User talk:Broccoli and Coffee/Archive 1

Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4

Your submission at Articles for creation: Aaron Skonnard has been accepted

Aaron Skonnard, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

» Shadowowl | talk 18:15, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

Punctuation

Hi Mistakenformatt. This is regarding your recent edits at Mark Twain. In most cases, Wikipedia style is to close the quote before placing a comma or period. (There are exceptions. See MOS:TQ.) This may be counterintuitive for you; it certainly was for me in my early days around here. Anyway, just wanted to let you know so you don't waste time and effort "fixing" it on other articles. RivertorchFIREWATER 03:42, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, apparently I had misinterpreted that rule (and you're right; it is counter-intuitive!). Thanks for the notice, will leave that alone going forward. Mistakenformatt (talk) 03:53, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Mistakenformatt. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Slaughterhouse Five

Slaughterhouse Five is not a "satirical novel" even if it might have heavy doses of satire's first cousin, irony. If you insist on injecting that opinion into the lead, I would expect to see one or more cited critical categorizations as such in the body, to which I will add innumerable others contending that it is a different species of vegetable entirely. Hopefully my alternative wording now up will hit the mark with you. Carrite (talk) 17:59, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Juliette Danielle for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Juliette Danielle is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted. Since you have helped edit the article recently, thought you should know. -- Fuzheado | Talk 22:54, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Yo, You've been approved at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_permissions/AutoWikiBrowser&diff=815780793&oldid=815763867 with an AWB thing. Nakon 03:01, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! — Mistakenformatt (talk) 03:41, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Choices (Billy Yates song), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Can You Feel It (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 11:02, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of shopping malls in the United States, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Crossroads Mall (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:34, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Jumanji

Okay, I've cited my source of Robin Williams recorded an audiobook in 2011.--NeoBatfreak (talk) 07:33, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

NeoBatfreak (talk · contribs), thanks. I've added a link to your citation as well. Mformatt(So it goes.) 07:40, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Malcolm Butler

Please explain the point of mentioning the Patriots making it on HIS page, unless its about HIM going. It doesn't make sense. - GalatzTalk 20:39, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

I didn't add the original comment, I only fixed some of the syntax, but it is noteworthy and felt perfectly fine to include. Other players, including Tom Brady, Danny Amendola, Dion Lewis, and Rob Gronkowski, make notes about this. Again, I didn't add the note, but seeing it mentioned in several other Patriots players article justified keeping it. Making it to the Super Bowl is notable, and the line does not include anything that hasn't happened yet. - Broccoli and Coffee(So it goes.) 04:02, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Re: 1987

Hi, I saw you reverted me on this page. I want to clarify I was only reverting a LTA there, as can been seen on his contributions page. Hope that clarifies it. --Wiki13 (talk) 18:29, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Yeah sorry, I was just looking through that now. I didn't mean to revert you or Chrissymad specifically, just that several formatting changes (dashes, extra spaces, etc.) were also reverted so I was looking to restore those, and didn't realize there was a bigger history there. Thanks for the note. Broccoli and Coffee(So it goes.) 18:32, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
No problem there. This LTA is known to do that kind of stuff (besides that also plainly vandalizing pages, calling patroller and administrators names and creating attack usernames from time to time). I was confused for a second when you reverted me, until I quickly realized the English Wikipedia has its own formatting style for articles. --Wiki13 (talk) 18:37, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Brian Hoyer

Why do you think he's number 15? He was number 2 after being traded to the Patriots last season, and the Patriots roster lists him as number 2. Tarl N. (discuss) 03:03, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Not a big deal, but we're talking about two different players. Hoyer is 2, Hogan is 15. Broccoli and Coffee(So it goes.) 03:05, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
Oops. Time to get my eyes checked. Sorry about that, I could swear it said Hoyer. Tarl N. (discuss) 03:07, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
Not a problem, easy mistake to make with those 5-letter H names. Cheers. Broccoli and Coffee(So it goes.) 03:13, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Maria Rivera (Actress)

so you just said "delete Not notable enough, nothing indicating that will change in the immediate future" just because you dont know this particular actor, it does NOT mean she's not "notable enough". please check the list of the projects shes been in that i added to the page. have you heard of the hit tv shows Power (starz network) she has a major important recurring role there. im sure you heard of the NBC network where shes worked in multiple shows (GUEST STARS speaking roles) like Law and order svu, chicago med , blindspot; where she got great reviews from her performance there. her face was all over the newspapers like NY times, etc.. (let me know if you need me to send it to you or just google it.) shes returning again this season on the tv series power AND has a speaking supporting role on the very known blockbuster movie and franchise THE PURGE 4 (the first purge). i could go on and on. shes also represented by one of the biggest managers in the industry, whos clients are: JUST to name one THE viola davis herself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rodrigop1983 (talk • contribs)

@Rodrigop1983: You seem to be taking this too personally. Really, the article and subject do not meet notability guidelines as described in WP:NOTE and WP:BIO. I'm not sure if you have a personal connection to the subject, but if you do, that may also violate WP:COI. If you'd like to create a new article, I would suggest first beginning in the sandbox before publishing in the mainspace. I'd also suggest becoming more acquainted with wiki policies and guidelines. In the meantime, you may want to start with WP:DUDE. - Broccoli & Coffee (Oh hai) 06:03, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

im not taking it too personally. it ca be frustrating to have people like you "nominating" my article for deletion without knowing facts! do your research first on the person im making the article about THEN you can have a valid opinion. there are a lot of other pages with WAY less information about people no one has ever heard of and the pages are up and running. so why target my page without doing research to see if what im writing is valid?

you and the other 2 guys have made this whole experience of writing this article about a KNOWN person, sour. by nominating pages to deletion instead of giving advice of how to improve it or give constructive feedback . also doing so without doing any proper research on my article/ person im writing about.Rodrigop1983 (talk) 07:02, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

please delete my page - all this headache makes no senseRodrigop1983 (talk) 07:32, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Sleeping in United States Congress offices

I removed the {{PROD}} tag at Sleeping in United States Congress offices, which says "If this template is removed, do not replace it". If you like, you may nominate the article for deletion at WP:AFD. Thank you. --Jax 0677 (talk) 13:12, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Arturo Féliz-Camilo

Hi,

Thanks for your comments. I'm working on fixing them. I have already fixed:

Removed external links from body

Revised language to make it more neutral

I did want to ask you about this:

"avoid peacock terms that promote the subject".

I used a few phrases and terms from cited articles in trustworthy sources but I still did edit some of them to make it more neutral. One thing that I don't feel should be removed is the "Best in the World" which is in no way meant to mean that the author's book was "the best in the world" but it's actually the name of the award. Every year Gourmand World Cookbook Awards recognize the "best" cookbooks in the world and give the top three in each category the "Best in the World" denomination. So it's not meant as a "peacock term" but it's actually the name of the prize.

I leave you a link to the image here for reference. I did not add to article as I don't have copyrights over the image and didn't want to infringe.

Gourmand World Cookbook Awards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yu Jing Hao Tse (talk • contribs) 6:54 pm, 2 June 2018, last Saturday (2 days ago) (UTC−7)

@Yu Jing Hao Tse: These changes are a good start. I've gone in and made several cosmetic changes. One thing you can do next: remove all of the amazon citation links in the "Works" section. If you're comfortable doing this, you can use the ISBN template in its place. This template will allow you to use the ISBN to create a neutral source for each work. Hope that helps. Broccoli & Coffee (Oh hai) 9:49 pm, 2 June 2018, last Saturday (2 days ago) (UTC−7)
@Broccoli & Coffee: Of course. Thanks. I'll review the links and check the ISBN template. Thanks for your feedback. I'm just learning the ropes.
@Broccoli & Coffee: Just removed outside Amazon links and replaced them with the ISBN template. Thanks again.

WikiProject Western Governors University

WikiProject Georgia Tech

As a current or past contributor to a related article, I thought I'd let you know that I've started WikiProject Western Governors University, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of WGU. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks and related articles. Thanks! Paul Smith111977 (talk) 08:49, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Sleeping in United States Congress offices for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sleeping in United States Congress offices is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sleeping in United States Congress offices until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

- BilCat (talk) 05:25, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

Orphan tags

Hi, as per WP:Orphan please do not add orphan tags to articles that have at least one incoming mainspace link not including disambig pages or redirects, but including articles, lists and index pages, thanks Atlantic306 (talk) 15:04, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

I changed the name of Piranshahr city to Mahabad in its article on English Wikipedia

Hello mr broccoli, i changed the name of Piranshahr to Mahabad, West Azerbaijan, the two cities are not the same but since they were previously the same county, i would like to change the name of Piranshahr to Mahabad, West Azerbaijan in English wikipedia, it was reverted at the beginning but now it is saved and i hope it will not be reverted to Piranshahr, it is true it is not neutral in POV but many people consider the two cities as being one city. Please do not let other admins to revert the name despite being a wrong name. Thank you --Zana.daneshian (talk) 02:08, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

Request on 07:30:56, 31 May 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by ARynan


Hi, BC! Just got your notes back on my article submission. I am SO sorry about the Amazon links; I forgot to delete them from my Word draft; I'll remove them immediately in the morning. As for your other notes -- so it was basically too promotional-sounding, yes? I should revamp it to less adjective-laden description? :P There aren't a lot of outside sources I've been able to find to offer in the Reference section, though. Can you offer any other suggestions or specific examples of to the problems you spotted in the draft so I can improve this and get it closer to right? I'm heading off to bed, but will tackle this again in the morning; may I come back to you if I have questions during the rewrite?

ARynan (talk) 07:30, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

Edit to Draft:Credence (Graphic Novel)

In this edit to Draft:Credence (Graphic Novel) you removed the publication date from a cited source, changed the title from an accurate one to an excessively abbreviated one, and removed the author information. I have restored the publication date, and plan to restore the other citation metadata. Why did you make these changes, please? Please ping me if you respond here. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 02:05, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

@DESiegel: I think you may be reading that edit wrong. The same URL was cited twice, with two different sets of metadata. One had a long, irrelevant title, the other had the shorter one. One had the publication date, the other didn't. In the latter case, I agree with you, and I think it was just removed accidentally while consolidating. The author appears to be pulled from a different post; I think the one here is actually Keith Howell, but this site is so poorly formatted, it can be hard to tell. Hope that all makes sense. Broccoli & Coffee (Oh hai) 05:51, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
I think that there were two different pages on the same site used as sources, but I may be mistaken, and i will check. The long, irrelevant title is, if I am not mistaken, the actual page title.If it were my site I wouldn't have used such a long title, but it is what it is. Thank you for your response. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 12:23, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

Broc, I've removed some citations that were irrelevant, tightened the narrative to keep to story or publishing facts, and added the ISBN. If you have a moment or two to let me know how this revision feels to you, I'd be much obliged. Hope you had a good weekend. :) ARD (talk) 01:51, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Diyal

Hi can you please specify the section in my article, for submission, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Diyal that needs a more specific or original source for verification. thanks, Don.chaudhry — Preceding unsigned comment added by Don.chaudhry (talk • contribs) 17:26, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

@Don.chaudhry: Read through WP:RS for more information on reliable sources. Basically, blogs, facebook, and discussion boards are not reliable sources for an encyclopedia entry. – Broccoli & Coffee (Oh hai) 00:17, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Amelia Edwards, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page St Mary the Virgin (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 09:25, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

HomeLight

Hi Broccoli and Coffee, I see that you have reverted my edits for HomeLight service under NOR policy.

"HomeLight is a California real estate broker based in San Francisco. HomeLight is a California real estate broker and is paid from the agent’s final commission in the form of a referral fee. Matched results provided by HomeLight are always biased because only real estate agents who have agreed to pay the fee are displayed in HomeLight results. HomeLight analyzes real estate agents independently of their referral agreement status, but it fails to match real estate consumers with agents that have not signed their referral fee agreement. The cost of a referral fee is almost certainly incorporated into consumers’ final cost of commission."

Let me know what specifically you have a problem with in these statements, I am happy to reference Terms of Service of this service:

  • [Copyvio removed]

Thanks.--Litesand (talk) 21:38, 14 July 2018 (UTC)


  • Hi Broccoli and Coffee, here is a proposed change to address your NOR edit. Please let me know if you see any issues with this update,
HomeLight is a real estate referral company based in San Francisco. Although Homelight is itself a real estate broker, it does not provide services typical of a broker. Instead, Homelight works with a network of participating real estate brokers in various markets to which they refer customers.
HomeLight is paid from the agent’s final commission in the form of a 25% referral fee. Matched results provided by HomeLight are always biased because only real estate agents who have agreed to pay the fee are displayed in HomeLight results. While HomeLight claims to rate real estate agents independently of their referral agreement status, it fails to match real estate consumers with agents that have not signed their referral fee agreement. Referral fees generally result in what antitrust experts label as "reverse competition" - competition not for the consumer attention but for the attention of middle-man who steers the consumer toward its network of brokers and away from competitors. Such steering may result in lower quality of service or higher commissions, fees, and price levels.
Thanks.--Litesand (talk) 01:29, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
@Litesand: Thanks for bringing up the discussion, rather than engaging in an edit war. My reverts were actually for not adhering to a neutral point of view. The main reason for this was the line "HomeLight are always biased". This line in particular does not pass NPOV, as it is more commentary and criticism, rather than providing an encyclopedic description of the company. Likewise, phrases like "While HomeLight claims..." and "it fails to..." push that line. A criticism section could be added, but this would need to be separate from the "Overview" section. Hope that answers your question. – Broccoli & Coffee (Oh hai) 05:31, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
@Broccoli and Coffee: Hi Broccoli and Coffee, your NPOV recommendations make sense, thank you for pointing it out. While it it true that referral fee services are always biased, I can also see why Wiki rules do not allow for such statements. I am going to revise the edit with the following format, if you don't think that your concerns have been addressed or see any other issues with the following, please let me know so that I can adjust it before making an edit:


HomeLight is a real estate referral company based in San Francisco. Although HomeLight is itself a real estate broker, it does not provide services typical of a broker. Instead, Homelight works with a network of participating real estate brokers in various markets to which they refer customers.
==== Referral Fee Model Criticism ====
HomeLight is paid from the agent’s final commission in the form of a 25% referral fee. Matched results provided by HomeLight may be considered biased because only real estate agents who have agreed to pay the fee are displayed in HomeLight results. While HomeLight rates real estate agents independently of their referral status, it does not match real estate consumers with agents that have not signed their referral fee agreement. Referral fees generally result in what antitrust experts label as "reverse competition" - competition not for the consumer attention but for the attention of middle-man who steers the consumer toward its network of brokers and away from competitors. Such steering may result in lower quality of service or higher commissions, fees, and price levels.


Thanks.--Litesand (talk) 05:54, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
That's certainly better, and thank you for the patience and effort. I would say now try and find an outside source that calls HomeLight's results biased. Right now the phrase "may be considered" is going to imply that "someone" said that. If that "someone" exists, and is not just you or me, than it should be included. Additionally, any other sources that criticize the company and this model will help with the rest of the section. – Broccoli & Coffee (Oh hai) 06:08, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
@Broccoli and Coffee: Hi Broccoli and Coffee, thank you for your help. I am removing the direct reference to HomeLight bias, instead, now concentrating directly on statements from its Terms of Service that agent must agree to a referral fee in order to play. I am also adding a reference to referral fees being criticized as a business model. Please let me know your thoughts on this edit,
HomeLight is a real estate referral company based in San Francisco. Although HomeLight is itself a real estate broker, it does not provide services typical of a broker. Instead, Homelight works with a network of participating real estate brokers in various markets to which they refer customers.
==== Referral Fee Model Criticism ====
HomeLight is paid from the agent’s final commission in the form of a 25% referral fee. Matched results provided by HomeLight only include real estate agents who have agreed to pay the referral fee to HomeLight after the transaction is complete. While HomeLight sorts through real estate agents independently of their referral status, it does not match real estate consumers with agents that have not signed their referral fee agreement. Referral fees generally result in what antitrust experts label as "reverse competition" - competition not for the consumer attention but for the attention of middle-man who steers the consumer toward its network of brokers and away from competitors. Such steering may result in lower quality of service or higher commissions, fees, and price levels. Some real estate agents advocate that a referral fee brokers make consumers a commodity that the referral broker is selling to another agent.
Thanks.--Litesand (talk) 20:21, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Creation of Rendez-vous (band)

Hey there!

Thanks for your feedback with my article Draft:Rendez-Vous_(Band) I have to say that this is my first contribution to wikipedia so I might need to learn a bit ! I took time to look for the reason why my article was not accepted and I did some modifications I hope that will work. 1- I add some sources : national french Radio (France Inter, France Culture), European TV (Arte) that show the notoriety of this band at least in France. 2- I've check the Criterian for musicians and ensembles and it seems that the band meet at least 5 criteria : 1, 4, 7, 10, 12. 3- You can easely guess that if I do an article it's because I like the band, but I think I do respect the "Neutral point of view" in my article, I focussed on the facts and tried to respect the wikipedia style as far as I can (my english could sometimes be better). I'm new to wikipedia and I would love to contribute more so I'll be pleased if you can help me with this first one. Looking forward to reading from you --AntoineWiki2018 (talk) 10:35, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi AntoineWiki2018 (talk · contribs), I've gone in and made some edits. I think the band is likely notable enough. I've cut some of the WP:NPOV concerns. Can you find some sources indicating they are working on their new album, and clarify the Burger Records line? – Broccoli & Coffee (Oh hai) 00:33, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi Broccoli and Coffee (talk · contribs) and thanks for you help ! I added a citation for the Burger Records line. For the sources concerning the new album, it's for now only on social networks (links I can't add, right?) But the first single will be out this week as they just announced, so we might have some sources then ! I will add it and let you know ! Many Thanks ! --AntoineWiki2018 (talk) 09:43, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Marc-Olivier Strauss-Kahn

Hello Broccoli and Coffee, A page has been posted for a new subject, Marc-Olivier Strauss-Kahn, Director General and Chief Economist of the Central Bank of France. It underwent extensive changes, cuts and edits today. One editor reviewed it, wanting the family background sections to be cut (even though the parents are referenced and written about on his brother Dominique Strauss-Kahn's Wikipedia page, and I found a different set of genealogical references than the ones on DSK's page); and wanting more references. The principal critique was that any unsuitable reference(s) (such as .geni needed to be removed, which they have). There are quite a lot of sound, independent, verifiable references here. That editor suggested that another editor now review it for submission. I am wondering if you would be nice enough to be that editor so it can keep moving forward? Many thanks. Here is the link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Marc-Olivier_Strauss-Kahn. Lettucecup (talk) 20:38, 18 July 2018 (UTC)Lettucecup

It is very important that all wikipedia articles about living persons contain neutral, notable, and verifiable information. That last one is especially important. I suggest reading WP:RS and WP:V, as well as WP:BLP, WP:NOR, and WP:NPOV. I know you've already read some of those pages, but they contain important tips on how to get your article accepted, especially concerning a BLP.
In my initial quick glance, I'd say there's certainly some good information in the draft. I also wouldn't say that all of the sources are unreliable -- but neither of the previous reviewers were saying that either. Make sure every claim made in the draft can be backed up and verified by independent reliable sources. If it can't be verified, delete it. If it's not important or encyclopedic, delete it. Anything questionable should be removed -- you can always add it later if you find a reliable source to back it up. Good luck. – Broccoli & Coffee (Oh hai) 21:04, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. Making the cuts now. You are great to work with. Lettucecup (talk) 21:17, 18 July 2018 (UTC)lettucecup

Dear Broccoli and Coffee, I have taken all your suggestions and applied them. The article has been cut by 50%, and new references added. The ordering of information has been significantly changed and tightened. The Boards have been removed from the professional career section, and bulleted. One significant, and common issue, with people who are of this age, is that references are fewer. However, there are enough to verify what is written here now. Would you happen to be in the mood to have a look and potentially review for article creation? Thank you again.

Lettucecup (talk) 22:22, 18 July 2018 (UTC)Lettucecup

Aretha Henry albums

Hello, you nominated an Aretha Henry album for deletion at: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Enchanted (Aretha Henry album). It turns out that she has another album article that was easily missed because it was not linked to her main article. I nominated that one for deletion for the same reasons of notability and conflict of interest, so consider placing a vote at: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beautiful (Aretha Henry album). ---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 21:17, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Request on 02:42:46, 16 June 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by JodyWhitehead


Hello Broccoli and Coffee, you recently declined a draft I created. This is the first page I have ever created on Wikipedia and would like to try to get it published as a summer project. I would like to let you know that I do not know the subject personally. I live in New York and saw her on the news. I am just trying to get a page submitted for a summer project and I already submitted Dani Carson as my subject. Is there anything I can do to make this page better so you can accept it? Thank you for your time! JodyWhitehead (talk) 02:42, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

@JodyWhitehead: Hi Jody, sorry for the late reply, just got back from a mini-vacation. To answer your question, Wikipedia has a strict requirement of notability for its articles, especially on biographies of living people. This helps preserve the integrity and reliability of the entire encyclopedia. Unfortunately, it does not (yet) appear that Dani Carson is notable enough for her own page. You can read more about these standards here: WP:BIO, WP:42, WP:VER, and WP:YFA. Hope that helps. – Broccoli & Coffee (Oh hai) 21:49, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Regarding Draft:Die Sektor

I've been editing Wikipedia for years anonymously, mostly minor edits or weighing in on talk page discussions to provide info and reach a consensus. However, I'm having trouble putting together a new article. I chose the band Die Sektor because they previously had an article years ago, but they had only released one studio album at that time, so, naturally editors must have figured they weren't notable to have their own page. Rightly so. Now, Die Sektor has had several more studio album releases, EPs, and compilations; and they have toured with other notable aggrotech and electro-industrial groups who do have articles on Wikipedia such as God Module. They've also taken many interviews, so there are plenty of sources out there to write about the group's history, style, influences. and current situation. My problem is in putting all this information together into an article format. I'm generally a good writer, but it's been probably a decade since my last academic writing assignment. Could you provide me with some links to resources or tools that could help me with putting my information into the correct article format? I'll be looking at articles for similar groups for inspiration. Thanks Clouvas (talk) 07:57, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

New page for Richard J. Marks has been re-written

Hello Broccoli and Coffee, (I like your username, it goes well with mine (Lettucecup). Thanks for reviewing the new page for Richard J. Marks. It has now been extensively re-written, pruned, and re-styled for Wikipedia in mind to addressing all your comments. In every possible place and instance, a source has been established for attaining the neutral voice needed, as well as to elicit needed context for additional notability. Special note, asking for your editorial guidance. The section that still remains long-ish (longer) is the 2nd PP in the China section. In this case, my sense has been that additional context may be good. I understand that this shouldn't be article style, so any final editing would be absolutely OK! Marks, as an American, held a unique place in the SISC. It was a major enough competition/event that China Central Television (CCTV) did a one-hour documentary on it that was primetime broadcast in China, but that program video no longer exists in any online archive, and no press release in English can be located for it. This China event (SISC) also comes, contextually, from an "earlier era" (more groundbreaking, first-of's) for climate change action. It was held by the niece of President Xi in China, with CGI-Asia and other high-powered international partners -- but over time, prior China websites (press articles, etc.) have vanished, leaving much less written about it (except for here). (I asked a source in China, who added a subtle thing about Hiu Ng ... that since her uncle Xi gained power as China's President, her public profile as a pioneer in clean energy/climate has been completely subdued; most immediate members of China's ruling family have now all taken permanent leave from the public eye.) The SISC took place before Xi took power. It would nonetheless be easy to remove quotes or names, thereby shortening it; or leave it in. I am asking you about this, and fine with any and all cutting, so it doesn't feel like "original research" by any means (which I don't think it is). My personal opinion is still that the range of top-end leadership (and given that it took place in China) is benefited by keeping the few sentences that provide additional context/voice/verification. They also establish a link to the environmental relevance of the main subject's work there (Richard J. Marks). Further, this piece has been carefully re-written throughout to eliminate prior problems of "resume" style. The subject's boards and charities has been moved to the end, and can easily be cut if needed, but they have been sourced and are accurate. The filmography has been made more concise by moving the renewable energy films into the list. (ACORE as a section unto itself has therefore been cut). I am hopeful we are in good shape now. Thanks so much for helping move this into a useful, concise, approved piece. If you are able, would you consider coming back to review it? If you think this piece is ready to be published, that would be great. All best! Lettucecup (talk) 20:24, 14 July 2018 (UTC)Lettucecup

@Lettucecup: Hello, thanks for the note. Looks like significant changes have been made. I will take a further look tomorrow and get back to you. In the meantime, other editors and reviewers may comment as well. Thanks for the effort. Best, – Broccoli & Coffee (Oh hai) 21:01, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Fantastic, thank you. I'll give it one very careful review again tonight.

Lettucecup (talk) 23:24, 14 July 2018 (UTC)Lettucecup

Many thanks again. Lettucecup (talk) 20:12, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Marc-Olivier Strauss-Kahn

Hello Broccoli and Coffee, A page has been posted for a new subject, Marc-Olivier Strauss-Kahn, Director General and Chief Economist of the Central Bank of France. It underwent extensive changes, cuts and edits today. One editor reviewed it, wanting the family background sections to be cut (even though the parents are referenced and written about on his brother Dominique Strauss-Kahn's Wikipedia page, and I found a different set of genealogical references than the ones on DSK's page); and wanting more references. The principal critique was that any unsuitable reference(s) (such as .geni needed to be removed, which they have). There are quite a lot of sound, independent, verifiable references here. That editor suggested that another editor now review it for submission. I am wondering if you would be nice enough to be that editor so it can keep moving forward? Many thanks. Here is the link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Marc-Olivier_Strauss-Kahn. Lettucecup (talk) 20:38, 18 July 2018 (UTC)Lettucecup

It is very important that all wikipedia articles about living persons contain neutral, notable, and verifiable information. That last one is especially important. I suggest reading WP:RS and WP:V, as well as WP:BLP, WP:NOR, and WP:NPOV. I know you've already read some of those pages, but they contain important tips on how to get your article accepted, especially concerning a BLP.
In my initial quick glance, I'd say there's certainly some good information in the draft. I also wouldn't say that all of the sources are unreliable -- but neither of the previous reviewers were saying that either. Make sure every claim made in the draft can be backed up and verified by independent reliable sources. If it can't be verified, delete it. If it's not important or encyclopedic, delete it. Anything questionable should be removed -- you can always add it later if you find a reliable source to back it up. Good luck. – Broccoli & Coffee (Oh hai) 21:04, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. Making the cuts now. You are great to work with. Lettucecup (talk) 21:17, 18 July 2018 (UTC)lettucecup

Sick Boy (EP)

Hi, thanks for reviewing my draft. Why do you remove the info box from the article? ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (alt) (talk to me) 00:33, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Oops, didn't mean to. I've restored it now. – Broccoli & Coffee (Oh hai) 04:27, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Draft:5nance Re-submission

Hello Broccoli and Coffee,

As you had asked, I have made the necessary corrections to the article & submitted it for re-review. The tone of the article is more neutral. Kindly go through it once again and let me know in case of further changes.

Article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:5nance

RD 14:26, 20 July 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rushitdawda (talk • contribs)

@Rushitdawda: It is important that articles on Wikipedia are reliably sourced. Right now, too many of the sources in your draft appear to be unreliable. If it a company is not very notable, it can be tempting to use whatever you can find, which can include press releases, blog posts, and articles written by people involved in the company. Those are not reliably sources, however. This may mean that the company itself is not notable enough yet. Please also read through WP:NCORP for more information. – Broccoli & Coffee (Oh hai) 15:43, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
Hello Broccoli and Coffee, I have added the notable "news" website citations from leading newspapers of India which refer to subject. Kindly check & let me know if any other changes need to be made. RD 12:17, 21 July 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rushitdawda (talk • contribs)
@Rushitdawda: While there are a couple of acceptable sources, there aren't enough. Too many of the existing citations come from press releases or are written from someone involved in the company. Those won't work. Again, the company may just not be notable enough yet. If they start receiving coverage in various reliable independent news sources (i.e., not the CEO's own op-ed), then it may be an acceptable article for Wikipedia. But it does not appear to be there yet. – Broccoli & Coffee (Oh hai) 17:55, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Request on 12:52:37, 21 July 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Thomasjensson


Dear Broccoli and Coffee, thank you for the speedy review.

What I don't understand is, why the article "Villiers Chart" can't be published, since it is marked as a stub. In my view, a fully functional publication of the chart, which is cited, is a decent source. Due to the new nature of this visualization more sources have to yet become available and I am planning to update this article frequently, including more sources and more research.

Thomasjensson (talk) 12:52, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

@Thomasjensson: It is the purpose of Wikipedia to provide articles on notable subjects that are accurately and reliably sourced. While I believe that you will update the article, it is critical that drafts prove their notability with acceptable sourcing before being accepted for publication. It is very possible that this will get there at some point, but right now, with only one source (one that appears directly tied to the subject), it may be WP:TOOSOON. – Broccoli & Coffee (Oh hai) 18:00, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Regarding Draft:Marc Olivier Strauss-Kahn

Hi Broccoli and Coffee, The article for Marc Olivier Strauss-Kahn: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Marc-Olivier_Strauss-Kahn ... has been entirely rewritten from scratch, with the assistance/advice of several editors yesterday on the live channel. Major contentions/critique were to fix the "promotional" tone, which was largely a problem of the academic nature (resume) of the subject as the Chief Economist of the central Bank of France. That has all been purged. The publications have been shortened, book list removed; the piece has been referenced throughout, and any unverifiable references omitted. The tone and overall structure are completely different. Most importantly, perhaps, is that I spent the day finding new references, including magazine (REFLETS) and other news sources. An editor suggested that it would be GOOD to include French news and magazine references, and not stick only to English. That was the right way forward and has provided/established the types of references that were lacking before. The last editor (late!) last night remarked that it looks much better and now in good shape for submission. Wondering if you would review it. Many thanks. Lettucecup (talk) 18:56, 19 July 2018 (UTC)Lettucecup

@Lettucecup: I've made major changes to the article, including updating and fixing sources, some copy edits, and clean up. I went ahead and accepted the article for publication. For future articles you may want to create, I'd suggest reading through the Manual of Style for tips on formatting the article and style guidelines. Let me know if you have other questions. Best of luck – Broccoli & Coffee (Oh hai) 23:18, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Thank you so much, Broccoli and Coffee, I feel like sending you French tulips or something ...

-) Lettucecup (talk) 03:44, 20 July 2018 (UTC)Lettucecup

Dear Broccoli and Coffee,

I have been doing intensive research, since the new page was created, to establish the best level of notability. Of everything I've located, I've added five good sources, and have added them to the page (without adding any new or additional content). This is done so we can safely establish solid notability for the page. If you agree, the flag can come off. Please let me know ... and thank you.

Here's what has been added:

  1. A published article in the newspaper LesEchos about Strauss-Kahn's nomination as Special Advisor: https://www.lesechos.fr/21/07/2017/LesEchos/22491-114-ECH_banque-de-france---marc-olivier-strauss-kahn--olivier-garnier.htm
  2. A published magazine article that includes the subject's expertise on economic education: https://www.unaf.fr/spip.php?article21884
  3. An published article in the newspaper La Croix quoting the subject in a survey about French and economic education: https://www.la-croix.com/Economie/Economie-et-entreprises/Pourquoi-Francais-mal-leconomie-2017-05-29-1200850905
  4. A published article quoting the subject on the City of Economics as President of the Steering Committee: http://www.lepoint.fr/villes/un-palais-pour-l-economie-01-12-2014-1885838_27.php
  5. An article quoting the subject's analysis in Europe: https://www.lyoncapitale.fr/actualite/le-plan-juncker-une-belle-opportunite-a-accompagner-de-reformes/

Aside, now that I have found all this new material, I'd like to remove the reference to an article you had inserted, which I have re-read. I see it as salacious/sensational journalism (if not altogether incorrect) in the context of the DSK scandal: https://www.lejdd.fr/Societe/Le-frere-encombrant-de-DSK-94976-3089456

Is that OK?

Lettucecup (talk) 15:26, 24 July 2018 (UTC)Lettucecup

@Lettucecup: I don't speak/read French, so I can't say anything with complete confidence, but I don't see anything immediately wrong with any of those sources. As for removing the other source -- same as above; I can't read French, so I'm only relying on Google Translate. I don't know the history, but I would advise against removing a source strictly because it may paint the subject in a poor light. Whether it is salacious, I can't judge. I'll take your word for it, though, and let you make that decision.
For the notability tag at the top, I would suggest leaving it for now and letting either the editor who added it remove it, or an unaffiliated editor. You don't want to give the impression that you "own" the article. Does that make sense? – Broccoli & Coffee (Oh hai) 03:57, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Lettucecup (talk) 03:59, 25 July 2018 (UTC)Yes, THANK YOU. Makes perfect sense. The effort was significant to find those French references! I'll leave it there.

Draft: List of J-Novel Club Titles

First off, thank you for reviewing the page. After reviewing the guidelines on external links, I can see where I went wrong on that. I will correct that. Ironically, what I’m going to do was something I had been contemplating, but will take it one step further than originally planned and remove the external links completely.

As far as notability goes, I’m not quite sure how to make a list of books “notable”. They are all published books, which I believe makes them notable. Also I would like to point out that this list is intended as a companion to another article. I didn’t really want to fill the main article with a number of large tables, but if it would be better suited being added there, please let me know.

Again, thank you for your feedback.

PaulNeb86 (talk) 20:19, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

Hello @PaulNeb86: A few comments back. First, it isn't necessarily that the books aren't notable, but that the existing sources don't prove the notability. This is mainly because most of the used sources are primary. In other words, citing the publisher's website does not provide any credibility to the subject's notability. Instead, look for reliable secondary and tertiary sources. You may also be interested in using Template:ISBN.
All of that said, while I appreciate you not wanting to fill the main J-Novel Club article with large tables, that article itself is not actually that long. I think merging your tables into that article can work, especially since it will replace the existing "Titles" section, therefore not making the entire article that much longer anyway. Let me know if you'd like any help with that. Best of luck. – Broccoli & Coffee (Oh hai) 20:43, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

172 242 225 33 ,too harsh?

With user 172.242.225.33, on his/her talk page all anyone did was warn him/her or threaten to block him/her without giving the IP any advice or the like on the nature of their edis. I left a welcome message on their talk page with advice. Their edits seem like mass edit tests (i've seen the like recently), but they do border on pure vandalism (sometimes the line is thin between the two). I'm not saying you were wrong to report the ip, but try to engage more with the ip. JC7V-constructive zone 05:39, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

Just an aside, if the ip continues this edit spree when he/she's block is up. I would strongly suggest reporting the ip to AN/I to deal with this. With all of the warnings and my recent welcome-advice message to them on their talk page, AN/I is the route to go if the disruption starts up from them after the block is up. JC7V-constructive zone 05:47, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Undergraduates of Canadian Research Intensive Universities, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page University Students' Council (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:28, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

GA nominations

Hi, I noticed that you've recently nominated three articles, USS Callister, James Blake (musician) and Roy Cohn, for good article status. But it doesn't look like you've contributed significantly to any of these articles. While the nomination page says that "Anyone may nominate an article", the instructions page says that "it is preferable that nominators have contributed significantly to the article and are familiar with its subject and its cited sources. Nominators who are not significant contributors to the article should consult regular editors of the article on the article talk page prior to a nomination". You've not left any talk page messages on any of these three pages.

So far as I can tell, you've not been through the GA process before, either as nominator or reviewer, so I want to check that you know what you're doing. By nominating these articles, you're asserting that you are familiar with the topic area, know exactly what the articles cover, and have thoroughly checked that the articles meet each of the six GA criteria. You're then committing yourself to fix any errors, omissions, structure issues, prose problems etc. that the reviewer finds.

I would recommend that you withdraw these nominations (simply remove the talk page templates {{GA nominee}}), unless you are certain that the articles are GA standard (this requires more than a skim read to determine), and you can address any concerns that arise. For USS Callister, this is a page I was working on and about to nominate for GA anyway—there are just a few 1(a) and 1(b) concerns to fix—so I would be happy to handle the GA review if you are okay with that. (Alternatively, you could withdraw and I could resubmit.) — Bilorv(c)(talk) 12:17, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

(P.S. Just noticed that you categorised USS Callister as "Media and drama" when "Television" is the best fit, so I've fixed this.) — Bilorv(c)(talk) 12:23, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
Bilorv you can take on the USS Callister nom if you'd like. I placed it in "Media and drama" only because White Bear (Black Mirror), San Junipero and Nosedive are all in that category. – Broccoli & Coffee (Oh hai) 17:35, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
Yes, but they're in the Television subcategory of "Media and drama", so they were nominated under the Television subsection of the Media and drama nominations (which says "This includes [...] television episodes [...]"). But anyway, that's just an explanation for next time.
I'm happy to take on USS Callister yes. I'm still concerned with the other two articles; you should at least give them a thorough copyedit and check everything is sourced. — Bilorv(c)(talk) 18:00, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

Why is Massachusetts always spelled wrong?

Because the Lights Went Out.

(I'm here all week. Tell your family and friends...) Narky Blert (talk) 00:05, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

Narky Blert -- Ha! I love it. Probably better than because "the way each day is phrased in Massachusetts" – Broccoli & Coffee (Oh hai) 21:46, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Disambiguator's Barnstar
The Disambiguator's Barnstar is awarded to Wikipedians who are prolific disambiguators.
For fixing four million links to DAB pages doing a lot of good DABbing work, and most especially for your unintended starring role in today's light relief!

You might like to add {{DPL topicon}} and/or {{WikiGnome topicon}} to your User Page... Narky Blert (talk) 22:24, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

Callum Semple

Not sure why you moved this back into draftspace when I had moved it from draftspace and added references to show notability (WP:NFOOTBALL)??? GiantSnowman 11:09, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

GiantSnowman, When I moved it, the article looked like this. No sources, poorly formatted, and broken templates. Add to that that there appears to be a WP:COI, with the user who created the draft appearing to have the same last name as the article subject. All of that seemed like a good reason to move it back to draftspace. I do see now, though, that the stub looked much different since you had last edited it, and when I moved it. – Broccoli & Coffee (Oh hai) 05:00, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Rollback granted

Hi Broccoli and Coffee. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

  • Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
  • Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
  • Rollback should never be used to edit war.
  • If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
  • Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! TonyBallioni (talk) 15:10, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

(AfC) Requesting review for Draft:Moideen_Koya_K._K.

I believe I have brought this draft to a very acceptable state by following the comments from a few reviewers. I request you to please review the page and move it to the articles section. This is my first article and I am pretty keen on wanting to see it get accepted. Please let me know if it needs any more improvements. Thank you. Ubhasrk (talk) 08:18, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Adam C Franklin

Hello Broccoli and Coffee. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Adam C Franklin, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: text ist not completely promotional and having a #1 bestseller is a sufficient claim of significance. Thank you. SoWhy 07:47, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

A page you started (Amazing Interiors) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Amazing Interiors, Broccoli and Coffee!

Wikipedia editor SkyGazer 512 just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Thank you for creating this article. Could you source the sentence stating that the first season of 12 episodes was released on July 20, either with one of the references that you have or a new one?

To reply, leave a comment on SkyGazer 512's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 13:19, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of USS Callister

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article USS Callister you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kingsif -- Kingsif (talk) 04:01, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of USS Callister

The article USS Callister you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:USS Callister for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kingsif -- Kingsif (talk) 14:01, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Majora Carter Photo

the photo up now is 9 years old. There was a current photo up, which was changed to the 9 year old photo....why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.192.161.242 (talk) 16:13, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

Karayilan article

Please go to my page to read my answer. Urgent. Thanks, Heval7884

The Intercept and Vox

Both of these articles use the word "liberal" to describe their respective editorial stances. Why does the more accurate "far-left" descriptor violate Wikipedia's terms, but "liberal" does not? Furthermore, why is Wikipedia rife with "far-right" used as a descriptor (rightfully, in many cases, but unjustifiably in others)? --185.31.155.150 (talk) 17:40, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

It's not that those terms cannot be used, but to make changes to an article, there needs to be a reliable source to justify the change. In both of these cases, you used unreliable sources (Newsbusters, Lifezette, The Unshackled, Gateway Pundit, and the Daily Wire are all biased, opinionated, or otherwise unreliable). See WP:IRS for more. – Broccoli & Coffee (Oh hai) 18:10, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
Thank you. --185.31.155.150 (talk) 18:12, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

copyvio in Amazon Echo (macsome copied from wikipedia)

Hello. You marked first paragraph of Amazon Echo as copyvio https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Amazon_Echo&diff=851273298&oldid=851272775. Yes, there is same text as in https://www.macsome.com/guide/two-methods-to-stream-apple-music-to-amazon-echo.html. But there can be two possibilities: Wikipedia copied from macsome, or macsome copied from wikipedia. By searching the macsome page with Google with Tools->"Any time" changed to "past year" I have "Nov 11, 2017" date mark for the page. And web archive have no this page from 2017: http://web.archive.org/web/*/https://www.macsome.com/guide/two-methods-to-stream-apple-music-to-amazon-echo.html. On the other side, wikipedia page has bit different text in the first paragraph of Amazon Echo some time ago: ..tall cylinder... (1 feb 2017), two paragraphs in 20 December 2016. I think it looks more like macsome.com had copyvio of wikipedia page; so I will remove your copyvio template. Thanks! `a5b (talk) 08:37, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Broccoli and Coffee. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Clive Wilkins article

Hi Broccoli and Coffee, Not sure if this is the right or best way to contact you. Forgive me if I am writing in the wrong space!! I am no specialist with Wikipedia - as you will have already realised:-) The recent deletion of photos on the Clive Wilkins entry by you was, I thought, due to a query over their acceptabiity in Wikimedia Commons. Once that was sorted I assumed they could go back onto the entry. However you are not happy with them appearing it seems. Can you help me to understand why this is? The world of wiki can seem confusing at times, especially to a bear of very little brain such as myself. Please get back to me when you can and let me know the thinking behind this. Also let me know if i have made contact with you using the correct channels, and if not a nudge in the right direction would be most welcome :-). Sincere best wishes. Jean Scott Thomson (talk) 18:24, 20 November 2018 (UTC) Jean Scott Thomson Jean Scott Thomson (talk) 18:24, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi Jean Scott Thomson. I'm not sure if you've had a chance to read the message I wrote on your talk page, but basically the issue comes down to Wikipedia's policy on conflict of interest editing. You can read more about these policies at WP:COI and the other links I included on your talk page. The short version is: it is strongly encouraged that editors with a conflict of interest do not directly edit those pages, but instead suggest and request edits on that article's talk page. For Clive Wilkins, in other words, rather than making major changes to the article, it is better to post to that article's talk page, and request those changes there. Let me know if you have further questions after reading my earlier message on the bottom of your talk page and the linked pages I provided. – Broccoli & Coffee (Oh hai) 18:32, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the fast response Broccoli and Coffee, I will endeavour to do as you suggest and see if I can get the photographs replaced using the proper protocol. Apologies if caused any upset, none was intended. best wishes Jean Scott Thomson (talk) 19:02, 20 November 2018 (UTC) Jean Scott Thomson Jean Scott Thomson (talk) 19:02, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Dynamic list hatnote in section(s?)

Regarding List_of_J-Novel_Club_titles, I see what you did with the moving of the hatnote, but it brings up another question. Should the dynamic template be included in each section, or is having it in just the first one adequate to get the point across? PaulNeb86 (talk) 18:42, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

PaulNeb86, I think just one is fine. If you're concerned about cohesion, you could re-work the section headers so that the Completed translations section falls under the same section as above, but that'd be a stylistic choice and is certainly not necessary. I'm fine either way. Thanks – Broccoli & Coffee (Oh hai) 19:26, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Album artwork for album The Know by Wye Oak.jpg

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 18:03, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Roy Cohn

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Roy Cohn you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of JerrySa1 -- JerrySa1 (talk) 19:40, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Roy Cohn

The article Roy Cohn you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Roy Cohn for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of JerrySa1 -- JerrySa1 (talk) 17:02, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Request on 09:44:35, 2 January 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Manoj Sable


Hello, Thank you for valuable feedback. The definition written here is my own thoughts basis on my studies on Waste Management work experience. I wrote simple definition and my plan was to elaborate once my basis definition get published on Wikipedia. I actually referring to green waste and I termed it as Kitchen Waste as it is my definition.

Kindly assist me to make further progress.

Thanks and Regards Manoj

Manoj Sable (talk) 09:44, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi Manoj Sable. It's not quite clear what makes your article different than content that already exists on Wikipedia. Pages like Food waste, Compost, Waste sorting, Waste management, Food rescue, and plenty of others, seem to cover what you want to say. Even Green waste already exists as an article. Perhaps you could look through those articles and find ways to expand and improve them, rather than creating a new redundant article. Hope that helps, but let me know if you have other questions. – Broccoli & Coffee (Oh hai) 19:15, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Children's names

Thank you for the greetings and information! 

I think it may be best to include the children's names for Marilynne Robinson .

This is the basic information which is included in an obituary. Children are a real legacy which flesh out the full picture of a subject's life. It is significant if they are sons or daughters (would that not be true of your own parent's legacy?).

With the simplifying act of including the son's full names, it clarifies that she had two sons from her marriage. Otherwise are they sons from later in life? By two additional relationships?

Alternatively: "2 sons from marriage." Though this might be awkward and provides less information.

What are your thoughts? Beth Timken (talk) 16:24, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi Beth Timken, sorry for the delayed reply, just got back from a trip. Hope you had a nice New Year's. To answer your question: Generally, for privacy reasons, it is preferred to list the number of children, unless those children themselves are notable (e.g., if they had their own Wikipedia article). On the page for Template:Infobox person, it suggests the same policy. You can also read more at WP:BLPNAME. While I think your point is certainly reasonable, to go against this established protocol would require consensus. Hope that helps clarify, but let me know if you have any questions. – Broccoli & Coffee (Oh hai) 04:19, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
Thank you so much for the clarification and the helpful links. I appreciate your time on this.
Would not Robinson's sons fall into the category of "immediate family member" rather than "family member" (or loosely involved). Their names are "reliably sourced" in several publications, and would they not be "relevant to the readers complete understanding of the subject?" One of the sourced articles references her raising the boys on her own, with photos of her with her sons.
I'm fine with not using their names, but think it might be referenced they are from her marriage. Again, would they be from one or two later relationships?
Is there a simple, yet more informative manner of handling this?
2 from marriage
2: (1st) marriage
2 sons from marriage
It may just stand as is, but I am just considering all viable options. It seems a pity, if a subject can be more fleshed-out, not to do so. What are your thoughts? Beth Timken (talk)
@Beth Timken: In general, the infobox's purpose is to provide a brief snapshot of the subject. In this case, Robinson's name, birth date, notable works and awards, etc. The specifics that you mention – essentially, clarifying that her 2 children are both sons from her marriage with Fred Robinson – would fit better into the body of the article, rather than the infobox. Right now there isn't a section called "Personal life", but this is generally where information like this appears. You are of course more than welcome to be bold and add this in yourself! For models, you could look at other contemporaries like Louise Erdrich, Alice Munro, Nora Roberts, Nora Ephron, etc. Best of luck. – Broccoli & Coffee (Oh hai) 19:09, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Excellent, thank you! Beth Timken (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:36, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Help in rewriting the artical

Respected sir/madam, I'm Joshua Jonathan a new beginner in wikipedia, i just wrote an article which was reviewed by the wikipedian members and you did too, so can you please help me in writing the article, you suggested me to At a minimum, this will need to be re-written so can you please give me an advice how to start the re-writing section? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonathan Joshua 55 (talk • contribs) 14:06, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

@Jonathan Joshua 55: Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and therefore all articles within should strive to meet encyclopedic quality. Part of that means that in order to even have an article at all, it necessary to demonstrate notability. In other words, the subject should already have articles, books, or other sources written about them. For Wikipedia, it is vital that the sources we cite are considered reliable. For Draft:Dr.Irene Leeser, it isn't clear the subject is notable enough, as it doesn't provide reliable sources to demonstrate so; it also isn't written in a neutral encyclopedic tone; finally, there are certain style and format requirements necessary for articles on the English Wikipedia.
I would recommend reading the following pages before re-submitting: WP:YFA, WP:RS, WP:NPOV, and WP:NOTE. Good luck. – Broccoli & Coffee (Oh hai) 18:16, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

U.S. Route 101 in California

Thanks for fixing the labels in the U.S. Route 101 (California) article. I'm from California like one of the recent editors that decided to put "the XX/the XX Freeway" but I also agree that the US and SR labels should be used instead of things like "the 126" or "PCH" for the better portion of the article. Pf1127 —Preceding undated comment added 18:55, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Pending changes reviewer granted

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

 ~~Swarm~~  {talk}  02:21, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Wish

Hello. Help improve and copy edit for article Maureen Wroblewitz. Thanks you. Trinhthisau (talk) 22:41, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

@Trinhthisau: Uhh, do you have a specific request? I'm not familiar with this person and I've never edited that page. If there's something specific you're thinking of, I can take a look. – Broccoli & Coffee (Oh hai) 22:50, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
Help nominate articles for Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests. Thanks you. Trinhthisau (talk) 22:52, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
Sock account: WP:DENY; see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Haiyenslna. Baffle gab1978 23:09, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Technical issue on Põhjala Brewery

Hi Broccoli and Coffee, Thanks for your input on Põhjala Brewery and To Øl. I'm having a problem with the logo on Põhjala Brewery and wondered if you know anything about images? The image file seems to be fine but it's not displaying properly in the article. Not a massive issue but I just thought I'd ask on the off chance... Cheers, Tammbeck (talk) 21:11, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

Hi Tammbeck, I'm a bit late replying so it's possible it's been fixed since you posted here, but the image seems to be working. Let me know if you have further questions, though. – Broccoli & Coffee (Oh hai) 05:05, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
Maybe it's just on my laptop, so not really an issue. Many thanks! Tammbeck (talk) 07:55, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

category move/recent edits

Broccoli and Coffee, thanks for the comment regarding the category move that I made by mistake. I tried to move the wrong category. Also the recent reverts that I made to Fujimori5 edits were simply restoring the Category:American people of Samoan descent category that the user removed from several articles. Sorry for the mix up.Nyeeye