User talk:Sionk/Archive 7

Carla Lavatelli

Hello Sionk,

I am a new comer to this whole process. I appreciate your patience. Carla Lavatelli was my mother and I am trying to narrow down the things that I need to do to get her life and works cited on Wikipedia. How do I understand which points you need more information on? I am having a hard time pin pointing which of the many things mentioned are not considered valid yet. How do I zero in on what I am supposed to do? Is there any way I can call you from France where I work and live to have a direct conversation with you? I think that once I get the gist I will be much more efficient and productive in my contributions.

Many thanks, CarloHerrmann (talk) 15:27, 25 March 2013 (UTC) Carlo HERRMANN

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/SOI

Other than Bloomberg Business Week and SCNOW.com(both already cited), SOI only appears in business journals. Is there any way to proceed from here? Dorgant (talk) 17:10, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Candida Baker - Author

Hi Sion,

Can you please revise the latest version of Candida Baker - Author

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Candida_Baker_-_Author

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Georgina Louise Francis (talk • contribs) 07:14, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Not much has changed since I made my last comments on your Talk page. Please base the article on coverage about Baker (and her works) that are reliable and independent. Sionk (talk) 12:44, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Boxley Street Housing.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Boxley Street Housing.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 19:45, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Sardinian literature

Hi Sionk , I have added some additional notes and bibliography as you suggested. Could you exactly indicate me which sentences do you think they can seem my opinions rather than information? I am not native English speakers, as you certainly know, there might be misunderstandings on my translation. I'll try to find some free copyright images but will not be easy. Thank you so much. Mauro — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roburq (talk • contribs) 22:59, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Working in progress :-)--Mauro Podda 08:27, 30 March 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roburq (talk • contribs)

Candida Baker - Author

I created a new section as you did not respond to my previous post. It was there for several weeks too...

As for your feedback...take a look around the hundreds of author/journalist/editors pages on Wikipedia. You will find that the majority of theses Wikis have a lot less secondary sources than I cited. You will also find that most of them have a lot more citations from publishing houses. I have used one - from Penguin! So what are you talking about? Can you please advise who I can complain to about your feedback in relation to this.

I will take on board your feedback regarding the web copy, though it was re-written

Georgina Louise Francis (talk) 03:04, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

I offered you constructive advice on your Talk page on 6 March, but unfortunately it wasn't the news you wanted to hear. These are the basic requirements of Wikipedia, notability and verifiability. If you chose to ignore the advice then I can't help you any further. Sionk (talk) 03:17, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Grinberg Method

Hello Sionk,

There were some additions in the last month to the entry that I wrote on the Grinberg Method. I am new in Wikipedia and in writing entries, so I wanted to ask for your help - I read those additions (from the 19.3 and 28.3) and saw that it's full of gossip, dirt, revealing personal and un-relevant information about people who are alive, and most important - not fitting to a Wikipedia entry, not written in an appropriate language, no sources, and not interesting information about the method. It looks as if someone has an open account with the method and wants to close it on the wikipedia pages. I think in Wikipedia it can be called un-sourced or defamatory content.

I wanted to ask you what can I do about it - is it enough if I erase it - someone can just add it again? is it possible for editor with more wikipedia experience to erase it? do I put a tag? Is there a way to make sure that whoever wrote it doesn't put it back there?

Thank you very much--Shulas (talk) 08:57, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

I see what you mean! The recent addition was completely inappropriate, for the reasons you outline above. I've undone the most recent change and I'll leave a message on the anonymous IP's Talk page.

I'm not an expert on the Grinberg method and haven't looked at the earlier change (addition of a 'Controversies' section). The editor provided sources. If you think they are wrong, or the controversies are overstated, you are welcome to edit the section yourself. It is a good idea to explain your actions on the article's Talk page. Sionk (talk) 12:51, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Fir Hill Manor

Sorry, but the page reads like a story. All the sources are based on the BBC documentary, which is also a story. Pages about houses or manors should include descriptions of the property, not long tales of who owned what and who inherited what. Please also see discussion on DYK nomination page. Yoninah (talk) 11:52, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Maybe you should put this on the Talk page, or nominate it for AfD. The clean-up template certainly doesn't make things clear. Pages about buildings should describe why they are notable; if they are not notable for their appearance then their description is hardly necessary. Sionk (talk) 12:06, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Fir Hill Manor for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Fir Hill Manor 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/Fir Hill Manor until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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.

Christopher Bevan

Dear Reviewer,

This article has been edited since it was reviewed onm 22 February, several weeks ago, and I am still waiting for it to be reviewed again in its edited format.

Regards, Jennifer Bingham Publisher Goanna Press Sydney Australia April 3, 2013 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goanna Press (talk • contribs) 00:14, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Dean Anthony Gratton

Could we please at least review? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iconovate (talk • contribs) 21:24, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Global H2O

Dear sir/ Madame I would like to understand why the application was rejected for Global H2O. The charity is becoming more and more significant and getting more coverage globally. If I need to change anything, I will. I just need to understand how to do it. Thanks James — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grendel93 (talk • contribs) 18:53, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Thank you very much for helping on AEG Turbine Factory! BenjaminBaillaud (talk) 22:01, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Requests for Comment: Proposal for rewording WP:NSONG

Hi, an RfC has begun which proposes rewording WP:NSONG. As you participated in a related discussion, I invite you to join the RfC conversation. Regards,  Gong show 04:53, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Colvend and Southwick

Sorry, it may be copy and paste (and it acknowledges this at the end of the article), but it's not copyvio. The site you cited is making free use of it as we are - it was published in 1846. I've put a note on the talk page. Peridon (talk) 16:36, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Mandy Goodhandy's Article

Dear Sionk,

After some conversation with the subject, I'm going back to work on Mandy Goodhandy's Wikipedia bio.

In previously rejected versions, the reason cited was that we didn't have enough verifiable sources to prove Mandy's relevance.

Through research I have discovered three newspaper articles that testify to the subject's accomplishments and relevance.

One discusses her position as Grand Marshal of Toronto's 2010 Pride Parade, while the other two articles detail the Miss Shemale World pageant that Mandy founded in 2002.

I am preparing to revise the article and do some minor edits along with including these new verifiable sources. In your opinion, would including new material strengthen the case for a Wikipedia entry on Mandy?

Sincerely,

Josh Bentley-Swan

Josh.bentleyswan (talk) 00:02, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Mozart (train)

Mozart (train) is up for AfD at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Mozart_(train). Please make your opinion there known, in light of what everyone has said already. I'm Tony Ahn (talk) 03:30, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Venini

I've been working on Venini today, added sourcing, basically re-writing the article. There might be more to come, but the bulk of it is done now, and I think I've demonstrated notability. Could you take a look at the changes and see if you have changed your mind about the article's deletion. 阝工巳几千凹父工氐 (talk) 05:40, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Because I was the nominator of the AfD, I'll let the other participants decide the outcome. Sionk (talk) 19:21, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Curtis Lang

Hi Sionk, Thanks for your comments on my page! I take the main objection was the tone. I went through it and can see where I can choose more neutral language. I am assuming that the range of references was adequate? I do have one or two more that I can add. Cheers, Claudia 173.183.80.142 (talk) 20:44, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Well, on a second look I'm not entirely sure what Lang is notable for. At first glance it looked possible it was a basically sound article. But I think on a closer look, people will question it. The subject (Lang) has to meet Wikipedia's 'golden rule'. Alternatively if his work has been widely reviewed or written about, he may meet the alternative notability criteria for artists and authors. As I said, the tone of the language leaps out as being inappropriate. Sionk (talk) 20:53, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Questions re:Sonia Gechtoff article

Hello, SionK- Thank you for approving the above article and for making the formatting changes.

I'm new to this process so would appreciate your input when you have the chance. I'm unsure why more citations are needed. Facts that mention specific things are cited, whereas general information, which I define as being in multiple sources, are not. If there are specific Wikipedia requirements and/or guidelines please let me know.

Also, the listing of exhibitions, awards and collections is per the standard way of doing so in artist biographies and has been for years although there are differences as to whether or not the year comes first or last; see the Wikipedia article on Ernest Briggs. Any input on this would also be appreciated.

Thank you for your time.

Cynthiavictoria (talk) 15:00, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

The "Further Reading" and "External Links" suggest there are other sources which haven't been added to the article yet. At the moment, the lists of exhibitions and awards are unsourced, but could possibly be verified.

'Selected' exhibitions and awards are things artists put in their press pack, or on their website. Wikipedia includes things that are well known and have been noticed by independent sources. That is why I changed 'Selected' to 'Notable'. Unfortunately there are many sub-standard articles on Wikipedia, which are not always good precedents.

Anyway, it looks like you wrote a decent article, well done! Sionk (talk) 17:07, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Listed Buildings in Wales

I'm not convinced the images add much to this list. One or two, and they look a bit folorn. Loads would be overwhelming. What do you think? KJP1 (talk) 06:11, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Having said that, I've just looked again at Grade II* listed buildings in Greater Manchester, which does have lots of images and doesn't look bad. But turning the Wales list into a similar table would be a big job! KJP1 (talk)

There seemed no harm in it. Lists often have illustrative images. The Glamorgan and Monmouthshire sections in particular are quite lengthy and have plenty of room for one or two images. I'd counter you too by saying I don't think the map of "Wales within the United Kingdom" is particularly pertinent or illustrative ;) Sionk (talk) 08:12, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jonathan Adams (architect), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Penryn (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:18, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Article for Creation: Zardoze

Hi Sionk, Thank you for your feedback on my article "Zardoze". Could you please advise me on any specific parts of the article that can be removed or amended that would improve it? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tammilin (talk • contribs) 02:58, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi Tammilin, the Zardoze article is weak at the moment because there is very little reliable news coverage about this new company. A lot of your article is about the past credentials of the design team, rather than Zardoze (though admittedly the "5 questions with … Zardoze's John Paul Rangel" article is okay-ish, linking him and his record to the company). The 'Retail' section seems mainly promotional, because it is telling readers where to go and buy Zardoze products. Sionk (talk) 11:15, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you!

a wonderful article on US public radio this morning: http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2013/04/22/177975138/how-coffee-brings-the-world-together Thanks for feedback on my first AfC (it's far easier to edit articles that are already there). ResearcherQ (talk) 00:12, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
	For your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brian Farrell (artist). I double-checked your information; very tenuous indeed! Bearian (talk) 17:21, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Well thankyou, that's a new barnstar I've never heard of :) Glad you agree the article is dodgy! Sionk (talk) 19:20, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Holistic management international

"This is now a regional office of HMI" was added with a 2009 reference. (before the split) It should probably be removed unless a reference AFTER the split can be found. ie 2010 or later. Redddbaron (talk) 17:36, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Article for creation : Last Curtain Call

I have revised and updated the references section on the Last Curtain Call-page (Live CD/DVD from the Norwegian band Theatre of Tragedy). ToT has been active since 1994, and has been a significant band in the gothic metal genre. They are already listed with the rest of their discography on Wikipedia, and I find it strange that the Last Curtain Call has been rejected two times. I hope you will have another look at the references, and let me know if something is still missing. Easorbo (talk) 18:26, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Just want to correct you on something......

I saw your comment on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Josh Faga and I just want to correct you on something. Rochester Rhinos play in the USL Pro which is a fully pro league. – Michael (talk) 22:43, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

It's not on the list at Wikiproject Football. Sionk (talk) 22:54, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

It's listed as USL Professional League. – Michael (talk) 02:50, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Maybe this should be raised with Wikipedia:WikiProject Football. It's a new league, maybe they've missed it? Sionk (talk) 11:35, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

They didn't miss it, they just incorrectly referenced it. I'm gonna go fix it right now. – Michael (talk) 18:22, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Question/request re: Sonia Gechtoff article

Hi, Sionk-

Okay. Here's the situation.

Sonia is 86 years old, one of the last living American Abstract Expressionists. She is concerned about the "clean up" note at the front of the article because she fears that people will think that what is written is untrue. I assure you every word is correct; I have been interviewing her about her life for nearly a year. And that doesn't include the hours of research.

It would be a very good deed indeed if you could see your way clear to removing the initial "clean up" note. It would make an elderly - yet very active - woman most happy. If you feel you can't, and I understand, please tell me the level/number of citations I need for you to feel comfortable. I honestly am somewhat unsure what to do short of citing every sentence.

Thank you for understanding. Sonia is a grand woman and anything I can do to make her happy I try to do.

Cynthia

Cynthiavictoria (talk) 01:30, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Deletion of Institut auf dem Rosenberg

Dear Sionk,

Many thanks for your insightful commentary as to why, the Institut auf dem Rosenberg page should not feature on the english version of Wikipedia. However, you have failed to enlighten me on how to make the page sound 'less as an advertisment,' and more as an article.

As a fellow writer, I have put in enormous effort to write a true picture of Rosenberg. I tried to include other views about the school, such as its hefty pricing (the one negative comment online), however the comment I found regarding the price exists only in form of an online commentary, which Wikipedia does not permit as a source. I have also looked at all references about Rosenberg online and have included all of the ones found online. Finally, I looked at the entries of other boarding schools, and based my article about Rosenberg on those already existing.

I would like you to note that I have invested a enormous amount of time to produce this article in my own free time and have put it together with outmost intergrity, being a journalist myself. I am open for comments and changes to my entry, however, I am puzzled why other entires of boarding schools are deemed to meet the integrity standards eventhough the quality of the article and sources is much poorer than the one you asked to be deleted about the Institut auf dem Rosenberg. (Please take 5 minutes to check: List of boarding schools - Switzerland.) You will see that they are all shown in a positve light, some of them dont cite a single source!!! Yet they are online since many years??? I cannot help but feel there is a certain capriousness to this. Again, any suggestions from your side are welcome. (LKK343 (talk) 11:52, 4 May 2013 (UTC))

No 'capriciousness'. It was sourced from listings and websites with a vested interest in promoting the school. It even gave the current school fees, which ony added to the promotional feel. I see an admin has now agreed and deleted the page. I'll take a look at List of boarding schools, thanks! Sionk (talk) 15:12, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

I had a conversation with "User:Boing! said Zebedee", the admin who removed the article. He/She gave me a general idea what was wrong with my entry and how I could get a better style/sourcing to the article. I was also told that I can show my next draft to him/her. I will work with this user to get it right next time. This will (hopefully) help me to make a contribution the passes the criteria. Thanks. (LKK343 (talk) 20:04, 4 May 2013 (UTC))

Madeleine Boschan

Dear Sionk, You have been so kind to see through and comment on the article of Sculptor Madeleine Boschan. Thank you very much for this! I have tried so far to add as much secondary and third sources in the external links- and reference-sections as possible (e.g. exhibition catalogues, magazine reviews/features and links to institutions where she has exhibited). If this is still not sufficient, please let me know how to improve the page. With best regards and thanks again, P Postq (talk) 07:56, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

A bowl of strawberries for you!

...and thanks for your contributions to Slow Food! Kind regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 01:05, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

ENGS Request for Submission

Hey Sionk,

The Wikipedia article for the English Nanny and Governess School at [1] has been submitted and is waiting to be reviewed. You reviewed this article once before, and I would like to request you to review it again.

Thanks Aeroplanepics0112 (talk) 15:21, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Thankyou for your support

Thankyou for your support. I am wondering though if there is a way to convince people not to do the stupid, hate increasing, overbearing RFC. It seems that all the discussion currently will be wated if someone goes and creats an RFC.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:49, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

No probs. I imagine it must have been fairly uncomfortable to be singled out in the national media!! My understanding of the pitfalls of categorization has been improved dramatically as a result of the coverage, and I think Wikipedia's problem is quite evidently not down to one individual. Sionk (talk) 19:09, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

formatting and additional sources templates

Hi Sionk, you have contributed to the 'viken berberian' article in the past. for the past 16 months the contributors have expanded with additional citations for verification. the article is very well sourced, yet it has both sourcing and formatting templates above it since its creation more than a year ago. the formatting template nots that the article used bare urls for citations and recommended using full citations. a number of contributors have reformatted these citations in the past year with full name of author, title, date and work. there has been no incidence of link rot with any one the urls; however, the formatting template persists. is there a problem with the cnl citation, number. 17? is this the only one and can you please help with this and review the citation and the two templates in question? thank you in advance for your conscientious work. 141.136.81.45 (talk) 08:12, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Sarah Howells

If you had checked the Guardian article, you would have noticed a reference to her home town, Milford Haven. However, I have added an additional reference for your convenience. Alvear24 (talk) 17:05, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 30

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Rita Genet (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to America

Torture Museum, Amsterdam (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Iron maiden

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:59, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Toowoomba Local History Library page

Hi Sionk,

I left a talk message about 2 months ago regarding the decline of the Toowoomba Local History library page (Archive 6 No 70.)but haven't received any feedback yet. Would there any chance for you to provide us some advices on this please? It would be much appreciated. Many thanks in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lhsunshine (talk • contribs) 00:21, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Youth time

Hi Sionk,

Can you takes the time to review our article submission again Youth Time ?

Thank you! Tanya ZAV. (talk) 04:28, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

I've never reviewed this before. But I can see immediately it is unadequately sourced. Sionk (talk) 08:56, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Vince Kidd

How can you define performing on a show watched by 7 million people and releasing a new single as "not notable" for a music artist? Seriously?! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.159.77.40 (talk) 20:39, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Copy Data

I saw you declined Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Copy Data as a neologism a few months ago. It got re-submitted. I declined it as already being covered in "Data proliferation and Data deduplication as well as other articles in Category:Data management and its sub-categories."

Just thought you might want to know. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 19:42, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

advocate?

I think you may be on to something, but I have another line of thought, around the term "advocate" - I responded at the talk:sarah brown page, take a look and let me know your thoughts. --Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 06:12, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

WP Wales in the Signpost

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Wales for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. –Mabeenot (talk) 15:34, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Shillingford

Hi Sionk. Shillingford is a hamlet, see the article civil parishes in England - moreover per WP:UKVILLAGES it would normally need to be merged with Warborough, for which it dependent on it for far more than its church - social side? sports? etc. etc. However it is historically notable, remote from all but that place and using the criteria there probably qualifies to exist in its own right, arguably on the basis that is population is as you point out large enough. In any event as no-one in the commuter land country it is in, like Essex of a younger generation would write or say "hamlet" I think I'll use instead one of the preferred terms, technically a community/neighbourhood/locality (hamlet) of... That avoids any doubt and lets people stick to their historic communities, or at least know about them. And the "proper" word which irks you, and to a lesser degree, but somewhat, me.

The fact that some hamlets are described as villages is fine where the population is over 1000, ie typically at least 10 streets, which it is not and I don't intend on that term, I think you will agree seeing the size of some South East villages that is only fair (some are more than town sized).Adam37 (talk) 19:39, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

I was simply going on what the sources say, rather than making up my own definition. But I suppose the rewrite leaves it suitably ambiguous, so I'm not going to change it back. Sionk (talk) 22:45, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Further Revisions to Mandy Goodhandy Article to Make it Fit for Publication

Dear Sionk,

It has been awhile since I have worked on this project, but I have recently resumed editing Mandy Goodhandy's Wikipedia article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Mandy_Goodhandy

I recall sending you a message via Talk perhaps two months ago inquiring as to what further edits are needed so the article can be published. At the time, new references (#5 and #10) were added.

Could you advise if any further changes are needed to this article?

There is a possibility that I may be able to add a reference about the subject's connection to playwright John Herbert - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Herbert_%28playwright%29

Looking forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

Josh Bentley-Swan

Josh.bentleyswan (talk) 00:59, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Melbourne Cabaret Festival

Thanks for taking a look at an article I started.

I've totally overhauled it - could you take another look?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Melbourne_Cabaret_Festival

Regards

David Earlierdrama (talk) 07:22, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject AFC needs your help... again

WikiProject Articles for creation Backlog Elimination Drive

WikiProject AFC is holding a one month long Backlog Elimination Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running from July 1st, 2013 – July 31st, 2013.

Awards will be given out for all reviewers participating in the drive in the form of barnstars at the end of the drive.
There is a backlog of over 1000 articles, so start reviewing articles! Visit the drive's page and help out!

A new version of our AfC helper script is released! It includes many bug fixes, new improvements and features, code cleanup, and more page cleanups. If you want to see a full list of changes, go to Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Helper script/Development page. Please report bugs and feature requests there, too! Thanks.

Delivered at 13:13, 19 June 2013 (UTC) by EdwardsBot (talk), on behalf of WikiProject AFC

argh

But it DOES have support in sources. Have you checked recently? Advocate is the way she is most frequently described, and it is her current source of notability, at least that one word is the best and most frequently used. Please check sources and reconsider. thanks! --Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 13:28, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

It's not mentioned in the article and has been discussed on the Talkpage without gaining support. Maybe we need a separate discussion about the lead paragraph! Of course, the primary source of this description is on the Browns' own website, which should be taken with a pinch of salt. Sionk (talk) 13:36, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

fyi

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Harrassing_admins_into_reversing_decisions --Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 05:03, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time to review Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Docker

It appears that your two primary concerns were: a)Use of technical jargon and b)The extent to which references were blogs, rather than traditional publications

Docker is a very popular and rapidly growing piece of open source software. Over 60,000 unique visitors per month are visiting the project homepage, and it is consistently one of the top trending repositories on github.

I modeled the form, tone, and references on wikipedia articles relating to other well-known open source software. This would include:

• Jenkins_(software)
• Puppet_(software)
• Couchdb

As the intended audience is highly technical, the article was written to a level that would be appropriate to the audience.

With regard to citations, I included articles in the Wall Street Journal, InfoQ, and ZDnet. However, as is typical of early stage open source software projects, the vast majority of early coverage is in technical blogs. The blogs that I included were not primarily personal/hobby blogs, but rather:

• a)Blogs by well-known technologists (e.g. Rami Rosen, the Changelog)
• b)Company or organizational postings ( including OpenStack, Atlassian, Puppetlabs)

With regard to the facts about the project itself (e.g. usage, versions, history, etc.), GitHub is as close to a definitive source as can be obtained by open source software.

I think that you'll find that the tone and type of sources are very consistent with those used by other articles on open source projects. If you would prefer, I can make this a highly stripped down (stub) article.

Again, I appreciate the time that volunteer editors like yourself put in.

Golubbe (talk) 17:47, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Referenceable articles

Trying to understand what I should be using for references in an article to get it through the review. I have the following questions:

1. Can I reference an article scanned from a source that is not online? Or do I need to have the info posted somewhere online? If I can use the scanned in article do I need to upload it somewhere so it can be reviewed/seen?

2. In general, is a high school newspaper article considered referenceable?

3. For facts that might might not be published anywhere (like facts about the subjects early life), how can that info be included in the article? I noticed the following on the Referencability page "....self-published sources can sometimes be used as information about themselves". Does this mean that some facts can be established by the subject if they haven't been published yet?

4. If an article contains multiple facts about the subject, each of which I include in the Wikipedia article, how do I reference the source? Do I put multiple references in for each fact as it is referenced back to the same article? Do I just put the reference on the first fact then leave the remaining facts unreferenced which makes it look like the article on Wikipedia is not supported?

Thanks for your help

Rflarson (talk) 22:47, 3 July 2013 (UTC)rflarson

Good questions. My answers are...

1. Yes, but describe it well so we can identify it (and find it if necessary). See WP:CITEHOW for suggestions.

2. Not normally. For personal facts in particular you need reliable sources and I'm not sure a high school newsletter has adequate journalistic standards. University newspapers are much better!

3. If they're not published anywhere don't use them. It's one of the basic tenets of Wikipedia - no original research.

4. I'd advise you to copy the source multiple times, where it is needed to verify important facts. Another editor can combine the duplicate sources if necessary (sometimes a 'bot' will find the article and sort them out). Or take a look at WP:NAMEDREFERENCES.

Sionk (talk) 17:20, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Declined 4th diff on my AfC page

Hi Sionk, I noticed that you declined diff #4. Based on the article's References section, there is only 1 source at my time of reviewing. What I meant by asking for more sources was because only the very front part was sourced, and the rest wasn't. Cheers. ✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎ 00:43, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

My submission at Articles for creation: Muhlenberg Greene Architects

As I am in the process of further researching the history of Muhlenberg Greene Architects, we are simultaneously updating our history on our company website, at http://mgarchitects-ltd.com/history. This information has been researched and cited to other outside sources, noted within the Wikipedia article, but much of the information on the Wikipedia page will mirror the information found on the MGA history page. Is this okay? Do I need to cite the Wikipedia page on our company website? I'm not sure how to avoid this duplication of information, as I am simultaneously researching for both the website and Wikipedia article.

Also, I am researching the company history through news articles and company archives, and have not intended to present a biased view. I appreciate you noting a specific area of the article that reads like an advertisement. I have adjusted that, deleting the quote all together. Hopefully the article now no longer reads this way, as it is all researched through historic newspaper archives and old building blueprints, company archives, and historic photographs. Thank you for your help!LvanS (talk) 19:46, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Cite your article to the original published sources, not the company website. Information from "old building blueprints, company archives, and historic photographs" is what we call original research and best left for the company website, not Wikipedia. Sionk (talk) 19:54, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Ahh, that's something I did not know. Thank you!LvanS (talk) 20:09, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Cislo & Thomas LLP article

Hello Sionk, I have made some modifications to my Cislo & Thomas LLP page on page creation and I was hoping you could run through it again and let me know what you think, I would really appreciate the feedback. Thank you for your time. Mtheisner (talk) 22:21, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

You really need to read the reasons I declined the article - "see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies and the golden rule" - you need to find reliable published sources that are entirely independent of Cislo & Thomas and talk about the company in some depth. Sionk (talk) 22:42, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Would it be too much trouble to ask for an example source that does not follow the guidelines? That way I can rule out any other sources that may be similar in nature, Thanks. Mtheisner (talk) 22:46, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Sources are sources. However, the sources you have used only show that the company exists. Wikipedia isn't a directory of all existing companies. That's why we have notability criteria, to identify which companies are important or widely noticed. None of your sources demonstrate that the company has been widely noticed. In fact, much of the article is about Dan Cislo, rather than the company. Sionk (talk) 00:10, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Undercliff (Isle of Wight) initial cleanup

Thanks! I've just restarted contributing after a very long break, and am very rusty on image format conventions. I can't believe I wrote "named for" - too much contact with US writing! Gordonofcartoon (talk) 18:33, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

I wondered why an American would want to write about a bit of coast on the IOW! Apology accepted ;o) Sionk (talk) 19:06, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Dancing Girls (Nik Kershaw Song) review

Hi Sionk, Thanks for reviewing my article on Nik Kershaw's Dancing Girls. However, I'm a little confused - I had a whole pile of information about the single on there, and the previous reviewer told me it was too much information and I should get rid of it (you'll find it in the history, I'm sure). Now you're saying that there is not enough information. While I'm happy to search out reviews etc, these are not necessarily given in other articles about singles. Where do I go from here?

Metabelis (talk) 17:15, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for expanding on your comments. The issue, I guess, is in finding a happy medium between what I find interesting - the minutiae of record production credits fascinates me, for example - and what actually makes a good article. However, in the interests of completeness, I have reinserted the track listings of the various 12" releases, partly because I believe it gives an insight into the way the record was promoted at the time, and partly because this is information that makes the article useful to collectors. I have also quoted from a couple of reviews as per your suggestion, but am now being told that the quotations should be removed. What do you recommend. Metabelis (talk) 20:07, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Enquiry

Hello Sionk, Thanks for reviewing my aritcle [2]. I am sad that you are rejecting it again and again. I couldn't give more sources. Becuase there are no more reliable sources. I am one of the member of the parish. What do you really want to know? Whether there is a church named Little Flower Forane Church in Nilambur or else..I have given sources which I got. I couldn't give more. It's unavailable. Will you please go through the websites given in the article. That will be enough for surety about the church. 991joseph (talk) 14:31, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Unfortunately Wikipedia isn't a free listing service for all churches. There has to be at least some strong evidence that the church has been talked about in sources that are reliable and independent. It's not sufficient simply to prove the church exists. Sionk (talk) 15:08, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Question on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Amari

Hi Sionk,

Really appreciate you taking the time to review my submission, it's very much appreciated.

May I just check whether the reason my submissions rejection is down to the sources predominantly consisting of PR sources? If so I totally understand now and will do my best to find more credible references, for the next submission.

Once again, many thanks for your help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tchhh (talk • contribs) 02:55, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Well, in reality I couldn't see any significant (news) coverage that was reliable and independent - the Travel Weekly link is a promotional listing, while the BBC source is a press release (which briefly mentions Amari). Wikipedia's notability crieria for companies is quite stringent, but basically you need to at least follow the 'golden rule'. Sionk (talk) 14:51, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Geoffrey Key

Hello - I noticed you have edited my page about Geoffrey Key. Can I ask you - what did you do with the quotations from the Messum's archivist & Art Historian - Andrea Gates - which read (here below):

"For almost fifty years now, Geoffrey Key has been one of the most successful and recognised names in Northern contemporary art. His boldly stylised landscapes, still life’s, equestrian and figure subjects – long sought after by Manchester & Salford’s private collectors and institutions – now evidently inspire the work of several succeeding Northern painters”

“With its bold colour and complex tonalities, strong lines and contrapuntal curves, Geoffrey Key’s work expresses the contemporary energy of the (largely) industrial North with true cosmopolitan panache. But what truly sets his work apart and has made its popularity so enduring is that he apparently never had any problem with either side of this equation. His style is sympathetic with European modernism, but not dependent upon it. In fact, it’s flavour is just as Northern as it is, arguably, continental”.[9]

Is this just an editing mistake? Because if you choose to omit these qoutes can you please change the text accordingly as it currently reads:

In the exhibition brochure, Andrea Gates – Archivist & Art Historian for Messum’s - said of Geoffrey Key and his work;

Geoffrey Key’s work has also been the subject of a number of published books – G Key A Book of Drawings and Interview (1975), Daydreams (1981), Clowns (2001), Geoffrey Key Twentieth Century Drawings (2002), Images (2004), Geoffrey Key Paintings (2008), Birds (2010). Signature Book (2011).[10]

I'm pretty sure that isn't what you intended as, I'm sure you'll agree, there is no continuity to it & it doesn't really make any sense.

When I compare the Geoffrey Key page to one of his contemporaries in Northern Art, Liam Spencer see - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liam_Spencer - I cannot honestly understand how the Spencer page is deemed better for publishing than the Geoffrey Key! It's no more informative or interesting - is much shorter in detail, with no pictures, & has far fewer external references than the Geoffrey Key article.

I have provided stacks of reputable third part sources - including, The BBC, Messum's, De Brett's, Lancashire Life, Manchester Evening News, Daily Telegraph, Asian Art News & more. As you will understand this isn't a subject that is written about on an everyday basis. What I have provided to Wikipedia is practically all the material you can access from anywhere,the art dealers who sell his work, fan websites, magazine & national newspaper articles etc. I am totally at a loss where I go from here with this now & getting a bit down with it all - Your suggestions please!

JeffersonWSoiwittaya (talk) 16:39, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Sionk - Ok, I take your point about the Messum's Achivist's comments.To describe them as meaningless is a bit harsh though, unless you are looking at it only from an impartiality perspective. Yes, it's my first effort & I am going to see it through so I'll definately be back to you again with the required quotes. Thanks.JeffersonWSoiwittaya (talk) 11:48, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello Sionk - Please take a look at my additions to the page. Think you would approve of the additional:

Reference to the BBC - Your Paintings website - showing the artists work there

Reference to an independent review of the recent Messum's exhibition

Reference to an independent website quoting critical reviews of the subjects work

Reference to the books published about the subject's work

Reference to a local television interview by the subject,regarding his links to Salford & his work

Your comments are welcome, as always - Best regards, Rob JeffersonWSoiwittaya (talk) 18:11, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Dear Sionk

Added a reference this morning from a North West UK business magazine regards the investment value of Northern Art in general & Geoff Key's work in particular. Hope this meets with your expectations as I am really struggling if you need more!By the way - the Artist asked me slightly ammend the first paragraph (introduction) hope you don't mind that too much. Thanks. Rob JeffersonWSoiwittaya (talk) 09:24, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

AfC

Sionk, you wrote *{{afc comment|1=I'm struggling to believe the Countess meets Wikipedia's notability standards, based on a book by a relative and a brief feature syndicated across several newspapers in 1933. If any of the other publications left at the bottom of the article have useful information about her, maybe you need to add it. Sionk I have cited more than just a "brief feature syndicate". Moreoever, several dozens newspaper and magazine articles were written about her in the 1930/40s, and she was as notable back then as any celebrity is today. It seems to me that you decision was based more on the fact that "a relative" created the article. Is this really what Wiki the founders of Wiki had in mind? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.226.253.253 (talk) 21:11, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Multiple Unresolved Issues

Sionk, I am reaching out to you because talk page of Parsons Paris (2013) has not been responded to. There are several inaccuracies associated with the Parsons page verus Paris College of Art that I am attempting to correct but have continuously run into trouble. Let me know what you think about the changes I have proposed on the Parsons Paris talk page and if you need any clarification on the proof of the validity of the proposed edits or the history of Parsons Paris itself. Thank you. Mickey Lukens 15:04, 25 July 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mickeyallen (talk • contribs)

Re: Jade Bailey

Semi-protection is definitely an option, but for the moment, he/she seems to be sticking to one IP, so I'd start by blocking that account if necessary, before protecting the article. Sir Sputnik (talk) 18:17, 30 July 2013 (UTC)