User talk:Qcne/Archives/2023/October

Draft:Gwjwn

Hi, can u please tell me how to improve my article should i rewrite or my sources are not true these are the only notable sources i have tried finding when I searched for it and I'm not paid for editing or writing for anyone I just love to contribute on music articles about topics song's albums or the artist's i love I wanted to write articles on topic about Bodo song, album or about Bodo artist's can u please help me out by explaining me how can I improve or wt should I add more i will be very happy and thankful for ur help thank you!!! XERI MUSIC (talk) 09:16, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi @XERI MUSIC. If those are the only sources you can find, then there can be no article on this topic. It simply does not pass the WP:NMUSIC threshold. There's really nothing more to say or suggest, you can't make up notability out of thin air. Sorry. Qcne (talk) 09:26, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi and wt about the draft Charles Mashahary can u please explain me wt should I add more or how can I improve it please don't delete my draft. XERI MUSIC (talk) 09:34, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

I did not add a deletion tag, but I am afraid I agree it should be deleted. I have rejected it as the sources you have used do not show notability under WP:NMUSIC, I'm sorry.

Please very carefully read WP:NMUSIC and WP:VERIFY if you want to start creating articles. Qcne (talk) 09:44, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Please observe my page carefully and if you think that I have given a fake source, block my ID. Madian wiki (talk) 18:02, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

@Madian wiki it is a breach of our rules to create a second account to evade a block. Qcne (talk) 18:03, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

It is ok but the registration named S.M Jahid Hasan has been blocked by @Qnc and said that the authentic source I have given is fake. My request will be to look at the page seriously and not to remove the page. New information will be added to the said page day by day Madian wiki (talk) 18:08, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Your source is a WP:PRIMARY source, and throws up a malware warning by Microsoft. In any case your article has been rejected and will not be considered further. Qcne (talk) 18:11, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Yes it is wap primary source but not fake. Please do not delete the page Madian wiki (talk) 18:23, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

The page is pending deletion as it is inappropriate for Wikipedia. Please read WP:NOT. Qcne (talk) 18:24, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Ok thanks Madian wiki (talk) 18:28, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

John Irvin

I've fixed all the issues with the article. KingTheD (talk) 23:46, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Manis mysteria moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Manis mysteria. Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing because it needs more sources to establish notability and Mammal species need to be accepted by both IUCN and the ASM's MDD, or have other reputable secondary sources supporting it. Your article is now a draft where you can improve it undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. UtherSRG (talk) 01:36, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Draft:VNU_University_of_Medicine_and_Pharmacy

Sorry for disturbing you, but i want to ask u how my post can be accepted by reviewer. U say that my sources and references are not vertified, but some page about medical school in Vietnam such as Hanoi Medical University is even no references. So I hope u can give some advices or even help me to complete the Draft. Cause this Draft is my first time i have published, and this published draft is about my medical school that i am studying, so i put all the passion in this Draft. Thank you, hope u can reply soon. Vietanh04 (talk) 19:17, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Vietanh04. Please see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. If you look at the Hanoi article, it has had a no references tag since 2008 (!). As you have pointed it out to me I will mark it for deletion.

We require significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources, that are secondary to the University. Otherwise it does not pass WP:NSCHOOL. Qcne (talk) 19:20, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you u for advising me. But can i ask u a bit, that to be approved by u and all reviewers, all paragraphs that doesn't have sources or references have to be deleted ? And if I take the references from the vertified newspaper in Vietnam written in English, will is it accepted ? Thank you for spending u time answering me. Vietanh04 (talk) 19:32, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

You are free to re-submit it if you find sources that prove it passes WP:NSCHOOL. Click the big blue re-submit button, but only do this if you are sure this draft passes the criteria. Qcne (talk) 19:36, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank u Vietanh04 (talk) 19:37, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi Qcne, well i still confused because i have the secondary sources, but how to pass the WP:NSCHOOL ? How my post is not noteable, cause the sourse is not diversity ? I should collect the sources from more newspaper ? Cuz almost my source is from Vietnam National University so think it is reliable enough. And this is my first time so something u said that i hadn't passed the WP:NSCHOOL makes me feel more confused. I need a help to write this post cuz it is about my school and I really want to publish it. It is so lucky for me if u can help me to do somethings with this post. Hope u reply soon. Vietanh04 (talk) 19:59, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

@Vietanh04. The criteria is really clear: we need significant coverage in multiple reliable sources that are independent of the subject.

1) All the vnu.edu.vn sources are WP:PRIMARY because they come from the Univeristy's own website. This means they are not independent.

2) You have one source from moh.gov.vn which states just that the Pharmacy Department exists. This source is fine to cite the fact it has a pharmacy department, but useless for everything else.

3) And your VietnamPlus source is fine but it is the only one. We need to see the University discussed in multiple independent sources.

Do you understand the criteria? Qcne (talk) 20:04, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Ok thank you for replying me, i am very appreciate for u advice and helpness. But if i find and replace the sources, can I have a chance to publish the post or I have to change the name ? Thank you Vietanh04 (talk) 20:08, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

@Vietanh04 no, don't create a third new draft! You shouldn't have created the second one.

If you can work on your first draft and add in the sources we need, then message me here and I'll have another look. Qcne (talk) 20:14, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Ok really appreciate u, maybe tomorrow i will find the source and send u Vietanh04 (talk) 20:16, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi Qcne, thank you for advising me how to have a good source, i have done like what u said and changed the sources of the Draft. So can u have a look at my Darft, thank you so much. Vietanh04 (talk) 10:44, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi Qcne, can u check me Draft. I have changed all the sources by the secondary sources, thank you Vietanh04 (talk) 20:16, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

I've re-submitted it for you, as I am not Vietnamese I'm not in a great position to evaluate the other sources you've added. It's easy to decline when there are no suitable sources. Hopefully another editor will come along and review it. Qcne (talk) 08:38, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you so much, i really appreciate u Vietanh04 (talk) 13:12, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Roman Axelrod

Hello, thank you for your feedback on the draft of Roman Axelrod's article. We appreciate your input. Could you please specify what changes we should make? Are there any particular links you'd like us to include? Would a link to Forbes work for you? https://councils.forbes.com/profile/Roman-Axelrod-Founder-XPANCEO/7817903d-6616-4720-8f73-a537ace1bfe8

Or would you prefer a link to his LinkedIn profile?  https://www.linkedin.com/in/romanaxelrod/ Your guidance will help us improve the article. Thank you! Thesmartlens (talk) 14:16, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Thesmartlens.

Firstly, "we" suggests your account is shared by multiple people, and/or you represent Roman as some sort of PR or marketing company? Wikipedia accounts are strictly for the use of one person only, and sharing accounts is a breach of our terms of service.

Likewise, making edits to a topic you have a conflict of interest in and a financial stake in, without declaring it, is also against the terms of service. Please see:

- WP:NOSHARING.

- WP:COI. You will need to follow the instructions here to make a conflict of interest declaration.

- WP:PAID. You will need to follow the instructions here to make a paid editing disclosure.

On to the draft you submitted:

1) One of the fundamental pillars of Wikipedia is that information and statements must be verified. Your draft did not have a single source to back up any of the text, so was completely unacceptable for Wikipedia. The policy on verification is at WP:VERIFY.

2) Articles should only be written about what we deem 'notable'. There is a specific criteria to establish if a person is notable, and can have a Wikipedia article written about them, which is at WP:NPEOPLE. You will see that the easiest way to prove notability is for there to be significant coverage of the topic in multiple, independent, reliable, secondary sources. The Forbes profile and LinkedIn page are both primary, non-independent, sources so can not be used to establish notability.

3) Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources.

4) Wikipedia is not to be used to promote or advertise a subject. This is against the purpose of Wikipedia (see WP:NOT). Articles must be written from a completely neutral, dispassionate, point of view. Your draft was written in a way solely to promote Roman with inappropriate language like "forged valuable partnerships" and "leaving a lasting impact". This is just marketing speak. This is not allowed. Check out the guide on writing neutrally at WP:NPOV.

I hope you can see then, that your draft needs to be completely re-written from the ground up. You need to first establish if Roman passes that WP:NPEOPLE notification criteria. If he doesn't pass, then there can be no article, and you are wasting your time in trying to write one. I'd recommend reading WP:YOURFIRSTARTICLE.

Hope that helps, let me know if you have any questions. Qcne (talk) 14:27, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Draft blanking?

When you declined [[Draft:AKUNDWA VILLAGE]], you also blanked the entire content. Why? WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 13:14, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Uh, I didn't! How strange. I am using the AfC helper script and didn't touch the source of the article. Qcne (talk) 13:16, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

You might want to report the bug to the script author/maintainer. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 14:24, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Request on 12:32:23, 4 October 2023 for assistance on AfC submission by Shirrapal

• Shirrapal (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:S6 (computer software) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Qcne, since you confirm yourself that "Software is notoriously hard to get sources for", why not start from something (with limited number of references) and let people verify and edit? Just mark that the article is a stub and require further development, verification etc. Isn't it how this should work?

Like this, it is just not going anywhere.

How many references do you need? Process control page already mentions s6, just with an external link. So I am not writing about some imaginary idea, but something that exists. Why not make at least a stub of an article and let it be developed further? People will verify and correct if anything is wrong. But it has to be started.

I have just checked Runit page for comparison - it does not really have more references: some are repeated, most are from the project itself.

So either you use the same criteria or I am not going to spend more time on this, I have better things to do than looking for more references than are normally needed.

Also, this is something relatively new so simply there are not that many. And not adding article prevents them from appearing because also software popularity depends in a way on its presence in wikipedia (let me be clear - I am NOT related with the s6 project in any way). I was expecting to find it myself here but it was not there, I found out about the seeing how much it is being used and still nothing about it in wikipedia - that is why I decided to add it.

Shirrapal (talk) 12:32, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Shirrapal. Thanks for the feedback. The Articles for Creation process states reviewers reviewing drafts must assess them with reference to the relevant guidelines and policies, not by comparing to other articles that already exist. Wikipedia has millions of articles many of which are poor quality and should probably be deleted.

The relevant criteria is at WP:GNG. The test we use is if there is significant coverage in multiple independent secondary sources. On your draft that leaves the medium.com and kreuzwerker articles, and I just don't think it's quite enough to pass notability.

If it is a new piece of software then perhaps it is simply WP:TOOSOON for there to be an article? Note also that Wikipedia must not be used for promotion of a topic.

If you disagree with my judgement - and don't worry, I won't take it personally! - then feel free to re-submit and I will recuse myself from reviewing it again. Let me know if you want to do that so I can add a comment to the draft for the next reviewer.

Let me know if that helps, Qcne (talk) 12:40, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Qnce,

Thank you for rapid reviews and response.

I do understand your point. However - I reviewed WP:GNG. I do not quite understand why, for instance, the wiki for Gentoo project is not an "independent and reliable source". Wikis are specified as one of those not necessarily "reliable", but not quite excluded. In case of documentation of projects, I do not see why not treat them as reliable sources. This is not about a political debate where opinions matter (and differ etc.). This is information that the software project in the new article exist, that it is being used by other projects and how. I have found a number of other links like those to the Gentoo project, but including them all seems an overshot... It will turn wikipedia info article into Linux distribution package database...

True, that the case of software is a bit specific, as it is a virtual, non-material "thing". It has also specific means to be documented. For my understanding, the references in wikipedia should confirm that the software exists and that the description in the article is consistent with reality. In this case, documentation for independently developed projects clearly confirms this. Most of such documents have nowadays a form of wiki, as they need to be up to date. Excluding them does not seem a reasonable practice. Really, software is not the same thing as, for instance, some political event or whatever else that depends heavily on interpretation...

I have found, for instance, a conference publication about s6 (a lightning talk) - but it was presented by its author. That, according to the mentioned criteria, is also not "reliable" source (as information comes from its author...). But really, it is rather hard to expect to have a BBC coverage, or a publication in Nature about it...

If you feel that you cannot accept it, of course, I understand. But consider that it is a not good to put too many obstacles as it may discourage and harm further development of Wikipedia articles... Note that the article I wrote is very short - so that it contains only what is really necessary and it is as easy to verify as possible. Then, it can be developed further (if needed).

So, if this is not a problem, let me know exactly how many more references of what kind you would like to see. This is not strictly defined in WP:GNG.

Or, if you prefer not to look as it anymore or still consider this is not enough, please leave it for others to check when I submit it again ;-)

Thanks again! Shirrapal (talk) 14:13, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

@Shirrapal I understand your viewpoints, and we could get into a real discussion about the usage of sources: it is a very complicated area that has been looked at my hundreds of editors over two decades! I do think the article is borderline with your two secondary sources. But I am not so confident it will pass WP:AFD if accepted, and may even get bounced back to draft by the New Pages Patrollers. If you want to resubmit it go ahead. Sorry it's a frustrating experience. Qcne (talk) 18:50, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Draft:List of employment websites in India

hey hii, can you specify the what is real problem? RajeshKumarRajan7492 (talk) 19:23, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

I explained, it does not pass WP:NLIST. Qcne (talk) 19:26, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

what if i remove country from column? RajeshKumarRajan7492 (talk) 19:33, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

How will that help? Qcne (talk) 19:41, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

What if they actually read the page you linked to? Drmies (talk) 19:42, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

I don't know, may be all links are Indian website so it doesn't matter?

You have any solution to pass the article? RajeshKumarRajan7492 (talk) 19:43, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Please re-read and understand WP:NLIST, which explains why the article was declined. Qcne (talk) 19:44, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

BTW it has "sockfarm" written all over it, and it's on a range that should probably just be hardblocked--there is so much that there's really nothing I can do, unfortunately. I see it more than once a week. Drmies (talk) 19:45, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, I was thinking that too, but wanted to give benefit of doubt. I've not seen this type of spam before in my reviewing. Qcne (talk) 19:47, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

spam? RajeshKumarRajan7492 (talk) 19:49, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

can you tell me where is spam? RajeshKumarRajan7492 (talk) 19:50, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Here. RajeshKumarRajan7492, stop asking these inane questions or I will block you per WP:CIR and WP:UPE. Drmies (talk) 19:52, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Athugalpura Prince College

Hey Qcne,

I'm writing this to ask for the source files of the wiki page that you asked for speedy deletion and I like for info about what should i modify to suit fix my errors — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sahan Rasanjana (talk • contribs) 17:12, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello, to request undeletion temporarily please see WP:REFUND.

Your draft did not prove how this college met our WP:NSCHOOL criteria. Qcne (talk) 17:56, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Draft: Jon Boutcher

Hi Qcne,

I've just added some more secondary sources to the page you reviewed (Draft: Jon Boutcher). If you could take a look I'd really appreciate it!

Thanks CGR019 (talk) 21:02, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi @CGR019. You have some issues with your citations: numbers 1, 2, 3, 4 are all randomly at the top of the page instead of interspersed throughout the text.

Sources should come after the specific statement they are backing up, not just shoved somewhere randomly (which is known as citation stuffing).

Again, this person is likely notable but if you could fix the citations and let me know. Qcne (talk) 21:04, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Qcne, just moved them, sorry about that. Let me know if anything else is wrong though. Happy to fix. CGR019 (talk) 21:10, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

@CGR019 approved. :) would you mind going through Police Service of Northern Ireland and adding in WP:WIKILINKS to the new article, which is at Jon Boutcher. Qcne (talk) 21:18, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! Of course, I will do that now :) CGR019 (talk) 21:22, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Araglin

Hi, a page which you have previously rejected due to a lack of sources, Draft:Araglin, has since been updated with citations and I am wondering if you would mind rereviewing it. King HB

Draft: Manoharabad Railway Station

Thanks for reviewing this article. It's been rejected and I see the reasoning is that the sources are more about the railway line rather than the station itself. I know there are codified rules for what meets notability for an article to be considered.

But I would like to say that the railway line and the station are intrinsically linked, you can't have one without the other. And in this case, it is one of the Named stations of the Manoharabad-Kothapalli railway line project. The other station, Kothapalli has a page, but this one doesn't. There are not many sources for this station because it is in an area of the state where internet access, literacy, and education are lagging. Having a page for this station provides the those who are gaining access to these resources, the media included, to properly collect valuable information about the location of the station and the railway line being developed. thanks Thistheyear2023 (talk) 05:40, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

@Thistheyear2023 I understand your points and sympathise with the situation, but I have to go by the criteria, otherwise I doubt the article would pass the new page patrol and it would get bounced back to draft again. Railway stations have to pass the WP:NBUILD. Do you have even one source that directly talks about the station itself? Qcne (talk) 10:58, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

Not that i can see at the moment - if I do see one in the future ill resubmit the article - thanks Thistheyear2023 (talk) 04:31, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

I encourage you to re-submit if you do find any. Feel free to ping me here and I'll take a look. Remember sources don't have to be in English and can be offline. Qcne (talk) 08:01, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

Absolutely right

Accepting a borderline draft is exactly what you did and should have done.

If you feel you have to comment at the AfD may I suggest that you take a neutral stance? An alternative is to maintain a dignified silence.

Your acceptance is not under attack. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 16:55, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

@Timtrent Thank you :) I'm totally okay with the draft being deleted via consensus or draftied again. Qcne (talk) 17:30, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

Draft: Marc Ocampo

Hello Qcne,

Thank you for taking the time to review my draft on Marc Ocampo. I understand the importance of reliable sources, and I've made an effort to include them where possible. Specifically, I've referenced information from the Climate Change Commission, a government website, which I believe to be a reliable source. Could you please provide more specific feedback regarding which areas or statements in the draft you found lacking in reliable sources? This would greatly assist me in addressing those concerns and improving the article further. I appreciate your assistance and look forward to making the necessary improvements.

Best regards, Astroboyx72 Astroboyx72 (talk) 21:11, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

@Astroboyx72 Hi, I will give some more specific feedback- but tomorrow, as I am about to go to sleep in my timezone! Qcne (talk) 21:14, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi again @Astroboyx72.

My first two pieces of feedback are to 1) remove all the external links from the body of the article, and 2) substantially cut down the amount of external links in the External links section. See the guidance at WP:EXTERNAL.

Now onto your sources. The test to see if a person merits a Wikipedia article is the WP:NBASIC criteria: there needs to be significant coverage of the person in multiple independent reliable sources. Let's go through your sources one by one:

1. Instagram: not independent of Marco

2. Instagram: not independent of Marco

3. Imdb: cannot be used to establish notability, see WP:IMDB

4. TikTok: not independent of Marco

5. Instagram: not independent of Marco

6. Spotify: not independent of Marco

7. Behance: not independent of Marco

8. Behance: not independent of Marco

9. Firstly, sources shouldn't be hosted on Google Drive, we'd prefer a link to the source. But this thesis is also unpublished (so cannot be used as a source), and was written by Marco so not independent

10. Cinemata: not independent of Marco

11. Finally, a reliable source! But it does not mention Marco, so cannot be used to establish notability

Hopefully that shows with your current sources how Marco fails WP:NBASIC.

Wikipedia is complex and the standards for articles are strict, but I hope this gives you a better idea of where you went wrong. Please don't be discouraged, writing a new article from scratch is difficult. If you can find significant coverage of Marco in multiple independent reliable sources I would encourage you to re-submit.

On another point, I noticed you replied to my automated message on your Talk Page. Frustratingly I don't get notified of replies to these, which is why I missed it, but if you want to grab an Editor's attention it's best to WP:PING them. Finally, please remember to sign your posts so we know who and when messages, see WP:SIGN.

Hope that helps, but let me know if you have any questions. Qcne (talk) 08:13, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

Request

Sir can you review Draft: Tagaru Palya Arumobileworld (talk) 16:12, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Pleng Chan

Hello @QcneCould you mind checking this draft if there's needed to be added more to be accepted. Thanks. Bxrxbx (talk) 11:02, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello @Qcne Can you help check on this article? Thanks. Bxrxbx (talk) 17:30, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Bxrxbx. I've had a look at half your sources, and they mostly seem to be listicles or blogs, so not reliable. As such I am not sure this passes WP:NORG or WP:NPLACE.

To make it easier, choose the three strongest sources that provide significant coverage to this shop and are reliable and independent, and list them as a reply here. Qcne (talk) 18:35, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your review. the strongest sources are phnompenhpost.com ; kampucheathmey.com ; oknha.news ; postkhmer.com ; news.sabay.com.kh . I think they are all reliable and independent. Bxrxbx (talk) 13:12, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello @Qcne, I just re-read and you only mentioned the 3 strongest sources. I think it would be: postkhmer.com ; oknha.news ; news.sabay.com.kh

Thanks for your help and guidance. Sending love! Bxrxbx (talk) 15:32, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello Qcne ! How are you doing? I would like to know if my sources are acceptable or not since I didn't get your response. Thank you for understanding. I hope you can give me some more guidance to make this wiki pass. Regards. Bxrxbx (talk) 09:56, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Bxrxbx, sorry for the delay in replying. It's a difficult one: I think it is borderline on WP:NORG. I think the best thing is to see if a more experienced reviewer has any thoughts, and let them review it. It'll get reviewed eventually. I'll add a comment with a link to this thread. Qcne (talk) 08:41, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks @Qcne for your response. I am looking forward to see if there is anything I can do to make it pass. Thank you so much. Bxrxbx (talk) 09:22, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello @Qcne Sorry to disturb you again. Could you let me know how I can accept it? Do I need more sources or any information? Please kindly guide me since I don't see any reviewer helping out besides you. Best regards. Bxrxbx (talk) 09:44, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

Hey @Bxrxbx. It's in the pool for review, but there are 3400 other drafts waiting a review so it may take several months. You could ask for a look over by editors at WP:TEAHOUSE? Qcne (talk) 16:48, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you so much, @Qcne ❤️ Bxrxbx (talk) 05:46, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

Changes made

Hey

i have made the changes

can you please check it . I have added the correct references. Honeysingh1234321 (talk) 09:48, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

I've replied on the Help Desk query. Qcne (talk) 09:52, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Regar_Raghuvanshi_Kshatriya

Hello Qcne,

Thank you for taking the time to review my Draft:Regar Raghuvanshi Kshatriya . I understand the importance of reliable sources, and I've made an effort to include them where possible.

The article is about the caste which original history is mentioned in this article. I have cited all the valid ancient pdfs and books where these information is mentioned which I believe to be a reliable source. Could you please provide more specific feedback regarding which areas or statements in the draft you found lacking in reliable sources?

I would make more improvements if required. Honeysingh1234321 (talk) 09:53, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

@Honeysingh1234321 hi, please don't make multiple topics! You've now got four of these open. I've replied to the original thread on the Articles for Creation Help Desk. Qcne (talk) 09:54, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

Request on 16:44:53, 15 October 2023 for assistance on AfC submission by Kaftm

• Kaftm (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Kimberly A. McClain (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Kaftm (talk) 16:44, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello @Kaftm, do you have a question about your draft? It is in the pool for review. Qcne (talk) 17:46, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi. No specific question. Kaftm (talk) 17:50, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

Ah, I see; you removed my original decline notice, so you're coming back to me as the last reviewer for another review. With the decline notice removed, I did not realise.

It is in a much better state than before. However, the Career section is entirely unreferenced. Either remove that or find some reliable references, please. Qcne (talk) 17:56, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

Got it. I am removing the career section now. Thank you for your help and patience. Kaftm (talk) 18:22, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

I completed the removal of the career section. Can you review again for me?

Thank you. Kaftm (talk) 18:25, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

Approved. Feel free to add some WP:CATEGORIES. Qcne (talk) 18:30, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

Draft: Opobo marathon

Hi please could you check out Opobo marathon draft again Henryicookey (talk) 14:55, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Henryicookey. Still not appropriate for Wikipedia, the language is biased and promotional in tone. Please read WP:NPOV and WP:PEACOCK. Wikipedia is not to be used to advertise a marathon, which seems to be what the draft is mainly doing. Qcne (talk) 08:41, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! :)

Thank you for reviewing my drafts, @Qcne ! And in the case of Draft: Wapddi I actually expected that, too. In the case of this draft, I think I should pay a little more attention. 올해의수상자 (talk) 12:58, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

No worries @올해의수상자, feel free to ping me again here if you want to re-submit it for review.

My only other comment was that you seemed to be using the short description template to put in your comments on the article. That template is actually just for a very short description of the article that'll appear in search results. Qcne (talk) 13:04, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

You're right. I think that's the part that I have to fix in order to write more professionally while writing the article. Anyway I'll leave you a message whenever I need a review. 올해의수상자 (talk) 13:11, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

No worries :)

Qcne (talk) 13:12, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello. first, thank you so much for yesterday! By the way, there is something that I am worried about working on something in wiki. (For example, discussions). So I'd like to get a better understanding of wiki and ask for a lot of advice from people who've worked on wiki longer.

Of course this is not about Draft, but I would like to ask you for advice, may I ask you about this? 올해의수상자 (talk) 02:38, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

Sure, let me know and I'll try and help :) Qcne (talk) 10:35, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! :)

Anyway, I'm currently discussing the deletion of Decadent (band) (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Decadent (band)), and even though this document has enough reliable sources, some users have said "Delete" since I talked about "Keep". Of course I tell them why this should be Keep, but sometimes I was thinking about whether the way I left a discussion comment was wrong...(Of course, this is not over, but I'm a bit emotionally pressured doing this discussion.)

Maybe I said something a little aggressive because I was swept away by emotions because another user responded to me, but anyway, it feels like my fault too, when it comes to this part that I couldn't talk to them specific reason even though the article met in with first citeria of WP:Band. If there's anything wrong with me in the discussion, I would like to ask to you give me some advice. 올해의수상자 (talk) 11:06, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

Oh dear, yes that discussion has gotten a bit contentious hasn't it? Articles for Deletion discussions can become, shall we say, bitey: usually there is high emotions from the article creator/people interested in the topic, and high emotions from exclusionist/inclusionist Wikipedians.

I think you did well to argue your case, and you obviously have a passion for the article which shows. I would caution you that you came across a little bit WP:BADGERING: though of course it is difficult to get tone right via text and we're missing nuances in body language. I think instead of replying to each commenter with your argument for Keep, I would suggest making a single comment that has a very strong argument and stands on it's own merit.

Hope that helps? Articles for Deletion is a bit notorious so please don't take anything personally. Qcne (talk) 11:24, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

Yep you are right. And, well, maybe I think this article can hold up. (Because it meets the conditions of WP:Band) But it was a little hard to talk to because of some other users.

Anyway, thank you, your advice is really helpful to me. I've had very little experience discussing deletion, and I think I was a little emotionally swept away because I'm not used to other people criticising me on the internet. Now I think I'll have to wait for the results with my faith. 올해의수상자 (talk) 11:41, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

Stay safe, and let me know if you have any other questions! Qcne (talk) 12:01, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

If I have any questions, I will ask you anytime! It's hard to meet kind people online, but you are so kind and I feel better when I talk to you. Thank you for helping me! 올해의수상자 (talk) 12:11, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Influence of Johnny Depp

Given you were last editor to report them at WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Hpushkas318/Archive thought I would let you know. I am inclined to just leave it as is, in a rejected state. With IPs it seems to be wack-a-mole and they will just come back after a time and recreate it. S0091 (talk) 17:28, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

Good lord, again?! Qcne (talk) 17:29, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

Well, at least they stopped trying to create a Wikiproject dedicated to Depp. Baby steps, lol. S0091 (talk) 17:35, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

I saw the page and stumbled here randomly. Fyi, I just filed the report to ANI. NotAGenious (talk) 17:43, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Sunset Blvd & Kenter Ave - Intersection

Hello there,

You just rejected mine and put a stop sign, so now I can't have it be reviewed any futher. I would like to let you know that I changed it, so it was not like a news article.

I would like you to review it once more.

Here is the link to it: Draft:Sunset Blvd & Kenter Ave - Intersection - Wikipedia

Thank you! Jrmango (talk) 19:25, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Jrmango. My rejection still stands. Wikipedia does not cover every intersection in the world, and this intersection does not pass our WP:NROAD criteria for inclusion in the project.

I've noticed you've had a few articles rejected and saw your comment on the Help Desk. I would recommend familiarising yourself with Wikipedia and our policies and guidelines first, before you attempt to create any more drafts.

Let me know if you have any questions, Qcne (talk) 19:26, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

Still, isn't the purpose of Wikipedia to have lots of different bits of information for people to learn about different things? Jrmango (talk) 19:28, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

@Jrmango no, the purpose of Wikipedia is to paraphrase from reliable independent sources topics that meet our strict notability criteria. We are not an indiscriminate collection of every piece of information in the world, that would be far too much! Although Wikipedia is open to anyone to edit, we are curated in the sense that ever article should confirm to our guidelines and policies. Many don't, unfortunately, but that's because we are a volunteer project with a limited amount of volunteers. Qcne (talk) 19:30, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

I believe Los Ange'es official newspaper is a reliable source, and I paraphrased from it. So I don't see the problem here Jrmango (talk) 19:31, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

Also, this issue has been overed by multiple secondary sources, as per what the notability guildlines say Jrmango (talk) 19:29, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

You have three sources (ignoring the Google Maps link) to local newspapers detailing crashes on this intersection. I am afraid that just isn't enough to pass notability under WP:NROAD. There are millions of intersections in the world, many of which are notorious for traffic accidents: but very few of them deserve a Wikipedia article.

There may be an argument to incorporate a single line about a particularly notable traffic accident into the existing Sunset Boulevard article.

I will also say, your draft wasn't written in a way that was compatible to our standards. The Wikipedia voice (the way you write article) should never pose questions to the reader. Please have a read of WP:NPOV and WP:MOS.

I've noticed a few of your other edits have not been very useful to the project, and I will be reverting some of them I am afraid. For example, you removed an empty History section with a maintenance tag- don't do that. It's empty to allow it to link to the main article and allow anyone to expand on it if they want. You added a definition of an unincorporated county to a road article, but that definition does not belong on that article as it is not about the county. Qcne (talk) 19:36, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

DRAFT: Anglezarke Quarry

Hi

I have removed the circular reference.

As for the other reference not mentioning 'quarry' that is correct; climbers will simply know the place as Anglezarke or Anglezarke Quarry (it's fluid)

RockArchivistv2 (talk) 09:53, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks @RockArchivistv2. I'm sorry, but at the moment the draft doesn't show that the quarry meets the WP:NGEO notability requirements. Do you have any sources that describe the quarry in a non-rock climbing sense? Qcne (talk) 09:57, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Regarding New Page named Project Provakor

Hello, would like to talk to you about how I can contribute in creating new pages. Pritamd193 (talk) 03:45, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Pritamd193.

I would recommend reading the following:

- The Wikipedia Pillars which explains how this site operates.

- The general notability guidelines: all new articles must pass the notability criteria in order to be accepted.

- Your First Article which explains how to create your first draft.

Writing a new Wikipedia article from scratch is difficult. I would recommend starting out improving existing articles first so you can get used to all our guidelines and policies. Check out suggested articles for improvement at Your User Homepage.

Let me know if you have any questions, Qcne (talk) 10:29, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

hide.me VPN page

Hello,

as you requested I added citations from independent and trusted sources like i2 Coalition, Forbes and TechRadar to every sentence as evidence that what I wrote is true.

Please review it and I hope that it will be enough to publish the page. VPNMage (talk) 07:08, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi @VPNMage. I think @Theroadislong gave you further useful comments on the submission page this morning. I did say I would be willing to review again if you could prove notability under WP:NORG, but the GitHub and Forbes Contributor references are simply not enough to prove notability. Qcne (talk) 10:26, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Articles for Creation Barnstar
		For reviewing Bulgarian National Alliance QuickQuokka [⁠talk • contribs] 20:37, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

<3 Qcne (talk) 07:37, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Draft: University at Albany Student Association

Good day,

I'm a representative of the University at Albany Student Association, and I would greatly appreciate your help on this article. I've been trying to get an understanding of the WP:NPOV guide, but I don't understand what specific "inappropriate language" I have "loads" of. Do you mind clarifying and recommending how I would structure the Branches and Committees into one section of a few bullet points?

Thanks. Calebsappy (talk) 20:15, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi there @Calebsappy. Thank you for letting me know you are a representative of the Association.

You must immediately make a conflict of interest declaration by following the instructions at WP:COI. Are you paid in any way by the Association? If so, you must also immediately make a paid editing disclosure by following the instructions at WP:PAID.

Failure to do the former or both of these will result in your account being blocked.

Now that is out of the way...

Wikipedia articles exist only to summarise/paraphrase what published independent, reliable, secondary sources state about a subject. The tone should be formal, neutral, and dispassionate: it is prohibited to use Wikipedia to promote a topic. I'll extract some promotional language below, emphases mine:

- With these diverse branches and departments (who says it is diverse?)

- with a safe, strong, fun, and healthy campus experience (just PR speak)

- notable historical development (who said it was notable?)

- Her election is seen as a symbol of diversity and inclusion (by whom? symbol is an inappropriate word to use)

- Passionate about education and service, Fontaine carries with her a dynamic vision aimed at fostering an enriched and inclusive campus community, while promoting academic engagement and transparency within the Student Association (we call this nonsense WP:PEACOCK language)

- unprecedented number of self-nominations for elected positions, highlighting an active participation in the SA's democratic processes (this is just a PR statement)

- crucial role in the ongoing success of the organization (more PR speak)

- with a distinct focus and role in enhancing the campus experience and advocating for student needs (PR speak)

- serves as a vital link between (as above)

- plays a crucial role in fostering a vibrant student community (c'mon.)

- dedicated to organizing enjoyable programs (etc)

- strong advocate (etc)

- plays a pivotal role in (etc)

I'm going to stop there because I think that's quite enough examples. Every paragraph has this type of marketing language that makes me think it's been written by a 1st year Marketing and Communication student. I hope you can understand why this is written in an entirely inappropriate way for Wikipedia?

Now onto the actual structure. Wikipedia is not to replicate the About Us section on the Association webpage, which is basically what your draft does. The History section can be condensed down a bit, but the worst offenders are the Branches, Executive Departments, and Senate Committees sections. You've basically regurgitated the Association webpage onto Wikipedia. That's useless. If you really must have sections, just have a wider Organisation section with a bullet point for each, e.g.:

Organisation

The University at Albany's Student Association is structured as follows:

* Executive Branch, responsible for overseeing the day-to-day operations.

* Legislative Branch, consisting of the Student Association Senate.

* Judicial Branch, serves to resolve disputes.

The Association also has several committees, including:

* Committee on Ethics

* Committee on Appropriations

etc

Writing for Wikipedia is different to probably every place on the internet. Creating articles is hard and we have strict policies and guidelines we expect editors to adhere to. Sorry if my words come across as harsh. As an editor with a conflict of interest in the Association, your COI contributes will be subjected to a greater degree of scrutiny in order to ensure Wikipedia is not being used just as a vehicle to promote the subject.

I hope that clarifies why I declined the article. I do think there's a kernel of something here which could be worked into an acceptable article (which is why I did not reject it outright), but it needs a lot of work. I'd suggest starting over, after becoming intimately familiar with the following guidelines:

- Notability requirements for organisations.

- Writing in a neutral style.

- Peacock words to avoid.

Let me know if you have any questions. Qcne (talk) 20:41, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

I greatly appreciate it! I'm definitely trying to grapple with the nuances of Wikipedia, so thank you for your help! Thanks for the links to those forms as well. Can't wait to apply all of these wonderful suggestions. Calebsappy (talk) 21:34, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Also how do I do the COI thing if I'm not being paid to post on Wikipedia? Calebsappy (talk) 21:36, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

If you're not being paid, then you just need to copy the code from WP:DISCLOSE and place it on your user page, at User:Calebsappy. Use the source editor and just copy the code, adding in your username. I've already added one to Draft_talk:University_at_Albany_Student_Association. Qcne (talk) 21:45, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Okay, I think I did it! So will it automatically attach to any edits I make? Also, do I have a limit on how many resubmissions I can make for a single draft? If so, should I just create a whole new draft?

Thanks. Calebsappy (talk) 21:54, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Perfect, that worked. All edits on Wikipedia are public and attributed, so any editor will be able to see you have the COI with the article.

We'd only reject an article if it was completely inappropriate for Wikipedia, or there had been several reviews with no improvement. As I said, there's a kernel of an article there, so I'd recommend working on it and re-submitting when you think it passes WP:NORG. Keep working on the draft you have. Drafts are only deleted after five months of no activity. There's a large pool of articles to be reviewed (over 3000) so if you do re-submit, feel free to ping me here and I'll take another look. Qcne (talk) 22:00, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Awesome. I'm currently making drastic edits, but I'd like to know if the introduction part was fine? You mentioned everything past History, so would that be where I'd be making the most change, or was there "peacock" language in it as well? Also, should I just not use any reference to the website? (Totally understand if that's the case). Also, how much is too much information without a reference? Your bullet suggestion can't be found in an article with those exact words, so would I just leave it in without a reference? Calebsappy (talk) 22:11, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

The Introduction works though careful of phrases like "With these diverse branches and departments", "passing a wide range of social, cultural, academic, and professional organizations", " provide the undergraduate student population with a safe, strong, fun, and healthy campus experience". Again, the sort of stuff you'd find on a glossy brochure. The guidelines on writing introductions is at WP:LEAD.

You can certainly use WP:PRIMARY sources but these should be supplemented by strong, reliable, independent secondary sources. The primary sources can be used to verify straightforward facts.

We'd generally say you should have one reference after every paragraph but this isn't a rule. The idea is to find the references first and then write the article by paraphrasing or summarising the contents of the reference, then sticking the in-line citation at the end of it. Don't copy anything verbatim, as that would likely be a copyright violation. WP:WHEN will explain in more detail. Qcne (talk) 22:19, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

I just have to publish my changes in order for you to see an edit, correct? I don't want to resubmit if I don't have to. I've cut down on the history section, extracted all of the regurgitation (lol), and I'm hoping the most peacock language was the addition of "positive" to the last sentence of the lead section. Calebsappy (talk) 23:03, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

@Calebsappy Yep. "Publish" in this instance is akin to "Save". You can then click Resubmit button for it to go back into the review pool. Qcne (talk) 23:12, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

I submitted for review! Hope it's better. Calebsappy (talk) 23:26, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Much better. I've done some copyedits (you can compare revisions to see what I changed in the History tab) and have accepted. You should now add some WP:CATEGORIES to the article. Qcne (talk) 09:43, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Jalpaiguri Institute of Technology

A tag has been placed on Jalpaiguri Institute of Technology requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section R2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from the article namespace to a different namespace except the Category, Template, Wikipedia, Help, or Portal namespaces.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. CptViraj (talk) 14:28, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

References added and edits made

Hi,

The references didn't get added for some reason. Fixed now. Please check Shetty mayur (talk) 14:59, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. I will undo my rejection. You can now re-submit it for the review pool. Qcne (talk) 15:03, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

How to delete an article

Hello

Can you delete the DRAFT:ST.PETER'S COLLEGE OF ORMOC article please

cries

JOHN_GABRIEL231 JOHN GABRIEL231 (talk) 16:29, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

I've tagged it for deletion. You can blank the draft if you like, by just removing all content and publishing it. Qcne (talk) 16:31, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

can I still replace it to other content?

How to change name on an article?

Cries

JOHN_GABRIEL231 JOHN GABRIEL231 (talk) 16:33, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

I don't understand your question. Please re-phrase. Qcne (talk) 16:36, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Fuck you too

You reverted the message I wanted B732 to get. (Redacted) 95.187.129.47 (talk) 16:57, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

<3 Qcne (talk) 16:57, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Don't go near any hydraulic presses today Qcne. Knitsey (talk) 17:00, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for the encouragement! Qcne (talk) 17:02, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

@Qcne: @Knitsey: That was... something. Have a good evening! B732 (talk) 18:28, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Future for Ukraine

Hi there.

I edited https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Future_for_Ukraine_Charity_Foundation . Could you review this article? Niveus (talk) 14:49, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

@Qcne help him please -- 80.64.84.9 (talk) 15:58, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

It's been re-submitted for review and will be reviewed in due course. Qcne (talk) 16:00, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Assistance with editing and launching Zanele Mbokazi page

Good day. Please assist me with editing and approving our page, Zanele Mbokazi Nkambule

Here are a few links about her.

https://www.instagram.com/mbokazizanele/ http://www.ukhozifm.co.za/sabc/home/ukhozifm/shows/onairpersonalities/details?id=8d0fe02e-49a5-455d-8a1f-e3e2d20cab6c&title=Zanele%20Mbokazi https://za.linkedin.com/in/zanelembokazi https://www.thehistory.co.za/zanele-mbokazi-biography/ https://www.gospelcorneronline.com/zanele-mbokazi-takes-over-indumiso-on-ukhozi-fm/ https://www.amazon.com/Books-Zanele-Mbokazi/s?rh=n%3A283155%2Cp_27%3AZanele+Mbokazi Spmujuru (talk) 14:12, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello @Spmujuru. It is up to you as the editor to reference the correct sources for a new article.

I would recommend having a read of the following:

- WP:VERIFY: explains the types of sources Wikipedia requires.

- WP:NPEOPLE: this guideline explains what we mean by only 'notable' people can have Wikipedia articles written about them.

- WP:INTREFVE: this explains how to reference using in-line citations. For biographies of living people, every material statement must be referenced.

Your usage of the word "we" suggests you have a conflict of interest with Zanele, or are being paid by her/her organisation in some way to create this article. You must make a conflict of interest declaration by following the instructions at WP:COI and a paid editing disclosure by following the instructions at WP:PAID. Failure to do either of these is a breach of the Wikimedia Term and Conditions and may result in your account being blocked from editing.

Let me know if you have any questions. Qcne (talk) 14:22, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Please Review the article you just declined

Qcne Please kindly review the article Bala Sanusi Turaki. I have properly cited it and made valuable corrections Brogonee (talk) 16:55, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

I've answered your question on the AfC Help Desk - I am afraid there is still no evidence this person passes our strict WP:NPEOPLE criteria. Qcne (talk) 16:57, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

The Recent Changes Barnstar

		The Recent Changes Barnstar
		For your excellent contribution in recent Changes section. Mr. Rasel Hasan (talk) 17:05, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

♥ Qcne (talk) 17:07, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Question on Norman F. Ramsey Prize page

Hi @Qcne, as you requested I've added a non-APS source in the prize description. Currently, I think the page draft is no worse than the numerous other APS prize pages, most of which do not cite other sources other than APS. See the following for examples:

Herbert P. Broida Prize

I. I. Rabi Prize

Herman Feshbach Prize

Abraham Pais Prize

Davisson–Germer Prize

Unparticle (talk) 23:51, 30 October 2023 (UTC)