User talk:Vexations/Archives/ 2

My article getting rejected

Hi. You rejected my article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Delphin_(greek_god)

The comment you put was: Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Delphin (greek god) instead.We're never going to have two articles about the same subject. Sorry. However, this article doesn't exist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Galaxywing01 (talk • contribs) 17:26, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

I made a copy/paste error, sorry. I meant Amphitrite. Vexations (talk) 18:13, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Joe's Basecamp speedy deletion

Hello, the article I wrote about Joe's Basecamp was speedily deleted and I'd really like to try again... I'm happy to make any changes needed to make it less promotional and am willing to follow any advice you have. I learned about it through researching Joe Bonington after I saw the film about his father. Unfortunately my editing history shows a frustrating time trying to fix Naveen Jain's page where I was wrongly accused of being an undisclosed paid editor, so I hope that didn't influence your decision... I'm very much here to contribute constructively (I already have a full time job) and just want to spread accessible and unbiased knowledge! My time is limited due to work constraints so Joe's Basecamp felt like a project I could keep coming back to because it's a 'next big thing'. People already travel there from other continents to train so I wanted to get in first... Who can I talk to for guidance in making the page more encyclopedic please?Trufflegoblin (talk) 15:05, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Trufflegoblin I would suggest that you start by gathering sources that are independent of the subject, cover the subject in-depth and are considered reliable. Please review our notability guidelines for organizations. Ideally, those are reputable peer-reviewed journals. Of course I know full well that such high-quality source are unlikely to exist for a gym, you should look for coverage in magazines and newspapers. Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL I don't think the North face stuff is usable, because it's a form of advertising or corporate sponsorship, not independent reporting. If you have questions about editing, the WP:TEAHOUSE is a great resource. As for Jain, I'm not involved, unfamiliar with the details, etc. so that did not influence my nomination. As for the "next big thing" and "travelling to other continents", as indications of notability: That seems like to wrong approach. You might want to review Wikipedia:Notability. All the best, Vexations (talk) 15:41, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:David Ogden Stiers

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:David Ogden Stiers. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Your Request for Speedy Deletion of ShipRocked

There are any number of other music festivals (Download Festival, Memphis in May, Rock On The Range, etc) and music cruises/festivals (Holy Ship!, The Rock Boat, 70,000 Tons Of Metal, etc) listed in good standing on Wikipedia. The ShipRocked page was created to be no more than a simple, factual and historical accounting of the event's existence, history, past lineups, etc. Frankly, a number of the aforementioned pages would appear to have more promotional info/data by comparison. We have read Wikipedia's notability guideline for events, and do not see how the ShipRocked event page wouldn't qualify, especially considering it appears that other festivals, cruises and events, and the aforementioned pages do. We are open to whatever suggestions you may have to improve the page in your vision, but we respectfully request that you withdraw your request for speedy deletion. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ask4ent (talk • contribs) 04:21, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Ask4ent I'll make sure to look into promotional articles by your competitors and request their deletion too, if warranted. Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising. It is troubling that you would think it is appropriate to use such articles as an example. For the sake of clarity, the articles discussed are Download Festival, Memphis in May, Rock on the Range, Holy Ship!, The Rock Boat, 70000 Tons of Metal.

Vexations (talk) 11:08, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Hattie Bartholomay article

Thank you!

Patricia M Harris (talk) 20:04, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

Oksana Tanasiv Page

To clarify “we” - for creation of Oksana Tanasiv Page it is not used any kind of paid editors or paid contributors. Editorforart (talk) 07:02, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) But does it mean that more than one person is editing under the name "Editorforart"? PamD 17:37, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Poland

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Poland. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

Mark Wright - Wikipedia Page

Hi Vexations,

You recently removed the page I published for Mark Wright (entrepreneur). I am Mark's Public Relations Manager.

In regards to the picture I included, the photo was taken by a professional photographer (Jordan Curtis Hughes). We do have the copyright for this photo, and it is used on our own website. However, I have redrafted the page again, however have chosen not to include this picture to avoid another speedy deletion.

We were also alerted that the content in the page is "promotional". It would be great if you could let us know how this content is "promotional". We have tried to ensure it is in keeping with other Apprentice winners (see Leah Totton and Susan Ma).

My colleague will be making some edits to the page once I've put it live [improving content and formatting], however I'd like to get this live next week.

Thank you in advance for your help.

Looking forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards,

--Helenareid (talk) 16:26, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Helena Reid

Helenareid Sorry, but no. You must comply with Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure and refrain from editing articles directly where you have a conflict of interest. Make suggestions on the talk page instead and submit new articles for review via WP:AfC. For detailed information on how to manage your COI, see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. Vexations (talk) 16:56, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Hello,

In that case, I would like to suggest a new article to be written about Mark Wright (entrepreneur), to coincide with other winners.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Helenareid (talk • contribs) 17:06, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Helenareid To request an article, go to Wikipedia:Requested articles. You might want to visit Wikipedia:WikiProject The Apprentice UK to see if anyone there is interested in your client, but I believe that project is defunct. You might also want to read WP:OTHERSTUFFEXIST, which explains that the fact that we host a lot of really low-quality articles or articles about non-notable subjects doesn't mean we require more of them. The examples you should look to are "Good" or "Featured" articles. For example, we have these "featured" articles about entrepreneurs: Magic Johnson, Michael Jordan, William D. Boyce, Alan Shepard, Elwood Haynes, Madman Muntz, Lazare Ponticelli, Mark Kerry, Satoru Iwata, Derek Jeter, and these "good" articles: Asif Ali Zardari, Bill Gates, Dr. Dre, Sergey Brin, Agneta Matthes, Leo Frank, Oskar Schindler, John D. Rockefeller, Nicki Minaj, Paul Allen, Demi Lovato, Samuel Colt, Bruce Dickinson, Kakha Kaladze, Willie Nelson, Ronnie Barker, Sean Combs, Solange Knowles, Cindy McCain, Hina Rabbani Khar, Heather Mills, John Hancock, Penny Pritzker, Imelda Marcos, Rahm Emanuel, Jeffrey Pollack, Jeff Bezos, William Adam (architect), Mona Best, Paul Cornell (lawyer), Charles T. Hinde, Dan Borislow, Charles Allen Thomas, Danny Williams (politician), Charles Boycott, Evangelos Zappas, Ahmed Zayat, Charles Melville Hays, James Ludington, Michael Laucke. Vexations (talk) 17:53, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

NPR Bronze Award

		The New Page Reviewer's Bronze Award
		For over 1000 new page reviews in the last year, thank you very much for your help at New Pages Patrol! — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 00:13, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

Francesca Grilli

Hello Vexations - thank you very much for reviewing my page about Francesca Grilli. I've added the citations needed and some categories. I guess I can delete the template messages, but I want to check with you first. Thanks a lot for your help!

Alesvias (talk) 17:03, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

Alesavias  Done I removed them. Thanks for your contribution. Vexations (talk) 15:07, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

Anna Barlik

Hi Vexations It's Rey Mirj and I'm writing you about Anna Barlik's page. Thank you so much for your time. I am new in Wikipedia so I don't understand everything perfectly but I'm doing my best. I totally understood your comment on my article, so could you move it as a draft so I will work on it more and find more references?

Regards. R M Rey Mirj (talk) 20:41, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

Rey Mirj  Done The article is now at Draft:Anna_Barlik. Please let me know if I can help. Vexations (talk) 20:51, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. I will come back to you with my future questions :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rey Mirj (talk • contribs) 20:53, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

George Grie

I would like to make a general observation, if you don't mind. The objections that you make are true perhaps, however in my view the general policies WP:ARTIST that you follow are quite outdated, to say the least. The polices that could be applied to traditional form of fine art, paintings, drawings, and graphics mostly. Not to digital art. All of them would be quite relevant, let's say 20 years ago. Not anymore. How would you describe a 60-year old artist today, is it still an “emerging artist”, or it is already an “obituary”? The artist who considers ground exhibition as a waste of time due to their poor attendance. The artist who refuses participation in solo or group exhibitions and give away his art for free in the internet. Subsequently he's not mentioned in all those pompous Biennales and Galls that you are looking for. Is he a notable person or just a fool? Perhaps both. Well, you know what… I think I am ready to give up…. it is such a waste of time. Pity… All the best! Artsgrie (talk) 00:53, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Carrie Underwood

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Carrie Underwood. Legobot (talk) 04:31, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

Resilience in art

Hello,

Thank you for your intervention about resilience in art. In response, resilience in art is not the same as the Art Resilience movement, whose page has actually been removed. Both are part of the notion of Resilience which is studied in different disciplines. Here it is about art. Resilience in art was presented at the Congress "Resilience in the World of the Alive" 2016 in Marseille, France and will be presented in the "4th World Congress on Resilience" in June 2018 in Marseille, France. Best regards, AlexArago (talk) 14:14, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

Do you agree that it is original research? Vexations (talk) 14:22, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

No, it is not original research. The résilience in art will bee presented also in the 4ème Word Congrss on Resilience Best regardsAlexArago (talk) 17:09, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

References

Nicole Chesney article

Hi Vexations - thanks for your suggestion on how to improve the Nicole Chesney article. This list of collections was included in Tina Oldknow's Collecting Contemporary Glass book along with other biographical and career info on Chesney. I cited that source at the end of the paragraph - would you suggest I provide citations from each of the museums' websites if possible? Another secondary source? Thanks in advance! extabulis (talk) 14:24, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi extabulis I always like to get the information from the museum itself, because often it gives you an opportunity to see the work. It is hard enough to include reproductions of contemporary artwork in a Wikipedia article, so I think such citations are welcome. If the collections are sourced to Collecting Contemporary Glass: Art and Design After 1990, that's fine, of course. Vexations (talk) 14:48, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

Okay, thanks! I'll do that where possible. Thanks for your help! extabulis (talk) 15:55, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

Elke GERNS page

Hello, I trying to reply Vexations‘ message about my newly created page. Thank you for the advice. Wikipedia looks very complicated!! I spent hours this morning trying to figure out how to publish a page, so many symbols, all alien to me! The page wanted to be a brief biography of my mother - photographer from Germany, now deceased. Very brief, very simple, so that people can refer to, nothing biased, no ulterior motifs. She’s now deceased, it just wanted to be a very brief page to link to the Facebook page I created in her memory. I can’t soend any more time on Wikipedia trying to edit text only to have it taken fine soon after. Thank you for the advice, I think I’ll abandon the idea. Kind regards, Michela

Cocolinmichela (talk) 13:05, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Hello Cocolinmichela I'm sorry that we can't be of assistance memorializing your mother. You might find this essay helpful in finding another place to host the material. If you want to abandon the page, simply remove all text. All the best, Vexations (talk) 13:14, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Culture Trip page

Hi Vexations. I'm not an advocate I'm an SEO manager at Culture Trip. I've added the required disclosure to my userpage in what I hope is the correct format. Please let me know if there is anything else I need to do. Thanks, Webbyyy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Webbyyy (talk • contribs) 21:52, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

As a user with a WP:COI, you should not be editing the article about your employer. I mean really, what were you thinking? That we're the Yellow Pages? Vexations (talk) 22:04, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

I created this page yesterday as the previous version no longer existed. If not an employee then who is best to create these kind of pages? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Webbyyy (talk • contribs) 08:50, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Thanks for reviewing Culture Trip, Vexations.

Unfortunately Anarchyte has just gone over this page again and unreviewed it. Their note is:

I've declined the G4 speedy request. It may be smart to have another look or to have someone else take a look. The article is not identical to the AfD deleted one.

To reply, leave a comment on Anarchyte's talk page.

Anarchyte (work | talk) 10:33, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

@Largoplazo: You might be interested in this too. The discussion above does not instill me with hope, and I suggest going the route of AfD if you wish to seek deletion (and consensus might be there to just G11 it). Anarchyte (work | talk) 10:36, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

@Anarchyte:Thanks for the heads-up. Fair enough: G4 is always a blind nomination for us non-admins. I reserve it for cases where it looks like the article could still be materially the same as the one described by the old AFD based on the details and defects it sets forth. I see that Webbyyy did replace the inappropriate sources. One of the new ones has me scratching my head because the website is PhocusWire, and any website with "wire" in its name makes me think it's a bulletin board for press releases, but it isn't clear that this site is one of those. It is refreshing to see Webbyyy take my comments about the original sources to heart. I still don't see anything promotional about it, other than, possibly, the creator's intent in creating it, but that isn't what G11 refers to, that's a COI issue. Largoplazo (talk) 10:46, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Anarchyte Funny how that worked. I sent it to AfD with the Page Curation Tool, but that didn't work. See [1]. I think Largoplazo then tried to fix that botched AfD nom. (tx!) Page Curation has some issues with repeat AfDs it seems. This isn't the first time. I'll try again, with Twinkle this time. Vexations (talk) 10:50, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Ah, that explains it—a bug. I was surprised that you'd be putting up the tag manually. Yeah, I use Twinkle (I tried Page Curation for a while, didn't much care for it!) for deletions. Largoplazo (talk) 10:53, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Lesley Heller and Foley Gallery

I live in the Lower East Side of NY and am in the art world. I want to write about lower east side galleries and contribute to the lack of pages with them, because artists have pages. My pages are getting flagged.. am I using wikipedia wrong? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Juniordealer (talk • contribs) 19:55, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Hello Juniordealer Reviewers like myself look for clues to identify undisclosed paid editors and editors with a conflict of interest. Sometimes we make mistakes. If I made a mistake, my apologies. If you placed a notice on your user page that explains what you just told me, that would put your contributions in a context that makes them easier to assess. Or you could use what I use, User:Vexations/COI as an example. I flagged Foley gallery for two things, a likely CoI and notability. I'll remove the CoI tag. Articles about businesses need to meet our notability guidelines, WP:NCORP and I think (but I have not yet tried to find more sources) that Foley gallery does not do that. When you linked to Foley Gallery in Polixeni Papapetrou, you did exactly what we look for, create links between articles. Thanks. I don't see that anyone has commented on Lesley heller (which I'd move to Lesley Heller Gallery) yet, but I think that you'll need better sources than [2] and [3]. You may be interested in joining Wikipedia:WikiProject Visual arts. All the best, Vexations (talk) 20:27, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. I am new, so I apologize! I am just getting started and would enjoy helping out in the future. My plan was to expand from my area of NYC out. I noticed the only galleries up were the big ones like Gagosian and Zwirner and I aim to expand on contemporary art. I want to confirm working in contemporary art, but not FOR or even WITH these galleries is not a conflict of interest? Juniordealer (talk) 20:44, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Juniordealer Any Conflict of Interest can be managed. You don't have to say who you are. Nor do you have to disclose where you work, unless you get paid. If you have a relationship to a subject, you ought to be clear about that. We're trying to maintain a neutral point of view and people tend to find that difficult when writing about themselves, their fiends, clients or employers. Merely being a part of the artworld is not a CoI. I mean, just because I met Jeff Koons at a party once (true!) doesn't mean that I can't write about him. Check out the WP:TEAHOUSE if you have questions about editing. If you want to discuss what galleries are notable and why, I'm more than happy to help with that. It's a difficult subject to tackle. I'd try to find an angle that makes clear that a gallery has played a role in a change in art that is somehow important. Castelli was mattered because he gave artists like Serra their first shows, for example. We just summarize what secondary sources say, of course, so especially for newer galleries, it may be difficult to find such sources. Good luck. Vexations (talk) 21:09, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Thank you! Bravo. You have made it all so clear. I began with Foley as I live near them, and the recent death of Polixeni Papapetrou refreshed my memory to her work there years ago. I added additional citations and will aim to tackle one gallery a week. This is fun! Thank you for your hard work and keeping it neutral. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Juniordealer (talk • contribs) 21:14, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Aromanticism

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Aromanticism. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

Thanks so much for the speedy reply at the Teahouse! ⇒ Lucie Person (talk) 21:29, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

Improvement article Airco Caravan

Hi Vexations! Thanks for your feedback on the article about Airco Caravan. I improved it and before removing the notification on the page, I would like to ask you if you could check it, if you have the time. Thank you in advance! Chantal Goddery (talk) 19:35, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Slavic spirits

Thank you for your interest shown for articles about Slavic spirits. I have been trying to sketch a way to put an order into all those small, badly written, and totally unsourced articles. I invite you to take part in the discussions which are unfolding here.--Eckhardt Etheling (talk) 13:19, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Sarah Paulson

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Sarah Paulson. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Invasion of Privacy (album)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Invasion of Privacy (album). Legobot (talk) 04:26, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Carrie Underwood

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Carrie Underwood. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Music

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Music. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Record charts

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Record charts. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Event coordinator

Hi, the English Wikipedia recently created a new user permission for editors involved in off-wiki outreach work, event coordinator. This new permission allows users to mark accounts for confirmed for up to 10 days, and also allows them to create accounts for events without rate limits without some of the features of the account creator right that aren't used at edit-a-thons and other events. I have added the event coordinator permission to your account and removed the account creator permission, as you appear to have been using it mainly for outreach work.

This should have no noticeable impact on your ability to create accounts, and will give you the extra ability to temporarily confirm accounts if you need to. For more information, you can see the information page on the right, or you can ask me if you have any questions. TonyBallioni (talk) 18:32, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Sara Facio redirect?

Hi @Vexations:, I am in the process of cleaning up the page Wikipedia:Meetup/ArtAndFeminism/Stubs. I am clearing out some articles that are no longer stubs. I am keeping a record of the removed artists on the talk page. My request of you is for your assistance on the Sara Facio page. I believe it erroniously redirects to her partner's page María Elena Walsh. I think it should be a redlink rather than a redirect. Do you agree? And if so can you make the redirect go away? Best, WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 00:44, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Hello WomenArtistUpdates I think that it is better to have some information about Sara Facio on page about María Elena Walsh than to have nothing at all. If you have sources that can sustain a full article about Facio, the way to make the redirect go away is to write the article. Note that the page history shows that it was not always a redirect. In fact, it started as an article. It was made a redirect here. To make it a redlink would require that we delete the existing page. I don't think that's an option. Perhaps the Spanish version of the article is helpful in re-creating the article? Vexations (talk) 00:58, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the prompt response and clarification @Vexations:! I will put her name on my list to see if I can make a page, also I will read through the Spanish article. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 01:06, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.11 25 May 2018

Hello Vexations/Archives, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

ACTRIAL:

• WP:ACREQ has been implemented. The flow at the feed has dropped back to the levels during the trial. However, the backlog is on the rise again so please consider reviewing a few extra articles each day; a backlog approaching 5,000 is still far too high. An effort is also needed to ensure that older unsuitable older pages at the back of the queue do not get automatically indexed for Google.

Deletion tags

• Do bear in mind that articles in the feed showing the trash can icon may have been tagged by inexperienced or non NPR rights holders. They require your further verification.

Backlog drive:

• A backlog drive will take place from 10 through 20 June. Check out our talk page at WT:NPR for more details. NOTE: It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing. Despite our goal of reducing the backlog as much as possible, please do not rush while reviewing.

Editathons

• There will be a large increase in the number of editathons in June. Please be gentle with new pages that obviously come from good faith participants, especially articles from developing economies and ones about female subjects. Consider using the 'move to draft' tool rather than bluntly tagging articles that may have potential but which cannot yet reside in mainspace.

Paid editing - new policy

• Now that ACTRIAL is ACREQ, please be sure to look for tell-tale signs of undisclosed paid editing. Contact the creator if appropriate, and submit the issue to WP:COIN if necessary. There is a new global WMF policy that requires paid editors to connect to their adverts.

Subject-specific notability guidelines

• The box at the right contains each of the subject-specific notability guidelines, please review any that are relevant BEFORE nominating an article for deletion.
• Reviewers are requested to familiarise themselves with the new version of the notability guidelines for organisations and companies.

Not English

• A common issue: Pages not in English or poor, unattributed machine translations should not reside in main space even if they are stubs. Please ensure you are familiar with WP:NPPNE. Check in Google for the language and content, tag as required, then move to draft if they do have potential.

News

• Development is underway by the WMF on upgrades to the New Pages Feed, in particular ORES features that will help to identify COPYVIOs, and more granular options for selecting articles to review.
• The next issue of The Signpost has been published. The newspaper is one of the best ways to stay up to date with news and new developments. between our newsletters.

---

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:34, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Thank you very much

The RfC discussion to eliminate portals was closed May 12, with the statement "There exists a strong consensus against deleting or even deprecating portals at this time." This was made possible because you and others came to the rescue. Thank you for speaking up.

By the way, the current issue of the Signpost features an article with interviews about the RfC and the Portals WikiProject.

I'd also like to let you know that the Portals WikiProject is working hard to make sure your support of portals was not in vain. Toward that end, we have been working diligently to innovate portals, while building, updating, upgrading, and maintaining them. The project has grown to 80 members so far, and has become a beehive of activity.

Our two main goals at this time are to automate portals (in terms of refreshing, rotating, and selecting content), and to develop a one-page model in order to make obsolete and eliminate most of the 150,000 subpages from the portal namespace by migrating their functions to the portal base pages, using technologies such as selective transclusion. Please feel free to join in on any of the many threads of development at the WikiProject's talk page, or just stop by to see how we are doing. If you have any questions about portals or portal development, that is the best place to ask them.

If you would like to keep abreast of developments on portals, keep in mind that the project's members receive updates on their talk pages. The updates are also posted here, for your convenience.

Again, we can't thank you enough for your support of portals, and we hope to make you proud of your decision. Sincerely,    — The Transhumanist   07:01, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

P.S.: if you reply to this message, please {{ping}} me. Thank you. -TT

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Songs

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Songs. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Angela Behelle (novelist)

Hello Vexations. Thanks a lot for the article Angela Behelle (novelist). On the French wiki, I have enough contributions to create articles directly but not on the English wiki. That's why I made the mistake of turning drafts into an article for Angela Behelle and La Société (novel series)that a contributor converted back into Draft:La Société (novel series) (2). Here I learn every day. Thanks again ! Théodore Roux (talk) 07:03, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Star Wars: The Last Jedi

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Star Wars: The Last Jedi. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

Please re-review the tag you placed on an article

Hi https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mike_Omotosho&action=edit&redlink=1

I created that article, how can I edit it to make it look less promotional?

Because the person is a notable person.

Ladispeaks (talk) 09:04, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

Alice Marian Ellen Bale

Hi @Vexations:. Would you be able to work your magic on the article Alice Marion Ellen Bale. Her name is actually MariAn. Let me know if you would prefer I take this to the Teahouse. Thanks! WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 17:42, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Hello WomenArtistUpdates, I'm happy to help. Was there anything in particular that needed attention? Vexations (talk) 23:04, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the prompt response @Vexations:. The name of the article needs to be changed to Alice Marian Ellen Bale. Then we need to make a redirect from Alice Marion Ellen Bale to the correctly titled page.WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 23:16, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

WomenArtistUpdates  Done Vexations (talk) 23:21, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Ah... Thanks! @Vexations: :) WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 15:44, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

My sincere apologies @Vexations: and @WomenArtistUpdates: to both of you for putting you to this trouble and for handling a silly mistake so graciously...I am very embarrassed to realise that in creating the page Alice Marian Ellen Bale I should have double-checked the spelling of her name! The experience will make me much more careful! Jamesmcardle^(talk) 03:06, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Reversion of Original Research on Feminist urbanism

Hello User:Vexations, I have undone the reversion of my edit removing a specific line that contains original research on the article Feminist urbanism. The sentence includes a citation to a research paper that included a quote by the research author. This source does not necessarily represent a WP:mainstream view. The sentence was written as a quote, which was an WP:OPINION by the author of what the research in the academic area of feminism as applied to the theory of urbanism does. Per the WP:FORUM within WP:ISNOT this is promotional content as it supports a specific feminist point of view. While that is noted, it is my position that the sentence would be improved if it were framed to reference an encyclopedic summary of the content rather then the author's specific point of view. Randomeditor1000 (talk) 15:24, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

Randomeditor1000} Just to clarify why I reverted you: I considered your use of the term "original research" sufficiently different from how it is defined in WP:OR to be out of line with consensus. I think it might have been better to follow WP:BRD and take it to the talk page before undoing my edit, but I can live it. We should try to find consensus at Talk:Feminist urbanism. I'll see you there. Vexations (talk) 20:52, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Tom Dixon (industrial designer)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Tom Dixon (industrial designer). Legobot (talk) 04:26, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Cheikh Anta Diop : Rebirth, clarity on article creation

Hello @Vexations:, saw your note. Will shed some light and no probs. Will need more time to develop the content of the article. Sources that it lacked several years back have now surfaced making its standing more credible. Please remove/replace speedy deletion tag. Thanks. Eightnisan 21:51, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

Eightnisan The deletion discussion closed on 18 May 2017, not "several years back". If you have sources, use them. If you need more time, I'll move that article to Draft space for you. Vexations (talk) 22:12, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

Sure @Vexations:, go ahead and move it. Eightnisan 22:14, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

AfD Nomination of Matt Whitman

Hi, I have undone your edit for the nomination because you had clubbed it along with the old discussion. As it would be a 2nd nomination, please follow the instructions at WP:AFDHOW. Thanks, MT Train^Talk 04:36, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

Sorry about that, Mark the train. The page curation tool WP:NPP uses doesn't handle repeat AfDs. I knew that and should not have used it to nominate Matt Whitman. Vexations (talk) 13:32, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

Algorithmic entities not in given citation

Hi User:Vexations, thank you for reviewing and editing. Citation 1 established the case for Algorithmic Entities being bonafide (nonhuman) legal entities. Citation 5 discusses that EU motion "Creating a specific legal status for robots in the long run, so that at least the most sophisticated autonomous robots could be established as having the status of electronic persons responsible for making good any damage they may cause, and possibly applying electronic personality to cases where robots make autonomous decisions or otherwise interact with third parties independently"; the article specifically illustrates the notion with the "2015, an A.I.-powered Twitter bot" which is clearly an Algorithmic Entity.

I am not sure how to interpret your 'not given in citation' marking. I appreciate your insights and improvements here as this is becoming a global social and technical issue.Emoritz2017 (talk) 12:52, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello Emoritz2017 It's not that I don't think that Algorithmic Entities don't exist, or are being discussed. I didn't think the summary of what the source said was accurate. I'll respond in more detail on the talk page. Talk:Algorithmic entities Vexations (talk) 13:51, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

Vigilius of Thapsus

Hi Vexations, I saw your question up at rfa. Was the Vigilius of Thapsus article recreated? scope_creep (talk) 09:42, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

I don't think so. Here's what I know:

• 2018-05-02T04:09:55 Yamaplos created Vigilius of Thapsus (his third new article) [4]
• 2018-05-02T05:07:00 TheSandDoctor marked it patrolled [5]
• 2018-05-02T05:07:01‎ TheSandDoctor nominated it for deletion [6].
• 2018-05-02T06:33:25 LaundryPizza03 nominated it for speedy deletion [7]
• 2018-05-02T06:47:07 Cryptic deleted the article [8]
• 2018-05-02T11:28:43‎ Mark the train closed the AfD [9] as speedy delete

Vexations (talk) 13:14, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

I don't mean to step on anyone's toes here (and I'm sorry if I am, Vexations, scope_creep), but I do have a draft of an article about Vigilius of Thapsus in my sandbox. If you'd like, I'm more than willing to polish it a bit more and push it out as a Draft within 24 hours, if that might help. Thank you! —Javert2113 (Let's chat!) 15:38, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Excellent, why not. Not a lot known about him, but definitely an established figure, and notable. I dont think WP:BEFORE was done, and there is more than a few refs. I can review it as well, if you want. scope_creep (talk) 15:55, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Oh, goodness, I forgot to link it. (Also, the floruit dates are off.) Here. —Javert2113 (Let's chat!) 16:02, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

I started a draft ss well, User:Vexations/drafts/Vigilius of Thapsus it needs work, but feel free to plunder it. Vexations (talk) 17:48, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Something tells me your draft is far better than mine, Vexations. I think yours should be the main article. (I'm particularly impressed with the exposition of the dialog. Wonderful work!) —Javert2113 (Let's chat!) 18:10, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Rey (Star Wars)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Rey (Star Wars). Legobot (talk) 04:28, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Just wanted to apologize for accidentally tagging one of your draft pages (the one on Vigilius Tapsensis, naturally) for speedy deletion. That was a mistake on my part; I thought I was deleting my own draft of it.

Again, sorry. I think I'll just go to bed now.

—Javert2113 (Let's chat!) 02:30, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

How to...

Hi Vexations, can you help me with that Problem: There are so many deletion Templates so which one to chose for simply speed deleting the Sandbox after publishing? (Du sprichst auch Deutsch habe ich gesehen?) Thank you. Karla1936 (talk) 07:11, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi Karla1936 If you want to ask an administrator to delete a page from your user space, that is anything with a URL after https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Karla1936/, for example User:Karla1936/delete me, you can add a template like {{Db-u1}} or {{Db-userreq}}. See WP:U1. BTW, the WP:TEAHOUSE is a friendly place to ask questions like this. I don't mind answering them, (I'm a teahouse host too), but you might get a (better) answer faster there. Stimmt, ich spreche auch Deutsch, bin jedoch nur auf enwiki aktiv. Vexations (talk) 11:19, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

DANKE!!--Karla1936 (talk) 11:59, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Use of neutral words

Thank you very much for helping me with Jeremiah Obuobi Shammahamoah (talk) 12:27, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for reviewing

Hi Vexations, thank you for so promptly reviewing Le Groupe des XV. Much appreciated, Jamesmcardle^(talk) 03:01, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Pointless

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Pointless. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

NPP Backlog Elimination Drive

Hello Vexations/Archives, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

We can see the light at the end of the tunnel: there are currently 2900 unreviewed articles, and 4000 unreviewed redirects.

Announcing the Backlog Elimination Drive!

• As a final push, we have decided to run a backlog elimination drive from the 20th to the 30th of June.
• Reviewers who review at least 50 articles or redirects will receive a Special Edition NPP Barnstar: . Those who review 100, 250, 500, or 1000 pages will also receive tiered awards: , , , .
• Please do not be hasty, take your time and fully review each page. It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing.

---

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 06:57, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Fall in Line

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Fall in Line. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Quantico (season 3)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Quantico (season 3). Legobot (talk) 04:27, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

I don't understand

Why did you accept Black Disability Justice and State Violence? Chris Troutman (talk) 04:13, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi Chris troutman, I made a mistake. The logs [10] show that I moved a draft that was moved to mainspace back to a sandbox (as part of NPP). I then noticed that there were two different versions. I accepted the sourced version, operating on the view that there is a substantial body of literature on disability studies, so that an article about disability as it affects people of colour can be supported by high-quality sources. WikieEd supported the effort. Generally, I think that even an article with serious deficiencies can be accepted at AfC. In retrospect, I failed to recognized how serious the problems were, and we now know that they have not been remedied. AfD is the right next step here, but I wonder if the creator, the course instructor and the WikiEd folks have been notified? The student editor who created the article seems to have abandoned the article, and has not specified a valid email address. Vexations (talk) 11:09, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. I used to be involved both with the Education Program (before it became WikiEd) and AfC (before I had to quit it in frustration). There's an incentive mismatch between what the student wants, what WikiEd manages, and what AfC can accept. Chris Troutman (talk) 13:49, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

• Hi! I received a notification that the page would be nominated for deletion. I was definitely concerned about this article as well. Something that I was toying about with the topic was changing it into a general article about disability justice, as there does seem to be coverage for the general topic. I voiced concerns that the topic here was just far too specific. Chris troutman, if I'm not able to get about to doing it before the AfD's end, do you think that this could be moved to my ReaderofthePack userspace? Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 22:23, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
• I figure that the sourced content that's specifically about black disability justice could be made into a subsection. I know that it's not ideal, but I think that one of the best ways to retain the page would be to work on the general topic first, as there's not a page for the parent topic, which should be rectified. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 22:25, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

NPP Backlog Drive Appreciation

		Special Edition New Page Patroller's Barnstar
		For completing over 50 reviews during the 2018 June Backlog Drive, please accept this Special Edition Barnstar. Thank you for helping New Page Patrol and keep up the good work. Cheers! — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 19:00, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

Thank you

Hi Vexations, I appreciate the promptness of your review of Caroline Hebbe, and all the work you do in Visual Arts on WP. All the best, Jamesmcardle^(talk) 00:02, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:2018 in heavy metal music

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:2018 in heavy metal music. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:WUPV

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:WUPV. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Response re: Gardenista

Hi there,

Thanks for the note. I am not a paid editor for the Gardenista page. Please let me know if you'd still like me to make further edits, or if your tag can be removed.

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rosied28 (talk • contribs) 01:06, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Hello Rosied28 thank you for your reply. I may have jumped to conclusions based on your editing history and choice of topics. We get quite a lot of new articles from editors who have a conflict of interest, but are unaware that the Terms of Use require disclosure of paid editing. Our FAQ on paid contributions without disclosure is here. If none of this applies to you, the tag can be removed. You can do this yourself, if you like. If you do so, please leave an edit summary clarifying that you have no connection to Gardenista, and have not been remunerated for your edits. Vexations (talk) 15:35, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Fixed your comment

Just dropping you a note that I had to edit your AfD comment because the emphasis tag wasn't closed. The closing tag needs a / . I was trying to figure out why all the other AfDs below it were in italics. [11] Enigma^msg 00:24, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. Sorry for making unnecessary extra work for you. Vexations (talk) 15:19, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

No problem. I merely felt the need to explain because normally one doesn't edit someone else's comments. Enigma^msg 17:45, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for reviewing Matthias Rauchmiller and improving it

I am a big fan of Vienna's Plague Column, so I am trying to convert some of its red-linked artist names into articles, with help from German Wikipedia. The best source for many of these is online articles, in German, from NDB. I see you are a native speaker of German (I am a very inadequate speaker of German) so if you feel inspired to add any information to these stub articles from German sources, I will be grateful. HouseOfChange (talk) 21:24, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Hello HouseOfChange Great that you're working on Plague Column, Vienna. The German article about Johann Bendel, the only remaining redlink is not about the sculptor though. That's Johann Ignaz Bendel, who doesn't seem to have an article at all. Did you know that there's a way to link to articles on other wikis using the inter language link template {{ill}}. For example: {{ill|Johann Bendel|de}} renders as Johann Bendel. I found this book: https://books.google.ca/books?id=e88jAAAAMAAJ Vexations (talk) 22:20, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, I did not know this technique. I look forward to using it. HouseOfChange (talk) 22:30, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

HouseOfChange I started Draft:Johann Ignaz Bendel. We obviously already have Ignaz Bendl, Johann Bernhard Fischer von Erlach, Ludovico Ottavio Burnacini, Paul Strudel and Tobias Kracker, but what about Joseph Frühwirth and Matthias Gunst? Vexations (talk) 22:48, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, Vexations, I hope to get back to this soon. While researching Rauchmiller, I found so many interesting related facts that I am trying to get my notes from all of them into articles before I proceed to the next level of Plague Monument. Also, I have a question: in En.wiki amd De.wiki he is Rauchmiller but in Wikimedia commons he is Rauchmüller. Any comments?HouseOfChange (talk) 18:41, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

I think that different spellings of artist's names from that period are very common. I don't think that's something to worry about. In the case of Rauchmiller, I'd go with what the ULAN has: http://vocab.getty.edu/page/ulan/500005964 Vexations (talk) 18:50, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Response to speedy deletion nomination of Steve Egboro

Hello Vexation, Thanks for reaching out, about the article recommended for speedy deletion, there were enough references to go with it to certify the written contents about the subject. Also, I think a more reason should be given to go with the reason that suggests this is a promotional article or where it fails to meet standards, I didn't see anything that makes this promotional except if am wrong on this. If there are corrections to make do let me know. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Delords (talk • contribs) 16:50, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Delords "got his name in the books after ramping-up promotions", "extend his highly sought-after", " pulled a massive crowd", "is already building interest " is not neutral language. Please read WP:COI. Vexations (talk) 17:24, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Natalie Portman

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Natalie Portman. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daniel Schallmo

With reference to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daniel Schallmo, I think that he may pass WP:NACADEMIC, even if he does not pass as a businessperson. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 04:33, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

FYI

I added a missing apostrophe to your De Sarthe Gallery !vote, which was formatted as 'delete. Thanks for all your excellent analyses.96.127.242.226 (talk) 19:28, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for reviewing

Hi Vexations! Thanks so much for reviewing Monica McKelvey Johnson. Perimeander (talk) 20:58, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Meessen De Clercq

Vexations—you provided a source, and there are many more like it, that amply confer notability on the article. This is a source that you mentioned. Based on such reviews of art exhibitions held at that gallery we know that this is long-term functioning art gallery with a busy schedule. Let me ask you a question. Does that source tend to confer notability on the artist, Fabrice Samyn? Then why wouldn't it tend to confer notability on the art gallery? Bus stop (talk) 02:26, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Bus stop It confers notability on the artist, but not on the gallery because you can paraphrase the review and summarize what it says to make a meaningful statement about the artist. You can't do that with the gallery. The only thing you can get from this review is: "Fabrice Samyn exhibited at Meessen De Clercq in Brussels". Vexations (talk) 11:45, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Vexations (talk) 11:45, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Notability is not about being able to paraphrase something to make a meaningful statement. In fact policy language says something contrary to that.

At WP:NNC we find:

"The criteria applied to the creation or retention of an article are not the same as those applied to the content inside it. The notability guidelines do not apply to contents of articles or lists (with the exception of some lists, which restrict inclusion to notable items or people)."

At WP:ARTN we find:

"Notability is a property of a subject and not of a Wikipedia article. If the subject has not been covered outside of Wikipedia, no amount of improvements to the Wikipedia content will suddenly make the subject notable. Conversely, if the source material exists, even very poor writing and referencing within a Wikipedia article will not decrease the subject's notability."

The subject of the article is notable because it has been covered outside Wikipedia. Numerous reviews establish the notability of the gallery. This is an art gallery. Its purpose is the exhibition of art. Its purpose is not about itself at all. This is not a dry cleaning store. Yet you are making no distinction between these two different sorts of entities. Mere passing mention of a dry cleaning store would not establish notability for it. But an art gallery is an entirely different sort of entity. In fact, art is an entirely different sort of entity from soiled clothing. I know that you know this. But you are not articulating this in the AfD discussion. And when I articulate this, you do not even acknowledge what I'm saying. Is there any reason that Wikipedia shouldn't have articles on art galleries? That is a facetious question. Bus stop (talk) 12:33, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

I think you mistake me for someone else. In my opinion a review of an exhibition establishes notability for an art gallery it does not establish its notability does not establish the gallery's notability, I have given my reason for that, and you have not provided any new insights that might cause me to change my mind. WP:NNC does not negate the need for sources, the subject of an article is not about itself, and I think art galleries should be covered in Wikipedia if significant coverage in independent, reliable sources exists. ARTN is correct to say "if the source material exists". If you want to help, find sources. Vexations (talk) 22:04, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

You say "In my opinion a review of an exhibition establishes notability for an art gallery it does not establish its notability". Is that a typo? If not, can you clarify? Bus stop (talk) 05:31, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Yes it is. Thanks for pointing it out. My bad, fixed it. Vexations (talk) 11:23, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

A review of an exhibition at an art gallery potentially impinges on the notability of three entities—artists, artworks, and art galleries. I fully understand that artist and artwork come first in the subject matter found in such reviews. The gallery itself is barely mentioned. But the art gallery plays a role in the artist's exhibition of artworks, and a large number of serious reviews of exhibitions at an art gallery start to tell you that the gallery is notable. Yet these reviews are dismissed at AfDs on art galleries. They tend to indicate notability. No, I am not mistaking you for someone else. I am speaking to you because I think you are capable of understanding what I'm saying. Bus stop (talk) 12:13, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Alright, let's try it, and see if we can make it work. Say you want to write an article about another Brussels gallery, one that is more established than MDC, has been around for 30 years, and represents artists that are better known, see User:Vexations/lists/Galleries#Greta_Meert. How would could we write an article and establish the gallery's notability based on exhibition reviews? For the sake of argument, try to use only exhibition reviews; if other sources exist, they might establish notability. Vexations (talk) 12:32, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Deletion is categorically different from a sparsely written article. At the least it is a placeholder for a notable subject. Other possibilities exist. Create a List article or even a Category into which it might fit, along the lines of Category:Art galleries in Manhattan, Category:Defunct art galleries in New York City, Category:Defunct art galleries in Manhattan. At this point "Meessen De Clercq" has very little presence on Wiki—a mere thirteen mentions. I think the article was sparse but OK as it was before deletion. Promotional language written by gallery employees should definitely be removed from all articles on art galleries. But many galleries are unique institutions. I'm going to go out on a limb with this assertion: any gallery selling contemporary art which pushes the envelope is almost surely notable. Cutting edge art is not comparable to anything else. A gallery involved in standing behind new ideas (and unknown artists) is a truly remarkable thing. In fact this whole idea of WP:NOTINHERITED is one of the most ridiculous arguments against these sorts of galleries because such galleries are more notable if the artists displaying there are not notable! I know you're not superhuman and there was overwhelming support to delete that article. But I have watched this go on with several galleries and I view it as destructive. We are not considering the deletion of an article on a more mundane business. I don't think WP:NCORP has as much to do with these discussions as some argue. The fact of the matter is that most articles on galleries could be deleted if we compared them to the notability requirements for more mundane businesses. Just look at the sourcing for the galleries in the above categories. Coverage in sources is rarely of the gallery itself. Any overblown, promotional language should be removed but the article in most cases should be allowed to exist. Bus stop (talk) 17:44, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Bus stop We're talking past each other. Can you show me that what you're proposing to do is plausible? I have created Draft:Galerie Greta Meert and used sources about exhibitions of work by some of the most significant contemporary artists, Struth, Baldessari, Judd. There is absolutely no doubt whatsoever that these artists are notable. Baldessari ranks in the top 10 at artfacts.net, Struth and Judd in the top 100. The sources are not good, but the exhibitions undoubtedly did take place. Based on what I've written so far; have I established that Galerie Greta Meert is notable? Vexations (talk) 22:03, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Would you have nominated "Meessen De Clercq" for deletion? There are editors going around nominating art galleries for deletion because most art galleries are vulnerable for deletion because coverage in sources is rarely of the gallery itself. A rethinking of criteria is called for. We are unconcerned with the notability of the artists or the artworks shown there. We are concerned with reviews of art exhibitions at art galleries because such reviews have the potential to confer notability on artists, artworks, and art galleries. Why would you accept that for artists and artworks and not for art galleries? The majority of the art galleries in Category:Art galleries in Manhattan, Category:Defunct art galleries in New York City, and Category:Defunct art galleries in Manhattan are vulnerable to deletion based on incorrect criteria that arise out of WP:INHERIT and WP:NCORP. I think that a basic argument that you are making is that it is difficult or impossible to write articles based on reviews. But I think it is the rare instance that nothing can be said about an art gallery which is supported by reliable sources. "Meessen De Clercq" is a perfect example of this. There was an article of acceptable quality. But it was deleted. There was no reason to delete the article on "Meessen De Clercq". Notability is not temporary. Many reviews of serious art shows at the "Meessen De Clercq" gallery attest to its noteworthiness. If you apply the wrong criteria you get skewed results. Bus stop (talk) 11:47, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

You're seeing the problem I'm trying to point out to you, don't you? As it is, Draft:Galerie Greta Meert cannot stand. You still haven't said if you agree with that, but I suspect that you do see that if it were brought to AfD and no other sources existed, it would fail. What I've done is of course a contrived example. In most cases, exhibition reviews are not the only sources, and there often is more information than the mention of the venue. I think that what you need to do is find a way around NOTINHERENT and NOTINHERITED, by clarifying that there is such such a thing as inferred notability that is different from inherited notability. You need to show how that inference works, and codify that in a guideline. I've been thinking about how to do that, but I am not quite sure that the community would accept the premises that we'd propose for that kind of deductive reasoning. Vexations (talk) 12:38, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

To answer your question, Would you have nominated "Meessen De Clercq" for deletion: I don't know what I would have done. I did nominate Eden Fine Art and Alexander Friedmann-Hahn for deletion. I hope that WP:IDL didn't play a role in those nominations. The fact that their artists are mostly unremarkable and that there was clear evidence of undisclosed paid editing certainly made it easier. Vexations (talk) 12:38, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

WP:INHERIT has just about nothing to do with this issue. A review of an art exhibition does not have to include a notable artist or a notable artwork. I have never argued that a gallery is notable because it has shown notable artists or notable artworks. Reviews of art exhibitions potentially confer notability on artists, artworks, and art galleries. It is true that artists and artworks are more pointedly referenced in such reviews but the gallery's presence is entirely real and the review invariably refers to the art gallery. The physical plant is rarely if ever of any importance. A gallery is alternatively referred to as a "space". (Note here "In 'Notes on the Gallery Space,' O’Doherty points out the importance of the gallery space throughout the history of modernism, envisaging the white cube as a model for 20th-century art. Like some kind of a sacred space, the white cube removes the artwork from any aesthetic or historical context. And, since the work of art becomes sacred due to its context, it is the context that becomes the work in late modernism.") But that space is all-important. In that space the gallerist's tastes find expression. There is no shortage of artists knocking at the door wanting to have an exhibition in the gallery. The gallerist chooses the artwork that represents their vision. You mention certain galleries that I would say are using Wiki as advertising or substantiation of their importance. We have to use our sources wisely. If they are promotional we can give less weight. But if they are serious we can give more weight. And once again it does not matter if the artist/artwork is notable or not. It is almost arguable that greater weight should be given to sources mentioning unknown artists. Why? Because prints by Picasso or Miró are products in the conventional sense. WP:NCORP should apply if the gallery only deals in established artists and established artworks and if the gallery cannot take credit for "discovering" these artists/artworks. Bus stop (talk) 15:16, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Have you seen Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Albemarle Gallery? Bus stop (talk) 16:59, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

If a gallery article has been deleted at AfD and it's listed on User:Vexations/lists/Galleries#Galleries_at_AfD I've seen it, If it isn't, I haven't seen it. If you know of some that I've missed, please let me know or feel free to add an entry. Vexations (talk) 22:34, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

The compilation of that list is a great resource. Bus stop (talk) 22:48, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion / Sellma Kasumoviq page

Hi Vexations

I also added a note on my user talk page about your comments regarding whether or not I am being paid to write the wiki page in question. Not sure if you saw it so am pasting below. I would like to have a discussion on this with you and see what the best solution is. Thanks!

My response:

Hi Vexations , thank you for your interest in working on this Wikipedia Article and also for your concerns - I do strongly believe in the principles of Wikipedia and that information entered into the encyclopedia should be neutral and informative to the public. I am not receiving any financial compensation for my work on this page, and will not be receiving compensation in the future either. This article is the first of a series of articles I have planned to write on artists from Kosovo. I am a visual designer and videographer here and am planning on creating a short documentary soon on women who are from Kosovo (which is you read more about the country recently declared independence) and who are working and creating services and products that are having an impact in the world. Included in my list is a fashion designer currently based in New York City, a ballet dancer and choreographer, and an art curator. This list will expand as time goes by and I meet more people.

I do appreciate your concerns and am aware of the what this article "looks like". I had edited the previous version of this article which consequently went on for deletion. Since then, I have edited the article considerably and have tried to make it as neutral and non-advertisement like as possible. Regardless, this person is definitely a notable figure in the world and I do believe Sellma should have a Wikipedia article (among other women from Kosovo) which can be argued on the point of her work and recognition.

I am open to any suggestions that you have on editing this, and also for the future articles which I am going to write. I don't think it should be deleted though. I look forward to hearing from you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Etrithaxhiu (talk • contribs) 15:21, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Quantico (season 3)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Quantico (season 3). Legobot (talk) 04:27, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Nieca Goldberg

Thank you (I think) for you questions about Nieca Goldberg on her talk page. I think that you are as "guilty" as I usually am. You typed "uload." Did you mean upload?

       There are many factors going on here. I as a professional care about some things that I am told Wikipedia does not care about. So unless you really want to get into that discussion I will leave it. I admit I did not know that I should not remove my comments from her talk page. SNicodemus (talk) 14:35, 25 July 2018 (UTC)tarting an AFD process seemed like the comments on the talk page were redundant. Her author accused me of plagiarism in my comments. I have no idea where that came from. I thought that I made it clear when I paraphrased other editors complaints.  Sorry to waste your time with all this.

Oldsilenus Ha! I'm a terrible speller I like to blame my declining eyesight, but the truth is I'm really just a bad speller. There is absolutely no need to apologize for making beginner mistakes, and we don't expect anyone to be completely familiar with our myriad of policies and guidelines before they begin editing. With regards to the AfD for the Nieca Goldberg article, I think you are probably right that Goldberg is not notable for innovations in cardiology in the conventional sense of the word notable, but Wikipidia's use of that word is unfortunately (and in flagrant violation of its own policies) anything but conventional and has a very specific meaning. Basically, as understand it, what we look for is to make everything we publish verifiable. That means that we need a source for all significant claims. Those sources need to be published, reliable and independent. If we have those sources, we can write an article. It then doesn't really matter if the subject is important and famous or obscure and trivial; as long as there is enough source material, we can write an article. In the case of Goldberg, it seems to me that it is actually quite difficult to verify the claims made about her. There are a lot of glowing reviews, she's been called all kinds of nice things, but I actually don't see any real evidence of what she contributed to cardiology. Having said that, our coverage of women scientists is lacking, and I would love to see it improved. Perhaps, as a subject matter expert, you have access to sources that people like me don't have. Maybe you can help bring the article into shape, remove all the promotional and irrelevant material and focus on her actual contributions? Thanks,

A note here (and also made elsewhere) that Ildar2013 has not made any Wikipedia contributions since April 2018, and may be unaware of this recent flurry about Goldberg. My personal opinion is that deletions of inappropriate and poorly sourced material from the Goldberg article may result in a core of an article that meets Wikipedia's idea of notable. David notMD (talk) 16:32, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your review!

Hi Vetations, Thanks for reviewing my article! I noticed you do a lot of important contributions to the wikipedia community. I appreciate your work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cbratbyrudd (talk • contribs) 16:27, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for creating Britteney Black Rose Kapri Cbratbyrudd. Vexations (talk) 16:43, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Television

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Television. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 26 July 2018 (UTC)