Jump to content

User talk:Wiae/Archive 10

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 5←Archive 8Archive 9Archive 10Archive 11Archive 12→Archive 14

Evesham Flats article

Hi Wiae

Thanks for your message regarding my draft article on Evesham Flats. In writing the article I uploaded a couple of images to WikiCommons. I am not sure how to format these to ensure the monitors are satisfied they can be published, and am hoping you can help, given they directly relate to the draft article.

The black and white photos are all taken from Australian newspapers, now digitally available on www.tove.nla.gov.au, which is the website of the National Library of Australia. The National Library of Australia acknowledges that all photographs taken prior to 1 January 1955 are not subject to copyright and are in the public domain. Refer to the last sentence under the heading 'Duration' on the attached link: https://www.nla.gov.au/copyright-and-the-pictures-collection

This is consistent with what Wikipedia states regarding Australian photographs taken before 1 January 1955, which it states are out of copyright and are all in the public domain: Copyright expiration in Australia

On this basis, it seems OK to reference to the photographs in the article, particularly given they were taken by unidentified photographers.

Being new to Wikipedia, I've had trouble coding these to reflect their copyright status and I hope you can help (given you kindly transferred the article to the proper space online for draft articles).

Thanks and Regards

Lyndon — Preceding unsigned comment added by History devotee (talk • contribs) 3:22, January 26, 2016 (UTC)

@History devotee: Hi, thanks for stopping by! I'm no expert in picture copyright, but if the pictures are in the public domain now, then I believe they can be freely used. As for the 2015 picture, you can certainly use that if it is your own work.
I'm looking at the draft now—seems interesting. A quick suggestion would be to trim some of the content about the notable residents. Anything that's not directly related to Evesham Flats could probably be condensed. Content like "Madame Lehmann soon became the subject of Archbishop James Duhig’s public wrath, who opposed Sunday trading on the basis the Sabbath should be a day of rest" is certainly interesting but I think it gets a little far away from the subject of the article. Either way, a reviewer will be along in the coming days to assess the article—they may give you that exact same feedback, or they may have some different ideas as to how the draft can be improved. Thanks! /wiae /tlk 12:05, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

@Wiae - Thanks for the feedback, I will appreciate any guidance the reviewer provides. Yes, I agree I think there is little concern regarding breach of copyright in the pictures, as this would have expired and that is why I have tried to include them. I am more concerned that the pictures will just be deleted from Wikicommons in the next seven days as being outside the USA the pre-set questionnaire wasn't easily answered having regard to Australian law. I wasn't sure if you were aware of the formatting tricks to make the copyright reviewers aware of the status re each file, so that they would be retained.

Lyndon

Welcome to STiki!

Hello, Wiae, and welcome to STiki! Thank you for your recent contributions using our tool. We at STiki hope you like using the tool and decide to continue using it in the future. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Here are some pages which are a little more fun:

  • The STiki leaderboard - See how you are faring against other STiki users!
  • Userboxes - Do not hesitate to wear the STiki label with pride by choosing from a selection of userboxes!

We hope you enjoy maintaining Wikipedia with STiki! If you have any questions, problems, or suggestions don't hesitate to drop a note over at the STiki talk page and we'll be more than happy to help. Again, welcome, and thanks! West.andrew.g (developer) and Ugog Nizdast (talk) 13:32, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Note: Having a username change after you start using STiki will reset your classification count. Please let us know about such changes on the talk page page to avoid confusion in issuing milestone awards. You can also request for your previous STiki contributions to be reassigned to your new account name.

12:05:53, 28 January 2016 review of submission by Reubenv74

{{SAFESUBST:Void|

Hi Wiae, thank you for stopping by and taking the time to review and comment on my draft. If I included links to the awards AJ Bell Youinvest won this in 2015, will that help? Just to give 2 examples: http://www.icawards.co.uk/awards-2015/ and http://www.goodacreuk.com/index.php/city-of-london-wealth-management-awards-list/item/city-of-london-wealth-management-awards-2015. Will this help?

Thanks again

@Reubenb74: Hi, thanks for stopping by! I took a look at these two new sources, and unfortunately I don't think they'll help. Notice that they only mention AJ Bell Youinvest once—that sort of quick name-drop doesn't offer substantial coverage. That's one of the three things a good source offers: reliability (in the form of fact-checking and editorial oversight), independence from the subject, and significant, in-depth coverage. If you can find more sources that meet those three criteria, they'll go a long way toward helping the draft. If those sources just aren't out there right now, you can always try again in a few months, or you can briefly mention AJ Bell Youinvest on the AJ Bell page. Thanks, /wiae /tlk 03:33, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Request on 18:13:49, 31 January 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Alexis Teyie


Thanks for the feedback! Are we not allowed to insert a quote even if it's by the author if it's included in another article? Keep well :)

Alexis Teyie (talk) 18:13, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

@Alexis Teyie: Good day! I assume this relates to Esther Madudu. Yes, you can quote from another page or website, but the quote must be put inside quotation marks, and you should not copy entire paragraphs and put them in quotes. Rather, it is better to rewrite it in your own words. See WP:QUOTE for a useful essay on quoting and paraphrasing. Thanks! /wiae /tlk 23:25, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

The Little Mermaid

Hello! I see you've reviewed my article and declined it. Could you please help me how i can improve it and what are reliable sources? IMDb? YouTube? IMЯAN™ (talk) 16:24, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

@Immu 01: Hi, thanks for dropping by! The draft in question is Draft:The Little Mermaid (2017 film). The unreleased films policy states that we shouldn't have an article on a film until it begins principal photography. Once the film hits that stage, see if you can find this fact reported in reliable sources—sources with editorial oversight and a reputation for fact-checking, like reputable magazines or newspapers (whether online or offline). IMDb is generally not considered a reliable source, as anyone can edit large parts of the site's film listings. It would depend on what you're using YouTube for, but generally not a reliable source either for this purpose. I'd stick with newspapers, magazines or reports on reputable film websites. Thanks, /wiae /tlk 15:23, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks alot... :) IMЯAN™ (talk) 16:24, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Where in breach copyright???.RabeaMallah (talk) 03:46, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

@RabeaMalah: If an editor has replaced text with the big blue box stating "Investigation of potential copyright issue", do not restore or edit the blanked content on this page until the issue is resolved by an administrator, copyright clerk or OTRS agent. Thanks, /wiae /tlk 04:12, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
@Wiae: Alright.RabeaMallah (talk) 04:16, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
@RabeaMalah: No problem. I'd noticed that a lot of the content in that section looked similar to that at [1], which is why I'd sent it off to copyright problems. (Incidentally, you can find the page where all these articles appear at Wikipedia:Copyright problems, if you're interested.) I'm sorry to mess around with the page you've been working on, but it's better to be safe rather than sorry when it comes to copyright. All the best, /wiae /tlk 04:22, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Page on Geshe Dhargye

Dear Wiae, thanks and I appreciate your information and your contributions! Will try to improve the article asap. Regards, Lucia --Luzilla Knapp (talk) 09:42, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

No problem. If you can find some more secondary sources about Dhargye, that would help improve the article! Thanks, /wiae /tlk 14:41, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your support

Peacemaker67 RfA Appreciation award
Thank you for participating and supporting at my RfA. It was very much appreciated, and I am humbled that the community saw fit to trust me with the tools. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 04:53, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
It was a pleasure to support a strong candidate! /wiae /tlk 12:45, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Timergara, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pashtun. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:44, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

 Fixed /wiae /tlk 12:45, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

The Hadleigh TAG

Thanks for taking the time to review the new item about the Hadleigh TAG. I have a logo which would help to illuminate the article but I'm not IT savvy and don't know how to get it from my own laptop library to yours

Please advise

Mick — Preceding unsigned comment added by MickCollins215 (talk • :contribs) 13:02, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

@MickCollins215: Hi, not a problem! I've moved your draft to Draft:Hadleigh Tag, so you can continue to work on it there. It is submitted for review and an experienced reviewer will be along in the coming days or weeks to give you some feedback about the draft.
Depending on what the logo looks like, it may or may not be copyrightable. If it is copyrighted, then generally it cannot be uploaded to Wikipedia, unless you are the copyright-holder and would be willing to license it for use on Wikipedia. However, if it is a copyrighted, non-free image, then Wikipedia policy dictates that it can only be added after the draft's acceptance. So the short answer is this—don't worry about the logo just yet. If the draft is accepted, then you may be able to add it, but that depends on what the logo looks like. Once you get to that point, you can ask at the Help Desk for assistance and they'll be glad to give you some pointers. Thanks, /wiae /tlk 13:06, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
:-) It's just a little logo which we have made up so no copyright issues there at all. I'll await your confirmation then before looking at anymore editing. regards Mick — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.69.41.226 (talk) 13:08, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

16:07:32, 8 February 2016 review of submission by Iwebresults


Hi, I read the guidelines on degree awarding institutions: Most independently accredited degree-awarding institutions and high schools are usually kept except when zero independent sources can be found to prove that the institution actually exists. I have more independent references concerning this item

http://www.acaom.org/find-a-school/default.aspx?state=FL&dicipline=undefined&programtypes=MasterAccredited http://www.acupuncturetoday.com/schools/fcim.php Acupuncture Today http://www.american-school-search.com/review/florida-college-of-integrative-medicine American School Search https://www.petersons.com/graduate-schools/florida-college-of-integrative-medicine-000_10030292.aspx Petersons

@Iwebresults: Hello! This is true; however, note also that WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES is not a notability guideline, and WP:NSCHOOL says that All universities, colleges and schools... must satisfy either this guideline (WP:ORG) or the general notability guideline, or both. So the goal is to find some reliable, independent sources talking about the school—use them to cite the specific claims made in the draft. Once you've added sources to the draft (and I see you've added some since the decline), you can resubmit and a reviewer will take a look. Thanks, /wiae /tlk 00:29, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

California Water Plan Article

Dear Wiae,

Thank you for moving my article, "Draft: California Water Plan," to the Draft namespace page. I've had my account for 10 months or so, but this is my first article. After the article is approved, assuming it will be, will I be able to add photos/graphics to it. I tried to do that as I composed and formatted the article, but I discovered that I couldn't do this because I was not auto-confirmed or confirmed. Would having the article approved earn me the status to add the photos/graphics.

Thank you!

William O'Daly Wodaly (talk) 23:12, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

@Wodaly: Hello! Your account will be "autoconfirmed" after you have made ten (10) edits to Wikipedia and after the account is four (4) days old. At that point, you would be able to upload images. Whether the images are copyrighted or freely licensed is also relevant. In short, lots of images out there on the Internet are copyrighted and often can't be uploaded to Wikipedia. you can learn more about image copyright at the image use policy page, in case you're interested. Thanks! /wiae /tlk 23:18, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Request on 04:07:08, 10 February 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by The Gaia Internet Media


The Gaia Internet Media (talk) 04:07, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

The visual editor is not downloading , why is that?

@The Gaia Internet Media: Hello, Visual Editor is a tool that allows simple editing of Wikipedia pages without any of the fancy Wikipedia markup that can sometimes be confusing to learn. I don't believe it is something you can download, so I'm not entirely sure what your question means. But if you are having trouble getting Visual Editor to work, go here and follow the instructions in the top left blue box. That should enable Visual Editor for you! Thanks, /wiae /tlk 04:09, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Eovtos question

Greetings and Salutations;

There is substantial information concerning the units of energy posted. Can and/or will, you assist me in keeping the information simplified? 

 There is no link to the Xennoquoon wiki page. Being the I uploaded

the equation to Eovtos I would be adorable to at least give me that much credit. At least I'm attempting to share this information. It must be shared to the masses please.

Sincerely;

Eovtos Bo Brymer / Artist 04:14, 10 February 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eovtos (talk • contribs) 04:14, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

@Eovtos: Hello, I'm sorry but I'm not sure I understand your request. Are you trying to make a page about Xennoquoon? This subject doesn't seem to have been discussed anywhere online—is it a topic you have come up with yourself? Thanks, /wiae /tlk 04:19, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

12:42:37, 10 February 2016 review of submission by Markpedia1


Hello Wiae, I've correct all the major faults that were on my first draft. You will see that I've also added some few good sources. I've also titled the photos appropriately as well as the content.I invite you to re-review my work. Thanks

@Markpedia1: The tone of the draft is looking better now. As a minor point while you wait for a review, please remove the external links from the body of the text, replacing them with footnote-style references. I try not to review a draft twice in a row so that you will get fresh eyes on your work, but a reviewer will be along in the coming days or weeks to assess the draft and give you their feedback. Thanks! /wiae /tlk 17:36, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Support needed

Hi Wiae!

Would you mind helping me to fix the article I've written? Find out more at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk#08:50:32.2C_10_February_2016_review_of_submission_by_Know1ledge

Thanks a lot in advance!

--Know1ledge (talk) 11:14, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

@Know1ledge: Hello, and thanks for dropping by! You are right in that it is very important to cite sources on Wikipedia. However, take care not to copy the text from copyrighted websites directly. The proper course of action is to summarize what the copyrighted source is saying in your own words.
I've removed the content that was at issue. You are welcome to rephrase what the germaninnovation site has said, as long as you use your own words to do so. Once this has been taken care of, you are welcome to resubmit the draft and a reviewer will take a look! Thanks, /wiae /tlk 16:40, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
Update: I have updated the article according to your suggestion! Please take a look at it again! Thanks a lot!
--Know1ledge (talk) 18:49, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
@Know1ledge: Looking better! I found a few more copied or closely paraphrased sections so I reworded them myself. I had to cut out the section about its weight and the fact that it could easily fit inside a bag. You can insert that again if you'd like, as long as you rephrase it in your own words, naturally. /wiae /tlk 19:28, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Fromage article

The edits that the user is reverting, particularly the addition of the PBS Kids and Barney DVDs is the calling card of a Long-term vandal I believe. (See here: [2]) RickinBaltimore (talk) 18:36, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Very interesting; their edits do seem consistent with the pattern of editing in that LTA log (although with a Canadian flavour this time). Looks like they're gunning for a long block at the rate they're going. /wiae /tlk 18:47, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Wiki entry for review: Akane Takayama

Dear Wiae, I have seen there is a ref tag issue with CDJ magazine review of Takayama in 2003. This is in the section on publications and media. The problem I have with this is that I have a photocopy of the article but cannot trace the magazine itself. This is not uncommon in the art world where magazine titles can come into being, last a year or two and then disappear. when starting to research how to write an article, I contacted another wiki adviser who said that hard copy references were acceptable. I am not at all sure how to reference this piece or if, ultimately it is acceptable. I await your advice for which I am grateful. Jama myth (talk) 14:38, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

@Jama myth: Hi, the reason there was a ref tag problem was solely technical—there was one reference that had a starting <ref> tag but did not have an accompanying </ref> tag at the end. That's why the big red error showed up. I've fixed it so that it's not a problem.
As for the offline sources, yes you are certainly able to use them. Now, if you don't know what magazine the information is from, I wouldn't use it, as it likely runs into verifiability issues. But it seems like you do know some things about the magazine—CDJ magazine, 2003—so that's a start. If you can find out the volume/issue numbers, page numbers and author, that is as much information as anyone needs about the magazine, I think. Thanks, /wiae /tlk 15:04, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

11:59:31, 17 February 2016 review of submission by Abe21476


HI, I request you to kindly peruse our points placed below and to reconsider your position on the article.

Reasons why we feel his inclusion is important

1. Over the last decade, Pratish has been single handedly managing the affairs of VGN Developers and has been instrumental in ensuring their position as one of the top developers in the city of Chennai

2. We have given many references, where as you state, he has only been quoted, but which is also proof that he has been instrumental in the progress of VGN and spearheading their journey to be one of the top real estate players in the city

3. Over the last decade, he has been focused on the journey of VGN Developers and has consciously avoided personal profiling, which is why there are fewer references to his personal achievements

4. There are more articles that talk solely on the achivements of Pratish, but we haven’t included them since they don’t have a web page link

5. The first reference that we have produced (http://epaper.newindianexpress.com/693413/The-New-Indian-Express-Chennai/15012016#page/18/2) traces his journey and offers an insight on the work he has done over the last many years

6. Under Pratish, VGN Developers has by now delivered over 20 million sq feet of residential projects in the city of Chennai. And this is significant

7. VGN has successfully delivered residential projects to almost all sections of society in the city of Chennai and is a well known name in the city

8. While the company has numerous achievements under their belt, Pratish takes obvious pride in the fact that he has been helping thousands of families realize their dreams of owning their own homes and providing exponential returns on their investments.

As we said at the beginning, this is an individual that has let his work speak for himself. There is ample proof of the work he has done and his presence in guiding the company to its current position. In the real estate scenario in the city of Chennai, he has a pre eminent position amongst his peers.

I humbly request you to kindly consider the above.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Abe21476 (talk • contribs) 11:59, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

@Abe21476: Hi, have you read WP:BIO yet? Please do—it explains exactly what must be demonstrated about a person for them to be suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia. Whether they have been "instrumental" in the life of a real estate company, "avoided personal profiling", developed millions of square feet of property, helped thousands move into homes or let their work speak for themselves is completely irrelevant. The standard for inclusion in Wikipedia is not "has this person done good/important work" but rather "has this person been discussed in significant detail by multiple reliable sources that are independent of the subject". The newspaper article you've cited here is a decent start, although it is rather light on substantive content about Devadoss, since it really only has a few sentences about him. The other sources currently in the draft offer almost no coverage of Devadoss.
You can use offline sources but of course they have to be from reliable sources, and you should provide enough bibliographic metadata about them so that another person could find the source. I would remove the sources with almost no coverage of Devadoss and concentrate on finding sources that would meet WP:BIO. Thanks, /wiae /tlk 13:57, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Hotel Kirkwood

Please note this commentary on my talk page (which I refactored) by User:Capitalcityrealty. There is an obvious conflict of interest. Which I pointed out to them more than once, but seems to be being ignored. Thanks. --‖ Ebyabe talk - Attract and Repel ‖ 22:38, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

@Ebyabe: Thanks for letting me know. I've watchlisted the relevant pages and will keep an eye on things too. If they continue to edit but do not change their username in the coming days, I may consider a post at WP:UAA. Thanks, /wiae /tlk 14:10, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

East London Group

Thanks, Wiae.

Graean — Preceding unsigned comment added by Graean (talk • contribs) 08:11, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

No problem. Congratulations on the article's acceptance! /wiae /tlk 19:05, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Test Edits and Other Mistaken Submissions

I understand that user subpages, sandboxes, and draft pages sometimes have a large Submit button. I can also see that it may not be clear what Submit means. As a result, new editors often Submit things that they don't know will go into AFC. You and I don't see that button because we have the AFCH script installed, which instead provides an 'afch' button, which in turn displays Accept, Decline, and Comment, or Submit and Comment, but AFC reviewers know what Submit means (and don't use it very often anyway). If what I understand is correct, the Submit button should say Submit for Review as Article, or something like that. I think that these new users don't mean to be wasting the time of the reviewers. They just hit a button. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:08, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon: That's true; there are quite a few submissions that aren't really drafts but rather editing tests or attempts to make a user page. I think renaming the button would be a good idea and might help curb some of those submissions. Do you get the impression that declining as a test is too harsh? I've been working on the balance between being firm when it comes to policy yet friendly with new editors, and will gladly take any advice if you have it at the ready. Thanks, /wiae /tlk 22:20, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
If the edit is a test edit, declining it as a test is not too harsh and is what needs to be done. I sometimes say that this test edit may have been submitted by mistake. It isn't too harsh to say that an edit is a test edit, if it is a test edit. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:39, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
@Robert McClenon: I think the newly added AfCHscript feature that places the reviewer's comments on the editor's talk page is also helpful in this regard. The editor has a higher chance of seeing a human comment now. /wiae /tlk 04:39, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for being one of Wikipedia's top medical contributors!

please help translate this message into the local language
The Cure Award
In 2015 you were one of the top 300 medical editors across any language of Wikipedia. Thank you from Wiki Project Med Foundation for helping bring free, complete, accurate, up-to-date health information to the public. We really appreciate you and the vital work you do! Wiki Project Med Foundation is a user group whose mission is to improve our health content. Consider joining here, there are no associated costs, and we would love to collaborate further.

Thanks again :) -- Doc James along with the rest of the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation 03:59, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

I think this was mostly thanks to some extensive Huggle work last year but I appreciate the award and may contribute to more medical articles in the future! Thanks, /wiae /tlk 13:23, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Request on 23:57:06, 1 March 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Jimhussey

Hello,

Thank you for the rapid response to my Wikipedia submission. I was attempting to be methodical, rigorous and "non-promotional" in developing the submission on ACT (nonprofit organization).

Is the objection that I included links to PDFs and other copyrighted material, or that the text itself appears to be copyrighted? I am a writer for ACT so the text may resemble some of what we have written, but it's intended to be "all fresh" without straying from the original meaning (or, most important, from being accurate). If it's a linking issue, I can certainly take those out, but if it's a general writing issue, with my writing and the assistance of an editor, it's likely to look like conventional ACT material.

I'd appreciate any guidance you might be able to provide. Thank you.

Jim Hussey

Jimhussey (talk) 23:57, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

@Jimhussey: Hi, thanks for stopping by! If you consult this link (which should be active for the next little while), you'll see the content that I've removed. Some of the sentences were copied from various ACT subpages. It's not all the draft's text that was at issue; just some parts, and I've removed those from the draft for you. You're welcome to re-add this content on the condition that you rephrase it and/or use quotation marks for parts that you're going to quote. Linking to other websites isn't a problem (although see below about the use of external links) but in general, text on Wikipedia should be written in your own words. (There's the possibility of donating copyrighted material to Wikipedia if you're the copyright-holder, but that process takes a bit of time and in general I find it easier to just rewrite the "offending" content.)
As for the draft's substantive merits, the draft will need some references (say, 3–5) from reliable, independent (third-party) sources that discuss the subject in significant detail. These are necessary to show that the organization meets our organizational inclusion criteria. I suspect that ACT meets the threshold, but this will need to be proven/demonstrated by the quality of the referencing in the draft. Coverage from reputable magazines, journals, books and newspapers (whether online or offline) is the best type. Also, so far there are quite a few external links within the body of the text, which are a no-go on Wikipedia. You can turn them into references; if you're unfamiliar with referencing on Wikipedia, take a look at WP:REFB for the general idea.
Lastly, if you work for ACT, then you have a conflict of interest. That doesn't mean you have to stop editing, but generally users find it difficult to write neutrally about subjects they're closely connected to. Have a look at WP:COI when you get a chance and see how it will affect your editing on Wikipedia when it comes to ACT-related subjects.
I know I've just thrown a bunch of links at you (I freely admit that Wikipedia can be a confusing place), so if there's anything you're not sure about, don't hesitate to drop me a line here. Thanks, /wiae /tlk 00:09, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
@Jimhussey: Oh yes, I forgot to mention: the Articles for Creation process is iterative. So don't be discouraged if a draft is declined once or twice or more. Just fix the issues the reviewer has flagged and then feel free to resubmit. There's a bit of a backlog right now, so I can't guarantee that reviews will always be done the same day, but we'll get to it! Thanks, /wiae /tlk 00:11, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Glooby

Hi Wikiawesome!

I have added a new reference to the wikipedia-article about Glooby. I was wondering if you could have a look and tell me if it's good? The new reference is a large, in depth article, but available in Swedish. I asked you earlier if I could use a Swedish article and it would work :) Hope you find it appropriate!

Best Regards Simon Smedberg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smedbergsimon (talk • contribs) 18:49, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

@Smedbergsimon: Hi! I'm a little busy at the moment but I'll certainly take a look and give you my thoughts in the next few days! Thanks, /wiae /tlk 01:45, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
No worries Wikiawesome! Read it when you have the time. Looking forward to your input. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smedbergsimon (talk • contribs) 15:58, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
@Smedbergsimon: HI, sorry for the delay. I've looked at the new source—the nwt.se link—and it looks like a decent source. That makes three sources discussing Glooby. I'd like to see a few more to show website and corporate notability, but you're welcome to resubmit at any time to get a new opinion from an Articles for Creation reviewer. Thanks, /wiae /tlk 00:16, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
Thank you very much!— Preceding unsigned comment added by Smedbergsimon (talk • contribs) 11:59, March 2, 2016‎ (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Minor Barnstar
Thanks for your contributions in providing deletion sorting, an often overlooked aspect of AfD that is helpful to encourage editor input in the discussions. North America1000 18:06, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
Thank you! Happy to help. /wiae /tlk 18:12, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
Thanks again! North America1000 18:37, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Information icon Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FA9295 (talk • contribs) 19:35, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

@FA9295: Thanks for the heads-up! /wiae /tlk 19:37, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Forum for International Trade Training page

Hi Wiae, my apologies for any confusion as I edit the Forum for International Trade Training page. I believe I've re-written any sections you highlighted for copyright reasons, so if you could please take a look and see whether the page is now OK in its current form, or either let me know which sentences need to be changed or how to better cite sections to avoid copyright issues, I would greatly appreciate the help. I've never done this before, so I appreciate any insight you can give Ewan Roy at FITT (talk) 20:23, 7 March 2016 (UTC) Ewan Roy at FITT (formerly Forum for International Trade Training (FITT), thanks for the tip about the username as well)

@Ewan Roy at FITT: Hi, thanks for stopping by! I find that most new editors don't know about Wikipedia's username policy, so thank you for changing your username.
I don't know if you're familiar with using the page history of a Wikipedia article, but if you check this link (which should be active for the next little while, at least until an administrator hides it), you'll see all the text I've removed. (Yellow text on the left-hand side was removed or moved around in the document.) A good deal of it was copied from subpages of http://fittfortrade.com. This probably sounds a bit counterintuitive, but since the text on that webpage is copyrighted, it can't be added to a Wikipedia article unless it is suitably licensed. Most of the time, the easiest thing to do is to rephrase the content so that it summarizes the source. I also removed some text that read rather promotionally. For example, text like "The CITP®|FIBP® stands as a symbol of competency and credibility" is fine for a website, advertisement or press release, but it lacks the objectivity and neutrality that characterize encyclopedic writing. A good rule of thumb is to avoid flowery language (adjectives are often a big offender in this regard), informal/conversational language, and any use of the words "you", "your", "us" and "we".
This leads to my last point. Since you're (presumably) affiliated with FITT, you have a conflict of interest. Conflict-of-interest editing is strongly discouraged on Wikipedia, in large part because most editors find it very difficult to write objectively about subjects they have a financial or other close connection to. I encourage you to read WP:BESTCOI—this page gives a six-point explanation of how you should approach editing on Wikipedia with a conflict of interest. My suggestion would be to not edit Forum for International Trade Training directly, but rather to propose changes on the FITT article's talk page.
I realize this is probably a whole slew of policy links and confusion, so do let me know if anything is unclear or if you have any further questions. There's also the Teahouse, which is a great, friendly place to ask questions. Thanks, /wiae /tlk 20:43, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
Hi Wiae, thanks again for the clarifications. I can certainly re-write sections that were copied, and remove any subjective or promotional language, adjectives and we, us, etc. to focus on the facts. Are there any further steps I can take right now to have the copyright banner removed from the page, or do I just have to wait for someone to look at it and see if it's now acceptable?
I am an employee of FITT, and would like to re-introduce parts of the descriptions about the courses and certification, as we often face some confusion from people and I hoped to include some explanatory facts to clarify some frequent questions. It is possible for me to re-write sections and propose it as a change on our talk page, or do I need to just suggest the idea and let someone else write it? Thanks! Ewan Roy at FITT (talk) 21:09, 7 March 2016 (UTC)Ewan Roy at FITT
@Ewan Roy at FITT: Hi, the copyright box at the top that reads "It has been requested that certain historical revisions of this page be redacted..." is only there to alert an administrator that some of the revisions in the page history need to be hidden due to copyright. It will be removed by an administrator (probably in the next 48 hours, I'd imagine) and then you won't see it anymore. So that will basically take care of itself!
To answer your second question, my first-glance impression is that the nitty-gritty details about courses and certifications are more appropriate for inclusion on FITT's website than they are in a Wikipedia article. After all, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a directory for every company/organization/unsigned hip-hop producer/app developer to list their products. So we're collectively more interested in seeing what others have said about FITT than what FITT itself says about FITT, if that makes sense.
So, long story short:
You can suggest your changes on the FITT talk page. Any way you like is fine, although well-developed text is much easier to work with. Just above your request, put this: {{request edit}}. (Make sure to add the braces too.) This will "flag" the talk page so that other editors know there's an open request. Thanks! /wiae /tlk 01:49, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Assistance with first new entry

My thanks for moving my first stub to the correct location for evaluation by experienced editors. TBoaN (talk) 04:12, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

@TBoaN: Hey, no problem. It looks like Voceditenore has very helpfully listed a lot of potentially useful sources at Draft:FireKing, and at a glance they would make a good foundation for a draft. Let me know if there's anything else I can help with on Wikipedia! /wiae /tlk 04:16, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. I set up a user page but am concerned that it may not be in the correct location. Did I get it right?TBoaN (talk) 04:20, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
@TBoaN: User:TBoaN is in the right place! Looks good. /wiae /tlk 04:23, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

05:01:26, 9 March 2016 review of submission by Dwayne Turberville


I'm not sure why this was declined, but I altered a few of the reference links. The cited source from PerezHilton.com is a post about Perez himself on the cover of Contrast Magazine's 1st issue. That is a reliable source. Please review the links that are being cited.

@Dwayne Turberville: Hi, did you read my comment at Draft:Contrast Magazine? It explains why the draft was declined. The Aaron Carter site doesn't mention Contrast Magazine, so it is not a good reference here. The two Wikipedia references should be removed, as Wikipedia is not considered a reliable source. As for Perezhilton.com, please see WP:QS—Questionable sources are those that have a poor reputation for checking the facts, lack meaningful editorial oversight, or have an apparent conflict of interest.[8] Such sources include websites and publications expressing views that are widely considered by other sources to be extremist or promotional, or that rely heavily on unsubstantiated gossip, rumor or personal opinion. Questionable sources should only be used as sources for material on themselves. Since this article is not about Perez Hilton but about Contrast Magazine, the Perezhilton site isn't helpful. In other words, citing Perezhilton.com doesn't show why the magazine itself is notable.
Unless the magazine has been discussed in depth by a variety of reliable, independent sources, it is probably not ready for its own article. Further, I advise you to read Wikipedia's conflict of interest policy. Thanks, /wiae /tlk 12:38, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
@Dwayne Turberville: Okay, I have a bit more time for a more comprehensive answer now. Do start by taking a look at the magazine inclusion guidelines. There are four main criteria, any one of which a magazine could satisfy in order to be suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia. They are:
  • the magazine has made significant impact in its field or other area, such as higher education;
  • the magazine has received a notable award or honor at a national or international level;
  • the magazine is or was the proceedings of a highly selective and prestigious scholarly society or association; or
  • the magazine has had regular and significant usage as a citation in academic or scholarly works.
Also, if a magazine receives significant, in-depth coverage in multiple reliable, independent sources, then it should also be suitable for inclusion; that is the general inclusion guideline.
So your job is to show that the magazine meets any one of those five criteria. I don't imagine it meets 1, 3 or 4. If it has won a significant national award, that could do the job. But your best bet is to find a variety of high-quality sources discussing the magazine. The problem with the current references is that they are not reliable, independent sources with significant coverage. As explained, the Aaron Carter site doesn't mention the magazine, the Wikipedia articles aren't considered a reliable source, and the Perezhilton.com site is questionable, given that it is a gossip blog which really should not be relied upon for encyclopedic sourcing.
Where to look for these sources? Reputable magazines, journals, books or newspapers (whether online or offline) are a good place to start your search. If such sources do not exist, then the subject is likely not ready for its own Wikipedia article at this time. Thanks, /wiae /tlk 13:57, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Possible inappropriate article

The article Wisteria (Web Series) is about something that has not come yet and has no sources. Should it be deleted? Abel Lawrence (talk) 04:21, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

@Abel Lawrence: Yes indeed. I took a look for a "Kyle Cipes" on Google and there are no hits (other than Wisteria (Web Series), so the article doesn't make a credible claim of significance. I was going to tag it for speedy deletion via the A7 web criterion, but User:Oshwah beat me to the punch. Good catch! /wiae /tlk 04:24, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
I did the same thing ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 04:27, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
I found another page which makes me uneasy [3]. If the page is appropriate, I apologize. If not, deal with it according to policies. I have already told Oshwah. Abel Lawrence (talk) 04:40, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
@Abel Lawrence: The page has since been submitted for review and a reviewer has declined it and flagged one of the key problems with the draft—that it does not show whether the subject meets the musician notability criteria. In general, if it's in a user sandbox, it's probably alright to let the user work on it uninterrupted. (Of course, there are exceptions, like for web host violations, copyright problems and attack pages). Many of the pages submitted for review to Articles for Creation are "in progress"; they're not perfect right away and they sometimes require a good deal of tweaking, referencing and rewriting before they may become suitable for acceptance into the article-space. Thanks, /wiae /tlk 12:15, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

hey

could you pls move the artcle Draft:Louis Casely-Hayford to Draft: Ing. Dr. Louis Casely-Hayford — Preceding unsigned comment added by Forsonkwesi (talk • contribs) 12:33, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

@Forsonkwesi: Hi, thanks for stopping by! The rule on Wikipedia about using academic titles, which you can read about here and here, is that article titles shouldn't use academic credentials or styles like "Dr." or "Ing." However, what you can do (and I see you have done this at Draft:Louis Casely-Hayford already) is to mention the schooling they undertook to receive those qualifications.
Also, while we're discussing the draft, I would suggest finding more references that discuss the subject in significant detail, and trimming some of the content in the "Contributions to VRA" and "Technological Knowledge" sections, as it reads somewhat promotionally and comes across at times as prohibited original research. In short, whenever you write a claim about a subject that another reader might question, it's a good idea to put a citation to a source after that claim. Thanks, /wiae /tlk 12:48, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
could you please review and accept my draft for me.
thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Forsonkwesi (talk • contribs) 17:03, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
@Forsonkwesi: Hello again! As I mentioned, the draft will need a variety of references to reliable, independent (third-party) sources that discuss the subject in significant detail. Many of the current references are insufficient to show whether the subject meets Wikipedia's biographical inclusion criteria. For example, geni.com is a generic people database that doesn't meet Wikipedia's reliability requirements, and that doesn't offer substantive, in-depth coverage of the subject. LinkedIn pages are primary sources that are not independent of the subject.
The draft will also need to be cleaned up in accordance with Wikipedia's neutral point of view. In all likelihood, the draft will not be accepted before these two things are done. Thanks, /wiae /tlk 17:07, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
thanks
could you pls help me with the editing
thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Forsonkwesi (talk • contribs) 18:02, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
@Forsonkwesi: Hello once again. I have no interest in this subject, but you may have better luck inquiring at WikiProject Ghana. Perhaps someone there may have knowledge of relevant sources. Thanks, /wiae /tlk 18:31, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Assistance with deletion

Hi, I had recently made a userspace draft for Association House of Chicago. It was deleted due to copyright infringement on two specific subsections (History, Mission). I would like to know if it is possible to restore the sections to my userspace for the rest of the sections, which were not copyrighted? Thank you User:Nmalekal —Preceding undated comment added 16:28, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

@Nmalekal: Hi, unfortunately I did not delete Draft:Association House of Chicago; I only nominated it for deletion. You would have to ask the deleting administrator, User:Diannaa, to see if they would be willing to do so. As I recall there was a good deal of copying, so it might not be possible to restore it on Wikipedia. Diannaa would be able to give you the final answer though. Thanks, /wiae /tlk 16:50, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
@Nmalekal: I have restored the non-violating segments to Draft:Association House of Chicago. Please don't add any prose to this wiki that you did not write yourself. Thanks, — Diannaa (talk) 19:26, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for your help! /wiae /tlk 20:58, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
@Diannaa:@Wiae: Thank you very much. I will work to make it all in my words. I'm sorry for the confusion I created. I didn't realize that submitting it for review wouldn't allow me to make changes and then resubmit it if it had any copyright issues. /nmalekal /tlk

my first wiki page

Hi there Wiae. I noticed you offered me significant assistance in understanding why my first pathetic attempt at creating a wiki page was deleted lickety split. I have created a page in my sandbox to try to find a place that is safe to work on my wiki article while I learn. I appreciate any help or advice you can give. I am literally clueless at what I am doing. I will do my best to get with the program. This and the wiki interface in general is not at all user friendly (to me) so I'm wicked confused most of the time. Laurenbove (talk) 19:05, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

@Laurenbove: Hi, thanks for stopping by. I'm happy to give you a bit of advice about your sandbox draft! I'm a little busy for the next three hours or so but I will give you a more fulsome response then. I certainly would not call your first attempts "pathetic", however. Wikipedia is, I freely admit, a very confusing place. Not pathetic, just new! More later. /wiae /tlk 19:13, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
@Laurenbove: Okay, here goes. The reason your draft was deleted was because it was copied from another website. The vast majority of the text on the Internet is protected by copyright, and that means we can't reuse it on Wikipedia. Now I understand you work with Mar Jennings. It's possible that the copyright-holder could license the text for use on Wikipedia. However, if the text is promotional (and I recall this being the case), then it's probably not worth licensing the text, as content on Wikipedia must be written from a neutral point of view.
This leads to my next point: since you work with or for Mar Jennings, you have what Wikipedia calls a conflict of interest. Conflict-of-interest editing is discouraged on Wikipedia, in large part because most people find it very difficult to write neutrally and objectively about a subject with which they have a close personal or professional relationship. All too often, people try to use Wikipedia as a means to promote their business/service/product/boss. This runs into two problems: encyclopedias aren't business directories or PR platforms; and Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that anyone can edit, meaning that no one person dictates or controls the content of a page. Both positive and negative well-sourced coverage can appear on Wikipedia. For this reason, I don't really recommend trying to write an article about Mar Jennings.
If you decide to proceed with User:Laurenbove/sandbox nonetheless, you would need to demonstrate that he is "notable". Subjects must be "notable" before they can appear in Wikipedia. "Notable" doesn't mean "important". Rather, it's a reflection of how much good-quality coverage a subject has received. For people, the standard is whether the person has been the subject of significant coverage in published reliable sources that are independent of the subject. For example, if a person is the subject of stories in the New York Times and The Guardian, that would be a strong indicator that the person is "notable". However, if the only real coverage comes from, say, the local community newsletter, the person wouldn't be "notable". (For example, here's an article about Mar Jennings, but notice how it's from a local newspaper, so it doesn't carry very much weight.) By "independent", I mean "has no connection with the subject". A person's own website is not independent. Neither is a press release or a blog post by a company affiliated with the person.
I had a quick look online for useable references for your draft and did not see much that would be helpful. My at-first-glance conclusion is that Mar Jennings may not meet Wikipedia's notability criteria. This is along the same lines as what RHaworth, the deleting administrator, told you on their talk page. So for these two reasons, I don't really recommend that you devote serious effort to the draft. Of course, there's no absolute prohibition on working on the draft, but I suspect that those efforts would be in vain. This may not have been the advice you had hoped to hear, but it's my two cents on the matter.
Of course, there are lots of other things to do on Wikipedia—all sorts of other topics to write about, articles to clean up, claims to reference, typos to fix, and the like—and so if you're interested in contributing to Wikipedia on a broader level, it's always great to have more editors with a strong command of the English language! Thanks, and do let me know if you have further questions. /wiae /tlk 22:28, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

article MassRoots

Thanks for catching the copyright violations on MassRoots, I am new to articles for creation and I missed it. I'll try not to let it happen again.  InsertCleverPhraseHere  23:25, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

@Insertcleverphrasehere: Hey, not a problem! If there are ever pages where you're not sure about possible copyright issues, you can always send the article to copyright problems, where the copyright clerks will take a look. On another note, it's nice to see you at AfC! There are always lots of submissions to review, and so the more reviewers, the merrier. I'm by no means an expert at AfC, but I'm happy to help however I can if you have any questions. And there's the Reviewer help talk page too! Thanks, and welcome. /wiae /tlk 00:05, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
I've started using the cpyvio detector, so I should be good.  InsertCleverPhraseHere  00:56, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
@Insertcleverphrasehere: That's a very useful tool indeed! By the way, apropos of nothing, if you ever notice that a draft submitter's username doesn't meet the username policy, you can report them to WP:UAA in blatant cases, or leave a {{uw-coi-username}} template on their talk page. As I'm sure you'll discover (if you haven't already), there are a lot of "corporate" accounts writing about their own services and products. Cheers! /wiae /tlk 16:40, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
Yes sorry I forgot about the "no corporate accounts" rule, I remember reading it a long time ago, but only recently have I gotten into AfD and had use for it. Thanks for the reminder.  InsertCleverPhraseHere  23:34, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

ANI User:Weist.michael

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Regardng Draft:Michael Weist. Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Weist.michael_is_disruptive_over_at_AfC  InsertCleverPhraseHere  00:13, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for accepting my redirect User:WP MANIKHANTA —Preceding undated comment added 04:40, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Redirect request: Victor G. Atiyeh International Airport

Hi Wiae,

Can you take a look at the redirect request that I posted here? Thanks! Ralletsretni (talk) 18:44, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

@Ralletsretni: Hi, I just took a look at the request. I noticed that I can't find any sources that actually call it the "Victor G. Atiyeh International Airport". I've gone ahead and created Victor G. Atiyeh International Concourse, but I'm not sure about Victor G. Atiyeh International Airport. I also noticed that the two examples given (Susan B. Anthony International Airport and Martin Luther King Jr. International Airport) were created by blocked users without any other contributions. If it were up to me, I would probably not create the redirect. However, as I'm definitely not an expert with redirects, I'll leave the request open so that another reviewer can give their thoughts. Thanks, /wiae /tlk 23:01, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Comment about Gwen Wynne

Hi! This is Gwen; thank you for helping me post. Just trying to get my head around the rules. On another deadline so I will study this more thoroughly in the next couple of days. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gwenwynne (talk • contribs) 01:31, March 23, 2016 (UTC)

@Gwenwynne: Certainly! There are indeed a lot of policies and strange acronyms on Wikipedia, so if you ever have any questions, feel free to swing by here and ask away, or try at the Teahouse, a friendly place for new editors to ask questions. Thanks, /wiae /tlk 01:54, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Request on 14:05:26, 23 March 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Stevejohnson008


I have recently submitted one article on wikipedia, but it was declined due the copyrights issue. I obey the rules & regulations of wikipedia & thus write the article again with unique content/text. Now my question, will you accept the article once it was declined? How many edits can be allowed per user for the same article?

http://www.transdyne.com (talk) 14:05, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

@Stevejohnson08: Thanks for stopping by. You are welcome to rewrite the content from the old draft in your sandbox (say, at User:Stevejohnson008/sandbox), so long as it is written in your own words. Note also that Wikipedia has a neutral point of view policy, and that Wikipedia prohibits promoting companies, services or products. This means that the text should be written as neutrally and objectively as possible. An easy way to do this is to avoid flowery adjectives and to simply report on what reliable, independent sources have said about the subject. Thanks, /wiae /tlk 14:30, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Very New To This

Hi Wiae,

Thanks for looking at my draft on the moss Seligeria cardotti, I was wondering if you might be able to tell me how to create an element on the page? What I mean is, on many pages about species or taxonomy there is often a box at the relative top left of the article containing an image of the species, a caption and some taxonomic classifications. I feel it would be useful to include and would like to include it in future pages but am not sure how to do so.

Dave! — Preceding unsigned comment added by DavidCThorn (talk • contribs) 16:02, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

@DavidCThorn: Hi Dave, and thanks for dropping by. What you're looking for is called an infobox. For living things, there is a specific one you can add called the Taxobox. Just navigate to that link, copy the code under "Usage", paste it at the top of your draft, and fill whichever fields you have information for. (It's okay if you don't fill them all out.) Also on that page you can see a few examples of taxoboxes in action. Let me know if you have any further questions. Thanks, /wiae /tlk 16:10, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Help With A Draft Edit

Hello Wiae, Thank you for taking a look at the RedPeg Marketing draft page. I have one change that I'm unsure how to fix. The company name should be RedPeg Marketing. The 'P' in the company name is lowercase and should be uppercase. Do you know the easiest fix? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jselig24 (talk • contribs) 16:09, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

@Jselig24:  Done. See Draft:RedPeg Marketing. Thanks! /wiae /tlk 16:23, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Scurtis2001

Hello, I believe you made a mistake deleting my revisions on the JKEDI Siege page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scurtis2001 (talk • contribs) 19:07, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) No; the only mistake was posssibly in not reporting you for vandalism!!!. Take it easy. Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 19:11, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
I agree. Scurtis2001, the content you added didn't have anything to do with the topic discussed at JKEDI Siege. You are certainly welcome to contribute constructively to the article, as at first glance it does need some work. However, jokes or conversational prose don't work in an encyclopedia. You may want to read WP:WELCOME for an introduction to Wikipedia and the sort of work that volunteers (like you and I) can do here. Thanks, /wiae /tlk 19:20, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Request on 22:01:14, 30 March 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Jimhussey


Hello, I have reworked previous draft on the ACT organization to try to eliminate any text that could be perceived as self-promoting, while at the same time creating an article that is consistent in content and tone for similar organizations (e.g., College Board, ETS). I would welcome any feedback you might be able to provide. Thank you. Jimhussey (talk) 22:01, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Jimhussey (talk) 22:01, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

@Jimhussey: Hi, I haven't been around much the past week but I'll take a look and give you my thoughts, hopefully by the end of the day. Thanks, /wiae /tlk 16:22, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks so much for your help in the copyvio areas! As you can see, it's heavily backlogged, so the help is most appreciated! CrowCaw 22:41, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Thank you! This message brightened my evening. I'm happy to help however I can. /wiae /tlk 03:03, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Oxford Space Systems concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Oxford Space Systems, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:31, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

08:08:24, 5 April 2016 review of submission by Pax72


Hi. I'm trying to meet all the criteria to get my submissions accepted. You have requested that I correct spelling errors, but I cannot find any errors. Please point me to the error you've seen. Most of the references to Craig Bryant are films and shows who's web pages have since been archived or removed. IMDB and similar sites are the only reliable references to them. Please advise which kind of online resources would meet the criteria. I have included some wikipedia references but have replaced most with 3rd party pages and reviews.

@Pax72: Hi, thanks for stopping by. I didn't leave the comment about spelling errors (333-blue did), so you may want to inquire with them. At first glance, the spelling is fine, although there is some formatting that could be done. Specifically, names of television shows and films are italicized on Wikipedia, but not also bolded.
You can use websites that are no longer active (e.g., if they've been archived) by searching for them on archive.org.
I would remove the references to Wikipedia articles, since Wikipedia is not considered a reliable source. You can use Wikipedia articles as wikilinks but not as references.
I took a look at some of the other references and noticed that most of them don't offer significant, in-depth coverage of Bryant. Mostly they mention him once or twice. That's fine for proving that he was involved with the works listed in the draft, but it doesn't alone show why he is notable. In order to show that he is notable and thus suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia, he should meet one of the criteria at WP:COMPOSER. Judging from my quick look at the article, he does not appear to meet any of those criteria, either under the main "Criteria for composers and lyricists" heading or the "Other" heading.
So your job is to see if you can find references that prove he meets at least one of those criteria. You may find this tool helpful in your search: Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL. Thanks! /wiae /tlk 13:17, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Hello Wiae

Two months ago you checked my article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Niama_Reisser_Company#History and you even went ahead to give suggestions as to what needed to be changed. I now want to invite you to check if my draft is ready for publication. For instance: I noticed Innomot AG: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kugelmotor has a published page here, yet they don't sell any mechanical products or engines. I also checked and found that their website ranks lower when compare to Naima Reisser that is according to Alexa.com. Any assistance to have this article will be appreciated greatly. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Markpedia1 (talk • contribs) 14:37, April 5, 2016‎ (UTC)

@Markpedia1: Hi, thanks for stopping by. DGG has left a very helpful comment on the draft and I would suggest following his advice. I'll note that references to Amazon pages are generally not reliable sources, as they don't have a reputation for fact-checking or editorial oversight. The Frost publication does not have any substantive content about Niama Reisser, and I don't read German but the Springer link only seems to mention them once. At first glance this does not appear to be the sort of substantive, in-depth coverage required for inclusion in Wikipedia.
As for the Kugelmotor page, that is in the German Wikipedia. The German-language Wikipedia has different notability standards and tends to do things differently than we do on the English-language Wikipedia. I'm afraid it's a bit like comparing apples and oranges. Thanks, /wiae /tlk 13:23, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Message moved from your User Page

hello. You removed material from a page I created that comes from my own Website and is therefore not an infringement on copyright. The other material you removed is publicly available at the Tate Britain site and is of a general nature. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rburnettatemilycarr (talk • contribs) 09-04-2016

@Rburnettatemilycarr: Hi, thanks for inquiring. The text from http://rburnett.ecuad.ca/ronburnett/2014/8/13/henry-inlander-a-personal-view is not suitably licensed for use on Wikipedia, and so it cannot just be copied and pasted into a Wikipedia article. Having said that, since you own the copyrighted text on that page, you can donate it for use on Wikipedia by following the steps in the link in this sentence. However, the text is from a blog, which are generally not considered reliable sources and thus aren't really fantastic sources for biographies. (The exception to that rule is if the blogger is an established expert whose work in the relevant field has been published by reliable third-party publications.) And at any rate, since the text in that source is a little flowery at times (like "understood this eruption of the real world onto the canvas", for example), I would suggest that it is probably easier to paraphrase it than to donate it, having regard to Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy.
As for the Tate Gallery source, I haven't removed that content from Henry Inlander; I've just rephrased it in complete sentences. Thanks, and let me know if you have further questions. /wiae /tlk 17:37, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Request on 10:52:22, 9 April 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Paul2322


Dear Wiae re: MARSIPAN: MAnagement of Really SIck Patients with Anorexia Nervosa (April 8)

Thank you for considering this article, and for your comments. I would be most grateful for clarification. I understand that the article must not seem like a journal article, but cannot really see how to change it. I have looked at other medical Wikipedia articles and find them rather similar to mine in structure and content. (For example "Refeeding Syndrome", "Binge eating disorder", "Heart failure", "Wernicke's encephalopathy".

They all follow a similar structure e.g. Introduction, Aetiology, Epidemiology, Clinical features, Treatment. I structured my article deliberately in the same way.

The importance of this article is that young people with anorexia are dying in medical wards because the staff do not know how to treat them. Doctors use Wikipedia as a primary source of information, and although I have produced guidance reports, the uptake is not as good as I wish.

I would be so grateful if you would help me by letting me know how I can make my article more "Encyclopaedia"-like.

Regards and thanks

Dr Paul Robinson MD

Paul2322 (talk) 10:52, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

@Paul2322: Certainly! My first suggestion would be to take a quick look at the "body" section of Wikipedia's Manual of Style. It indicates the order in which the different sections of an article should be arranged. You can click on the individual "sections" there to learn more about how to write each section according to Wikipedia's house style. More specifically, Wikipedia articles don't start with "summaries" or "introductions". Rather, they should begin with a lead section that summarizes the who/what/when/where/why of MARSIPAN in particular. This is the difference between your draft and the articles you've listed above like heart failure. While those are about general medical conditions, your draft is about a specific guideline implemented by a specific group of physicians/academics. And so your draft should reflect this focus and should probably be restricted to a discussion of MARSIPAN specifically, not about the general treatment of anorexia nervosa. Likewise, there is a good deal of discussion about subjects peripheral to anorexia nervosa (for example, BMI figures, the DSM-5, and so on) in the draft. However, as mentioned, this draft should be primarily about the MARSIPAN guideline itself. A good way to shift the focus of the draft accordingly is to report on what reliable, independent (third-party) sources have said about MARSIPAN. I don't have access to most of the references that are in the draft right now, but it seems like some of them might not offer significant discussion of MARSIPAN itself. Basically, the draft should show both what MARSIPAN is and why it is "important"; good references about MARSIPAN will do just that.
Finally, there is the issue of writing about medical subjects. Wikipedia articles do not give medical advice, but nonetheless many readers use them as a tool to learn more about health and medicine. So Wikipedia has a specific rule for writing about biomedical information: such information must be "based on reliable, third-party published secondary sources, and must accurately reflect current knowledge". I am largely unfamiliar with medicine-related articles on Wikipedia, although there are some editors (Jytdog and Doc James, for example) who I believe have a good deal of expertise in the area.
I hope this is a helpful start. If you have medicine-specific Wikipedia editing questions or are seeking feedback that is more specifically tailored to the direction the draft should take, I would recommend inquiring at the talk page of WikiProject Medicine. Thanks, /wiae /tlk 18:04, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

DRN help needed and volunteer roll call

You are receiving this message because you have listed yourself on the list of volunteers at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard/Volunteering#List of the DRN volunteers.

First, assistance is needed at DRN. We have recently closed a number of cases without any services being provided for lack of a volunteer willing to take the case. There are at least three cases awaiting a volunteer at this moment. Please consider taking one.

Second, this is a volunteer roll call. If you remain interested in helping at DRN and are willing to actively do so by taking at least one case (and seeing it through) or helping with administrative matters at least once per calendar month, please add your name to this roll call list. Individuals currently on the principal volunteer list who do not add their name on the roll call list will be removed from the principal volunteer list after June 30, 2016 unless the DRN Coordinator chooses to retain their name for the best interest of DRN or the encyclopedia. Individuals whose names are removed after June 30, 2016, should feel free to re-add their names to the principal volunteer list, but are respectfully requested not to do so unless they are willing to take part at DRN at least one time per month as noted above. No one is going to be monitoring to see if you live up to that commitment, but we respectfully ask that you either live up to it or remove your name from the principal volunteer list.

Best regards, TransporterMan (talk · contribs) (Current DRN coordinator) (Not watching this page) Sent via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:05, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

18:53:23, 11 April 2016 review of submission by 142.113.145.68


Hello Waie, thanks for your review and explanation for why my submission was declined - it made sense. I've made changes to the article that I hope will align it with the requirements but I wanted to make sure I'm heading in the direction, with my adding more "non-Wikipedia" references. I think it's noteworthy that I've tried to model the article and content after similar products - Febreze, Glade, AirWick and LittleTrees. 142.113.145.68 (talk) 18:53, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi, IP editor! I took a quick look at the new sources and here are my thoughts. Many of the references provide interesting reading material, but very few of them are specifically about Deodoroc. Some of the references talk about zeolites, for example, but don't discuss Deodoroc. That's what is needed—sources that are about Deodoroc. (At least a solid paragraph about them is a good minimum target to shoot for.) The references should also be from reliable sources, meaning sources that have a reputation for fact-checking and editorial oversight. Typically this includes books published by reputed presses, newspapers, journals, some magazines, and the like. What is not included in the definition of a reliable source is sites like blogs or web forums. References should also be independent of the subject, so from a source that isn't connected or affiliated with the subject.
So that's the goal: references from reputed sources that offer an independent, in-depth look at Deodoroc. If you can find, say, three to five such references, that would be a very good start. Thanks, /wiae /tlk 19:23, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Wiae/Archive_10&oldid=1139973298"