Open main menu

Welcome to my talk page. Click here to leave me a message Face-smile.svg.


Q on reference source languageEdit

07:53:55, 14 November 2017 review of submission by FriendlyBEdit

Dear Thereodislong,

thank you for reviewing the draft "Dr. Petry Textile Auxiliaries".

For the sources, I cited independent sources, such as - -

In order to have more evidence, I added information from further independent sources and references: - -

Thank you in advance for re-reviewing.

Thanks for your help!Edit

Thanks for your assistance with Draft:InnoCare. I have included {{connected contributor}} and noted it on your user page that I work for that company. They're not paying me to create this page, I just think it would cool to have a Wikipedia page. Let me know if there's anything else you can suggest to improve my draft. I appreciate your help!

05:44:48, 23 November 2017 review of submission by LizzybunkerEdit

I've added the appropriate citations!


Hi Theroadislong I've edited the text - please let me know if it's better this way I appreciate your feedback!

00:53:26, 27 November 2017 review of submission by CmolaroEdit

I added more 3rd party sources that are verifiable and are independent, professional sources (not personal blogs or sites). I now have 15 citations.

Please let me know what else you think is required to have it accepted?

12:54:53, 27 November 2017 review of submission by LlewolEdit

08:40:08, 28 November 2017 review of submission by Salt&pepper12345Edit

Hi there, thank very much for your care and consideration to to help build this page. I can understand why the review was rejected, as i hadn't cited enough sources on the first draft. I was wondering if you'd mind having a read over the latest draft and checking if it is better now thank you. SP

13:22:45, 4 December 2017 review of submission by

21:10:13, 6 December 2017 review of submission by Innocent CutyEdit

Dear Theroadislong

Hope you are fine and doing good.

I am requesting for a review again as the major comment for rejection/decline of this article was its Reference section or having less references. Now, the draft has been updated, and more than 20 solid references have been employed, with more historical details, and best possible bibliographic support in the light of the available literature. This single page article is now having over 25 appropriate references, and are strengthened with new data.

Your anticipation in this regard will be highly appreciated.

Sincere Regards

The objected references (facebook) has been udpated with the departmental URLS (links to the webpages). Thank you for the Prompt response and providing support to make this draft better.Edit

Dear Theroadislong

Thank you very much for your prompt response.

The objected references (facebook) has been udpated with the departmental URLS (links to the webpages). I think, these were the most up to dated and regularly updating references. Moreover, the last paragraph was deleted, because the book describing the paragraph and the mentioned material is in press (which is written by Dr. Ikram), and once the book got published, the three to four lines paragraph will be inserted again.

I do hope, that the draft will get approved now and will get online, as after coming across other such articles, this one seems to be far better than those.

Your prompt and positive anticipation in this regard will be highly appreciated.

Thanking you in anticipation

Sincere Regards

07:43:09, 15 December 2017 review of submission by Kgkg90Edit

23:49:06, 23 December 2017 review of submission by Pearl allyEdit

The submission's referencing was improved as advised, and I added a few more. More information on his teachings and publications were added. The page exists in 3 other Wikipedia:

In-depth coverageEdit

I added RPG Site. Is that a reliable source?

02:14:50, 26 December 2017 review of submission by Pearl allyEdit

Please see references 15,18,19,21,22

07:39:46, 28 December 2017 review of submission by Nat.johnsonEdit

Hi Theroadislong! I have recently uploaded a draft of the article "Admitad" here and you have declined it. Could you kindly explain what can I do to make it right? Is it possible to work with you as my mentor on the draft? Or, maybe, you can help with writing, could you kindly tell me what is the best option? admitad is a global company, it already helps over 630,000 people worldwide. I believe, that it needs to be on Wikipedia.

23:24:44, 4 January 2018 review of submission by YesterdaysfireEdit

Hi there!

I was just wondering what the issue was with my article submission? I tried to follow all the guidelines. I hope that I can make any revisions that you may require!


Hi there Thanks for your comment. Made the edits per your notes on the page for David A. Hurwitz. GigiH0118

13:36:39, 8 January 2018 review of submission by TearstosweatEdit

More reliable references like newspaper sources(Times of India, Decaan Chronicle) are added

00:42:00, 26 February 2018 review of re-submission by VlianderEdit

Dear Theroadislong,

Thank you for your valuable time and timely reply.

The bellow listed recognition letters and independent press publications may provide a more in-depth coverage regarding different subjects about Carl-W. Röhrig's life and work mentioned in the WIKI article.

I now additionally added the following references to the Citations and References section in the article:

8. Röhrig, Carl-W. (1992). "Newspaper Article". DIE WELT - Independent Daily Newspaper for Germany.

9. Röhrig, Carl-W. (1993). "Newspaper Article". East Grinstead Courier, United Kingdom.

10. Röhrig, Carl-W. (1989). "Recognition Letter". by the National Geographic Society, Washington D.C.

11. Röhrig, Carl-W. (1993). "Newspaper Article". THE PRESS, Christchurch, New Zealand.

12. Röhrig, Carl-W. (1992). "Recognition Letter". by Heinz Sielemann, Munich, Germany.

14. Röhrig, Carl-W. (1993). "Newspaper Article". BILD Newspaper, Germany.

17. Röhrig, Carl-W. (2003). "Newspaper Article". Fränkischer Tag, Newspaper, Germany.

I am looking forward hearing from you.



Vliander (talk) 00:42:00, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

12:27:00, 26 February 2018 review of re-submission by VlianderEdit

Dear Theroadislong,

The article was written from a neutral point of view and reliable sources where provided.

The questioned links in regards to Röhrig letters could be removed if required.



Request on 08:52:05, 6 June 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by WildBullMillerEdit

Thanks for the infoEdit

For the bio, is Nicholas Kaufmann's official website a good enough source? That's where the info comes from, anyway.

Typo in TitleEdit

Hi and thanks for approving my post for "Helgesias of Sinope." Unfortunately there's a typo in the title, which should be "Hegesias of Sinope" (no L). My apologies for that (it was my first post). I don't know how to fix a mistake in a title. Are you able to help me? Thank you, Budapest Joe


Hi Theroadislong.

I have resubmitted the article for a re-review, please let me know if it reads better now? If not, can you give me an example of how to improve it. Thank you, Christian.


Hi! As Images/Imágenes stated I am being paid to edit this page, but I am also working on this program as it is a work in progress. It was on the aire for over 30 years and pulled off in 2011. We are currently working on starting the project again but as this program began in the 70's there is not a large online presence. Is there anyway this page could be published for now, so we can show people that Images/Imágenes is coming back? Thanks, Alice

I have a lot of information from the Executive Producer but since none of it is available online, I cannot reference it. For example: (None of this is available online) Mission Images/Imágenes is a multi- Emmy award-winning television program series that creates, chronicles, and promotes the varied rich diverse history, culture, and life experiences of Hispanic/Latino communities in the state of New Jersey and the nation. Brief Organizational History For 46 years, the Images/Imágenes television series provided a voice and platform for New Jersey's diverse Latino population. The program series is known as the longest-running Latino community program in the history of PBS. Over the decades, the Emmy award winning series featured thought provoking round table discussions, interviews, profiles, documentaries and special topic episodes on the most prevalent issues pertaining to and for the Hispanic/Latino populations – the fastest growing demographic in New Jersey. Program topics ranged from lifestyles, business, education, legal matters, community affairs, pop culture/entertainment, the arts, sports and the health and sciences. Images/Imagenes was launched on January 6, 1972 than titled “Mi Casa Su Casa” on NJPTV hosted by producer, Diego Castellanos. The program made history as the first Latino television series on Public Television in New Jersey to air across the Garden State and surged as the nation’s number one market in New York and the number 4 market in Philadelphia. Since then the series is recognized as a resource for top Latino stories, both at local, as well as the national level. Award Winning Producer William Sánchez is the Producer/Director of Images/Imágenes since 1972, and is currently revitalizing a new series as its producer/director at Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey. He produced the series with the PBS NJ Television Network until the station was dissolved by the state on June 30, 2011. Within the first ten years Images/Imágenes became the leading contributor of programs for the PBS Series Presente hosted by Rita Moreno. Images/Imágenes competed with mainstream networks and was selected over ABC World News Tonight at the National Unity Awards in St. Louis. Then it rose to the top of the Latino Broadcasting Media when it was highlighted at the San Antonio Film Festival in the 1980s as a must see series on Latin Music alongside the films “LA BAMBA” and “STAND AND DELIVER.” National Recognition

For over 40 years, Images/Imágenes under the leadership of producer William Sanchez the television industry has recognized the series with four Emmys and nominated for twenty by National PBS. The series is distinguished having received numerous national acclaims from the White House, Congress, National PBS, the National Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), and three New Jersey Governors. The series represented PBS in Europe, Asia, and Latin America. It was distributed by the Department of Defense and with audiences including American military bases around the world. It was also national under the Latino Consortium’s series “PRESENTE” with host Rita Moreno. Now under the banner of Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, Images/Imagenes’ legacy continues for public viewing at the United States Library of Congress. Signature Shows There are a number of evergreen programs that were signature shows for the series and are timeless works of history and culture. A. Sembrando El Futuro/Seeding the Future (5-part Parent Education Series) Nationally acclaimed/ New York Emmy Award Winner 1985 B. The Hispanic Youth Showcase 1999 (Talent competition/motivational program hosted by kids (Ages 5 to 17) was recognized as one of the top six children’s programs in the nation by The Arts Council Co-op/ Mid-Atlantic Emmy Award Winner C. Su Salud Primero/Your Health First with host John Quiñones Mid-Atlantic 2008 Emmy Award Winner, drew national acclaim D. The Spanish Guitar (History/Legends: Jose Feliciano) Mid-Atlantic Emmy Winner 2010

Notable Programs & Specials Include: E. Festival Afro-Caribeño (Afro-Caribbean Festival at Newark’s Symphony Hall 1980) 2,500 people attended concert/first of several Images’ shows to obtain national acclaim F. Word-Up Stop the Violence with Edward Hames Olmos (Actor) 2004 Emmy Nominated Town meeting with 400 teens G. Lainzation of New Jersey, 1982 winner of the national Unity Award held in St. Louis, Ma. Won against ABC’s World News Tonight Other Notable Programs & Specials Include: H. Caribbean Music And Dance Emmy Nominated, Represented PBS At An International Level I. Latin Music Special Emmy Nominated J. The Art of Baseball Emmy Nominated K. Latinos in Boxing (History and Legends) L. History of Flamenco (History and Performance)

The Golden Age of Dance: The Palladium Obtained worldwide download success on the internet in 2009 1983 Special: Alcoholism & Mental health Inspired New Jersey Government offices to establish policies and focus groups aimed at understanding and serving Latinos in need of mental health

Productech Corporation draft reviewingEdit

Dear Thereodislong,

thank you for reviewing the draft of Productech Corporation article. I was trying to do it objective aтв not an advertising, taking an article about JBL as an inspiration. Looks like I failed (( Would you please advise, what parts of the article require editing? thank you in advance!

References addedEdit

Hi, I filled up the draft with some useful references and also added some literature. I hope it could be enought. Thanks


I want to know that why my article not approving any suggestion

Grateful!Gmli82164 (talk) 11:12, 7 October 2018 (UTC)Gmli82164Edit

Hi! Thank you for the review. I will do what I can to improve that article.

Lorraine McGowen Draft PageEdit

Thank you for the notification. I have removed all external links from the Lorraine McGowen page.

DRAFT:Summation Formula List DeclineEdit

Ok, I took your advice and added my material back onto the wiki page on summation. You watch how long it takes D Lazarus to delete it and post his own rambling notes. His notes don't transition well for sentence-to-sentence; paragraph-to-paragraph, nor make any sense; Some of what he posts really is not related to closed form summation. Roger

Dixon Algebra submission.Edit

I have followed your instructions and I think I have successfully updated the references to conform to wiki practices.

Historical notes: • I begsn working on this topic some 40 years ago; • Periodically the algebra has cropped up in the works of others; • Most of this activity has occurred in the last 8 years; • John Baez was the first to call the algebra the Dixon algebra; • This became somewhat solidified when the Quanta Mag and Wired articles appeared; • I recently saw a blog in which the blog's author said there is no wikipedia page for the Dixon algebra yet; • So I decided to start one.

Cheers, Geoffrey Dixon

Great American Doll Company DraftEdit

Hello. Can you please help me edit this wiki page. I have done it the best I can. Can you please tell me what i need to fix up

Thank you for your help....Edit

I really appreciate your help with my draft:Marek Holeček. I will try my best to add those missing citations you pointed out so hopefully it can get better. Thanks again...I really hope the article will be accepted at last ...


Dear Theroadislong,

Thank you for your reply - I wasn't aware of restriction on autobiographies, but can well appreciate the reasoning behind it!

all best,

Ketty Nez

Aron Ain DraftEdit

Thank you for reviewing the draft. I'll edit the page to include more sources or remove sections that don't have sources. Thank you!


FYI: Ashley has been adding photos to Commons and then inserting those photos into various articles in preparation for her intention to create an article about her grandfather, Virgil Williams. I left a note on her Talk to declare paid or COI if she proceeds with the attempt. (Evidence for intention is creation and then deletion of a draft in her Sandbox.) The quail hunting photo you deleted was there because Virgil owns the land that was name-mentioned in the image caption. David notMD (talk)

Mona Lisa BrookshireEdit

Can you help me improve my page?Edit

Celalettin-Field Quantum Observation TunnelEdit

Hello there,

I have removed unsourced material and thinned it out as per your direction. Can you please cast an eye?

Draft:900 wine proseccoEdit

Hi Theroadislong, thanks for reviewing my page!

I saw your comment on my draft page 900 wine, I'm inserting the Italian wine brand on the market. I'm not connected to the company, I just try to make the list of brands on wikipedia as complete as possible. I am passionate about wine and I think this brand is important in the Italian sparkling wine scene.

can you possibly and kindly advise me of the changes that can better comply with the policies of wikipedia? Thanks a lot!

April editathons at Women in RedEdit

Page deletion taggedEdit

I am definitely not using it as a free hosting service and i am sorry i ll need to disagree with your analysis. its just i am taking time to be up to the required standard of trained wiki editors and i think i ll make it. thank you for taking the time to reviewing my page.


Shahara Ahmad-LlewellynEdit

Why can't you just add some things and save as you modify instead of it making you resubmit and publish. Because I have a long way to go and I can't keep getting rejected.

Re-review My ArticleEdit

Hello Theroadislong,

I have already added new sources like you adviced for my draft article Draft:Finalist of the Intel ISEF and hope if you could review it again and see if its notable enough for Wikipedia.

Thank you very much Mathew Anderson

Review of submission by Casper da Costa-LuisEdit

Thanks for your review.

As requested, I've removed external links as requested (except for the "See Also" section) and used more neutral language.

Do let me know if anything else needs improving!

Short information about Ukrainian scientistEdit

Hello. Could you please help to create short info page about Ukrainian scientist?

Milly Bennett reviewEdit

Hey! Thanks for reviewing the article. I'm very new to this, so I'll try to learn more and go back in to cite third-party sources. Thanks for your help

re-edit is submittedEdit

Hi Theroadislong.

I have re-edited my article submitted on the 19th of April. Will be very thankful if you can have a loot at it in the nearest possible date. Thank you!

M28 TrombonicoEdit

hey how can I make my article better or get some exceptions by changing a few things cause I don't really understand what the bot thing wants

Wikipedia pageEdit

Dear Theroadislong,

Thank you for getting back to me so quickly, I take on board what you say and will think again.

Many thanks,


Australian Biome ProjectEdit

Thank you for your advice, do I need to add credit or remove the biome reference entirely.````

I have re edited for your comment. could you please take a look and give me some feed back thanks````


Hi, Theroadislong -- thanks for your comment. I have updated the situation with the external links. Sorry for the mistake! Please let me know if anything else needs changing. Thanks!

Thank youEdit

Thank you for the swift review of my article. Best, K



I think Draft:PyCM is good enough to be accepted. This article provides some reliable references like Journal of open source software and Github (the most popular community of software developers) and etc. In comparison with other accepted open-source software articles like Aika_(software), Renjin , UIMA , BigDL, Cantera_(software) that most of them are self-cited. And also this library with more than 640 stars, 200 dependant codes and 1000 installs per week, is more popular than currently available articles on English Wikipedia like ELKI, Cantera_(software), OpenNN. Any suggestion is gratefully welcomed to improve this draft.

Thank you for your consideration.

Request for Dispute ResolutionEdit

Apologies for not notifying you on your talk page. I thought notification on the related talk page was appropriate initially, but see that I need to notify everyone individually.

Jorgen Odegard declineEdit

Hey Theroadislong!

Hope all is well. I happen to notice a decline for Jorgen Odegard’s wiki page which is totally okay because I’m very new to creating wiki pages. My goal is to improve and help songwriters and producers’ lifes with publishing & management company by creating sources of all their music credit and praises as this is one of the most useful tools publishing companies use to determine their qualifications for sessions, pub deals, and so much more! Also as you mentioned, the information on the producer is lacking and scattered all over the internet, which is why this wiki page is super important for a lot of these producers and songwriters.

That being said, would love your thoughts and suggestions that’ll help this process. To give you an idea, I used Sarah Aarons as a reference who’s another songwriter with a similar amount of credibility as jorgen in this industry. Again, would love your input! Thanks so much

Jorgen odegard declineEdit

Hey Theroadislong!

Hope all is well. I happen to notice a decline for Jorgen Odegard’s wiki page which is totally okay because I’m very new to creating wiki pages. My goal is to improve and help songwriters and producers’ lifes with publishing & management company by creating sources of all their music credit and praises as this is one of the most useful tools publishing companies use to determine their qualifications for sessions, pub deals, and so much more! Also as you mentioned, the information on the producer is lacking and scattered all over the internet, which is why this wiki page is super important for a lot of these producers and songwriters.

That being said, would love your thoughts and suggestions that’ll help this process. To give you an idea, I used Sarah Aarons as a reference who’s another songwriter with a similar amount of credibility as jorgen in this industry. Again, would love your input! Thanks so much


Hello, your words 'Their own website, blogs and press releases are not suitable sources'. I believe you are mistaken here because first of all not all the press is from ascopubs and second those publications on ascopubs are written by doctors in the name of the American Asociation of Oncology they might not be fully independent from CancerLinQ but they are the most reliable source. Or do you believe the American Asociation of Oncology publications are lies? they have many years researching, collecting information and contributing with medicine for you to discard their work and call them unreliable. I also source Forbes and the national medical journal. I had been waiting weeks for a review...

CancerLinQ LLC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of ASCO so their press releases are NOT independent sources. The Forbes article is not reliable either it is user contributed. You can get other opinions here Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk. Theroadislong (talk) 19:05, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
      • I resubmitted the article with new references, feel free to re-review it,Javieralexvr (talk) 23:51, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Unsourced: Athel_Cornish-BowdenEdit

Thank you for looking at my draft page on the enzyme kineticist Draft:Athel Cornish-Bowden. You left the message 'unsourced'. Could you expand on that a little so that I can improve the page? Thank you. Rhodydog (talk) 17:23, 4 August 2019 (UTC) Addendum: I think I know what you meant. I've updated the page by rewriting the research section which now has references to the various areas of research that the person did. I've also added citation numbers for some of his papers which shows that the person in question has notability. Rhodydog (talk) 18:04, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

In response to your comment: "All the sources are to her own books, Wikipedia requires in-depth coverage in independent reliable sources." I have added citation numbers to one of his books and all the influential publications I listed. His most popular book on enzyme kinetics has over 3000 citations. Most of these will not be self-citations but independent sources. As for being reliable, virtually all these citations will have come from peer-reviewed journals. Do you have any specific reliable sources in mind? For example, if I found citations to his books and papers from Nature, Science or PNAS? Rhodydog (talk) 21:26, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

Please see WP:NACADEMIC for details of what is required. Theroadislong (talk) 21:33, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

That's a useful link you provided. On that page, it indicates: "Academics/professors meeting any one of the following conditions, as substantiated through reliable sources, are notable.". I believe the following criterion have been satisfied:

1. "The person's research has made a significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources. The most typical way of satisfying Criterion 1 is to show that the academic has been an author of highly cited academic work – either several extremely highly cited scholarly publications or a substantial number of scholarly publications with significant citation rates."

To support this the author has, according to google scholar, 27613 citations and an h-index of 57. Both of these are substantial. His popular textbook alone has had over 3000 citations.

"Criterion 1 can also be satisfied if the person has pioneered or developed a significant new concept, technique or idea, made a significant discovery or solved a major problem in their academic discipline. In this case, it is necessary to explicitly demonstrate, by a substantial number of references to academic publications of researchers other than the person in question, that this contribution is indeed widely considered to be significant and is widely attributed to the person in question."

In this regard, I can refer you to his paper from 1974 ( where he developed a new approach to estimating enzyme kinetic parameters. This paper has been cited 1716 times. This is just one of many examples of substantial contributions he has made over the course of his career.

4. "The person's academic work has made a significant impact in the area of higher education, affecting a substantial number of academic institutions. Criterion 4 may be satisfied, for example, if the person has authored several books that are widely used as textbooks (or as a basis for a course) at multiple institutions of higher education."

The author's texts books are used in higher education. Fundamentals of enzyme kinetics has 3120 citations; and Principles of Enzyme kinetics 706 citations.

I would also like to point you to a review of his textbook in Biochem and Molecular Biology Education (vol 40(5), 345-346, 2012) where the book received a great review. The last paragraph of the review states: "This book is a gem. The writing is clear and concise. It is filled with historical information, hints, common errors of analysis, and enough theory to enable his readers to do what Cornish-Bowden really wants, which is to understand, perform, and interpret enzyme kinetic analyses correctly and in a way which unleashes the explanatory power derived from their sound use".

In addition, the book has been adopted for classwork in at many universities. After a few minutes searching I found the following courses that use his text book: (Norwegian Graduate School) (University of Edinburgh) (Princeton)!wesmaps_page.html?crse=003107&term=1099 (Wesleyan University) (University of Guelph)

I can list these on the page if you think it would be useful.

His textbooks were certainly the main books we used in enzyme kinetics when I was an undergraduate. I therefore consider the author to satisfy criterion 4.

8. "The person is or has been head or chief editor of a major well-established academic journal in their subject area."

Athel Cornish-Bowden has been on the editorial board for a number of peer-reviewed journals but in particular, he was "Deputy Chairman of the Editorial Board of the Biochemical Journal, London, UK"

I therefore consider him to have satisfied criterion 8.

Feel free to re-submit but "as demonstrated by independent reliable sources" doesn't appear to have been met yet? Theroadislong (talk) 07:33, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

I believe the author has "as demonstrated by independent reliable sources". He has, according to google scholar, 27,613 citations and a h-index of 57. His popular textbook alone has had over 3000 citations. The google scholar citations are peer-reviewed, I'm not sure how one can do better than this. I think I might need specific suggestions that would satisfy your requirements. One thing I could do for example to illustrate independent reliable sources is to cite on the page recognized notable researchers that have commented on his work. Would that be sufficient?

I came across some additional evidence for the significance of the author's impact which might be of help to you. According to "Citation Thresholds (Essential Science Indicators)". Science Watch. Thomson Reuters. May 1, 201, I quote "During the period January 1, 2000 – February 28, 2010, a physicist had to receive 2073 citations to be among the most cited 1% of physicists in the world." 1229 citations for molecular biology and genetics. Since the author in question has 27,613 citations, he is well within the top 1% of researchers.

I've updated the article by including sources in the section "Education and Career", and adding six examples of independent reliable sources from well-cited researchers (Note this is 6 out of 27,613 possible examples). I resubmitted it and awaiting your comments. (talk) 04:42, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

The sources you added to the Education and Career section do not support the content? You seem to be have a basic misunderstanding as to what constitutes an independent reliable source. Theroadislong (talk) 07:18, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

I saw your comments in the education and career section, and I think I know what you’re getting at. Essentially if I don’t have independent verification for statements I make they shouldn’t be presented until I have such evidence. Most of the his career information I used came from his online cv which of course isn’t an independent source. Eg when and where he was born, what nationality he has, whether he was an undergraduate or even a graduate at oxford (I assume his thesis is not an independent secondary source). I also don’t have actual evidence he was for example at U of Birmingham or more recently at the CNRS (although he has a CNRS url for his research page). I’ve removed all these statements.

I shall resubmit the page based on these changes. If I see anything else that is unsubstantiated for lack of evidence I’ll remove that too. I hope we can agree based on Wikipedia’s own riteria that he is a notable scientist (see previous comments). Rhodydog (talk) 20:55, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

Jay Wexler DraftEdit

Thank you for reviewing Draft:Jay Wexler. I removed the in-line external links. Is there anything else I need to do for this to be ready for the mainspace? Thanks! JRobble (talk) 19:15, 6 August 2019 (UTC) Application Builder (web framework)Edit

Hi Theroadislong,

thanks for reviewing.

I'm confused again. A number of different people rejected my article on different basis (StraussInTheHouse‬, Mjs1991‬, SamHolt6).

This is the first time it's rejected on the "This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia." basis. StraussInTheHouse Reviewer noted: "Potentially notable, but we need more WP:SECONDARY sources."

I really went and checked ALL Python Web Frameworks Published on Wikipedia and have no idea how is my article different than any other? This is a nerve breaking procedure, I do not think anyone deserves this with helping to Open Source community and absolutely free software. Can you please help with advice?

Thank you

Page VerificationEdit

Hi Theroadislong,

I am curious if you could fill me in a little bit on the page verification process. Why does it take only a couple of days to decline a page submission, but it takes weeks to verify? Is there something wrong with my submission that could be causing a delay? I am new to Wikipedia and I hope you can help.

Articles are reviewed in no particular order. Your draft Draft:Arbor Investments still reads like an advert to me, with routine funding details. The Portfolio section is unsourced and promotional, but I'll leave it for another reviewer to take a look to be fair. Theroadislong (talk) 16:09, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

Your attentionEdit

Hi. I am bringing your attention to the discussion at Draft talk:John R. Everett, regarding your decline. --2604:2000:E010:1100:C405:9FEB:9973:3205 (talk) 01:36, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

I accepted the draft John R. Everett earlier today? Theroadislong (talk) 21:34, 8 August 2019 (UTC)


Thank you for the review and the feedback.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hannibal13 (talkcontribs) 14:03, 9 August 2019 (UTC) 

Bird TechnologiesEdit

You removed content relative to this page. This content has been up for years. I updated (2) photos on this page one for a current image of a product and the other is the current company logo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DJacksonBird (talkcontribs) 14:23, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

It's irrelevant how long the content has been there, it was totally unsourced and promotional. Theroadislong (talk) 14:25, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

Bird TechnologiesEdit

I understand what you are saying but I did not write the original content that was posted on that page. That content had been there for several years. As I stated I corrected (2) images. The rest of the content was relative and should have remained. If you feel that there was based advertisement content then you could have edited it instead of deleting those sections. Please replace the content and edit as you see fit to retain the integrity per Wikipedia's guidelines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DJacksonBird (talkcontribs) 14:38, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

I didn't say you had written it and no, there is no obligation for me to add back unsourced promotional content, if you can find reliable independent sources that back up any of the content you are free to request it be added back on the article's talk page. Theroadislong (talk) 14:42, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

Decline of And That's Why We Drink pageEdit

Hi. You declined the page I worked on. I know I need better sources but they dont list their episodes on their website so the only place to know the episodes is spotify and other player sources. I double checked them by listening to the episode. How would I reference that? Do a MLA citation of each episode? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hopson1996 (talkcontribs) 22:42, 9 August 2019 (UTC)


Hello. I am contacting you regarding your allegations against me and your revert of an edit I made. I am only noticing it now, as I have been busy IRL. I am very offended by your actions. It is antisemitic for Jewish people to not be able to read an article about a practice of our religion, Judaism, and I don’t see why you do not want Jewish people to not be able to read the article Nazirite. As I tried to explain to you, in Judaism we are not allowed to utter, think, read, write or type the four letters which are taught in the Torah to be the true name of Hashem, or G-d. No scholar of Judaism, no Rabbi, no sage, no figure in Jewish history have ever used the real name of G-d, and instead Adonai or Hashem is always substituted. I understand you are likely not Jewish and not aware of this practice. As the article concerns Jews, the correct term for the Jewish god should be used. To use the other name would prevent many Jewish people, especially those who are religiously observant, from reading the article and finding out about the interesting topic of Nazirites. I personally feel that it is antisemitic for the article to use the other name, as it is denying Jewish people the right to read an article about Judaism, and it culturally appropriates Jewish religion, culture and tradition and I find it very offensive, as many other people do. It is equivalent to having a depiction of Muhammed in every article regarding Islam. It is unacceptable and I hope that your actions were well-intentioned and not truly antisemitic in origin. I hope that you now understand the reason I made the edit, and I do not wish to engage with you any further and I will not be reading any possible replies on my page. Thank you. Yallayallaletsgo (talk) 10:00, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

I understand why you made the edit, however you are going to have a very tough time if you plan to remove the many thousands of mentions of this name from Wikipedia! To imply that I am antisemitic is abhorrent. Good day. Theroadislong (talk) 11:15, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Your Reversion of My Recent 'Creation-Evolution Controversy' Page CorrectionCrissieLuckey (talk) 12:33, 10 August 2019 (UTC)Edit

Although I make no pretense of expert knowledge on the subject, I do take offense at your suggestion that my recent attempted correction on the above-referenced page was invalid. By quite direct opposite, I wrote a detailed explanation for why the claim that evolution is "established ... empirical scientific fact," is false. I went on to note that it in fact does remain a theory vs. scientific law today - more than 150 years after Darwin first popularized his evolutionary view. Furthermore, I mentioned yet another easily verifiable fact that many scientific authorities reject evolution on various grounds. Then closed by one prime example cited as Darwin's own "irreducibly complex" test.

I was very careful not to interject my personal view or any pro-creation or theological persuasion in my revision. Thus, your reversion seems difficult to justify and highly suspect as biased. Please clarify at your first opportunity.

The source [1] confirms that evolution by natural selection has been established as an empirical scientific fact. Theroadislong (talk) 12:43, 10 August 2019 (UTC)


  The Articles for Creation barnstar
For tireless reviewing ~Kvng (talk) 16:48, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Request on 18:57:59, 10 August 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by RCalixteEdit


I'm curious for clarification. I included two additional sources of significant coverage in published, reliable, secondary sources that are fully independent.

In particular, I'm curious for clarification in particular when compared to the already published pages here:

Thank you!

RCalixte (talk) 18:57, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

RCalixte It reads like an advert and the sources appear to be mostly routine press releases. Please see other crap exists Jimmy Joy (company) has a tag saying "The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines for companies and organizations." Huel is a paid for puff piece and you appear to have an undeclared conflict of interest. Theroadislong (talk) 19:17, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Lal Bagh Palace declineEdit

i did not copy i just copy some codings of reference cz i am new here sir — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nileshjaind (talkcontribs) 20:20, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

/Nileshjaind All of the the content of Draft:Lal Bagh Palace was copied from here.. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. Theroadislong (talk) 21:08, 10 August 2019 (UTC)


Hello i am the wrighter of Florin-micronations for my micronation i am new to wiki and whatever i did wrong please tell me and i will do my best to fix it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mavdog2020 (talkcontribs) 21:00, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

I'm sorry but there isn't really anything you can, do the topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia at this time. Theroadislong (talk) 21:05, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Reliable CitationsEdit

Dear Theroadislong and Wikipedia

I am very happy that you are keeping high standards for new article creation. This is much needed to maintain the quality and reliability of Wikipedia. I am all for it.

I am trying to create a page for a famous Kannada (a prominent south Indian language) film director who has made many dozens of feature films. Given, he is a regional figure and most of the sources are in Kannada, I have tried my best to cite important sources in English (including well known English newspapers like Times of India and the Hindu). Of course other cites I have cited are regional equivalents of IMDB, which you don't consider a reliable source. Please, do search around on the web to authenticate, rather than relaying only on the standard list of citations.

It will be unfortunate and a disservice if you delete this page. Thanks for your time.

KannadaRasika — Preceding unsigned comment added by KannadaRasika (talkcontribs) 23:51, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Request on 13:44:58, 11 August 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by AkiramukEdit

Thank you very much for spending time on reviewing the page. The person whose article was created, then submitted for review has been appointed by the Government of Odisha, India as Advisor to Odisha Adarsha Vidyalaya (the page cites Dr. Bijaya Sahoo's name). There are other references on the internet, published by major news sites, but since the reference cited in the other Wikipedia article was approved, I used the same.

Please help me understand which line was unverifiable. I will look for better references.


Akiramuk (talk) 13:44, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

Regarding your draft User:Akiramuk/sandbox
  • Source number 1 is a primary source
  • source numer 2 is a passing mention
  • Source number 3 is another primary source
Wikipedia requires multiple in-depth coverage in independent reliable sources. Theroadislong (talk) 14:10, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
I have fixed indentation in the above comment. (Note: lists can be indented, too!) --CiaPan (talk) 09:59, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

No affiliation with any company or organizationEdit


I noticed that you sent me a message. I am writing to confirm that I have no outside affiliation with any publication. I am an independent historian with much work. Please confirm you are able to maintain my revisions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anation1! (talkcontribs) 18:04, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

So you claim you are not August Bernardicou and are not connected with the website --Orange Mike | Talk 18:20, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

Marzocco GroupEdit

Hello, I've seen your review, I tried to rephrase some sentences, and asked for a new review. Please let me know if there are some specific points to reformulate, it would help a lot! — Preceding unsigned comment added by C0273x (talkcontribs) 18:53, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

Leather SeatEdit

Hello Mr./ Ms.,

  Can you please approved my publish of Products of Leather because this is my project in school. please, please approve my publish. Thanks and God Bless!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Slicedpotato (talkcontribs) 06:28, 12 August 2019 (UTC) 
Your draft is a copyright violation of Wikipedia cannot publish your school project. Theroadislong (talk) 07:36, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

TX RX Systems and Daniel KaegebeinEdit

I wasn't sure if it was appropriate to post Mr. Kaegebein's obituary as a source, please advise. Daniel Kaegebein — Preceding unsigned comment added by DJacksonBird (talkcontribs) 15:26, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

Obituaries are perfectly good sources but is the content really needed? Theroadislong (talk) 15:32, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

Thank YouEdit

Hi, thank you for the clear review I will sure make the improvement if any. I will make sure I keep in mind what you say in all my edits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amanijoseph87 (talkcontribs) 23:19, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

Draft: Darren BakerEdit

Hi, I'm not sure if it is inappropriate to message you on here so please delete if it is.

You reviewed an article I wrote over 2 months ago that is still waiting to be reviewed again. I changed in line with your comments and I'm not sure if I need to do anything else.

I wonder if you could be so kind as to help me because I am lost.

Thanks--David Thornberry (talk) 10:06, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

I'm afraid the draft Draft:Darren Baker is still stuffed with non neutral trumpery eg. " For a young contemporary artist to achieve this kind of status and recognition is extremely rare and can only be put down to Darren’s talent for naturalistic description" " enjoys a range of artistic appointments" "keen supporter of, and tireless fundraiser" "one of the leading painters of the classical realism genre" "portraiture which grace many public and private collections" Theroadislong (talk) 10:11, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

Kevin P. Thompson notabilityEdit

Dear Theroadislong, I have removed external links from the article. Sorry for the blunder. I would like to add why I think this person is justified for a wikipedia page. He is a scientist/engineer who has contributed significantly in the development of modern technology. This is verified by a third party, the Optical Society. This is one of the largest societies for optics in the world which hosts many conferences, is responsible for scientific publications and the advancement of the field in general. In 2017 they established an award in honor of the contributions of the subject of the article. Thank you for your consideration. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vasilis Theofylaktopoulos (talkcontribs) 16:47, 13 August 2019 (UTC) Furthermore, he is a recipient of an award himself. I think he should be qualified under notability academics 2.The person has received a highly prestigious academic award or honor at a national or international level. Vasilis Theofylaktopoulos (talk) 13:07, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Lyla FitzsimmonsEdit

Hi Theroadislong

Hope you are well.

I am writing in regards to the page Lyla Fitzsimmons. Forgive me as i am trying my best to produce a page i believe me daughter deserves. It has been declined due to references. I do not know if this is the correct place to ask for advice, sorry if not. I'm struggling to figure which more references are needed. Is there any information you could give me on this?

Best regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dotsone (talkcontribs) 21:16, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

You have only one poor quality independent source [2] Commercial links to buy the book are of no use whatsoever. Wikipedia requires multiple in-depth coverage in independent reliable source. You will also need to declare your conflict of interest on your user page. Theroadislong (talk) 21:29, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

Please remove your comment since I have done what you askedEdit


I just successfully moved my Draft article to the main namespace: Refugio I Rochin

I am new to Wikipedia, and this is my first article (and, most likely, my last).

Soon after you posted your comment, I did what you asked and removed all external links from the body of the article.

I had hoped your comment would be removed as part of the successful move, but I see it is still there, along with a new Warning box, which I'm not writing about here.

Would you kindly remove your comment, or tell me how to remove it, after your final review?

And if it is possible for me to remove the new Warning box, please tell me how.

Thank you, Mizpat (talk) 21:30, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for removing your comment; did you also add new comments in the Warning box?Edit

Hello again,

Thanks for removing your comment, which I fulfilled soon after you posted it: Refugio I Rochin.

I don't know how this happened, but the Warning box now contains two more messages: Multiple Issues, and Major Contributor Has Close Connection...

Did you add those two new messages (or, perhaps Multiple Issues is automatic after adding the Close Connection issue?)?

Why, and why now? Why not mention the Close Connection issue way back, in your first comment? I've been up front from the beginning about my writing this article for a friend, and I've been extra careful with wording and citations to be as neutral as possible.

Are all items (tags?) in this box things I can remove myself, without making further changes to the article?

Thank you, Mizpat (talk) 21:45, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

My ArticleEdit

Dear The road is long,

Hi, thank you for your message. as I know you reviewed and declined my article. Could you please kindly let me know what is the specific problem with my article? I dont know what is the problem. I just have added some sources and need time to add more. But if I know what is the problem, will do my best for the rest of it.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daveawe (talkcontribs) 08:39, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Daveawe Please see WP:REFB for help with formatting sources, but be aware that YouTube and Facebook are not reliable sources and will need to be replaced. Theroadislong (talk) 08:47, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi, as advised I have removed the link to the You Tube videos. What should I do next to submit the article/page for review. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahmedsayed6311 (talkcontribs) 09:43, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

You will need to find multiple in-depth coverage in reliable sources, you have none at the moment. Theroadislong (talk) 09:46, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. The link does not work. could you please check and resend it for me? For a musician, a video or audio of his work is the best source to introduce him/her by his job and not just by words. I wonder why you said it is not reliable. I assume that a youtube video as a vlog or etc might not be reliable. but Music or Film or any other media that introduce an artist is the best way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daveawe (talkcontribs) 07:42, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

multiple in-depth coverage in reliable sourcesEdit

1961 - 1965: Somali Ambassador accredited in Italy and the Vatican as well as to the European Economic Community

could the links in Italy and European economic community be considered as reliable sources — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahmedsayed6311 (talkcontribs) 08:23, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Revised Qualifacts DraftEdit

Hello, I believe I've revised the Qualifacts draft to read less like an advertisement. I've also added a source from Inc. 5000 that helps to show the company's credibility. Would you mind giving the draft another look?

@Theroadislong could you give this draft a look again? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Judahpedia13 (talkcontribs) 14:38, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

You took links awayEdit

You took existing links away someone else added to the page, one of which happened to have been of the event I organise, all I did was update the outdated link and info with the link, as the webaddress changed and we nolonger have a forum. Now you took it away completely which is quite frankly very rude. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BantonPhoenix (talkcontribs) 21:29, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

It matters not who put the external link up, it is advertising your event and has no place in a Wikipedia article, you are welcome to argue your case on the article's talk page. Theroadislong (talk) 06:43, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

multiple in-depth coverage in reliable sourcesEdit

I have added some links to the references tag as reliable sources links. If it is ok, how will I be able to submit it for final publication.. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahmedsayed6311 (talkcontribs) 04:59, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Those links don't appear to be independent reliable sources. Theroadislong (talk) 14:25, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Draft:AWA StudiosEdit

Greetings. I write you because I may need your help to improve this draft even better. I need more advise or could let you write on it. I await your answer. F. E. Puricelli (talk) 13:32, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

You say in the draft "an independent comic book publisher founded on October 2019" this might be WP:TOOSOON for a Wikipedia article. Theroadislong (talk) 14:12, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

multiple in-depth coverage in reliable sourcesEdit

Thank you for your feedback "Those links don't appear to be independent"

Would these sources not be considered as "reliable"? 1) The presidency of the Italian republic web portal. 2) Official Somali Government News Agency website. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahmedsayed6311 (talkcontribs) 01:28, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Ahmedsayed6311 Yes they are reliable, but they are primary sources, so not independent. Theroadislong (talk) 07:53, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

I am truly confusedEdit

I have seen many other person like myself showing a Wikipedia page written in the same way I am trying to write mine. There are many examples out there. This is truly confusing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Th.Migeotte (talkcontribs) 12:09, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Th.Migeotte As it says on your talk page "Creating an autobiography is strongly discouraged" your draft has no reliable independent sources. If you are notable someone else will write your article, please wait until they do. Theroadislong (talk) 12:24, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Yes they are reliable, but they are primary sources, so not independentEdit

Hi, The line between these different sources has become a bit blurred for me. Found this on Wikipedia:

To verify that a subject is important, only a source that is independent of the subject can provide a reliable evaluation (I believe that the references I provided can indeed be categorized as "only a source that is independent of the subject"). The article continues.. A source too close to the subject will always believe that the subject is important enough to warrant detailed coverage, and relying exclusively upon this source will present a conflict of interest and a threat to a neutral encyclopedia.

Much as I would like to continue with this project, I think I have come up against a dead end. Please let me know if with the info. I have provided the page is ready to be published. Thank you very much for your advice and believe me I would hate to abandon this project and look forward to your input... Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahmedsayed6311 (talkcontribs) 02:51, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Josha StradowskiEdit

I am not the editor that created that page, but I tried to clean it up a bit and added a secondary source (major Dutch news site I also linked to the existing wiki pages of some of the other works by the actor. Can you have a look to see if it addresses your concerns? Hg03u (talk) 22:44, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Request on 14:24:20, 21 August 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by ShailzEdit

Hi Theroadislong, This was my first wiki page ever, and it got rejected...I am depressed (kidding). But please explain what was the reason, I have added few references and am resubmitting the article. Please check if it works now

Shailz (talk) 14:24, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Inserted 3rd party refsEdit

Hi I dug up a bunch of 3rd party refs hope this meets the requirement. Thanks for the explanation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Biologyfishman (talkcontribs) 16:50, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Declined SubmissionEdit

Hi, I would like to get more details about the decline of the post. Can you provide me some details? see — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sintratec (talkcontribs) 10:14, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Sintratec Firstly you have what we call a conflict of interest and will need to change your username. The draft is stuffed full of marketing trumpery, for example " to enable the students and scientists of today for the requirements of tomorrow" "Sintratec's laser sintering technology allows the production of complex and freeform objects which meet demanding part resolution, robustness and temperature requirements." "Many hundreds of professional Sintratec machines are in operation around the world in various industries," 'The step-by-step guidance and the user-friendly design allows an easy handling of 3D-files and the print settings." and none of the awards are notable. Theroadislong (talk) 10:27, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Yes they are reliable, but they are primary sources, so not independentEdit

Hi, I would appreciate your feedback if the page is ready for publishing or not? Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahmedsayed6311 (talkcontribs) 01:15, 24 August 2019 (UTC)


  The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
For all the backstage work David notMD (talk) 17:04, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Sample of links already providedEdit

You have reviewed the article on the Author Arnaud Segla Saying:

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

I want to know how many additional references must be included since the external links coming with the page created are already sample of content published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent and talk of the subject.

Considering these links is it possible to validate the publication as it is?

Thanks in advance

Arnaud Ahmed Segla (talk) 18:48, 24 August 2019 (UTC)Arnaud Ahmed Segla

/* Roy Franks */Edit

Hello, I don't know if you remember reviewing an article iv'e written, but if you do could i get a little more info on the reason for rejection? I want to edit it to the liking and acceptance of others, but unfortunately i'm not sure on the major issue, i know at first the source was not the best so i fixed that with a better source. I am trying to get a job as a writer and am trying to get public articles as references. im very new to wiki, but so far my work is rejected and i have trouble figuring out why. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Americanretail (talkcontribs) 19:33, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Americanretail I'm afraid your topic Draft:Roy Franks is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. Theroadislong (talk) 10:18, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "Theroadislong".