17:53:16, 13 November 2015 review of submission by Ejcruz
I am asking for a re-review because I have taken action to Cult of Green's review by removing the "About" materials from bank webpages. Instead, I have left a link to the bank pages so that users can read more about them.
Thank you for the comment. Would you show me an example of "inline citation" as you mentioned. I have followed citation format of Wikipedia published articles.
LW1588 (talk) 04:50, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- LW1588 to reference something in your article you simply put the source between the ref tags.
- For example: Health premiums will continue to rise but more slowly in 2016<ref>http://www.theage.com.au/business/banking-and-finance/health-insurance-premiums-to-rise-more-slowly-in-2016-20151117-gl0rlx.html</ref>
- Then reflist (which is under your Reference heading) will automatically number the reference and list it as a footnote, so what you end up with it this:
- Health premiums will continue to rise but more slowly in 2016.[1]
References
- I hope this helps. See ~WP:ILC , best wishes Cult of Green (talk) 06:03, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Cult of Green, I used another Canadian artist wikipedia article as an example and modelled my references on that. I don't understand why inline references are not acceptable. I understood from reading wilipedia material that they were an option for references. Please explain what is wrong. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Evelynmck (talk • contribs) 04:14, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Evelynmck - my apologies for placing the wrong notice on the page. I have reviewed - and declined - and the reasons are clearly stated. I am more than happy to assist. Best wishes Cult of Green (talk) 04:21, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Cult of Green,
Unfortunately, there are not so many secondary reliable sources in english, as in russian. But there are some, and we tried to do our best, but you declined it again.
will you please help to improve our page because we really do not understand what to do next?
- Lidiatch sources don't have to be in English. Wikipedia only allows articles about notable subjects that independent sources have written about. The criteria for notability are at WP:ORG. Cult of Green (talk) 03:10, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Cult of Green Thanks for help. Notable and intepentent sources were added in chapter "See also". The article was submitted again. Will you please review again?
- Lidiatch, sorry but based on the references you have used Transport Clearing House is not notable enough for an article.23:57, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Cult of Green Why? We used references from your recommendations, for example, from here: https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Transport+Clearing+House%22&tbm=nws and others. Transport Clearing House is an organization like ARC (Airlines Reporting Corporation) in USA or BSP IATA (Billing and Settlement Plan) in Europe. They don't have many references in articles. Our links contains phrases like "According to Transport Clearing House" making the organization notible. What else should we do with the article to be accepted? Ref #5 will be removed.
- Lidiatch wikipedia has criteria that article subjects might meet. Your subject doesn't meet those criteria. Cult of Green (talk) 02:29, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, my submission was rejected because it said that some of the material was drawn from press coverage and from a website. In fact the original material is mine. I wrote the press release and the copy on the website and this was subsequently picked up by various publications. If I cite the publications that have quoted my press release will this be ok? Janieiw (talk) 11:23, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Janieiw please read WP:COPYVIO. If you use sources other than a press release, and you don't breach copyright, then you can include them. Cult of Green (talk) 03:13, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I've added as many reliable references as I could find about the Lily. I avoided the plentiful travel websites that reference the Lily.
I know the Lily has featured in several TV programmes but couldn't find any web-references of this. It certainly is a famous landmark in the South West of Australia.
Because it is so unique (it's the only working windmill in Australia) I think this windmill deserves its own article. Feel free to give me any more pointers though. As you probably understood, I'm a novice at creating Wikipedia articles, but I'm happy to learn! Cheers, Roel
- Verhoeven.roel I have reviewed the article again and it doesn't meet the criteria for notability because it lacks significant coverage in sources independent of the subject. Cult of Green (talk) 22:55, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I've added extra references to the article. I'd also like to draw to your attention to the fact that there is already a Dutch language article on this subject: https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lily Once this (English language) article is approved I'll language link the two.
- Verhoeven.roel I am going to leave this to another editor to review. The sources are improved, however many of the statements in the article are not sourced. I also suspect you have an undeclared conflict of interest. Cult of Green (talk) 22:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi - as you may have guessed I'm a newbie, so please be gentle.
I think this article is notable because this admittedly only projected aircraft falls into the range of Nazi-inspired WWII 'secret weapons' that are not only of interest to Third Reich apologists not but those interested in the technological advances made during the war and immediately after it: unless those many projects that fell by the wayside are at least gets a mention in passing it perpetuates the myth everything inspired by the Nazis worked brilliantly while (because the many tribulations of allied designs are lovingly detailed) the heroic efforts of their allied opposite numbers are written off as the fumbling, bumbling efforts of incompetents whose aeronautical efforts are somewhere between a joke and a tragedy.(snip)
- Hi Ebookomane and thanks for your post. I have no reason to disagree that the subject of your article is notable, however the sources you have (and have not) provided do not demonstrate that. Apart from the Specs section, you don't have any references to support the content of the article. Wikipedia articles are supposed to be accurate summaries of the key points written about a subject by reliable sources. Please read The Golden Rule and WP:SOAPBOX and let me know if you need any assistance. Cult of Green (talk) 22:46, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Cult of Green, this is my first Wikipedia page. I was wondering what kind of additional information I should provide in order to get my page approved? I have found some articles portraying the large annual soccer tournament that draws in teams from all around the area, as well as out of state. Would sources like this be enough to prove that my topic is notable? Thanks! BenRuby15 (talk) 01:59, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi BenRuby15 and thanks for your question. The criteria for notable clubs is at WP:ORG but essentially you need several third party sources that have written about the club. The golden rule applies here too. Best wishes, Cult of Green (talk) 05:09, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:07, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Cult of Green, I thank you very much for your review of my draft article: "John Zurier." I would greatly appreciate some specific feedback to understand why the article was declined and, hopefully, meet the Wikipedia requirements. You left a review comment: "The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners." I received the same review comments from a prior reviewer and I therefore added 8 footnoted references to support the text (prior to your review). I thought this would answer the critique for insufficient inline citations. What more do I need to do? I appreciate your kind suggestions!
Sincerely,
Smokyhallow (talk) 21:25, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- As the other reviewer, I will be taking this to the Teahouse for discussion. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:33, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi Smokyhallow and thanks for your questions. We have a higher standard of required referencing for biographies of living persons that is described at WP:MINREF. I have added a comment to the draft article that explains my thoughts and I am more than happy to assist you if you need it. Best wishes Cult of Green (talk) 05:05, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi Cult of Green I thank you for your kind and constructive feedback. This is very helpful! Best wishes Smokyhallow (talk) 15:07, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Cult of Green please do me a favor and indicate specifically what parts of the article on Magic (religion) need to be improved upon and how and also indicate which parts require citations. I have already address the previous notification to provide a lead and have added citations to the bits I felt need them.Mojobadshah (talk) 16:06, 25 November 2015 (UTC) Mojobadshah (talk) 16:06, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Mojobadshah I have left a detailed comment on the draft article for you. Wikipedia articles are supposed to be accurate summaries of what reliable sources have to say about a subject. Every key point you make in the article needs a reliable source. I note that there is an existing article Magic and religion that may be on the same subject as you are writing about. See also WP:VERIFY. Cult of Green (talk) 23:55, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I was actually going to send this message last night but I had noticed you hadn't been here in about a week. I simply wanted to mention I noticed you changed accounts again and actually thought you had permanently retired. Hope all is well, Australian mate! 
SwisterTwister talk 06:33, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi SwisterTwister thanks for the message! All is well. Cult of Green (talk) 00:09, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Cult of Green. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The redirect Sly 5: Master Of Thieves has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 October 4 § Sly 5: Master Of Thieves until a consensus is reached. Regards, SONIC678 05:18, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
