User talk:StraussInTheHouse/Archive 6

Active discussions

kindly review the draft " Maskoor Ahmad Usmani". All of the suggestion by Wikipedia has been taken care of in the new draft. Infact the draft has been changed into the stub. Kindly review the draft as it is long awaited. Marghoob2018 (talk) 23:08, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Marghoob2018, Huon has since re-declined the draft, commenting Many of the cited sources do not mention Usmani, others are misrepresented and do not say what they're cited for. There also still is decidedly non-neutral language. If you require further elaboration on that rationale, please let either of us know. Many thanks, 10:30, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 The Barnstar of Good Humor Sometimes bad portals need to be ridiculed. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:42, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
Thanks Robert, it's how I cope with them! Best, 19:09, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Ping ping

WanderingWanda and Mathglot: apologies for not responding to the pings that I requested from you both in the meta-discussion about Talk:Genderqueer, I did intend to, but I had to have a wikibreak due to personal IRL circumstances. I see from the page now that the discussion has substantially developed since my proposed closure, so it is probably best for me to leave it to another uninvolved user who's had more of a handle on how the discussion has developed to close it, however, such a user is, of course, free to incorporate any elements of my proposed closure into it. Kind regards, 10:38, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

I had already thought about what I would do in your situation and came to exactly the same conclusion you did. Good call, afaic. RL always takes preference, so not apology necessary, but you're kind to explain your thought process here and let us know. Thanks again, Mathglot (talk) 23:07, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Ray

Hey Strauss, would it possible for you to move this article [1] as well for spelling consistency? --HistoryofIran (talk) 13:55, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Hey HistoryofIran, I've done it, the same sources seem to apply to the county as well so the consensus from the other discussion can apply. Rey County has now been left as a two-entry disambiguation page as there doesn't appear to be consensus for whether Ray County, Missouri or Ray County is the primary topic for Rey County (despite the Iranian one being at the base page name for the correctly-spelled version), so if you want that changing, a fresh RM would be needed. Many thanks! 14:39, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Ningen Dock

I got the following comment. I do not know which part I should delete. I changed the summary. Because I am weak in English, I want you to tell me concretely. "Aside from sourcing issue: the last line of lead needs removing, we don't pass judgement, if published sources say it's wrong then we can note dissent." Owada.k (talk) 05:51, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

1. The need for better quality sources.
2. The last sentence in the lead paragraph needs taking out.
I hope this is clearer, if not, please let me know. 09:17, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

George Beauchamp (RMS Titanic)

Hi! Nice to meet you! I've changed some things from the article, and taken it from more reliable source Opera House Players. If declined, no matter, I will take it as experience as beginner on editing. Best wishes. LLcentury (talk) 13:42, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi LLcentury, thanks for letting me know, I or another reviewer will be with it shortly. I declined it because it was still being investigated at CP, but Justlettersandnumbers has sorted it. 14:40, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
Thank you so much! Should I resubmit? or not? Best wishes. --LLcentury (talk) 14:49, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
Looks fine for resubmission to me at a quick glance! 09:53, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Çağlar Yüksel

Hello there, Can you look at Çağlar Yüksel? I've added the resources by correcting the required error. Thank you in advance--Spentime (talk) 14:53, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Spentime, I note you've resubmitted the draft, a reviewer will be with it within the stated time period on the yellow template. Unfortunately, we can't expedite reviews based on talk page messages. Thanks, 08:27, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Have you had a chance to see the updated page of Peter P. Vekinis?

As you see Peter has had a very interesting life and accomplished many things. I call him a renaissance man. I found some photos and updated the text and added many new references so please let me know it this is OK now. Thanks!

Wendygorski (talk) 18:01, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi, I further edited the entry on this gentleman and there are now many more references(as you requested). In addition, many other references are only available on paper from the time the internet didn't exist. Please take a look and let me know if there is something else that should be done. I would like to have this entry in wikipedia. Your cooperation is appreciated. Wendy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wendygorski (talkcontribs) 13:16, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Wendygorski, you can use {{cite book}} and {{cite journal}} to cite pre-Internet sources. As long as you click "Resubmit", it will be in the queue and a reviewer will take a look at it within the stated time period on the yellow template. Thanks, 08:27, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Oman Aviation Group

Well, there are two Keep !voters at MFD on it, and they are different. One of them is a sockpuppet engaged in undisclosed paid editing. The other appears to be a good-faith editor who simply has the idea that all of the other editors are like himself and are all good-faith editors, and so doesn't understand just how difficult it is to keep Wikipedia free of corporate pollution. Also, I do assume that the company is notable, but that its paid editors are never about to write a neutral draft, even with handholding, and besides, volunteers shouldn't be expected to do handholding for paid editors. The two Keep voters are two different sides. One is part of the problem, and the other simply doesn't understand what the problem is. Robert McClenon (talk) 12:25, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

• Thanks for the heads up Robert McClenon, I can see how legitimate users who aren't active in the area could !vote keep in good faith. I know requested articles is a bit of a black hole, but that is the only recourse if the company is notable as the editor behind the draft has demonstrated that they are incapable of writing from a neutral point of view. Best, 08:27, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
Well, there is a way for a paid editor to get their company listed, that doesn't use the black hole of Requested Articles. That is, first, get advice about paid editing at the Teahouse. Second, write a draft that is as neutral as possible and submit it via Articles for Creation, with the declaration, and then simply let the reviewer review it and wait patiently, and address any comments made by the reviewer before resubmitting. They might get the article approved after a response cycle. The key to it is patience. That may be sometimes feasible for a salaried paid editor. If the company has a contingency fee arrangement with the paid editor, that they get paid when the article is accepted, that greatly reduces the likelihood of acceptance, because it increases the likelihood that the paid editor will resubmit too many times and start acting like a paid editor, and the draft will go to MFD, and the editor will start using multiple accounts and wind up at SPI. There is a paradoxical element, that the harder the company or its paid editor pushes to get the article, the less likelihood they will get the article soon, or ever (because it gets salted). Of course, they would actually do better to spend the same money on improving their own web site, which is their own. Or if they want to cheat, they would do as well as to pay for black hat SEO as for a Wikipedia article. It is less difficult to game Google, who can be paid honestly, than to try to game Wikipedia, who has honest volunteers in a slow-motion cyber-war against dishonest non-volunteers. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:31, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Wording of the close

Talk:Saint Peter#Requested move 24 May 2019. “Not moved”? Obviously, that is the fact of the result and the statement that no action was taken, written in past tense about the upcoming non action. It is not a good one line summary of the discussion. Surely, you would agree, “consensus to not move” is a better summary of the discussion? —SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:22, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

SmokeyJoe, sure, I've clarified here. Many thanks, 11:06, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

Delhi Football Club

Please check it now & help us to approve it, Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bs mehra (talkcontribs) 17:05, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Bs mehra, it still isn't in an acceptable state. We advise using inline citations as opposed to an external list dump, and it comes across as rather promotional when the majority of said links are affiliated social media sites. Furthermore, please can you clarify who you are referring to when you say "us"? Only one person should use a given account. Many thanks, 11:08, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

Video Games Chronicle

Hi Strauss,

Please could you advise us how we can get our references on Video Games Chronicle to an acceptable standard for your approval? I'm looking at similar approved pages such as PCGamesN and Nintendo Life (who are in the same network as us) and struggling to see what we're missing. Both of these are also made up of links from MCV and GamesIndustry, which are the two most credible trade business publications in the games industry.

Appreciate the help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Espio101 (talkcontribs)

Hi Espio101, thanks for the message. What you're looking for is in-depth, significant coverage of the publication in independent, reliable sources. This page gives a brief summary of the sorts of coverage which is useful for conveying notability and also verifying content. I am unaware of community consensus regarding either of the two sources you have mentioned, so I am erring on the side of caution because if I was to approve it and it then got subsequently deleted, it wouldn't really be fair on you. I must ask, are you in any way affiliated with the publication you're writing about? If so, you must disclose your conflict of interest and it is mandatory if you are paid for your edits. I ask because you refer to yourself in the objective plural first person and your comment about a network regarding the business suggests ties. Kind regards, 14:08, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
Hey StraussInTheHouse, no just a dedicated reader. The two references on the page are the most respected industry publications in games. In terms of getting a games journalism page approved, I honestly don't think you could expect to get better links from anywhere. However, I've added a few more referrals in terms of original news citation and resubmitted the page for your approval. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Espio101 (talkcontribs)

Draft:Asylum in France

Hello! I noticed that you have reviewed my draft on 3 June. The reason for rejection that you gave me seemed to be "Topic is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia". Could you please clarify more about why that topic could not be accepted? I have noticed many similar pages with titles "Asylum in XXX", where XXX puts the name of a country. LIUs1812 (talk) 08:11, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

If it is because you have seen the page "Asylum in France" so that you may not accept the draft.....well it was me that started the new page "Asylum in France" before I submit my draft for review. LIUs1812 (talk) 08:26, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi LIUs1812, thanks for your message. We've got a bit of an issue at Articles for Creation at the moment with duplicate submissions, that is, submissions which are on topics already in the mainspace or already in the Articles for Creation workflow. Articles for Creation is designed primarily for use by non-autoconfirmed users - those users with fewer than ten edits and newer than four days - and users who have a conflict of interest. Despite submitting your draft first, if you then become autoconfirmed and decide to create the article directly, it goes into the New Page Patrol workflow. This makes the draft unnecessary as it is already in the mainspace. However, if a New Page Patroller thinks it needs more work, it may be moved back to the draftspace or be kept in the mainspace with maintenance tags. To cut a long story short, the "contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia" is an automated message which prevents double-submission and is not, in this instance, meant as a value judgement of the content you have created. If you wish, you can go to the draft and tag it with {{db-g7}} and an administrator will delete it, leaving you with the article you have created at Asylum in France. Many thanks, 09:16, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

Can I please get some feedback that is a bit more specific?

Hello there, You turned down my draft on EIoT. I can only imagine it can't be easy to be an editor like you and probably having to hear a lot of such whining. I really do. On my side of the equation though, I have spent days training myself, and then drafting that article. Days, I assure you, trying to do the best I could. I cited from the most authoritative sources I could, but EIoT, if it is growing at a dizzying rate, is still very new. Can you please, please tell me a tiny bit more as to what I should do differently, because I do not see it. I just do not. "...reads like an essay (?) make it more neutral" means very little to me. I do not know what you mean by it reads like an essay. I have dedicated an entire section to the limitations of EIoT. Do I need to come up with more in that column? I probably could, but it would almost feel like I'm loading the dice on the negative side. It is growing at probably over 100% year on year for a reason. Please please please sir tell me a bit more, I have spent a very large amount of time on this and I'd love to at least understand. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stephane Malhomme (talkcontribs) 05:24, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Stephane Malhomme, thanks for your message. Absolutely not, I'm always happy to give more detailed advice to good-faith editors! The issue that caused the decline was that the submission read like an essay. The key indicators which led me to make this determination included: #Definition, #EIoT Hardware stacks & EIoT Software platforms, #Applications and #Key benefits being unreferenced. Often, editors who are specialists in a given field can forget to provide references for content that is considered fundamental to their field of study. The problem with this is that it can give the impression to a reader that the content provided is original research, so what is being said may be true, but it is not attributed to a reliable source. For a user-generated encyclopedia, attribution to reliable sources is important for verifying content. Depending on the neutrality, reliability and independence of a given source, in-text attribution may be required. For example, if FOO is a controversial figure and reliable source BAR has given a statement of opinion on FOO, it is necessary to both provide a citation for BAR's statement regarding FOO and also to word it BAR said of FOO's actions "XYZ". However, that's at the advanced stages of sourcing; you firstly need to get those first few sections referenced and ensure that statements are either attributed views of authoritative sources in the field or a broad overview of the consensus of such sources, and not synthesis. I hope this helps, please feel free to come back if you need any more help! 09:09, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi StraussInTheHouse, thanks for your message. And sorry about my little rant yesterday, dumb as it feels to admit I was bitterly disappointed. Thank you for providing such a detailed reply, very helpful. I have scraped around online for more, more authoritative sources, for all the sections your flagged. I found a couple of things, but they seem too weak still https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/2014EA000044 or too contextual https://scholar.google.com.au/scholar?start=0&q=eiot+environmental+iot&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5 I saw also recently some online content about AWS (Amazon Web Services, largest Cloud providers in the world) describing some nano-satellite enabled connectivity, for EIoT in water monitoring. Maybe that can help. I am really sure I can find anything better though, maybe I need to just wait 6 months or a year, until the concept becomes more familiar, until more authoritative online publications pick up EIoT. Seems a bit of a shame to cover old news in a way but I understand this is an online encyclopedia, not an expert news outlet. And I just do not know what else to do. Someone volunteered to help, I will take them up on it, otherwise, I'll just park it / can it. Thanks anyway, and all the best. Stephane Malhomme (talk) 03:04, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi Stephane Malhomme, no problem, let me and the other volunteer know when you're ready to add some more to it and it can be re-submitted. I'll keep my eye on it to make sure it doesn't get automatically deleted as an abandoned draft. Many thanks, 13:38, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

article draft permanently deleted

I have deleted my draft and would not choose to contribute "content" to Wikipedia again. In parting, I think it's worth pointing out that a published book is evidence of its own existence: it would be folly to provide citations "proving" the existence of a book title that is already included in numerous university library catalogues, displayed on its publisher's website, advertised for sale on amazon.com, etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Polishedresponse (talkcontribs) 14:57, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

kewl 13:38, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Article draft

Hello Sith I hope you are well, after making all the changes you pointed me to I reposted the and you replied that it would be reviewed by another curator, I now realise that I should probably have asked you to kindly see if my changes were done properly, as it's been a couple of months now. Thank you Vicky Draft:Philip_Morgan_Lewis_(Musician) — Preceding unsigned comment added by VCMatthews (talkcontribs) 17:28, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Close reverted

I've reverted your close of Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Music Portals by Moxy per WP:NACD as you are involved. — JJMC89(T·C) 05:04, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

User:JJMC89 - I was about to reply to User:StraussInTheHouse to thank them for closing the Music Portals discussion. I will comment that it isn't initially clear which of two reasons you are citing for reverting the closure, whether you are reverting it as an involved closure, or as a non-administrative closure. I've closed a lot of RFCs, and I personally would prefer not to close XFDs, because a non-admin can only complete the close if it is a Keep or No Consensus. In this case, I support the closure, and am concerned that now this trainwreck is going to sit for probably another three weeks before it is closed, since its history now makes it smell like dead fish. May I ask how you think it should have been closed, and who you think will close it? Robert McClenon (talk) 18:21, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

I reverted it as an involved NAC. NACD and INVOLVED do not permit such closures. I'm not concerned with who will close it or when, other than it shouldn't be someone involved in the discussion. Closing the discussion is not a time sensitive matter. On a brief read, I would delete many of the portals with some left as no consensus or keep. — JJMC89(T·C) 19:25, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
• No problem JJMC89, that's your prerogative. While not technically time-sensitive, I agree with Robert's sentiments for the reasons I gave in the closing statement. Thanks, 20:54, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
User:JJMC89 - You have only sort of answered my original question. You haven't answered whether you reverted it as a NAC or as an involved closure. Would you have reverted it if BHG had closed it as a trainwreck? Would you have reverted it if NA1K had closed it as a trainwreck? Or would you have reverted it if SmokeyJoe had closed it as a trainwreck? I didn't see a rule about involved NAC. I have seen rules about NAC, and rules about involved closure. However, it appears that reverted it solely for the sake of correctness, therefore disregarding Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy and Ignore All Rules (in situations where the rules are clearly in the way of common sense). It now probably won't be closed until July. It is now an accursed MFD. Well, you wanted to follow procedure just to follow procedure. Very well. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:23, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
I reverted the close because StraussInTheHouse is involved and a non-admin. WP:NACD is quite specific about it: Do not close discussions in which you have offered an opinion[....] I would have reverted any involved non-admin making the same close. The close needs more nuance, like Amory's. — JJMC89(T·C) 02:38, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
Yes. You reverted a non-close close, which is a nuanced disposition, because you ignored Ignore All Rules in place of a rule, NACD. You still haven't answered my question as to whether you would have reverted a non-close close by BHG or by NA1K. I didn't ask whether you would have reverted a real close by Strauss, by SmokeyJoe, by BHG, or by NA1K. A real close by any of Strauss, BHG, or NA1K would have been very improper. Yes. You said that a close by a non-participant that teased apart the nominations would be fine. We knew that. The question had to do with non-close closes. Thank you, sort of. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:39, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Sheeba Alam

please review this page agian i am sending you a print media coverage here https://www.facebook.com/SheebaAlamSinger/photos/a.1654305554646242/1654305491312915/?type=3&theater — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pen303 (talkcontribs) 12:53, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Pen303, apologies for the length of time it has taken for me to respond, I'm just putting this here as a pro-forma. Please cite the newspaper it came from and not a picture of said newspaper on Facebook. If this query requires further discussion please notify me on my talk page. Many thanks, 11:22, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Kazim Azimov

Dear, Mr.

The article has been labeled as “draft”. We have amended the article in accordance to your requirements. We would kindly ask you if you could furnish us with some other requirements which will help to improve the text of the article. After the amendments to the article, we hope that you will delete the draft label.

Kind regards --Elnur Neciyev (talk) 17:11, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

User:Elnur Neciyev - The draft is difficult to read, and does not appear to have been written in the style of a Wikipedia draft article. I suggest that it needs to be reworked by someone whose native language is English. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:41, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Luca_Stricagnoli

Hi ya, You previously declined this as it was at mfd stage. it has been waiting 3 months since for review and i am going to hand it over to someone else, can you review it and decline it if its not good enough and give as detailed of a reason as you can,

thanks Mick Mickmonaghan343 (talk) 12:04, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Mickmonaghan343, apologies for the length of time it's taken for me to respond. I can see that Theroadislong has since reviewed the draft but notability appears to be the issue. Many thanks, 11:52, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Submission for Peter Panagiotis Vekinis

Hi, I just completed updating the entry (with more references as requested by you on March 30). Can you, or someone else please review the updated version and comment or publish it please. Thank you so much for your help. Wendy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wendygorski (talkcontribs) 17:11, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Wendygorski, apologies for the amount of time it's taken to respond, I've been away. I see that ClarityFiend has since reviewed your submission with biological notability concerns in addition to Theroadislong's reliable sources concerns. Hopefully those linked guidelines have provided some clarity. 11:52, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Anti-Gravity_Game_Studios

HI , I mean I am founder of this company , what else of "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" can I do for this, our company website , news and even steam store is already references???? so what else can i do ? and which part do I have problem? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Snakemkii (talkcontribs) 19:52, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Snakemkii, please see the disclosure of paid editing and conflict of interest policies first. 11:52, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

KAAZE Wiki Declined

hey, when I want to find KAAZE data, it's not on Wikipedia, I want to publish the wiki KAAZE so people can know common things about KAAZE.

Rayyansyafa (talk) 11:58, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Rayyansyafa, both AngusWOOF and I declined Draft:KAAZE on the grounds that it doesn't meet music group notability standards. Please review the linked guideline and consider whether the subject has the type of coverage required. Thanks, 11:52, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Stage_III:_Cancer_of_the_Uterus

Hi JJanRose, thank you for your patience in waiting for a reply, I've been away. I'm not medically qualified, however a specific stage of a disease didn't meet the criteria to create a separate article. I suggest asking a user at WikiProject Medicine as they may be able to give subject-specific advice which I may not be able to. Many thanks, 11:52, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Draft:European Competence Network on Mastocytosis (ECNM)

Hi! I have just edited the above mentioned page and tried to present a neutral point of view. Furthermore I have modified the positions of the references and added an additional reference. I would appreciate any suggestion for further improvment of the article. Thanks! Medicine Vienna (talk) 11:31, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Medicine Vienna, apologies for the wait time for my response to your message. I or another reviewer will take a look at your submission in the time frame specified on the AFC main page. Thanks, 11:52, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Sedimentary isostasy draft still awaiting review after 12 weeks

Hi SITH You may remember that my original draft was rejected by you and resubmitted with alterations in March. I recognise the need for patience but would appreciate an indication of whether it will receive a reviewer's attention within the next few weeks as I'd like to make reference to it at a coming conference.

Best regards

Geologician (talk) 14:07, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Geologician, apologies for the length of time it's taken to reply, I've been busy off-wiki. Please could you provide me a link to the draft, I remember it but I can't seem to find it at Draft:Sedimentary isostasy? Many thanks, 11:24, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Draft pending for more than 8 weeks

Hi

A draft Draft: Harichandana Dasari IAS is pending review for more than 8 weeks. AKKKumar (talk) 08:10, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi AKKKumar, this has since been reviewed by Mjs1991. Please look at the linked policies and guidelines in their feedback and consider the sourcing and layout of the draft. Many thanks, 11:52, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Thomas Jefferson University and Philadelphia University page merger

Thank you,

18:44, 9 July 2019 (UTC)Christian — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeff1140 (talkcontribs)

Moved discussion to Talk:Thomas Jefferson University. 11:52, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Sam Orlando Miller Draft rejection

Hi,

Can you please tell me more specifically in what way the draft is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia? How can I change it so that it would be in line with the purpose of wikipedia? I would very much value your feedback.

Many thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Viocox24 (talkcontribs) 18:29, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Viocox24, I declined the draft on copyright violation grounds and, probably as a side effect of the aforementioned copyright violation, it read like an advert. Please resubmit the draft for another review if you think it is ready. 11:52, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi there,

A few months ago you picked up on a section on a page for The Infants' Home Ashfield that was not sourced properly (thank you btw) I made the necessary changes and I was wondering if you had time for a quick look to see if it can be approved?

Many thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarahwikisydney (talkcontribs) 22:36, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Sarahwikisydney, apologies for the wait in responding. I see Headbomb has since accepted the draft, congratulations! 11:59, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Global Judicial Integrity Network page

Hi there,

I just wanted to check in about the sources for the Global Judicial Integrity Network page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Global_Judicial_Integrity_Network). Because it's an international group, many of the references from reputable sources are in languages that aren't English (for instance, Al-Jazeera in Arabic). The Network itself is referenced on Wikipedia on other pages (ex. https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maria_Thereza_de_Assis_Moura https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adrian_Saunders), so it would make sense to have a Wikipedia page to clarify what it is. Thanks!

Melissa1070 (talk) 12:33, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi Melissa1070, we don't require our sources to be in English, so if the source quality is good then the next review (I see it is pending) should reflect that. Many thanks, 12:00, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Video Games Chronicle page

Hi,

Is it possible to advise on how the Video Games Chronicle page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Video_Games_Chronicle) can be improved to an acceptable, publishable state? The site is referenced in several places (Video Games Chronicle) and part of a large, credible network of games media sites (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamer_Network). I am struggling to see what pages such as PCGamesN, Nintendo Life, GameDaily or AusGamers have in terms of credible references, that this doesn't.

Espio101 (talk) 20:50, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi Espio101, unfortunately, other stuff that shouldn't be on Wikipedia being on Wikipedia isn't a reason for more stuff that shouldn't be on Wikipedia being added. Fortunately, you can nominate the aforementioned "other stuff" for deletion if you think it doesn't meet notability standards. Thanks, 12:02, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Why did someone started a bot and changed my article references from 41 to 11?

Hi StraussInTheHouse (Salieri's house?), someone started a bot on the entry for P. Vekinis (still not submitted) and removed some very good references so from 41 it is down to 11 references. How we can undo this? It is August and the submission is still not in. I am a professional editor and owner of Newsbytes News Network [already in wikipedia], now retired, and was wondering. If you get a chance, please take a look so that we can get this submitted in Wikipedia. Thank you, Wendy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wendygorski (talkcontribs) 13:33, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

Hello Wendygorski! StraussInTheHouse isn't around right now. I took a look at Draft:Peter Panagiotis Vekinis and saw that the references were removed by a human editor, not a bot because they were not useful. References to other Wikipedia pages are not acceptable sources because Wikipedia depends on outside sources. Some citations were also removed because they were just links to the main page of a site and did not support any particular statement in the article. For more information about sources on Wikipedia, you can read Wikipedia:Reliable sources. You can also ask the editor who removed the citations, Lopifalko, on their talk page. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 11:31, 10 August 2019 (UTC) (talk page watcher)

Renato D'Agostin

Hi,

I'm new to Wikipedia and tried to contribute writing an article about an artist but the submission looked like temporarily declined because of footnote sources. I have corrected that as much as I could using the correct way to input sources footnotes, but I don't know what to do next.

Here is the page : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Renato_D%27Agostin

Thanks,

Thierry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Geeteebee17 (talkcontribs) 05:54, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi Geeteebee17, sorry for not getting back sooner, I see Kvng has since accepted the draft, congratulations! 12:10, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Quantum_Resistant_Ledger

The draft for Quantum Resistant Ledger was declined due to a lack of reliable sources. In reading Wikipedia's Verifiability:#reliable_sources, extra sources have been amended. While many of the sources included are academic and peer-reviewed, not all are, so it's understandable should there be some desire to remove some. Reference 15 might also be an issue as it's referencing a wiki website, though it is an external one - and there's other sources to back it up. I'm okay with its removal. As a thought, the best way to source that bitcoin uses ECDSA (secp256k1) would be to link to the code on, say, github. This also seems like the best way to reference that QRL uses XMSS. I haven't been able to find a position of where code fits into references.

Previous to your edit, it was stated that journals are not reliable sources, though WP:SOURCE seems to indicate that it is. Understandably, many journals can't be considered reliable, so if I'm linking to a journal that's not reliable, I'd be happy to oblige in its removal.

Finally, while the first edits weren't by me, many of the recent ones have been. With that in mind, I want to be clear that I do have a conflict of interest as I'm on The QRL team. Not sure if I need to declare it here, but it's also mentioned on my user page for full transparency. I've aimed to keep the stub as informative and as bias free as possible, but if you see something that may have bias, I would love to know to fix it.

Page is Draft:Quantum Resistant Ledger. Thank you for your time and diligence --Jackalyst (talk) 20:10, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi Jackalyst, thanks for your message. Thank you for declaring your conflict of interest. I see Liance has since reviewed the draft, but it's certainly in a better state than when I reviewed it, I think if the cryptocurrency-specific publications could be replaced with more reliable sources like number 18, provided they give significant coverage, you should be good to go! Thanks, 12:10, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Review of Draft:Meute

Hi there StraussInTheHouse. I created a page for Meute, User:Riaanvn/Meute (Band), which was rejected because there was already a draft version being reviewed, Draft:Meute, submitted by another contributor. You rejected this one in April due to lack of reliable sources. She made some changes and submitted it for another review. I have been adding my inline references (which are from the original German page) as well as doing various fixes to the page. Would it be possible for you to have a look again and determine if the page is good enough to be accepted, if the old criticism stands or not? Riaanvn (talk) 14:29, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi Riaanvn, please feel free to re-submit the version of the draft which you've worked on and a reviewer will take a look. Many thanks, 12:10, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Draft: Jaime Medina

Good day, StraussInTheHouse! According to the tab that appeared in the top of the draft, the page/wiki of Jaime Medina was declined by you for according to the issue raised, the page does not appear to meet the WP:NPOL. Would it be possible if you could recheck it and see if it is good enough to be accepted as a page? I have edited it already and have cited references from reputable news sources in our country regarding the subject's notability in his field. Thank you!

Page is Draft:Jaime_Medina. Thank you for your time and diligence -([[User_talk:Jum_Bae_Bi]) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jum Bae Bi (talkcontribs) 06:46, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi Jum Bae Bi, I would advise against resubmission until the tone issues are rectified; it reads a bit like a hagiography at the moment. Thanks, 12:10, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Irish backstop contains copyvio from Reuters

On Irish_backstop, Earwig's Copyvio Detector, on September 9, 2019, shows ″Violation Possible 41.9%″.

• StraussInTheHouse, thank you. Yes, it looks was all solved as occurred that the Copyvio Earwig showed coincidence because of just a quote in the Reuters short article. PoetVeches (talk) 15:50, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Article on Mission 21

Hi StraussInTheHouse, I just actualized the article about Mission 21. You wrote, there should be more quotes from reliable sources. I am currently at work to add further publications. I would like to stress the fact, that sources 1-3 are independent scientific publications and therefore fulfill the Wikipedia requirements. As soon as I added more sources, I will leave a message here, so that the page can be published. Best regards, MovieChrisMovieChris (talk) 16:38, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

MovieChris, thanks for your message, when you've done that please feel free to resubmit. 11:54, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Community Insights Survey

RMaung (WMF) 16:38, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Article Submission: Donya (Singer)

Hello, thanks for reviewing my draft article for Donya (Singer). Since then, it has been updated with more reliable sources. If it's possible, would appreciate a second look at this submission which has been pending.

Masazad (talk) 02:30, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi Masazad, the draft is awaiting review and the reviewer will leave feedback if further improvement is required. Thanks, 11:57, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Reminder: Community Insights Survey

RMaung (WMF) 15:39, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

I got a notice that there was copywrited material in my article on R. Bradford Malt. (Probably because there is only so many ways you can say he's a "lawyer from Boston.") I made changes and added information to the article and clicked submit a long time ago and have heard nothing back. What's the status, do I need to change anything, is it good to go? Thank you - Alex — Preceding unsigned comment added by Malt518 (talkcontribs) 16:10, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Malt518, I've added it to the review queue per your request. Thanks, 11:56, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Just wondering if there are any updates? Malt518 (talk) 17:12, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

Reminder: Community Insights Survey

RMaung (WMF) 20:40, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Relisted Ghazal ?

Hi. Why relisting once again Ghazal the Syrian high jumper? Nobody has contested or opposed to renaming. Am I wrong ? Yours,-Arorae (talk) 15:55, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Arorae, if this is a move request relist it's because it needs consensus. I'm not passing judgement, it's just a formality. Sometimes no-input discussions can be closed if it's obvious but because it's a biography I'm erring on the side of caution. 16:02, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
thanks for your reply. But nobody opposes to the move, and the sources in English are without an -e at Eddin (Eddine is the French version, that you often find in Syria, former French mandate). I do not think you need to be cautious. Thanks for your explanation.-Arorae (talk) 16:15, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Draft:List of Books About Women in History

Thanks for the speedy review of the draft list. Could you give me an idea of what to shoot for regarding 'well-sourced and at least partially authoritative'? Happy to work on it more but hope it is not unnecessarily delayed by issue of completeness, which I suspect would be addressed quickly by the community. Women I know very much want a list like this! Thank you! Hermionefc (talk) 18:26, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi Hermionefc, no problem and thanks for your message. There is potential for this list, but I think a bit of fine-tuning might be needed. For example, we don't have a standalone list named List of people nor a List of biographies because the discriminating information to make such a page usable is too vague. Similarly, we don't have a List of women because, again, that only narrows it down by roughly half the population. However, List of women redirects to Lists of women which show you some of the intersections about particular kinds of women. The issue with the submission is that it is so wide in scope that it falls outside the technical purview of a list and more in a category. It is important to note that Wikipedia does have a Wikipedia:Portal system which may be more suited to this. I'm going to leave a link to this discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red to invite any other interested editors to participate and offer any further advice. I'm also going to leave a few policies, guidelines and essays below about the list system which may help clarify things a little bit.
Many thanks, 18:41, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
Edit: it may also be of interest to take a look at Lists of books#People in general. 18:42, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
Thank you so much! Will check out Hermionefc (talk) 18:48, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Resubmitted

Hello SITH, Thank you for reviewing my article. I have made the appropriate changes to respect neutrality of wikipedia writing style. I appreciate the feedback and if you get a chance, can you look over it? Thank you AleitheaAnne (talk) 20:21, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Neelima R. Sinha

You declined this draft on the basis of not meeting WP:PROF. But the article says and gives a reference that she is a dellow of the AAAS; Fellow AAAS, (unlike member) is a high honor and is considered to show notability by that standard, so I have accepted it. It needs expansion, but that can be done in mainspace DGG ( talk ) 20:01, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

DGG, noted, thanks for the advice. 16:02, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
similar: Walter S. Gibson
similar, but needs some editing first, such as moving a ref for the bio part from the EL to the main text; the publications reference themselves. Draft:Laurent Cesalli, Draft:Toshitaka Kajino -- my view is that it is much easier for us to do it ourselves than to just decline & hope the author understands, but opinions on this vary. DGG ( talk ) 05:40, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Review of Draft:Meute (part 2)

Hi there StraussInTheHouse. Thank you for your response at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:StraussInTheHouse/Archive_6#Review_of_Draft:Meute

According to the Draft:Meute page, section Editor resources: "This draft has been resubmitted and is currently awaiting re-review." E.g. I cannot tell if the original author has submitted the article a 2nd time, awaiting approval/rejection, or if I need to do something to get the "currently awaiting re-review" status off the article so that I can resubmit it. Riaanvn (talk) 08:21, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

```I managed to get help on the IRC channel. I see the article was submitted again in June. I will await the review. You can ignore this query. Riaanvn (talk) 04:09, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
```

Deletion of Draft:TechnoArt_LIVE

Hello, SITH and thank you for your work. I was not in time to edit the page (I didn't check Wiki for messages) and I did see the message only 5 minutes ago, but the page was deleted already. I would like to edit the article and finish it. Can this draft (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:TechnoArt_LIVE&action=edit&redlink=1) be undeleted?

Thanks, Respectfully — Preceding unsigned comment added by PesTenamo (talkcontribs)

Hi PesTenamo, undeletion requests can be made at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion. I'm not an administrator so I don't have the capability to do that, however, unless the copyright violation was marginal, which I would suspect it wasn't otherwise revision deletion would have been used, I'm unsure as to whether an administrator would be willing to reverse a G12, but that's up to the administrator in question. Many thanks, 12:38, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

That was quite the rollercoaster ride of teamwork!

Thank you for the teamwork that just happened in resolving the vandalism at the Conan Doyle page. Just went to report them to the vandalism section but you were already there!

Cheers! Yeetcetera (talk) 13:53, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Yeetcetera, no problem and thanks for your reverts too! It was going quite quickly I must admit. Cheers, 14:26, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Change the name of The Farmers Bank Limited

Dear Concern,

The Farmers Bank Limited has been renamed as Padma Bank Limited and logo has been also changed.

Therefore we want to change the Header name as well as want to update the new logo.

Parthasahabd (talk) 18:34, 11 October 2019 (UTC)Partha SahaParthasahabd (talk) 18:34, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi Parthasahabd, if you have a reliable source noting that, please cite it and put something like "In 2019 the company renamed to XYZ". Article titles are based on the common name. Furthermore, who is "we"? If you are in any way affiliated with the company or are being paid for your edits, you need to declare it on your userpage. Please see WP:COI for more. Thanks, 18:43, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Tagging of National Company Law Appellate Tribunal

I recently removed a speedy delete tag that you had placed on National Company Law Appellate Tribunal. I do not think that National Company Law Appellate Tribunal fits any of the speedy deletion criteria  because copied language is largely a matter of factual statements in obvious expressions. Much of the duplicated text is a matter of fixed phrases that would have to be used in any article about teh tribunal. Not a blatant copyright infringement. I request that you consider not re-tagging National Company Law Appellate Tribunal for speedy deletion without discussing the matter on the appropriate talk page. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 00:44, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Cartonplast

Good evening I don't understand why you have put the advise that Cartonplast's page have some issues, you said that there aren't book and newspapers article as references.....but if you go on the external link you can see that there are book and newspapers article as well. An other question....why the Coroplast page is ok and Cartonplast page not?They have identic structure! Bye Giovannicaciotta (talk) 15:06, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi Giovannicaciotta, it's not that there are no independent, reliable sources in the references list, it's just that the inline citations rely far too heavily on affiliated or primary sources such as official websites. This, in turn, affects a claim to notability, which is why the notability tag is also there. The third tag is just a copyright revision deletion request, please see more about quoting at length here. I simply reviewed Cartonplast, that isn't a tacit endorsement of anything else that is on Wikipedia that may not be, as other stuff existing isn't a valid rationale for more things existing. If you have an issue with Coroplast, please either fix the issues, tag them for other editors to fix or if the problems are pervasive enough to warrant deletion, start a deletion discussion. Many thanks, 12:34, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Review of Draft:Pan-Romance language

Hello! I see that you have reviewed a draft article I'm working on and I have a question about copyright violations. The article is about a group of languages and it includes a sample text of each language it deals with. The format of these sample texts (Blockquote template) is different from the main text of the article, and a note follows indicating the origin of the text. It's basically like a citation. Do you think it's ok? The first review marked one of those sample texts as a copyright violation, but not other sample texts. But back then the format was not so different from the main text.

The other issue on copyright violations has been corrected, I would say. I had reused some fragmets of an external text which I had myself written. Now I have reformulated these fragments, changed their structure, splitted them, added new information.

I have also added much more bibliography.

Thanks for your help. I don't have much experience in the Wikipedia, I'm afraid. --Jorcaiba (talk) 00:24, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Alona Rodeh -- draft

Dear SITH,

Thank you very much for taking the time to review the draft article. Your comment regarding the Biography section and the lack of inline citations is well received. I have added 11 new inline citations to the Biography section. They point to specific locations where Alona's exhibitions are referenced. I hope that this is what you have been looking for.

Thanks again!
Micky.rodeh (talk) 13:38, 16 October 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Micky.rodeh (talkcontribs) 10:00, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Matthew Lowton, Talk:Matthew Lowton and Special:Contribs/84.9.228.0/22

Hello there, exactly a week after a second move request on the said talk page, I couldn't help but notice that there was another one (before IdreamofJeanie reverted all disruption by the IP from the range and the bot which never does things wrong so it won't be blamed for that). It seemed like the block made by an administrator was not really long enough and therefore should be applied for longer, say 2 months or somewhere along the lines. I have messaged Bbb23, the user who did the range block on the smaller range of 256 addresses on the 84.9.228.0/24 part. Let's hope that there would be no more disruption on the Matthew Lowton page with the false name. Iggy (Swan) (What I've been doing to maintain Wikipedia) 14:37, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Revised Draft Sedimentary isostasy

Hello SITH

I have removed sections about Chronosomes and their significance and added a new section about the structural significance of Herschel’s interpretation. This supports my contention that the explanation of the relationship between North Sea stratigraphy & structure and the erosion surfaces on the Scandian Mountains is of considerable current interest. Please discuss with me any remaining problems that editors foresee before reinstating it to the main Wiki section. Geologician (talk) 15:15, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Declined Submission - UGCY

Hi, Thanks for your review of my page. I have made some significant changes to the University Gospel Choir of the page following your recommendation and resubmitted it including tone of voice to make it more neutral and added a lot of citations. Hope it is now ok. Could you check please? Thanks UG GLOBAL. (UGCY (talk) 22:58, 19 October 2019 (UTC)).

Copyvio Drafts

Please do not remove the AFC submission templates when removing copyvio as you did at Draft:Kwai Chai Hong. If a draft has enough copyvio to merit a decline, use the "cv" decline option and nominate for deletion if appropriate. If there is just trimming required (as in the link above) the revdel should not keep the draft from being reviewed. Thanks. Primefac (talk) 14:22, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

Draft updated

Hello StraussInTheHouse! I’ve updated my draft for Out of Bounds (2019 film) that I’ve worked on for some time. I messaged the reviewer in July, but did not receive a response to date. I know you all are very busy, so it would be great if you checked into this for me. Thanks and have a great weekend!Nineminutesuntil (talk) 18:01, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

Revised Draft Sedimentary isostasy

Hello SITH (I had mistaken Archives 1 for Archives 6 in the sequence — hence repetition below made in error.) I have removed sections about Chronosomes and their significance and added a new section about the structural significance of Herschel’s interpretation. This supports my contention that the explanation of the relationship between North Sea stratigraphy & structure and the erosion surfaces on the Scandian Mountains is of considerable current interest. Please discuss any remaining problems that editors foresee before reinstating it to the main Wiki section. Geologician (talk) 16:30, 15 October 2019 (UTC) (talkGeologician (talk) 19:56, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

A Dobos torte for you!

 has given you a Dobos torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it. To give a Dobos torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

13:48, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

7&6=thirteen, thank you very much! Happy editing, 11:54, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Ali Mansour

now 7 sources in draft? and many actor in wikipedia are add with imdb or elcinema, And others without any sources !!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 197.48.36.126 (talk) 13:09, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi, it's not the quantity of the sources that's the issue, it's their quality. We require sources which are reliable for verification. For demonstration of notability we require sources which are both independent and reliable which give significant coverage to the person. Unfortunately that wasn't the case in the version of the draft which I reviewed, and other things which shouldn't have Wikipedia articles existing on Wikipedia isn't a rationale for the inclusion of other things. Thanks, 11:57, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

```famous +100k followers Facebook Account:
```
```+200k followers Facebook Page:
```

You're speaking as if ${\displaystyle followers\propto notability}$ , but in fact ${\displaystyle followers\not \propto notability}$ . Even more precisely: ${\displaystyle followers\not {\mathrel {R}}}$  ${\displaystyle notability}$ , in itself. Please read the links I provided above. 14:13, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

Matthew Lowton, Talk:Matthew Lowton and Special:Contribs/84.9.228.0/22

Hello there, exactly a week after a second move request on the said talk page, I couldn't help but notice that there was another one (before IdreamofJeanie reverted all disruption by the IP from the range and the bot which never does things wrong so it won't be blamed for that). It seemed like the block made by an administrator was not really long enough and therefore should be applied for longer, say 2 months or somewhere along the lines. I have messaged Bbb23, the user who did the range block on the smaller range of 256 addresses on the 84.9.228.0/24 part. Let's hope that there would be no more disruption on the Matthew Lowton page with the false name. Iggy (Swan) (What I've been doing to maintain Wikipedia) 14:37, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

And now Special:Contribs/87.74.55.0/23

Same editorial behaviour today and in the past, week by week vandalism. Looks like I have found a WP:DUCK. Iggy (Swan) (What I've been doing to maintain Wikipedia) 18:16, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

Iggy the Swan, hmph, I despair sometimes, I wonder what they get from it. With the DUCK addition, it looks like they've found out how to evade a rangeblock, or at least found a new range. If it persists with no calculable range, I'd say a request for pending changes protection would be the next step. Best, 21:21, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

Laura Stoker Biography Draft

Hi StraussInTheHouse, I'm writing to request guidance about [[2]]. I would have thought that that links to her official University of California website or a link to Google Scholar would count as reliable sources. I'm sorry to bother you about this. A group of us would like to make pages for prominent women in political science and I chose to make a short page for Laura. Would you mind giving more detail about which of the sources I used should be deleted or redirected? Thanks much!

Jake --Profseldon (talk) 21:13, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

 Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add `{{NoACEMM}}` to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:22, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello,

Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

Thank you!

--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:58, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Deletion of Akra Krishnanagar High School

Please don't delete this article . The school is one of the oldest schools of Maheshtala , West Bengal , India. It was Established in 1924 when the British ruling India. It is a big School of our area. I think as the another secondary schools it must have to in Wikipedia. Thank you!

Regards Subhajit Parbat Subhajit Parbat (talk) 15:39, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello, please voice your opinion on the Articles for Deletion entry at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Akra Krishnanagar High School instead of the nominator's talk page. Thanks! --Majavah (t/c) 17:15, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

Tagging of Lone Star Classic

I recently removed a speedy delete tag that you had placed on Lone Star Classic. I do not think that Lone Star Classic fits any of the speedy deletion criteria  because " one of the largest drumline contests in the country." is a Claim of significance. I request that you consider not re-tagging Lone Star Classic for speedy deletion without discussing the matter on the appropriate talk page. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 19:50, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

DESiegel, no problem, I see it's been BLAR'd. 13:00, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
That's fine, I have no problem with a redirect and the history is there if anyone wants to re-expand later and has sources. What does BLAR stand for? That a new one for me. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 15:36, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
DESiegel, WP:BLAR is blank and redirect. Basically an alternative to PROD for non-notable stuff that can be adequately handled in a parent article section. 15:38, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
Make3s sense. And any knowledgeable editor can always undo it later if there is good reason, without needignt an admin. I know the process, but hadn't encountered that term for it befor. Thanks. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 15:40, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Page "Li Zhaoping"

Hi I have updated the page "Li Zhaoping" with more cites last nigh. The page however, was marked "deletion" for copyright violation. I double checked the web link this morning and confirmed that there is no copy right violation. Regard of the deletion of the page Davidypan (talk) 00:27, 28 November 2019 (UTC) 21:20, 27 November 2019 DESiegel (talk | contribs) deleted page Li Zhaoping (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement of https://hi.is.mpg.de/events/a-new-framework-to-understanding-biological-vision) (thank) Davidypan (talk) 00:27, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

I cited the link "https://hi.is.mpg.de/events/a-new-framework-to-understanding-biological-vision" on "Li Zhaoping" page as reference. The link goes to Li Zhaoping's article "A New Framework to Understanding Biological Vision". The linked page also shows her title "Zhaoping Li (Head of the Department for Sensory and Sensorimotor Systems within the MPI for Biological Cybernetics and Professor at the University of Tuebingen)" and displays her photo. This is my first time to create a Wikipedia page and I try to understand which part of my world/or syntax triggered the "violation". Would you remove the 'deletion' tag and help me to avoid similar event by identifying the 'trigger' please? Many thanks.

Regards David Pan

Hi, I see you have created a non-CV version of the article in the draftspace, please feel free to submit it when ready! 12:43, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

Peshawar

I responded to you discussion on the Peshawar pageLewanayspay (talk) 20:32, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

Page renamed

Please could you change the name of the article "Nongshaba" into a "Dragon Lion" for the creature is a mixture of lion and dragon, highlighted in the page. Goutamkumar Oinam 2 (talk) 15:19, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Goutamkumar Oinam 2, if your request is about a non-controversial technical request, please file it at WP:RM/TR, if it is potentially controversial, please start a discussion on the talk page using the format at WP:RM. Thanks, 22:07, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Superfine Films prod

I decided not to delete it via Prod, since sources had been added, and others might find more. AfD is of course up to you. DGG ( talk ) 22:03, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

Merry Christmas/Happy Holidays

 Merry Christmas, StraussInTheHouse! Or Season's Greetings or Happy Winter Solstice! As the year winds to a close, I would like to take a moment to recognize your hard work and offer heartfelt gratitude for all you do for Wikipedia. And for all the help you've thrown my way over the years. May this Holiday Season bring you nothing but joy, health and prosperity.CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 07:43, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
Thank you CAPTAIN RAJU, Merry Christmas to you too! 12:55, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message

Happy New Year!

Happy New Year!
StraussInTheHouse,
Have a great 2020 and thanks for your continued contributions to Wikipedia.

– 2020 is a leap yearnews article.
– Background color is Classic Blue (#0F4C81), Pantone's 2020 Color of the year

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year 2020}} to user talk pages.

Utopes (talk) 09:11, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Brandon Berti Diau

Hello, can you review my draft page?

Alin869 (talk) 12:47, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Add an article in Wikipedia About "National Aquaculture Group" in English and Arabic

Hi StraussInTheHouse,

We need your support to add an article to Wikipedia about "National Aquaculture Group (NAQUA)" in two languages "English and Arabic".

Can you please support us in this regard?