User talk:Rickywrites

This is Rickywrites's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Phat Farm (brand) has been accepted

Phat Farm (brand), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

aaronneallucas (talk) 17:48, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome and COI

Hi JSFarman. I appreciate what I take to be your passion for protecting the credibility of this information space, but I’m not affiliated with either these people or these entities, except by own passion for pop culture and fashion history. I was a professional fashion stylist in Los Angeles for about a decade, and in a bout of nostalgia for the early aughts, I fell into a bit of Wikipedia rabbit hole. I just thought the Kimora Lee Simmons article I encountered was egregiously bad, so I decided to edit it! It was my first, but I tried to match voice as well as I could. I read through the guidelines, and I used some articles of prominent female figures as a rubric. It’s possible that the content I chose to feature in my edit is too scattershot, or that some of it is extraneous even (?), but I was careful to avoid any language that expressed personal opinion or suggested promotion…Even when I really wanted to, because I do think Baby Phat really is iconic and sort of definitive of that era.

If you compare the KLS article to its previous one, I hope you’d agree that it was, at the very, least improved. My subsequent contributions - Baby Phat edit and Phat Farm entry - were branches from that initial Wikipedia foray. Like the KLS article, the Baby Phat one was egregiously awful. Then, when I found nothing on Phat Farm, I decided to try my hand at page creation. If, by not first submitting these edits or pages to the panel of moderators who help to protect the integrity of Wikipedia, I was breaking community protocol, then I apologize - I’m new and didn’t know. In fact, I was certain that Phat Farm would be rejected.

Whatever the case, I just want to be clear that I have no affiliation with these people or companies; I just saw some holes and thought I’d patch them if I could. Next, I was going to create a page for a designer whose work has influenced fashion houses and streetwear style since the nineties, when his patchwork leather jackets started to pop up in music videos for Michael Jackson and Madonna, then on NBA stars in some memorable moments from sports history. Should I not do this now? Given that I’m so new, I also don’t fully know what your comment means - forgive me - or what its implications are. I can stop contributing if I’m causing issues. It was really just a moment of abject boredom that lead me to toss my hat into this ring.

Hi Rickywrites and thank you for your thoughtful reply. I added the conflict of interest notice and then removed it because I thought I was jumping the gun. Your recent edit to Kimora Lee Simmons] raised a flag -- it consisted only of removing the tag, which is an unusual edit for a new user. Please don't stop contributing!

I totally get the Baby Phat thing. I am an LA-based refugee from the music industry and spent a lot of time around Baby Phat-wearers. I was surprised there wasn't an article already. Thank you for creating it. You might want to give it another edit for neutrality. Let me know if you need some guidance.

Future ref: you should sign your messages - select "signature" from the the "+" dropdown menu (or use four tildes). And, if you want another editor to see a message anywhere other than their own talkpage, you need to let them know. You can ping anyone by their username. For example:[[User:Rickywrites|Rickywrites]], . Welcome to Wikipedia! JSFarman (talk) 20:16, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Jeff Hamilton (June 3)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Robert McClenon were:

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 people). 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.

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

The comment the reviewer left was:

The title of this draft either has been disambiguated or will need to be disambiguated for acceptance.

If this draft is accepted, an entry will need to be added to the disambiguation page for the primary name.

The disambiguation page for the primary name is Jeff Hamilton (disambiguation).

This draft, as written, does not appear to indicate that the appropriate notability criterion is satisfied. In particular, this draft does not appear to indicate that WP:NBIO is satisfied. If one of the criteria is satisfied, please revise this draft appropriately, with a reliable source, if necessary stating on the talk page or in AFC comments which criterion is met, and resubmit. It is the responsibility of the submitter to show that a subject satisfies a notability criterion.

You may ask for advice about the notability criteria at the Teahouse.

In particular, see and refer to WP:NBIO for notability, which is the guideline that the subject should be evaluated against.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Jeff Hamilton and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Robert McClenon (talk) 05:36, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rickywrites! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Robert McClenon (talk) 05:36, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Robert. Thank you for your feedback. I'm working on revising this article. I've reviewed the notability criteria again, and I have some questions.

You write that my article fails to prove the notability of its subject because my sources only include passing mentions of him. One of my sources is a profile of the subject in the Wall Street Journal. Is it the breadth of the profile that is unsatisfactory? Is WSJ no longer a reputable, reliable source of information?

Also: it's stated in the "basic criteria" section of the notability page that, "if the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability." I've included citations from Sports Illustrated, USA Today, and Complex, all of which are long-established reputable brands in journalism. Don't these sources combined prove notability?

Under additional criteria, in the "creative professionals" subsection, it's stated that a subject is notable if "the person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors." Other sources I have provided prove that the subject's work is widely referenced by artists as well as other fashion designers. I concede that this argument may hold little water and is perhaps a matter of personal interpretation, but together, these sources do seem to indicate that the article's subject's work exists as a monument to seminal moments primarily in the history of the NBA but, by proxy, also the history of hip-hop and street culture. This is why the subject's name has come to function as a signifier of wealth and status in hip-hop, which can be seen in the use of the subject's name in tracks by grammy-award winning rappers like Jay-Z.

Mostly, though: a profile in the Wall Street Journal combined with subject-focused articles in Sports Illustrated, USA Today's sports section, Complex Magazine, and a (passing) mention in the Los Angeles Times don't sufficiently prove notability?

Regarding the article's style, I am working to better match it to Wikipedia's voice, but it's easy to feel discouraged in process. I'd greatly appreciate it if you could address these questions so that I can determine whether or not to keep working on it. Rickywrites (talk) 01:06, 15 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Jeff Hamilton (designer) has been accepted

Jeff Hamilton (designer), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Theroadislong (talk) 08:03, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]