Jump to content

User talk:Timtrent/Archive 32

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 25←Archive 30Archive 31Archive 32Archive 33Archive 34Archive 35

Season's Greetings

Hello Timtrent: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, North America1000 15:30, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message

Kingsley C. Dassanayake

please help improve Kingsley C. Dassanayake, they want to delete it from Wikipedia--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 05:08, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

I am not active on Wikipedia. I have commented at the deletion discussion. Fiddle Faddle 09:00, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

File:Plaque of Tide Mills Time-Line.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Plaque of Tide Mills Time-Line.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination.

ATTENTION: This is an automated, bot-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 23:50, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Merry, merry!

From the icy Canajian north; to you and yours! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 21:16, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

Your draft article, User:Rajendu/sandbox

Hello, Timtrent. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "sandbox".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. 1989 (talk) 03:49, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

@1989: Nothing to do with me. Fiddle Faddle 10:57, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Salim G. Sfeir

Hello, Timtrent. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "Salim G. Sfeir".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. 1989 (talk) 16:27, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

@1989: Also not one of mine. Perhaps you need to check better, since Wikipedia attributes articles in a strange way sometimes. Please do not find another stale draft to notify me about, I am really not interested. Fiddle Faddle 16:29, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
The Twinkle tool automatically predicts who is the creator of the AfC draft, and notifies them. If you are not the creator, just ignore the messages. -- 1989 (talk) 16:38, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello

How can we delete this entirely?

http://speedydeletion.wikia.com/wiki/Draft:Mariam_Saab 

It comes up when the subject's name is googled. One of the top searches of the subject is her name + wiki

Could you kindly close the request? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 500lightyears (talk • contribs) 18:04, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Wikia is nothing to do with Wikipedia. You must take that up with them. It is a separate site with separate policies. I am not entirely sure why you are asking me. Fiddle Faddle 18:15, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Help request

How to restore delete write Amna Nasir Jamal? I was working on it but it got deleted.

Approach the admin who deleted it. I am not an admin. There is no point in asking me. I have no idea why you are asking me. Fiddle Faddle 22:05, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Your draft article, User:Kasiaprada/sandbox

Hello, Timtrent. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "sandbox".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. 1989 15:39, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

@1989: Not mine. It's a foible of mediawiki software's ownership. Fiddle Faddle 15:50, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Help update Gigamon?

Hello, Timtrent! I see you're taking a break from Wikipedia, but I'm dropping you a line to let you know that I have prepared some updates to Gigamon, an article you accepted via AfC in 2015. Should you return to Wikipedia, perhaps you could consider these suggested updates and move them into the mainspace if everything looks OK. As disclosed on the Gigamon Talk page, I have a financial conflict of interest as I'm offering these updates on behalf of the company as part of my work with Beutler Ink, so I am not editing the article directly. Thank you in advance, Danilo Two (talk) 14:57, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

@Danilo Two: I have been alerted to this message by email. I am not currently planning a return to Wikipedia. Your use of other mechanisms where you have a conflict of interest is suggested. I suggest you investigate the ability to request a specific edit. I forget the mechanism, but I am sure the help desk will tell you how. Fiddle Faddle 14:59, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Glenn Mena

I wanted to talk you about Glenn Mena. The artist is notable, which NK Ruth has more references about him. I wanted to know if you can help? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ajoke Nunu (talk • contribs) 15:37, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

@Ajoke Nunu: I am not currently active on Wikipedia. Please see the header of my page. I am unable to help you. Fiddle Faddle 16:42, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Recreation of MCskill ThaPreacha

Hi there, hope this meets you well. You accepted the article for MCskill ThaPreacha in AfC in 2015 i think but it got deleted eventually. Now i think he has some really good sources that can get the article back on. I just wanted to ask if i have to write another one from scratch or i have to take it to deletion review? Will appreciate a response. MustaphaNG (talk) 22:41, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

a) I have no idea, I'm afraid.
b) I am not active on Wikipedia at the moment. Please see the top of this page.

Fiddle Faddle 22:54, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Its okay, thanks for the response. MustaphaNG (talk) 09:46, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Precious two years!

Precious
Two years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:21, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Timtrent. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

I disclosed

On this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_R._Kowey was a note about disclosing for conflict of interest. Thanks for that. I have disclosed on my User page DLoyle.

Happy Holidays!

Donna Loyle — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dloyle (talk • contribs) 14:32, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Seasons' Greetings

...to you and yours, from the Great White North! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 02:35, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Blakely

Hi, there is an article you nominated for deletion in 2012 that was reinstated and is now under consideration for deletion again. Maybe you could take a look at it: WP:Articles for deletion/Michael Blakey (music producer) ||| Wikitigresito (talk) 21:06, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

@Wikitigresito:Thank you for your note. I do not have time to do a detailed analysis of the article, I am not active on Wikipedia for the present. The analysis will take you 30 minutes or so and must be rational and unbiased. You may prove yourself to be incorrect in the nomination. My approach would be to assess every reference given to determine whether is it in WP:RS, is significant coverage, is independent of the subject, etc. WP:42 is relevant, but not to be quoted in a deletion discussion. You should then state with clarity which references pass and which fail, and consider doing so in the AFD, working out how to quote them.
It then becomes simple. Either the gentleman has acquired sufficient notability since the first discussion or he has not. If he has, then he stays, and you ought to withdraw the discussion. If he has not then your analysis reinforces the nomination for deletion.
Ideally your input to the discussion should be/become minimal from that point on. We do not help our arguments by repeating them, nor by countering every argument presented against us. Fiddle Faddle 21:49, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for the detailed advice! Wikitigresito (talk) 22:14, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
@Wikitigresito: Wikipedia is, as I am sure you have noticed, a very challenging place to play. It is vital to be unemotional about all aspects of it, especially wishing to see articles kept or deleted. It is only the facts of the topic's notability that are important. Note that to retain an article WP:N must be "referencable", but need not always be referenced. WP:V is important, but comes after N.
Keep detached from all that you do on Wikipedia and you will avoid burnout. Even then the hobby tends to pale after a while. It is an interesting academic exercise in fact based discussion and neutral writing. Fiddle Faddle 22:21, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Fing

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Fing, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Pichpich (talk) 20:05, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

@Pichpich: Nothing to do with me. Please read the history tab. I don't; care about it one way or the other. Please tell the major contributor. Fiddle Faddle 21:14, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
This is just sent automatically by Twinkle. Apologies, Pichpich (talk) 21:17, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

File:Tide Mills tidal and wind mill.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Tide Mills tidal and wind mill.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Lord Belbury (talk) 16:03, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

File:Tide Mills tidal and wind mill.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Tide Mills tidal and wind mill.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination.

ATTENTION: This is an automated, bot-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 23:55, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

File:Tide Mills tidal and wind mill.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Tide Mills tidal and wind mill.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination.

ATTENTION: This is an automated, bot-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 23:55, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

File:Tide Mills tidal and wind mill.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Tide Mills tidal and wind mill.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination.

ATTENTION: This is an automated, bot-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 23:55, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

File:Tide Mills tidal and wind mill.jpg

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. RonBot (talk) 17:02, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Old draft for deletion

Hi Tim, I'm planning to send User:Timtrent/Damon Matthew Wise (example) to MfD as an abandoned draft of an Afd-deleted article here (AfD). The subject doesn't seem to be notable, the original author hasn't edited in months and it's been five years since I wasted my time copy-editing it. Please let me know within seven days if you object to deletion and I'll leave it alone. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 20:33, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

sometimes despite our best endeavours these things happen my friend. Delete away Fiddle Faddle 20:56, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
No worries; I found it looking through my old edits; didn't realise it was still here. I'd have nommed it for speedy deletion if I hadn't copied it from elsewhere. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 22:48, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
 Done; the discussion page is here and I've posted a note on the original author's talk page. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 23:10, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Timtrent. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious
Three years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:31, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

Draft:List: Cast of Avatar: The Last Airbender listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Draft:List: Cast of Avatar: The Last Airbender. Since you had some involvement with the Draft:List: Cast of Avatar: The Last Airbender redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. UnitedStatesian (talk) 15:49, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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) 00:07, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious
Four years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:00, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

User talk:Seongyunhong12345#2What is your position at the company and why haven't you complied with WP:PAID

and further down. He says he's the CEO and also that he's an unpaid intern, asks for his VPN to be blocked. What do you think? Shall I block him? Would you ping me please if you reply. Thanks. Doug Weller talk 14:21, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

@Doug Weller: I left a request in the admins noticeboard to do a short term block. I think this is a struggling kid doing its best (badly) Fiddle Faddle 14:34, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
I think you may be right. Thanks. Doug Weller talk 15:59, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanking for editing

Hi, thank you so much for suggesting edits and making my first article good. --Thozhan Warrior (talk) 13:21, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thank you for leaving tips on my newly created page. I appreciate your help. Origamikuren (talk) 15:02, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Article: Dan Niles

Hello Timetrent, I am new to Wikipedia and my draft Dan_Niles was rejected due to it reading more like a resume according to your comment. I tried to copy the format of the Jim Simons, Kenneth Griffin, and Michael Bury articles (talking about his career, awards and quotes etc.) Given the comment was very brief as to why my article was rejected, I was hoping to get guidance as to what I should remove, edit, or reword to make it better. I had the following questions: 1. What sources should I look for that aren’t from the person themselves? My thinking was that CNBC, Fox, Yahoo! Finance, Marketwatch, and WSJ were a good smattering across both the political spectrum and financial opinions spectrum that were desperate from the source, but the comment implies I used to much from the source itself and that the sources lacked neutrality. 2. How should I modify the article to make it more objective, and if you had the time, I would greatly appreciate some examples so I have a model to work off of?

Again I apologize if any of this seems very basic, but I am a very new contributor to the platform and I would like to improve. Cheers, Alexander2357 Alexander2357 (talk) 04:32, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

@Alexander2357: Judgements such is this are often borderline. Another reviewer might have disagreed. That's a good place to start, because reviews are partly based upon feel and partly on referencing. From the referencing, Niles's notability is hard to verify. Let me try to explain that a bit better:
What all this means when I look at it is that Niles does pass our threshold for notability. You could argue therefore that I ought to have accepted the draft. Wording, though, tipped the balance in my mind against. "As an analyst, Niles made a famous call" was one clause that niggled. In the world of finance fame is the luck of the draw. If he had not bet against Dell like all the rest the call would have been reversed and irrelevant.
The guidelines WP:AFC asks me to work within are to accept drafts if I feel they have a better than 50:50 dance of passing any deletion discussion. All the foregoing leads me to believe that this draft is likely to be discussed at WP:AFD and likely to be deleted as the outcome. That is a desperately stressful process for a new editor because everyone takes it personally when their baby is criticised. Our role as reviewers is to seek to ensure that an article will not immediately be subject to one of our deletion processes when it is accepted. That is why we push it back to the author. We want to accept articles.
I appreciate you have worked hard. I appreciate, too, that you will have thought my review arbitrary. Perhaps I ought to have given you a more detailed rationale then and there. Thank you for asking for it here, now. Remember, too, that I may be mistaken.
To give you a model based on other articles is hard. No precedent is ever set by any article for any other. If it were we would have a brutally fast descent into idiocracy. Instead my suggestions are:
  • Pare back anything that appears to be puffery. "Famous" is an example.
  • Look hard for referencing, and write your artcile around the references. Do not find references to fit the article. For a living person we have a high standard of referencing. Every substantive fact you assert, especially one that is susceptible to potential challenge, requires a citation with a reference that is about them, and is independent of them, and is in WP:RS, and is significant coverage. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources. Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact cited, that meet these tough criteria is likely to make this draft a clear acceptance (0.9 probability). Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the person is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today.
We could proceed in a different direction. If you ask me to, because you are willing to take the risk of a deletion discussion, I will accept the draft in its current state. I think this unwise, but remember, I may be wrong. What I don't want you to do is to think in any way that your hard work has been slighted by my declining the draft. Again, another reviewer might have viewed it differently.
I try hard not to offer a second review after an article has been worked on. I believe that other eyes are always better. Fiddle Faddle 07:28, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you so much for the feedback! I think I have a better idea as to how to write articles going forward. I really appreciate your time and hope you have a wonderful day. Alexander2357 (talk) 20:42, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

@Alexander2357: A good way to practice is to choose a topic you have really never considered. Let's say you were to write my biography. You have no real idea which of the various folk a Google search throws up that I am. If you choose one of us you would find some references. After judging which, if any, are WP:RS, you would extract facts form the references and start to build your drat around those facts. By doing this you would be confident that the draft was well referenced, and factual.
I am not notable, certainly not in a Wikipedia sense, so no article would be accepted about me, but I think the example of the process will help you. I hope you get the bug and start to contribute to loads of articles here, creating some, improving others. Being able to write for Wikipedia improves all your writing. Fiddle Faddle 20:53, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Sahim Omar Kalifa

It appears that we edit-conflicted, but that we agreed that it was crud, and so that is all right. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:42, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

no amount of turd polish will handle that one Fiddle Faddle 16:15, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

Gig Performer

Hi Timtrent,

Thank you for your comment. Feedback is always OK, be it positive or negative.

I'm an IT specialist and a hobby guitarist, and would like to contribute on pages in these respective fields. When I wrote about Gig Performer, I researched similar topics, such as: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guitar_Rig https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MainStage_(software) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonic_Visualiser etc. etc.

I wanted to maintain this simple and informative style, like in articles I mentioned: quick overview, basic features, info box, and references. I researched references from MainStage, Sonic Visualiser and Guitar Rig and added mine correspondingly. Can I kindly ask you to review these articles, and then take a look of mine again? It isn't any different when it comes to style and references. This topic is surely notable, because software is used for live gigging among many musicians, i.e. Chris Broderick from In Flames. For some magazines I don't have a live preview (they must be purchased, no preview). https://www.musictech.net/news/magazine/musictech-207-how-to-set-up-your-studio-for-online-collaboration/

I really thought this would be a lot because Sonic Visualiser is in Wikipedia, and it's the most basic article out there.

Can you please help me out with references, this software is available as trial, 14 days, it has public documentation, it's just software I like to use as well as Logic, Kamelot Pro, etc. There are no university publications, or books about those simple apps.

I'll highly appreciate all the help I can get to make my first article live. I had problems at almost every step of writing this articles, I even quit thinking to add screenshots because that seems really difficult with all the rules... I got tangled in all different rules...

Thanks and kind regards, --Npudar (talk) 19:46, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

@Npudar: I can offer as much help as I am able. First tell me that you have read and understood the comment I left in Draft:Gig Performer
No precedent is ever set by any article for any other. If it were we would have a brutally fast descent into [[idiocracy] Fiddle Faddle 21:02, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

@Timtrent

Yes, I have read all these recommendations (especially Wikipedia:Reliable_sources, Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything), and yes, when I read these guidelines, they all seem so reasonable. So, I'm asking myself what did I do wrong. I'll break this through, please check my references:

1. Release notes - I find info i.e. version, publish date, etc. on the official changelog or release notes for any software I use (right from the horse's mouth)

2. This is a magazine "Keyboard", Stephen Fortner wrote about Gig Performer, he was the editor of that magazine (unfortunately this magazine is now discontinued, but it doesn't change the fact it existed and the issue was published once). I found a preview and entered it.

3. Reference for time it was originally released (the same source I used for the current version, which is still v3.71)

4. Ask.Audio is a non-linear educating company, with bunch of courses, lectures, etc. It is not blog, forum, common newspaper etc. and Matt Vanacoro is a professional musician and producer: http://mattvanacoro.com/ his opinion counts, I guess. I used it for reference that VSTs (virtual instruments) can be loaded into Gig Performer (since it is an audio plugin host application, it's natural it supports instrument plugins, isn't it? I used "him" as a reference, because I tended to have all sentences referenced with different people).

5. Soundbytes magazine, I used this reference to introduce the term "rackspace". When you install Gig Performer, rackspaces are shown by default. There are no lies, there. Everyone can check it by installing software. Author of this article has also a great music career: https://www.davetownsendmusic.com/

6. Songs, setlists, I've taken from the official documentation. There is every option thoroughly explained, also lots of screenshots that confirm options are really there. When I'm stuck in any program, I use its documentation to fix things.

7. General feature page. For example, support for VST, VST3 and AU plugins. Yes, directly from the horse's mouth. As a Windows user, I personally used many VSTs, and imported VST3 plugins, Mac users prefer AU (I didn't make any of these claims in the article, just stated Gig Performer supports these types, nothing else).

8. Vincent Robin is another cool name in music industry: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lk7HDIVH8Is

9. Reference 8 and 9 I used to prove that layout is based on connecting plugins by virtual wires. I thought it would be nice to show a video of it, so Wikipedia users can check it out without downloading software.

10. News web site. I used this as a proof that these features really exits (these features featured @ NAMM). I could link here official documentation or another 3rd party reviewer, perhaps?


Please forgive me for not coping well with these Wikipedia features (talk pages, section inserts, references' issues, tons of guidelines, ... ), I know you're experienced Wikipedian, I guess all puzzle parts fit just into place when one has 10+ years' experience. If my references are not OK (they look 100% legit to me, though), I'm all ears and open for advice. This is just about a cool software ~40 MB and everything's pretty transparent about it. Other articles I mentioned are also simple ones (Guitar Rig, MainStage, Sonic Visualiser, with fair references). I wouldn't have audacity to write about complicated CAD topics, etc. Just a guitar-based, e.g. tablature editors, Guitar Pro, Kamelot Pro, etc.

I hope things I write make some sense.

Thanks for your reply, and kind regards, --Npudar (talk) 22:19, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

@Npudar: Please look up ^^^ and treat us both to some para breaks. I know you tried but please put a blankline in here and there. The Show preview button is your friend. Almost midnight here. After you have made that huge paragraph readable I'll look at it tomorrow Fiddle Faddle 22:23, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm aware I'm n00b. Npudar (talk) 22:36, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

My assessment of the references

@Npudar: Thank you for listing these, above, and thank you for breaking the paragraph. I'm going to do the same with a critique of each element:

  • https://gigperformer.com/release-notes.html is a primary source. I have made it into a 'note'. It is useful, but not as a reference because it simply verifies what the vendor says it has produced. Notes are very useful for this.
  • https://idoc.pub/documents/keyboard-magazine-march-2017-pnxkqk67jg4v This is the whole magazine. The magazine itself does appear to pass WP:RS but I have no idea where to find the elements about Fortner. The thing is, no-one is going to search for that article, so it needs to be refines to page. Look at {{Cite news}} to determine if that or a different citation template meets your needs better, and add values to the parameters

Let me know what you think of my analysis, please.

I think that making these changes moves the draft into the class where it could be accepted. I suggest you make the changes and resubmit it. I try never to review more than once. Other eyes are always better, especially if I've done a reference analysis. I am now too close to this draft to be objective about it. Fiddle Faddle 08:06, 24 June 2020 (UTC)


@Timtrent: Thank you for your critique!

  • Thanks for adding a note, and grouping two references into a single note
  • OK, I'll switch this Keyboard magazine to "cite news" and then populate corresponding fields
  • I'll follow your lead and set a reference to a note; yes, I'm interested to learn this myself
  • Okay, I'll remove this passing mention (remove the reference to Surface Book). Remark sounds good.


You asked what do I think about your analysis: unbiased, well written, and good to sharpen one's writing/logic (I'll definitely know how to behave next time). I don't think you became close to this draft, you only understand this topic better (I think understanding things is always a plus). I'll leave a reply when I manage to edit this article properly (Show Preview button is already so hot :-) Thanks and kind regards, Npudar (talk) 15:46, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

  • @Npudar: I am sure you will learn fast. I believe in teaching folk to fish, not giving them a fish. I am too close to the draft to review it. Other, better eyes will do that next time. Fiddle Faddle 16:20, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

SKYSAWA

Hi. I was wondering what you saw in SKYSAWA that the previous two reviewers didn't? WP:NBUILDING says buildings 'require significant coverage by reliable, third-party sources to establish notability'? Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 14:16, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Well, I thought I saw that. I also work on the >50% chance of not being deleted guidance Fiddle Faddle 14:27, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
Those are enough for an AFC pass. I can't read the Polish ones. Welcome to put it up for deletion if you feel strongly. I think the community is wise enough to know one way or the other. Our job is not to review to perfection, itl;s to sort the probable from the implausible. You may disagree. Fiddle Faddle 14:38, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Third time's a Charm

@Timtrent: There's a proverb: third time's a charm; I have edited that draft according to your instructions, and submitted the draft for a "re-review" (I won't say my article, because it's already result of great teamwork :) Thank you for your replies, feedback and good will (yup, I managed to find a thank you button, too). Kind regards,

--Npudar (talk) 21:50, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

@Npudar: 👍 Now create another draft, or edit an existing page. Fiddle Faddle 21:53, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
@Timtrent: I'm not sure what to do, the current status of that draft is "Review waiting, please be patient."

--Npudar (talk) 22:04, 24 J. une 2020 (UTC)

@Npudar: It's simple. If you can improve it further (the magazine needs the page numbers, have you done that?) continue to do so. Otherwise leave it alone, be patient, and think what else you might do here. The draft will be reviewed, that I guarantee. It could be in the next few hours or the next few weeks. Reviewers have no queue, just (currently) sees weeks worth of submissions, and each of us works in different ways.
As an example, I aim for the oldest first, but they are usually old because they are hard to review, and take a time each. When I want a break I do some of the newest. Those are usually an easy accept or decline. Other reviewers, usually the newest and least experienced, start at the newest and learn how to review. And we all make mistakes. Some of us aim for a set number a day, others drop in and out when we feel like it.
What interests you? Do you feel like adding value to Wikipedia as a hobby for a while? If so there are many things to do. What about something local to you that you have seen? Is it worth an article? As an example, I created Edward Upcott because I saw a spectacular gymnast on TV and found there was no article. I walked to a beach near Newhaven and found Tide Mills, East Sussex and found nothing about it. I started the page. That led me to a load of other things, such as Chailey Heritage Marine Hospital. After I create I ignore and let others improve. Fiddle Faddle 06:47, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
@Timtrent: If clumsy ones are ever the priority, that article will be verified very soon :) I didn't find the page numbers section (when I entered reference as "journal", at the first place - there were page numbers; when I converted to "news", I didn't find fields for page numbers). You said: "After I create I ignore and let others improve." - yes, I was thinking the same when I was creating my first article: I'll make the basic structure, the foundation, and everybody is welcome to contribute... ... but I stumbled upon many obstacles along the way. Too many concepts to deal with. I guess I'm lucky you were willing to help. I even stopped thinking about inserting a screenshot, since it would be deleted very likely due to various strict copyright regulations and guidelines.

Yes, I'll continue to contribute, but in the beginning far simpler things, like changing version numbers, adding a few sentences to paragraphs, new references, etc. (I was doing that before I got the courage to create my own, I even got a "thank you"). Perhaps also to create my own page, like you did. I suppose that would be great to exercise. I like stuff related to computers, and guitars, I'll roam through those fields/topics. --Npudar (talk) 13:12, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

At {{cite news}}, scroll down and this list appears, albeit in vertical format:
{{cite news | last1 = | first1 = | author-link1 = | last2 = | first2 = | author-link2 = | last3 = | first3 = | author-link3 = | last4 = | first4 = | author-link4 = | last5 = | first5 = | author-link5 = | display-authors = | author-mask = | name-list-format = | last-author-amp = | date = | year = | orig-year = | title = | script-title = | trans-title = | url = | url-status = | format = | editor1-last = | editor1-first = | editor1-link = | editor2-last = | editor2-first = | editor2-link = | editor3-last = | editor3-first = | editor3-link = | editor4-last = | editor4-first = | editor4-link = | editor5-last = | editor5-first = | editor5-link = | display-editors = | department = | work = | type = | series = | language = | volume = | issue = | others = | edition = | location = | publisher = | publication-date = | agency = | page = | pages = | at = | nopp = | arxiv = | asin = | bibcode = | doi = | doi-broken-date = | isbn = | issn = | jfm = | jstor = | lccn = | mr = | oclc = | ol = | osti = | pmc = | pmid = | rfc = | ssrn = | zbl = | id = | archive-url = | archive-date = | access-date = | via = | lay-url = | lay-source = | lay-date = | quote = | postscript = | ref = }}
Choose the parameters you need from the entire list 👍 Fiddle Faddle 13:18, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
@Timtrent:

OK, done! :) I think it's now 100% by the book. I saw you don't like the visual editor, I think it's really neat for beginners. Thanks for your suggestions and best regards! Npudar (talk) 21:06, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

@Npudar: I am old school with my editing 🤪 I like to make real mistakes properly! 👀 Fiddle Faddle 21:12, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Request on 15:05:49, 26 June 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Hugh David Loxdale


Dear Editors,

I have created an article about Major Hugh Victor Duke (1918-1944) MC & Bar, killed during the invasion of Normandy on D-Day. One Editor who examined the draft text said that there was too much genealogy in the 'Early Life and Ancestry' section, which i think was a fair comment, so I have greatly reduced this to what I consider the bare minimum.

Another Editor said that some of the references citing Wikipedia articles were not in the right format, which I have tried to change, as below. I would be grateful if you could please kindly look at these and let me know if they are okay.

"Charles Kingsley." Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 17 October 2018. Web. 26 June 2020, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Kingsley

“Gold Beach.” Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 25 October 2016. Web. 26 June 2020, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold_Beach

“Bubbles (painting).” Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 29 Jan 2010. Web June 2020, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bubbles_(painting)

With these things done and if you the Editors are now satisfied with the contents and length of the article, then hopefully it will be deemed acceptable for publication online. I have duly cited every statement I can as per instructed.

I have removed any reference to living persons except for Hugh Duke's original fiancee Jane, who is still alive and re-married, age 94.

Thank you for your help in this matter.

Best wishes,


Hugh Loxdale

Hugh David Loxdale (talk) 15:05, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Hugh David Loxdale (talk) 15:05, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

@Hugh David Loxdale: Which of the two articles have you selected as the one to take forwards?
Once you decide please submit the one and BLANK the other Fiddle Faddle 15:11, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Wikitia

@Timtrent: Hi, me again :) I'm totally confused, as I've just found the Gig Performer article on this site called Wikitia.

https://wikitia.com/wiki/Gig_Performer

Is this web site affiliated in any way with Wikipedia? It seems to me that it is a bogus web site, because it has copied an old unverified draft. Npudar (talk) 22:41, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

@Npudar: Many sites scrape content from Wikipedia. It's fine, normal, lawful, expected, and to be ignored. Fiddle Faddle 06:52, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

help i have no experience

Thanks for your advice and directions, is everything good now or not? and What can I do also? --Mohamed Omar 3 (talk) 16:24, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

  • @Mohamed Omar 3: Now you wait for a decent interval to allow Chris troutman to respond to you. It is likely that will be on his talk page. He may be away, or doing anything at all. He also has a free choice not to respond. I'm afraid I can give no more advice. I cannot read the references so have no comment to make on them. Fiddle Faddle 17:45, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

Fiddle Okay, Thank you very much, sure Chris troutman He has a free choice. Thanks a lot. --Mohamed Omar 3 (talk) 17:54, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, you declined my submission for Draft:Trading-at-Settlement for copyright violations. Is there a tool I can use to look at copyright violations? I will often copy text from an article into the editor, and then change the text as I proceed through the page, but sometimes I forget about them. Is there a tool to look for identical sentences?

And now that I'm looking at the copyright violation box again, it seems that "closely paraphrased" text is also not allowed. What is the standard for being too closely paraphrased? Can you point out where that is the case in the above article? Eric.c.zhang (talk) 16:38, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

@Eric.c.zhang: in my left margin I have near or ays the bottom "CVDetector (1)". I looked for it in preferences>gadgets and could not find it. Many editors have it. It may even be standard. It picks up https://copyvios.toolforge.org I have no idea how I gained access to it. Asking at, eg the Teahouse may help. Fiddle Faddle 16:45, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

What’s your problem?

Hi there. I see you have reported me for some problem you have with my user name. I was hoping you could explain exactly what you find to be so offensive about it? Many thanks. Cumpchunt (talk) 23:04, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

EuroGeoSurveys

Dear Timtrent,

Thank you for reviewing the draft I submitted more times. I am writing you concerning the declaration needed to demonstrate that I am payed from EuroGeoSurveys to submit an article. Moreover, I would like to know what kind of formal and verified references are needed, since I have also added one about the EU transparency register. Regards, Erika — Preceding unsigned comment added by Erika.maugeri (talk • contribs) 14:45, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Tagging of User:Amyamychan1130/sandbox

I recently removed a speedy delete tag that you had placed on User:Amyamychan1130/sandbox. I do not think that User:Amyamychan1130/sandbox fits any of the speedy deletion criteria  because Seems to be just editing practice, not an article draft, but not webhosting either. If you wish, you may try using the simple proposed deletion (PROD) process, or the full articles for deletion (AfD) process, instead. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 19:24, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

DESiegel, i really don't mind not being notified when you do this, you know. I've removed the submission for review at WP:AFC and the editor may do what they wish with it. Fiddle Faddle 19:27, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
If you would prefer not to get such notifications from me I won't send them. I don't think I need to inform you about the CSDs in general so it is just about my specific action. I send such notices routinely when i decline a speedy, but I don't have to. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 19:32, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
DESiegel, it depends what is simplest for you, really. CSD is a fire and forget thing. It is either agreed with or not, and each outcome is fine. I genuinely don't mind either way, to be notified or not. 🌷 Fiddle Faddle 19:36, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Witold_Wnuk-impresario

I have made the suggested changes to the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Witold_Wnuk-impresario

Madamegrochovitz (talk) 00:15, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Madamegrochovitz, I have resubmitted the draft on your behalf. I try not to review a draft a second time Fiddle Faddle 05:53, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Request on 23:31:54, 2 July 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Exsap



Exsap (talk) 23:31, 2 July 2020 (UTC)


I need assistance with the referencing my Draft, I filled in as many areas that I can but i am left with red areas that i cannot remove or amend

I have referenced my Draft from Belgium Government Defence site, a (Nl/Fr/En)Belgium veterans Paracommando site as well as Belgium Artillery and Medical Component sites

I have viewed the Wiki Reference Video and followed it to the letter but there are somethings when translating to English that are coming out red

I need assistance with the referencing my Draft, I filled in as many areas that I can but i am left with red areas that i cannot remove or amend

I have referenced my Draft from Belgium Government Defence site, a (Nl/Fr/En)Belgium veterans Explosive Removal and Destruction Service =Bedo.be site

I have viewed the Wiki Reference Video and followed it to the letter but there are somethings when translating to English that are coming out red

I think you are being unfair in not publishing my Draft I have followed all the requirements, I have provided all my reference material. and it is all my own work, written to best of my belief in a encyclopedia format. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Exsap (talk • contribs) 23:42, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Exsap, I have corrected the first of the references as an example for you. I don't mind at all doing one.
Your first one was
{{cite web |website=www.paracommando.com |accessdate=15 May 2020 |archiveurl=www.paracommando.com |language=NL and Fr}}
Compare that with the corrections, below.
{{cite web |url=http://www.paracommando.com/news.php |accessdate=15 May 2020 |title=Regiment Para-Commando: Para, Commando en Paracommando's Para Cdo |language=NL and Fr |publisher=paracommando.com}}
Reading {{cite web}} for the correct parameters will help you.
You miss the point when you suggest I am being unfair. What I think you mean is that you wish I'd corrected your errors for you. That won't happen because you will not learn from it. Instead I am showing you how to correct your own errors. Also, the error messages have individual help links which describe what is incorrect, and show you how to correct them.
We do not accept draft with errors in.
As for your telling me I have been unfair, that did not endear you to me. Instead of offering help I very nearly chose to ignore you. Instead I decided that you simply had not investigated far enough, and chose to show you what to do
Our role as reviewers is to seek to ensure that an article will not immediately be subject to one of our deletion processes when it is accepted. That is why we push it back to the author. We want to accept articles.
I try very hard not to review drafts a second time, and will not be re-rebviewing this one. Please correct the rest of your errors and resubmit for review. Fiddle Faddle 06:08, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Pedro Sauer

Hello there. You recently declined my article for creation Draft:Pedro Sauer. I understand and accept the feedback that you gave and I am looking to try and improve the article's sources in order to better it's chances of being approved next time around. In line with your feedback I removed sources that were not independent of the person this article is about and am going to replace them. That being said, are there any other sources or claims made in the article in it's current state that would make it likely to be rejected again? Having read the links you left in your comment, I still think it would be valuable to get the opinion of someone who reviews articles and I would greatly appreciate any feedback you can give. Asm20 (talk) 22:28, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

@Asm20: WP:ATHLETE will give you more useful pointers. I try very hard not to re-review drafts I've declined because other eyes are usually better than mine once I've seen a draft once. A pointer is that the Notable Students segment adds nothing, unless he trained a particular student to a particular and exceptional level, and that his training of that student is reported in WP:RS. You see, notability is not inherited from someone else. It is his training that is notable, not, normally, the person he trained. The reason I'm basing on about this is that this section will put the next reviewer off (0.9 probability).
A concept that has always helped me build articles is to start from the referencing. I look for references before writing a single word. I marshall the facts from those references that I can put in the article, and then write the draft based around those facts. Often a new editor does the reverse and writes the article and then seeks references for the facts, but less is genuinely more.
I've tried to encapsulate what I usually succeed in doing in User:Timtrent/A good article which folk have found useful
I think it likely that Sauer is sufficiently notable for inclusion, especially once you excise anything that might be awkward to accept. So look at facts facts, facts.
Our role as reviewers is to seek to ensure that an article will not immediately be subject to one of our deletion processes when it is accepted. That is why we push it back to the author. We want to accept articles. Fiddle Faddle 07:26, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
@Timtrent: My apologies for the late reply. Thank you for the advice. It is nice to see that you agree that it's likely Sauer is notable enough to be included, and your feedback especially as it pertains to the notable students section is something I did not know before and will work to improve in the article. Thanks for your time! Asm20 (talk) 18:01, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
Asm20, it was a total pleasure. Writing biographies is very hard, a difficult skill indeed. As for lateness in reply, there is never a deadline, even for talk pages. I hope you manage to get the draft over the line. Fiddle Faddle 18:07, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
Timtrent as do I. I appreciate the help. Asm20 (talk) 18:43, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Articles for creation: Net-25 tower

Hello, question for you regarding the above article. I assume that it was the second reference which was provided that was seen to be a self published source and I respect the decision to decline the article based on that. However I believe the article should still be published based on the information provided by the first reference, which is most relevant to the article with the data that the second source provided being omitted. The source that I am referring to is Emporis, a third party in relation to the matter at hand. To quote wikipedia's own entry on it; "Emporis offers a variety of information on its public database, Emporis.com, located at www.emporis.com.[4] Emporis is frequently cited by various media sources as an authority on building data". There are hundreds of articles on wikipedia that use Emporis as a source and so I would like to recreate the article based on that, I will wait to hear back from you before doing so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LayfonCSR (talk • contribs) 21:58, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

@LayfonCSR: Emporis provides a simple factcheck - the tower exists. It is also a passing mention, not significant coverage, I'm afraid. Another reviewer may have a different opinion.
Please don't forget to sign messages on talk pages with ~~~~ Fiddle Faddle 21:08, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
@Timtrent:Generally lattice towers by their very nature don't have significant coverage, many don't see or understand their use or purpose. They are however amongst the tallest structures in a city. The Net-25 tower in particular is not only the tallest structure in Quezon City, it's currently the tallest structure in the Philippines. I would strongly argue that regardless of whether or not there is significant coverage of it - though from my understanding there is more significant coverage of it just not in english - the fact that the tower exists and that it is that tallest man made structure in an entire country merits an article of it's own. After all hundreds of other structures of far less statue and equal coverage have articles about them often times using emporis.com, skyscrapercenter.com, skyscraperpage.com as their sole source.LayfonCSR (talk) 17:46, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
LayfonCSR, I reviewed your draft. As with all reviews it is an opinion. You offered it for review because, presumably, you wanted one or more opinions. I have reasonable experience at reviewing drafts, and I am not always correct
I see you have now created an article. Good. I imagine it will either survive or not. That is also good. There really is no point in lecturing me on lattice towers. I wasn't interested in them when I reviewed your draft. I was interested in the referencing and the quality of the article. I suggest you nominate your old, dead draft for deletion. Fiddle Faddle 18:04, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
Fair enough and done. Only thing is I did not offer it for review I'm not sure as to how it ended up there, but in any case it's good to know more about how things work.LayfonCSR (talk) 00:09, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
LayfonCSR, People other than the creating editor sometimes take it on themselves to submit drafts for review. I can never work out why. The world of Wikipedia can be bizarre.
When those of us who review articles at WP:AFC look at them it is rare indeed that the topic is one where our interests coincide. What we review against is the criterion expressed simply as "Do we believe, looking at all aspects of the draft, that this will stand a better than 50% chance of surviving an immediate deletion process?" When we are in doubt we push articles back for work to seek to exceed that 50%.
Thank you for having a strong interest in what is, for me, an arcane topic. Without editors like you Wikipedia would be less useful. Keep up the work and never become discouraged Fiddle Faddle 06:15, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Draft Explosive Removal and Destruction Service (DOVO-SEDEE)

Thank you for your assistance, I have re referenced and edited my Draft ready for your review. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Exsap (talk • contribs) 06:16, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Exsap, thank you for your extra work in the draft. Please don't forget to link to articles and drafts you would like other editors to see. Some of us ignore messages with no links, others can be quite brisk in replies, forgetting that people need time to learn.
I try very hard not to offer second reviews of drafts unless I see an immediate and obvious reason to accept them. My opinion of this one is that you are still not understanding the following terms:
This means that, in my view, it would face an immediate deletion process where I to accept it. Our role as reviewers is to seek to ensure that an article will not immediately be subject to one of our deletion processes when it is accepted. That is why we push it back to the author. We want to accept articles.
We are asked to accept drafts when we believe they have a better than 50% chance of surviving the deletion process. With the single reference that you have for the huge number of facts you have in your draft I feel it very unlikely that even 50% chance of survival exists.
Your drafts is interesting. It's also useful, but that does not mean it would remain when it has no sources in any substantive manner.
Please accept this as my private review. If I add this as a public review it may prejudice the next reviewer against accepting your draft, even after more work. Fiddle Faddle 06:31, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Shuvro

Are you Bangladeshi? Yes or no, please help me fix the 'Shuvro' article. Shuvro is an epitome of perfection in Bangladeshi literature. The character, Shuvro was created by legendary novelist, director, screenwriter, songwriter, scholar and lecturer Humayun Ahmed. This character is a very important character of Bangla literature, please help me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ‎ Suborno Sabbir 17:05, 4 July 2020 (talk • contribs)

@Suborno Sabbir: I am not Bangladeshi. I have an interest in good referencing and good quality articles. I review drafts for WP:AFC. I have helped you already, by telling you what is required and by giving you an example of how to do it. I have also added the alternative (correct?) spelling of the characters name
The problem you face is that you have jumped straight into an article, not stayed with a draft. I am unable to find more sources. If I could find them and felt them to be useful then I would have added them already. Fiddle Faddle 16:09, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Barkercoder

Thank you for your glowing appraisal and acceptance of my first article. With help from some experienced editors the article has moved on a lot and I now appreciate the difference in style and the clean up that was necessary. I have also editing it myself which I found exciting, challenging at times but very interesting. Having researched the subject on Wiki I now understand the work my father did far better from the technical side. I read your comment above saying "you try very hard never to review a second time". However I'm hoping you will appreciate the big difference between my first attempt and the current version if you do. The article is very different having had a significant clean up. Please take a look to see whether the ! WP:MOS is still relevant. If it is any feed back as to what is needed would be appreciated.

I have a minor question regarding (undo I thank) on the history page. It is nice to thank editors for making changes. Am I write in thinking this is instigated automatically by pressing the I 'thank' link. A message then appears publicly send thanks. This puts me off as I don't know why it should be made public. Do people use it and what does it do? Windswept (talk) 19:03, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Barkercoder, I just thanked you using the link. So I guess that is what it does. I'll have a look at the article. the fun thing is it started as 'yours' when it was a draft. Now, and as soon as it went live, it became 'ours'. Now I have no more control over its destiny than do you.
I won't look as a review. I will look as one taking a look. Back in a bit Fiddle Faddle 21:11, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Barkercoder, It is substantially more succinct and less like a familial pæn of praise. That means it does the subject of the article better justice. We see, now, that he was respected. Before we saw he was loved. Love is fine, but comes form a small group. Respect comes to us from a wider group.
Tough to be able to write dispassionately about a family member.
Now, be the article's father. Be pleased to watch it grow, graze its knees, come home a little bloody. Do not be tyts mother and wrap it in warm towels. Or, to put it another way, stand aside and become a spectator.
I wrote this essay some time ago. Keep the broad principles in your mind and create articles where we have none, improve articles that need improvement. I found out about suffragettes and suffragists by visiting Newhaven and finding the village of Tide Mills, which led me to The HGuild of the Poor Brave Things (ghastly title), and a whole stream of articles Fiddle Faddle 21:20, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

References added Draft:Napoleon Wal Mahrousa

Thanks, references have been added, please take another look Draft:Napoleon Wal Mahrousa --John Adam é (talk) 12:39, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

John Adam é, I try very hard never too review a second time, but I can tell it looks like a substantial improvement. I am unable to read the references I am afraid, but we have reviewers who can. You can also search for a suitable Wikiproject and ask for a speaker.reader to assess the references and the draft. Fiddle Faddle 12:52, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Timtrent, Okay, you can see also Napoleon Wal Mahroussa 2012 and Napoleon Wal Mahrousa on Google --John Adam é (talk) 13:23, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Timtrent, Draft:Sherif Salama Review Please! --John Adam é (talk) 12:27, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
John Adam é, Your draft is submitted for review. Let us await its reaching a reviewer's attention. Please don't forget to sign talk page messages Fiddle Faddle 11:58, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Timtrent, Another draft Draft:Sherif Salama --John Adam é (talk) 12:29, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
John Adam é, it will be reviewed in due course by someone, John Fiddle Faddle 13:21, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

REGARDING CONTINUOS VANDALISM OF BIOGRAPHY ARTICLES BY USER NAMED "NitinMlk" TO SUPPORT HIS OWN PARTICULAR CASTE

Dear Wikipedia admins Fiddle,a user named NitinMlk, is targeting BLP pages in name of caste factor continuously.He belongs to a particular caste Jat himself and is trying to spoil all genuine history articles in name of editing. His pattern of spoiling articles is uniform and always targetted against BLP of particular caste.Almost all times he doesn't even read the references provided and simply modified all articles mentioning his particular caste.Respected,admins I urge to monitor and protect Wikipedia from casteist and racist people, so that it remains an independent platform where good referenced material can be kept.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.255.238.114 (talk) 21:34, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

I have no interest in this message. If you feel that this has happened please report it to WP:ANI. I am not an admin, nor will I ever be an admin. Fiddle Faddle 21:39, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Colleen davis changes

Why did you unset the changes I made to colleen Davis? She is my wife and I know her real birthday and name. Colleen carroll davis isn't her real name and her birthday is jan 16, 1980. Carroll is her maiden name and no longer part of her legal name. Cyberant76 (talk) 19:05, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Cyberant76, Wikipedia is a peculiar place. It is concerned with verifiable facts, see WP:V, in reliable sources, see WP:RS. So, while I am certain you are correct, the changes cannot be allowed without references. Fiddle Faddle 19:07, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
Ok, I get it. Thabks Cyberant76 (talk) 19:09, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
Cyberant76, I understand how aggravating this must be for you and for her. It's the way things work here. Imagine for a moment that you are someone who wishes the lady ill, and adds something defamatory. Editors have a duty to remove that unless referenced. It's the same with simple facts, too Fiddle Faddle 19:12, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

I totally understand. Thanks and we'll provide references next time. Cyberant76 (talk) 20:18, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Cyberant76, Whatever you do please do NOT put (eg) a birth certificate in as a reference, lest it can be used for ID theft Fiddle Faddle 20:19, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Can u protect pages sir

Ruturaj Sinh Sisodia to prevent vandalism AS0070 (talk) 10:13, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

AS0070, You will need to ask an administrator to do that. I am not one Fiddle Faddle 10:14, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
Where shall I contact them sir AS0070 (talk) 10:15, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
AS0070, Try asking a question at Wikipedia:Teahouse where many of the people who patrol it and answer requests are administrators. Generally they do not protect pages unless vandalism has occurred Fiddle Faddle 10:18, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Declined AfC of Draft:Ruturaj Sinh Sisodia

Hi Timtrent, hope you're well!

An IRC user brought up their draft Draft:Ruturaj Sinh Sisodia, which you rejected because there was an article in mainspace. Ruturaj Sinh sisodia is a redirect to the self-same draft, that's currently being CSD'd. Is there another page I've missed somewhere?

Cheers! Naypta ☺ | ✉ talk page | 12:52, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Naypta, I have no idea. What I know is that this article, draft, in various spellings, has been created by a sock farm. Is the gentleman notable? Fiddle Faddle 13:03, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
Ah good. I honestly didn't check notability, only having seen what looked like a procedurally invalid AfC decline - let me look into it... possibly an SPI is due here looking a bit further up this talk page sighs thanks for the heads up! Naypta ☺ | ✉ talk page | 13:05, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
Naypta, There was a main namespace article there where I declined it saying so 👀🤪 I wonder what happened to it afterwards. I'll go and look.
If you scroll up ^^^^ you will see a section "Can u protect pages sir" which refers to one of the incarnations of the article, draft etc. You might also look at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Imrutu. Fiddle Faddle 13:10, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
Yeah, I've just filed there as well... It'd be lovely if they wouldn't do this. Naypta ☺ | ✉ talk page | 13:11, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
Naypta, this diff explains it. Fiddle Faddle 13:12, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
Naypta, I asked at the Cricket Wikiproject for eyes on the main space article to check for notability. With this much effort the duck of not being notable quacks very loudly. Loads of different capitalisations and spellings. Maybe it's the kid's birthday present! Fiddle Faddle 13:26, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Emmeline Pethick-Lawrence -

Please note:the inputs are good contributory clarifications. The place of birth for Emmeline Pethick was NOT Bristol - it was Bristol Road, Weston-Super-Mare I have her birth certificate and her family's census form. In addition the Blue Plaque at "The Duitch House" was a ceremony I attended and her great nephew Jan Pethick did unveil the plaque which was organised by Dorking Museum. Your comment of "vandalism" is a complete disgrace.


Brian Butterly

Myself and friends will never contribute to Wikipedia again — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.224.22.216 (talk) 17:24, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

You may believe what you wish about things being a disgrace, but no-one here at Wikipedia has a clue who you are, or what you have, unless you use references. Despite your diatribe I am happy to continue to help you. While I am sure al that you say is true, we need verified facts. Fiddle Faddle 17:41, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Moving own Page to Main Article Space

Hello Trimtrent Is it okay if i move my own finished draft ( Haruna Sentongo and Ham Group ) to the main Article Space? Mark Mulwanyi (talk) 12:23, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Mark Mulwanyi I can raise no objection. You have every right to move it as you see fit. Once there any editor may edit it, change it radically, even nominate it for deletion. Fiddle Faddle 13:00, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Alright, thank you. Mark Mulwanyi (talk) 08:01, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

You should be careful of giving advice like this. Declared paid editors are required to go through edit requests or AfC and not edit mainspace on their own. Seraphimblade Talk to me 08:28, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
My apologies I had completely forgotten that this was a paid editor. MyAdvice was 100% incorrect Fiddle Faddle 09:27, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Altered speedy deletion rationale: User:Taximan2020/sandbox

Hello Timtrent. I am just letting you know that I deleted User:Taximan2020/sandbox, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided, which didn't fit the page in question. Thank you. GedUK  10:21, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Ged UK, I was torn between a couple, but couldn't seem to do both with Twinkle's choice of multiples. Thanks for the note, more power to your elbow Fiddle Faddle 10:33, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Oh, don't worry too much. I usually turn that notification off! GedUK  10:41, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Newlon - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Newlon_Housing_Trust

Hi

As per your request, I've edited to add a significant number of additional references for each fact stated - including more varied sources and types of sources. I've also removed links directly to their own site as references to facts stated, and replaced with links to alternative sources.

The full references now include The Guardian, Charity Commission, Care place, various local newspapers, Camden Council, mutuals register, a book about the area and housing focused websites/papers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Newlon_Housing_Trust — Preceding unsigned comment added by LondonKHH (talk • contribs) 14:35, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

LondonKHH, I've given it a brief look. The main thing is that you have improved it for everyone, not for me. It looks to me likely to be accepted. I suggest you submit it for review, and even then continue to look at enhancing it. Look especially where you have more than two references for a single fact.
If reviewing it today I'd put the following comment on it: "Please look at (these areas) as they are examples of WP:CITEKILL. Instead we need one excellent reference per fact asserted. If you are sure it is beneficial, two, and at an absolute maximum, three. A fact you assert once verified in a reliable source, is verified. More is gilding the lily. Please choose the very best in each case of multiple referencing for a single point and either drop or repurpose the remainder."
Even so I think it passes muster. In fact I've submitted and accepted iyt for you (in a few moments) Fiddle Faddle 14:44, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Polo Piatti

Article protection dropped, go for it. Primefac (talk) 11:16, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Primefac, Thanks. It can now take its chance. If it dies again this time let us weep no tears over it. Fiddle Faddle 11:56, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Timtrent/Archive_32&oldid=1078246261"