl from an admirer - if so I thought it maybe should be deleted but it's one of those cases of trying to work out what speedy condition would match. You deleted as "BLP privacyviolation" but when the page is not negative or an attack I didn't think G10 would apply (or more that it would depend on which admin dealt with it), so what would you think it should have been tagged as? KylieTastic (talk) 11:37, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Request for submition

Hello, I have changed the Draft:Amit Bhadana (YouTuber) article. Please review the article. Mr Vikas07 (talk) 11:01, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Mr Vikas07 to be fair to all submitters I don't re-review on request, I just pick new and old submissions at random, so it may or may not be myself who reviews it next. Also I'm busy in real life dealing with pandemic related issues so I have not got much time to review/edit. We are still getting high number of submissions daily, but their is less reviewing than normal is going on so it may take a while. Regards KylieTastic (talk) 11:19, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Request for submition

Hello, I Draft:Sumit Godara Create in the article. Please review the article. Mr Vikas07 (talk) 11:04, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

  • See answer to previous question. KylieTastic (talk) 11:19, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Oh Seung-ah

Hi KylieTastic. I saw this Draft:Oh Seung-ah and i did some improvements and added reliable sources. Can you published it. I fixed mistakes and everything. It's not my draft it is someone else's draft. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:15, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

My Article

I have recently posted an article called "Federated States of Gapla" and I have noticed that you have declined it for being humorous. The article was for a micronation, which is a project to start a new nation by someone, and I feel that it should not be marked as humorous. There are articles of other micronations on Wikipedia such as the Principality of Sealand or the Republic of Molossia that have been approved. The Republic of Molossia is very humorous, they have claimed to go to war with East Germany! If there is another reason why my article was declined, feel free to message me! Thank you for the support. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Seungri400 (talkcontribs) 17:12, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Seungri400, your article User:Seungri400/sandbox is just sourced by self made sources, it's own weebly and a wiki I'm guessing you created. Unlike places like the Principality of Sealand that exist in both a physical and legal form, as well as having many independent reliable sources, yours appears to be like the many self declared. As the "presidents" own website says born 2009, I assume this is nothing more than a 11 year old claiming there bedroom is a micronation. Wikipedia is an Encyclopedia, not a place for thing individuals make up or declare are true. Articles require significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources to show notability. Regards KylieTastic (talk) 17:25, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
  • Thank you, but I wish to correct you. I am not the creator nor the president of this. I just found this online and felt like it desreved a page. Whatever then. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Seungri400 (talkcontribs) 20:02, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Request on 12:18:29, 28 March 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Binilselva

My content based on a service, which provides materials for students to reach their goals easily. And, I'm the proprietor of this service. I decided to add this in Wikipedia so that large number of students can identify this service online. And I never found any reference for this service online. So I'm unable to add a reference. So, kindly go through the content once again, and give permission. Thanks.

Binilselva (talk) 12:18, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Binilselva, Wikipedia is an Encyclopedia for subjects that are notable - it's not for promotion. Use social media for that. Regards KylieTastic (talk) 12:21, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

Huge problem about article review

After you reviewed by article Draft: Transportation In Nigeria I corrected the mistake which was reference when I went offline I didn't see it again so what is the problem kylie Tbiw (talk) 16:19, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

Okay kylieTastic I have heard I will change.But I want to ask about my article quality Tbiw (talk) 17:49, 28 March 2020 (UTC)



Moujiya is another spelling for Maujia. Same name, same place, two spellings. I wanted to create a direct link. But I am not allowed to create it. I was provided links to create a draft. I dont know how to do it. Please do this for me or teach me how to do it. Appreciate your help.

Yours truly Babbar — Preceding unsigned comment added by BabbarJatt (talkcontribs) 18:26, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

  • Thank you for your help. It seems I am not allowed to create new pages or redirects like you did. Do you know when I will be able to ? --BabbarJatt (talk) 20:21, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
  • Hi BabbarJatt yes you need to be "Autoconfirmed" see WP:AUTOCONFIRM - so you have the minimum edits, and just have to wait a couple more days and then the permission should automatically be added. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 20:39, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Request on 05:24:51, 30 March 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by नलिनी मिश्रा

नलिनी मिश्रा (talk) 05:24, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Barnstar for you

  The Reviewer Barnstar
you reviewed the article on transportation in Nigeria well Tbiw (talk) 16:28, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Spoiler Country Article


Hoping this is how it works to get clarification. In attempts to get information out about the Spoiler Country podcast I used examples from other articles on Wikipedia. Could you maybe clarify what sections or exact issues caue this article to be rejected?

reasons for rejection:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

are press releases needed?

Thank you, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rslavinsky (talkcontribs) 20:09, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Rslavinsky all new articles on Wikipedia have to show they are notable (See WP:N) which in most cases requires significant coverage in multiple independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS) to show notability. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 11:30, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Post that was nog good

hello i am Richard Jansma (RichardJansma)

and i made a post/sandbox with the tile opensea. its my first article i would like to write and i try my best. i would like to know what I can do to make my article accepted (I want it to grow on its own)

now I see that I may not have used correct references but I would like to learn how to do it correctly.

i look forward for your feedback

yours sincerely,

Richard Jansma — Preceding unsigned comment added by RichardJansma (talkcontribs) 13:26, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Richard all new articles on Wikipedia have to show they are notable (See WP:N) which in most cases requires significant coverage in multiple independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS) to show notability. User:RichardJansma/sandbox had two from so not independent, and one from generally not considered a reliable source. Note that because of previous issues with this topic area and lots of promotion, articles on blockchain and cryptocurrencies need very good sources to show clear notability. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 17:58, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Hey thanks for your reply. i would love to make my post good (its my first post) and I'm trying to make it as good as possible, I have added some sources and I will build it up. is there maybe a way you could help me out with getting familiar with he Wikipedia system/writing.... maybe outside of Wikipedia but that's up to you (just search my name on the internet) also what would you suggest for learning the systemand writing good posts... i would love to hear from you.

yours sincerely,

Richard Jansma — Preceding unsigned comment added by RichardJansma (talkcontribs) 18:40, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi RichardJansma, I'm swamped with real life issues at the moment, but other experienced editors are editing more because of the virus situation. Lots of good starting information is inthe links in the welcome message I left on your talk page, you can also ask for help at the Wikipedia:Teahouse a place specifically for new editors to get help/advice. You could also ask at the Wiki Project Wikipedia:WikiProject Cryptocurrency based on you first draft. All the best, keep safe KylieTastic (talk) 20:08, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Article waiting for review for long

Hi, I had created an article on Wikipedia Draft: Ass torture two months ago. However, since then it is in draft stage and is pending for review. I think you are one of the persons who reviews draft articles. In case you have time available, pls review my article.

Pls note that you can change the article name from "Ass torture" to "Anal torture". Thanks Dugro (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:14, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Dugro yes I do review articles, one of 411 listed "active" reviewers or more realistically one 139 of them who have actually reviewed any in the last month. Sorry but yes the backlog got very big and long, but it is coming down from up to 5 months to up to 3 - see Category:AfC pending submissions by age, we all wish we had enough reviewers to get it down to a more desirable 1-2 week max, but we are all volunteers and we don't have enough. I'm not doing much editing at the moment due to several "real life" issues, you could try asking for input at the AfC help desk or at the Wikipedia:Teahouse. I did however move the page as requested to Draft:Anal torture. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 19:12, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Resubmission of Narendra Kumar (fashion designer) page

I have corrected the page you declined, may you kindly review it again.

  • Hi Innolawrence I see you have added a number of sources so thanks. To be fair to all submitters I don't re-review on request, I just pick new and old submissions at random, so it may or may not be myself who reviews it next. Also I'm currently not doing much editing do to real life issues. Regards KylieTastic (talk) 19:13, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

talk thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Innolawrence (talkcontribs) 19:18, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Tanaza - Disapproved articles

Hello KylieTastic,

we don't really understand why the articles dedicated to Tanaza are always rejected by Wikipedia. We have tried every type of writing style, we have followed the Wikipedia guidelines, tested different levels of information. We are sure that our content is not commercial. It simply describes what Tanaza is and what it does.

I hope you can help us to understand the reasons before this decision against Tanaza.

Thank you so much.

Marco Papavero

  • Hi Marco Papavero firstly the fact you say we indicates that you are doing this on behalf of the company - so the first guideline your not following is Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. I cannot see the first version of User:Marco Papavero/sandbox that was deleted so I can only comment on the version I declined. All new articles on Wikipedia have to show they are notable (See WP:N) which in most cases requires significant coverage in multiple independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS) to show notability - in this case see Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) as linked to on the decline notice. You have no references at all let alone multiple independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS) to show notability. Wikipedia is an Encyclopedia of notable subjects, it's not for promotion or for just listing things that exist - that's what social media and websites are for. Regards KylieTastic (talk) 19:36, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

American Revolutionary Party article

Hello, Kylie Tastic I created an article about the American Revolutionary Party and it has been declined because it isn't notable. Which I understand, but what exactly is considered "notable"? As far as I know, the American Revolutionary Party (ARP) is famous on Instagram as they have around 1000 followers.

Spill Article

Hi Kylie Tastic! The Spill article is my first submission. A quick note - it is a book and not a movie. Not sure how to change that in the title. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jshipley528 (talkcontribs) 19:51, 9 April 2020 (UTC)


It is 'Sayeed Mohammed' only. Could anyone please correct it ? Riyyan Farooq (talk) 11:10, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Winston Ellis

What relaible sources would you accept? IMDB is the generally accepted source for film credits? Any advice would be appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C8:108:8F01:7D68:10ED:EF7D:885A (talk) 18:15, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi, IMDB along with Wikis (including Wikipedia) are not deamed reliable sources as they are user-generated and while popular films may be mostly accurate we have many submissions where the IMDB entry was created or changed recently. And unlike Wikipedia, no sources to check anything is correct. See WP:RSPSOURCES for the list of most used sources and which are good and bad. There are lots more, but they should not be linked to the subject, user-generated, publishers of submitted works. See Wikipedia:Reliable sources for more information. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 18:29, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Specific References I Need for Approval

Hi KylieTastic I would like to get your recommendation on what types of specific references I should enter to have this article approved Is the most important thing to have lots of ref links within the body that appear in the References section at the bottom of the article? Or is it more valuable to have more Templates cite web, cite news, cite book, cite journal references? I feel like there are enough references to this novel out there on the web; I just need to know what would count the most to getting it approved. The author, Les Standiford, has a wikipedia page, his own author page . Should I look at the references used in Standiford's Wikipedia article to see if I can find more on this novel Spill in them? Any feedback would be appreciated. I really liked this book and would love to have the article published! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jshipley528 (talkcontribs) 22:03, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Jshipley528 I see you had asked the same at WP:WPAFC/HD and had no reply - unfortunately we are all just volunteers and things get missed, especially at the moment when some frequent editors are doing less (such as myself) or nothing due to real life issues. Firstly it is more important to have a few very good references that lots, and yes it is always good to have them in the body of the article rather than just listed at the bottom so information can be verified WP:V more easily. See Help:Referencing for beginners for the key guide, note that you can use the same source in many places see the same reference used more than once section. Although using the cite templates helps people locate the sources, especially for bare urls to preserve extra information for if the url changes, but it's not essential. The most important thing here is all new articles on Wikipedia have to show they are notable subjects (See WP:N) which in most cases requires significant coverage in multiple independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS). Just because Les Standiford is notable does not mean every piece of work is also notable on it's own. The key criteria for a book is Wikipedia:Notability (books) in particular WP:BOOKCRIT. Currently your three sources are the book (not independent), the second appears to just be the book blurb (not independent), the last is IMDB (not a reliable source) and is about the film adaptation. So what you need to find is the independent sources, normally at least 3, for instance reviews and any awards won. Hope that makes sense - all the best, keep safe KylieTastic (talk) 11:39, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Request for editing, creating Amit Bhadana

Hi, I do not have much knowledge of English language. Therefore, I probably made mistakes in editing the article. Therefore, I request you to contribute in the article Draft:Amit Bhadana (youtuber). Please do contribute to Amit Bhadana (youtuber) article. I hope for you. Mr Tejal (talk) 15:32, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Mr Tejal I just made the edit to Draft:Amit Bhadana (youtuber) in passing I know nothing about the subject and if sources are available in not in English I would not be able to find them. References do not have to be in English, so if you can find and that cover the subject then add and resubit. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 15:37, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Please Accept my Edit

Hey Kylie I Have Submited a One Wikipedia Page But You Have Declined Can You Tell me Why I Have Submitted all Proofs Like a Website Facebook Twitter Instagram Please Approve This Page So Indian Small Business Grow And Get More Reach Please From India

when you approve then i will submit a every correct information of this page on every three month — Preceding unsigned comment added by James3354 (talkcontribs) 16:54, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

  • James3354 Wikipedia is not for promotion to "Get More Reach" - all new articles on Wikipedia have to show they are notable (See WP:N) which in most cases requires significant coverage in multiple independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS). KylieTastic (talk) 17:03, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

English Wikipedia page for Josef Mitterer

Dear KylieTastic, many thanks for taking the time to review my draft! The Austrian philosopher Josef Mitterer has been increasingly received outside the German speaking world for years, so I think it is time for an English Wikipedia entry. I hope I have responded appropriately to your objections with the additional references and I will continue working on it. You mention that you have a busy life and so do I. However, I would be very grateful if you could take another look at the draft. Best wishes. Bronsky 2020. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bronsky 2020 (talkcontribs) 12:59, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Bronsky 2020, well a big improvement from no references, so thanks. I've tided it up a bit. My German is minimal but I think another source that could be used to show the impact of his work is and that also gives other sources. I think your correct that they probably meet our notability standards, but if you could add a bit more from that source or others, and any news stories about him then I think it will be acceptable. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 15:08, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi and thanks again for your feedback! I've added the link you suggested and one more reference from the Austrian newspaper Die Presse. Also I've added a part on Mitterer's philosophy (as a start this is mainly a translation from the German Wikipedia site) and a list of selected talks and presentation. Best wishes Bronsky 2020--Bronsky 2020 17:33, 13 April 2020 (UTC)


Hi . I need a help. How can I put a reference on my draft ? Tanisha priyadarshini (talk) 16:00, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

I mean what ref. Should I put over? Tanisha priyadarshini (talk) 16:01, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Yahh I have seen that but still I'm so confused that what ref should be the correct one ? Tanisha priyadarshini (talk) 16:04, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Tanisha priyadarshini, to make a start find just put the reference between the ref tags after the text in the article it is a source for. i.e. <ref></ref> or <ref>Name or publication, date, author, page(s)</ref>. However if your talking about Draft:Panchanan Maheswari then Panchanan Maheshwari already exists, and if you look at that, or any other article, you can see examples of references. KylieTastic (talk) 16:08, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Minerva Academy Football and Cricket Club

Why did you reject my article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sisanchobraut (talkcontribs) 19:03, 13 April 2020 (UTC)


I've moved the tagged redirect into hyperspace and accepted the disambiguation page. A strange exercise, but it gets the encyclopedia improved slightly. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:22, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

  • Hey Robert McClenon, thanks - that sums up how I feel about this project in general a lot of the time ;) KylieTastic (talk) 19:28, 14 April 2020 (UTC)


Thank you for resolving error Maizbhandariya (talk) 18:56, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi ,can you please tell me when will this article become live thanks Maizbhandariya (talk) 20:08, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Maizbhandariya, sorry there is no timescales - like everything on Wikipedia reviewing is done by volunteers. Many submissions are reviewed in the first couple of days, however some get left as no one immediately wanted to accept or decline. Currently there 1995 submissions waiting , which is better than the 4000+ it was at a couple of months ago. All the best KylieTastic (talk)

Actually I thought that you are a new page reviewer ,so asked this question sorry and thanks again Maizbhandariya (talk) 20:28, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Maizbhandariya, I am a reviewer but to be fair to all submitters I don't re-review on request, I just pick new and old submissions at random, so it may or may not be myself who reviews it next. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 20:35, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Ok thanks Maizbhandariya (talk) 20:37, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi,I beg to your kindness for my draft to be review by another experienced editor than previous one who do not share any sort of good or bad relationship with the article,so that an unbiased decision will be made.thanks have a nice e Maizbhandariya (talk) 04:36, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Maizbhandariya, you don't appear to have asked the last reviewer for any more feedback. Other options you have is to use the "ask us a question" link on the decline notice to ask the AfC Help desk, or you can ask for the Wikipedia:Teahouse. However I see AaqibAnjum has been making changes and has marked as doing more. They are also an AfC reviewer so maybe they are working on getting it into a state for acceptance. I would suggest waiting to see what they do, and if not accepteed asking them for advice on what is needed. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 09:52, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
Thanks dear KylieTastic. I've copy edited the draft. Maizbhandariya may resubmit it to AfC for acceptance. I've done my best to bring the article close to WP:NPOV. I can see it passes WP:GNG easily and other criterias do meet. The creating editor has been troublesome at places by undoing my edits. That should not be done. Aaqib Anjum Aafī (talk) 09:58, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks have a nice day Maizbhandariya (talk) 09:56, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

I Thank you from the bottom my heart for your relentless effort for the publication of my article may Almighty bestow his mercy on you with true path Thanks once again Maizbhandariya (talk) 12:15, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi , actually I want to add the beliefs and practices of Saqib Iqbal Shami as a spiritual leader draft:Saqib Iqbal Shami with reliable independent sources but user:Aqib Anjum is reverting my edits without any reason can you please help me for this,also I have added the reliable sources to draft; khwaja Abdullah chishti as it was declined for not adding reliable sources, he is also reverting it without any reason, you are requested to kindly solve this issue, an unbiased decisions is hoped Maizbhandariya (talk) 11:34, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Please don't do disruptive editing on the Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not everything where you share the beliefs, in lists. Noting that Saqib Iqbal Shami is a Sufi and Barewli - it automatically adds up his beliefs. Moreover, you do not have enough knowledge about referencing, please see WP:REFB and that the Draft:Khwaja Abdullah Chishti is being looked after by User:Shahbazakhter99, you should and must not disrupt his editing, unless he clears the issue. You can add up resources on the talk page instead because you are right now ignorant of WP:REFB and why are you removing maintenance tags from Saqib Iqbal Shami? Aaqib Anjum Aafī (talk) 12:24, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Still Aqib Anjum is deleting the reliable sources from draft: Khwaja Abdullah chishti which can be seen as an unbiased editing as he is a believer of deobandi ideology mentioned on his user page so he wanted to edit the pages on his personal interest,a strict action is requested against this user aa early as possible thanks have a nice day ,be safe Maizbhandariya (talk) 12:28, 16 April 2020 (UTC)


Wikipedian Aaqib Anjum Aafi at one day Urdu Wikipedia workshop in Deoband

Maizbhandariya (talk) 12:30, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Maizbhandariya, did I not copy edited your article about Saqib Iqbal Shami. Why are doing personal attacks on me? The above image is from a Wikipedia Workshop that I arranged in a town known as Deoband. You are newbie and I welcome you too to learn some policies of Wikipedia. You are welcome always. But do not do this disruptive editing. - Aaqib Anjum Aafī (talk) 12:32, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Dear Kylie,there is also evidences that user: Aqib Anjum had made many article on deobandi figures which can be seen as his deep connection with the deobandi movement thanks have a great day keep safe ⭐ for you Maizbhandariya (talk) 12:38, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Are Deobandi personalities not deserving a place on Wikipedia? At least any of my article does not fail in referencing like yours. You have used a number of unreliable references on Saqib Iqbal Shami, and I would request you, please stop doing vandalism and be fear with Wikipedia policies. You seem to be a stubborn. - Aaqib Anjum Aafī (talk) 12:44, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
  • Maizbhandariya and AaqibAnjum after a very long day I have no desire to get involved however I will make some comments/observations...
  • Maizbhandariya maintenance tags should not be removed as you did here without addressing the issue (i.e. when it's clear, such as no categories that is easy to understand and fix). If a tag such as "Unreliable sources" is placed that disputes your own work you should either discuss with the editor who added the tag and/or start a discussion on the article talk page possibly using {{help}} to get other editors attention; or just leave for another non-involved editor to review. It is also fine to ask for input/opinion at a general help forum such as the Wikipedia:Teahouse or the Wikipedia:Help desk.
  • If a tag is removed, or other such edits and then reverted both editors should preferably discuss on the article talk page as per Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle (WP:BRD) and not keep reverting - beware the The three-revert rule (WP:3RR)
  • Maizbhandariya if you have an issue with another editor you should not go to Wikipedia talk:Username policy but Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (WP:ANI) or the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard
  • Maizbhandariya I am aware there are many different factions/movements/groups in Islam (like most/all religions) but I have no interest in the frictions between such groups. I have no knowledge of Deobandi. Any editor is allowed to edit in there area of interest, as long as they have no Conflict of interest (WP:COI) and the articles meet the guidelines that is not just OK but normal. Many if not most of the editors who create articles have a subject or subjects that interest them - be that roads, plants, a band, a sport, a science, ete. So if AaqibAnjum has mostly created Deobandi related articles that is fine. It is expected that such things are balanced out by other editors interested in other areas.
Collaborative editing is not an easy thing to do, especially on subjects that relate to religion & politics and other such emotive subjects. But Wikipedia is collaborative editing based on the current guidelines that where created collaboratively. The best advice is always to step back from any conflict, give it time, get other opinions and try not to escalate.
To both of you stay safe, be happy, as that's what matters most KylieTastic (talk) 18:01, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Theta Nu Psi

Greetings. And thank you for the quick review. Can you please provide me guidance in what particular Reliable sources do you need? We have our 501 from the IRS and are Incorporated from Virginia. Again thank you for any guidance you can provide.

  • Hi Ru9ture, Wikipedia uses a concept of notability as described at WP:N, which basically means articles generally require significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic. While details of a 501 are indeed independent and reliable it is not any in-depth coverage. The point is not to show subjects exist, but has the world "noticed" - if Wikipedia just required it to be proved subjects exist every company, organisation, brand, person, book, film, sports team etc would have a page. Usually 3+ independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS) with significant coverage (not just a passing mention) is required. Hope that explains things. Keep safe KylieTastic (talk) 19:55, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
  • Yes it does actually. But what if the recognition is done via social (i.e. FB, Twitter, etc.)? Again thanks for the quick response.
  • Hi Ru9ture, generally not as most stuff on social media is from unverified sources, and trivial in nature. Most is classified as "Self-published sources" see WP:RSSELF. However obviously this is not always the case, otherwise a lot of what Trump says could not be referenced without finding another reliable source re-quoting, etc. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 20:44, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
  • KylieTastic You are AWESOME!!!! LOL! Good point! Let me do some digging around and I'll look into resubmitting.


Please accept iran bar association Transaction this page persian (Behrouz asbahi sis (talk) 16:30, 15 April 2020 (UTC))

  • Hi Behrouz asbahi sis, different language Wikipedias have different policies and standards. In general as they get larger they get more guidelines, and get stricter. English Wikipedia requires significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources to show notability. So sorry but it is not acceptable as it is at the moment. However it appears the Persian language version does have a lot of references. I haven't checked them to see if there are multiple independent reliable sources, but hopefully there are, so look to use some of those, or any others you can find that talk about the subject in-depth, and add to your article - see Help:Referencing for beginners for help in adding sources. All the best, stay safe KylieTastic (talk) 17:14, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

hi but nobody dont translation this pages i try know my bar but can not . thank you Behrouz asbahi sis (talk) KylieTastic

Page under review: added rightful citations (non urgent! take care!)

I have added rightful citations to the page you declined, may you kindly review it again? Thank you so much for your work, in any case this is not urgent :)

  • Hi Federicoabefrancesco always glad to see people improving the submissions but to be fair to all submitters I don't re-review on request, I just pick new and old submissions at random, so it may or may not be myself who reviews it next. Keep safe KylieTastic (talk) 09:47, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

What is considered a 'Reliable Source'

Dear, KylieTastic You recently declined my article about the Origin of the Funderburk Name. You said that neither cites seemed liked "Reliable Sources" but please hear me out. I am new to this Wikipedia stuff, and don't know much about what is considered a reliable source. However, I know what I am taking about on that page. I decedent of the 'Von Der Burg' family. I am positive I don't need a thousand reliable sources when I am one.

                                                                                                     -Patriot History2nd
                                                                                                              Please message me back at my talk page on
                                                                                                                           User:Patriot History2nd
  • Hi Patriot History2nd for the full answer on what an RS is see Wikipedia:Reliable sources - however let me explain on the particular ones on Draft:The History of the Funderburk Name. The first states that it's distribution map is from a "global database of over 4 billion people" so fine, however the other information is marked as "User-submission" and "User-submitted" so not suitbale to Wikipedia. I'm sure they were probably submitted in good faith and could have come from valid sources, but also could be just a story that has been passed down in the family with no historical reality - basically there is no way to verify correctness (WP:V). The second appears to be someone's personal website. Now the history section may be correct as it starts "Several books have been written Of the Family Funderburk" which is good if they used sources, but Wikipedia would expect the original books to be used as references. Some of these home Genealogy projects are very well done, others take a more poetic stance - i.e. preferring interesting sounding stories, and famous relatives rather than worry about factualness. Being a "decedent of the 'Von Der Burg' family" has no merit here - you will have either got your information from reliable sources or not, if the first they should be used here. We don't need or want a "thousand reliable sources", generally 3+ good sources, or 2+ excellent sources are desired to show notability and in general all key facts should be backed by at least 1 source. Look for some more sources to add, having these more informal sources is a great way to start locating better ones. You could also seek help/advise at Wikipedia:WikiProject Genealogy. Cheers, keep safe KylieTastic (talk) 08:51, 16 April 2020 (UTC)


Dear KylieTastic, I am personally sorry for the disruptive edits that the another editor has made at your talk page concerning me. I would request you too to make him understand basic principles of Wikipedia. Regards - Aaqib Anjum Aafī (talk) 13:15, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Aaqib Anjum Aafī, these things happen now and then no worries. The only thing I would say is when a disagreement moves as it did to Wikipedia talk:Username policy it's best to step back and let other deal with it. It stops the other party feeling hounded and when a third party (in this case an admin) sees the post they can bring balance and an independent judgement to the issue. One thing I always try to do is to not make things one editor vs another (even if I really think the other party is wrong, unless mindless vandalism) - so for instance if I reject an AfC submission twice in a row and they just resubmit I wont reject as much as I may want too, but I leave for another to reject so they can see that it's not just that one persons opinion. I do appreciate the sentiment though and thank you. Keep happy, keep safe, all the best KylieTastic (talk) 18:13, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
Thanks dear KylieTastic for your humble advises. Love. - Aaqib Anjum Aafī (talk) 21:06, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Todd Burns (producer)

Can you tell me what needs to be done here?

Draft:Look (company)

Draft:Look (company) is good to go now. BaldBoris 14:10, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Bald, looks much improved - but to be fair to all submitters I don't re-review on request, I just pick new and old submissions at random, so it may or may not be myself who reviews it next. However with the backlog shrinking daily hopefully it wont be to long. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 09:49, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
    OK thanks. It wasn't a request, just a heads up. This is my first meeting with Afc. I only saw the outright crime of not allowing it in the first place, and backed whoever submitted it. I can't accept anything but a pass. BaldBoris 11:17, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
  • Hey BaldBoris - they do look like a notable company, at least with a quick look - surprised that it failed its AfD before. I just noticed your edit history - a lot of FA/GA and 205 article created, you clearly know your stuff. AfC is always looking for experienced editors to help tame the backlog, even if you only do a a few all helps. I see your interest is in cycling if so it looks like we have a few you may be interested in AfC cycling submissions. if interested ask for name to be added to the AfC Participants and enable "Yet Another AFC Helper Script:" in Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets. Cheers, keep safe KylieTastic (talk) 11:28, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Thank you for your feedback Kylie. Sorry I'll be bumbling about for a bit while I learn my way.

Jennifer T. Coen (talk) 16:36, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Request on 20:26:46, 17 April 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Jack Fangles

Jack Fangles (talk) 20:26, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

  • Jack Fangles No question? But I see Schazjmd has improved the article for you. As a place on NRHP it is notable, but it would be good to see a bit more content and sources. If you can find any to add great, and then either way re-submit and an AfC reviewer will re-check. Stay safe KylieTastic (talk) 10:14, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks KylieTastic. I am basically just trying to figure out an appropriate subject that warrants a contribution. I am trying to cut down on the possibility of spending time writing on a subject that won't get approved. I initially wanted to add to the Raymond Chandler page and create a "subheading"? for "Raymond Chandler and Los Angeles" which catalogues all of the Los Angeles locations associated with the writer and his work. This is all very daunting, though, Especially because I am working under a deadline for university. Any help, clarity, or just all around good vibes are welcomed and appreciated. Jack Fangles (talk) 19:17, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Jack Fangles writing new articles is one of the hardest things on Wikipedia, the same as for many tasks starting with nothing. I've always been baffled when I see someone trying to create new articles linked to outside education, at least without a solid mentor. Also with AfC in the past being up to a 5 month wait, really not appropriate for educational tasks IMHO. With over 6 million articles finding a good topic that isn't covered isn't easy (or at least I don't find it so). Wikipedia:Requested articles is supposed to be a place to start, but many requests are without sources or any indication of notability. WikiProjects are also a place some find ideas, but there are only a few that are active. Another place to start is look at subjects your interested in and look for any red-links for related topics, then see if you can find sources to show notability. You could ask at a more general forum such as the Wikipedia:Teahouse so that many editors will see the question and can give advice. All the best, stay safe KylieTastic (talk) 10:03, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Why did you delete my article?

Hi there.

I want to know why you deleted my Wikipedia entry when it was more or less mirrored this ACCEPTED Wikipedia article -

This article that I submitted did not break any rules that Wikipedia currently have standing. Also, you did not provide any comments on what needed to be improved on to be accepted.

Looking forward to your response,


  • Hi Michael Walliam firstly I did not delete the article, I flagged as promotional and an administrator checked, agreed and deleted the article. I can not see deleted article so I have to go from vague memories, but I don't believe it had any independent reliable sources to show notability unlike Hello (social network). If Hello (social network) was submitted to AfC now as the current rules stand it probably would not be accepted, however doing a google search it appears other sources exist. Obviously your wrong about not "break any rules" as both myself and the administrator who deleted it believed it was just it met Wikipedia:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion#G11 "Unambiguous advertising or promotion". As it was flagged for speedy deletion, there was no point in saying how it could be improved. If you believe you can find multiple independent reliable sources with significant coverage to show notability then you are free to recreate. Stay safe KylieTastic (talk) 10:15, 19 April 2020 (UTC)


Hello KylieTastic,

Good day....

I have resubmitted an article reviewed and declined by you. I believe, I have written and sourced in a better way. Kindly have a look and review the same. Best: DreamSparrow Chat 09:27, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

  • Hey DreamSparrow, good work clearly very much improved content and references. However to be fair to all submitters I don't re-review on request, I just pick new and old submissions at random, so it may or may not be myself who reviews it next. Cheers, stay safe KylieTastic (talk) 10:23, 19 April 2020 (UTC)


Please review and help me publish the article.She is one of upcoming actress in Kannada Film industry. Cinemapremi (talk) 11:15, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Cinemapremi sorry I don't have the time, and my interests are on other subjects. I just helped tidy in passing while looking at submissions. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 11:30, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Two Different Personalities considered as same person

Hi, The page that I have created Draft : Amulya has been linked to wrong person.Amulya is Kannada actress who mainly works in Kannada Film Industry. Nisha Ravikrishnan is an actress who primarily works in Kannada television industry. These two are two different actors working in Kannada Film Industry. Cinemapremi (talk) 11:14, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Thanks for your response . Respect your time and suggestions. This article was moved to Draft : Amulya as Nisha Ravikrishnan plays character with that name. Could you please help me move it with Nisha Ravikrishnan. Please help me in reviewing it.

  • Hi Cinemapremi - it has now been moved to Draft:Nisha Ravikrishnan - to be fair to all submitters I don't re-review on request, I just pick new and old submissions at random, so it may or may not be myself who reviews it next. However I would point out that it's not clear if any of the references cover the sections Biography, Career, and Works. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 11:59, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello kylie

I am having the problem with citation when ever I am citing a source a message below source is arriving with`` text web ignored|help can you please help me to resolve this issue thanks cheers Maizbhandariya (talk) 19:51, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Apologies for the presumption.

Hi again, Kylie.

Okay, so do you have a link to what would be considered as an independent, reliable source? We have Medium posts regarding the app that are currently up - would articles and citations like these be reliable?

Thanks in advance.

  • Hi Michael Walliam the main guideline is Wikipedia:Reliable sources. Unfortunately no easy answer, but most major newspapers independent websites etc - the main thing to avoid is any user-generated content (Wikis, IMDB, etc) and any that publish for money, or publish press releases - there is now a lot of websites that look like news but just repost a mix of real news from other news sites, and mix in paid content to give it credibility. Another way to think about it is any source that has actually written the content mostly themselves, such as proper independent reviews. There is a non-exhaustive list of often discussed sources at WP:RSPSOURCES - Medium is marked as "generally unreliable" as it's a blog site and thus user-generated content. Hope that helps explain things KylieTastic (talk) 08:37, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

"Requires significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources to show notability"

The first reference is a Article that discusses the person I wrote about> That article also References a book that has the same information. The second reference is a Article by a notable news site for military members. The third reference is a Article by a notable military news journalist.

How are these not relevant or valid sources? There was MULTIPLE and INDEPENDENT sources. There are 1000's of Wikipedia pages that are created with less reliable sources and less reliable information. Any other "References" would just be redundant information.

  • Hi, the first ref was a brief mention, the second was by the subject so not independent - yes many Wikipedia articles created before the current standards would not be accepted, and slowly are being found and improved or deleted. KylieTastic (talk) 20:47, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
    • I am not sure what more you want, the guy worked for DELTA FORCE. A brief mention is still a reliable source. Maybe you guys should have a Military Moderator/Admin do reviews who understand this stuff. It's not like they publish their stores often. There is now 11 References to include interviews. There is not much more you can post for someone who worked for Delta Force and USASOC for 20 years. And I've been on here for 10 + years they are not slowly being improved or deleted. And last there was significant proof he was in the band, I am not sure what you are looking for as "proof". These are more than reliable sources for a college paper, they should work for Wikipedia... (talk) 20:55, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
  • Great so you've improved the sourcing, that's what we want. Wikipedia "notability" is not about has a subject done worth while things, but have they been noted by the world. So unfortunately that means a "celebrity" who has done nothing but self promote can qualify, but many people who have done great things with their lives, helped the world, even saved mankind but no one writes about them don't. It's far from a perfect system, but having to have verifiable sources that are independent and non-trivial keeps the hundreds of people, companies, quack ideas from using Wikipedia to promote themselves each day. The guidelines and policies make Wikipedia better than most social media and blogs, but less than it could/should be if it had staff working on content like other encyclopedias. Regards, stay safe KylieTastic (talk) 21:15, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Articles for Creation: Sandbox rejected - Potential stub?

Hi Kylie, Hope you and everyone around you are doing well. My submission at Articles for Creation: Sandbox was rejected, as it lacked significant coverage, and contained only passing mentions. However, the subject is well known for his works on social media and has over 100 million views on YouTube. Can we consider it as a potential stub, which we can keep updating with time? Thanks. Bling.a.ding (talk) 07:43, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Bling.a.ding, sorry but that's not how Wikipedia works. A stub just means minimal content, but the subject has to still be deemed "notable" - in this case WP:BIO. See Wikipedia:WikiProject YouTube/Notability that has the section "AfD discussions" that shows how many YouTube related articles have been deleted - even for cases such as "Deji Olatunji" with 5 million subs, and is up for deletion discussion again for Deji (YouTuber) even with billions of views. It's sources outside of the fan-base that count. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 08:57, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Leinster Trophy contest deletion

Hi there, My article on the Leinter Trophy was based upon an article also written by me (I have the copyright). Can you advise on how I might proceed? Thanks BrianF1Man (talk) 16:29, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi BrianF1Man, even if you have the copyright then you have to have given permission to use under the licence Wikipedia uses (when you save an article it says just above the public button what that means). So if previously published Wikipedia needs to be able to verify that the copyright holder is actually realising the text - See Wikipedia:Copyrights for the whole topic and Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for how to donate. However the other issue is if you have written the text then it sounds like possible "original research" so see Wikipedia:No original research - so you would still need to provide reliable sources for it to be usable. Copyright is something Wikipedia takes very seriously due to the legal problems that could arise, so I hope you understand why the original action was taken, we have a lot of people just taking other peoples text and images without permission. All the best, keep safe KylieTastic (talk) 17:34, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Can I re-access the article to edit it appropraitely? I have references for all the data in the article but hadn't completed including the references yet. This is my first Wikipedia article that I've written and a friend told me that an edit review would take 6 months (not 1hr!!!) and I would have had plenty of time to complete all the edits and references that I wanted to include as well as expand it. Can I just have it as a draft and then resubmit for editing once it is ready for review? Thanks for the encouraging words and please excuse my naivety when it comes to writing my first attempt. BrianF1Man (talk) 18:34, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi BrianF1Man, yes the AfC process backlog did get up to a horrendous 5 months and approx 5000 submitted articles backlogged with hundreds of new ones a day - however we've been fighting it hard recently (like all editors we are just volunteers who 'choose' to help) and it's down to < 1700 and only 36 left that have been waiting 3+ months. Several of us check the new submissions for copyright violations, attack pages, spam, promotion, easy accepts so yes many articles get reviewed in the first 24 hours, but then tend to wait till they reach the other end of the queue - so hours or many months. A horrible situation, but we have way more submissions than we have volunteer experienced editors. I'm not an admin so I cannot access your deleted draft and until the text is donated it could not be restored as it still counts as a copyright violation. So you can jump the copyright issue by following the process on Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials and then ask for it to be restored, or possibly you can ask the deleting admin Jimfbleak to email a copy if you plan to significantly reword the text to avoid copyright issues. Remember writing new articles is not an easy thing to start with but if you work though the issues creating them is rewarding - oh and the Wikipedia:Teahouse is there to help new editors out. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 19:03, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello kylie

Thanks for your reply to my request ,with your blessings I have sorted out the previous editing issue but Dear Kylie I need your help again to check my new Draft: Shakir Ali Noorie whether it is meeting Wikipedia's general notability and If not than please guide me accordingly so that it will become live,also you are kindly requested to please look onto other issues if possible ,help from the blessed and experienced editor like you will be my fortune...... cheers...have a nice time... thanks again17:22, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Dear Kylie what is your personal opinion whether it is fit for submission? Maizbhandariya (talk) 18:12, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Maizbhandariya sorry I've run out of energy for Wikipedia, on top of real-life work it's making days really long, so I have no energy to review and to be fair to all submitters I don't re-review on request, I just pick new and old submissions at random. I also find biographies difficult as I have no personal interest in most people, I'm more interested in scienc0e, engineering, or the works of people. I would note that the "Spiritual lineage" has no reference, and such lineages from the Prophet onwards would need good references. You may also be able to find some editors with an interest in helping, and more knowledge than I have in Wikipedia:WikiProject Islam. Other than that I would say look for any other good reliable sources that have talked about the subject to add then once finished submit. Remember a decline is not a reject, it's just part of the review process. You could also ask for feedback from the Wikipedia:Teahouse where lots of experienced editors will see the question. ALl the best KylieTastic (talk) 19:18, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Request on 17:37:53, 21 April 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Phug846

Oxford PPE Society draft page Hiya thanks for responding to my draft so quickly! Was wondering which part of your notes I should pay most attention to, to improve it. WP:42 mentions significant coverage from reliable sources independent of the topic.

Significant coverage: covered in relevant newspapers, official Oxford University website Reliable sources: official website, nationally acknowledged newspapers, official University site Independent of the topic: I am sorry but I'm not sure what this means.

Phug846 (talk) 17:37, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Phug846 the basic criteria for an organisation can be found at WP:ORGCRIT - so yes national newspapers, independent websites, books, magazines etc are all good. The Oxford university website is somewhat, but they are obviously not totally independent. is completely non-independent while although probably independent in one sense is there to report on oxofrd uni related subjects so not independent as Wikipedia means. For "Independent of the topic" see WP:INDY - basically is the source reporting because they have links to the subject or not, i.e. local interest only. A way to think about it is if no one outside of the Oxford University linked outlets have 'noticed' then it's not yet notable enough for a worldwide encyclopedia. Hope that helps, so tired I'm struggling to think of the words tbh! Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 19:34, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Broken links fixed

Kindly do not revert my today's edits. I am only fixing broken links and you are bringing back the dead ones. Thanks.

  • No Vassiliades you have been reverting to your versions of the articles mostly from 2018 adding back many broken links, invalid categories, and other issues other editors over the years have addressed. If there are broken links fix them but don't do it based from your very old versions disregarding all other editors. KylieTastic (talk) 20:13, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
  • I was searching through my old contributions and corrected the broken links there. I was not aware that the whole page was coming back. How should I revert them, since I made more than 100 changes today?
  • Hi Vassiliades it looks like you only made 43 edits today (other than here) see Special:Contributions/Vassiliades I know it often feels like more. I only reverted the ones that looked like large reversals and/or introducing errors (but I may have missed some). To see your changes to each article look at the history (the 'hist' link on the left of your edits on Special:Contributions/Vassiliades). From looking at the edits were you just trying to remove the "en/" and fix links from ""? If you notice any others you accidentally edited more than expected you can use the "undo" next to your edit on the article history, then re-edit the article from the edit at the top-right of the article to do the fixes you actually meant to do. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 20:36, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
  • Vassiliades if you want I can easily revert all the other edits, and you can then just re-do the link corretions you meant to do. Regards KylieTastic (talk) 20:46, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
  • Thanks. That will be helpful. I just made a change on a page now though the edit. Hope it works ok now.
  • Hey Vassiliades OK I've revert ed them all - and yes that last edit this was good and what I believe you meant all along. These things happen, all good for you to go ahead and fix the rest. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 20:58, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
  • Thanks a lot and sorry for the trouble caused. Best Regards.
  • Hey Vassiliades no trouble at all, we all make mistakes. You meant to fix broken links and improve articles, and I'm happy to help anyone with such good intentions. Wikipedia is built on millions of those good intentions that together make what Wikipedia is. All the best, stay safe KylieTastic (talk) 21:08, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Vandalism on Meles Zenawi, Hailemariam Desalegn and Abiy Ahmed

Hi KylieTastic, If you're patrolled can you protect the page of three articles (Meles Zenawi, Hailemariam Desalegn and Abiy Ahmed), which heavily abused by an IP editor by deliberately changing office position chronology. If you doesn't so, can you ask other administrator for attention of these articles? The Supermind (talk) 11:35, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi The Supermind if pages are under persistent vandalism then you can request self-protection at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection if just a single IP editor then you should warn them see Wikipedia:Vandalism and WP:WARNVAND. However be sure it is vandalism and not just difference of opinion/misunderstanding. With such jobs some people count individuals, others count terms - so maybe start by asking why they changed them? Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 11:46, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

looking to improve

Hi Kylie, I am trying to improve an article written on Bruce Pawsey. I read the inital guidance and have since resubmitted but Im wondering if there is anything specific that needs to be improved. thanks NedNedSuskin (talk) 12:36, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi NedSuskin just a quick note as I'm at work but you said you have resubmitted but User:NedSuskin/sandbox has not yet been resubmitted, so if you had meant to please note you have to click "Publish Changes" (bottom left) after "Resubmit". Although the notability guidelines are long and nuanced the general gist is that all new articles on Wikipedia have to show they are notable (See WP:N) which in most cases requires significant coverage in multiple independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS). Also that all major claims made should have a reference - see Help:Referencing for beginners for help on that. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 08:47, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

how to create wikipedia page?

how to create wikipedia page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tejastrivoli (talkcontribs) 12:24, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

  • You have created an article and it's waiting for review - but so is your suspected sock-puppet case. KylieTastic (talk) 17:32, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

About the article palath


The article i've drafted is about a small village in calicut city in kerala not about a person or a product to have more citations to follow.There are so many articles published in wikipedia without proper sources regard to the same content mentioned above.Citations are only available in native malayalalm language that is not much useful for english version of wikipedia.Requesting you to look in to this article and guide us to expand it with available sources.--Outlander07 Outlander07 (talk) 19:47, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Outlander07, yes other poorly sourced article do exist but generally they were created many years ago before the current standards for article existed. The Other stuff exists argument is more likely to get the existing articles either improved or deleted. The current procedures and guidelines are there to try to make sure the encyclopedia improves in quality. However, the good news is your wrong about non English sources - they are acceptable, especially for notability and key facts. Also please check the wiki-links are what was intended as it currently states "Palath is a small village in " then links to Chelannur which says it "is a village". A village within a village? Cheers, keep safe KylieTastic (talk) 08:28, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Krista Bradford entry

Thanks for the heads up. --Mark — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leewilliams23 (talkcontribs) 20:40, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Inferno the Fire Breather

You were absolutely tight abut those sources, big guy - lnferno first appeared in ZIP #10, not STEEL STERLING.Glammazon (talk) 03:17, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Invitation message

Greetings! Please excuse this intrusion on your talk page, and allow me to invite you to participate in the newly-formed Wikipedia Contribution Team (WP:CONTRIB for short)! The goal of the team is to attract more and better contributions to the English Wikipedia, as well as to help support the fundraising team in our financial and editing contribution goals. We have lots of stuff to work on, from minor and major page building, to WikiProject outreach, article improvement, donor relations, and more—in fact, part of our mission is to empower team members to make their own projects to support our mission. Some of our projects only take a few minutes to work on, while others can be large, multi-person tasks—whatever your interest level, we're glad to have you.

If this sounds interesting, please visit WP:CONTRIB and sign onto the team. Even if there does not appear to be anything that really speaks out as being work you'd like to do, I'd encourage you to join and follow the project anyway, as the type of work we'll be doing will certainly evolve and change over time. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me, or ask on the team talk page. Regards, Tbiw (talk) 20:34, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Hendrix MfD

Was there a reason you edited my MfD comments here[3]or was it just an accident? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Sulfurboy (talk) 21:06, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

  • Hey Sulfurboy, no that was not on purpose just the edit conflict checking failed again, or I'm so tired I just fooked up :/ KylieTastic (talk) 21:50, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
    No worries, I figured as much. Was just making sure. Sulfurboy (talk) 00:07, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Need your help !

Dear , actually I have made a draft on children's story . So, I just need your help to check my Draft:THE SAINT AND THE MOUSE ! whether it is meeting Wikipedia's general notability and if not please guide me accordingly so that it will become live , also you are kindly requested to please look onto other issues if possible. Tanisha priyadarshini (talk) 15:49, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Tanisha priyadarshini to be fair to all submitters I don't re-review on request, I just pick new and old submissions at random, so it may or may not be myself who reviews it when you submit it - it is not yet submitted. However I would say its unclear what the reference is I can find any mention of a book "Become mouse again". Also one reference is never enough for WP:GNG and see Wikipedia:Notability (books) for book notability guidlines. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 15:57, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Ok but I just wanna know how /what changes should I do for getting it fit for submittion? Tanisha priyadarshini (talk) 16:05, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Actually its not a book , it was picked from a part of a book , but the book is not about it . So, what should I do now ? Tanisha priyadarshini (talk) 16:17, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

  • Tanisha priyadarshini so it's about just a part of a book, I'm assumeing the book in the refernce. You may find the part of the book interesting, but it's unlikley it is notable for an Encyclopedic article - unless it has been written about in multiple independent reliable sources. KylieTastic (talk) 16:22, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Ohhh..... OK , I got it . Thanks for your help. With lots of love 💞Tanisha priyadarshini (talk) 16:28, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Please Help Me...For...Biography and Awards of Ramin Sharifian

Hi please help me. I want to register my biography on Wikipedia, but I don't know. I could only write like this, but I know that's not enough. I also want this biography to be displayed correctly as an artist when I do a Google search for "Ramin Sharifian". Like biography: Selena Gomez, Ramin Djavadi and ... But I don't know. Please help me. And if you can, please please make my biography.

Thank you

this is my bio link: Draft:Ramin_Sharifian

  • Sharifianramin Wikipedia is for articles about notable subjects, it is not like social media - not a place for anyone to put up a biography. KylieTastic (talk) 18:15, 25 April 2020 (UTC)


THANK YOU but one of my references got error after this change. please check it :) I'll try to be better on wiki. thanksRa_Ka 18:22, 25 April 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by راضیه کاشی (talkcontribs)


I want to tell you thank you. When you declined the publishing you helped me so much to learn. I am new to editing on this level and I really appreciate your support and guidance. I hope I did better on the next submission — Preceding unsigned comment added by NQCethos (talkcontribs) 21:52, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Sheikh Jalal ud-Din page


Can you tell me what I need to do to have this web page posted on Wikipedia? I believe that this is a figure that requires a wiki page for the purpose of communication with the multitude of international actors that he interacts with - allowing them to know what he is doing and who he has met with without having to check references. Please tell me what I can do to meet requirements, thank youTomnewman72 (talkcontribs) 12:42, 26 April 2020‎ (UTC)

  • Hi Tomnewman72 Wikipedia is for articles for subjects already deemed notable not for "the purpose of communication with the multitude of international actors") all new articles on Wikipedia have to show they are notable (See WP:N) which in most cases requires significant coverage in multiple independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS). Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 11:52, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

the progression and welfare of human rights is a rather notable subject matter but I understand and I retire thank you - cheers — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tomnewman72 (talkcontribs) 12:12, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Tomnewman72, I agree "the progression and welfare of human rights" is a notable subject, and maybe your subjects' work will help progress it and their work then spoken/written about and then I'm sure someone will write an article about them. However unfortunately not all notable works are spoken/written about and for those articles wont exist, but it does not diminish the value of the notable things they do. All the best, keep safe KylieTastic (talk) 17:12, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

corrected: <3 — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 07:30, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

includeonly tag for template code

Is there any reason why you want to suppress template output with <includeonly>...</includeonly> on the actual template page like you just added at {{letter other reps}}? Is there a guideline on this somewhere? VanIsaacWScont 19:42, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Vanisaac sorry I guess I should have added a little more to the edit summary, but it seamed like a run-of-the-mill template edit. It depends on the template, but if the template does not render in any useful way on the template page it serves no purpose as the "Template documentation" section shows the correct render. Also it was being listed as an image usage problem, and I've seen inexperienced try to 'fix' the errors not understanding templates, so it's just neater overall. Cheers, stay safe KylieTastic (talk) 19:49, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
  • As a person who is involved with a fair number of templates, I'd love the edit summary for maintenance like this to show me the error category it's showing up in. But thanks for doing what you do. VanIsaacWScont 21:50, 26 April 2020 (UTC)


Dear kyle,

I am working on the article for this person and I got as a answer that says: Apart from the first source the rest appear to just be passing mentions - Requires significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources to show notability KylieTastic (talk) 15:34, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

I will re-do the article, but i would like to ask if refferences in portuguese will be taken into account. As she was Presidential Staff for having more than 10 citations on Presidency of official website, it is a neutral important source. that website has millions of access montly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Verbetes criação (talkcontribs) 21:41, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Verbetes criação yes although English online sources are good to have and easiest to verify, both other languages and offline (books, newspapers etc) are acceptable sources. For a Brazilian like your subject it would be reasonable to expect many good sources to exist in Portuguese only. Hope that helps, keep safe KylieTastic (talk) 21:51, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

Copperweld - there is no ambiguity

Kyle, Copperweld is the registered word mark of Copperweld Bimetallics LLC with the United States Patent and Trademark Office. There is no ambiguity. And, there is no Fushi Copperweld. Wiki has accidentally helped promote the existence of a company that dissolved inn 2012. Please help me remove the Copperweld wiki page, or redirect it to the Copperweld Bimetallics page. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PowerGridManager (talkcontribs) 21:48, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

  • Wikipedia is an Encyclopedia it's for information not promotion, your companies registered word is of no interest. Note that no edit is trusted just on personal declaration, reliable sources are required, and people with a clear COI are definitely not trusted. The fact the "Fushi Copperweld" no longer exists and according to you "dissolved inn 2012" is also not an issue, should we remove all historical information? Information can and should be updated with reliable sources, but Wikipedia is not for a company to promote it's own brand. KylieTastic (talk) 18:06, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Ho to improve the edit you have declined for publication

Dear Kylie Tastic,

My draft on the sculptor Mamikon Yengibarian has been declined because of the inefficient references. I would need help and guidance here: there are many publications on him, but most of them are in paper based journals. Or some are only in Hungarian. He is certainly notable for his public works and I mentioned those in the draft. If his own website cannot be there, as well as the gallery websites, then it is difficult to make any reference. How shall I go about that? I have also to mention that I did encounter articles on painters with less references, yet they have been admited for pubications, even with just 4 sentences!

Many thanks for your guidance in advance! Sona--Grigsanch (talk) 15:57, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Grigsanch, firstly yes other poorly sourced article do exist but generally they were created many years ago before the current standards for article existed. The Other stuff exists argument is more likely to get the existing articles either improved or deleted. The current procedures and guidelines are there to try to make sure the encyclopedia improves in quality. However although online sources are preferred for verifiability "paper based journals" are still valid - see paper based journals. As for Draft:Mamikon Yengibarian the first source pinterest would not be a reliable source (see WP:RS) as it's just posts from other sources that may or may not be reliable source; the second AP is reliable but just a passing mention; the third is just a catalogue with nothing in depth. Wikipedia "notability" (See WP:N) is not to show a subject exists but "the world" has noted then subject and written etc about it. In general all new articles on Wikipedia have to show they are notable (See WP:N) which in most cases requires significant coverage in multiple independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS) - see WP:ARTIST for what we look for in an artist, but an artist could also pass just as a notable person WP:BIO or a generally notable subject WP:GNG. Hope that explains things, but if as you say "there are many publications on him" please do include them. Cheers, stay safe KylieTastic (talk) 18:55, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you

KylieTastic, Thank you for your feedback on the article that I am putting together about the 34th Army Band. I've done quite a bit of research on the organization, but am still clumsy at understanding how to use Wikipedia--I will put something together with more substance and independent sources, then I will resubmit. Keep up the good work! William Scheidecker — Preceding unsigned comment added by WilliamScheidecker (talkcontribs) 19:00, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi WilliamScheidecker, writing new articles is not an easy thing so well done for giving it a go. Basically Wikipedia uses a concept of "notability" (See WP:N) to determine which subjects should have an article. For yours it's difficult to judge in general as some military bands are very notable and other not so much. As I said on the article in general it requires significant coverage in multiple independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS). See what sources you can find and add them - and although the dream is people submit perfectly formatted articles they key requirement is basic good sources to show notability, along with other such requirements as not being promotional or copyrighted etc. See what you can find, good luck and keep safe KylieTastic (talk) 19:09, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Strictly Bvnkers Vol. 1

Ill do the research sir.

Cleveland Steamers Slo-Pitch Team

Curious if you could provide some feedback, I am attempting to create my first contribution for Wikipedia. It is based around our recreational slo-pitch team so there would not be a lot of information as it relates to verifiable sources as it relates to written articles, blogs etc. What steps could I take to help improve my article to meet the criteria of Wikipedia? Any feedback is appreciated.

Jeff Nordie14 (talk) 18:39, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Nordie14 if by "written articles" you mean offline sources, then if reliable (WP:RS) they are still acceptable. If obviously easier to verify with online sources, but some subjects have lots of books and/or newspaper articles with no online version but are still valid. Blogs however generally are not considered reliable sources unless it's one of the rare cases of a well known and respected expert that chooses to write in blogs. In general any "user generated" content is not a reliable source, so blogs, wikis, social media, IMDB. I don't really know what a slow pitch team is, but since its part of the "Edmonton Rec League" and that does not have an article I would doubt it notable (See WP:N) - If its just a local team it well may be notable and important to the locals but not enough to the world to justify a Wikipedia Encyclopedic article. Basically all new articles on Wikipedia have to show they are "notable" (See WP:N) which in most cases requires significant coverage in multiple independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS). hope that helps, keep safe KylieTastic (talk) 18:55, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Added few more links for notability

Hi Kylie, One of my articles was declined because it did not have significant coverage. I have added a few more external links, for example, the subject was featured on a show which airs on an app called 'Voot'. The subject also has been invited to many relevant events. The article is in my sandbox, and I have re-submitted it for approval. Best Bling.a.ding (talk) 08:48, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Bling.a.ding good to hear that you have been improving your article. Note that to be fair to all submitters I don't re-review on request, I just pick new and old submissions at random, so it may or may not be myself who reviews it next. Cheers, keep safe KylieTastic (talk) 12:37, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your help

Hi KylieT,

Just wanted to show appreciation for your help in completing the new page for the Soundabout UK charity. They are about to featured in major national media so I thought it was time to try and add detail to their profile for any interested parties. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Molanstonewell (talkcontribs) 13:00, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Molanstonewell happy to help tidy things up, it makes it easier to accept ones they are happy it has the reliable sources to show notability and to verify information. I'm not sure it is has enough in-depth coverage to be accepted (I didn't read all the sources) but if it's featured in major national media soon you'll then be able to add those as sources. All the best, keep safe KylieTastic (talk) 13:38, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

The charity was featured in an exclusive 4 minute feature on main, national, BBC TV News at 18:00 & 22:00 and on the BBC News website the following day. There are now 35 citations added including BBC TV News, BBC online, Radio 4, The Mirror, Birmingham Mail, Global Radio, Classic FM, Smooth FM and various individual people & smaller organisations. The fact that the BBC thought the charity's work was worth of a longer form news feature in main national news ought to be enough to show that this charity is worthy of a Wiki entry? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Molanstonewell (talkcontribs) 17:14, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Molanstonewell, sounds good - and hopefully it's enough (I haven't checked) as it's good to get such subjects on (I'd rather a charity than another damn social media "influencer"). I've got less time for any serious Wiki stuff at the mo with real life stuff, just fit in the odd answer, quick edit while a test run etc. I see it's submitted so just the waiting game, the backlog has been rising again as were suddenly getting 100+ more than normal a day. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 08:43, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Panashe Mrewa

I want to know how can i publish that article you keep deleting. Can i get your email address? Arifiqbalpakistan (talkcontribs) 17:24, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Arifiqbalpakistan I assume your talking about Draft:Panashe Mrewa (or Draft:Le hommie,) - they have not been deleted just declined, nor have they been deleted in the past. All new articles on Wikipedia have to show they are notable (See WP:N) which in most cases requires significant coverage in multiple independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS) - so far you have only shown the subject exists, not that they are "notable" - see WP:MUSICBIO for more information on notability for music subjects. Wikipedia is a collaborative project so no editors do not generally share email addresses to discus in private. Ragards KylieTastic (talk) 16:36, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

New article Hyperreal

Hi, I've just created a draft for a new article, which I wondered whether you are were able to review and approve if it was felt to meet minimum standard to get it 'off the ground'. If so, I've also noticed I have one too many 'r's in the article title which I somehow missed, so if/when moving can that be fixed?! I've tried to source refs from the larger media orgs (Guardian, BBC, Telegraph) but struggled so far - typical I think of one of those websites that was particularly popular around mid-late 1990s and so online refs from those media orgs are hard to source online. Hoping releasing it to wikipedia will invite others to develop it, however. Certainly, the site still exists and is to this day held in high regard, is regularly referenced/talked about in the rave/dance music culture and instrumental in the early internet/web. Thanks for your time Altinternet (talk) 18:41, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Altinternet, I've moved to removing the extra r. I can't say I've heard of it before, but sad to say I was on the internet in the 1990s. Note that references don't have to be online, just preferred, but for some subjects they just don't exist so offline references are fine if you can find them. However to be fair to all submitters I don't re-review on request, I just pick new and old submissions at random, so it may or may not be myself who reviews it. All the best, keep safe KylieTastic (talk) 20:34, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Thanks KylieTastic, appreciate your input. Best Altinternet (talk) 20:39, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

my article

why do you think my article is a joke? how can i get it to post? i under stand if you dont respond within a few days but im new here and i joined solely to make this article that describes a new word. can you help me because i was really exited and after days of thinking and days of writing just to be declined is a little frustrating. BringTheFlavor (talk) 18:51, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi BringTheFlavor firstly let me say I do appreciate the thought behind Draft:Autobibliography but it's not a "serious" encyclopedic article. Articles generally require significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources to show notability. So an article which is just a thought experiment with no independent reliable sources is not going to be acceptable. No reviewer would accept an unsourced article, and if any did it would it would be flagged for deletion soon after being accepted to main space. Regards KylieTastic (talk) 21:38, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

yeah but it is self sourced and it is entirely new, is there any way that i could get it up?BringTheFlavor (talk) 18:40, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Mamikon Yengibarian

Kylie, thank you very much. Would Hungarian sources count? My best, Sona--Grigsanch (talk) 19:13, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Grigsanch yes Hungarian sources, or any language sources are fine, English is always preferred but any language is an acceptable source. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 22:38, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

i Have a quastion

Does wikidata define as a good reference to writ a wiki from In other words if i do write a page using wikidata as a reference will it be counted as valid — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:08, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi no Wikidata is not a reliable source as it's user generated content - so as has happened people just add wikidata then use there own edits as references. However if the wikidata has a source listed you can use that. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 08:57, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Draft paramveer saini

Please sir its my request to publish this article . I have cite my draft properly. It is ready for publish . Please sir make it article . Please approve. Please Thanking you for esiting my draft. Aroundwoods (talk) 02:46, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

  • To be fair to all submitters I don't review on request, I just pick new and old submissions at random, so it may or may not be myself who reviews it next. KylieTastic (talk) 08:59, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

What is wrong with my article?

How many sources are enough for it to get by? It has now two reliable independent sources. I am new here so I would appreciate careful explanation about why my article was not good enough. I am talking about Japanese Story (anime) article. Hideaki Anno (talkcontribs) 09:34, 3 May 2020‎ (UTC)

  • Hideaki Anno all new articles on Wikipedia have to show they are notable (See WP:N) which in most cases requires significant coverage in multiple independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS) and IMDB is not a reliable source. Most youtube channels are not notable even with millions of subscribers. regards KylieTastic (talk) 09:06, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Ali Jalali

Hi, Is it possible to check this draft & tell us the result? Cause we haven't enough time in our hand. I'll be thankful if check it sooner.Ra_Ka 11:16, 3 May 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by راضیه کاشی (talkcontribs)

  • Hi sorry but to be fair to all submitters I don't review on request, I just pick new and old submissions at random, so it may or may not be myself who reviews it next. KylieTastic (talk) 11:49, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

theogenese changes

hi there, the changes were not a mistake, there was so much erroneous information in that last wiki that i took the time to fix things. I see that all that work is gone now? I deleted the discographies specifically because they are stated in the body of the pieces and it will add clarity. Also, the discographies are not central to Jaar's body of work, if you can see in the biography. Please let me know if it will be reverted back to the version I posted or not. Sorry for the inconvenience.

  • Hi Theogenese you removed a lot of content not just the Discography (9,895 characters in total) - you also removed over half the references, you added inline External links to youtube videos and removed the image. I suggest you discuss your proposed changes (these ) on the article talk page, and at least explain your reasons for the removals if you do choose to remove again. Don;t put edit summaries like "added all links for various organizations and references" when you are actually removing both content and references. KylieTastic (talk) 12:14, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

how can I remove content that is erroneous and clean up the page so that the most important things are visible? should I never link to outside sites? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theogenese (talkcontribs) 12:29, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Theogenese firstly it's not clear what you thought was erroneous as your edit summaries and actions did not match. You removed sources including the NY Times leaving sections unsourced, including the first two sections of the biography. References should be added to external sites using <ref></ref> tag see Help:Referencing for beginners, but no should should not just link to things like YouTube videos in the text such as you did like 'Cenizas' - however to be fair some already existed in the article so I understand the confusion. Removing sections like the discography may be valid but should be done clearly stating why in the edit summary - not under a false one that said "clarity + more names of the artists on the label, etc.)". Actions like removing sources and the image should be explained. Also you changed "composer and recording artist" that seams to fit to "composer and researcher" with no source. You changed "Chilean-American" to Chilean which is not what source like this say and as he was born in New York City seams unlikely. KylieTastic (talk) 12:59, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Could we at least keep the changes that I added, if you don't want to delete anything? comment added by Theogenese —Preceding undated comment added 12:51, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

  • If you want to add information that you have reliable sources for yes please do; if these is content you think is wrong and is not sourced then you can remove it; you can clean up the text to make more readable. However please do smaller edits to say a section at a time, with an edit summary that matches the actual edit. lastly as for "clean up the page so that the most important things are visible" that depends on what you think is important, please remember this is an Encyclopedia now a tool to just promote a subjects latest projects. Cheers KylieTastic (talk)

understood, thank you for taking the time. comment added by Theogenese —Preceding undated comment added 13:09, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

––– Hello again, sorry to bother. Just one last little question. I found that the picture for the wiki site for Nicolas Jaar is from 2011. I found a new picture from 2017. Where do I go to change the main image ? If its not possible its fine, just thought it would be good to have an updated pic !.....comment added by Theogenese —Preceding undated comment added 14:53, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Theogenese depends what you mean found... images must be uploaded WP:UPIMAGE but only if copyright/licence allows you can't just take any image from a website. If you found already uploaded (i.e. search "file:Nicolas Jaar") then yes those images can be used. The main image in the infobox is currently File:Nicolas Jaar live at Rex Club Paris.jpg you can see the file added to the infobox as "| image = Nicolas Jaar live at Rex Club Paris.jpg" and the caption is set on the next line "| caption = Nicolas Jaar live at Rex Club in Paris". Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 15:42, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

This burger is for you!

  Thank you for your hard work! 1mpossible c (talk) 18:54, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Request on 22:10:40, 3 May 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by User0614

I don't think my article should be declined because the events I listed are totally true. The events I listed will happen. And I'm pretty sure that Reuters and Global News are trustworthy sources of information.

User0614 (talk) 22:10, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi User0614, last year everyone thought for certain lots of things would happen this year - you would have been hard to find anyone saying that the Olympics would not happen, but here we are. We all hope things get back to normal, but for now it's hope and expectation not fact. Cheers, keep safe KylieTastic (talk) 08:15, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Request on 23:00:39, 3 May 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Info-Electronics Systems

Hi you recently reviewed the Dr. Harinder Pal Singh Ahluwalia (May 1) page request and did not accept the page for the reason below.

"This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources."

I am with Info-Electronics Systems (IES) and I have forwarded the message to Dr. Ahluwalia and he understands the issue. I apologize for not citing properly. Can you please tell me what text in the profile is required to be cited and what is the format of the citation i.e does the citation have to be a link to a place on the internet?

Thank you,


Info-Electronics Systems (talk) 23:00, 3 May 2020 (UTC)


I recently made an edit to the article on Heph B as I wanted the draft header to be Heph B and not Peter Odunade. pls can you assist in making the change because it didn't reflect after i publish the changes. Pending the final Approval for his wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Melody23events (talkcontribs) 15:27, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Article Rejected: BNMS

Hi, I hope you are well. My article on BNMS was recently rejected. I have made changes to the article and would thankful for your valuable input. Thank You Earthianyogi (talk) 11:02, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Earthianyogi glad to see you've improved your article, however to be fair to all submitters I don't re-review on request, I just pick new and old submissions at random, so it may or may not be myself who reviews it next. All the best, keep safe KylieTastic (talk) 12:24, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Michael Stanley revision

Greetings. I hope you are well in these awful times. You asked for better references for my draft article. I have supplied them now. Thank you,

Stanley TrollipStantrollip (talk) 15:31, 5 May 2020 (UTC)Stantrollip

  • Hi Stantrollip, thanks for taking the time and effort to improve your article - i did some basic tidy up and moved to Draft:Michael Stanley - unfortunately the first few sections still remain unsourced, or unclear if any of the sources are relevant. Cheers, keep safe KylieTastic (talk) 12:28, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Phyllis E. Zimmerman

Hi KylieTastic, thanks for editing my article. I have two questions:

1) what are the three quote marks for at the beginning: Phyllis E. Zimmerman?

2) I can see your comments but I am unable to edit the article. Have you already made the changes or do I need to make them? If I need to make them, how do I do that?

Thanks! As you can probably tell, this is my first article. I have a lot to learn and I appreciate your help.

T. E. Meeks (talk) 18:32, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi T. E. Meeks I have added a welcome message to your user talk page with some helpful links - see the Cheatsheet one for think like three single quotes for bold markup, 2 for italic, or 5 for both. I'm not sure what you mean by you can't edit the article, if you explain what your trying and what's not happening I can try to help, but you should be able to edit this as well as almost all articles the same as when you created it wit the "Edit" tab, make changes and save ("Publish changes"). Yes I was making the changes, when you look at the "history" of an article you can select the "prev" link next to an edit to see what was changed. However I notice the article has been accepted so, so congrats on your first article :) - Also note the Wikipedia:Teahouse link on your talk page to get answers to any new editor issues. Yes it's a lot to learn, but you only have to learn a little to start helping, many years on I'm still learning! All the best, keep safe KylieTastic (talk) 18:49, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Chandler Taslitz

Hello, you rejected my submission and made a comment that IMDb is not a reliable source. I used multiple other sources as well. If I remove the content cited using IMDb will the submission be accepted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jareds19 (talkcontribs) 19:25, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Jareds19 no, use of non reliable sources should never be a negative, it's just a note as many thing IMDB is reliable, but its just user generated so often used for promotion. Other sources such as Instagram and YouTube are also generally not reliable sources, or not independent. Notability is about showing a subject has been "noticed" by the "world" not that the subject exists. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 19:35, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

The YouTube videos I used are from interviews with the subject. They are third party YouTube channels hosting the interviews. So the information is factual information about the subjects life, coming straight from the the subject themselves. To me that seems as reliable as information can get. Given that the interviews are on independent channels, I would say that is showing the subject has been noticed by the world. Please correct me if I am wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jareds19 (talkcontribs) 20:08, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Jareds19 although there is no "official" guideline for interviews see Wikipedia:Interviews. The "LAnded Late Night With Haley Ringo" one is a minor non-notable youtube channel, and although the other one is a larger channel it would not appear to be journalistic in nature. Interviews can be good sources for things that the subject has said, but in many cases they are promotional and as for these types the interviewer is unlikely to challenge anything that is claimed. For many outlets interviews are two way promotion, it helps the exposure of interviewer and interviewee. So although some interviews by respected journalistic channels should be note worthy, most do not help for Wikipedia notability. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 11:52, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

  The Editor's Barnstar
Wow, u have made a lot of edits! Coool! Oneillge2029 (talk) 18:04, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Biography publishing

Hello, pls I wanted to ask how soon would the article and bio about the artist Heph B be made available publicly with it it still been in the draft. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Melody23events (talkcontribs) 21:46, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Melody23events unfortunately the AfC review process has a imbalance of reviewers to submitters. This year over 300 a day are being submitted, probably much more as deleted ones are not counted in the stats I can see. There are currently 1440 in the backlog. Ideally Wikipedia would have enough volunteer reviewers to keep the wait down to a few days, but the back log has been up to 5+ months, but luckily only 11 have been waiting more than 2 months. I have left a comment with a couple of notes on the article. You could also ask at the Wikipedia:Teahouse for feedback, there you have a chance of lots of experienced editors seeing your questions. All the best, keep safe KylieTastic (talk) 09:21, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Conversations about Draft:Amit Bhadana (yutuber)

Many administrators and reviewers felt bad about me. I apologize for this. My way of talking was wrong. I'm sorry But I want to put Draft:Amit Bhadana (yutuber) on Wikipedia.And my reference is also correct. Many news articles are available in the name of Amit Bhadana. Nevertheless, this article is removed from Wikipedia. That is why I made allegations that I am sad about this. I truly apologize. I just mean that you help this article to live up to Wikipedia. Sorry Mr. Bikaneri (talk) 02:44, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Mr. Bikaneri, we all get frustrated but online it;s always better to walk away for a bit and come back later. As the article has the "speed delete" tag on it now, it's up to an admin to review and decide, and I am not an administrator. You can still improve the article to help avoid deletion and get it accepted - you need to looks for reliable sources that talk about him in depth. Unfortunately a google news search for him shows mostly IWMBuzz that probably wont help. I dis find this from that could help. All the best, keep safe KylieTastic (talk) 09:33, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

@KylieTastic: I do not know much context. This is why I make a mistake. If you improve the article, I will appreciate you and be grateful to you. help please. Mr. Bikaneri (talk) 09:41, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Mr. Bikaneri, sorry but I have too many other articles to work on about subjects I am interested in, and social media personalities is not an area that interests me. Regards KylieTastic (talk) 09:51, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Article named Shaho Andalibi

Hey @KylieTastic, thank you for your revision. Can you please tell me where I can find the deleted article and its source code again? I have some reliable sources which I can add - and which I didn't do before because they are in a foreign language. Verethragna90 13:21, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

My page

Hi Kylie. You originally rejected my submission. I'm being harassed on Twitter now because of it ( So please delete the listing completely (or approve). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jsshafa (talkcontribs) 04:09, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Jsshafa, ah the joys of the internet... and that's why I'm not on any social media. Odd that they found it as Drafts should not be indexed by google. I have requested the delete, which should be actioned by an admin soon. All the best, stay safe KylieTastic (talk) 09:19, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Uyghur American Association

Hello- I have recently made a request for assistance on the Uyghur American Association draft page. [4] I would also like to proactively ask you if you had any advice for bringing the article up to Wikipedia standards (or determining that the organization is not notable). Thanks for any advice. Geographyinitiative (talk) 10:55, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Geographyinitiative the fundamental key is to show notability in this case Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). With 64 sources that's not a trivial task. I do have a tool that highlights known unreliable sources, and you have none apart from number 12 that warns it sometimes can be - however that also appears to be a dead link. Obviously it good to have sources that validate the statements but for instance you don't need 6 just to verify "Ilshat Hassan Kokbore" was a president, simple facts just need 1 good reference. Also to make the notability check easier for the reviewer you could add a comment to say which are the best notability sources with in-depth coverage. Note I haven't read the complete article or the sources as to be fair to all submitters I don't re-review on request, I just pick new and old submissions at random, so it may or may not be myself who reviews it next. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 12:11, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Hamad Arbabi draft

Hi there, I saw your comment on the page I was creating for an athlete in my country. It is my first article, and I am unsure what the exact issue of the reference section. I added all the news articles that are available online (again they are in Arabic) that relate to the player and the tournaments mentioned in the article. As well as, the YouTube link is from both Qatar and Kuwait associations (respectively) covering the tournaments the player participated in. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arbabi4 (talkcontribs) 12:42, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Arbabi4 when I reviewed it you didn't have many references, I see then you added some and although English references are preferred references being in Arabic are perfectly acceptable. When Theroadislong the reviewed they declined because you didn't have enough "inline citations" i.e. they were all at the bottom (See WP:MINREF). Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 13:20, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

are inline references the ones that are styled like this?: [1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arbabi4 (talkcontribs) 13:23, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Arbabi4 that's right, and I see Draft:Hamad Arbabi already has 5 of them - so yes your definitely doing the correct thing. It then makes it easy for a reader to know which source to look at. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 13:30, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you so much! If there's anything that I need to change please do inform me (if you want to and can), otherwise thank you for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arbabi4 (talkcontribs) 13:32, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Lakhahi Raj

I want to add this page please help. I Want to share about Lakhahi state with the world as it was a prosperous state in medieval era in India. On Google there is not much information about this. There is a royal website made by Lakhahi royals but that is of blogspot. Lakhahi was ruled by rathore royals of jodhpur and it's is among few dynasties of India which came to terain belt to established the kingdom and good life there Preetikasingh (talk) 13:31, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Concerning Draft:Uncyclopedia (spoon)

Hi KylieTastic!

I've noticed that you have rejected a draft article at Draft:Uncyclopedia (spoon). I have strong reasons to suspect ulterior motives by the author Romartus Imperator, as I have established in Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/PKHilliam. My request is simple: is it possible for you to compare the draft that you rejected to the deleted article at User:BFDIBebble/Uncyclopedia? (BFDIBebble is a sockpuppet of PKHilliam.) I'd like to know how similar the articles are.

My apologies for getting you involved into this situation! Stay safe, KevTYD (talk) 16:43, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi KevTYD I'm not an admin so sorry I can't see the deleted draft either, as you've raised the SPI I'm sure the admins will check it. Cheers, keep safe KylieTastic (talk) 16:50, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

  The Articles for Creation barnstar
Thanks for your help at AFC! Signed,The4lines |||| (You Asked?) (What I have Done.) 17:37, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Gústi B

Hey you recently reviewed my submission for the artist Gústi B. I featured few references that all supported my text. Can you tell me why you declinded and how I can make the wikipedia article so you would accept it?


Palli — Preceding unsigned comment added by Palli123 (talkcontribs) 01:45, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Palli123 all new articles on Wikipedia have to show they are notable (See WP:N) which in most cases requires significant coverage in multiple independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS). There are also other criteria that can help for music biographies - see Wikipedia:Notability (music)#Criteria for musicians and ensembles. Social media (facebook, intsagram) are not independent reliable sources, nor are links to works (such as spotify, youtube) - all they show is that the subject and works exist, not that the subject is "notable". The is better, but mostly appears to be direct quotes so not very independent. Hope that help explain, and do look at Wikipedia:Notability (music) for a full answer. Cheers, keep safe KylieTastic (talk) 10:57, 10 May 2020 (UTC)


Hi KylieTastic! I'm working with the author of Draft:SY Gowtham Raj on IRC right now. I see you ran ReFill on this draft, and several references have values in the |last= and |first= fields that are not correct. Could you please correct these? In the future, please review the ReFill suggestions before you save them (or fix them immediately after running ReFill). Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 02:59, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi GoingBatty I do give the results a quick scan, but when there is so many I guess I just missed them. Sorry 'bout that. However I would say that although "first=02 Sep 2019 11:45 PM MYT" is a mistake in usage the change from a raw url to a Cite web still saved key information such as the title still preserves information to help link rot. I wish it didn't try to guess the first/last for such articles though, it's rather presumptive on standardised website layouts, or parse the fields to see if they are dates (but maybe it does and failed a match as it included a time+time zone!). Cheers, keep safe KylieTastic (talk) 10:48, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Aditya Minz

How to improve my article that you have reviewed, please help me 😞! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnluvis (talkcontribs) 17:02, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Johnluvis all new articles on Wikipedia have to show the subject is notable (See WP:N) which in most cases requires significant coverage in multiple independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS). See WP:MUSICBIO and WP:BIO for your subject. Sorry but nothing about your subject looks notable at this time, maybe in the future they will be. Regards KylieTastic (talk) 17:19, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Need help for approval

Need help for approval Sir my page is real and all ref is available on you tube Google and other sites I need your help sir please approve my page RAJMUZIK Studio

Dilpreet Singh01 (talk) 17:39, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Dilpreet Singh01 the criteria to qualify for a Wikipedia article are not "existing" but "notability" - all new articles on Wikipedia have to show the subject is notable (See WP:N) which in most cases requires significant coverage in multiple independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS). There are probably many many millions of businesses in the world that are not notable. Keep safe KylieTastic (talk) 17:44, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

It's my first time and my all ref links are true please approve my page RAJMUZIK Studio Dilpreet Singh01 (talk) 17:43, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

  • please don't ask duplicate requests KylieTastic (talk) 17:45, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your review.

Hello, KylieTastic!! Thanks for your reviewing my first article 'BoLCA+' and kind advice.

It really helped me to understand what is going on in the Wikipedia, especially about objective view could be always different from mine.

I will asking help at the Teahouse following your comment.

Thank you again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joonki7 (talkcontribs) 01:19, 11 May 2020 (UTC)


Excuse me, you declined my resubmission of Draft:JetPunk within one second of resubmitting the article. Your comment, "nothing changed - pointless re-submit" is a disgrace. I worked hard to get more independent resources and more data to update the article with, and you say NOTHING CHANGED?! I added two new independent resources, which is what you wanted for the article, and you don't even care. Please reconsider the submission of the JetPunk article.

--RedLightningStrike (talk) 13:00, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Request on 09:21:44, 13 May 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Farmingsmalltownhero

Hello, I have added the new references for the article on Lance Molina. I'm sorry I'm new to this and if I need to put anything else in the issue please let me know.

I added additional sources regarding Lance Molina. I am sorry I am new to this editing process.

If anything else is needed please let me know and I will be happy to revise as necessary.

Kind regards, Mike Farmingsmalltownhero (talk) 09:28, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Farmingsmalltownhero thanks for adding more references, and don't worry about being new, most of us learnt the same way. Note that to be fair to all submitters I don't re-review on request, I just pick new and old submissions at random, so it may or may not be myself who reviews it next. However note the key here is to show the subject meets the criteria as set out on Wikipedia:Notability (people). All the bets, keep safe KylieTastic (talk) 09:44, 13 May 2020 (UTC)


Please review Drafts Draft:Raj Kumar Gaur Draft:Girdharilal Mahiya Viki Tuber (talk) 14:49, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Viki Tuber to be fair to all submitters I don't review on request, I just pick new and old submissions at random, so it may or may not be myself who reviews them. KylieTastic (talk) 17:13, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Draft: Revelation 13:18 (rapper)

Hello Nice to meet you I appreciate your feedback on the article can you look at the article and make edits and corrections to the sources and written marterial per Wikipedia specifications so it can be stripped down so the reviewer doesn't have to wade through allot of unnecessary information to make it easier on the reviewer like mentioned. I would appreciate your contribution to the article and Wikipedia. Thanks Allot For Your Time KplusWequalsU (talk) 06:11, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

User has been helped on their talk. CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n! 07:03, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
  • OK, thanks for the update CaptainEek and congrats on you successful facing of the RfA bear-pit. KylieTastic (talk) 08:34, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

How can I make article more significant.

How can I make article more significant for approval ?? Shubhamsinghrnc (talk) 23:07, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Daniel Fisk Bennett

I saw you declined the page that I was still adding references to. I saw the reasoning and respectfully disagree with the decision made. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ThePoliticalAtheist (talkcontribs) 10:29, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi ThePoliticalAtheist, if you still had to add the required reliable sources then you should not have submitted. You submit for review, yoou get reviewed. Wikipedia, YouTube, Facebook are not reliable sources. All new articles on Wikipedia have to show they are "notable" subjects (See WP:N) which in most cases requires significant coverage in multiple independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS). Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 10:38, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Reply: I made several changes and feel that they're being ignored intentionally out of subject matter bias. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ThePoliticalAtheist (talkcontribs) 10:50, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

  • ThePoliticalAtheist you choose to see bias for no reason here and I don't even know what "subject matter bias" you think there is. If it's religious bias then you'll you should go have a chat with religious "activist" who all claim Wikipedia is biased against them. You may also like to check my user page User:KylieTastic and you'll see I'm from the UK a not very religious country, and also I'm a humanist. KylieTastic (talk) 10:57, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Reply: That's fantastic, I'm glad to be speaking with a humanist from the UK.My confusion is the references requirements as I thought that I had more than fulfilled the requirements on citations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ThePoliticalAtheist (talkcontribs) 11:00, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

  • ThePoliticalAtheist, social-media is not a reliable encyclopedic source; the second ref is work by the subject not about the subject; The next two are not independent as is also clear from "I'm a very outspoken Atheist..."; appearing in YouTube is rarely notable. Note that YouTube/Social media "stars" with millions of subscribers/followers don't get articles unless they have outside sources. As I said on your talk page maybe ask at the Wikipedia:Teahouse as getting different opinions is often good - you unlikely to find any Alex Jones or Ken Hams around here ;) KylieTastic (talk) 11:13, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Reply: American Atheists is a recognized 501c3 organization and I am listed in an official capacity on there as well. I also have multiple published articles beyond just facebook and youtube. This is where my confusion is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ThePoliticalAtheist (talkcontribs) 11:20, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

  • ThePoliticalAtheist, Wikipedia "notabilty" is not about subjects existing or the works they do, or even the value to mankind, but more have others noticed and written about the subject in depth. We have some people/organisations that do really important work, things that could save millions of lives, but if no one writes, etc about them not "notable", however you get others that I would consider no value IMHO like the Kardashians that do. Not a perfect system, but it works to keep us more like an encyclopedic and less like social media. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 11:35, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Draft: Mandar Sudhakar Khare

Hey, I dont know what I'm Missing to add as because the name i'm adding is popular locally and even you can firm the IMDb page of same person — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 10:32, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi, all new articles on Wikipedia have to show they are "notable" subjects (See WP:N) which in most cases requires significant coverage in multiple independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS). Note that IMDB is not a reliable source as it is just user generated content. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 10:40, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Got it :)

Thanks for the revert & inputs, I'll build out with more notable referencing as suggested. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TerenceDanielBehan (talkcontribs) 15:48, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for updating Blewt! draft page

Hi KylieTastic! Thanks so much for your edits to the Blewt! Wikipedia article. This is the first article I've written, and I really appreciate your taking the time to help me make it better. I've gone back in and added new citations to replace the invalid ones that you removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tomatobacon (talkcontribs) 17:22, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Psychic painting

Hello, can you check again this draft please? I produced it by translating the portuguese language article. I have added The only reference found there too. Thanks. Barecode (talk) 16:14, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Barecode, each language Wikipedia has their own guidelines and policies. In general the more articles they get the more strict they get. English Wikipedia need more than one reference, we require multiple independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS). Cheers, stay safe KylieTastic (talk) 16:25, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
Sorry to bother you again, but can you take a look now? I've found another source and also a book on the topic. Thanks. Barecode (talk) 19:43, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
  • Hi Barecode, I'm back doing real-life work at the moment and to be fair to all submitters I don't re-review on request, I just pick new and old submissions at random, so it may or may not be myself who reviews it next. If you've found extra sources just re-submit - you can also continue to add other sources after that as well. If you'd like to get some general feedback from other experienced editors you can ask at the Wikipedia:Teahouse. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 19:46, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

The sun boycotts: Can I get help writing t?

I'm sorry for making my article on the sun boycotts so short. I'm new to writing on wikipedia. So, can I say, get help on writing it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by LockyHimself (talkcontribs) 20:52, 17 May 2020 (UTC)


Do people beg you to approve an article. Tbiw (talk) 21:28, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Tbiw yes they do sometimes but it never helps. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 09:24, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Courage is the heart of a lion the wise will speak the truth. Articles are difficult to approve . Please tell me how to make a good article recent ones have made was rejected. Tbiw (talk) 16:05, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Article Seaweed

Hi @KylieTastic:

Convenience link: File:Harvesting (cleaning) algae that has grown in an algae scrubber.jpg and File:Harvesting (cleaning) algae that have grown in an algae scrubber.jpg.

I was able to successfully request at Wikimedia Commons a rename for the file from "Harvesting (cleaning) algae that has grown in an algae scrubber.jpg" to "Harvesting (cleaning) algae that have grown in an algae scrubber.jpg". As you probably already saw, Mazbel has completed my request, and has also created a redirect. Hopefully that will end those good faith edits. :)

All the best! WILDSTAR talk 22:54, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

  • WildStar glad to hear they changed it - every small step to a better encyclopedia counts. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 11:23, 22 May 2020 (UTC)


I think draft:Kamil Tolon is done. When is it going to be in the main page? Thanks--Yiğitcank (talk) 19:28, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

C drive?

I gotta admit, this is something I've never seen before :-) -- RoySmith (talk) 00:25, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

  • @RoySmith: they do keep finding interesting new ways to do things wrong :) KylieTastic (talk) 11:11, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Do you have any tips?

I really want to make a page for this artist and think he deserves one for future reference to expand, upon. Any tips? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Serialexperimentslain (talkcontribs) 09:34, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Serialexperimentslain they have a small YouTube channel with hardly any views (14 videos with no views!) sorry but even some YouTubers with millions of subs and views don't qualify. Maybe someday they will become notable, but not now. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 10:18, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Thank you for your edit on Proton Technologies!

RichardMcKee (talk) 14:51, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Beaudette Foundation

Thank you, Kylie Tastic, for moving Beaudette Foundation to draft stage. Is this the way to reach you and thank you with 'talk' and using this edit feature. Peace, Roy!Robert Jan van de Hoek (talk) 17:03, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

My article was declined due to reference links issue

Hello my article is about my great grandfather he passed away in 2003 i dont have many reference links that can lead to him He was a big classical music teacher all i have of him are two wikipedia celebrities referencing him as their tutor how can i get approved — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oddmentiusmaximus (talkcontribs) 17:44, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Oddmentiusmaximus sorry about your loss. Firstly just top be clear sources don't have to be online if that's what you mean by "reference links", if he has been written about in books, newspapers, etc they can also be used. However sometimes subjects that would have notable in a general sense are not by the Wikipedia notability guidelines (WP:GNG, WP:BIO) just because sources do not exist, or can not be found. That's currently how Wikipedia works, and it works well in keeping it more like an Encyclopedia and less like social media or blogs. So add what references you can find, but if enough can't be found for the criteria of WP:BIO (or WP:GNG]]) then it wont be accepted. Hope that explains things, keep safe KylieTastic (talk) 18:08, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
  • Thank Ill try getting some newspaper articles links of his and try submitting again ,Reference as in his students referencing him as their teacher in their website ,could that get me a better chance of approval?Oddmentiusmaximus (talk) 18:50, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
* Hi Oddmentiusmaximus if they mention just that he was there teacher then it's of interest but not in-depth enough to help notability. If they had a few sentences or more saying why he was important to them or there development then yes maybe. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 10:40, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Draft: Delta magazine


I see my article was rejected due to:

"This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources."

What I wanted to do is create an English version of this site:ęcznik)

I basically translated the most relevant information (not everything though) and added a picture of the new edition of the magazine (the Polish version contains a picture of the order of the first issue from 1973).

Since we already have a Polish version I thought that it'd be nice to have an English one too :-)

Best wishes Tadek z Galicji (Dawid) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tadek z Galicji (talkcontribs) 16:33, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Tadek z Galicji each language Wikipedia has their own guidelines and policies. In general the more articles they get the more strict they get. English Wikipedia generally requires significant coverage in multiple references that are independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS). Sometimes sources exist but just haven't been added on the source wiki, but often then don't. Cheers, stay safe KylieTastic (talk) 16:37, 24 May 2020 (UTC)


Just a note about Draft:Crystallopathy (now at Crystallopathy). I saw you declined this a few weeks ago because it only had one source. I would have accepted it as it was; a review article in the New England Journal of Medicine, one of the most prominent medical journals, is more than enough to demonstrate notability for a medical topic IMO. Thanks for all your work at AfC. SpicyMilkBoy (talk) 17:53, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi SpicyMilkBoy although out in the real-world I would generally agree and an article in such a journal is worth a thousand of say celebrity based sources, I try not to be a "academic snob" (as some would say) and trust that any such article should easily be able to find more sources. If none exist then maybe although it's interesting and factually correct it too new and possibly speculative. Without access to the journal to read it's hard to judge (also a single source is always a worry for copy vio issues). Also I'll be honest and had not twigged "N Engl J Med" - oops :) - but if you see such things it's always in my book to re-submit and accept, or go chat to the decliner. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 18:11, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
    • Ah, thanks for explaining. I have access to the source and was able to check for verifiability and copyvio and it all looked good. :) SpicyMilkBoy (talk) 18:26, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Advise me

Can someone create a bot without programming. Tbiw (talk) 09:26, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Tbiw bots are something on my list to look at someday but I haven't had time yet so I don't know much. If you see Wikipedia:Bots it says "Some programming experience generally is needed to create a bot". However if you just have a task(s) you would like a bot to perform you can ask at Wikipedia:Bot requests and get existing bots/editors to do that for you. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 09:42, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Tbiw (talk) 21:40, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Cant i tag someone for a bot like kylie-tastic create a bot named thula and owner will be kylie-tastic. Can't that work Tbiw (talk) 21:43, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Okay got it thanks Kylie Tbiw (talk) 12:53, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Speedy on draft

The Draft:VINT in which I tagged for speedy del may have been my mistake, I've seen improvements in the draft and does not meet the criteria I've provided. KMagz04 (talk) 13:43, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi KMagz04 no problems with that, I must admit I didn't check myself as only a few bytes had changed (in size) and it was just a technical speedy removal reversal, so didnt notice it had changed as much as it had. Not that it looks likely to be notable enough. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 17:42, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Draft Robert K. Brinton (mountaineer)

Hi - Thanks for moving my draft article to the correct area. Apologies as I'm a first-time writer (and 71 years old) so not so adept with Wikipedia.

I do have a question. I saw that it was possible to expedite the review process by citing relevant Wiki projects. I tried doing this but apparently did it wrong as I received a message that the banners were in the wrong place. The two projects I found that were relevant were SKIING AND SNOWBOARDING and CLIMBING. How would I go about mentioning these two relevant projects in an effort to expedite the review? Many thanks. Donna Dmbrinton (talk) 03:16, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Dmbrinton happy to help and creating in your own sandbox and submitting is normal (that's why it had the template the help submit) - it's just once we start reviewing the draft namespace is preferred as bots other automatic processes can do more there than in a users own area. We all had to learn, and continue to learn, and we have editors of all ages. Nice try on the WikiProjects, the only thing you got wrong was they go on the talk page of articles (added now). It depends on the WikiProjects as to how active, or really if it has just one or more active editors looking for such flags. You could ask directly by posting of the Wikiprojects talk pages - i.e. Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Climbing and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Skiing and Snowboarding - neither looks very active, but you can never tell how many stalkers are just watching. At least the AfC review max time has now shrunk to 5 weeks, a few months ago it was up to 5 months but we've had a few more volunteers recently. Lastly another place to ask for input as a new editor is the Wikipedia:Teahouse a place for new editors to ask for help from lots of experienced editors and admins. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 10:15, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Request on 09:23:39, 27 May 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Benedict2005

I seem to have trouble to resubmit my article for review again.

Benedict2005 (talk) 09:23, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Benedict2005 looks like you sorted it out in the end, if you hadn't removed the old review you would have had the resubmit button still. Regards KylieTastic (talk) 10:19, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Request on 14:38:48, 27 May 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Sohinimoitra84

Hello, Subarnalata was telecast back in 2010 on a Bengali Channel in Indian television. Those days, we did not have that much of digital coverage of regional TV. The cult following of the serial is obvious from the push it received on social media when in April 2020 channels decided to re-telecast old serials. The channel was almost forced into re-telecasting Subarnalata by audience pressure. I have added information from newspapers that appear about Subarnalata recently. Request you to kindly reconsider. Thank you.

Sohinimoitra84 (talk) 14:38, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Sohinimoitra84 unfortunately is sources don't exist then articles cannot be accepted, however you also said "digital coverage" so note that sources can be newspapers, magazines etc. and if it has a real cult following then maybe there are or will be new reliable source. If you have added more sources and can't find any more then resubmit and someone will review. All the best KylieTastic (talk)

Need help in finding out the status of the draft Afzal-ul Amin

Hi Kylie ! You have been of great help to me previously so I thought of asking you about this new article that I had made. It lacked citations initially and hence was moved to the draft space, I was notified about it. But now that I have added all the citations available on the internet. Idk how to move it to the article space or request a review of the draft because inserting the Template:Sust:submit tag displays "this is a misplaced article". Please help me out here 🙏 Riyyan Farooq (talk) 04:01, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Riyyan Farooq Afzal-ul Amin is not in draft and the old draft Draft:Afzal-ul Amin is now a redirect to that article, and from your edits there do not appear to be any other drafts your working on. So unless I've misunderstood looks like there are no issues. Regards KylieTastic (talk) 09:17, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you so much Kyle for looking into the matter. I'm really grateful to you. But why isn't his Wikipedia page showing up on Google? Riyyan Farooq (talk) 10:06, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Riyyan Farooq it maybe that the google crawler just hasn't found it yet and it will just take time to first find it to add to it's index. However I have also heard that maybe articles that have not yet been patrolled by New pages patrollers are not indexed so that could be the reason. Either way it will show up in google at some point. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 18:00, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks a lot KyleTastic ! Cheers ! Riyyan Farooq (talk) 22:33, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Regarding Draft: NRB Commercial Bank Limited

Request on 19:43:37, 28 May 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Rubel33

NRB Commercial Bank Limited is a notable private commercial bank has been operating in Bangladesh since 2013. I included reliable secondary sources like The Daily Sun and The Daily Observer, both are renowned English newspapers in Bangladesh and the institutional website. However, again I have included citation from The Daily Star (most popular English Newspaper in Bangladesh), Prothom Alo and The Financial Express and re-submitted the draft. Now, please review the draft. I hope this time it will fulfill the criteria.

Rubel Shaikh (talk) 19:43, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Rubel Shaikh thanks for adding more sources and resubmitting, that's just what we like to see. To be fair to all submitters I don't re-review on request, I just pick new and old submissions at random, so it may or may not be myself who reviews it next. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 19:47, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
    • Dear KylieTastic thanks a lot for your quick response. It will be really inspiring if my draft is approved. However, as a new user of Wikipedia I have not much knowledge but try to contribute. Therefore, requires help from experienced like you. Again, Thank You Rubel Shaikh (talk) 19:55, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Question about a draft article

Hi! When creating a previous page, I made it in my Sandbox, which allowed me to submit it for review. After doing so, you moved it to a draft article, which was great, and it was later accepted as a new article. However, when I went back to my sandbox to make another draft of a new article, this option for review was no longer there. I moved my new draft to a draft page but I'm not sure how to request review of the page. Would you able to help me out? Thank you very much in advance!! Ipowlick (talk) 01:21, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Ipowlick I have submitted it for you - you can just add {{subst:submit|Ipowlick}} to submit, or to add a box with a button you could add {{draft}}. I have also added {{User sandbox}} to the sandbox so it's back to new sandbox state. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 08:22, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your help! Also, could you tell me how to restore my sandbox? I submitted another article via my sandbox and now when I click on my sandbox it redirects to this new page. Sorry for the dumb questions.. I have a solid feel on editing and the platform generally, but this has given me trouble. Thank you very much in advance!! Ipowlick (talk) 21:33, 31 May 2020 (UTC) Also, I have an unrelated question.. I have been updating articles in my area of interest (horses, riders, etc.) in addition to making new ones. How are important are article ratings? Such as if I update a stub, up to at least a start-class article, is it important that the article actually receives the new rating? If so, how do I go about requesting a review? Thank you again, you have been most helpful!! Ipowlick (talk) 22:08, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Ipowlick, when you click on a page that redirects under the title you should see "(Redirected from ......)" that allows you to go back and then edit the original page. I see you have found a way and removed the redirect so probably already worked it out. There are very few "dumb questions" most are just learning experiences, and I'm sure that one has confused all of us when it first happens. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 21:40, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi again! I submitted another draft via my sandbox and restored my sandbox, however I can't seem to unlink the talk pages, as my sandbox talk page automatically redirects to the draft's talk page. I just can't figure out how to unlink them... Also, could you tell me how to put up the draft submission box in the sandbox? Given that this is a recurring issue for me, is there a way to make new articles without using the sandbox, while still being able to submit them for review? Thank you so much for answering my questions, i really appreciate it!! Ipowlick (talk) 21:54, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Ipowlick, you had already removed the redirect successfully so should have just been able to edit your sandbox fine. I have added back the {{User sandbox}} to make submission easier. Yes you can create new articles not in your sandbox, you could for instance create User:Ipowlick/My New Article or Draft:My New Article or you could start from Wikipedia:Article_wizard. Hope that helps, but it's late I'm a tad drunk and very tired just trying to answer questions quickly so feel free to ask any follow-ups. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 23:05, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Source question

I'm trying to enter the following References into the Edit Page for subject Shane Stay. Can you advise on how to proceed?


— Preceding unsigned comment added by Six free (talkcontribs)

  • Hi Six free first {{Db-g7}} is for asking for a page you created to be deleted so not sure why that's here! Also I see that Draft:Shane Stay has both of those references, although one is just an external link so I'm not sure what your asking. So all I can suggest is looking at Help:Referencing for beginners. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 10:50, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Draft:2020 Sunshine Coast Rugby Union season

Can you give this draft article another look? --RockerballAustralia (talk) 04:18, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi RockerballAustralia well I can see you've added sources that are not just facebook and youtube and look to be from reliable sources (but I haven't read the content), and you have re-submitted so it's waiting for review. To be fair to all submitters I don't re-review on request, I just pick new and old submissions at random, so it may or may not be myself who reviews it next. It is marked for Wikipedia:WikiProject Rugby union so it's more likely a rugby fan will find and review/improve. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 10:54, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Muruganandam M

What Change is Needed — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sudhars823 (talkcontribs) 12:50, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Tell me

When a discussion at idea lab before getting to prospal has been satisfied or requested before how do I handle that. And how will you know are proposed idea has been accepted at proposals Tbiw (talk) 20:25, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Tbiw, regarding your many proposals at the Idea Lab, I very strongly advise you not to try to move them to the proposals board. The Idea Lab page is intended for out-of-the-box thinking, and we make allowances for eccentric ideas there. If you were to present formal Requests for Commont for any of the ideas you've thus far suggested (giving the WMF back direct control of outreach, making it mandatory for all articles to have images, an annual Wikipedia Holiday, locking down every historical article, you'd very quickly exhaust community patience. We do appreciate your being here, but you need to understand that Wikipedia is a complex product developed over 20 years, and realistically you need to understand how it currently works before you'll be in a position to start suggesting major changes. ‑ Iridescent 20:49, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
  • I will bow with thanks to Iridescent for the answer as I did not immediately know what the "idea lab" was and have not been involved so have no advice to give. Regards KylieTastic (talk) 20:54, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks irdescent I should be cool to learn about wikipedia those suggestion I want to close them not be further discussed . Those want I to learn. Tbiw (talk) 10:14, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of We Got Next for deletion


A discussion is taking place as to whether the article We Got Next 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/We Got Next 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. GoingBatty (talk) 15:06, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Review Page - Inside

Hello - I received notification that the article I created was rejected and therefore deleted. Since I am a new user to this process, would you kindly be able to restore the article so that I can modify as needed in order to meet the requirements you provided? I appreciate your feedback and look forward to addressing all concerns in order to post.

Kind regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lmuniz31 (talkcontribs) 16:16, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Lmuniz31 I'm not an administrator so I can neither restore or view the article content - I just flagged as promotional for the administrators to look at. User:Lmuniz31/sandbox was deleted by Spencer for both WP:U5 and WP:G11 which means it is not suitable for a WP:REFUND request. You could ask the deleting admin, but it's unlikely for a WP:G11 deletion. Regards KylieTastic (talk) 16:34, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the quick response. I will reach out to the administrator regarding this. Kind regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lmuniz31 (talkcontribs) 17:45, 1 June 2020 (UTC)


  There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Incidents#FloridaArmy_and_AfC_woes. Sulfurboy (talk) 04:53, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Interoceptive bias

Hi KylieTastic. I am contacting you because you accepted the article Interoceptive bias at AfC. Per the evidence at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sheldonium, the creator of this article, Vineword (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · checkuser (log)), has been blocked as a sockpuppet of a blocked editor. Although the article may at first glance appear to be a legitimate article with reliable sources, I took a closer look at the sources, and it does not appear that the specific phrase "interoceptive bias" appears in any of them. It appears instead that this user Google searched "interoceptive bias" and pasted in some of the first results they found, without checking for their relevance to the topic.

I think the topic of the article may well be a real topic; however, given the creator's history of disruptive editing and the dubious nature of the referencing, I am quite skeptical about the veracity of this article, and if it is a real topic, I would strongly prefer it be written by someone else. With this in mind, would you mind if I speedily deleted the article under WP:CSD#G5? I think it meets the criterion as "created by a blocked user in violation of their block, with no substantial edits from other users", but I wanted to check with you as a courtesy. Thanks, Mz7 (talk) 21:27, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Mz7, hey thanks for the heads up - I'm fine with you doing that and trust your judgement. Thanks for the courtesy. Go for it KylieTastic (talk) 22:01, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
    •   Done, thanks! Mz7 (talk) 22:17, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Create approved wikipedia pages

Hi, I am new in wikipedia to create the pages. I have create many pages but failed. Please tell me what to do, I have my original articles not copy pasted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 3mrogamal (talkcontribs) 21:27, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Request on 21:39:49, 2 June 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by 3mrogamal

I had created a draft page and sent it for the review, but it was cancelled. The reason is that "wikipedia is not reference". Please guide me about it

3mrogamal (talk) 21:39, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

my page is decline due to not an organization and reasons whats it exactly should i do — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:22, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

  • As you have no other edits or said which article you're talking about I cannot help. KylieTastic (talk) 09:10, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Draft:The Balkans (2020 TV Series)

Hi you recently rejected 'the balkans' i updated with further evidence, what kinds of additional evidence would you need on top of that. I've read all the guides for 'beginners' etc and cannot identify what else would be needed. thanks for the help — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theonetwoandthree (talkcontribs) 12:10, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Barnstar for you!

  The Reviewer Barnstar
This my little appreciation for all the good reviewing you have made thanks kylie. Keep the good job up.Tbiw (talk) 15:58, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

S.elrefaie (talk) 15:23, 4 June 2020 (UTC)Adding reference

Hello, I got my last page submission declined because not having independent sources, now i got the sources but i don't know how to add them. could you please guide me how or where to the references i have? Thank you.

Review Alireza Kohany Article

Hi, The source of is Doesn't Wikipedia accept the actor's page in another language as a source? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hezareh3vom (talkcontribs) 11:39, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Draft: Georges Brausch

Hello KylieTastic,

I am currently trying to publish an article on Georges Brausch, Belgian scholar and colonial administrator.

I have seen that you have previously reviewed my article yesterday and suggested I add more references. I have done so now but I am unsure whether the article is now good to go. I am really new as a Wikipedia editor so this is all really unfamiliar territory for me at the moment. I would appreciate it if took a second look to judge whether the submission is now appropriate or if there are any further changes I need to make in order for it to meet publishing standards. I apologise if I am posting this comment in the wrong section. Thank you for your guidance.

Best, Luigi Muci (talk) 04:46, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Luigi Muci yes it does look I first reviewed it but then stupidly edited the old version when bolding the subjects name in the lead, hence why you got re-reviewed. Sorry about that, I've removed the duplicate decline from your talk page as it has not been declined twice. When you first submitted you only had a single source and in general articles require significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources to show notability. You appear to have addressed that issue, and I have just done some minor tidy up. With a glance it look good but to be fair to all submitters I don't re-review on request, I just pick new and old submissions at random, so it may or may not be myself who reviews it next. Note it would be judged on the criteria as set out in Wikipedia:Notability (academics) so the question would be which criteria from WP:NACADEMIC do you think they meet? Also I see you have also asked DGG and I know they review a lot of academics so they will probably be a better judge. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 10:18, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi KylieTastic,

That's fully understandable, thanks for the really useful feedback and for explaining how this reviewing system works. I'll definitely take a second look to see if it meets all the eligibility requirements.

Best Luigi Muci (talk) 19:44, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Questions about my submission

Hello KylieTastic (I like the name!), As you may have figured, I am new to publishing on Wikipedia. I understand that you need references to know that my submission is not a joke. For publications however, I linked an NIH PubMed list, which is pretty authoritative (actually, i my field, the most authoritative) but you asked for "edit sources". Are websites not good and you want a reference for each of my papers (150)? My lab website is here:

Thank you for your guidance...

Philippe — Preceding unsigned comment added by Philippesoriano (talkcontribs) 18:21, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Philippesoriano there are three issues here. Firstly see WP:AUTOBIO as writing about yourself (that your username suggests) is strongly discouraged due to WP:COI problems. Secondly it would appear that this article would be checked against the criteria from Wikipedia:Notability (academics) that the single reference given may show is met - I'm not sure. The third issue is content need to be referenced, the reference just appears to be a list of publications, and does not verify (see WP:V) the rest of the content. So yes the link is fine for showing all the publications, but you should also add a short list of any key publications, but no not all 150. Then the key thing is sources for the rest of the content - you know you are you, and what you say is correct - but from a readers point of view its all unverifiable content from an unknown source. Hope that helps explain things. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 18:42, 7 June 2020 (UTC)


Dear Kylie, I am not sure I understand whether you declined again my last resubmission or it is pending? I appreciate you letting me know. Best wishes, Nantucket60 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nantucket60 (talkcontribs) 20:36, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Nantucket60 - Draft:The Hamilton Mathematics Institute TCD is still pending, if you scroll down to the bottom you'll see the goldish "Review waiting" template. I just bolded the subject name in the lead (standard formatting), and thanked you for your edit adding more references - but didn't re-review as I've already done about 50 reviews today and I'm tired (also it's good to get different eyes on new content). Al the best KylieTastic (talk) 20:49, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Dear Kylie, Thanks a lot! Nantucket60 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nantucket60 (talkcontribs) 14:12, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Dear Kylie, Did you have a chance to review the changes? I appreciate letting me know. Best, Nantucket60

  • Hi Nantucket60 I'm focusing on a few real life issues at the moment and also to be fair to all submitters I don't re-review on request, I just pick new and old submissions at random, so it may or may not be myself who reviews it next. Frankly I hate seeing the growing backlog as I always see it as a growing failure for good intentioned submitters, but there are only so many days in a row you can spend hours of your free time trying to prop up a failing system. There are just way more submissions than reviewers. Sorry, hope it gets reviewed soon KylieTastic (talk) 19:07, 15 June 2020 (UTC)


Hi KylieTastic. I had a few questions.

1) Rob Roy Rawlings, are we confident he was a state senator and then re-elected to a different district after redistricting? Something gave me pause about it and I can't see much of the cite used for his first term in office. For some reason I thought he might have been in the state house and not the senate at first?

2) Any chance you can properly format the cite for the composite photo of the "Radicals"? I'd like to use it in several of their articles and I am not great at ref formatting. <ref>{{Cite web|url=*:*&edan_fq[],+William+Beverly%22&edan_local=1&op=Search|title=Radical Members of the South Carolina Legislature|}}</ref>

I'm also not totally confident on how to describe the photo montage. There was a source that says it was used to besmirch them as part of efforts to restrict African American voting at the end or after Reconstruction but the source wasn't a great one. Not sure of who took the original photos or for what purpose but that same source did I.D. someone. I will have to investigate a bit.

The other issue I had with it is that it's identified where we cite it from as from 1868 but it appeared to me it had officials from 1868 and 1870? I could be wrong. FloridaArmy (talk) 22:18, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi FloridaArmy if the source for Rob Roy Rawlings pre redistricting was a book I would be more concerned, but I would not expect a local paper to get that wrong. You said you can't see much of the cite, do you not have access? For the work you do it would be very valuable... and when I got around to applying it was quick and easy (see wikipedialibrary if you weren't aware we could get free access). Also the new sources added show the same page 22. (I had searched for such records, but I guess you just have to no where to look, maybe Vycl1994 can help with others) so the additions show he was senator earlier from at least 1958.
As for the photo ref how I would format it something like:
<ref>{{cite web |title=Radical Members of the South Carolina Legislature |url= |website=National Museum of African American History and Culture |accessdate=8 June 2020 |language=en |format=photograph and description |date=1868 |others=Collection of the Smithsonian National Museum of African American History and Culture}}</ref>[1]


  1. ^ "Radical Members of the South Carolina Legislature" (photograph and description). National Museum of African American History and Culture. Collection of the Smithsonian National Museum of African American History and Culture. 1868. Retrieved 8 June 2020.CS1 maint: others (link)
I agree trying to track down the original author and purpose of the image is not an easy thing (maybe impossible), so I guess unless you can track down a good source it's maybe best to just describe it in a functional 'encyclopedic ' way. i.e. basically the first part of the text below the image would do (up to the first comma). The rest of the description sounds most likely to have been to besmirch, but it is also possible (but less plausible) that they were more anti tax. As for the dates, I don't know enough to judge, and without good reason I would personally trust the Smithsonian archivists date. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 18:47, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

The Edit Regarding a Wikipedia Site

I have have become aware of this edit change regarding the Park Jihoon Wikipedia site. Someone else apparently did this and I am unclear of how exactly it happened. I apologize for any disturbance that this caused. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:32, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi it was most probably another person previously assigned to your internet address, so no worries. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 17:53, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

On Chisel Entry

I am trying to create an entry on and you requested "Requires significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources to show notability". What is your number on multiple sources? I cited one published paper and one web site, the official web site of Chisel.

I would be happy to continue and improve the article. However, only if this work is not wasted by not being accepted.

Cheers Schoeberl (talk) 13:48, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Schoeberl unfortunately there is no magic number of sources but usually at least 3. The key to Wikipedia notability guidelines is for hem to be both independent (WP:INDY) and reliable sources (WP:RS). Primary sources can be used for facts, but not notability. There are many new programming languages and frameworks etc, so having independent sources shows 'others' not directly linked to the subject have noticed. As the paper was from June 2012 I would have thought if it was being used by people it would have been written about, but have a look around and see what you can find and add. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 18:02, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
  • Hi KylieTastic, thank you for your quick response and help how to fix the entry. I've added more third-party sources. Maybe you can check is this is the right direction. Cheers, Schoeberl (talk) 15:47, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
  • Hi Schoeberl glad to see you found some sources, I'm snowed under we real-life issues at the moment so trying not to be involved with Wiki stuff other than minimal effort edits. You could either use the "ask us a question" link on the decline notice to ask for input from the AfC help desk, or the Wikipedia:Teahouse is always there to help new editors, or you could just re-submit and one of the other reviewers will see it. Thought I'd give you a quick answer so you can move on without waiting. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 18:22, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

How to make article

Hey KyleTastic, thank you in advance for reading this. I am sending you this message wondering how to make my article acceptable to be posted. I would really like this to be acceptable, and would love some feedback on how to make this happen.


) — Preceding unsigned comment added by XxEl1te Gaming (talkcontribs) 19:24, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
  • Hi XxEl1te Gaming Wikipedia is an encyclopedia not a place to promote new subjects - your topic is more a social media topic. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 19:28, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

Kevin Behr resubmit with referencing

Hello, we have add some new sources to the site. You can check again. Thank you! --Haradl292 (talk) 11:31, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Haradl292 thanks for updating, but to be fair to all submitters I don't re-review on request, I just pick new and old submissions at random, so it may or may not be myself who reviews it next. Also I've not got as much free time for Wikipedia at at the moment. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 12:25, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

References for a Corporate Page

Hi Kylie, Thanks for the feedback on the LFL Group article. There was a concern about the lack of references on the subject and I'm trying to determine what types of references would be required to legitimize the article. As a quick background, LFL Group is the parent company of two better known Canadian furniture retailers; Leon's and The Brick, both of which have Wikipedia articles of their own. In 2013, after an acquisition, the LFL Group was formed...similar to how Alphabet became the parent company of Google. The LFL Group is traded on the TSX under symbol 'LNF', does over $2.2 Billion in annual revenue, and employs over 8,000 people in Canada. The Investor's Relations site can be found at and at the bottom of our retail brands' sites at and All of LFL Group's corporate documents can be found on Sedar. There are other references online, such as a press release touting [5] record earnings in 2019. Should I be including as many links and references in the proposed article as I can to help with the approval proccess? Thanks again for volunteering your time to Wikipedia. Lewis — Preceding unsigned comment added by LewisLeon (talkcontribs) 14:05, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi LewisLeon all new articles on Wikipedia have to show they are notable (See WP:N) which in most cases requires significant coverage in multiple independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS). In this case WP:ORG is the guideline we would use. Notability is not inherited, so a group that has no independent sources would still not be notable even if it was the parent of the multiple very notable companies. Alphabet Inc. obviously caused a lot of press so became instantly independently notable. Also things such as being stock market listed, of the size of revenues, number of employees does not count - some very small companies get lots of interest, some very big almost none. Some groups do things that cause interest to the world, some do little but do what a group does and the child companies are the ones people talk about. Press releases and corporate docs are not independent so also don't count. We are usually looking for 3 good references that have non trivial coverage, and are independent reliable sources. Adding more will help, but adding lots that don't add detail wont help, so if an article is about one of the owned companies and just mentions is passing the group it's not going to help. Hope that help explain things a bit. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 19:14, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

LewisLeon--there's another possible approach, which is merging the three articles under the name of the owningentitity,and making redirects from the brand names. I've sometimes used this method. DGG ( talk ) 20:52, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Sameer Shafi Pathan

I agree the draft needed to be declined, but I don;'t consider it promotional enough for G11, especially as a draft page, where it's possible it might be improved DGG ( talk ) 20:54, 11 June 2020 (UTC)`

  • DGG thanks for pointing out the other other to the previous post, always good to give all the options. And I agree on the draft and I didn't think the G11 was deserved but once put I'll leave it to the admins to decline and remove. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 21:00, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Request for submission of article Jam Mubarak Khan

I want to create page about a historical person who belonged to Sama Dynasty of Sindh now a province of Pakistan. Regards Aziz Kingrani (talk) 20:39, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Aziz Kingrani you can, but like all new articles on Wikipedia you have to show they are notable (See WP:N) which in most cases requires significant coverage in multiple independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS). I see you have already added more references and resubmitted which is the correct thing to do. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 10:37, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
  • KylieTastic (talk) with regards it is requested that surely I shall follow your kind instructions accordingly.Rgsrds..--Aziz Kingrani (talk) 10:54, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Draft Article

Rnagfn (talk) 06:00, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Hey! How are you doing? I have created a page on a school(Draft:Mount Litera Zee School, Howrah). I have checked similar articles before writing this one. I have followed the same writing style. I have added some reliable outside sources. Please guide me more.

Thanks & Regards!

  • Hi Rnagfn, I declined Draft:Mount Litera Zee School, Howrah because all the sources were from the school. All new articles on Wikipedia have to show they are notable (See WP:N) which in most cases requires significant coverage in multiple independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS). I have not re-reviewed but I see you have already added more sources that are independent. Once you think you have enough independent reliable sources to meet the requirements of WP:ORG please resubmit. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 10:42, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Hey KylieTastic! Thanks for your clarification. I really appreciate your help. I have added some new references. Will check once again before final submission.

Thanks & Regards!

Draft:Christopher Weston Chandler

greetings @KylieTastic I truly believe this individual deserves a wikipedia page. What do you recommend? The only other source I could find was a video of Pewdiepie talking about him. He was not merely mentioned in passing either as the entire video was dedicated to Christopher Chandler. I don't suppose that would suffice?Malcolmxhero (talk) 18:35, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Malcolmxhero I have no idea who they are or if they are notable enough for a Wikipedia article, but all new articles on Wikipedia have to show the subject are notable (See WP:N) which in most cases requires significant coverage in multiple independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS). In this case Wikipedia:Notability (people). I don't think anyone would take the fact that Pewdiepie had used him as a subject for a video as a notable reliable source. If sources exist then add them, if not then maybe they are just famous to a little part of the internet but not enough for an Encyclopedia. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 18:47, 13 June 2020 (UTC)


Help me add my first article please Draft:ali_Mansour_(actor) — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs)

  • Hi your article is submitted for review, please be patient. You can ask for help/advice at the Wikipedia:Teahouse Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 19:59, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Request on 17:30:23, 14 June 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Sanjaykumaro

Sanjaykumaro (talk) 17:30, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, KylieTastic. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.UriBraunerKinrot (talk) 06:18, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Mark Saber entry

Have added a reference to the only physical source for Mark Sabre that l know of, a book titled "The Great T.V. Detectives." l don't remember the exact page on which the entry for Mark Sabre appears, but the exact chapter is titled "The private Detectives."Glammazon (talk) 09:49, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Tech News: 2020-25

21:38, 15 June 2020 (UTC)


Can you do a RFA so you can be a sysop? (talk) 00:48, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

  • Now that's an odd third edit for an IP editor! KylieTastic (talk) 09:03, 16 June 2020 (UTC)


How will I use JavaScript wiki browser Tbiw (talk) 07:32, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Tbiw I had not heard of it until you mentioned it - I assume you mean User:Joeytje50/JWB which appears to have instructions and you can ask any questions on the talk page. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 09:51, 16 June 2020 (UTC)


Do wiki has test or exam Tbiw (talk) 09:00, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Okay.Tbiw (talk) 21:00, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer newsletter June 2020

Hello KylieTastic,

Your help can make a difference

NPP Sorting can be a great way to find pages needing new page patrolling that match your strengths and interests. Using ORES, it divides articles into topics such as Literature or Chemistry and on Geography. Take a look and see if you can find time to patrol a couple pages a day. With over 10,000 pages in the queue, the highest it's been since ACPERM, your help could really make a difference.

Google Adds New Languages to Google Translate

In late February, Google added 5 new languages to Google Translate: Kinyarwanda, Odia (Oriya), Tatar, Turkmen and Uyghur. This expands our ability to find and evaluate sources in those languages.

Discussions and Resources
  • A discussion on handling new article creation by paid editors is ongoing at the Village Pump.
  • Also at the Village Pump is a discussion about limiting participation at Articles for Deletion discussion.
  • A proposed new speedy deletion criteria for certain kinds of redirects ended with no consensus.
  • Also ending with no change was a proposal to change how we handle certain kinds of vector images.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 10271 Low – 4991 High – 10271

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:52, 18 June 2020 (UTC)


What is the vector skin on touchscreen device.Tbiw (talk) 07:50, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks.Tbiw (talk) 09:07, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia page declined

Hi. I sent a Wikipedia page to review and it was declined. I want to know how to improve it and what's missing. I already added reliable sources.. what else should I do for it to be accepted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Дарко Стаменов (talkcontribs) 16:08, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Sorry please answer this question

Are you a female?Tbiw (talk) 12:19, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

  • As a humanist I don't think it maters what sex, gender, ethnicity etc a person is - people are people - judge everyone on their actions. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 12:27, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Draft work in progress

Hello @KylieTastic: I hope you are doing good. Could you spare a while to have a look at my draft on which I'm working now Draft:Sheen Dass, Draft:Abhay (TV series) and Draft:The_Casino (Indian TV series). Thanks C1K98V (💬 ✒️ 📂) 12:36, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi C1K98V sorry but to be fair to all submitters I don't re-review on request, I just pick new and old submissions at random, so it may or may not be myself who reviews it next. Plus I'm not doing as much wiki at the moment. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 16:53, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
hello once again @KylieTastic: thanks for being fair to all. I'm not requesting for review or re-review. I just wanted to know from you will it qualify to be on the mainspace Draft:The_Casino (Indian TV series). Thanks for reply please reply once again C1K98V (💬 ✒️ 📂) 16:59, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Dongalaku Donga

Hi, this is regarding 'Dongalaku Donga' page. Unfortunately, for Telugu movies, particularly old ones, there aren't many references other than IMDB and You Tube. I did provide those as references. Not sure why this page isn't being approved. What else I need to do? I've seen many pages on Telugu movies, which are published with 'citations needed', why not the same rule apply for this page? Appreciate any assistance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashokreddy (talkcontribs) 18:30, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

My post

Dear KylieTastic I have fixed and added more source for my post one month ago Could you please revise that version for me Much appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Binloveblue (talkcontribs) 05:49, 21 June 2020 (UTC)


Hello. I provided you with every publication on my client. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pressforjamore (talkcontribs) 09:23, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Free Bird

  Free Bird
Hi i am here to create articles Lohananth (talk) 09:48, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Lohananth you giving of barnstar looks like a bribe so she can pass your article it never happen Kylie is very good reviewer i checked articles you are begging for are already declined.Tbiw (talk) 06:35, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

baroda global shared services ltd

very tuff task to create article with this procedure, please help me to create article what are key point i missed???? plese tell me — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vishal.r.vaja (talkcontribs)

I added reference to article

Draft Categories

There are categories designed to be placed on draft articles that are exclusive to draft pages, these categories are exempt from WP:DRAFTNOCAT. This is mentioned due to your edits on Draft:Poké Ball. (Oinkers42) (talk) 13:35, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Tech News: 2020-26

18:48, 22 June 2020 (UTC)


Today I created an entry for someone who is a notable figure in Britain but unfortunately the internet hasn't caught up on her achievements so references are limited and this individual died in the 1960s when very little history of Black history in Britain was being documented. My entry was rejected the first time round, I've made significant improvements which I've added to the page - I would like to submit again but do not want it deleted in case not sufficient — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mxthercxuntry (talkcontribs) 23:25, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Mxthercxuntry no need to worry about deletion from draft while making effort to address issues. In fact things are rarely deleted from draft as this step by step improvement is what it is for. Main reasons for draft deletion are major copyright violations, abusing content, pure advertising, repeated submission with no improvements, not being edited for over 6 months. You've addressed the issue and added more sources. However I did note that the DOD is not in the source given and this suggests she was working Sept 1966! So please check that the facts are backed by the sources and IMDB is not a reliable source, and the resubmit. Also note you said "the internet hasn't caught up" - sources do not need to be online. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 10:50, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
Source found for DOD KylieTastic (talk) 11:07, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Jobism ‎

Re. Jobism. I accept your decision on this. But, just to say, Axiomathes (the “Where Science Meets Philosophy” journal published by Springer Nature) requested I carry out a couple of peer reviews for them, and in those reviews I talk about Jobism extensively. Also my own paper (called ‘Is it time for us to accept Einstein was wrong about time being relative?’) in which I introduce Jobism has been peer reviewed by Axiomathes. However, that’s as far as I’ve got at the moment. I’m currently waiting on a decision by Axiomathes as to whether or not they’re willing to publish my ‘Is it time for us to accept Einstein was wrong about time being relative?’ paper in Axiomathes. JohnBottomley6 (talk) 07:41, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi JohnBottomley6, Wikipedia is for publishing existing accepted knowledge not for promoting new ideas. All new articles on Wikipedia have to show they are notable (See WP:N) which in most cases requires significant coverage in multiple independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS). Clearly yours has no independent sources, and as your bio states "... I'm ... the only Jobist in the world" clearly there are not any others. Also claims such as "...fact that time is not relative" would need multiple exceptional sources due to the huge amount of science that says completely the opposite. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 10:21, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
  • Hi KylieTastic, as I say I accept your decision on this. But again, just to say, although a huge amount of science assumes time is relative (depending on your frame of reference), I think it’s actually a demonstrable fact that time is not relative (and only a fact that the system of measurement of time is relative, which isn’t the same thing at all). And that’s what I explain in detail in my ‘Is it time for us to accept Einstein was wrong about time being relative?’ paper. And I think that, having read my ‘Is it time for us to accept Einstein was wrong about time being relative?’ paper, Axiomathes’ main peer reviewer now agrees with me on that particular point at least. But, as I say, I’m currently waiting on a decision by Axiomathes as to whether or not they’re willing to publish my ‘Is it time for us to accept Einstein was wrong about time being relative?’ paper in Axiomathes. I take your point though about the need for multiple exceptional sources. However, as you no doubt know, journals typically insist the papers you submit to them you do so on an exclusive basis, so I’m trying not to overdo the number of journals I’m submitting my ‘Is it time for us to accept Einstein was wrong about time being relative?’ paper to. JohnBottomley6 (talk) 14:20, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Do not show significant coverage

Hi Kylie

I didn't found the place where comes to this subject, or maybe I'm just not to smart for that hehehe:)

I got this message that you verify by my post "Bryan LeRoy : ( do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject )

For some stuff I'm really not the smartest, I do not wanna take you time, but if you could help me to understand a little more what is wrong, I would lovely appreciate it.

Thank you very much, and have a great Evening :)

Bryan Leroy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moodnxgt (talkcontribs) 23:51, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Moodnxgt all new articles on Wikipedia have to show they are notable (See WP:N) which in most cases requires significant coverage in multiple independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS). In your case Wikipedia:Notability (people) is the version of the guidelines that most applies. You have three sources, the first if the subjects website so not independent. The other two are "significant coverage" however neither appear to be well know sources, neither say anything about who they are, and one is an interview so is not deemed independent. Also there appears to be a lot of unsourced content. So more is needed to show they are notable. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 10:06, 26 June 2020 (UTC)


Hello, I am not doing this is a moanly manner and I am fine with this so read it in a normal manner, please! :-)

Thanks for reviewing my Preston Tower Primary School submission, I understand that this article is not fitting for Wikipedia!

I think you do a amazing job to keep the site going! thanks, WikiEditBoy2

  • Hi WikiEditBoy2 thanks. A school is a frequent first article but unfortunately they are deemed not notable just for existing so need significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources to show notability. In general most primary, secondary and middle schools get merged, redirected or deleted if they make it to the main article space. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 12:49, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Good catch

I was so happy to see a rewrite at all that I missed running a CV detector. Fiddle Faddle 16:38, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

  • @Timtrent: yup it's easy to miss CVs when distracted by other issues, I miss many the first time round - as long as they don't get accepted no harm done (although I know some get very upset if you dont notice immediately). Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 16:52, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
    • They may get upset if they like. I prefer lower blood pressure 😂 Fiddle Faddle 16:54, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Declined submission

Hi Kylie, mu submission was declined as it requires significant independent coverage. Since then, i made an update with more links to verified music sites such as Let me know if more coverage is needed after the last update. Thanks in advance for your time — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs)

  • Hi since this is your first edit and you don;t say which draft all I can say is if you have addressed the issue and added more sources great! Once you believe if has enough to show the subject passes Wikipedia:Notability (music) or WP:GNG just re-submit. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 13:22, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

Review of Tarakote state article

Hi Kylie Tastic ! Could you please review this article for me ? Someone is adding tags and trying to remove the page. :( Riyyan Farooq (talk) 13:26, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

  • Hi Riyyan Farooq Spbal has added some tags but I see no attempt to remove the page. You should discuss with them and ask them to clarify. They have taged as having unrelaibel sources, but none are flagged up on WP:RSPSOURCES so ask which ones and why; For circular reference issue I assume they mean the first one which does clearly state its from List of rulers of Odisha so yes cannot be used as a source, you should use the sources from that article directly (assuming it has them for the content in question). For the first tag ask them to specify, or to mark more directly in the article so you can address any concerns. Regards KylieTastic (talk) 13:41, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you so much ! You're amazing

Also I will leave a message on their talk page. Thank you for your help Riyyan Farooq (talk) 14:07, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi Kylie ! There's a small error in the name of the page, Tarakote state. Can you make the 'S' in 'state' capital please. Riyyan Farooq (talk) 18:42, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you so very much. Cheers ! Riyyan Farooq (talk) 17:25, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

I need help on how to arrange reference

I wanted to contribute to bring easy acces to sources Abubakar Zaria (talk) 14:59, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, I will go over it carefully. Abubakar Zaria (talk) 17:49, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Review Request

Hi can you review Draft: Nguyen Huu Cau High School for me. Thanks a lot. AutoVida123 (talk) 14:08, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

Return to the user page of "KylieTastic/Archive 2020".