Jump to content

User talk:Liance/Archive 9

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 5←Archive 7Archive 8Archive 9Archive 10Archive 11Archive 12

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:40, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Invitation to take part in a survey about medical topics on Wikipedia

Dear fellow editor,

I am Piotr Konieczny, a sociologist of new media at Hanyang University (and User:Piotrus on Wikipedia). I would like to better understand Wikipedia's volunteers who edit medical topics, many associated with the WikiProject Medicine, and known to create some of the highest quality content on Wikipedia. I hope that the lessons I can learn from you that I will present to the academic audience will benefit both the WikiProject Medicine (improving your understanding of yourself and helping to promote it and attract new volunteers) and the wider world of medical volunteering and academia. Open access copy of the resulting research will be made available at WikiProject's Medicine upon the completion of the project.

All questions are optional. The survey is divided into 4 parts: 1 - Brief description of yourself; 2 - Questions about your volunteering; 3 - Questions about WikiProject Medicine and 4 - Questions about Wikipedia's coverage of medical topics.

Please note that by filling out this questionnaire, you consent to participate in this research. The survey is anonymous and all personal details relevant to your experience will be kept private and will not be transferred to any third party.

I appreciate your support of this research and thank you in advance for taking the time to participate and share your experiences! If you have any questions at all, please feel free to contact me at my Wikipedia user page or through my email listed on the survey page (or by Wikipedia email this user function).

The survey is accessible through the LINK HERE.

Piotr Konieczny
Associate Professor
Hanyang University
If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:24, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Dexerto Draft submission

Hey, page for Dexerto was declined for lack of "significant coverage" in sources. It has 14 sources total, The subject of the article is one of the top 40 gaming websites in the US, but given the nature of news websites, it is near impossible to provide the sources suggested in Wikipedia's 'general notability guidelines' - most news websites are not the subject of coverage themselves.

When reviewing the Wikipedia pages of similar websites, there are no such references given (in fact almost all that I have checked have far fewer independent sources, and some none at all). I am informed that rules around this have changed which is why these websites have pages with such scant references.

Could you please advise on the best approach here, or if it is simply not possible, given the oddly specific notability guidelines which seem to not apply to news websites at all, to have a Wikipedia page for such a large and well-read website? This would strike as odd given the size of the site, and the state of other wiki pages about smaller websites, with fewer references.

Thanks

Calcium17 (talk) 14:26, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Another editor has since left feedback on your draft as to why it does not meet notability guidelines yet. If you still need assistance please let me know. -Liancetalk/contribs 04:49, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
Calcium17, I apologize - it seems that I confused your message with another editor's (I noticed this a few minutes ago while I was cleaning up old talk page messages). If you are still working on this draft I would first recommend taking a look at WP:ORGCRIT and WP:CORPDEPTH, as they outline what is required of articles regarding organizations on WP, which is somewhat higher than that required of other subjects. References need to be secondary, independent, in reliable sources, and demonstrate significant coverage to establish notability; acquisitions, etc are considered trivial/routine coverage and thus do not qualify. If you wish to resubmit the draft for review I recommend following the advice at WP:THREE and leaving a note on the draft to let reviewers know.
Lastly, there are indeed pages that do not conform to our current guidelines. You are more than welcome to nominate these pages for deletion but do note that Wikipedia is a work in progress and that WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. If you have any more questions do not hesitate to reach out. Best, -Liancetalk/contribs 02:35, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Teahouse host - belated welcome

Teahouse logo
Dear Liance,

Thank you for volunteering as a Host at the Teahouse. Wikipedia is a community of people working together to make knowledge free. You are an important part of that effort! By joining as a Host, and by following our expectations, you are helping new users to get started here at Wikipedia, and aiding more experienced users who just have a question about how something works. We appreciate your willingness to help!

Here are some links you may find helpful as a Host:

Editors who have signed up as hosts, but who have not contributed at the Teahouse for six months or so may be removed from the list of hosts.

Help with draft

Hello. I have edited Draft:Brooks Rehabilitation draft for review and would like some feedback before submitting for approval. You were involved in reviewing a previous draft. I would like to improve the article and am looking for help to ensure I am meeting the Wikipedia Guidelines. I believe the content is written from a neutral point of view and the sources meet the criteria. I would appreciate any direction you can provide. To be fully transparent, I have a declared COI with Brooks Rehabilitation.. Thank you Lauradavis44 (talk) 18:39, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Lauradavis44 - in its current state the draft does not quite appear to demonstrate why the subject is notable. On Wikipedia, subjects must be covered significantly in multiple independent, reliable sources (WP:GNG) - much of the references in the draft at the moment are passing mentions. Could you try to locate WP:THREE best sources which demonstrate notability to help reviewers? Thank you. -Liancetalk/contribs 04:48, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Draft: Pawthereum submission declined

Hi Liance,

I wanted to discuss the reasoning for the above-referenced Articles for Creation submission being declined and I hope the decision can be re-evaluated.

First, I'm hoping you can clarify your comment: Evaluating as organization as almost all coverage appears to be about the foundation. Lacks significant (non-trivial) coverage in multiple reliable sources. YouTube, crypto news outlets are not considered to be reliable sources. -Liancetalk/contribs 10:25, 17 February 2022 (UTC). What I don't understand about this, is "evaluating as organization as almost all coverage appears to be about the foundation." None of the coverage is about the foundation. The foundation was recently formed and there is only one line about the foundation that was included in the article itself, for thoroughness. All of the news coverage is about Pawthereum, the cryptocurrency, so I do not know how you reached the conclusion that you did.

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

I did read the page on notability, etc. that lays out the guidelines for what sources count, and by that guideline, I believe the article should qualify. I'd like to go through the sources one by one and discuss the ones that I believe should qualify (I don't necessarily agree with you that crypto news outlets aren't reliable sources but I understand the reasoning, so we can agree to not count those. I also understand the reasoning regarding Youtube but it is strange that an AMA from the largest cryptocurrency subreddit wouldn't count considering, 1. it is very significant, especially considering the significance of the guest speaker and size of that subreddit and 2. the AMA is 100% independent from Pawthereum).

Anyway, I think arguably these should count: Source #5, NewsTimes

  1. 10 InvestorPlace
  2. 12 Benzinga
  3. 15 Edinburgh News
  4. 17 People.com
  5. 18 The Newtown Bee

From what I understand the number of sources needed is 3. Are we saying that, disregarding all of the other sources I didn't mention, that there aren't at least 3 sources out of these 6 that qualify?

I appreciate you taking a look and reviewing this article, but I don't see the reasoning being applied to the decision lining up with Wikipedia's guidelines, so I do not agree with the decision making here and would appreciate a response to the points I've raised. If the decision can be re-evaluated, that would be ideal. If the reasoning can be explained and the reasoning is supported by Wikipedia's guidelines, I can accept the decision, but otherwise I will have to respectfully contest this decision.

Thank you,

CatDadoftheYear (talk) 19:26, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Hey CatDadoftheYear, thanks for reaching out. I evaluated your draft based on criteria for notability of organizations (see WP:ORGCRIT) because the coverage you cited focused primarily on the organization behind the project and its charitable donations. If, say, coverage and article content primarily concerned price movements or distributed technology behind the subject instead, then I would have approached it with the general notability guidelines. Regardless, I didn't feel that the subject was notable - on Wikipedia, significant coverage in multiple reliable sources is required. Of the sources you picked I would consider Edinburgh, People.com and Newtown to be reliable, however significant coverage is lacking in the People.com source (it is only mentioned briefly at the end). Lastly WP:LOCALCOVERAGE for one-time events such as donations generally do not establish notability strongly and is not means for a draft's publication. As always if you make changes to your draft and feel that you have fixed these issues you can re-submit for another editor to review with the "Re-submit" button on your draft page. Best, -Liancetalk/contribs 23:19, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, this does help clarify things. Appreciate your feedback.CatDadoftheYear (talk) 00:21, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Orphan article

Hello Liance,

Many thanks for accepting/editing my new article "membrane scaling" in Wikipedia. I see a message that this article has an issue:

  • Orphan article

I added links to my article and also to other articles where "membrane scaling" was just mentioned. So the reader in other articles can check in detail what membrane scaling is. But, I still see that my article is shown as orphan. How to resolve this?

Thank you!

Hey Mangal359 - I see that the links are working properly so you can disregard the message. Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia! -Liancetalk/contribs 23:28, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Request on 20:57:49, 17 February 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by LeonidasNSFW


I don't understand why my submission hasn't been accepted.

Hi there,

I have submitted a lengthy bio for me as a musician/artist and included all of the information required whilst looking up other professional musicians with a similar template. Can you please explain in detail what it is I need to change as I am incredibly keen to get my wikipedia page up and running.

LeonidasNSFW (talk) 20:57, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Hey LeonidasNSFW - first off, just to let you know autobiographies on Wikipedia are generally discouraged since they introduce issues regarding neutrality. Your draft was declined because it did not meet one or more of the musician notability criteria. Please review those before resubmitting. Best, -Liancetalk/contribs 23:31, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Second Contact

Hello, Liance,

It doesn't look like the draft you want to move to main space is ready to appear in the article space of the project. It seems like it is still in the process of being reviewed. Until it is "main space ready", it is unlikely that an administrator will complete this move that you requested. Eventually, there might be an admin who will decide, "What the heck, I'll do the move" but I'm not sure how long that will take. Most moves from Draft space to main space look like regular articles without all of the AFC tags. Just giving you a head's up, from a patrolling admin's perspective. Liz Read! Talk! 01:27, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Liz, apologies for that - I was meaning to accept the draft to mainspace but the AfC script did not allow me to do so before the redirect was deleted, so I tagged the page with {{db-afc-move}}. Should I just tag it with a G6 next time instead or is there a seperate procedure for situations like this? Best, -Liancetalk/contribs 01:57, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Shin Japan Heroes Universe

Greetings, I'm Fico. I thank you for what you did for the "Shin Japan Heroes Universe" draft. However, I must admit I need from people who really know more about those franchises than I do. In my country, I barely know a little about Godzilla, and then, nothing more. Therefore, I would appreciate the need of more help from other users. Thank you so much. Sincerely, Fico. (Perhaps, other live action and animated intellectual properties from other third parties can join this project, but of course, it is too soon to speculate.) Fico Puricelli (talk) 16:46, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Hey Fico Puricelli - thank you so much for your contributions :) Unfortunately I have little to no expertise regarding the media franchise you're writing about, I moved your draft to the correct namespace during AfC review. Perhaps you could try asking for help at a WikiProject since they tend to have very experienced and helpful editors who specialize in those areas? I looked around a bit it seems like WP:WikiProject Anime and manga/Evangelion and WP:WikiProject Tokusatsu would be good places to start! Best of luck. -Liancetalk/contribs 00:18, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
Thank you so much, and my apologies to you for the problem. Fico Puricelli (talk) 04:44, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
No need to apologize! If you have any additional questions don't hesitate to reach out again. -Liancetalk/contribs 04:49, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

dideye dito

how can there even be any other sources/citation, that all sites there are. There are only two original sources online. Those are the only source of published content. There isnt any other way to do anything. Also, what other sources are there for a webcomic than the webcomic itself? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChiserYT (talk • contribs) 19:09, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

ChiserYT, I understand that a draft decline is frustrating. On Wikipedia content must meet the notability guidelines to qualify for an article - otherwise they will be deleted quickly by editors. Content must be supported by reliable, independent, secondary sources, and original sources do not qualify for this unfortunately, and your subject might not be notable enough for inclusion if you are unable to procure more sources. Hope this helps and don't hesitate to reach out again if you have more questions. -Liancetalk/contribs 22:55, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Request on 03:09:39, 23 February 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by TrueVindicator

Hi Liance, could you please give me more explanation as to why my draft was declined?

Hey TrueVindicator - as noted on your draft article, it was declined because it fell short of the criteria listed at WP:MUSICBIO that describes the requirements a music-related biography must meet for inclusion on the encyclopedia. I would review that page and identify on which basis your subject could be notable, then update the references on your draft accordingly if you wish to resubmit. Additionally, since you are writing a biography of a living person please note that any statement you write must be backed up by a neutral, verifiable, and reliable inline citation. If you have any more questions let me know. Hope this helps! -Liancetalk/contribs 03:16, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Draft:DineWight

Hey Liance! Thank you for taking the time to review one of my first significant contributions. I have resubmitted the page for review, maybe you could take another look and let me know if there is anything more I need to do for it to reach the required level of satisfaction to be published on the Wiki please. I've contributed to other pages but it would be cool to have contributed a whole page. Congratulations on 21,000 edits too, that's some milestone! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Knowall23 (talk • contribs) 16:00, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Hey Knowall23, thanks for reaching out. On Wikipedia companies must meet the organization notability criteria which means they must demonstrate significant coverage in reliable sources that are unaffiliated with the subject. I noticed that the coverage you provided was mostly WP:LOCALCOVERAGE - do note that coverage beyond local sources helps to establish notability, and if you can find any I would add them to your draft. Hope this helps! -Liancetalk/contribs 20:00, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
Hey Liance, appreciate you getting back to me. For this company I am unable to find any other sources than from official local independent news outlets, nothing by the mainstream media. As this is a purely local business it is unlikely it will hit the mainstream media. What are the chances of this being published without mainstream media articles? There are plenty of local articles as referenced. Thanks. --Knowall23 (talk) 22:43, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
Unfortunately Wikipedia policies on corporations are quite stringent - WP:ORGCRIT outlines the criteria needed to establish notability for a company, which are considerably more specific than say the general notability guideline. You are welcome to resubmit the draft for review by another editor but without satisfying the necessary criteria I'm unsure if the subject is suitable for inclusion. -Liancetalk/contribs 18:01, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Request on 18:07:48, 24 February 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Zade.ali


Reliable sources like where? I put all reliable-looking English web pages that a google search returned for this university in the page. Can you provide an example that would have this entry accepted?

Zade.ali (talk) 18:07, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Hey Zade.ali - as I mentioned on your draft, your article needs significant coverage in unaffiliated, reliable sources - WP:GNG has a good overview which goes in-depth regarding what defines a source as reliable. Ranking websites and links to entries in database websites, which you cited, don't qualify as significant nor reliable coverage. Hope this helps. -Liancetalk/contribs 21:07, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

The Walking Zombie 2

Extended content

Sir last time you rejected my draft 'The Walking Zombie 2' (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:The_Walking_Zombie_2) but compared to that time I have made extensive changes in it. Sir please check it again and approve it for an article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Billapartygang123 (talk • contribs) 08:27, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Extensive Changes Done

Liance sir, please check my draft of the walking zombie 2. I have done extensive changes to it compared to last time. please confirm it for an article. Billapartygang123 (talk) 07:37, 28 February 2022 (UTC)Billapartygang123

PLEASE HELP!!!!!😨😭

Hi LIance sir, please approve my draft of [Walking Zombie 2]. Now it's perfectly fine for a Wikipedia article to have many independent sources. If you don't check it I will keep spamming messages to you every day.Billapartygang123 (talk) 12:42, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

please dont send threats or it wont get your drafts accepted — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.184.29.235 (talk) 18:33, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

Please Read This Liance Sir

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Billapartygang123 Billapartygang123 (talk) 15:25, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Draft: Grand Theft Auto 6

Hi Liance, please at least acknowledge my posts let alone approve my draft lease reply something or I will report you to Wikipedia moderator/admin. Billapartygang123 (talk) 06:29, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Billapartygang123 warned for making threats. David notMD (talk) 13:39, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for the help. -Liancetalk/contribs 00:01, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
Billapartygang123 Draft reviewers are volunteers who contribute when they can, and sending repeated threats for a few days of inactivity is seen as disruptive behavior and won't help your chances for getting a re-review (in fact, it could lead to a block in many cases). Please be resourceful and use the AfC helpdesk or the Teahouse in the future instead.
Your draft article was rejected because it did not sufficiently meet the notability criteria for video games after multiple resubmissions, and another reviewer has since rejected it again. Video games, like all topics, must have significant coverage in multiple sources that are secondary and independent of (unaffiliated with) the subject. -Liancetalk/contribs 00:14, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

Draft: Gorilla Tag

Hi Liance, Can you please tell me the things I need to edit for the Gorilla Tag draft? It would be much appreciated if you did! :D

- OGxSLAY3R

Hi OGxSLAY3R - as other reviewers have noted the draft requires additional coverage in reliable sources to meet the criteria for video game notability at WP:NGAME. An editor has since rejected the draft which means it is deemed non-notable for inclusion and should not be resubmitted unless you can present sources that demonstrate its notability per WP:NGAME. -Liancetalk/contribs 00:30, 8 March 2022 (UTC)


Sincere Apology

Hi, this is a sincere apology from a Wikipedian for threatening you continuously. Sorry. Billapartygang123 (talk) 11:45, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

MC Stan

Hello Liance Thanks for reviewing Draft:MC Stan, As I can understand that the draft was not much elaborated but as you declined it on behalf of not having WP:RS, I feel it does have enough RS although if you can guide me a bit with what is wrong with its sources as it does have sources like [GQ] and [Rolling Stone], Have you declined them cuz they are Interviews? Thanks Suryabeej   ⋠talk⋡ 13:20, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi suryabeej - your draft article was declined on account of not meeting the criteria at WP:MUSICBIO. Every source you cited at the time of review was an interview, and they are often considered to be primary or non-independent sources. Articles about musicians require multiple, reliable, secondary sources that demonstrate significant coverage about the artist themselves, not solely their works - please try to locate sources to satisfy WP:MUSICBIO if you wish to resubmit. Hope this helps. -Liancetalk/contribs 17:55, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
Got that, Thank You Suryabeej   ⋠talk⋡ 06:36, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

File:Puffy-Logo.png - Flag Copyright

Why this is being flag as copyright? How can I add a logo that a organization is using? https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Puffy-Logo.png — Preceding unsigned comment added by Liptapp (talk • contribs) 17:26, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Liptapp Your file was upload to Wikimedia Commons which only allows files with free-use copyright terms. Copyrighted works like logos of organizations cannot be uploaded to Commons, as the company that owns the work holds its copyright. If there is a published article on Wikipedia about the company (not a draft) you may upload its logo using Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard and selecting Upload a non-free file, but note you cannot do it at this time for the file you linked does not have a published WP page. Hope this helps. -Liancetalk/contribs 17:58, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
@Liance Thanks this is very helpful because this is my first time to upload and create article, so for now It should be deleted right? How can I delete it I don't want to get block from wikipedia. Liptapp (talk) 04:34, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
Liptapp One copyright violation upload will not get you blocked from Wikipedia or its sister projects so I would not worry. -Liancetalk/contribs 23:01, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Careful

This is wrong because, as an elected member of a state legislative assembly, Tripathi meets WP:NPOL.

The draft was a terrible mess, mind you (I've started cleaning it up), and I'd definitely want to check that the sources all say what they're claimed to, but there was absolutely a reasonable claim for notability. DS (talk) 18:59, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up DragonflySixtyseven - apologies for the error and will be sure not to make the same mistake again. -Liancetalk/contribs 19:09, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Request on 06:44:19, 11 March 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Roostermau5


Hello Liance,

Thank you for your feedback on the draft submitted by myself previously.

What would be required for the draft to be accepted as a notable figure? I just want to clarify that it must include further citings in notable media proprietors and remove the sources which you deemed to not be suitable for Wikipedia. Hypothetically, if a multitude of new sources are included, should I submit again and with a higher chance of approval?

Thank you Liance.

Roostermau5 (talk) 06:44, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi Roostermau5 - Wikipedia articles on people must meet notability criteria by citing reliable sources which are secondary, independent (not affiliated with the subject) and show significant coverage (see WP:NBASIC). Adding references that specifically fulfill the requirements helps to establish notability, and if you feel that you can demonstrate the subject's notability this way then you can resubmit your draft. Hope this helps. -Liancetalk/contribs 23:08, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Question Regarding the Scrat Tales Draft

There’s another tweet from another former employee who worked at Blue Sky that confirmed that the series was coming out that I forgot to add to the Development section, but other than that there isn’t any reliable/notable news articles covering the tweets from the employees. Even if another tweet from another former employee isn’t enough, should I just remove the entire section for Pre-release controversy per your suggestion? SlySabre (talk) 14:39, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Hey SlySabre - facts, especially those that may be controversial or contested, must always be backed up by a reliable source for verifiability. If, aside from one or two tweets from former employees, there is no coverage in a reputable source about the rumor, then I would recommend deleting the section entirely. If more reliable coverage of the controversy in 2022 and beyond emerges then the section could be reinstated. Hope this helps. -Liancetalk/contribs 18:39, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
Alrighty, thanks for getting back with me and letting me know. SlySabre (talk) 18:47, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

How is an organization determined to be notable?

Hi Liance!

I hope all is well! It seems that the Vaad HaBadchanim is not a notable enough organization to receive an article about it. What makes an organization notable or not? For context, the VHB is a known and respected source in the Jewish world for its humor, and runs an annual tournament with the best of Jewish humor that gets tens of thousands of votes.

Thank you so much for your time, and I appreciate all of the work that you put in to make Wikipedia a great website.

Best, Schwartzavij (talk) 17:29, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi Schwartzavij, thanks for reaching out. On Wikipedia articles about organizations must meet the notability requirements for organizations and must fulfill the relevant criteria by citing reliable, independent, secondary sources that have significant coverage about the organization itself. This means that cited sources should cover the subject organization with deep, non-trivial detail, and be secondary sources that are unaffiliated with the organization. Hope this helps! -Liancetalk/contribs 22:27, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Question from Pkillamusik1 on User:Pkillamusik1 (19:56, 15 March 2022)

Pkilla Musik Net Worth --Pkillamusik1 (talk) 19:56, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Pkillamusik1 Do you have a question or need help? -Liancetalk/contribs 22:28, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Draft:All Day 8 SPC Any Severe Days

Thank you for rejecting this non-article. This is just a bad test by a newcomer while all info in it is already in the article Storm Prediction Center. This user should not be allowed to create a redundant article.

Pierre cb (talk) 03:30, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Pierre cb No problem, thanks for letting me know. The submitting user had not included any context so the draft fell short of our required policies regarding context anyway. I will add a note to the draft so future AfC reviewers will be aware as well if the draft is resubmitted. Best, -Liancetalk/contribs 03:35, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Question from Pkillamusik1 on User:Pkillamusik1 (20:25, 16 March 2022)

User:Pkillamusik1 i was deleted i want my page back? --Pkillamusik1 (talk) 20:25, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Twisted Wood Guitars

Hi Lance. The article draft for Twisted Wood Guitars cites a respected paper which discusses the company in detail, the largest ukulele publication in the world which produced a full 4 page spread about the company, a top 5 wide-reaching industry magazine which discusses the company in detail, and the largest ukulele review site in the world which published a several hundred word review about one of their instruments.... I query how that doesn't constitute significant coverage from reliable secondary sources independent of the subject. I appreciate your desire to be zealous, but in this case, I think perhaps look into these citations in further detail. Many Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Learningtouke (talk • contribs) 21:13, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi Learningtouke - on Wikipedia, articles about corporations have higher standards and must meet the notability criteria for companies, this means citing sources that demonstrate significant coverage in reliable, independent, and secondary sources. A cited source must meet all of the aforementioned criteria, please review WP:ORGCRIT and WP:CORPDEPTH for more information. Your draft article was declined because I did not feel that there were multiple sources that met these criteria and demonstrated notability. If you add more sources and meet the criteria you can click the "Resubmit" button to get another review. Hope this helps. -Liancetalk/contribs 21:20, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
Hi Liance, I have reviewed WP:ORGCRIT and WP:CORPDEPTH.
As aforementioned, the article did contain multiple well-known and reliable independant sources that demonstrated significant coverage of the corporation. 2001:56A:FA97:E800:7449:B402:90CD:75D2 (talk) 21:24, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
Could you list the sources you are referring to? -Liancetalk/contribs 21:32, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
https://ukulelemagazine.com/gear-reviews/ukulele-review-twisted-woods-switchback-tenor-has-a-clear-warm-sound
https://msretailer.com/omg-music-obtains-exclusive-distribution-of-twisted-wood-ukuleles/
https://www.gotaukulele.com/2021/12/twisted-wood-ember-concert-ukulele.html
https://www.stalberttoday.ca/entertainment-news/hawaiian-style-1287632 Learningtouke (talk) 21:48, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

1. Ukelele Magazine might be good for establishing notability about the company's product, but there are maybe 1-2 sentences max that discuss the company itself. We are looking for significant coverage about the company, not their products. Also may not qualify as a reliable source.

2. Retailer constitutes trivial/routine coverage (see WP:NCORP#Examples of trivial coverage) and is little more than a business announcement. Also is less than WP:100WORDS in total.

3. Got A Ukelele same as the first source, maybe 1 sentence max actually concerns the company itself rather than its products.

4. St. Albert Today appears to be mostly an interview and quotes from the company's founder which makes it non-independent and a primary source. Additionally please see WP:LOCALCOVERAGE.

Learningtouke Next time, please read through the entirety of cited guidelines like WP:NCORP before requesting additional help, as it would have answered any questions you had regarding your draft. Additionally, if you believe you have a conflict of interest with the company or were paid to contribute please WP:DISCLOSE your connection or you may face a block from Wikipedia. Best, -Liancetalk/contribs 22:00, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Examples of substantial coverage
Media coverage of a company's product is regarded as substantial coverage of said organization.
I'm familiar with the guidelines.
Please don't threaten blocks for entirely unsubstantiated presuppositions. There is no need for that, and that kind of inane comment severely reduces the quality of work that we are able to do here.
Many Thanks Learningtouke (talk) 22:54, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
Please see WP:PRODUCTREV? Reviews that narrowly focus on a particular product or function without broader context (e.g. review of a particular meal without description of the restaurant as a whole) do not count as significant sources. - it's on the same page that you cited, and in the two reviews you linked there was at the very most one or two sentences about the company mentioning little other than the company's name or location. As mentioned earlier these sources are also self-published blogs which do not qualify as WP:RS. Additionally I was not threatening a block in any way, I was just adding a reminder that conflicts of interest must be declared as it seemed that you had some relationship to the subject you are writing about, and I apologize if it came off as a threat. Regards, -Liancetalk/contribs 16:09, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

(Misplaced message)

How would you no if the is insufficient context in a artical if you are unfammilair with the subject? not passing the Dig Down Concept / Alan B Christ for this reason is just bad editing by pepole that have no knowledge of the subject matter 

                                                     70.190.172.188 (talk) 23:47, 16 March 2022 (UTC)Alan B Christ
Alan B Christ Your draft was declined because it is not understandable to the average reader. At the time of review Draft:Dig Down Concept / Alan B Christ had no little content on the page that explained the topic or made it accessible to the average encyclopedia reader and consisted of mostly document scans. Please add a proper WP:LEAD section and read Writing better articles before resubmitting. Best, -Liancetalk/contribs 16:18, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Goldback article

Hi there Liance!

Thank you for reviewing my submission for article review. I read your critique carefully, and removed all reference to the 'Liberty Block' citations. Frankly, I do not think they were necessary to any part of the article, but included them as redundant source material on top of the existing secondary sources. Several include ABC and NBC news rooms, and the concomitant write ups. I believe that this should now be good enough for a basic starter article. Though of course I will continue to work on it further over time, but this should meet the minimum requirements as I understand them at this stage. Thank you very much. ♥Th78blue (talk)♥ 01:13, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Hey Th78blue, thanks for reaching out. Sources need to be independent of the subject to show notability and demonstrate significant coverage. The "KTNV" source is not independent (This segment is paid for by Las Vegas Coin Company is listed at the bottom of the page) meaning it is not a suitable source. KSL looks OK but local news coverage generally do not strongly indicate notability (for example see WP:LOCALCOVERAGE). The subject is not mentioned by name in any other qualifying sources, so WP:GNG is not met. If you find additional sources that are independent, reliable, secondary, and demonstrate significant coverage, you can resubmit the draft and have a reviewer take another look. Hope this helps. -Liancetalk/contribs 01:24, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
I'll see what else I can find. I thought the KSL source was good, and I'd consider that regional, not exactly 'local', since it is a dominant station out of the largest city in Utah (Salt Lake) and is referring to use of the Goldback on a statewide basis. That said, how many more would your say are needed beyond that one then? Just so I can see what I can find? Obviously the more the merrier, but a benchmark is always good too. ♥Th78blue (talk)♥ 01:28, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
Th78blue I generally abide by WP:THREESOURCES so long as the sources demonstrate significant coverage and are independent of each other. Of course this is not a hard and fast rule and there are cases where two sources are appropriate if they are very in-depth. -Liancetalk/contribs 01:30, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
Three sounds good. I will see if I can locate two more then. I'd like to keep the primary source as well though so that readers could verify directly from that source, but also add two more secondary sources, if that works? ♥Th78blue (talk)♥ 01:34, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Th78blue Sounds good. No problem with having primary sources in an article to verify information if there are no good secondary substitutes. However do note that primary sources do not contribute to establishing notability, so you will still need to locate two more qualifying, secondary sources. Best of luck! -Liancetalk/contribs 01:35, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

That makes sense. I just felt that more information was better, as long as (as you mentioned) it is accompanied by notable and reliable secondary sources. I don't write many new articles. I mostly do work on the typo team, recent changes patrol, and lots of 'gnome-like' work... That said, I would like to do more article creation if I can get the hang of it with some of these smaller ones to start. ♥Th78blue (talk)♥ 01:38, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
Th78blue That's good to hear! Article creation is always a bit daunting at first, but once you get the hang of identifying good sources, understanding notability criteria, etc you will have no problem. We all start somewhere :) As always do not hesitate to reach out if you have any more questions. -Liancetalk/contribs 01:42, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
I just spend a good amount of time on the article. I DID find another source, and removed the paid one that you had flagged as problematic. I have submitted for review again. I think honestly at this stage it should pass basic muster for an article, though I will of course add it to my watchlist and continue to add any other sources too it as they arise (and from more and different regions of course too). ♥Th78blue (talk)♥ 03:35, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
Hi again Liance, sorry to pester, and no worries if you just haven't gotten back around to it yet, but I'd love it if you could take another look at my Goldback article for submission. Thanks! ♥Th78blue (talk)♥ 14:03, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Th78blue I tend not to review AfC submissions more than once in a row for the sake of fairness and to let a fresh set of eyes have a look in case I missed anything. If you submitted the draft a reviewer should get to it at some point or you could ask at the AfC helpdesk. -Liancetalk/contribs 16:52, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

How do you do that cool "line thing" that you did above to respond to me comment? All I've known to do is colons to indent further and further, but I like the line you're doing! Also, no worries. I am not in any rush and will wait for the next reviewer then. Whenever that is. Thanks! ♥Th78blue (talk)♥ 16:57, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
Th78blue You can use the {{od}} template and place it ahead of your message. Outdenting is fairly useful for preventing discussions from flying off the page. -Liancetalk/contribs 17:48, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
♥Th78blue (talk)♥ 17:49, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
That didn't include my text. Sorry, I am trying again. NOW I think I got it to work. Thanks! ♥Th78blue (talk)♥ 17:50, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Crypto news sites are often the only sources available

Crypto news sites are among the only sources that exist about crypto games, so it is often impossible to find other sources. Since it is an emerging industry, most of the established news sites are not covering every development in the industry. All sources cited are legitimate journalists that do original reporting for the crypto industry. Please reconsider given the lack of resources to learn about these kinds of games, projects, companies in general. The only sources available on these topics are crypto news sites, in a large amount of cases. All sentences in this article are confirmed by the game and company's own websites and blog posts. If you advise that it would better to cite those instead, please let me know. But I thought it better to cite third parties. Bbpetro20 (talk) 03:06, 19 March 2022 (UTC)bbpetro

Bbpetro20 On Wikipedia all articles must meet the notability criteria meaning there must be significant coverage in reliable, independent (unaffiliated), secondary sources, and crypto news sites are not considered reliable per community consensus. Please search for sources that fit these requirements. Unfortunately if your topic is unable to meet these requirements it might not be suitable for inclusion. Hope this helps -Liancetalk/contribs 03:21, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Question from Justinbeibergirly on User talk:Justinbeibergirly (04:00, 20 March 2022)

I am very confused on how to use this website. Ives tried to read messages that were sent to me but it won’t show me them. --Justinbeibergirly (talk) 04:00, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi Justinbeibergirly! I'm Liance, your mentor on Wikipedia. You can view messages other editors send to you at User talk:Justinbeibergirly (also accessible from the menu of links at the top of the page). Please let me know if you have any additional questions. -Liancetalk/contribs 16:57, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Stub articles

Why is it that there are so many "stub" articles on the encyclopedia with little to no references and stuff? I am not meaning this question to be confrontational at all, but I am genuinely curious if you could help inform me as to how all of those passed muster and an article like mine (that I believe—albeit with a personal bias of course—is much better and better sourced and written etc.)? Thank you! ♥Th78blue (talk)♥ 21:46, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Th78blue Notability criteria on Wikipedia has changed significantly over the years, and as such there are a large number of stubs and non-notable articles left over from years past that would have been suitable for inclusion back then, but no longer meet guidelines like WP:GNG. Wikipedia is a work in progress so there are always going to be articles that don't conform to guidelines (see WP:WIP and WP:OSE). You are more than welcome to nominate non-notable subjects for deletion with a PROD or AfD provided they really are non-notable and not just lacking in references. -Liancetalk/contribs 04:35, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
I was just curious really. I appreciate the response and the relevant links. I am always learning. That is what keeps me coming back! ♥Th78blue (talk)♥ 04:53, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

...just one more "historical" question then. I don't know if you have been around long enough to gather the answer to this one, but when did that change? c. 2005? c.2010? More recent even? 2015 or 2020? I have not been editing long enough to know myself, but was just curious if you might know. Thanks! ♥Th78blue (talk)♥ 04:54, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

Policy on WP constantly evolves since it is based on community consensus, so I'm not sure if there was a specific date where it changed, and was likely a much more gradual shift over the years. I haven't been around long enough or paid enough attention to be aware of when the most drastic changes occurred however so I might not be of much help here unfortunately! -Liancetalk/contribs 05:57, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Memgraph

Hi Liance, thank you for your feedback regarding Memgraph. I've updated the draft with new sources: scientific papers, conference proceedings, etc. I hope that this is now up to Wikipedia standard :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Autorko (talk • contribs) 08:30, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Memgraph

Hi Liance! Thank you for your feedback for Memgraph. I've added reference sources from research papers, conference proceedings, etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Autorko (talk • contribs) 09:02, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

Advice

Hello,

Can you take a look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Fusion_Blockchain and maybe leave a comment in the "talk" section with some advice on how to proceed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.193.46.20 (talk) 16:26, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi 95.193.46.20 - comments were left on the draft regarding where improvements could be made, namely requiring more sources to meet WP:GNG / WP:NCORP (multiple independent, reliable, secondary sources w/ significant coverage). If possible I would identify the WP:THREE best sources for the next reviewer and leave a comment on the draft to let the next reviewer know. -Liancetalk/contribs 20:55, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

New message

Hi Liance, I've added some additional sources hoping to get the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Elizabeth_Moore Elizabeth Moore page acceptable to be live. I'm hoping you can take a look. I know there is a backlog, and my hope is to get it approved by the end of week Friday so it can be counted as an accomplishment in our edit-a-thon taking place this week. Thank for your time, Beth Jane Toren 18:57, 22 March 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by BethJaneToren (talk • contribs)

Hi BethJaneToren - given the time sensitive circumstances I have gone ahead and re-reviewed the article. It has been accepted seeing that it meets notability criteria. Best of luck with your edit-a-thon! -Liancetalk/contribs 20:58, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

Question from MCVLTRAIX (06:31, 24 March 2022)

hello, I just wanted to say thank you. being able to edit on wiki is not something i will probably ever do but just knowing I can means so much to me. its the first real change i have seen in over 4 years. thank you thank you thank you I feel alive again --MCVLTRAIX (talk) 06:31, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi MCVLTRAIX! I'm Liance, your Wikipedia mentor. I am glad you are excited about being able to edit - if you ever have any questions or just want some advice/resources about getting started here, do not hesitate to reach out. Best, -Liancetalk/contribs 19:55, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

Vercel Article Decline

Hi User:Liance: Thank you for reviewing the submitted Vercel article. I just have one question. It looks like the article is still in the draft space. Will it remain there so that I might work on improvements? I know that a draft article will be deleted after six months of no activity. Thank you and best, LeepKendall (talk) 17:23, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi LeepKendall - articles in the draft space are unpublished, but as long as you make any edit (minor or major) every six months it will stay there, and you are free to spend as long as you wish to improve it. In the case that the draft does get deleted, that is usually not a big problem as you can reach out to an administrator to get it restored. Hope this helps. -Liancetalk/contribs 19:57, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
Thank you User:Liance. Yes, it looked like it was still availble in the draft space for future improvements. I just wanted to confirm. Thanks much for your reply. Best LeepKendall (talk) 20:17, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

"TDEE" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect TDEE and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 March 25#TDEE until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. — Mhawk10 (talk) 05:02, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

"Start point" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Start point and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 March 25#Start point until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. — Mhawk10 (talk) 05:07, 25 March 2022 (UTC)


Thank you for your review!

Awesome Draft Reviewer
Stay awesome :) FlantasyFlan (talk) 18:50, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
Thank you :) -Liancetalk/contribs 23:52, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

You are highly welcome. Benedict Maluil Akok (talk) 21:25, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

List of google easter egg's edits

You made multiple large edits without giving an edit summary, please remember to give an edit summary unless you are making a minor edit. Idontknowwhattouseasmyusername300 (talk) 12:58, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

Could you point out which edits you're referring to? Checking the edit history I added an edit summary for every major edit with content addition, I didn't add summaries only for minor edits where an additional ref was added or formatting was changed. -Liancetalk/contribs 16:05, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

A Barnstar For You!!!

The Original Barnstar
A Barnstar for being one of the best reviewers!

- Free Barnstar from OGxSLAY3R!

Thanks! -Liancetalk/contribs 04:45, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

Revised - 90s Art School page

Thanks for your feedback Liance. The entry has been updated based upon your input. Additional reliable sources added. Liz Marks (talk) 15:09, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Question from Home Service99 on User:Home Service99 (17:56, 4 April 2022)

I want to delete this message --Home Service99 (talk) 17:56, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Question from Helloheart (00:28, 8 April 2022)

Hello! What pages need creating? --Helloheart (talk) 00:28, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

Hello Helloheart! I am Liance, your Wikipedia mentor. What subjects are you most interested in? We have many WikiProjects, so if you find one about a topic you are interested in or know a lot about that would be a good place to start! -Liancetalk/contribs 00:12, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Liance/Archive_9&oldid=1225515627"