Jump to content

User talk:Eddie891/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5

Some baklava for you!

Greetings Eddie,

I'm Giggitygiggity, I'm relatively new to wikipedia editing scene. Recently, I wanted to make an article about International High School of Sarajevo, but you have declined it due to lack of reliable sources. Could you please tell me further about this.

King regards Giggitygiggity (talk) 17:01, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

sure. Most of your sources must be WP:IS, and this school must apply to Wikipedia:Notability (high schools) Eddie891 (talk) 00:18, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Mitchell Kummen

Hi Eddie! Thanks for your review of my article. I will definitely do the things that are called out in your comments, but would like to know whether you think the tone of the whole article is wrong, or only certain sections. My first review emphasized notability and sources. So I worked hard to get lots of published sources on the individual. I think I have met the notability and sources criteria now. I understand that there are certain sections that definitely need changes, and I'll start working on them immediately,but what I don't want to do is rewrite sections that are actually OK. So, if you have a moment to give me just a few specifics, I would greatly appreciate it. I really want to get this article published soon. Thanks so much!

Gary.W.Fuller (talk) 17:26, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

@Gary.W.Fuller: very few sections in my opinion actually need a full rewrite, in most, I think it would suffice to remove WP:PEACOCK phrases and other promotional tone Eddie891 (talk)

Amazonum Kure Vyakulathakalum

I am not going to improve the article or going to add any more web references. In Kerala there are a lot of offline references about this book. plz delete this article. Regards - --Ranjithsiji (talk) 03:37, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Mitchell Kummen

Thanks, Eddie! I have removed all of the external links from the body and made them reference sources where appropriate. I believe that I've removed the offending promotional tone, too. As for the overall format and formality, I believe this article now comports with other actors' pages. If there is any way that you can take a look, I would appreciate that. I hope I don't have to wait another three to four (or more) weeks again. If it satisfies your objections, can YOU just approve it and move it? Hopefully, yes! Let me know. Gary.W.Fuller (talk) 00:03, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Reliable Sources: Why is the white house of the united states not a reliable source?

Dear Eddie,

I listed the following sources to an article

1. THE WHITE HOUSE PRESS RELEASES 2. THE DIVERSITY MAGAZINE 3. THE UC BERKELEY COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING MAGAZINE

among many others.

Why do consider the above NOT "reliable" sources? I would appreciate some guidance on this.

Best Regards

What article do you speak of? Eddie891 (talk) 13:07, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Request on 02:01:38, 24 May 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Bottoman183


Hello,

Thank you for reveiwing my submission. I have updated the references and removed the unnecessary YouTube and Facebook links. I appreciate the help and thank you for your time.


Bottoman183 (talk) 02:01, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

@Bottoman183:. While removing all the unreliable sources is a step in the right direction, you must also still cite the controversial information with reliable sources Eddie891 (talk) 23:02, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Chris Gibson (Reseacher)

Hello Eddie, I am new to wikipedia and have been working on the article Draft:Chris Gibson (Reseacher) which you declined due to 'this submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified'. Can you please clarify where I haven't done this as I've been as thorough as I thought would be necessary. Any advice you could offer would be great. Also, I've noticed that I misspelt 'Researcher' in the draft title of this page, can you advise how to fix this! Nmichgcp (talk) 14:22, 25 May 2017 (AEST)

Request on 12:57:51, 25 May 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Swbartowski


Why was this rejected? Your only comment was "are there any news articles or something written about it?"

Did you look at the references listed? References 7, 8, and 9 are from two different newspapers. Reference 3 is a magazine. Reference 2 is a book.



Swbartowski (talk) 12:57, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello

How did the Stephensen Jeorhgo article make you feel, emotionally, and did you read the whole thing

/? ῊῊῊῊῊῊῊῊῊῊ[] Error: {{Lang}}: no text (help)

20:41:18, 3 June 2017 review of submission by Gary.W.Fuller


Eddie, I have made numerous edits to the article that you declined a few weeks ago. I believe it meets all the criteria that you set forth. I would greatly appreciate it if you would take another look and let me know if there is anything else that you think I should do. If the article is now satisfactory, let me know, and if it's allowable please approve it and move it over to the article space. Thanks, again!

G


Gary.W.Fuller (talk) 20:41, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 9 June 2017

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:18, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Request on 15:52:14, 12 June 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by RLFerguson


Hello Eddie891. Thank you for reviewing my article and the kind words regarding its quality. I have added references to the article in the areas you recommended and I have resubmitted it for review. There was a question from another reviewer called Theroadislong regarding whether the article was an autobiography. It is not. I registered an account in the name of RLFerguson to keep track of my article creation, but I am Sallie Ortiz, a freelance science and energy writer. Mr. Ferguson has been a significant influence for the peaceful uses of nuclear technology and should be notable enough to qualify for a Wikipedia article. I foresee that I will be able to add documented information about his progress in producing a vital medical isotope, Mo99, without the dangerous methods currently in use that also present proliferation risks for nuclear material. I hope you will be the one to re-review and approve this article. Thanks again for your first review and recommendations.

RLFerguson (talk) 15:52, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

@RLFerguson: I see you got the article approved. Congrats. Eddie891 Talk Work 11:12, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

In the future, please add attribution when copying from public domain sources: simply add the template {{PD-notice}} after your citation. I have done a modified version of this for the above draft. Please do this in the future so that our readers will be aware that you copied the prose rather than wrote it yourself. Thanks, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:32, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

@Diannaa: Oops. I had fully intended to do that, but I got distracted by the Signpost's imminent publication. Sorry. Eddie891 (talk) 14:18, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Query about Traffic Report

Hello!!! Great work on Traffic Report!! I was wondering why you didn't cover XHamster though? It's at the top of West's 5000 and I presume it's due to this story: xHamster supports this motion sensor that hides porn when the door opens. Why not include?

Hope my edits added something, but feel free to scrap or change as you see fit. I'm new to this Signpost business! —A L T E R C A R I  ✍ 18:28, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

@Altercari: This question confused me greatly as well. I assumed at first that the popularity of XHampster was new and recent, as it hadn't been covered in any of the past wikipedia top 25 reports. But, looking at WP:5000, I noticed that it was not a recent addition to the list, and had been there for at least 2 weeks, but was not covered. Then it hit me. 95% of the pages views are mobile. The WP: Top 25 states that "This list excludes the Wikipedia main page, non-article pages (such as redlinks), and anomalous entries (such as DDoS attacks or likely automated views). Since mobile view data became available to the Report in October 2014, we exclude articles that have almost no mobile views (5–6% or less) or almost all mobile views (94–95% or more) because they are very likely to be automated views based on our experience and research of the issue. Please feel free to discuss any removal on the talk page if you wish. The top 25 report is the deferred to (at least for me) expert on this topic. I hope I have explained myself. Eddie891 (talk) 19:07, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
How interesting! Thanks Eddie! —A L T E R C A R I  ✍ 19:15, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
@Altercari: No Problem. Good Work yourself! Eddie891 (talk) 19:45, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Hey are you planning to work on the next issue? —A L T E R C A R I  ✍ 16:42, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

@Altercari: I do plan to work on the next few issues of the Signpost. However, my editing will be sporadic as I am going away to far off (and not so far off) places over the summer. Eddie891 (talk) 21:33, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 June 2017

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:32, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks

Eddie, thanks for your work on the Signpost's FC. Excellent choice of pics. May I make a suggestion as far as the text goes? I think you'll get more eyes reading through it as a whole (rather than skipping through and mainly looking at the pics) if you ration the text more ... much more. There's a link for each item, so those who want more than a quick entree can soon get the full meal. Tony (talk) 07:38, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Arbitration Report

Hey there. Just wanted to do a followup on being interested in writing for the Arbitration Report section for the Signpost. GamerPro64 16:35, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

@GamerPro64: Yes, I will help. Just tell me what to do. Eddie891 (talk) 21:33, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
For the time being I'd recommend adding the ArbCom noticeboard to your watchlist get up to date on decisions. As well as always keeping an eye on Arbitration cases whenever they open or go to different phases. Right now I think there isn't much to report at this time but this is what I recommend for now. GamerPro64 06:56, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Kind comments and good advice on Draft:Robert_Ferguson

Hi Eddie891 -- I wanted to thank you for your complimentary comments on my article about nuclear physicist Robert Ferguson and to let you know that I made the corrections you advised on May 17. I added secondary references to the Early Life and Personal Life sections and cut material for which there were no reliable secondary references. I also corrected the way I referenced Wikipedia topics throughout the article; that is, I used the Wikipedia code instead of the reference template for web material. Also, I had to change my username from RLFerguson to DoverBoy87 because someone blocked my account -- I think because my username was too similar to the article name. The article is NOT an autobiography. I am Sallie Ortiz, a freelance science writer. I was hoping that you would take a look to verify that your recommended corrections had been made and perhaps approve my article for publication. Thanks very much, Sallie DoverBoy87 (talk) 16:55, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

@DoverBoy87: I see you got it approved, congrats Eddie891 Talk Work 11:10, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Kenny Wax has been accepted

Kenny Wax, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Eddie891 (talk) 20:48, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Mitchell Kummen

Hi Eddie!

This article seems to be caught in a loop. On May 12th you indicated it was external references and peacock language. I fixed all of the former, and deleted any evidence of the latter. But today's review has reverted to notability and verifiable references again based on the first reviewer's comments. Earlier, you had indicated that I needn't do much major surgery or rewriting. There are all over 1000 people in Wikipedia that are of the same age as this person, and most of them aren't particularly notable. Certainly most of them have not chalked up 25 acting credits and multiple awards. It took almost seven weeks for this review to be completed due to the backlog (which is quite long). I took your comments at face value and did what you said, only to receive a third decline. I need some more specific guidance.

Gary.W.Fuller (talk) 21:09, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

@Gary.W.Fuller: I simply voiced User:SwisterTwister's opinion. If you have questions, please take them to him. Eddie891 (talk) 21:11, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

JTS and DoDTR

Cynthiaprose (talk) 19:01, 28 June 2017 (UTC) I'm confused about your decision to reject the JTS/DoDTR article. This article was reviewed by three different Wiki editors and not one of them questioned the reliability of the references. The references are neutral- mostly articles published in credible, reputable journals. JTS is a US DoD government agency which provides FREE research and trauma clinical care guidance to global military and civilian communities. There is nothing unethical or controversial about this article. I am asking you to reconsider your opinion and accept the submission for publication. Thank you.

@Cynthiaprose: I understand that the sources you currently have are reliable. However, you do not have enough sources for the length of your article. Every statistic, every statement, every somewhat controversial fact should have a citations. Eddie891 Talk Work 22:53, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Rollback granted

Hi Eddie891. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

  • Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
  • Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
  • Rollback should never be used to edit war.
  • If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
  • Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! Swarm ♠ 04:45, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

23:29:01, 3 July 2017 review of submission by 197.46.28.162


I'm a project manager for an Egyptian young director and in charge of publishing his Wikipedia page. I did my best to try to put all the references and the data required but unfortunately I couldn't get it accepted. I need to know what exactly I'm missing to get it published. Thanks a lot.

09:26:27, 4 July 2017 review of submission by MichelozziCapponi2


NYU Florence is a Wikipedia page that has been published and I don't see how our page is less notable than that page. None of its sources are independent and it seems like something that NYU could mention on their official page. Could you please explain the difference between the notability of that page and our page so I can make the appropriate adjustments?

Pending changes reviewer granted

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

Draft:Chicago Toy & Game Group

Hello, I am with ChiTAG working on the wikipedia page. You had denied it because of a lack of independent sources, I was wondering how many more independent sources you were thinking it needed. So far I have added at least 4 more and wanted to know if I should add more. Additionally, I was wondering if it would be possible to rename the page to the Chicago Toy & Game Week, rather the Chicago Toy & Game Group, because the event is more relevant to the information provided than the group itself. Thank you, ChTAG — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dberks (talk • contribs) 19:34, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

20:00:22, 7 July 2017 review of submission by Orangegeum


Thank you very much for your help so far. This isn't a request for a re-review yet - I'd just like some clarification on your advice to fix citations and wikilinks. I know that I had listed some citations as pending and that these need to be added. I've also checked formatting on links and removed a few of these and de-duplicated. I had a look at the Wiki pages you suggested, but was there a specific style I was getting wrong? Orangegeum (talk) 20:00, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Humorous?

I don't know if this is humorous or not, but I can't find my Signpost draft pages...Can you hold my hand and lead me back to where I belong? I'll make a link to the signpost pages on my 'tools' page so I don't get lost again. Also, I want to switch back to my personal username: Bfpage since there were rude fellows who besmirched the fine name of the University of Pittsburgh and my association as Visiting Scholar there. I would like the University to be able to disavow anything that I create. Best Regards,

Barbara (WVS) ✐ ✉ 17:03, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
@Barbara (WVS) and Bfpage: It is located at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Next issue/Humour. I have added it back to the newsroom, assuming you plan to add to it. Happy Editing! Eddie891 Talk Work 17:16, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
You are gracious, kind and careful to preserve my dignity. I am going to have a number of editors take a look at the piece before it is published, correct? I will need other editors to blame if something goes wrong. Barbara (WVS) ✐ ✉ 17:22, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Presidency of George Washington

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Presidency of George Washington you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Display name 99 -- Display name 99 (talk) 02:01, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Georges-Élie Amyot has been accepted

Georges-Élie Amyot, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

SwisterTwister talk 16:58, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 July 2017

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:49, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

13:30:54, 17 July 2017 review of submission by Lardav75



Can you please let me know what we need to add for citations to get this submission approved? G.A. Hauser is a prolific author with dozens of books written: http://www.authorgahauser.com.

Thank you.

@Lardav75: to get your article approved, you must cite every statement that applies to WP:CHALLENGE Eddie891 Talk Work 11:21, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

02:26:03, 18 July 2017 review of submission by ULA christa


Thank you for your feedback. I revised the style to be consistent with a more formal, news style and removed many of the descriptors that could be construed as "peacock language." In addition, I've incorporated feedback from a more experienced Wikipedia editor (not affiliated with ULA) who offered to help with style, citations, etc.

Please take a look and let me know if this revision addresses your concerns. If you concur, I'll resubmit for approval.

Thank you again for your time and feedback. ULA christa (talk) 02:26, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

@ULA christa:This article seems to be much better, and I am very unsure if to approve it or not. Since I tend to be a somewhat conservative reviewer, it will probably be approved, especially as the page already exists as a redirect, and the person creating it said "a notable person." Good luck. Eddie891 Talk Work 11:21, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
@Eddie891: Thank you for the feedback and quick response. Appreciate your honesty and help ensuring we meet the community standards.

Traffic report

I put a little copy in your traffic report. Delete if you don't like it. Tell me to cut it out if you want me to cut it out and leave it alone. I hid the code from readers.

Best Regards,
Barbara Page

00:55:34, 26 July 2017 review of submission by Pandit.sid




Requesting you to re-review the new edit which has now reliable sources and citations.

The Signpost: 5 August 2017

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:22, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

Request on 15:50:21, 5 August 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Shivanu14


Hello sir.. I want to make this article, this person is a world famous personality. Please help me or tell me how can I can make Complete this..

Shivanu14 (talk) 15:50, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

Roshdy's

Hello Eddie, how are you?

a friend of mine had a page created by an unknown user on wiki and he found wrong information about him so he basically started editing it. when he did the page was not created and rejected as he cannot submit it. he tried to add as much as he can of referances. but still. so please could you clarify for me what i have to add more for it to be accepted and published? would be thankful. here is my email address tho . samarmohammed543@gmail.com


thats my friend's page. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Nada_Mergawi?markasread=105790305 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 197.48.83.84 (talk) 16:45, 10 August 2017 (UTC) == Some baklava for you! ==

Greetings Eddie,

I'm Giggitygiggity, I'm relatively new to wikipedia editing scene. Recently, I wanted to make an article about International High School of Sarajevo, but you have declined it due to lack of reliable sources. Could you please tell me further about this.

King regards Giggitygiggity (talk) 17:01, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

sure. Most of your sources must be WP:IS, and this school must apply to Wikipedia:Notability (high schools) Eddie891 (talk) 00:18, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Mitchell Kummen

Hi Eddie! Thanks for your review of my article. I will definitely do the things that are called out in your comments, but would like to know whether you think the tone of the whole article is wrong, or only certain sections. My first review emphasized notability and sources. So I worked hard to get lots of published sources on the individual. I think I have met the notability and sources criteria now. I understand that there are certain sections that definitely need changes, and I'll start working on them immediately,but what I don't want to do is rewrite sections that are actually OK. So, if you have a moment to give me just a few specifics, I would greatly appreciate it. I really want to get this article published soon. Thanks so much!

Gary.W.Fuller (talk) 17:26, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

@Gary.W.Fuller: very few sections in my opinion actually need a full rewrite, in most, I think it would suffice to remove WP:PEACOCK phrases and other promotional tone Eddie891 (talk)

Amazonum Kure Vyakulathakalum

I am not going to improve the article or going to add any more web references. In Kerala there are a lot of offline references about this book. plz delete this article. Regards - --Ranjithsiji (talk) 03:37, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Mitchell Kummen

Thanks, Eddie! I have removed all of the external links from the body and made them reference sources where appropriate. I believe that I've removed the offending promotional tone, too. As for the overall format and formality, I believe this article now comports with other actors' pages. If there is any way that you can take a look, I would appreciate that. I hope I don't have to wait another three to four (or more) weeks again. If it satisfies your objections, can YOU just approve it and move it? Hopefully, yes! Let me know. Gary.W.Fuller (talk) 00:03, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Reliable Sources: Why is the white house of the united states not a reliable source?

Dear Eddie,

I listed the following sources to an article

1. THE WHITE HOUSE PRESS RELEASES 2. THE DIVERSITY MAGAZINE 3. THE UC BERKELEY COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING MAGAZINE

among many others.

Why do consider the above NOT "reliable" sources? I would appreciate some guidance on this.

Best Regards

What article do you speak of? Eddie891 (talk) 13:07, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Request on 02:01:38, 24 May 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Bottoman183


Hello,

Thank you for reveiwing my submission. I have updated the references and removed the unnecessary YouTube and Facebook links. I appreciate the help and thank you for your time.


Bottoman183 (talk) 02:01, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

@Bottoman183:. While removing all the unreliable sources is a step in the right direction, you must also still cite the controversial information with reliable sources Eddie891 (talk) 23:02, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Chris Gibson (Reseacher)

Hello Eddie, I am new to wikipedia and have been working on the article Draft:Chris Gibson (Reseacher) which you declined due to 'this submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified'. Can you please clarify where I haven't done this as I've been as thorough as I thought would be necessary. Any advice you could offer would be great. Also, I've noticed that I misspelt 'Researcher' in the draft title of this page, can you advise how to fix this! Nmichgcp (talk) 14:22, 25 May 2017 (AEST)

Request on 12:57:51, 25 May 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Swbartowski


Why was this rejected? Your only comment was "are there any news articles or something written about it?"

Did you look at the references listed? References 7, 8, and 9 are from two different newspapers. Reference 3 is a magazine. Reference 2 is a book.



Swbartowski (talk) 12:57, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello

How did the Stephensen Jeorhgo article make you feel, emotionally, and did you read the whole thing

/? ῊῊῊῊῊῊῊῊῊῊ[] Error: {{Lang}}: no text (help)

20:41:18, 3 June 2017 review of submission by Gary.W.Fuller


Eddie, I have made numerous edits to the article that you declined a few weeks ago. I believe it meets all the criteria that you set forth. I would greatly appreciate it if you would take another look and let me know if there is anything else that you think I should do. If the article is now satisfactory, let me know, and if it's allowable please approve it and move it over to the article space. Thanks, again!

G


Gary.W.Fuller (talk) 20:41, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 9 June 2017

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:18, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Request on 15:52:14, 12 June 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by RLFerguson


Hello Eddie891. Thank you for reviewing my article and the kind words regarding its quality. I have added references to the article in the areas you recommended and I have resubmitted it for review. There was a question from another reviewer called Theroadislong regarding whether the article was an autobiography. It is not. I registered an account in the name of RLFerguson to keep track of my article creation, but I am Sallie Ortiz, a freelance science and energy writer. Mr. Ferguson has been a significant influence for the peaceful uses of nuclear technology and should be notable enough to qualify for a Wikipedia article. I foresee that I will be able to add documented information about his progress in producing a vital medical isotope, Mo99, without the dangerous methods currently in use that also present proliferation risks for nuclear material. I hope you will be the one to re-review and approve this article. Thanks again for your first review and recommendations.

RLFerguson (talk) 15:52, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

@RLFerguson: I see you got the article approved. Congrats. Eddie891 Talk Work 11:12, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

In the future, please add attribution when copying from public domain sources: simply add the template {{PD-notice}} after your citation. I have done a modified version of this for the above draft. Please do this in the future so that our readers will be aware that you copied the prose rather than wrote it yourself. Thanks, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:32, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

@Diannaa: Oops. I had fully intended to do that, but I got distracted by the Signpost's imminent publication. Sorry. Eddie891 (talk) 14:18, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Query about Traffic Report

Hello!!! Great work on Traffic Report!! I was wondering why you didn't cover XHamster though? It's at the top of West's 5000 and I presume it's due to this story: xHamster supports this motion sensor that hides porn when the door opens. Why not include?

Hope my edits added something, but feel free to scrap or change as you see fit. I'm new to this Signpost business! —A L T E R C A R I  ✍ 18:28, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

@Altercari: This question confused me greatly as well. I assumed at first that the popularity of XHampster was new and recent, as it hadn't been covered in any of the past wikipedia top 25 reports. But, looking at WP:5000, I noticed that it was not a recent addition to the list, and had been there for at least 2 weeks, but was not covered. Then it hit me. 95% of the pages views are mobile. The WP: Top 25 states that "This list excludes the Wikipedia main page, non-article pages (such as redlinks), and anomalous entries (such as DDoS attacks or likely automated views). Since mobile view data became available to the Report in October 2014, we exclude articles that have almost no mobile views (5–6% or less) or almost all mobile views (94–95% or more) because they are very likely to be automated views based on our experience and research of the issue. Please feel free to discuss any removal on the talk page if you wish. The top 25 report is the deferred to (at least for me) expert on this topic. I hope I have explained myself. Eddie891 (talk) 19:07, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
How interesting! Thanks Eddie! —A L T E R C A R I  ✍ 19:15, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
@Altercari: No Problem. Good Work yourself! Eddie891 (talk) 19:45, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Hey are you planning to work on the next issue? —A L T E R C A R I  ✍ 16:42, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

@Altercari: I do plan to work on the next few issues of the Signpost. However, my editing will be sporadic as I am going away to far off (and not so far off) places over the summer. Eddie891 (talk) 21:33, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 June 2017

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:32, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks

Eddie, thanks for your work on the Signpost's FC. Excellent choice of pics. May I make a suggestion as far as the text goes? I think you'll get more eyes reading through it as a whole (rather than skipping through and mainly looking at the pics) if you ration the text more ... much more. There's a link for each item, so those who want more than a quick entree can soon get the full meal. Tony (talk) 07:38, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Arbitration Report

Hey there. Just wanted to do a followup on being interested in writing for the Arbitration Report section for the Signpost. GamerPro64 16:35, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

@GamerPro64: Yes, I will help. Just tell me what to do. Eddie891 (talk) 21:33, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
For the time being I'd recommend adding the ArbCom noticeboard to your watchlist get up to date on decisions. As well as always keeping an eye on Arbitration cases whenever they open or go to different phases. Right now I think there isn't much to report at this time but this is what I recommend for now. GamerPro64 06:56, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Kind comments and good advice on Draft:Robert_Ferguson

Hi Eddie891 -- I wanted to thank you for your complimentary comments on my article about nuclear physicist Robert Ferguson and to let you know that I made the corrections you advised on May 17. I added secondary references to the Early Life and Personal Life sections and cut material for which there were no reliable secondary references. I also corrected the way I referenced Wikipedia topics throughout the article; that is, I used the Wikipedia code instead of the reference template for web material. Also, I had to change my username from RLFerguson to DoverBoy87 because someone blocked my account -- I think because my username was too similar to the article name. The article is NOT an autobiography. I am Sallie Ortiz, a freelance science writer. I was hoping that you would take a look to verify that your recommended corrections had been made and perhaps approve my article for publication. Thanks very much, Sallie DoverBoy87 (talk) 16:55, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

@DoverBoy87: I see you got it approved, congrats Eddie891 Talk Work 11:10, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Kenny Wax has been accepted

Kenny Wax, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Eddie891 (talk) 20:48, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Mitchell Kummen

Hi Eddie!

This article seems to be caught in a loop. On May 12th you indicated it was external references and peacock language. I fixed all of the former, and deleted any evidence of the latter. But today's review has reverted to notability and verifiable references again based on the first reviewer's comments. Earlier, you had indicated that I needn't do much major surgery or rewriting. There are all over 1000 people in Wikipedia that are of the same age as this person, and most of them aren't particularly notable. Certainly most of them have not chalked up 25 acting credits and multiple awards. It took almost seven weeks for this review to be completed due to the backlog (which is quite long). I took your comments at face value and did what you said, only to receive a third decline. I need some more specific guidance.

Gary.W.Fuller (talk) 21:09, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

@Gary.W.Fuller: I simply voiced User:SwisterTwister's opinion. If you have questions, please take them to him. Eddie891 (talk) 21:11, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

JTS and DoDTR

Cynthiaprose (talk) 19:01, 28 June 2017 (UTC) I'm confused about your decision to reject the JTS/DoDTR article. This article was reviewed by three different Wiki editors and not one of them questioned the reliability of the references. The references are neutral- mostly articles published in credible, reputable journals. JTS is a US DoD government agency which provides FREE research and trauma clinical care guidance to global military and civilian communities. There is nothing unethical or controversial about this article. I am asking you to reconsider your opinion and accept the submission for publication. Thank you.

@Cynthiaprose: I understand that the sources you currently have are reliable. However, you do not have enough sources for the length of your article. Every statistic, every statement, every somewhat controversial fact should have a citations. Eddie891 Talk Work 22:53, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Rollback granted

Hi Eddie891. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

  • Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
  • Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
  • Rollback should never be used to edit war.
  • If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
  • Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! Swarm ♠ 04:45, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

23:29:01, 3 July 2017 review of submission by 197.46.28.162


I'm a project manager for an Egyptian young director and in charge of publishing his Wikipedia page. I did my best to try to put all the references and the data required but unfortunately I couldn't get it accepted. I need to know what exactly I'm missing to get it published. Thanks a lot.

09:26:27, 4 July 2017 review of submission by MichelozziCapponi2


NYU Florence is a Wikipedia page that has been published and I don't see how our page is less notable than that page. None of its sources are independent and it seems like something that NYU could mention on their official page. Could you please explain the difference between the notability of that page and our page so I can make the appropriate adjustments?

Pending changes reviewer granted

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

Draft:Chicago Toy & Game Group

Hello, I am with ChiTAG working on the wikipedia page. You had denied it because of a lack of independent sources, I was wondering how many more independent sources you were thinking it needed. So far I have added at least 4 more and wanted to know if I should add more. Additionally, I was wondering if it would be possible to rename the page to the Chicago Toy & Game Week, rather the Chicago Toy & Game Group, because the event is more relevant to the information provided than the group itself. Thank you, ChTAG — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dberks (talk • contribs) 19:34, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

20:00:22, 7 July 2017 review of submission by Orangegeum


Thank you very much for your help so far. This isn't a request for a re-review yet - I'd just like some clarification on your advice to fix citations and wikilinks. I know that I had listed some citations as pending and that these need to be added. I've also checked formatting on links and removed a few of these and de-duplicated. I had a look at the Wiki pages you suggested, but was there a specific style I was getting wrong? Orangegeum (talk) 20:00, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Humorous?

I don't know if this is humorous or not, but I can't find my Signpost draft pages...Can you hold my hand and lead me back to where I belong? I'll make a link to the signpost pages on my 'tools' page so I don't get lost again. Also, I want to switch back to my personal username: Bfpage since there were rude fellows who besmirched the fine name of the University of Pittsburgh and my association as Visiting Scholar there. I would like the University to be able to disavow anything that I create. Best Regards,

Barbara (WVS) ✐ ✉ 17:03, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
@Barbara (WVS) and Bfpage: It is located at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Next issue/Humour. I have added it back to the newsroom, assuming you plan to add to it. Happy Editing! Eddie891 Talk Work 17:16, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
You are gracious, kind and careful to preserve my dignity. I am going to have a number of editors take a look at the piece before it is published, correct? I will need other editors to blame if something goes wrong. Barbara (WVS) ✐ ✉ 17:22, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Presidency of George Washington

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Presidency of George Washington you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Display name 99 -- Display name 99 (talk) 02:01, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Georges-Élie Amyot has been accepted

Georges-Élie Amyot, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

SwisterTwister talk 16:58, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 July 2017

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:49, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

13:30:54, 17 July 2017 review of submission by Lardav75



Can you please let me know what we need to add for citations to get this submission approved? G.A. Hauser is a prolific author with dozens of books written: http://www.authorgahauser.com.

Thank you.

@Lardav75: to get your article approved, you must cite every statement that applies to WP:CHALLENGE Eddie891 Talk Work 11:21, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

02:26:03, 18 July 2017 review of submission by ULA christa


Thank you for your feedback. I revised the style to be consistent with a more formal, news style and removed many of the descriptors that could be construed as "peacock language." In addition, I've incorporated feedback from a more experienced Wikipedia editor (not affiliated with ULA) who offered to help with style, citations, etc.

Please take a look and let me know if this revision addresses your concerns. If you concur, I'll resubmit for approval.

Thank you again for your time and feedback. ULA christa (talk) 02:26, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

@ULA christa:This article seems to be much better, and I am very unsure if to approve it or not. Since I tend to be a somewhat conservative reviewer, it will probably be approved, especially as the page already exists as a redirect, and the person creating it said "a notable person." Good luck. Eddie891 Talk Work 11:21, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
@Eddie891: Thank you for the feedback and quick response. Appreciate your honesty and help ensuring we meet the community standards.

Traffic report

I put a little copy in your traffic report. Delete if you don't like it. Tell me to cut it out if you want me to cut it out and leave it alone. I hid the code from readers.

Best Regards,
Barbara Page

00:55:34, 26 July 2017 review of submission by Pandit.sid




Requesting you to re-review the new edit which has now reliable sources and citations.

The Signpost: 5 August 2017

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:22, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

Request on 15:50:21, 5 August 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Shivanu14


Hello sir.. I want to make this article, this person is a world famous personality. Please help me or tell me how can I can make Complete this..

Shivanu14 (talk) 15:50, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

Roshdy's

Hello Eddie, how are you?

a friend of mine had a page created by an unknown user on wiki and he found wrong information about him so he basically started editing it. when he did the page was not created and rejected as he cannot submit it. he tried to add as much as he can of referances. but still. so please could you clarify for me what i have to add more for it to be accepted and published? would be thankful. here is my email address tho . samarmohammed543@gmail.com


thats my friend's page. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Nada_Mergawi?markasread=105790305 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 197.48.83.84 (talk) 16:45, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Template:Arizona State Legislatures (September 5)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Sulfurboy was:
This submission provides insufficient context for those unfamiliar with the subject matter. Please see the guide to writing better articles for information on how to better format your submission.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
Sulfurboy (talk) 00:52, 5 September 2017 (UTC)


Teahouse logo
Hello! Eddie891, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Sulfurboy (talk) 00:52, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Eddie891/Archive_2&oldid=1144236877"