Jump to content

User talk:Elee/Archive 6

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1←Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6

Hello

From the Wikimedia NYC meeting! OR drohowa (talk) 00:40, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi there! It was a pleasure meeting you and others at the meetup and I can't wait to work with you guys in the future! Accents 00:43, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Mistake with Huggle

R key got stuck, just reverted a bunch of edits - manually working through them now. Accents 09:58, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Mistake with LienVietPostBank

Hi Accents, I am Daibangftu. I am updating the information for the topic LienVietPostBank as they are updating their annual reports. I have changed a lot of information as I would like to reorganize the structure of the article. I also replaced the old information with the newly updated information so there are a number of changes.

Could you kindly keep changes with the article because I did a lot work with the article. Reverting the old information could make my contributive work wasteful.

Thank you so much!

Hi User:Daibangftu - that's absolutely reasonable. I'll filter it from Huggle for the time being, but my suggestion is that you perform these edits in a draft, as it looks like the entire article could use a rework. Accents 10:43, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi User:Accents - Thank you! I shall do edits in a word file then copy and paste all the data on the content. I do hope that my work will be ok with Huggle. Thank you!


Marina and the diamonds

Hey, I'm just adding some details from the sources to make the article more accurate. EllenPao (talk) 10:54, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Hey, nice username :^) Fired yet from Reddit? So, based on the edits you've made so far, what you could really do to make your edits shine are to provide factual sources - e.g. how do you know she dropped out instead of quitting? Where does it say her manager worked with her for 9 months? Hope this helps! Accents 10:57, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
Here's the source for the manager (already cited in the article): http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/music/interviews/a192242/ones-to-watch-marina-and-the-diamonds.html#~pfFPu9SuXQM920
Here's the source for the classical composition course: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/music/8260821/Im-Marina-Youre-the-Diamonds.html EllenPao (talk) 11:10, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
You should then reference those in the article! Accents 11:11, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
I'm gonna do it, thank you for your help! EllenPao (talk) 11:12, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

???

Hi Accent - I am allgeneral. What is it that is not constructive about a hindu Matang community for you? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Allgeneral (talk • contribs) 11:24, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Mujaddid

Hi Accent! Mmmm, well, I think you are right. I have to agree with you on that one, and it's not a mistake at all. I am glad to find out that you're open-minded. :) Best regards from "The Land of the Pharaohs". :)

Hey there User:BiKaz - looking at the edit again I sort of like your version as well... You do what you think is best! Accents 11:52, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
Thank you so much for your kindness and understanding! Salam (peace). ♥ — Preceding unsigned comment added by BiKaz (talk • contribs) 12:01, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi again, can you please tell me who are the observers/supervisors of this page [[1]]? I just need to know if my sources are reliable or not. Thanks in advance! :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by BiKaz (talk • contribs) 04:46, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi there, this is something you'd need to determine yourself or with the help of other editors, either via IRC or on that article's talk page. Accents 10:45, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello Elee! Thank you so much for taking the time to reply to me, I truly appreciate your assistance. Nice new name, by the way! :) BEST REGARDS. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BiKaz (talk • contribs) 00:10, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Principality of Sealand

Hi Accents, I do not see what is not "constructive" about a statement that is to this day debated. The UK never made an official claim on Sealand which is why the whole subject is under debate. The statement of Sealand not being grandfathered in has no citation and seem more of a bias statement as both sides have their valid arguements. From the "Creating your own country" documentary, Danny Wallace calls the British embassy to inquire whether Sealand was itself a nation or not to which they were unable to give an answer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.255.35.185 (talk) 14:49, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Good morning (?) there anonymous IP! I believe I marked your edit as unconstructive because you had no in-line citation to a solid reference - if you can do that I'm sure no one would question your edit then! Hope this helps, Accents 15:11, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Some falafel for you!

Thank you very much for reviewing the Stormy Atmosphere draft! I know it takes lots of time and work to review drafts and decide whether they should become articles or not. I really appreciate it. I'm so glad that this draft was approved because Silverray123 had been working on it forever, and then I put a huge effort into it, too! All the best, Dontreader (talk) 19:02, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Questions about your review on Draft:Kavuri_Venkaiah

Dear Accents

I am extremely disappointed with the quality of your review for the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Kavuri_Venkaiah. I will appreciate if you would provide specific sections/paragraphs/lines about each of your comments.

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article.

Since you are the only reviewer I would like you to be specific.

Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format.

Please point where it needs to be writing in encyclopedic format.

Please make sure to avoid peacock terms, that are designed to promote or show-off the subject. As far as I know there are no peacock terms and I don't agree with you at any cost. The Article was rewritten from a book which is already cited. If you want a copy I can send that to you.

Venki.1130 (talk) 21:51, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi User:Venki.1130 - sorry to hear that. Let's take a quick look.
From the draft: "notable personality" sounds extremely WP:PEACOCKish, promoting the person of the article rather than presenting him or her in a neutral manner. Same goes for "ardent social worker" and "significant contribution". "significant contribution" could stay, but only if you present a quick overview of what sort of contributions.
From Early Life: how big was this family/did he have any siblings? To whom was he born to? What was the high school he graduated from? Why and how was he imprisoned? You have grammar error, such as "He adopted Gandhian unadorned way of life". You could reword that same sentence to say "... sustained political campaign expenses on his own accord". Same for the next sentence: "... he secluded himself by choice..." "beloved wife" is also WP:PEACOCKish. "He used to live" can be reworded to "He lived a simple life". Regardless of those minor changes, the entire section could use reworking for structure.
I can't help you with the entire article at the moment as I'd like to get back to getting through the huge backlog that is WP:AfC, so please, you have many friends at the real-time chat link made available to you on your talk page and on your article draft.
I sincerely hope this helps! Accents 22:04, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Honorary Fellows

Thank you for reviewing my article on the Honorary Fellows of St John's College, Cambridge, which was now complete in its list of those still alive. I still donut understand why this has been refused when essentially identical articles on the ten of the other colleges have been accepted -viz.:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Lists_of_Honorary_Fellows_of_colleges_of_the_University_of_Cambridge Maybe you weren't aware of the articles when you reviewed, but it is seems obvious that if this article is declined the other ten should be deleted at the same time. My intention is to help Wikipedia by starting similar lists on the other (21) colleges when time allows, but such capricious inconsistency calls into question whether it's worth bothering with Wikipedia. It l is not so much disappointing, as mystifying, demotivating and serving to undermine one's confidence in the management of the whole Wikipedia process. Rcb1 (talk) 23:12, 15 June 2015 (UTC)rcb1 Rcb1 (talk) 23:12, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi Rcb1, fair enough. If it's part of an organized decision then that makes sense. I personally disagree that a list of 10 people warrants their own article, and perhaps you should consider compressing all those articles into one large one. Thoughts? Feel free to resubmit with a comment asking me to back away and let another AfC editor decide. Accents 10:38, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
Thanks Accents. I have now added all the living Fellows so it's up to, I think, 38 people. I'll look at the other similar articles to see if I can format it better. Rcb1 (talk) 12:35, 16 June 2015 (UTC)rcb1Rcb1 (talk) 12:35, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Request on 07:12:30, 16 June 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by 81.133.113.202


Review of draft page-See through graphics

Hi Accents Thanks for your review of the page. I am not the most natural writer and I struggle to tell the difference between encyclopedic and essay writing. Please can you give me a couple of examples of where I have strayed. These should give me a pointer to be able to review and change the rest. Thanks

81.133.113.202 (talk) 07:12, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi anonymous user! May I suggest setting up an account? :^) That being said, I'm sorry I can't hand hold you through this one - may I suggest using the real-time chat provided on your talk page? Hope this helps, Accents 10:40, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Barnstar of Diligence
You have been doing in incredible amount of good work in the last week. Keep up the good work, though try not to get burned out! Pleasure talking to you on IRC! Thanks, L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 15:15, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

16:41:09, 16 June 2015 review of submission by JACAPJam1


JACAPJam1 (talk) 16:41, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Hey Accent. I hope al is well with you. You declined my article yesterday. Is it that the entire thing sounds promotional or just certain parts? I'd greatly appreciate your feedback. JACAPJam1 (talk) 16:41, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi there! My suggestion is that you come visit us on live chat at your convenience, where any experienced editor (including myself if we catch each other at the right time :^)) can help you bring your article to great success. Hope this helps! E. Lee (talk) 09:29, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Revision of Draft:Sven_Voelpel

Dear Accents,

Thanks for reviewing the draft about Draft:Sven_Voelpel. Could you please give the reason for declining and say what needs to be improved. User:Jaaron95 commented notabilty criteria of WP:NACADEMICS are not met and coverage by secondary reliable sources is low. Both issues have been substantially changed and improved.Your helpful advice is most welcome.

Thank you! Jacobsflem— Preceding unsigned comment added by Jacobsflem (talk • contribs) 08:58, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi there! My suggestion is that you come visit us on live chat at your convenience, where any experienced editor (including myself if we catch each other at the right time :^)) can help you bring your article to great success. Hope this helps! E. Lee (talk) 09:29, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

10:46:16, 17 June 2015 review of submission by Samirsoormally


Good morning Elee,

Is there any chance you could be more specific on your comment that the "Article needs to be formatted properly"? This has not been picked up on previous reviews which leads me to think that I have missed something very silly. Apologies if this is the case.

Many Thanks,

Samirsoormally (talk) 10:46, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi there! Great to hear you have interest in making sure this article gets there all the way! I'm actually about to head into work right now so can't help you directly at the moment. My suggestion is to talk to any experienced editor in the live chat option I've linked to you. Hope that helps! E. Lee (talk) 10:51, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

I contacted the help desk regarding your comment but this was the response:

Hi Samirsoormally, I'm afraid I don't see a serious formatting problem either. Perhaps Elee would explain the problem. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 10:56, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samirsoormally (talk • contribs) 11:28, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

20:27:33, 18 June 2015 review of submission by 75.251.65.231


Can you please be specific about which particular statements contain "traces of informal phrasing, bordering advertisement level"? I have reread the entire text and cannot identify the traces to which you refer. Thanks.

75.251.65.231 (talk) 20:27, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi there @75.251.65.231:, please see WP:PEACOCK. Cheers, E. Lee (talk) 18:13, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
I have removed anything that could be construed as a "peacock term." There should be sufficient footnoting of reliable references. Thanks for your suggestions, and I hope that this meets with approval. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.194.79.8 (talk) 03:19, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
@75.194.79.8:, sounds great! you should totally create an account, it looks like your IP changed. Cheers, E. Lee (talk) 03:22, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 June 2015

AfC Clarification on 'William “Billy” Murphy, Jr.'

Hi, I'm working to improve an AfC draft article you reviewed, Draft:William “Billy” Murphy, Jr.

As I've continued editing the article, I realized that I'm not sure if your concerns were about the independence of the sources or the notability of the subject (though I realize that the two are interrelated). So far, I've tried to add additional citations to independent reliable sources about Murphy: the original version had used a number of independent sources, but also e.g. used his bio at his law firm as a source for biographical details. At this point all but 2 of the 21 sources and counting are independent of Murphy, and almost all of the facts are confirmed with at least one independent source.

However, I realized that you might have had other concerns about notability, aside from the independence of the sources. If so, I'd appreciate it if you could let me know what those concerns were. Hopefully the addition of further independent sources covering a broad period of time helps with whatever that may be, but if you had more concrete concerns, I'd love to address them directly.

Thanks!

LiberalArtist (talk) 10:22, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi there @Liberalartist:!
I see you've made many additions since the decline. Thank you for your contributions! Note that if I were about to review it again, I'd be borderline about it and probably defer to another WP:AfC reviewer because while I think the article is ready to go contentwise (I haven't checked the new resources stringently so that would be contingent on this) the article feels... sluggish - rather than just give readers paragraph after paragraph are there good photos that can be used? A picture of him in The Wire would be cool.
When I originally declined on notability, I declined for several reasons. I started off with the fact that most of the coverage was about him and Mosby. I also declined because of out all the resources used (7 according to my diff-hunting), only 4 appeared to be reasonable - all four were from the Baltimore Sun.
I believe that is it - my rule of thumb is if the article were to be nominated at WP:AfD, would it get deleted? The way your article stands now, I don't think it could be anymore! Perhaps it's time to resubmit it =] Thank you again for your contributions! E. Lee (talk) 18:11, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 June 2015

Draft:Holy Redeemer Catholic parish, Belize City

I responded to the previous comment (by another editor) by changing the introductory paragraph (but was told to leave the comment). Admittedly this is an unusual parish with a complex history, so how do you suggest I clarify? Should I explain in a longer introduction the complexity that follows, or should I cut the article into small sections each with a limited topic, or say less about some of the people/topics mentioned? I have tried all of these in my editing just now, but the matter is so familiar to me that I can't see it with "fresh eyes". Your specific suggestions would be appreciated. Thanks!jzsj 00:21, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

July 8: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC

Wednesday July 8, 7pm: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our evening "WikiWednesday" salon and knowledge-sharing workshop by 14th Street / Union Square in Manhattan.

This month will also feature on a review of past and upcoming editathons, including Black Lunch Table Editathon @ MoMA on July 13.

We also hope for the participation of our friends from the Free Culture movement and from educational and cultural institutions interested in developing free knowledge projects. We will also follow up on plans for recent and upcoming editathons, and other outreach activities.

After the main meeting, pizza and refreshments and video games in the gallery!

7:00pm - 9:00 pm at Babycastles, 137 West 14th Street

Featuring a keynote talk this month to be determined! We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 05:44, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Elee/Archive_6&oldid=999238951"