User talk:Cabrils/Archive 5
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Cabrils. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
Draft:Stephen Douglas Gore
Hi. I started a discussion about an article that you moved to mainspace. Counterfeit Purses (talk) 18:50, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the ping. Cabrils (talk) 05:06, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Thank you for reviewing the first submission. I have just done a reediting. Please review when you have time. I did not click the "resubmit" button. If I have to do that in order for you to review it again please let me know. The last section might be interpretable as a CV but my intention is just that it serve as a summary or recent activities. Also, I have added a lot more references.
"KwabenaSlaughter (talk) 22:16, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
- Good progress, well done. You don't need to hit the Submit button --in fact it's better if you don't while we progress the draft together.
- That's a lot of new sources, good work. Please ensure each source meets the criteria of reliable sources.
- It would help by identifying, on the draft's Talk Page, the WP:THREE best sources that establish notability of the subject.
- I note your declaration of a conflict of interest on your User Page, thanks for doing that. The template hasn't formatted correctly though, so please re-read the instructions on how to add that and re-do it.
- Ping me here when you're done and I'll have a good look. Thanks Cabrils (talk) 00:13, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hi, I've done some more editing and I did the COI information in the Talk portion of the draft article. The citations are all respected newspapers, government or respected cultural institutions, and book publishers. In all cases the citations are included not for the purpose of opinion, but only to provide further facts.
- In the instructions for citations I saw mention that three citations was all that was desired. That's surprising. Many of the wikipedia pages I've seen over the years have more than that.
- Please let me know how the page looks now. Thank you. KwabenaSlaughter (talk) 19:34, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
- I'm wanting to help but it's clear that you have not read my comments carefully--please re-read all my comments carefully.
- My comments do not "mention that three citations was all that was desired". The purpose of WP:THREE is to allow reviewers of draft pages to efficiently assess the notability of a subject, which in most cases can be done by assessing the best / strongest 3 sources. This is now the third time I am requesting you to please identify, on the draft's Talk Page, the WP:THREE best sources that establish notability of the subject.
- Further, and again as I have already requested, please identify with specificity, exactly which criteria you believe the page meets (eg "I think the page now meets WP:MUSICBIO criteria #3, because XXXXX").
- Thanks. Cabrils (talk) 03:09, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hi, If my previous response felt rude I offer my apologies. That was not my intention. This is my first time working on a wikipedia page so I am at times unfamiliar with which actions on the Talk page require coded input and which is just writing sentences. I think the example sentence at the end of your most recent comment helped me better understand. On the Talk page for the draft I have added two topics: WP:THREE Notable Sources and WP:MUSICBIO Criteria. I hope these have been entered in the proper way. I think the conflict of interest portion was correctly entered a few days ago, because on the Talk page there is a portion that says I have made the declaration.
- Thank you for time and effort. KwabenaSlaughter (talk) 17:41, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @KwabenaSlaughter. No worries, your response wasn't rude, and I'm not offended, all good.
- I did include that example sentence in my comment at the top of the draft page.
- Thanks for providing that info on the Talk Page, I have looked through the revised draft and made some comments on the Talk page.
- Happy to help. Cabrils (talk) 03:44, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- Hi, Here's a question about an alternate direction to go with this project. On this subject of Maxwell Melvins there are three linguistic things that are woven tightly together, which make it hard to discuss them individually. 1) The Lifers Group was an organization created in the 1970s by incarcerated people to help those with long sentences. 2) Maxwell Melvins joined the Lifers Group in the 1980s and introduced his idea to make music to help them spread their message. They chose to name the music project the same as their social group: Lifers Group. This sameness has created a certain amount of historical blur between the group and the music project. 3) There is already a wikipedia page about the music project of the Lifers Group. Maxwell's name is mentioned five times on that page in a way that makes it clear that he was influential to its creation. The first sentence on that page begins with "Lifers Group was a hip hop group formed by Maxwell Melvins...". The dilemma here is that the Lifers Group was not just a hip hop group. They started as a social project, then added a music project, and Maxwell Melvins was a member of the social group and the creator of the music project.
- My question is, do you think it would be wisest if, rather than making a separate page for Maxwell, I tried to edit the currently existing Lifers Group page and more thoroughly clarified the multiple aspects of what the Lifers Group was? KwabenaSlaughter (talk) 16:14, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @KwabenaSlaughter,
- I think that's an excellent suggestion. I should emphasise that I think a page for Maxwell is possible, but there are a few hurdles to overcome, as our journey here has shown.
- I think it would be a very helpful and valuable experience for you to elaborate the material about Maxwell on the already existing Lifers Group page, being mindful of the relevant policies and guidelines. I expect it may become self-evident then whether there's sufficient notability for Maxwell to warrant his own page.
- As a new editor, with no (or little) experience, jumping in and creating a new page from scratch can be daunting and disheartening-- I know from personal experience!
- Feel free to ping me if you ever have any questions. All the best with it. Cabrils (talk) 07:21, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
Draft:Jane Stuart-Smith
I didn't create Draft:Jane Stuart-Smith but I came across it and had something to add. Don't the fellowships satisfy WP:PROF, at least now? I think there's more one could add, but I haven't done a deep dive. -- //Replayful (talk | contribs) 18:02, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- @Replayful: Yes! As I said in my comment on the draft, "The draft likely passes WP:PROF, however prior to accepting the page, it would help to add some reliable sources that discuss Stuart-Smith's contribution in some detail.I would be happy for you to leave a note for me on my talk page and I would be happy to reassess. I do think this draft has potential so please do persevere."
- Your additions look great, and I've added a reference to a Guardian article, which all just help to add some meat on the bone. If you wanted to submit the draft I'd be happy to accept it, please just ping me here so I know. Thanks. Cabrils (talk) 07:40, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
- @Cabrils I have submitted it now. //Replayful (talk | contribs) 12:53, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
- Draft accepted. Cabrils (talk) 22:00, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Yay! //Replayful (talk | contribs) 22:05, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Draft accepted. Cabrils (talk) 22:00, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- @Cabrils I have submitted it now. //Replayful (talk | contribs) 12:53, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
Hi, thank you for reviewing my first submission a few months ago! I apologize for the delay in responding to your comments. I've just resubmitted my article in the hopes that it adequately addresses your comments.
On the article's talk page, I list my WP:THREE sources and explicitly note that I have no conflict of interest regarding the article's subject. For the article itself, I added a couple more sources (which also fed into my WP:THREE list) and deleted one that no longer properly loaded. I also looked to rewrite certain sections and add additional sentences in the hopes that it no longer reads like a CV, as you previously mentioned. Hopefully I addressed your original concerns, but please let me know if it is not up to Wikipedia's standards, and I can do my best to make additional improvements. Thank you in advance for taking the time to review! Brick1329 (talk) 19:21, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Those amendments are all heading in the right direction, good work.
- However, the sources you included for WP:THREE are far from impressive, and none are from mainstream media. While Hochberg holds a a named chair appointment as a professor at Rice University (probably considered a major institution of higher education and research), and as such her notability may be assumed as long as it can be "substantiated through reliable sources": WP:NPROF. I would encourage you to look further for at least 2 such articles from mainstream media sources like larger newspapers (eg The Houston Chronicle). If she is truly notable theses shouldn't be difficult to find.
- Also, I feel the Selected Publications list is too extensive for the page (Wikipedia is not LinkedIn) and would encourage you to limit it to the most representative or most notable 4-6 articles. Cabrils (talk) 22:27, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
Hello, and thank you for reviewing my submission last month. I have resubmitted the article and improved sources and less bias commentary about the band. I have also included my COI in the talk page, as well as the WP:THREE for the articles. I have also linked the criterion from the necessary sections to provide quick reference for yourself. Please let us know if this articles are satisfactory or we require more direct content written the band. Aidangoodman (talk) 20:30, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
- Hi Aidan, thanks for the ping.
- Good work with those amendments and thank you for your COI declaration.
- Unfortunately, it appears you are not quite understanding the criteria that qualify a draft page to be accepted on Wikipedia, so I would encourage you to read thoroughly all the links I included in my comment on the draft, especially ‘Your First Article’, ‘Referencing for Beginners’ and ‘Easier Referencing for Beginners’. For example, in your COI declaration (which, incidentally, should be on your User Page, rather than the Draft Talk page), you say you are "ATTEMPTING TO BE AS UNBIAS AS POSSIBLE. I HOPE TO PRESENT AND ACCURATE AND TRUTHFUL REPRESENTATION OF OUR BAND AND ITS STORY", however lack of bias and accuracy and truthfulness are not the core criteria for a page, rather it is notability. And the sources you include are not sufficiently reliable to meet any of the standards identified in WP:GNG and WP:NBAND, which are the most relevant criteria.
- Further, because you have a conflict of interest, the page is required to meet even higher standards.
- In my view, a page for your band is WP:TOOSOON. I would encourage you to save the draft somewhere safe on your personal computer (because inactive draft pages expire after 3 months), and in time, as your band hopefully garners notability, add reliable sources that evidence that as they appear, at which point the draft may be worth re-submitting.
- For clarity with other reviewers, I am posting this comment on the Talk page.
- I wish you and the band success. Cabrils (talk) 21:20, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
Hi @CabrilsCabrils, you kindly reviewed and edited my article on Peter Barber Architect, which has been published. I’ve written a new one on Alex Ely Architect, would you be able to review this? I’m not making much progress as a writer on Wikipedia as I’m struggling with the coding! Thanks “21012024” @Architect encyclopedia Architect encyclopedia (talk) 16:58, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
- Hi thanks for the kind words and ping. I've posted a comment on the draft page which I hope you find helpful. Please do persevere, the page has good potential. Cabrils (talk) 22:42, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @CabrilsThanks for your feedback on my article. I've taken on board your comments and the piece has had input from other contributors so I believe it now addresses all feedback. Can you advise what happens next and how it gets considered for publication? Thanks Architect encyclopedia (talk) 07:22, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Hi again. That's good progress.
- At this point, to move forward, as I suggested in my comment on the draft:
- 1. It would help our volunteer reviewers by identifying, on the draft's talk page, the WP:THREE best sources that establish notability of the subject.
- 2. It would also be helpful if you could please identify with specificity, exactly which criteria you believe the page meets (eg "I think the page now meets WP:ARCHITECT criteria #3, because XXXXX").
- 3. If you have any connection to the subject, including being paid, you have a conflict of interest that you must declare on your Talk page (to see instructions on how to do this please click the link).
- Let me know if you have any more questions. Cabrils (talk) 00:44, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @CabrilsThanks for your feedback on my article. I've taken on board your comments and the piece has had input from other contributors so I believe it now addresses all feedback. Can you advise what happens next and how it gets considered for publication? Thanks Architect encyclopedia (talk) 07:22, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Rao family
A tag has been placed on Rao family requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section R2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from the article namespace to a different namespace except the Category, Template, Wikipedia, Help, or Portal namespaces.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. —Alalch E. 21:41, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
I obviously have no connection with this topic. There is a page for Puja Kolluru, who only directed one feature film Martin Luther King (film). I was not sure if she is notable (only directed one film). Maybe she is? But I saw that she directed a documentary and tried to create a draft to see if there are enough sources (which there aren't). We can safely redirect the draft to the director's article or delete the draft.
Main thing I wanted to say is that while creating the draft I thought that Tree Foundation was a recognized website but later realized it is only specific to Margaret D. Lowman. DareshMohan (talk) 00:22, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the ping.
- That you had no connection with the film was not "obvious" to me, so thank you for clarifying.
- Perhaps its worth adding the gist of the draft to Kolluru's page, after which it may become apparent if the doco is worthy of it's own page? In any event, I stand by my review and don't see the draft currently meeting WP:NFILM. Cabrils (talk) 00:32, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
New Pages Patrol newsletter April 2024
Hello Cabrils,
Backlog update: The October drive reduced the article backlog from 11,626 to 7,609 and the redirect backlog from 16,985 to 6,431! Congratulations to Schminnte, who led with over 2,300 points.
Following that, New Page Patrol organized another backlog drive for articles in January 2024. The January drive started with 13,650 articles and reduced the backlog to 7,430 articles. Congratulations to JTtheOG, who achieved first place with 1,340 points in this drive.
Looking at the graph, it seems like backlog drives are one of the only things keeping the backlog under control. Another backlog drive is being planned for May. Feel free to participate in the May backlog drive planning discussion.
It's worth noting that both queues are gradually increasing again and are nearing 14,034 articles and 22,540 redirects. We encourage you to keep contributing, even if it's just a single patrol per day. Your support is greatly appreciated!
2023 Awards
Onel5969 won the 2023 cup with 17,761 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 50/day. There was one Platinum Award (10,000+ reviews), 2 Gold Awards (5000+ reviews), 6 Silver (2000+), 8 Bronze (1000+), 30 Iron (360+) and 70 more for the 100+ barnstar. Hey man im josh led on redirect reviews by clearing 36,175 of them. For the full details, see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone for their efforts in reviewing!
WMF work on PageTriage: The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers deployed the rewritten NewPagesFeed in October, and then gave the NewPagesFeed a slight visual facelift in November. This concludes most major work to Special:NewPagesFeed, and most major work by the WMF Moderator Tools team, who wrapped up their major work on PageTriage in October. The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers will continue small work on PageTriage as time permits.
Recruitment: A couple of the coordinators have been inviting editors to become reviewers, via mass-messages to their talk pages. If you know someone who you'd think would make a good reviewer, then a personal invitation to them would be great. Additionally, if there are Wikiprojects that you are active on, then you can add a post there asking participants to join NPP. Please be careful not to double invite folks that have already been invited.
Reviewing tip: Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages within their most familiar subjects can use the regularly updated NPP Browser tool.
Reminders:
- You can access live chat with patrollers on the New Pages Patrol Discord.
- Consider adding the project discussion page to your watchlist.
- To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
New page patrol May 2024 Backlog drive
| New Page Patrol | May 2024 Articles Backlog Drive |  |
| |
| You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. | |
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:14, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
Revised Draft:Katherine_Elkins
Hello!
Thank you for so quickly reviewing the draft of this proposed Wiki article. I carefully read, researched, and revised the Draft to address your primary concern regarding 'Notable' and meeting the minimum threshold for several of the 8 academic criteria. To address the 'notable' and academic criteria, I had to be a bit more foward but tried to focus on an organized list of impact, results, and contributions rather than a laundry list of CV items. I hope I struck a balance - please advise if not.
The new draft has many more supporting details and authoratative secondary sources with notable academics, researchers, and thought leaders that Elkins has engaged with over recent years. Many of the details like upcoming papers and talks at Yale, Harvard, Reed College, and others did not have authoratative links so I left them out.
My main concern is being transparent about COI at this point. To avoid this, I initially engaged a service to navigate this issue. They turned out to be a scam, so I am trying to write the article myself. It's complex to communicate to a third party because there are so many details and subtle judgement calls. I flagged this article as a potential COI when submitting and tagged my user page with "
 | This user has publicly declared that they have a conflict of interest regarding the Wikipedia article Katherine Elkins. |
". I hope the merits of article speak to the authenticity.
There are very few women who are thought leaders in AI and tech in general, so I hope this will be a service to the research community and beyond to add more voices to discussions around AI. It's a bit of a catch-22 and as academics, we generally are not very good at having a voice beyond the narrow confines of academic echo chambers. With the rapid advance of AI in everything from lethal autonomous weapons to potential large-scale disemployment, there is a urgent need to bring more informed humanistic perspectives to the public discussions on AI.
Please advise on any next steps.
Gratefully,
J J2000ai (talk) 23:27, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hi J2000ai, thanks for the ping. Discussion about the page is best posted on the Talk page of the draft, so it is most easily seen and accessible to all editors and reviewers, so I have copied your post over to there, and responded there. Cabrils (talk) 00:40, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- Cabrils,
- Thanks! I'm new to this so apologies as I learn the ropes. - Jon J2000ai (talk) 07:27, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- No worries! Cabrils (talk) 07:28, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Teamwork Barnstar |
| Thank you for your endless work at AfC to keep WP a little less bloated for the readers and a little less work for the editors. Say ocean again (talk) 01:38, 16 July 2024 (UTC) |
- Say ocean again That's very kind, thanks very much!
Re-submission with WP:Three best references establishing notability on Draft: Siegfried Haase
Hi Cabrils,
I've looked over the feedback you've provided on my draft submission and made some changes for you to review. I've posted my WP:Three sources and some additional information on changes I've made on the draft's talk page. Let me know if these changes suffice the notability requirement.
Thanks. Grinkelton-wp (talk) 05:28, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Grinkelton-wp- well done, thanks. Good enough for me. Draft accepted. Cabrils (talk) 05:51, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
Dear Cabrils,
As suggested, I have added more references. Also I confirm that I am linked to the IAHE as I work on Hydrogen and part of the Board of Directors of IAHE. I also confirm that I do NOT get paid to do this and for the being part of the IAHE. I am volunteering to the IAHE.
Many thanks.
Kind regards,
Prof. Dr. Bruno G. Pollet
Sunday 21 July 2024. Bruno G Pollet (talk) 16:55, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the ping. Discussion about the page is best posted on the Talk page of the draft, so it is most easily seen and accessible to all editors and reviewers, so I have copied your post over to there, and responded there. Cabrils (talk) 06:16, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
I've recently been working on BLP issues involving another fired Apple employee, Ashley Gjøvik, and found Parrish's article there. Saw the comments between IP and you and was wondering if this page should be taken to WP:COIN, WP:Afd, or a merge discussion should be opened. It looks like the majority of the content is already at AppleToo. Say ocean again (talk) 02:21, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for the ping! I was amazed to see that the page had been accepted. Investigating. Cabrils (talk) 00:50, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
- I've nominated this for deletion | here. Cabrils (talk) 23:33, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- Not sure if the page is on your radar, but one of the voters made pretty substantial changes to the article I just undid using a newsletter to boost Parrish's role in AppleToo. Probably best to keep an eye on any shenanigans to sway votes. Say ocean again (talk) 01:36, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks Say ocean again. Looks like the deletion discussion will go the other way, but was certainly worth nominating. In my experience, Oaktree's votes are generally pretty sensible. Cabrils (talk) 00:25, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- Fair enough. I guess I'm a little more strict in my inclusion criteria. Say ocean again (talk) 19:02, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- I know what you mean. I appreciated your ping anyway. Certainly feel free to ping me in the future, happy to help where I can. Cabrils (talk) 23:31, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Fair enough. I guess I'm a little more strict in my inclusion criteria. Say ocean again (talk) 19:02, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks Say ocean again. Looks like the deletion discussion will go the other way, but was certainly worth nominating. In my experience, Oaktree's votes are generally pretty sensible. Cabrils (talk) 00:25, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- Not sure if the page is on your radar, but one of the voters made pretty substantial changes to the article I just undid using a newsletter to boost Parrish's role in AppleToo. Probably best to keep an eye on any shenanigans to sway votes. Say ocean again (talk) 01:36, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
- I've nominated this for deletion | here. Cabrils (talk) 23:33, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
Request on 22:52:50, 24 July 2024 for assistance on AfC submission by Seekingart
- Seekingart (talk · contribs)
Hello, would you mind please explain which of the parameters was not meet on the elihost.com article?
Seekingart (talk) 22:52, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- The draft needs to meet the relevant requirements including WP:GNG, WP:NCORP but presently it is not clear that it does.
- As you may know, Wikipedia's basic requirement for entry is that the subject is notable. Essentially subjects are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject. To properly create such a draft page, please see the articles ‘Your First Article’, ‘Referencing for Beginners’ and ‘Easier Referencing for Beginners’.
- None of the current references are from sources that are considered reliable for establishing notability (including the company's own website).
- The draft does not appear to show that the subject has any notability beyond the average coverage in trade publications for similar corporations (see WP:ROTM).
- Also, if you have any connection to the subject, including being paid, you have a conflict of interest that you must declare on your Talk page (to see instructions on how to do this please click the link).
- Please familiarise yourself with these pages before amending the draft. If you feel you can meet these requirements, then please make the necessary amendments before resubmitting the page. It would help our volunteer reviewers by identifying, on the draft's talk page, the WP:THREE best sources that establish notability of the subject.
- It would also be helpful if you could please identify with specificity, exactly which criteria you believe the page meets (eg "I think the page now meets WP:NCORP criteria #3, because XXXXX").
- Once you have implemented these suggestions, you may also wish to leave a note for me on my talk page and I would be happy to reassess. Cabrils (talk) 23:17, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for your feedback and suggestions. I've removed references from blogs, and kept only the references from reliable sources. To answer your questions:
WP:THREE best sources that establish notability of the subject:
2) https://www.startrek.com/en-ca/news/starfleet-academy-cast-karim-diane-zoe-steiner
I think the page now meets WP:NACTOR criteria #1 and #2 because the actor has significant roles in multiple notable television shows for the world's largest networks. But MOST notably, he has just been cast in a leading role for the newest Star Trek tv show for CBS on Paramount+. Star Trek is one of the most popular sci-fi franchises on the entire planet. Itsasecret123456 (talk) 01:32, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the ping. Please see my reply on the Draft's Talk page. Cabrils (talk) 01:49, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
Editor experience invitation
Hi Cabrils :) I'm looking for experienced editors to interview here. Feel free to pass if you're not interested. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 15:44, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks @Clovermoss! I will give it some thought. All the best. Cabrils (talk) 00:44, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Dear @Cabrils,
Thank you for your feedback and suggestion to communicate on your user talk page. I am reaching out to discuss my draft page, Draft:Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics. Following your request to specify which criteria I believe the page meets, I will provide a detailed explanation here. Your recommendations for improving the draft, if needed, would be greatly appreciated.
The Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics was established in 1864. The society is responsible for the Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics, which is also about to celebrate its 160th anniversary. The majority of the external secondary and reliable sources I have found predominantly reference the journal and its open-access publications on the SpringerOpen platform. However, the society itself, which is the driving force behind the journal and appoints its editorial team, may not be as prominently featured in the media.
Therefore, I would like to argue that the page meets the WP criteria #3 due to the following reasons:
- It provides information about an association that unites all Swiss universities with Faculties of Economics.
- It highlights the society's role in publishing the renowned Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics.
- The journal's chief editor is Professor Marius Brülhart.
I would value your feedback on whether this meets the criteria for organizational notability.
Thank you for your time and assistance.
Best regards,
KMerrigold KMerrigold (talk) 16:37, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hi [@KMerrigold, thanks for the ping.
- For clarity, I suggested you ping me here when you had implemented my suggestions. Discussion of the draft should best take place on the Talk page of the Draft itself so it is most easily visible to all editors and reviewers, so I'm copying this over to there, where I will reply in more detail. Thanks. Cabrils (talk) 04:19, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @Cabrils,
- I've made some changes for you to review. I've posted my WP:Three sources on the draft's talk page. Let me know if these changes suffice the notability requirement.
- Thanks.
- Best,
- KMerrigold KMerrigold (talk) 09:56, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @KMerrigold, thanks for the ping. Please see my response on the Draft's Talk page. Cabrils (talk) 02:48, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
Hello Calbrils,
I just wanted to Thank you for your input (and so quickly).
Notability:
I find that a lot of the elements from my Grandfather's time are not digital, as thus I am having a hard time proving notability in the digital references sought by Wikipedia so I appreciate your notes and I will work to pursue the right links. My main source is a book that was published about the History of Gospel Music in which my Grandfather and his singers group were mentioned, I have attempted to cite that as a reference, but Is there any way to dig deeper into what was shared in the book without copyright infringement as it is a published book about the subject and the person?
Another Attempt to meet the notability would be using Discogs and his Discography. There is an artist page and an page for each of his albums showcasing their publish date, and availability and ownership in the record-space.
Format & Structure:
You noted that the structure reads like a CV - I welcome any suggestions or examples on an approach to resolve this?
References:
I will work to resolve the references structure.
COI:
I did add, but forgot to publish the page... User:Jtreadwell - It's visible now. Please provide feedback if this is correct.
Future Plans:
In an effort to preserve my family's legacy, I intend to publish a series of pages regarding the cultural significance of my Grandfather, Pastor Willie A. Treadwell. My Grand Mother, Frankie Marie Treadwell (His Co-founder) of the Treadwell Community Singers and their discography. Please share if you have any advice for helping to achieve this goal within the confines of Wikipedia's approach to validation.
Finally, With additional feedback/suggestions from you I will gladly persist in making this page fully appropriate. If you are available, I would love to find time to connect and have a conversation (audio or zoom) about this and best practices.
Jtreadwell (talk) 15:12, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @Jtreadwell, thanks for the kind words and ping. I also appreciate your cogent post with headings! I'll respond below in kind:
- Notability:
- Offline (non digital) references are absolutely fine, just so long as the reference meets the definition of a reliable source, which allows it to be verified. Please click on that link and read the page carefully, I think you'll find it very helpful.
- I start to get a little concerned with your remarks at this point, because it feels that you have not yet quite grasped how Wikipedia works. I would encourage you re-read my comments on the draft, and please go to all the links I included, and read those linked pages carefully. I will begin repeating myself but for clarity, Wikipedia is not a place to host a biography about a person (see WP:WWIN), and especially not CVs-- it is an encyclopedia that contains information that is (1) notable; and (2) reliably sourced. Please especially go to WP:MUSICBIO as it sets out clearly and specifically what is required to meet the criteria of musicians.
- Copyright: Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. You may manage this by paraphrasing, but again, we don't want to see an elaborate summary of a single biography. Please see WP:COPY for more information on copyright.
- Format & Structure:
- For formatting, please see Wikipedia’s Manual of Style for help.
- Any content included must be reliably sourced.
- References:
- Please see Introduction to referencing with VisualEditor and Wikipedia’s Manual of Style for help.
- COI
- Thank you, that's perfect. You possibly have read the material about conflict of interest (if not, please do), but in summary there's no problem with having a COI (as long as it's declared) but it does mean any pages you create will necessarily undo greater scrutiny to ensure they meet the relevant criteria (notability, reliable sources, neutrality, etc). My feeling is that (an appropriate) entry into Wikipedia about your grandfather should probably be possible, but it will require finessing to meet the guidelines, which the current draft doesn't meet, in my view.
- Future Plans:
- Those are understandable and well meaning plans, but I would echo what I've said above about the purpose of Wikipedia, and that no matter how special, influential, ground-breaking a person is, to justify an entry in Wikipedia requires the draft to meet WP:ANYBIO etc. You may feel your aims can better be achieved by, for example, creating a website which you manage and control, and so can include whatever content you want in whatever way you want.
- Help:
- I appreciate your offer of contact, however that's not something I do. Fortunately, the WP:TEAHOUSE should be a good place to seek help with the page. From your draft and messages here, you certainly appear more than competent to be able to gain an understanding of the framework and and produce a draft that warrants publication.
- My final suggestion would be to start smaller than bigger (literally a couple of sentences can be sufficient, when reliably sourced, to warrant publication). And please re-read my comments and familiarize yourself with all the material to which I referred you! Cabrils (talk) 06:31, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for reviewing my article. Could you kindly tell me which part of the article doesn't meet the requirement of eight academic-specific criteria or cite independently?
Is the Fulbright US-Canada Research Chair award not enough for the academic contribution or the research content cited from the professor's website unreliable?
Thanks again for your time and patience.
Dmgy000 (talk) 02:18, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hi. Some evidence of the Alexander von Humboldt fellowship and Fulbright award would be very helpful (as you note, the only evidence is that which is stated on the subject's own website).
- Please also address the other issues I raise in my comment, including if you have any connection to the subject, including being paid, as you then would have a conflict of interest that you must declare on your Talk page. Your contributions history certainly looks consistent with being a paid editor. Cabrils (talk) 02:35, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks, I added more evidence of the award and conflict of interest. Dmgy000 (talk) 03:16, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not seeing any post by you in relation to possible conflict of interest? In fact you still don't even have a user page?? Cabrils (talk) 02:50, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry, I add the conflict of interest in Talk Page, and I add into User Page noew Dmgy000 (talk) 05:09, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for doing that, looks good.
- Please see my comments on the Draft's Talk page, where discussion of the draft is more appropriately held than here. Thanks Cabrils (talk) 00:42, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks, I had more edit based on your comment Dmgy000 (talk) 17:36, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the ping. Please see my response on the draft's talk page. Cabrils (talk) 01:20, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Dmgy000,
- Thanks for the collaboration. Further to our discussions on the draft's Talk page, draft accepted. Cabrils (talk) 06:38, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the ping. Please see my response on the draft's talk page. Cabrils (talk) 01:20, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks, I had more edit based on your comment Dmgy000 (talk) 17:36, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry, I add the conflict of interest in Talk Page, and I add into User Page noew Dmgy000 (talk) 05:09, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not seeing any post by you in relation to possible conflict of interest? In fact you still don't even have a user page?? Cabrils (talk) 02:50, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks, I added more evidence of the award and conflict of interest. Dmgy000 (talk) 03:16, 31 July 2024 (UTC)