This is an archive of past discussions with User:Ken Tony. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
The names used in citation templates are for the author of the work being cited, not you. As an example, you added 3 citations to MS Dhoni and used 2 of the 3 names in your username. e.g.Spike 'em (talk) 12:06, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
@Spike:, Noted. Will do as it in future. Thanks for the info.
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.
Hello. In a recent edit to the page Iain Hume, you changed one or more words or styles from one national variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.
For a subject exclusively related to the United Kingdom (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to another English-speaking country, such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, India, or Pakistan use the variety of English used there. For an international topic, use the form of English that the original author of the article used.
In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to another, even if you don't normally use the version in which the article is written. Respect other people's versions of English. They, in turn, should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Manual of Style. If you have any questions about this, you can ask me on my talk page or visit the help desk. Thank you. Robby.is.on (talk) 13:28, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
@Robby.is.on:, Thank you for the message. I primarily use Indian English and I think that's what the reason for my mistake. I went on to edit the article to add certain citation, but when I noticed that word in red line, I changed them with a vision of improvising the page but not with an intention to vandalise them. Anyway, thanks for letting me know about my mistake out of your valuable time. Best wishes and all the best. Ken Tony (talk) 13:48, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
you told me we should talk about adding a citation so heres why i didnt add any reliable sources
The thing i edited was not for a new fact or anything like that, instead it was just mixing up the way a list went, the list order used to be ranking for scotland, ranking for uk, then population, ranking for europe, this is not how lists work, the population would have to be either at the end or beginning of the list as to not interrupt the ranks within these places, if i am wrong about how grammar works you can tell me and i will be fine with changing it back. Thank you for taking the time to read this Ken — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smoceany2 (talk • contribs) 19:06, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
@Smoceany2:, Hello user. Please may I ask you one thing. About which list you're talking? I know you're talking about one of my changes from 'Pending changes' section, so please let me know the list name. Thank you KenTonyShall we discuss?19:20, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
@Ken Tony Peter: I was talking about Glasgow, Scotland, thank you for responding. :)
@Smoceany2: Whatever changes you make in Wikipedia, adding citations are mandatory in every case. No matter whether you're editing an article or a list, you should show from where you got the information. There is no excuse for that. Also, don't forget to sign after your comments in any of the talk page. (signing can be done by adding four consecutive tildes after your comment) Thank you KenTonyShall we discuss?07:13, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
@Smoceany2: You might have added any content along with the change in article grammar. I won't warn user without any reason. I don't remember the act of edit on the given article because I review many article every day. Thank you KenTonyShall we discuss?11:08, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
@Smoceany2:Anyway, when I saw them, there was some changes, and even if you move something you should use your edit summary to clearly say what changes were made in article. Even if you moved a non-cited sentence or words or what ever it is, you and all of them are compelled to add the source because non-cited and possible vandal activities will come to pending changes list and someone will review it. I am a reviewer and there are many like me. So they will review it. If we don't find citations in the change, we won't approve it. It's not my fault or your fault. So, I believe you understood the situation clearly. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?03:33, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
Capitalism and Criticism of Capitalism
I am working on editing the criticisms of capitalism section on the Capitalism page so that if goes inline with other economic pages. Since there is a page already dedicated to criticisms, that is where I am either moving criticisms or ensuring their arguments are there. I am making multiple edits with reasons so that each section may be reviewed. What are your thoughts on this project? I am newer to editing so any advice is appreciated in cleaning this article up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TauGuys (talk • contribs) 17:30, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
@TauGuys: Hai user. I am glad you're here to stay with a good intention. Wikipedia has certain guidelines which should be followed in every edit we make. I have nothing against your edits on the article of Capitalism. As I'm a pending changes reviewer, and should review edits made by different user in different articles, I'm compelled to have a clear look on them before proceeding to my next step. You were adding contents to the article but didn't provide citations to prove your addition. Also, there was a huge content being discluded in your edits. Citations are important in Wikipedia, which help people to navigate to the destination from where you got the information. Thank you for the reply, and you can further contact me if you have any more doubts regarding the guidelines and policies. Also don't forget to sign after adding a comment in any talk page (signing can be done by adding four consecutive tilde after your comment). Thank you and have a nice day. KenTonyShall we discuss?18:46, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
@TauGuys: You added citations to your changes? I can also see a mass removal in the page. It's in the list of pending changes again. Please add citations for inclusion, (if not added) and make sure you're not removing excess and important content from the article. KenTonyShall we discuss?18:51, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
@Ken Tony Peter: The only citations and changs added are ones that were already within the page. Content removed from the article, along with associated citation, was moved to the criticisms of capitalism page. On COC page you will see where I added the information along with its original citations. TauGuys (talk) 19:03, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
@Ohnoitsjamie: Dude, that user added her birth date, and when I surfed to check whether that's true or false, many sources showed the same date. That's why accepted the revision. Anyway, no problem your reversion. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?15:11, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
Uhm sorry. Now only I found out that she had a history of lying her age. I just took a quick look for review and that's what cause the problem. Thanks for reverting. KenTonyShall we discuss?15:14, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
It's quite possible someone is lying about her age, but we need to err on the side of BLP, especially with primary sources that show home address details and other personal information. Yes, the information is out there, but we don't need to present it front and center. OhNoitsJamieTalk15:17, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
@Ohnoitsjamie: Yeah. Basically I'm not into what you call a 'music genre' or something. So I don't know much about these people. I'm more into articles related to football. I've been seeing this article in the pending changes list since the morning, I guess, so I just took a look onto it. That's what caused the action. Thanks for informing me. KenTonyShall we discuss?15:23, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
Friedman
ran a 411 blog that the paper ran for one year, which since he has run on his own. It was during the time the paper ran the blog, so it is fine to reflect as an rs, but it was a blog nevertheless. See here .. [1] --2603:7000:2143:8500:B497:77CC:E598:1AB7 (talk) 08:22, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
@2603:7000:2143:8500:B497:77CC:E598:1AB7: There was no need for your change. He has both status. So, you should have added journalist and blogger. Revision before your action had no problem, and that's my reason of reversion. Thank you, and I recommend you to create an account to prevent showing your IP address to public. KenTonyShall we discuss?08:59, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
@2603:7000:2143:8500:B497:77CC:E598:1AB7: When you surf in any search engine for his name, it will first show his designation as journalist. I agree with the fact that your addition of 'blogger' by replacing 'journalist' is legit, but the early revision won't mislead anyone. That's why I reverted it. Thank you for the reply. KenTonyShall we discuss?17:03, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
Thanks. But can you make the addition? I seem to be unable to. Thanks. And the reason for the addition, btw, is that there is a marked difference between a run of the mill journalist, and a freelance gossip blogger whose blog is run by a newspaper. 2603:7000:2143:8500:B497:77CC:E598:1AB7 (talk) 20:08, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Kashmorwiki was:
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Paulius Ragauskas and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Paulius Ragauskas, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
Hi, I removed the citations from Heritage Times and added back Sport and Pasttime. I had added the details of his early days from Rahim's 1963 obituary in Sport and Pastime. The writer in Heritage times has clearly used the wikipedia data to add these details in his article . So makes no sense for us to cite his article as our reference. Tintin
CJ Entertainment was officially involved with Distributing Iron Man 1 and 2
To the user Ken Tony Peter
I don't know if you're aware but the South Korean Film company CJ Entertainment company was originally involved with Iron Man 2008 and Iron Man 2 2010 and this was before the Disney Marvel merger.
I put CJ Entertainment originally in the category section of 2 of those film pages. I got this information from a Korean website source called Naver at this link and take a look at the Iron man Poster and you'll see the CJ Entertainment Logo [1]
And also at the Iron Man 2 Poster and you'll also see the CJ Entertainment Logo [2]
But CJ Entertainment is not involved with Iron Man 3
Also Ken Tony Peter I don't know if you're aware on IMDB page. But CJ Entertainment company name has been mislabeled in many of the Marvel Superhero films including Avengers: Endgame 2019, Thor: Ragnarok (2017), Captain America: The Winter Soldier (2014), Black Panther (2018), Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 (2017), Doctor Strange (2016), Thor: The Dark World (2013), Iron Man 3 (2013) and the Shimajiro films. Please go to the IMDB link and look at CJ Entertainment and you'll see CJ Entertainment has been incorrectly mislabeled. [3]
If you have an imdb account please talk to the IMDB staff and ask them to remove CJ Entertainment from those Marvel Films that Disney company distributed.
Can you please accept CJ Entertainment Category for Iron Man 1 and Iron Man 2 because they were involved with 2 of those Paramount Marvel films before the Disney Marvel merger. CrosswalkX (talk) 13:14, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
@CrosswalkX: I understood the situation. You said there is the logo of CJ Entertainment in the posters of both the films in that website called Naver right? I couldn't see those. I know about IMDb. But the thing is that there is no Iron Man (2008) linked with the reference of IMDb you pinned here. Okay, I can see Avengers: Endgame, Avengers: Age of Ultron etc. But you should know the fact that the article of both Iron Man 1 and Iron Man 2 are those articles, which passed GA criteria, and has that status to this date. So while the passage of this criteria, every necessary informations must be included in the article, or else it will not pass the criteria. So, if the information about CJ Entertainment are not present in these articles mean that it's not necessary (most probably). There won't be any mistake. And it's already mentioned in the infobox that those two movies are distributed by Paramount Pictures. So considering all these things, I didn't pass your edit. Thank you for your question. KenTonyShall we discuss?14:07, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
You're welcome, I'm sorry I forgot to add the Naver Korean film website link, next time, I'll be better with my source information. May I have permission to re add CJ Entertainment Category to Iron Man and Iron Man 2? I'll make sure to add the Naver Korean film link to those 2 Iron Man Film pages. Let me know, I always do my homework research before I ever contribute on Wikipedia. CrosswalkX (talk) 14:25, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
To Ken Tony. I want to apology to the wikipedia staff.
Recently I got into trouble on wikipedia because I didn't know it was forbidden to upload copyright images like the Iron Man poster. I'm very sorry to the wikipedia staff, I won't upload anymore copyright images in talk pages again. I don't want to get blocked, I'm very scared, I'm autistic, I don't want to lose my contribution privilege. I'll try harder to be in good faith. Did the wikipedia staff accept my apology yet. Please let me know. I was only trying to show that CJ Entertainment was involve with Iron Man 1 and 2.
Please help me out by not being put at risk of getting blocked on wikipedia anymore. I'll try harder obey the rules from now on. And if you want, I'll stop contributing CJ Entertainment Category in the Dreamworks films since I don't think anyone on wikipedia understands at this time. CrosswalkX (talk) 15:08, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
@CrosswalkX: It's very important to read Wikipedia editing guidelines before starting up. You should read those policies before proceeding further actions. I told you to discuss in talk page regarding the issue. You're currently not blocked from editing. So do like what I said. Read the guidelines first. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?15:17, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
Please keep a close eye on the article of Vilnius as user Oliszydlowski is performing mass removal of a quality content which is based on completely reliable sources. Some of his removals (e.g. the entire section of "Language") kind of reminds racism, anti-Lithuanian thoughts because it presents well the usage of a Lithuanian language in the city (it is still popular among the Polish nationalists to falsely treat Vilnius as a Polish city). For example, there is a section about language in Rome#Language, so his motivation that such a section is not relevant in an article about a city is a complete non-sense. I created most of the sections myself and based it mostly on a quality article of Paris (e.g. Paris#Fashion) and of other cities, so Oliszydlowski's vandalism and personal opinion cannot be tolerated. Please take anti-vandalism procedures and inform the administrators accordingly if he continues his vandalism in this article. Best regards, -- Pofka (talk) 18:15, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
There is no vandalism on the aforementioned page and Pofka should get familiar with what WP:VANDALISM is/is not since he clearly has no idea what he is talking about. Oliszydlowski left edit summaries after every edit and I looked through it and agree with him. Currently, the page reads like a magazine in some parapgraphs and there is a lot of unneeded content. In addition, I see a worrying pattern in Pofka's recent behavior – he labels other editors as racists (Pofka clearly confuses racism with xenophobia), nationalists or Lithuanian haters when someone has a different opinion than his. And it does not matter what kind of edit someone makes, but Pofka will instantly come and start calling others names and start conflicts. – Sabbatino (talk) 07:19, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
@Pofka:@Ken Tony:@Sabbatino: - Personally, I believe that Pofka's accusations are disgusting, hinting xenophobia, and really not worthy of a Wikipedia user. In regards to the edits I will quote what I have recently written on my talk page - "Edits related to excessive information not linked to the city or its direct history. Countless examples of Wikipedia:Wikipuffery and of low relevance per Wikipedia:Relevance which states that "Material that is irrelevant or out of scope to an article's topic can unnecessarily bloat an article, making it difficult for a reader to remain focused, and can also give the material undue weight". The article is much too long and uncomfortable to navigate. It should not be classified as a B-class page in the first place. The content was deleted per Irrelevant section of the Wikipedia:Content removal. Oliszydlowski (talk) 08:26, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
@Ken Tony:@Sabbatino:@Oliszydlowski: Go on and delete these sections as well then: Paris#Fashion, Paris#City government, Rome#Language, Rome#Catacombs (PAY ATTENTION: that these sections includes history of fashion/city government/language of the city). So why it is not allowed to include analogous sections to the article of Vilnius? Are you trying to prove that the article of Paris (classified as "good article") structure is not according to the rules of Wikipedia? Broad articles, such as countries and cities, often reach about 300 000 bytes size and it is allowed to have a bigger size if it is a broad topic (100 000 - 150 000 bytes size is unrealistic if we are speaking about an article with 200+ or 300+ references). Moreover, large part of the article of Vilnius size is coming from its excellent amount of references (totally, 442). Article of Paris has 348 references, so by adding another 80 references it would easily reach over 300 000 bytes size. However, having a well referenced article is one of the aims in Wikipedia (Wikipedia:Citing sources). I will openly discuss removing/paraphrasing certain lines after reaching a Wikipedia:Consensus, but mass removal of sections which are based on high-quality articles of Wikipedia structures is nothing else than a vandalism for me as Oliszydlowski's removals largely were a destruction of an accepted structure of cities articles in Wikipedia. His reasoning for removing the section of "Crafts" was: "Completely pointless and an unencyclopedic section for a city article; some of the information belongs to the history section or GD of Lithuania article. Removal per Irrelevant under Wikipedia:Content removal", but this section is about Vilnius Mint, Vilnius Goldsmiths' Workshop, and other crafts that were essential components for Vilnius and largely contributed to its importance, development, so labelling it as "completely pointless" is an absurd and it fits much more to Vilnius (because they were based there) than to the article of Grand Duchy of Lithuania which describes things in a lot of cities (nationwide). If Universal Lithuanian Encyclopedia (most of the references are from it - vle.lt) is a magazine style for you, then I really don't know what is an encyclopedia for you in Lithuania. Wikipedia:Vandalism: "deliberately intended to obstruct or defeat the project's purpose", so mass removal of content based on the Universal Lithuanian Encyclopedia and the widely accepted articles structures of Paris and Rome does qualify as a vandalism for me. I questioned line "Vilnius was Sigismund's favorite city, his investments made it one of the most beautiful cities in Eastern and Central Europe" myself as well before adding it, however it is based on the facts that: 1) he spent most of his time in Vilnius when he was with Barbara Radziwill; 2) he was a Gediminid; 3) his investments were massive, one of the finest examples is the Palace of the Grand Dukes of Lithuania reconstruction with his father; 4) Barbara Radziwill (Lithuanian) was his only true love and he was devastated after her death, so he did not preferred any other city (including Krakow) over Vilnius at the time, which might not sound very pleasant from a Polish perspective by having in mind that he is one of the main components of the Polish Golden Age, therefore I'm not surprised that it immediately caught the eye of Oliszydlowski, whose edits mostly focuses on Polish topics. -- Pofka (talk) 17:07, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
Hello, Ken Tony. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Shabir, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.
If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. 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 here.
I've got some sources on the talk page, thanks for reminding me. I have been meaning to update the article for a while but haven't gotten around to it. jp×g19:06, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
Ken tony Erobb221 is tyler1s brother how else would i prove that!! ken!!!!!
KEN SEARCH UP WHO IS TYLER1'S BROTHER AND YOU WILL SEE THAT EROBB221 IS HIS BROTHER KEN!!
Information icon Hello, I'm Ken Tony. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on Tyler1, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Ken Tony Shall we discuss? 17:12, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
THE MESSAGE ABOVE THAT I HAVE RECIVED HOW ELSE WOULD IS SITE THAT EROBB221 IS TYLER1S BROTHER KEN!!!!!!!!
@3ichel21: Whenever you start a new conversation, start them from a new section. Don't start from the previously archived discussion present in the talk page. I've added the simplified way to start a new conversation in my user page. So next time, check that out. Coming back to the topic. If you are adding any content to any article in the Wikipedia, you should always cite the sources. It is very necessary that it serves as a sign from where you got that given information. It will also help the readers to make further more references on the given sentence/paragraph. It is one of the pillars of Wikipedia. Unreferenced sentences will be challenged and will be removed from the article. Also make sure that you sign after every comment you make on any user talk page (signing can be done by typing four consecutive tildes). Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?17:31, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
Reversed edit on Montana state page
Hi Ken Tony,
You reversed one of my edits on the Montana State page and left behind: "Not so convinced with the citation." Do you mind elaborating on why that is? That info you removed pertains directly to the Fishing section it was in, and provides context as to Fishing's impact on the state's economy, as one of the four largest sources of spending in the state of Montana. I find it odd you would remove details related to fishing outfitters, when they make up such a substantial portion of the state's economy, yet has no reference anywhere else in the article. I would like to undo your removal of this section, as outfitters are a massive aspect of revenue generation in Montana, and should have a reference in the state's article.
@Cpinto23: I reverted the inclusion because when I accessed the source, the link contained the word 'blog' on it. Blogs aren't used as a source. Blogs aren't always reliable. I'm not against that citation, but for me, I needed another source at that time to approve your inclusion. When I reached the rock-bottom of the source you cited, I saw a reference section there. This made me more inclined with my opinion that this source is most probably a blog. Considering all these facts, I reverted your edit. Feel free to ask more questions. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?18:08, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
@Ken Tony: Ah, interesting. So if an article takes other works, synthesizes the data from various facts and figures in those works, and then presents it anew while citing those original sources as the source for that synthesis, that doesn't qualify as a verifiable new source? What separates a blog from an article or publication? Seems like a semantics issue to me. So if that link had been from the same site, but without the word blog in it, that would qualify? Apologies, I'm just trying to understand for future edits. Cpinto23 (talk) 18:33, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
@Cpinto23: There is huge difference between a blog and an article. A blog is written from a personal perspective by an author and will contain biased information. An article to an extend won't be having any biased information, and will have most of the information that is reliable. A blog can be created by anyone. There are strict regulations proposed by Wikipedia regarding the citing of sources. Only reliable sources will withstand here. Blogs are always ejected as a source. If you find any other source it would be helpful. Reliability is one of the important pillars of Wikipedia. Feel free to ask doubts. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?18:38, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello, Ken Tony. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Shabir".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Hope you have a spectacular day! I think I did a Jeremy Lin edit several hours ago and I was wondering the "citation" thingy. I may be wrong since I forget at times, but I'm pretty sure I did not change/add any sources except for the position "Shooting Guard", but that's about it because I try to add Jeremy Lin's secondary position to the bio section on the right side of the screen. I did also add section titles but that's about it. I'm not sure what citations I used because I thought I did not use any harmful/outside-the-box sources since I did not change anything content-wise. Please respond!
@WAKANDAEDITNBA: A citation is a source which you cite on a particular sentence/paragraph to identify from where you got that given information. It also helps the reader to get further information regarding that topic. I'm not that much into basketball as I'm into football. You added his position as "Shooting Guard", but you didn't provide a source to support the claim, or mentioned it (source) in the summary. A source helps us to understand from where you got that information. Citing of sources is one of the most important regulations of Wikipedia. So, after taking all these into account only I took down your edit. And more thing. Whenever you leave a message on a user talk page or an article talk page, don't forget to put your signature at the end of your typing. Signing can be done by typing four consecutive tildes. Feel free to ask more questions. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?17:18, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!
Hello, Ken Tony/Archive 2021. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there! Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by David Biddulph (talk) 18:03, 24 May 2021 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template.
@223.229.254.243: Hai. That time, when you included that sentence, you didn't provide any citation. Unreferenced sentences/paragraphs will be challenged. Now I can see you've mentioned a source here. Go on and add them to the article. So it might be approved by someone or myself. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?12:46, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
Jeanette McCurdy
You left a message on my talk page about me adding unsourced information, but I'm confused what you mean. All I changed was pipeline [[bulimia nervosa]] to [[bulimia]]. SpyGuy12345 (talk) 14:03, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
@SpyGuy12345: Hai. You added that she is a model, but didn't provide a source to support the claim. That's what all is about. Next time, when you add something, don't forget to cite a source. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?16:02, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Bill Maher shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. — Diannaa 🇨🇦 (talk) 14:21, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
@Diannaa: I was not involved in an intentional edit conflict. Infact, It was me, who finally approved his/her's edit. You could see that in the history. I was asking for another citation in the summary to prove that user's claim. Nothing more. I finally approved his edit. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?15:57, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
@85.103.50.211: Whenever you start a new conversation, start a new section. I've simplified the way to create a new talk section on the upper part of my talk page. Coming back to the topic. If you got sources, you can add it on the article. Unsourced additions will be challenged. Citing of sources are very important. You can cite that source all by yourself. Also, don't forget to sign at the end every paragraph you add on any user talk page or an article talk page. Signing can be done by typing four consecutive tildes. Feel free to ask more questions. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?14:03, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
@85.103.50.211: I made a visit to that article, and it's visible that you haven't cited the source in the article to support your claim. I can see that you've mentioned the source in the summary. I asked you to cite the source in the article. Not to mention it in the summary. If you cite that source in the page, I'll approve your edit. If you have any doubts regarding citing sources, see WP:CS Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?14:13, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
@85.103.50.211: Yeah. I could see that. But we should always sign after every comment we make on any talk page. See WP:SIG for more information. And one more thing. Civility is one of the five pillars of Wikipedia. We should always use polite language to communicate to other users. What I'm trying is to make you understand the scenario. I think you understand what I'm mentioning. You can leave me a message whenever you need any help. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?15:01, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
im usually a very calm person but I spent more than an hour writing that list and Im not sure why you haven't bothered to approve it for over 5 hours and heres my sign whatever it has to do with the article 85.103.50.211 (talk) 17:09, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
@85.103.50.211: Buddy. The reason why I'm not approving your edit is that you haven't cited that source near your inclusion so far. Anyone with pending changes right can review your edit. I'm one of them. There are many like me. But it will be most likely reverted by them saying the same reason what I'm saying. The reason why I'm frequently telling you about signature is that, it is very important and necessary for every user to sign at the end of the message they post. It helps other users to identify who added that message by an instant. It'll be easier for users to navigate, who is included in a conversation. KenTonyShall we discuss?17:22, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
i dont understand, I placed it in the bottom where it says "destroyed or captured" where is it that you want it placed and can't you do it this time to show me? 85.103.50.211 (talk) 17:57, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
@85.103.50.211: Sorry buddy. I can only review it when it comes to pending changes list. I told you before right it will be removed by someone saying there is insufficient citations. That's what happened. I approved your edit based on one source. So that's why that user reverted it I guess. KenTonyShall we discuss?07:23, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi Ken Tony, that may have been me reverting the edit. I did so because the link appeared to be inviting the reader to engage in original research - to verify the data they present in the tables, we must assume that the video is genuine, and attempt to count the alledged materiel destroyed. There's also the question of the provenance of the information - I just wasn't comfortable that that it would survive a RS review, and so reverted it. Best, BrxBrx(talk)(please reply with {{SUBST:re|BrxBrx}})08:22, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
An article you recently created, Ashalatha (singer), is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. GermanKity (talk) 09:57, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
@GermanKity: For a clear understanding, that article was not written by me. It is a recreation of a page, first created by the blocked user Kashmorwiki. I asked permission of an admin to recreate all the good articles (not GA status) created by him, which was deleted under the G5 criterion. I had previously copied every source from most of the pages created by him and recreated them. You can see a list of recreations done by me on my user page. If I wrote that article, it wouldn't have been that small or stub or whatever you wanna mention it. Unfortunately, articles of that type are not under my scope. KenTonyShall we discuss?10:28, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Ken, @GermanKity:, I did some clean up on this article. I think it's enough to survive in mainspace now, thoughts? I've focused on the English sources as I don't read Malayam. StarMississippi19:23, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
I won't real history of Punyshlok Ahilyadevi Holkar on this Wikipedia.. I know your father is British.. But I warned you last time.. She was not Sardar understand 😡.. She is Queen of malwa in 'Maratha empire'.. And she is the greatest queen of India mind it..
Don't create differences of opinion in society.. If you are really the child of a father, then you will not apply the title of Sardar again...
The rest of you are smart. Why are you hiding your real name? You don't know who your father is or you don't know if you have a father.
Do you have the child of twelve fathers or not?
Are you the child of the twelve fathers or more?...
I think I have followed the guidelines and removed all promotional messages but the article is still declined.
Is it because of the tone or lack of range of independent, reliable, published sources?
Could you be more specific? Thank you!
Hai Goodlug. The reason why I declined that draft was because it still had that promotional tone. That draft requires reliable and secondary sources. YouTube videos as sources must be removed. So in conclusion, the draft should be modified according Wikipedia standards. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?10:21, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi Ken Tony, thank you for your kind reply. I have just revised the article again based on your suggestions. Is it possible that you can help take a look before I submit the article again? Many thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goodlug (talk • contribs) 04:36, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello. You have rejected my article about Michael Hall on the grounds that there are insufficient reliable sources. Since I quote references from major UK newspapers, published books and music journals I do not understand how these are 'unreliable;iab;e'. Can you explain please.Brenda P. Hall (talk) 07:01, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello Brenda P. Hall. The reason why I rejected your draft is because that draft has many sources that needs to be converted, as well as there is a YouTube video as a source. They're generally not reliable. If you sort all these things out, we can have a look on it once again. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?07:10, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
I think I have converted the links according to the correct format. The one I am not clear about is the las reference as this is a website not a publication. I hope you will be able to review and accept the article. Thank you for your help.Brenda P. Hall (talk) 12:56, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
Hey Brenda P. Hall. I'm convinced with the draft now. Reliability of sources, significant coverage etc etc are there to make that draft pass WP:GNG. But there is one more thing left to do. All citations must come after the symbols. If you sort that out, I'll move that draft to mainspace. Good work. KenTonyShall we discuss?16:04, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello Ken Tony. Same question as Brenda P. Hall. You have rejected my article about Charly 2000 on the grounds that there are insufficient reliable sources. Since I quote references from major german newspapers and online journals I do not understand how these are 'unreliable'. Further the translation was done by a professional native speaker. Can you explain please. --W2357 (talk) 07:50, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
Hai W2357. The reason why I rejected your draft have many reasons. Firstly, it looks like a rough translation from a German Wikipedia article with the same name 'Charly 2000'. Secondly, YouTube video as a source is present. Third reason is that the articles requires secondary sources. After taking all these things into account, I rejected your draft. You can modify it according to Wikipedia standards and re-submit it once more. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?07:59, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
1927-28 NHL Transactions
Hello Ken,
I am confused with the message of: 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. Thank you.
Diamond, Dan, ed. (2003). Total NHL. Chicago: Triumph Books. pp. 447–926. ISBN 978-1-57243-604-6.
The second one is a book that was endorsed by the NHL in which all the trades listed in my draft are actually found in the book as well and cross-referenced with the website NHL tracker. If this book isn't one of the best reference to list, well Wikipedia should take all NHL references as there is no reliable source at all.
Hey Scuddy07. Whenever you finish typing a message, always sign at the end of the message. It would helpful in many ways. The reason why I declined your draft was because the draft lacked 'inline citations'. That draft still don't have any inline citations. If you don't know what an inline citation means, I would recommend you to read WP:IC. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?12:18, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello again Ken Tony! If I understand correctly, since the information is in the Total NHL book, on each transactions or dates, I need to add the book as reference with the actual pages. If yes, it will take a while but it can be done. Scuddy07 (talk) 01:13, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
Hey buddy, don't forget to sign at the end of the message. It can be done by adding four consecutive tildes. You can take time and modify the draft. There is no issue in that. KenTonyShall we discuss?18:07, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
RAPWI - Recovered Allied Prisoners of War and Internees
Hi, your message is asking for me to add inline citations. My problem is that a lot of this is based on a whole assortment of original material spread across many hard copy files at the National Archives in Kew. I put a section in under "Research Resources" with links to the catalogue entries, but we are talking about raw materials, like entries in FORCE 136's war diary. For example, I have a photo of the 2 pages which make up the mission brief, which was in one of the Force 136 file. I also have a photo of the full set of orders for MASTIFF/ANIMAL, which runs to 3 pages, from the personnel file of the team leader, which runs to 3 pages, and includes the lovely idea that he should be able to account for the 10K Guilders he was given!
I started the page because I found a number of other pages were referring to RAPWI (which I added links from before the page was put in draft mode) and it seems that there is little information on this subject, despite the large number of lives these teams apparently saved. I am still trying to find the source particular bit of information as it is in a one of the "Lost Voices" type books, which means it probably came from the IWM. I currently can't find the book I think it is in :-(
So not sure how I can move forward with this. All the books I mention generally have barely a mention of RAPWI but there are 7 pages on Wikipedia all making mention of it, eg:
And, yes, I added the RAPWI entry for Force 136 a few years ago when I first started researching my Uncle, who was one of the RAPWI team leaders, trained by SOE as a Jedburgh, caught by the Gestapo 3 times, escaped twice, sentenced to death by the third time and liberated by US troops before the sentence was carried out. Oh, and he ran the company that created pay per view TV. So yes, I have a personal interest, but I created the page due to the lack of any proper documentation on the subject. Everybody makes such a deal about the Vulcan attacks on Port Stanley being such a long flight, but that was only 15 hours and they needed 11 Victors to support them. The RAF squadrons supporting Force 136 flew unsupported mission for up to 24 hours, flying by dead reckoning, not being able to use the stars to navigate until the were well on their way and having limited fuel to find their drop zone. In the case of my Uncle, it looks like the parachute drop he did into Padang might have only been the second he ever did, the first being in training.
Buddy Marc350, I won't clearly understand what you're saying above, because this type of topics are not under my scope. Okay, whatever the reason maybe, a draft/article needs inline citations. To know more about inline citations, see WP:IC. I'm not against your creation, and is impressed by the quality of the draft, but the draft should have a sufficient amount of inline citations to go the mainspace. Feel free to ask more questions. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?16:48, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi Ken. I think I am struggling on what needs inline citation. The requirement in the link you sent me says I need to inline cite anything that is a quotation or likely to be challenged. So, for example, the bit about the Dutch military command wanting to get Force 136 to help re-impose colonial power is referred to in the Dutch commander's own Wiki page without an in-line citation. That page has a references section with a link to his autobiography. The rest is all taken from a series of messages going to and from Force 136 command, across a number of files at the National Archives, all of which are noted in the references section (although I called it further research)
I could, for example, link the section about the orders to the exact file I found it in, which is http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/C14477956 but there will be a copy in every single team leader's file, I expect. So I think there is a mismatch between the requirements of an inline citation, as defined in the link you included, and what you want from me, as I don't think anything I have written is quoting, paraphrasing, contentious or exceptional. I could better organise the sources and reference sections maybe?
@Marc350: Did you read ref tags section? There you find a brief information about citing inline citations or footnotes. For a clear information about citing footnotes, you may see H:FOOT. From there, you can see how an inline citation looks like. KenTonyShall we discuss?13:45, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
Source Catalog Publishing Collective 1970s
Hi,
For progressive movements in the 1970s the Source Catalogs (published by the original Source publishing collective in DC) were widely distributed across the United States. They also were collected by a number of libraries, especially on US college campuses. These printed bound booklets (8 1/2 by 11 in.) were called a "Whole Earth Catalog for activists." They predated the Internet evolution into the World Wide Web. Outside of library science publications and progressive publications, it is difficult to find any mention of them online today.
So this is a classic "Catch 22" situation. The catalogs were never aimed at the general public, so they seldom received mass media attention.
I am a published author and independent scholar, and can get an article about the Source Catalog Publishing Collective 1970s in a serious Journal, but then you probably would complain that I was cheating.
-)
I could probably find some favorable mentions in old published print library science journals?
Hai Chip.berlet. The simple reason why I rejected your draft submission was because it lacked inline citations. Moreover, the condition of the draft is very bad to go the the mainspace. If you modify the draft according to Wikipedia standards, and to an encyclopedic way, in addition with sufficient inline citations, we can discuss about the additional measures that is to be done. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?16:56, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
Will try finding some citations. I will have to go to a university library. Anything that predates the World Wide Web is a nightmare.
Thank you for the review of List of Antstream Arcade games
I complied a list of games offered by Antstream Arcade by pulling the games list directly from their application.
I have not been able to find a verifiable source for all the games they offer other than the approximate total (1200) and a few short list from various site. I have cited the 2 websites that give the most information about the number and their more popular games.
Please let me know if there is a better method to verify the list of games other than pulling the list directly from their application.
Hello Ant Shrew13. Good that you've cited sources. I don't think this draft will pass WP:GNG because as far as I'm concerned, the given topic haven't received significant coverage. Moreover, there is no main article for the so called 'Antstream Arcade Games'. So, I think, the chances of the draft surviving in the mainspace is comparatively low. KenTonyShall we discuss?17:43, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello. The main page it pertains to is Antstream Arcade. Should I wait for the main page to be completed prior to looking at getting this approved or would it be more worthwhile merging the pages? Ant Shrew13 (talk)
@Ant Shrew13: I would recommend you to make the main draft approved into main article. If that draft gets approved, we can discuss whether to merge or to keep an independent article regarding the list of games whatsoever. KenTonyShall we discuss?13:54, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
I was hoping for some assistance with this draft. The team was declined due to not being in a fully professional league but I feel like due to players on the roster and the statement in the "Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Fully professional leagues" of "Players who have not played in a fully professional league listed below may meet Wikipedia's General notability guideline the team should be reconsidered. We have 3 players who played full professional soccer in the US that have their own page. Also, dozens of the teams in our league have pages.
Please let me know any changes that can be made. kevinw33— Preceding unsigned comment added by Kevinw33 (talk • contribs) 14:33, 8 June 2021 (UTC)kevinw33
Hey Kevinw33, whenever you add a message in any of the talk page, don't forget to sign at the end. It would be helpful for us in many ways. Signing can be done by typing four consecutive tildes. Coming back to the topic. The draft was rejected for many reason. First of all, the football club is not competing in a fully professional league as listed in WP:FPL. Second, the article don't have sufficient secondary and reliable sources. Final reason is that, the club hasn't received significant coverage to pass WP:GNG. Considering all these into account, I rejected your draft. KenTonyShall we discuss?16:45, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
NPSL teams qualify for the U.S. Open Cup which would be their check mark for notability. Being fully professional is not a necessary qualification. There are hundreds of teams in the US and thousands in Europe that are not full professional that have pages. I am working on sources but bear with me... this is my first page I've created. Kevinw33 (talk) 17:29, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
No Kevinw33, it's not given a team's ability to qualify for the cup will help meet it with GNG. It's given that the teams that have played in the national cup (or the national level of the league structure in countries where no cup exists) generally meet WP:GNG criteria. The team hasn't played in national cup so far. So, it won't qualify GNG. KenTonyShall we discuss?17:47, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
Ahh, ok. So either the team needs to pick up their play or I'm back to the drawing board. Too bad Covid put a stop to qualifying for US Open Cup this year.
@Kevinw33: Ha. Current time buddy. Anyway the draft will be there an extended period. You can modify it according the standards when the draft meets the minimum criteria to move to the mainspace. Happy to assist you. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?18:01, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
From reading a bit more about the requirements, it seems many of my citations were not converted; would you say that's the main problem I am facing here? Or is there something more that's amiss? Because 90% of my sources are national or regional newspapers and official websites. Do let me know if there is something else I have not considered! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shingimavima (talk • contribs) 04:02, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello VRJ Bandhu. Sad to say, I'll decline the draft once again because, other than merging some cells, you haven't made any serious changes, and citations that you cited are YouTube videos. Already the draft was full of The Times of India sources that had YouTube videos linked to it. YouTube videos are not reliable. The draft's whole sources must be replaced with secondary and reliable sources. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?06:55, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
I didn't add an additional citation because it was already provided in the infobox with her current subscriber number which is below 4 million Hannahxo (talk) 17:39, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
Hai Kichuz996. I'm not sure whether this message will reach you or not because you're currently blocked. See, I'm also from Kerala, and I'm very familiar with the things happening in Kerala. Prasanth Nair aka Collector bro has got significant coverage and you've cited plenty of reliable sources. I didn't knew the creator was a sock. Even if I accept the draft and move it to the mainspace again, it'll surely be deleted under G5 criterion. So there should be no hope for you that the draft will survive in the mainspace. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?07:53, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
FYI - Draft:Prasanth Nair now has information in Comments that it has a history of being created and deleted, and is currently nominated for Speedy deletion, so may disappear soon. You would not have been expected to know all this when you reviewed and approved the draft, because no history was connected to the draft. David notMD (talk) 08:48, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
On May 25th Nat declined to accept the article on grounds that the submission was not supported by reliable sources, and now you are echoing same objection on June 11th.
To meet that deficiency I cited four academicians who attest to Mahal’s work as writer and public volunteer.
One of Wikipedia notability requirement is that “This can include published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, other books, television documentaries, bestseller lists, and reviews”. Reviews of Mahal’s published works are provided: two for each of the two books. These are people independent of the subject itself and /or of its author, publisher or agent.
I will be grateful if you can specify/exemplify the exact nature of deficiency.
S TallimS Tallim (talk) 15:13, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
I was able to find mention in secondary source. He is mentioned in an article titled "Trauma and memory witjin the Sikh diaspora" by N G Barrier (https://doi.org/10.1080/17448720600779836) under note 14. He is also named in Sikh Diaspora by R. S. Chilana (https://scholar.google.ca/scholar?start=42&q=bhupinder+singh+mahal&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5). He fulfills Wikipedia's notability defined as "The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor". Mahal is recipient of prestigious Queen Elizbeth Diamond Jubilee award. He also received Council award by the College of Physiotherapists of Ontario. Do above meet the reliable source criteria? S TallimS Tallim (talk) 18:03, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
@S Tallim: Still the draft has a lot of primary sources. It requires additional secondary and tertiary sources. Also can you show me the sources saying that the given person has won all theses awards as you mentioned? KenTonyShall we discuss?12:07, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
Photographic evidence of presentation of medals is with Permissions-Wikipedia Commons who will publish it once the article is approved. I can provide you with these photos if you wish. S Tallim[[User:S Tallim|S Tallim] (talk) 16:11, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
@S Tallim:If these images are from taken from Google without providing the credits, your Wikimedia Commons account will be warned. I want to see written evidence in internet as a form of feature. These images are not sources. KenTonyShall we discuss?12:38, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
The presentation and documentation are not on the internet nor they need to be. I have filed a request for arbitration. {{subst:arbcom notice|CASENAME}}. S TallimS Tallim (talk) 14:52, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
I was informed that arbitration is not the route at this moment. Instead I should seek dispute resolution. But, lo and behold, I was able to find internet mention. Here’s the link -
When you click on the link you will have to make your selections, as follows: In windows on left provide your query: Under HONOUR select Queen Elizbeth ll Golden Jubilee Medal. Under FIELD select [-] Other (69). Under PROVINCE select [-] Ontario (36). That will bring you to the page mentioning Bhupinder Singh Mahal. S TallimS Tallim (talk) 17:10, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
Permissions from Mrs. Mahal and Registrar of College of Physiotherapists were provided to Wikipedia Commons on April 19. Hereunder their e-mail response to me dated April 19 - Ticket #2021040510008374 - Dear S Tallim, When article it's approved, we can proceed. Please let us know then. Sincerely, Valeria Domínguez. TallimS Tallim (talk) 16:20, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Hey mate. Images, if you got permission, its okay. But what about the chunk of primary sources in the draft? You still haven't added secondary sources to constitute with primary sources. KenTonyShall we discuss?16:45, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
I want to thank you for your guidance and your patience. I am new at this kind of project. I will be grateful for all the help I get. I am 88 and frail of health. S TallimS Tallim (talk) 22:40, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Mr. S Tallim. I made a visit to all the citations in draft. I found out that out of all 33 citations, only 15 sources mention about him. Rest of the sources doesn't have any connection with the draft. And out of this 15 selected sources, 7 sources are primary sources, and rest of the sources are perfect. WP:GNG clearly says that an article/draft requires more secondary and reliable sources that has no original research on it to establish notability of the topic. This person may meet notabilility criteria, but the draft currently needs to fulfill all of the GNG. You may also read WP:PSTS. KenTonyShall we discuss?07:28, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
I have revamped the citations and removed those that have no "connection with the draft". I have added another citation from Google Scholar. I have also provided proof of award of Queen Elizbeth Golden Jubilee medal. Here's the link indicating significance and importance of the medal: https://archive.gg.ca/honours/medals/hon04-qegj_e.asp. I have inserted it in the draft. S TallimS Tallim (talk) 14:49, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
I could delete the section on personal life. In the award section I can mention the award and then provide the criteria for awarding of the award by the respective organization. S TallimS Tallim (talk) 19:36, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
I am a bit confused about your statement that “Award section is written like an advertisement”. A presentation of an award is always preceded by a citation that describes accomplishment for which the recipient is receiving the award and stating why the nominee was considered for this award. This is done even at the awarding of the Nobel prize or Presidential Medal of Honor or Padma Bhushan. On the Indian site it states “Citation for the Padma Awards should bring out the scale and the extent of the work that an individual has done”. Please clarify. S TallimS Tallim (talk) 14:28, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
I have re-written section on Awards from a NPOV, stating facts and not opinions. I have deleted section on personal life. S TallimS Tallim (talk) 16:08, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
Found and added citation of Mahal by Dr. Pashaura Singh in his book “Life and Work of Guru Arjan: History, Memory, and Biography in the Sikh Tradition”. S TallimS Tallim (talk) 16:11, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
@S Tallim: There are still many errors in the draft. And why linking external links to the content? That's inappropriate. I want to ask you one thing. Do you have any close connection to the subject? KenTonyShall we discuss?16:44, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
I was a founding member of a Sikh discussion group on Yahoo-Groups, now shut down. I was approached by Mahal in 2012 to help publish his book - about a Sikh emperor - as it could then be disseminated widely among the 1200 Sikh members of the group. No fees were asked nor paid. My son and I helped Mahal on the publication on Kindle Direct Publishing. I do not have friendly relationship with him. As our members bought his book and wrote favorably about it, and as I came across his recently published book "Origin of Jat Race", I was impressed with his works and decided to explore his life and activities. As I delved into his life I got persuaded to write his bio. To write the bio I contacted Mahal. I will delete the external links. Please tell me nature of errors in the draft. I am indebted to you for your indirect help in improving the draft. S TallimS Tallim (talk) 17:27, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
@S Tallim: Okay, so you have an interest in the topic. If my observation is correct, in one of the sources, I saw a review uploaded by you in one of his books or journal or whatever it is. I also read the rest of the parts and found out that in some parts, it is not written from a neutral point of view, as it sounds like your own personal opinion. You may also see WP:PSCOI. KenTonyShall we discuss?17:36, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi, Ken Can you please specify why you declined the submission??? The article have cites specifically explaining about Dr. Vidhya, Have you been gone through all the references i gave on that draft, it have around 14 references and all are clearly focused on Dr. Vidhya.
Hai Ajna Hamza I didn't reject the draft citing the reason that it lacks sources. In fact I rejected it under the reason that the person hasn't got sufficient coverage to pass WP:GNG. Two of the sources that you mentioned here are most likely not reliable. One looks like a blog, and the other is a photo. I can't read Tamil. There is a sourcing in Tamil, but I'm okay with that. Also when you just search with the name of the person in any of the search engine, there is no feature mentioning about her at first place. At first instance, it only shows her profiles in various websites. Previous reviewers also rejected the draft saying that it fails WP:GNG. So after taking all these into account, I rejected the draft. KenTonyShall we discuss?18:25, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
Question for Draft:Jean-Marie Haessle
Hello,
Thank you for your taking the time to review the draft. I have some questions on how I can cite some references which I believe is the main problem with this draft. How can you cite art catalogs cause, unlike books that have an ISBN, these do not. Also, how would you cite old newspaper articles which don't exist on the internet but there is physical proof of it? Perhaps there is a tool online where you can reliably upload for wikipedia to use? And finally do let me know what else I can do to work towards getting the draft published! Cheers.
Hai OneEyedWolf I rejected the draft under the ground that the person is not notable, i.e. the person fails WP:GNG. The sources that you've cited are also not fully reliable. I don't know how we add physical proofs as source in Wikipedia that doesn't exist in the internet. I would recommend you to ask about this in the Teahouse. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?03:40, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi. I see you already deleted our conversation but I'll reply still. :-) Thanks for the explanation. A reference from primary source, i.e. an announcement from the player's club, is better than no reference at all. You can in fact cite tweets as well: see Template:Cite tweet. Kind regards, Robby.is.on (talk) 13:33, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
When you decline someone's AFC submission, please make sure that you leave the "sorry" message on the talk page of the person whose draft it was, rather than the person who showed them how to fix the errors in their use of {{submit}}.
Also, never tell someone that the topic of their draft isn't notable. Tell them that they haven't shown notability. DS (talk) 14:23, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
Steve Ravic Article Submission - Copyright Violation?
Hi Ken Tony,
I just writing in regards to my submission for the Steve Ravic article. There is a copyright violation but I'm not sure what exactly is in violation, if there is, it's been a while since I wrote this one up. Could you please assist in pointing out the offending material, then I will attempt to rectify this. MetaldarrenMetalDarren (talk) 17:00, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello MetalDarren. Whenever you leave a message on any of the talk page, don't forget to sign the end of it. Signing can be done by typing four consecutive tildes. It would be helpful for us in many ways. Coming back to the topic. Buddy this is not your fault. A website named Everybody Wiki has copied your draft and added it to their mainspace. So when I searched with the name of the person, that site popped up and the writings about the person were the exact same as what you wrote. (Here is the site) That's what prompted me to do so. This is not your fault. I would now recommend you to change the style and usage of some words to avoid copyright conflict between your draft and that site's content. If you felt down by rejection, I'm very sorry for that. Thank you for reaching out to me. KenTonyShall we discuss?17:00, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
Sorry if I'm supposed to reply to this another way, I'm still fairly new so not sure how I do a follow up to a response, also sorry for the signing issue as well.
As for the case of EverybodyWiki, it seems they've completely copied my article here. In fact at the bottom of the page underneath the references section it states, I quote:
"This article "Steve Ravic" is from Wikipedia. The list of its authors can be seen in its historical and/or the page Edithistory:Steve Ravic. Articles copied from Draft Namespace on Wikipedia could be seen on the Draft Namespace of Wikipedia and not main one."
I want to make it clear I'm not having a go at you, it could be how the rules are, but is it really fair for me to have to change the draft I've written out myself and had submitted for review a third time on 19 April 2021, then have it sniped by potentially a bot or some person to put on a completely different wiki that looks to act like some sort of back up with its last edit being made at, I quote "This page was last edited on 28 May 2021, at 16:19" , whilst this one was being reviewed.
I'm not too sure what EverybodyWiki is but it may just be a a site that copies over drafts that are unpublished from Wikipedia, as searching for say, Tom Cruise doesn't bring up a copy of a Tom Cruise article for example.
Again, just thinking that if the article was going to be published on Wikipedia (not saying it should, that's ultimately up to you guys), it may be that the duplicate gets deleted off of EverybodyWiki.
At least, I would put that forward to the mods here for discussion as it can be quite the punch to the gut to start creating articles then to have this happen, but even more so to have this happen and then have Wikipedia the one to fold in the situation when it's clear that they're (EverybodyWiki) the ones in violation of any copyright in the worst case, and in the best case just a site that seems to be acting as a repository of drafts and rejected articles from Wikipedia.
If you could reconsider the case if this is the only reason this would be holding up the publication of the article it would be much appreciated.
@MetalDarren: You can continue the conversation in this section itself. There is no problem in that. I also saw that they've created the article after giving credits to you and your draft. You may do one thing. As I said before, change the structure/usage of words to make it different from the revision that is present in that site. That would be helpful and then re-submit it again. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?03:35, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
@Ken Tony: Ok I will do so next when I can. However there's the worry they may just copy the changes over whilst this new iteration of the article is being reviewed. As an alternative, if I could contact someone from the site there and have them pull the article, would that be fine?" MetalDarren (talk) 13:42, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
You can do it whenever you want. Also if you have any means of contacting with personalities on that site, you may do anything as you wish. There will be full support from me. KenTonyShall we discuss?13:46, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Request on 20:20:50, 13 June 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by DaffodilOcean
I fully recognize that I am new to Wikipedia, however, I think Bontempi should be considered under the guidelines for academics. She is an oceanographer, and has been named a Fellow of The Oceanography Society. This is described and documented on the page I wrote. When I read the guidelines for Notability (academics), this falls under criteria #3 : "...or a fellow of a major scholarly society which reserves fellow status as a highly selective honor". Being named a fellow at The Oceanography Society is a selective honor, to quote their website ("... recognize TOS members who have made outstanding and sustained contributions to the field of oceanography through scientific excellence, extraordinary service and leadership, and/or strategic development of the field.")[1] My understanding was that academics are only required to meet one of the 8 possible criteria. Have I mis-understood the criteria here?--DaffodilOcean (talk) 20:20, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello - Let me see if I can put this in the right terms. I don't think WP:GNG is the guideline to use in evaluating Bontempi's page. I think it should be WP:PROF. On WP:PROF the guidelines for academics do not include the requirement for significant coverage (as described in WP:GNG).
Mate, don't forget to sign at the end. Yes, WP:NPROF does mentions about coverage as a part of reaching notability criteria. Are you sure that you've read WP:NACADEMIC properly? It mentions about 'impact' inside and outside the topic. Also keep in mind that every draft or an article requires significant coverage to go to the mainspace. WP:NPROF is an extended branch of WP:N, where in its main page, it cites about WP:GNG and the requirements which I've said you that the draft lacks comes under GNG. KenTonyShall we discuss?11:54, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
Ack, sorry about not signing that message. I have read WP:NACADEMIC and it states "This guideline is independent from the other subject-specific notability guidelines, such as WP:BIO, WP:MUSIC, WP:AUTH, etc., and is explicitly listed as an alternative to the general notability guideline." (I added the emphasis about independent). It then goes on to say that "Academics meeting any one of the following conditions..." and Bontempi meets criteria #3.DaffodilOcean (talk) 12:23, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
Criteria #3 is "The person has been an elected member of a highly selective and prestigious scholarly society or association (e.g., a National Academy of Sciences or the Royal Society) or a fellow of a major scholarly society which reserves fellow status as a highly selective honor (e.g., Fellow of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers)." Bontempi was named a Fellow of The Oceanography Society in 2019. On her page, I provided two citations for that honor:[1][2]. According to the guidelines at WP:PROF, "publications of the electing institution are considered a reliable source" so the citation I included from the The Oceanography Society website should suffice, though I added the Eureka Alert as well since it includes additional information about Bontempi.DaffodilOcean (talk) 17:11, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
Okay DaffodilOcean. I'm convinced with your proof. The draft can be transferred to the mainspace. But before re-submitting the draft, there are many things that is to be done. Will you perform according to my instructions? Or should I do it myself? Anything as you wish. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?17:17, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
Excellent. I would feel better if you moved it because I have never moved something out of AfC. Thanks for your consideration of this article.DaffodilOcean (talk) 17:19, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
@DaffodilOcean: Yes mate. The only thing that's left in the draft is to do some modifications. It's not compulsory to do it, but I want every draft to be in a good condition whenever they go the mainspace. I'm more inclined to this because I myself is on a mission of improving a certain genre of articles. So, are you ready for that? Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?17:28, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
I don't know what this means: 'dmy date tag', nor do I know what 'English usage tag' means. I added a short description and removed the two non-existent links.DaffodilOcean (talk) 17:56, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
No worries @DaffodilOcean:. I'll do it. For that I wanna know one thing. Which variety of English was used by you to write the draft? Is it British or American? If I could know that, it would be really helpful. KenTonyShall we discuss?19:05, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
Dear Ken, After you rejected my first submission on the grounds of "Only one or two citation mentions about his name. Easily fails WP:GNG", I re-edited all references to make sure they come from reliable sources and clearly mention the author. Could you please review again to ensure that the revised version meets the requirements of being posted? Best wishes.
Future of AI (talk) 10:11, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
Ken, thank you for reviewing this article. My view is that there are sufficient references demonstrating significant coverage about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. These sources include government press releases,[1][2] publications by reputable organizations independent of the subject (including the World Health Organization and Public Health Agency of Canada),[3][4][5] and media,[6][7][8] all of which are published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Several of the media articles referenced provide significant, rather than passing, coverage of the subject (e.g., [9][10][11]). Is it a matter of simply including more of these? I felt that this would simply be over-referencing - the references included are clearly significant coverage and meet all of the other criteria, and so it is not clear how this fails to "show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject."
Hello Asphodel76. Whenever you add a message on any of the talk page, don't forget to sign at the end of the it. Signing can be done by typing four consecutive tildes. Signing is very important as it is helpful for us in many ways. Coming back to the topic. For your concern, one citation you gave in above is not accessible for me as I'm not a subscriber. The problems which I found in some, if not all of the sources you cited above are as follows:-
Firstly, as I said before, I cannot access one sources due to not buying their subscription.
Secondly, one or two sources you cited above doesn't even mention his name.
Thirdly, only two or barely three sources have given a lengthy feature about him.
Fourthly, there is a French source among the group, which I cannot read. I know it is possible to translate the page and read them, but that translating would be rough, and it won't be conveying everything that is present in the original revision. (NOTE:- There is no problem in citing another language citation in English Wikipedia.)
Finally, a weak and unpopular reason. When you search with the name of the person in any search engine, there would be nothing, other than some profiles in various websites.
By taking all these into account, I rejected your draft. I know this can be a bit absurd point of view, but you can defend your draft against my reasonings by speaking your part. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?17:03, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
Ken - really appreciate the response. Thank you. And I apologize for not signing off - will ensure to do so from now on. I will address each of the concerns you've raised in turn:
Firstly, as I said before, I cannot access one sources due to not buying their subscription. - I have now swapped this reference (#20) out for another suitable reference that should be accessible.
Secondly, one or two sources you cited above doesn't even mention his name. - I've just checked, and every reference mentions the subject's name, although two of them did indeed require a further click - apologies for that. I've modified references 9 and 12 so that it is more apparent and directly links to the page with the subject's name.
Thirdly, only two or barely three sources have given a lengthy feature about him. - Most references in the article are provided to confirm details (e.g., education, current position, etc.), and so would not need full coverage on the subject. However, the parts of the article that are substantive, e.g., that discuss the subject's research focus, have multiple references devoted entirely to the subject. It seems that the number of references I've provided is the norm and stops short of over-referencing. With that being said, I've added an additional three references that provide significant coverage of the subject, which now hopefully meets this criterion.
Fourthly, there is a French source among the group, which I cannot read. I know it is possible to translate the page and read them, but that translating would be rough, and it won't be conveying everything that is present in the original revision. (NOTE:- There is no problem in citing another language citation in English Wikipedia.) - I appreciate that you cannot read this. But, the subject is a Canadian bioethicist, and consequently, there will be media on the subject in both of the country's official languages: English and French. The French article is another example of significant coverage of the subject. Hopefully the addition of the three new references will offset the fact that this reference with significant coverage of the subject is in French.
Finally, a weak and unpopular reason. When you search with the name of the person in any search engine, there would be nothing, other than some profiles in various websites. - Hopefully this can be overlooked given all of the other ways I've addressed your concerns above, for at least the reason that search engine searches are tailored for the searcher's specific geo-location. At any rate, the name of the subject is not uncommon, and so you might try "Maxwell J Smith" to retrieve more results for the subject.
Thanks for allowing me to defend my draft against your reasonings. Happy to revise further.
Glad to see that you've cited more sources to the draft. I'm impressed with your claims. Yeah, it maybe true that our difference in the geographical locations might've influenced the way our search engine works. Anyway there are many things that is to be done in draft. I'll tell you everything gradually. Happy to assist you. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?03:42, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
Henk Jan de Jonge
Dear Mr. Tony,
Thank you for your comments on the draft article on "Henk Jan de Jonge," Professor em. of New Testament and Early Christian Literature at Leiden University, the Netherlands.
In your review you mentioned the following about the references in the draft: "they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people)." I have been looking at the references once again, and they seem to me to give exactly the coverage you ask for, some of them coming from independent sources, such as official, biographical registers of Leiden professors, others from leading, peer-reviewed, scholarly journals and other publications. All these references are verifiable.
Could you please tell me what kind of changes you are thinking of in order for me to make the draft acceptable? I would be very grateful to you for your help.
Thank you in anticipation.
Hjdejonge (talk) 10:44, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Hey mate. I'm the second reviewer of the draft. Before me, some other reviewer reviewed and declined your draft citing the same reason. For your attention, unlike the previous reviewer, I didn't mentioned that the draft is not adequately supported by reliable sources. In fact this time, I rejected it with reason that the person hasn't got significant coverage to pass WP:GNG. The citations maybe reliable but we should check whether the draft constitutes with the guidelines implemented by Wikipedia. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?11:21, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Concerns about AFC reviewing
Hi, I'm concerned about some of your recent AFC declines. See Draft:Dragutin Prica, Fryderyk Buchholtz, Draft:Lucio Luiz, Draft:Jahantighi, Draft:Miroslav Milisavljević (last one had multiple reasons but one of them was translation related). Translations of other Wikipedia articles are perfectly acceptable, and that is not a reason to decline them at AFC. Unedited machine translations are not acceptable, but you seem to be declining all translations, even if performed by a seemingly competent human. Unless the translation is obviously faulty or is a copy of a Google Translate translation, there is no need to decline it on this basis. Also, to the extent a translation lacks attribution, you can simply add this attribution via a null edit and adding the template {{Translated}} to the talk page. This is better than simply declining the article (on one, you called it a copyvio and advised the author to rewrite it -- which is completely unnecessarily in light of the option to simply attribute the work to the other wiki). Do you understand these issues, and can you correct these errors? Thanks, Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:42, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi there -
I'm confused, I was told on Dec 01 when the submission was first declined that I needed to show proof that the film was reviewed beyond passing mention and via secondary sources - which the Ain't It Cool News, Total Film, and San Francisco Bay Times reviews provide. The rest of the material is from online Press Releases I found on media new sites.
If I were to source the film on streaming platforms, i.e. iTunes, Google Play, Amazon, etc. would that count as a reliable source being under the Vendor and e-commerce sources?
I know for a fact this film exists (having seen it myself), was distributed by a major distributor (Cinedigm) and it was reviewed in at least 3 notable sources (including SF Bay Times, a print paper); if there is a real way I can edit this page that I am doing incorrectly my apologies, please let me know how to edit it correctly.
Ken Tony, this isn't a valid reason to reject a draft. Even if one source supplied is unreliable, that doesn't mean an entire draft has to be rejected. I express no opinion about the draft overall, but it does not rise and fall on the inclusion of one YouTube source. Calliopejen1 (talk) 06:02, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi Ken Tony, I got a notification the you left a comment regarding my AfC, but I couldn't find the comment. I was excited because I haven't gotten any feedback yet and honestly you might be the only person that has even seen it besides me. HaHa! I'd be grateful for any recommendations you can give me, because (if you can't tell from my username) I'm scared it is going to get deleted, so I want it to be as good as possible.
HERE ARE THE FACTS I CAN TELL YOU ABOUT IT:
I got an alert from you that took me to the bottom of my talk page User talk:Deleteopedia
There was an AfC new comment box that linked to my PRE-DRAFT sandbox page User:Deleteopedia/SandboxHoneycutt
I couldn't see a comment there and my PRE-DRAFTsandbox page had been deleted (I have since recreated it)
My deleted PRE-DRAFT sandbox page had a red box saying you had moved it {somewhere? I'm not 100% sure where}.
I ?think? it said you moved it to my DRAFT page? Draft:James Honeycutt (Distinguished Professor of Communication)
OK, I figured it out.
Instead of the DRAFT page I already created (link above), you made a new one Draft:James M. Honeycutt
Wow that was confusing as hell! I finally found "view log" on the pages history for the page you moved/deleted
From there I could see that where you moved it was q new page I didn't know about. LOL, glad that's over hehe Deleteopedia (talk) 05:42, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Hey mate, oh that's so confusing. Ha. I left a comment on your submission saying 'Additional sources would be helpful'. Eagleash moved the page with a valid reason. So you can work from there from now, instead of doing it in the sandbox. Simple! 06:53, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi again Ken Tony and thanks! I finally found the comment.Shall we discuss? <--- Love that!
I have a couple of other questions as well.
1) Are you guys doing an AfC review or just helping out? If you are does that comment mean I failed it?
2) Can you or possibly Eagleash explain why my sandbox had to get deleted, Isn't a sandbox mine to do with as I please? Also, ::why did it have to be moved/renamed. Couldn't we just used the Draft I already had?
3) On the "Additional sources would be helpful", what do you want the sources to help with? Can you give me some guidance on what you think is missing because it feels extremely well sourced to me. I dove pretty deep. I've got something like 5 Discipline specific Academic Encyclopedia, 7 Graduate and undergraduate textbooks, some book chapters, and more peer-reviewed journal articles than I cared to count. I also have different types of sources for the early life section, his profile on amazon, linked in, and his CV. I'm afraid its not going to get much better than that. He wasn't a famous child actor or anything that would make journalist write about him, just a regular high school/college kid back then. Can you let me know specifically what seems missing? Thanks so much Deleteopedia (talk) 07:36, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
@Deleteopedia: Glad that you like my sign. Mate, we're reviewers at (Articles for creation), who can move drafts to mainspace/namespace, if the draft fulfills WP:GNG criteria and several other selected criteria. I only left a comment on the draft for you to see and work on it. It doesn't mean your draft has failed. You could say so if someone rejected or declined your draft upon submission. Your sandbox was deleted because, when the submission was moved to draft space, it served as duplicate. So that may be the reason that the user deleted your sandbox. I think there is WP:CSD criterion for that. You can recreate the sandbox, even if it's deleted after redirection. And the last thing. I was thinking that the table in draft, if more sourced, would be great. I didn't said it's mandatory. That's why I just left a comment instead of declining or rejecting the draft. In overall, I like the structure of the draft. You did a great job. KenTonyShall we discuss?07:55, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
@Ken Tony Wow, thanks for the kind words. I've worked my ass off on it for over 6 months. I'm pretty excited to get it out of draft space, so please let me know if I can do anything that would help expedite that. Is there anything that comes with completing the Afc review, like does your page get the AfC stamp of approval or something like that?
I had a HUGE milestone just yesterday. I finally got the copyright for his picture straightened out with OTRS. I kid you not, that was the hardest part of the whole thing. OTRS man... what can you even say... shit-show. I emailed Honeycutt and asked him to give the license in February. He did it immediately, same day, but OTRS waits till mid-June finally approve it. OTRS basically trolled the Honeycutts (yep, they got his wife into it). The Honeycutts must be the most chill people in the world, because I was getting stressed just watching OTRS give them the run around for 5 months. Anyway, the war is over! I got the ticket number on the talk page, and Boom, no more copyright headaches! Deleteopedia (talk) 08:51, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
@Ken Tony Not that I want to relive the trauma LOL, but I'll give you some of the highlights from the OTRS (now called VTRS) debacle.
OTRS didn't ask me (page author) to do anything (unless you count implying I should piss off as asking me to do something LOL). OTRS implied several times that the process didn't involve me, going so far as to unCC me on replies to the donor emails (the donors always re-CCed me, since I was the only one being helpful and not stonewalling them). If you think about that OTRS attitude, it's just plain dumb, because page authors drive the whole donation process by initiating it (zero people wake-up and spontaneously think, "today I'm going to donate a license to use the copyright I hold on this image of myself to Wikimedia Commons!). Then, still before OTRS even opens a ticket, page authors assist donors with preparing the license grant and sending it TO OTRS. After that, once OTRS opens a ticket, page authors connect the ticket number the content they are creating, OTRSs attitude towards me alternated between 1) the pseudo-hostility above, or 2) having zero clue who I was (despite clear identification of all parties to the ticket ), or 3) mistakenly thinking I was the donor/copyright holder (despite clear, explicit introduction as the page author).
OTRS asked Dr. & Mrs. Honeycutt (the donors) to do a ton. The first thing to know about that, is that the recent final approval from OTRS was based on the very first license grant Dr. Honeycutt ever sent, in his very first email to OTRS, on day one, back in February. EVERYTHING in the intervening five months was a completely unnecessary hassle for the donors (basically, they got trolled by OTRS). To be clear, neither Honeycutt ever failed to comply with OTRS requests, and always did so in less than 24 hours. 100% of it was OTRS ignorance, incompetence, or idiocy ("Three I's of OTRS" I'll call it, if I ever get around to writing my essay critiquing OTRS. Here is a sampling of all that: OTRS would ask them to send in stuff they had already sent in (and was in the very same email thread). OTRS would receive stuff (that they had specifically requested) and then reply with something that could be paraphrased as "thanks for sending us X, but I think another approach would be easier, so can you send us Y instead"? One of my favorites is that OTRS would ask for stuff that they had no possible was to comprehend, much less evaluate the legal accuracy of, and then just ignore the response and request some other info (For Example... OTRS REQUEST: "Please explain how the copyright was transferred by operation of law". Upon receipt of a concise answer {accompanied by an accurate, complete legal explanation with citations}, OTRS RESPONSE: "That is too complicated send us some other stuff instead".) OTRS received info they requested from people outside the ticket email chain (so they couldn't reply to it), receive it, and then open a new ticket for that info and not tell anyone in the original ticket about it. One OTRS volunteer just went away, forever (maybe quit?), politely waiting.. and more waiting... and finally we got another volunteer. Last, but definitely not least, is that someone very high up in that organization is apparently either an idiot, or insane, because they are training those volunteers to dispense legal advice without a licensee. It's not like they are in a grey area, it's more like they saw a clear line, then crossed, then shat on, then took picture as evidence and emailed them to tons of people, and proceeded further across the line. It's brazenly out in the open, OTRSs apparent reason for being is to make legal determinations about copyright ownership. That's beyond dumb, it's flat out illegal, a criminal misdemeanor in 40+ of the 50 US states. Even actual copyright lawyers would not be allowed to do that, unless they were members of the bar in the state the donor lived in. I have multiple instances in my emails of volunteers stating substantive legal conclusions based on their analysis of copyright law and the facts of the individual donor's case (that is literally the exact definition of proacting law without a licensee (not everywhere, but in most US states), so they are obviously being trained to operate that way. It's crazy man. OTRS is horribly structurally flawed from the top down. Like I said... shit-show. Deleteopedia (talk) 02:59, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
@Deleteopedia: FWIW the sandbox was not actually deleted per se; but the draft was moved without leaving a redirect. This is a useful 'right' in my view, as an AfC reviewer, as what often happens (otherwise) is that the sandbox 'owner' will start a new item by over-writing the redirect and whoever created the redirect gets the blame / credit / messages. Eagleash (talk) 09:58, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
@Eagleash, ahh ok. You guys did some work cleaning up the formatting for me, which I appreciate and don't wasn't to rollback, So I am making the version you created the main article (draft) now. I am going to keep my sandbox one as a development environment because I screw things up a lot on the first try LOL. For example, those custom tables I'm making (like the sortable on on the talk page under Notability Assessment > WP:NPROF(1). substantial impact) are ridiculously broken when I first make them. Also, I'm really looking forward to getting my page graded and moved to mainspace, so please let me know if there is anything I can do to expedite that process, or get a higher grade on it. Thanks! Deleteopedia (talk) 02:59, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
@Deleteopedia: The draft is in the review system but it could take some considerable time before it is considered. Drafts are not reviewed in any particular order and there are over 4,000 awaiting review, so what you have to do is be patient... Please do not be tempted to submit a duplicate draft or sandbox submission as this can cause some confusion and make extra work for other volunteers. Thank you. It really isn't worth worrying about the grading system; most new articles are 'stub' or 'start' class some might make a 'C' but anything much above that makes for a lot of hard work to maintain the grading which can be easily lost. Eagleash (talk) 04:45, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
Regarding Draft Sunkara Pavani
Respected Reviewing Member, I think the subject of the article has sufficient notability. For your kind notice the subject is the elected mayor of a big Municipal Corporation and she is a well known woman leader of that party for which I think she may deserve a page like other mayors who have their article on wikipedia. Please kindly look on the matter again. KnightD2H (talk) 16:43, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Sir she was reported by several media outlets when she was elected as mayor and Sir mayor is not an ordinary post. In WP: Politician there is reference to person holding important offices. As you can check even Deputy Mayor of Birhanmumbai Municipal Corporation Suhas Wadkar has a page although he is not that great leader and sir I think a lady mayor deserve a place as it will help many women to find about her and can mentor them. That's my view on it Sir. Thanks..! KnightD2H (talk) 17:26, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
"Not that great leader" - I meant that Suhas Wadkar has similar reference like Sunkara Pavani and if a male deputy Mayor can have a page why a woman mayor of similar notability can't have an article. KnightD2H (talk) 17:35, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Thanks Sir..I think this references are enough to prove notability of the subject.Actually I forgot to add those references earlier. KnightD2H (talk) 17:55, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Sir,I have checked the Suhas Wadkar page and for my surprise I could not find any significant content about the subject except that the subject is being elected as deputy mayor. Sir, here the only difference is that I as a new editor submitted it for review instead of directly publishing the page and that article was directly created by an editor. And sir similarly Sunkara Pavani has also got significant media coverage as a mayor. With Regards..! KnightD2H (talk) 04:22, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
@KnightD2H: Then your draft will be declined again. In WP:POLITICIAN, it clearly says that, Mayors of cities of at least regional prominence have usually survived AfD, although the article should say more than just "Jane Doe is the mayor of Cityville". Mayors of smaller towns, however, are generally deemed not notable just for being mayors, although they may be notable for other reasons in addition to their mayoralty (e.g. having previously held a more notable office). As you said, if there is nothing available about this politician rather than being a mayor a place, this will surely fail notability criteria for politician. Hope you understood the situation. KenTonyShall we discuss?05:44, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
Sir,What I am trying to make you understand is that how the deputy mayor Suhas Wadkar has an article page although he too doesn't have notability. It means that if I had created the article directly like Suhas Wadkar my article would have stayed. If my subject doesn't have notability than Suhas Wadkar too doesn't have notability than will you remove the article from mainspace? Kindly make me understand how Suhas Wadkar suits notability guidelines.With Regards..! KnightD2H (talk) 06:35, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
Yes,I have read that's why I asked. Just tell me what is written in that article except that he is a deputy mayor of India's richest municapal corporation, elected unoppsed. I have read the resources too and I found no significant coverage about the subject. With Regards..! KnightD2H (talk) 09:54, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
@KnightD2H: The person has got significant coverage in leading news papers in India. Even when a search with his name in the internet, there are lot of sources coming up, which is direct opposite to the person in your draft. According to WP:POLITICIAN, it is said that: City councillors and other major municipal officers are not automatically notable, although precedent has tended to favor keeping members of the main citywide government of internationally famous metropolitan areas such as Toronto, Chicago, Tokyo, or London. As far as I'm concerned, that man is a deputy mayor of Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation, which is the richest municipal corporation in India, located in the metropolitan region of Mumbai. This, along with other factors as I said earlier is enough for that person's article to be fit in the namespace. In your draft's case, everything's opposite. Also try not to compare two pages located in two different spaces. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?11:18, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
I have searched "Suhas Wadkar" and the 1st result is from wikipedia, 2nd about Kishori Pednekar, 3rd from Twitter, 4th news from the Hindu about the election and again about being elected as deputy mayor and after that Facebook posts. And not a single article. And on the other hand you search my subject on Google you will find reference from The Hindu, many local news , thehansindia, Deccan Chronicle. KnightD2H (talk) 12:55, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
Sir with due respect I didn't find any article completely dedicated to Suhas Wadkar and I found them similar with my subject. Although my subject and her related news have been published repeatedly by leading newspapers. With Regards..! KnightD2H (talk) 13:00, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello my friend, I think I've explained you enough regarding the status of the situation. Also there is no point in trying to prove that Suhas Wadkar's article fails notability criteria. That doesn't have anything to do with your draft. Your draft, in the current condition is not ready to go to the mainspace when constituted with the guidelines. I told you to read the guidelines properly. Even me myself has taken out some points and pointed out to you. I hope you understand. KenTonyShall we discuss?13:08, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
Regarding to Arsha Aghdasi’s draft
Hello;
Firstly, I want to thank you for re-reviewing my draft and mentioning the problem. Secondly, Do you mind to help me with finding reliable resources? with many thanks in advance. Atena ak2 (talk) 22:09, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello Atena ak2. It's great that you've understood the problem. You can make a good research on it and find reliable sources. I could only contribute a little because I've got many objectives to do and drafts to review. Drafts of this kind are also not under my scope. If possible, I'll help you find them. Thank you reaching out to me. KenTonyShall we discuss?05:29, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
Regarding Berlando Deton's Draft Article
Hello, firstly i want to thank you for reviewing my article. You left a note regarding how one of the criteria is that the person needs to be well-known. Berlando Deton is actually a well-known actor in Indonesia and Malaysia. If he wasn't, he wouldn't have a google knowledge panel https://g.co/kgs/iC7oaa and IMDB profile https://www.imdb.com/name/nm9447598/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0. So, I am now confused on how I can prove that the person in my article is suitable for wikipedia as i have already listed multiple reliable articles as references yet is still declined, so may ask for a feedback on what to do now?
Hello Dewi339458. Whenever you leave a comment on any of the talk page, after adding your comment, don't forget to sign at the end of it. It would be helpful for us in many ways. See, anyone can have a knowledge panel and IMDb is not a reliable source. It is edited by people. Most of the sources in the draft is not reliable. The last citation is one a perfect example. KenTonyShall we discuss?11:28, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
hey, but i'm not sure which one is unreliable sir. i've changed the sources 3 times and deleted the informations that i don't have proof of. could you please help me. --Dewi339458 (talk) 22:01, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
hey, I have read WP:SOURCE , I think I know my mistake and I have removed the stream link and the apple music. I also have decided to instead put the discography in the external links. I think those were my mistakes and have resubmit it. could you please see and review the article again. Thank you. --Dewi339458 (talk) 14:44, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
alright, thank you. when you do and if you find any mistakes, please leave another feedback on which is wrong. thank you. --Dewi339458 (talk) 16:35, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
Frans Vera draft
Hi Ken. You recently declined my draft article entitled 'Frans Vera' because 'This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified.' My draft was prepared by:
1. Translating the Dutch Wikipedia article which was accepted in 2011, with its associated Dutch citations which were also accepted then.
2. Expanding that article with further publications by Vera, and further reading and references, all in English.
Can you elaborate on the 'inadequate support by reliable sources'? Is the problem that the original Wikipedia article's sources are in Dutch? As far as I know, they have not been translated into English, but are self-evidently sufficient for the Dutch Wikipedia editors and users.
Or is the problem with my additional citations? Or what?
Thanks.
Hai Masato.harada. Whenever you leave a message on any of the talk page, don't forget to sign at the end of the message. Signing can be done by typing four consecutive tiles. I rejected your draft because it has insufficient number of citations. Don't take the sentence about reliability so seriously now. I wanted to see more sources. That's what it was all about. KenTonyShall we discuss?12:19, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply, but I don't think you've answered my question. The original Dutch entry must have had sufficient sources or it would not have been accepted, or is there inconsistency between reviewers? In addition, I added 6 more publications authored by Vera, 1 more reference, and 3 more items for further reading. How many is a 'sufficient number of citations'? Where specifically do I need more? Thanks. Masato.harada (talk) 13:22, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
@Masato.harada: The Dutch article maybe would have been directly created from the namespace. Who knows? But in here, you created it in a draft and submitted it for reviewing. According to my observation, the amount of sources cited in that sized draft is not sufficient. You said right you've added 6 sources authored by Vera? That won't be helpful, because Wikipedia needs secondary sources to establish WP:GNG. If out of 7 sources, 6 are authored by the person mention in the draft, it is necessary to add further secondary and reliable sources to the draft. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?13:30, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
Hey, thank you for the comment. If I can ask you, do you have any secondary/tertiary sources/websites you'd recommend for making manga pages? If not, it's fine, and I'll look myself. Thanks! Malcolm L. Mitchell (talk) 13:49, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
Mate, avoid tertiary sources. I typed it by mistake. The article requires sufficient secondary sources. You may find them. I don't have enough time to invest in a topic that I'm not interested in. I think that's fine. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?13:54, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
Request on 15:41:05, 19 June 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by MarcAnder79
MarcAnder79 (talk) 15:41, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi Ken Tony, thank you for your feedback. Could you give me a hint which of the sources I used are insufficient? All of them are publicly available literature. Regards, Marc
Please be more specific. I have no idea which of the sources I used should NOT be reliable and acessible. The sources are perfect and even include ISBN. This is very discouraging.
Mate, don't forget to sign at the end. Okay okay, I could see that. There are many things that is to be done in the draft. First of all, take down that Vimeo source from the draft and replace it with a reliable sources. Secondly, the source in Exhibitions, Screenings, Installations (selection) section must be formatted properly. Thirdly, YouTube videos in the external links section must be omitted. Fourthly, the Categories section in the draft must be removed, as they're not linked to anything in the English Wikipedia and doesn't belong to EN Wikipedia. Fifthly, from Standard Data (person) section, the last link must be removed, as it has no importance in a draft (It is a tool). And finally, Literature (selection) section must be sourced. All these problems must be solved. I believe I've made it more specific. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?18:33, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi again, thanks for the specific advice and sorry for missing the signature. I have executed it all and I hope the article is perfect now. Regarding the Vimeo link, however, I think it is important in the given context, as it leads to the artist's original work (it's his own site). The Wikipedia rules on this say, "Linking to online videos can be acceptable if it is demonstrated that the content was posted by the copyright holder or with their permission." - "The appropriateness of any source depends on the context." Thx and cheers, Marc MarcAnder79 (talk) 11:55, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
Good evening, I would like to know why my resources are not reliable as some have come from the users verified topics page and BellaNaija.com is the most reliable Celebrity source in nigeria.Bankslogebhd (talk) 21:37, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
jordan has left kerela blasters and joined jamshedpur fc
@2401:4900:3849:9a41:1:1:38c0:de6f: No. Don't change anything. No official announcement has made so far. Until then, Murray is Blasters player. When an official statement arrives, you can change that. Also don't forget to sign at the end of the comment. It can be done by typing four consecutive tildes. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?09:48, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
Request on 10:01:49, 21 June 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by PriyaWrites
@PriyaWrites: Sorry for declining it with copyright reason. It was a mistake. A website called Wikitia copied your draft and moved it to their namespace. So, upon researching, I thought it was copied from there. I'm really sorry. KenTonyShall we discuss?10:46, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello Ken Tony, thank you for the time you took to review my draft article on Museo Benini. Could you please clarify what further types of sources might remedy my lack of sources, cited as the reason for TD? I have been researching single and private artist museums (nationally/internationally) for four years and plan further articles for Wikipedia. This clarification will be very helpful.
Regarding the sources I did cite for MB article - Glasstire magazine is the "oldest online-only art magazine in the country" with 1.4 million annual page views, 870,000 visits. Sightlines Magazine is an "open access online magazine in arts, culture, news and ideas" with a viewable mission & ethics statement. Both are 501c-3 entities. I have no affiliation with either source and receive no remuneration from them or any of the artists or museums that I research and write about. In the course of my research sometimes I interview the museum directors or artist if they are amenable and close geographically. I keep my writing fact based and non-promotional.
Would exhibition catalogs with statements about the artist from museum directors and curators be considered a noteworthy source?
Friend, the exact reason why I rejected your draft was because it is not adequately supported by sources. There are only two citations in there. That's what all was about. Also, you shall not add your own research. See WP:NOR. Everything should be well sourced. KenTonyShall we discuss?17:10, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
> 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. Thank you.
I have the following message in the draft wiki. I am new to adding content to wikipedia. I went through the wiki, I don't quite understand what more referencing I would need to add. The provided references are the content that I have used in the wiki. Appreciate if you can share any suggestions, thank you in advance!
@2620:10D:C090:400:0:0:5:8AB7: Whenever you add a message on any of the talk page, don't forget to sign at the end of the comment. It can be done by typing four consecutive tildes. The time when I reviewed the draft, it didn't hard any inline citations. There were sources, but they weren't cited to the content. Now I can see that you've cited them. So problem solved. You can re-submit it again. Someone else will review it. KenTonyShall we discuss?10:02, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi Ken Tony,
Regarding the decline on my Draft:Haris_Doukas, I could really appreciate some help on what to change in my page so that it is accepted.
1. most comments refer to it being sited under WP:PROF. Should I just change the category?
2. Notability under WP:PROF is covered by the following:
The person's research has had a significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources.
The person has received a highly prestigious academic award or honor at a national or international level.
The person has been an elected member of a highly selective and prestigious scholarly society or association (e.g., a National Academy of Sciences or the Royal Society) or a fellow of a major scholarly society which reserves fellow status as a highly selective honor (e.g., Fellow of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers).
The person's academic work has made a significant impact in the area of higher education, affecting a substantial number of academic institutions.
The person has held a named chair appointment or distinguished professor appointment at a major institution of higher education and research, or an equivalent position in countries where named chairs are uncommon.
3. External links have been removed from the text body already
4. Many external references are included
What else could i add/correct? Can you guide me please since this is the 4th time my article is rejected, and I noticed similar Pages dedicated to professors with far less information included?
Hello Integrative13. Now, I'm on a small break from AfC reviewing. I got to have more studies before reviewing further more drafts. This draft was reviewed by me 8 days back. I owe you an apology. I would recommend you to talk with Calliopejen1 about this draft (I've pinged him). He will come here. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?14:55, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
Integrative13 , For WP:PROF, which of these criteria do you think he meets? I told you previously what information needed to be supplied. You can't just refer to GoogleScholar for a list of publications,; if you want to show notability by citations to the published works, you need to `add the list of 5 most cited articles with the number of citations. In addition, the title Dr. is not used in an encyclopedia --just in press releases or the like.
If the criteria proposed is the GNG, there needs to be substantial 3rd party reliable published sources, not press releases or blogs or postings or mere notices. There is not a single reference that meets this standard--they're all links to his own publications or to the list of people in an organization.
much more important, since this is your only contribution, and since it is written in the format of a press release, it is reasonable to ask whether you are a connected contributor, in which case you must declare the connection. Please see our rules on Conflict of Interest If you are writing this for pay or as a staff member of the organization, see also WP:PAID for the necessary disclosures. Or if it is an autobiography, you must say so. DGG ( talk ) 17:01, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
AFC Mentoring
Hi @Ken Tony: I thought I'd ask you here to do this, on your talk page as it is a bit out the way of the admin board on NPP or AFC. It is for admin. I've found several drafts:
It looks a lot but its not much. I brought that Harris Doukas. To check that you use Google Scholar. There is the Google scholar link for the his page: [11]. Take a look at it. There is 9 papers with more than 100 citations. Somebody that is measured under WP:NPROF has got a graded notability. If they have more than 5 papers with 100 citations then they likely notable. If they are editing a book series, they are likely notable. If they are in a learned society. They are notable, like the IEEE or Royal society, they are notable. If they are on a named chair, the Regius professor, notable. Take a look at NPROF and take a look at google scholar and get back to me. If DGG shows up or David Epstein, follow their advice. scope_creepTalk19:27, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
Thank you Scope creep for the comment. Actually, now I've decided not to review anymore academics' drafts. It seems very complex for me to do. But this piece of information is very useful. If one day, I come across such drafts, it would be helpful for me to review. Thank you for that. KenTonyShall we discuss?20:38, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
I have so far edited this AFC with most efforts and tried to make it as wiki-friendly as possible. I have noticed so far that there are many articles live and published on wikipedia on persons related wikis with so less references but I have created this article with multiple number of references from reliable sources which are acceptable by wikipedia which is The Hindu WP:THEHINDU, Indian Express WP:INDIANEXP, Times of India WP:TOI as stated in reliable sources list at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources & Wikipedia:News sources/India. Now, also added secondary sources from reliable sources as well.
Not only that, On Wikipedia there are many living person's articles published previously where notability is not there at all & even number of references and secondary sources are very low but still the articles are live on WikiPedia and here are the example of such articles: Rudratej Singh, Rameshwarlal Kabra, Sunit Khatau, Muljibhai Madhvani, Ghanshyam Binani, Ravindra Reddy, Jaikrishan Jajoo, Achal Bakeri & Ratilal Chandaria. So, these articles on living persons are mostly not having secondary sources and very less reference links. In the case of my created AFC, article gets declined on the basis of notability where there are many articles available where notability is zero still article is published directly. which is disheartening.
Please note, this is not first article I am trying to create and I have contributed to wikipedia since long time and created many articles especially subjects related to Gujarat. The subject in this AFC is the vice president of GCA i.e Gujarat Cricket Association, which is Cricket Body of Gujarat, India. Apart from that the subject of AFC is also playing important role in one of the largest Indian company Reliance Industries Limited, I humbly request you to re-look into this article and kindly point-out the issue in it: anything like grammatical mistake, citation mistake or anything which is missing.
I agree, if this article is marked as stub as I am looking forward to edit this article and expand it further even it gets published.
I have tried again and edited the article once again with significant changes as asked.
Sorry for not sighting a source on my edits to the Jim Harbaugh page. In reference to his sister Joani Harbaugh, here are a few sources including her husband's (Tom Crean) Wikipedia page where she is mentioned as the younger sister of Jim and John Harbaugh.
Hai CedarR. Don't forget to sign at the end of the comment. It can be done by typing four consecutive tildes. And, if you got sources, you can cite it. There is no problem in that. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?12:05, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
@Ken Tony: Right, no worries. It actually easier for NPROF, if there are 5 papers with 100+ cites then the person is auto notable. Understand what your saying. Park that for the future I guess. Lets look at Draft:Sri Gautam Chatterjee. When you look at it, there are three minor things wrong with it. It is a good thing to get to try and clean it up. They are no bad things. The Book image and the two goodread refs. They are WP:SPS, written by folk not under editorial control, or peer reviews. So they can anything. They are not allowed as sources, non-Reliable soure. Tell the guy to remove them. They is a script you can get that highlights bad references. You can ask at Afc they will show you were it is. That is structure. To Review it: In the lede, it says He has received numerous awards and honours including the Nad Vachaspati[1] and Ravi Dave Smriti Samman[2][3]. The first thing is to try and find the award, and see if they are notable. There are many many many many awards and the majority are rubbish. Everybody wants an award as it's the best chance of getting an article. If that is a prestigious award, the person is probably notable. Right, have a look at the refs. There is thing in Afc, known as WP:THREE, it is well know. The first small block of references should validate the article per WP:V. If there are good, deep, independent, secondary, WP:SECONDARY references for a WP:BLP in that first small block, then person is notable. There is not there, there is no point looking for them. Human nature tell that will try and make an impression in the first small block. So you can look at the first 5 or 10, or however many in the first column. So lets have a look at them. I have translate them.
Ref 1. [12] This is a new literary magazine, by established writer. Have a look at the article, in English, identifies as a poet. Seems a decent ref.
Ref 2. [13]. Looks like a newspaper. given to the country's famous playwright and film director Dr. Gautam Chatterjee; So that is good.
Ref 3. [14]. Combined with the two awards he is likely notable. They are no well known, but most awards aren't. They are given by everybody to everybody, so they are millions of them. If there was a reference to satisfy WP:SIGCOV, then the awards would need to be evaluated. But I think he is notable. Lastly, the article has some weasel words. A brilliant playwright. That is WP:PUFF. He is either playright and is proficient, or he isn't.
Before I go for today let's quickly look at this one: Draft:Dhanraj Nathwani. I wouldn't have probably rejected that outright as more than 4 peoples have looked at it, so it becomes a time-wasting problem. It is waste of time. This article has been written by a WP:UPE who has had several articles deleted as they are junk and promotional. Look at User:હમઝા ઘાંચી. There is no declaration to say he is paid, but that guy Dhanraj Parimal Nathwani has paid him to create the page. It has all the looks of it. In that instance I would reject the article, then post a WP:PAID notice on his page, so the administration can examine his edits. Take a look at his references. The first one starts off with a company document. Doesn't pass WP:SIGCOV and is not WP:SECONDARY. I will leave it there for the moment. scope_creepTalk14:45, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi happy to write to you,
I found an article, Draft:Sandhya Mohan is rejected from publication, you reviewed it as not to publish now. Kindly please tell me how can I enrich it to get it publish through the proper channel. Because its one of the old article I wrote and I believe it is having enough strength to get it to publish atleast as a stub article.
Hello Rahulsoman. This draft was reviewed by almost two weeks back. I'm still studying AfC guidelines thoroughly. I've already mentioned the reason for the declining of your draft. Anyway, I'll tell you the reason I left on that day again. The draft overused an almost unreliable source, from where you copied the lead section, contradicting WP:PARAPHRASE. Also, there was also a presence of speculative information in the career section. Try to sort these problems out and re-submit it again. Someone else may review it. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?14:57, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
Hey mate, you could have just continued the conversation in the first section you created. There is no problem in that. Coming back to the topic. Sad to say, your creation will not go the mainspace as of now. There are two reasons for it. Firstly, the person fails WP:GNG, which eliminates the chances of the draft entering the mainspace by WP:NFOOTY criteria. Secondly, the person has played in a league that is not fully professional as listed in WP:FPL. So, your creation, as of now, is not eligible to go the mainspace. Hope you will understand. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?15:07, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
Draft:Suriya Jayanti
Hello. You rejected draft: Suriya Jayanti, claiming there were copyright violations. This is in error, as I wrote the entire article from scratch AND provided citations/references for everything. Please can you fix your mistake? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.58.30.130 (talk) 18:55, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello, thank you for taking the time recently to review the Hyperautomation draft. I'm reaching out to see if you would be willing to review the draft once more. I've added additional references which have been published since the draft was originally submitted for review. In my opinion, these new references provide significant coverage of the topic from sources that have been identified as generally reliable, in addition to the remaining references. For ease of reviewing, references 3, 4, 5 and 7 are the newest ones added. Would you agree that the references in the draft are enough to satisfy WP:GNG? Thank you! JMGAppian (talk) 19:50, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
Oddparents (talk) 17:44, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi Ken Tony, I have re-worked on the draft of Falguni Nayar. Please can you recheck the page and let me know if the updated draft is good or if it needs any more changes.
Hai Oddparents. i'm on a break from reviewing any kinds of drafts at AfC, but I'll tell you the things I observed from the draft. The career section, in some parts, is still written like an advertisement. There is no need of writing about the company's statistics. The draft is a WP:BLP. You may try to correct that, and re-submit it. Someone else may review it. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?17:53, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
@100.40.11.12: Yeah, know that. Citing of sources are very important in Wikipedia to support the claim, even if the event is well-known or is the truth. Add a citation next to it. That would be helpful. KenTonyShall we discuss?18:15, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
Aziza Kibibi draft article
Hello,
Just curious about the Aziza Kibibi article and why it was rejected. Your reasoning, as mentioned on my page was that Aziza did not qualify for a Wikipedia article, because she hadn't received significant coverage in independent, published, reliable, secondary sources. Yet I quoted a respected New Jersey news site, which gets contributions from area county newspapers. I also cited Glamour magazine, a national women's magazine known just as much for its feature journalism as lifestyle topics. Weren't these significant enough? The feedback didn't include any specific references to specific areas to correct, so that makes it hard to address this in a way that isn't exhaustive or overcorrecting.
Can you be more specific about the sources and any other specific areas of the article that should be addressed?
@LaurenOlamina: I reviewed the it 2 weeks back. You can re-submit your draft. Now, I'm not assessing anything, as I'm on a break from reviewing. Someone else will review it and will say what is required (if anything is pending). I'm still studying AfC more clearly. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?07:43, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
Draft article "Henk Jan de Jonge"
On June 18 last, you were so kind to ask me for an example of articles on former Presidents of the Studiorum Novi Testamenti Societas ( = Society of New Testament Studies). I already mentioned to you the article “James Dunn (theologian)”. Similar articles in Wikipedia are those on (1) Graham Stanton, (2) Christopher M. Tuckett, and (3) Francois Bovon. There are dozens more.
The article “Studiorum Novi Testamenti Societas” gives a list of all former Presidents. It includes “H.J. de Jonge” as President for 2012.
Could you tell me please what can be done to make the draft “Henk Jan de Jonge” acceptable? I realize you are not obliged to reply, but any advice would be highly appreciated.
Mate, I've one thing to ask. I've already WP:THREE before and read it once again. I'm in a confusion. Does this say that three good sources are enough to meet WP:GNG? What if the other sources are unreliable (If WP:THREE says that three sources are enough to pass WP:GNG)? Eagerly waiting for your response. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?20:18, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
@Ken Tony: Three good sources are needed to prove the article is notable, depending on type of article. If its an academic, then WP:NPROF, if its organisation, WP:NCORP, if its a musciain, WP:MUSICBIO. If its an entertainer WP:ENT, if its an author WP:AUTHOR. So for example, if it was an organisation, the three sources would need to satisfy NCORP, but not all references need to go to prove the organisation is notable. But every sentence in an article generally need a ref, now. If a WP:BLP, every sentence needs a ref. If its an org, every sentence needs an org. If you see a block of text on some celebrity article, or a writer, then decline it as unsourced, until the editor adds sources to those refs. Even if it has 60 sources, if they're is a section unsourced, decline it. If they're is three sources, and the rest are unreliable, then inform the editor, if its at afc and you decide whether to accept or decline. In that instance, it passing work on somebody else. You should minimise it, and get the editor to do as much work as possible. If it is NPP, then post an appropriate tag so it gets onto a maintenance list and tell the editor it needs fixed. scope_creepTalk08:23, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
I fixed that Draft:Henk Jan de Jonge to mainspaced. If somebody is a professor emeritus, then it means they are notable. If you can't read the references, you must assume WP:AGF, meaning they are valid. They are academic refs on the article. scope_creepTalk08:26, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
Ken Tonyscope_creep, WP:THREE is not a policy of the encyclopedia like [[WP:NPOV], which "have wide acceptance among editors and describe standards all users should normally follow." (from WP:POLICY sldo implies thee can be special situations where we do not follow them exactly as written; it is not a guideline like WP:GNG which gives "best practices supported by consensus. [which] editors should attempt to follow," though "occasional exceptions may apply". It is not even an essay, which is "opinion or advice of an editor or group of editors for which widespread consensus has not been established" (though the degree of acceptance can vary widely--some are treated as guidelines in some areas of the encyclopedia). It's a usespace essay, which is a personal statement, sometimes one that might even contradict widespread consensus"
it is RoySmith's opinion or advice, which in this case not just they, but a number of other editors give it as their advice also. As written, it's not a statement of either the minimum or maximum number of references, butt a strategy for writing an article that might be challenged at AfD--its original purpose is to discourage using an excessive numbers of references just repeating each other or dealing with unrelated points, which can just confuse people. The typical use of it is for someone at AfdD to ask, what are the Three really best references that establish notability . It often focusses the discussion. It's also used by some editors as advice at AfC--make sure that there are three unmistakably good references, and the article is likely to be accepted at AfC and be kept if there's an AfD, if there are no other problems like promotionalism or copyvio or original research. I use it to give the advice–before you even start writing make sure you have three good references--it's usually better than to first write the article and only then look for references.
Having 3 references doesn't mean it will always pass afd, if they're not really reliable independent substantial sources. Having only one will sometimes pass afd, if it establishes something that is always considered notable . Having none at all is never acceptable, for without references an article fails the fundamental policy WP:V, for there is no way to verify it.
There's another fundamental policy, WP:IAR , which says to do what will be "improving the encyclopedia ". I usually restate as "we make the rules; we can make the exceptions". What is necessary at WP is to follow consensus, which can and does vary. A blind reliance on the written rules does not determine how we in practice interpret and use them. (And all of what I've said here is my advice, the way I would word things. I think it's good advice, for I try to be conservative in offering advice. But other's opinions may differ. ) DGG ( talk ) 14:30, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
Thanks DGG for coming out here and utilising your valuable time to make me familiar with all these things. This would be very helpful. I'm so grateful to study from veterans like you and Scope creep, who try to make me understand Wikipedia more in terms of policies and guidelines. KenTonyShall we discuss?15:00, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
You may not notice that I have given several reasons in each of the edit summaries. [15] I do not get what exactly the problem with your allegation of saying to me "remove content or templates from Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary" over my talk page. On the contrary, you would be the one to give me the valid reason for reverting my edits without giving proper elaborations.123.195.130.73 (talk) 10:02, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
Very respectfully, the addition of "Venus" to "transit" does not require the addition of a reliable source. The addition merely clarifies text that is otherwise mildly ambiguous. Thank you Iriskayak (talk) 06:31, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
@Iriskayak: I saw your edit and read the present citation. The citation mentions about the thing. I found out that after reading it by myself. You could have just mentioned about it in the summary. In fact, you didn't even write the summary. Summary helps other editors understand what changes you've made into a page. I got your edit from pending changes list. If you mentioned in the summary that the already present citation mentions about the inclusion, I wouldn't have reverted your inclusion. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?06:55, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
Draft:Suriya Jayanti
Dear Ken,
You rejected my article Draft:Suriya Jayanti citing copyright issues. I find this very confusing, as not only did I write the entire thing myself, not copying anything, but I also provided references and citations for everything, per instructions. I thus think you've made a mistake in your review, and request that you revisit the draft. If you can tell me a single part that is copyrighted or not attributed correctly, I'll happily revise it . . . but as there aren't any sections I copied or didn't attribute, I'm at a loss of how to revise it absent your direction. Will you reconsider?
Thanks,
BabydinoX
Hello BabydinoX. That rejection was a mistake. As a result, I'm on a break from reviewing any drafts to study more about AfC. You may re-submit that draft. Someone else may review it. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?12:55, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi Ken Tony, I wanted to clarify this revert that you made with the edit summary "Citation should be converted". The citation provided does support the content added by the user so I'm not sure why you reverted it. Could you clarify what you meant in the edit summary. Thanks. EN-Jungwon15:50, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
Can you please guide me on how to tell if a secondary source is reliable ?
There are a few posts about the company all over the internet... Of course there are not from New York Times or the Wallstreet Journal.
They are from small technology blogs — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bellerophongr (talk • contribs) 10:15, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
I believe I 've added more secondary sources than the article for Haas and of course the links I added are not broken. I will read again the PSTS and I will come back to you if I need any extra help.
@Bellerophongr: A primary source is not always an independent source. It will be written by people having close connection to the subject. A secondary sources provides the opinion of an author based on the primary sources which in most of the cases are independent and reliable. A simple example given in WP:SECONDARY to determine the difference: A review article that analyzes research papers in a field is a secondary source for the research. Whether a source is primary or secondary depends on context. A book by a military historian about the Second World War might be a secondary source about the war, but where it includes details of the author's own war experiences, it would be a primary source about those experiences. To identify a primary sources, I would recommend you to see WP:IDENTIFYPRIMARY. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?18:04, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
@Bankslogebhd: I won't be reviewing it (if submitted), because I decided not to review any more draft for an extended period of time. But I'll read it and tell you what I felt from the status of the draft. KenTonyShall we discuss?17:09, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
Salaam alaikum. It's extremely foolish to have removed my edit for "not supporting my claims" As the information I added was referenced in the ready cited sources. It was literally in the headline as well. The Muslim Maestro (talk) 18:59, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello The Muslim Maestro. The thing mentioning it have might be cited in some other part in the article, but in WP, it is very important to add citation to every single thing that we include in a BLP. At least, you could have just mentioned about it in the summary. That would have reduced the chances of me reverting your editing and handing you a waning. Hope you understood the situation. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?19:16, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
I don't know what you want me to do mate. Are you saying I need to find an additional source for my claim even though it's stated in the already 3 sources present? The Muslim Maestro (talk) 21:27, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
before evrey euro match i update thier caps so i updated joe Allens caps but you guys keep blocking me so pls dont
Hello Ashmash360. Whenever you leave a message on a talk page, don't forget to sign at the end of the message. It can be done by typing four consecutive tildes. Coming back to the topic. You can only update the caps and goals of a player, once the match is over. No source will be updating it before matches. In fact, every sources will update it the game is over. So you have be patient and should update it after the matches. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?09:24, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
Resubmission of my Draft:The Order of Musashi Shinobi Samurai
Hello Vanessa. Your draft is rejected. There is nothing I can do now. Also, I'm not reviewing any drafts until I feel that I'm more eligible to review them (I want to study more about AfC). Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?11:35, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
First, thank you for reviewing my draft of Marty Simon and for your time.
I have made some adjustments to the copy since it was first suggested that I do: I did remove the Discogs references as requested, and was about to do the same with the AllMusic and IMDb references.
But then I kept finding similar references on other Wikipedia entries I was visiting, and became confused.
You see, I've been told IMDb, YouTube, Discogs, Allmusic and, even Wikipedia, are not considered reliable sources.Yet, when I turn to the official Eric Clapton Wikipedia page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Clapton),I find the following listed in the References section: #8, #31, #45, #51, #52, #53, #70, #95, #98, #99, #104, #144, #187, #235, #236 are from AllMusic; #177, #207, #208 amd #210 are from YouTube and #233 is from IMDb. #101 is from All Movie Guide, which I believe is the cinematic equivalent of All Music Guide. And in the External Links section, there are direct connections to Discogs and IMDb for those who want further info on Clapton's career. I saw consistently in many musician and music artist Wikipedia pages as I searched for alternative sources and solutions.
At this point, I should tell you that the reason I'm interested in Marty Simon is that he's a fascinating anomaly in the Canadian music scene. He spent the '70s recording with Brian Eno - he contributes drums to a few tracks on "Here Come The Warm Jets" and then spent a good portion of the next decade contributing to the Quebec music scene. I could go on but you've read my draft.
My biggest challenge has been to find sources that qualify for what I think Wikipedia would find acceptable and credible. I feel there's a lot out there, but much of it is buried in the sands of time, as newspapers and magazines that have covered different facets of his career either have removed public digital access to their archives because they're decades old or they've gone out of business. Quebec sources have proved extremely frustrating and more difficult to dig up.
I completely understand why Wiki would want to avoid fan-generated pages, but I don't understand why some of the ones that I do provide are deemed unacceptable, although they're used elsewhere in Wiki.
Perhaps you can offer me some direction?
I've been constantly readjusting my draft - many due to coding mistakes I've made along the way - and others due to trying to be as meticulous as I can with unearthing new information about Marty Simon's diverse career - and I've spent more than a year off-and-on getting it to where I thought it was finally ready. I've put a lot of work into this and while it's been fun, I'd really like for my persistence to pay off in getting this Marty Simon entry posted on Wikipedia.
Is there a way to look at the edits I've made and help with any final guidance so you approve and post the entry? Thank you Ken Tony for any assistance and insight you can provide, and I look forward to hearing from you in the very near future,
Hello Octopus69. First of all, I'm on a break from reviewing AfC, but still I'll tell you the difference. Eric Clapton's article is a B-class article meaning the article conveys almost all of the information. It also have more than 200 sources with some sentences cited twice, to support the length of the article. I don't know about the reliability of Discogs, Allmusic etc, but, on that day, I rejected your draft because the draft contained an excess number of sources coming from IMDb and YouTube. It is still there. You may sort that out and re-submit it. Some other reviewer will review it. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?06:53, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
Video game controversy article edit
Hello! I noticed the message you left on my talk page about an edit I recently made to the Video game controversy article. You mentioned that I failed to leave a reason for my edits; I presume you used the "Pending changes" view, which actually combined two of my edits into one and hid the message for my first edit, which contains the explanations for the change. (I remember thinking this view would cause a problem.)
The edit history will show my former edit with the following explanation:
Removed an incorrect information: the shooter was sarcastic when saying video games "trained" him. The linked articles mentions that he discarded the idea immediately after mentioning it, and the Wikipedia article related to the shooting (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christchurch_mosque_shootings#Manifesto, third paragraph) refers to three articles (refs. 186, 187, and 188) with more details.
Thanks for leaving a note on my talk page; please let me know if the above explanation is appropriate and valid, and if my edit should be brought back. (I will not take the initiative to re-add it immediately, I will wait for your feedback.)
Hello Skencer11. Your assumption is correct. I got your edit(s) from the pending changes list, which would only allow us to see only one previous revision. So, it was not able for me to see your first summary. I'm not expertising in gaming topics nor have any idea about the topic. You may try to change the content in the article again (if there is a valid reason, you can), and see the result. If it is reverted again, you may seek Teahouse for the help. There you can find many people who can possibly help you. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?06:50, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
Draft:List of Atlas LV3C launches
I see that you declined the article List of Atlas LV3C launches and asked to put inline citations in it. Why does it need inline citations?
@100.2.238.109: Always remember to sign at the end of the every comment you make in any of the talk pages. It can be done by typing four consecutive tildes. Coming back to the topic. Wikipedia has guidelines regarding citing inline sources in a page. Your draft lacks inline citations. You may add those and re-submit it. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?11:21, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
I fixed the issues and resumbited it. Can you review it?
@100.2.238.109: I have no idea regarding this topic. I have to look the guidelines for the particular topic. As you have re-submitted the draft, you may do one thing. Leave a message in Teahouse saying review my draft. There you might find a person who deals with these kind of topics. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?11:05, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
Additional References added to declined submission
Hello,
Hope you are doing well and thanks again for taking the time to review the previous submission. I've added a lot more references from various sources that I hope work. I also have a list of more references from websites that mention the artist but nothing really to add to the article. I can post the links in a reply if you want to take a look at them to see if I can use them or add them to the external links section if it helps. This is in regards to the Jean-Marie Haessle draft. OneEyedWolf (talk) 20:42, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
Hello, the transliteration of the quote was incorrect, which is why I changed it from "ee" to "i", the correct transliteration of the Russian phrase. Thanks.
@67.183.66.79: Don't forget to sign at the end of the comment. It can be done by typing four consecutive tildes. You may provide a source to prove your change, next to your addition. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?
The grammatical errors were already present in the original, and your revert did not fix them. But you did reintroduce a ton of promotional bullshitmaterial that I'd just removed. 82.17.168.217 (talk) 09:19, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
Hello friend. It would be nice if you keep civility in your messages. I saw grammatical errors in your inclusion (beginning of an heading you included was not capital). I was mentioning that. If possible, fix it. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?11:41, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
Well, "promotional bullshit" is just a common phrase that you'll see a lot around here, sorry if it offended you. I did not add any sentence using the wrong case - this is the entirety of my changes, and I do not see any grammar errors introduced (The heading is debatable, but not a reason for reverting). But that's beside the point anyway. You should not revert a series of clearly good changes just because you think you see a grammar error among them. You should carefully examine the totality of the changes, and only revert them if you are reverting to a clearly better version. I appreciate your attention to new changes and your efforts to keep bad changes out, but in this case you were reverting to a clearly worse version. Anyway, all is well now - so cheerio, and it was nice meeting you. 82.17.168.217 (talk) 12:56, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
@82.17.168.217: My only concern was that the heading's beginning words weren't capitalised. You may do as you wish. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?
Sure, and sorry to carry on about this. But you really must not make large scale reverts just to fix one miscapitalised letter. Just change the letter yourself, or leave it miscapitalised if you don't feel like doing that. But *do not* damage the encyclopedia by making destructive reverts of obvious improvements just because you find a single letter wrong. That's what I'm trying to get over to you - not arguing about the capital letter itself. And I would like to know that you do understand this point. 82.17.168.217 (talk) 13:56, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
Articles for Creation July 2021 Backlog Elimination Drive
Hello Ken Tony:
WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running until 31 July 2021.
Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.
There is currently a backlog of over 1700 articles, so start reviewing articles. We're looking forward to your help!
Please do not remove my edits as it's legitimate. When this page was created, most of the shows/movies had already been broadcasted. Because the list of shows that had been broadcasted before is very huge and it takes time to compile, please understand the situation. This TV station have been broadcasting for at least 51 years ago. As for the source, I had already add them. You can check my authenticity based on my edits done today on other pages as well. You may also perform a cross check on the sources to further verify the edits done. I only make edits when it's official, not simply editing for the fun of it. I won't bother wasting my time contributing in the first place if that is the case.
Thank you.
~~175.143.251.213~~
@175.143.251.213: In the revision I saw, there was no source. Already the articles lacks sufficient sources. Unsourced addition will be challenged. What you added might be legit, but we need source for everything that we include in a page. KenTonyShall we discuss?10:26, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
At that time of edit, the source have not been included, the past editors who had accounts on wikipedia also didn't add the source, why are they not being questioned as well for their edits? Why did they have no issues on their edits? Just because I do not have a user account, it does not necessary meant my edits are fake/vandalism. Please do not discriminate.
Thank you.
~~175.143.251.213~~
@175.143.251.213: I don't know why other users didn't add any source. That's not my problem or your problem. I'm not focused on that page to hunt down the IP users. In fact, I'm a recent changes patroller and I saw your edit in that page. I always take down unsourced edit, no matter whether the user have an account or not. If you want, you can check my contribution history. There should be source to WP:VERIFY everything. If I came across that page when a user with an account added unsourced material, I would have done the same I did with your edit. There is no discrimination here and I hate it. Hope you'll understand. KenTonyShall we discuss?10:40, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
Add new player
Hi,
There is player Omkar Landge who plays in FC Goa. Create his Wikipedia page.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Thriprayar Ramachandran requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from https://english.mathrubhumi.com/news/offbeat/tuskar-triprayar-ramachandran-dies-at-71-1.4901952. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Onel5969TT me14:55, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
@Onel5969: I didn't knew this article was copied from that website. The content was not written by me. I recreated the article after a discussion made between an admin and me at AfD. So, for a time being, can I remove the CSD tag and rewrite the content in a different way to avoid copyright infringement? Would that he helpful? KenTonyShall we discuss?15:09, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
Ken Tony, absolutely. Since there was an earlier version of the article, there is a chance this is a mirror, and I don't know when the prior version was created. But if you put the content into your own words, that would alleviate the issue. Ping me when you do, and I'll double check, and then ask for a revdel to get rid of the copyvio history. Onel5969TT me15:14, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
Reet, lets look at this Draft:Sameer Kulavoor first. The notability policy that applies here is WP:ARTIST. Its has been on commented several times, and its been rejected by an experienced editor Hoary, so you must examine the sources. An artist is notable if their is work is exhibited in a major museum or collection. This is the quickest way to tell. As it is a person, WP:BIO is the main policy. (this is the enclosing super policy for people) and WP:V (it must be verifiable facts). WP:CITEBOMB comes in here, as the 4th paragraph in the Art Practice section has far too many sources. So you would expect that to fixed first-ish. The structure first. Structure wise it has external links in the body of the article. They must be removed by the editor. Ref 3 and 42 are very poor quality. The script will tell you that. Looking at the references.
In the reliable list,
the first is neflix, which can be discarded. Most of the world doesn't have netflix. This is the Netflix front page, so it is meaningless.
The Hindu piece. It states in the article Register for the free workshop ‘Virtual Studio: Reimagine Your Environment with Sameer Kulavoor here So that is PR and a dodgy ref.
That is better. That could be a proper in-depth, secondary source.
Bunch of images in Vogue. Likely shows he has an international audience.
This ref, is a newspaper that he exhibited in Helsinki. More pointing to an international audience.
Forbes. This is former contributor. I would say it is non-RS at the moment. Avoid.
Architectural digest ref. AD is a heavyweight mag that has been going since the 1920's. It is really heavyweight. If your in that, your likely notable.
When you search google images with his name, it comes up with a lot of images of his stuff, which means he is all over the web, another indication he is notable.
Once the refs are cleaned up, de-refbombed, the ext links taken out the body, promote it.
Hi Calliopejen1. I reviewed it a month ago. You known I had my own flaws in AfC right? I found this draft as an article in a clone website of Wikipedia. I could not provide the link here because it is showing that the website is blacklisted. At that time, I didn't knew they could publish the draft in their mainspace if they are attributed properly. I full understand my mistake. Hope you understood my stand. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?06:11, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
new page
check rg punjab updates... to save conflict this should be created:
Good Evening , I'm interested on how to create a football page . I recieved a message from you saying I can , Inbox you . So I want to know how do I create a page and how to add sources since it needs sources A1LT6N (talk) 17:24, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
Hai A1LT6N. Great to hear that you're interested in football-related articles. I would like to know what kind of article you want to create in football genre. Please let me know that. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?17:31, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
I wanted to create football season statistics for 2020-21 season for Orlando Pirates F.C. on it's current season update , and the South African Premier Division is starting in August for 2021-22 A1LT6N (talk) 17:38, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
Why reverted the Mojang Studios Article the Formerly of "Mojang Specifications: 2009 - 2011, Mojang AB: 2011 - 2020" To "Mojang Specifications: 2009 - 2010, Mojang AB: 2010 - 2020" but in MineCraft the StartUp of the Mojang logo changed on 2011 of "Mojang Specifications to Mojang"
Hi Ken, I have already corrected my draft based on your comments. I hope it is finally well and can be moved into the article space. Please check it out when you can. Thank you for all your help!
→ Draft:Sistine_Chapel_of_Football
Hello So Overrated. Don't forget to sign at the end of your comment. It can be done by typing four consecutive tildes. i myself once searched for this topic in the web and I was surprised that the topic has no article in Wikipedia. This draft is eligible for mainspace but I'll assess it once again and tell you the requirements if anything is required. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?06:13, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
@So Overrated: I made some corrections to the draft and made it look good for the mainspace. I also added a "citation needed" template in a section where a source is required. You may do that and inform me. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?06:38, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
Thank you so much, Ken! - - -I think the source for the "citation needed" template could be the same as for the next sentence in the article, that from The Hindu[1] → Because it says «“We realised the ceiling was rather dark. We thought at first of painting it blue with white clouds. But one day, the artist came and said it would be better to do it with Messi and Maradona,” said Mr. Elsegood.» ...What do you think? So Overrated (talk) 02:54, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
An article you recently created, Nanu Eezhuthassan Sivasankaran, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Mccapra (talk) 21:58, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
Hello Mccapra. The article was not written by me. It was written by a user who unfortunately had multiple accounts resulting in the articles created by him to be deleted under G5 criterion. I recreated many of his articles after a discussion made between me and an admin. They passed WP:GNG at the time. This is just a piece of information that has no relevance in this topic. It is okay that you have moved it to the draftspace. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?08:19, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
Ken_Tony, I took your advice and went to Teahouse about Draft:Jose Guevara. Enormous waste of time. The two-dimensionality, lack of critical thinking skills, and obtuse reckoning of the higher editors whom I've encountered so far is so consistently unnerving that after 15 years I'm ready to quit Wikipedia forever. Zelchenko (talk) 16:09, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
Hello mate. I think the problem is solved. The draft has been moved to the mainspace by a user. I'm sorry that you could not find enough help from the Teahouse. Apologies for that. KenTonyShall we discuss?06:22, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi Ken, I am at a loss as to why the simple page for Vatsala Mehra has been reject 3 times. After the second rejection the reason was given "should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources."
I believe I had resolved these issue only to find it rejected by you stating that references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. She is an Artist that has performed in many places around the world and release 17 albums. Many similar Artist do have wiki pages. Can you please recommend someone we contract with to help me get this through the approval process?
sc east bengal (management), kerala blasters (personnel); both sections locked and correction needed. positions are in small letters after first word. (Head coach etc).
I am asking about a submission that was declined. It is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Jon_Myer. It appears that I had accidentally added a space in a reference, which a reviewer noticed. I believe that I have remedied this issue, and I have resubmitted the submisssion. Have I handled this properly?
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 trouble or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! - TheresNoTime😺11:55, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
Sorry Ira Leviton. It was an accident. I didn't intended to revert your edits. It was a mistake and it is now I'm noticing it. Is there any way you could do it again as I cannot revert my action. So sorry my friend. KenTonyShall we discuss?06:16, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
I will have to redo it, but it's not a big problem. I was scratching my head trying to figure out why the edits were reverted – these formats are a common problem that affects many WP articles, often using Indian news articles, and probably involves importing data by a program that has been incorrectly programmed to format some types of references. Ira Leviton (talk) 13:36, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. GenQuest"scribble"14:12, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
Hello GenQuest. I'm a bit confused. There's no CSD tag in that page. You just redirected the article, and I understood your reason for that. So, with all due respect, can I know what was the motive behind this message? Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?16:29, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi, Ken Tony. The deletion tag was on the redirect, which at the time was H. A. Mohammedali. So you know, that is the title where the article should have been, not at H. A. Mohammedali (footballer, born 1994). (There is no need for the disambiguation in the title unless there are conflicting named articles, which in this case there wasn't and were unlikely to ever be.) As creator of the original redirect, you get notified of the deletion. No worries, though. It has already been fixed, and the article moved to its correct home. All the best. Regards, GenQuest"scribble"16:52, 9 August 2021 (UTC) p.s.: If you have questions about any of this stuff, just ask. ~GQ
I only wanted to make you understand that I didn't take that decision all by myself. From now, I'll only do anything according to what you said just now. Best regards. KenTonyShall we discuss?07:01, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
As I thought: Star Mississippi didn't say that you should recreate these articles with copied text from Kashmor. They said that you were welcome re-write them (in your own words), even adding specifically that it might help to restore "anything from the deleted one that wasn't written by Kashmor". I was giving you the benefit of the doubt that maybe you'd received bad advice, but now I see that you were simply not reading it properly, I am going to delete these articles as WP:G5s recreated by proxy. Please take more care in future. I understand that you were concerned about losing good content, but we have to enforce blocks and bans for them to have any effect. – Joe (talk) 07:40, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
This draft was previously published but deleted due to Paid-contribution disclosure. Seyed Ali Jaberi has several criteria for notability, although according to the rules of Notability, at least one of these criteria is required:
Has top albums at the international level
Top ranking of musicians from Fajr International Festival
Definition and Review of Albums in the International Magazine of Songlines
Leading a music group and performing in famous halls and successful to attract public attention
Albums released by major record label
Performance in important international events
Performing with famous singers in international concerts
Hai WPooya. I appreciate the quality of the draft, but I declined your submission on the grounds of unreliability of sources. I also a left a note for you to see. There are still no improvements. Try to fix it and resubmit it again. KenTonyShall we discuss?11:17, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
Many sources are used in this draft, but you just mentioned that “ YouTube videos and Facebook videos as a citation is present”. Do you think that the video of his live performance in international concerts with the presence of people in reputable channels with several thousand views is not reliable? Do you think that the specialized music sites and news agencies and even the reputable Songlines magazine that wrote about him are unreliable?WPooya (talk) 12:12, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
@WPooya: That's why I included a note. I only wanted to get those sources replaced. Just try to sort that out. There are multiple unreliable sources. Not only one. That's why I rejected it. I'm not neglecting the other sources, but the mentioned sources are the only single citation to prove that claim. So I demanded it. KenTonyShall we discuss?16:19, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
@WPooya: Great! I saw yours additions. You can remove those YouTube and Facebook sources including those tags, as you've provided additional citations. After that, resubmit the draft. A reviewer will review it. Best wishes. KenTonyShall we discuss?12:16, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
@WPooya: I mean, there is no problem in keeping it, but reliability of sources are very important in Wikipedia. Sources from those media are considered unreliable. So, it is better to remove them to, so that the draft won't be declined again for the same reason upon the next submission. KenTonyShall we discuss?06:34, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
Hello. I'm guessing you're unaware of the standard site-wide practice for ordering page names in category lists. Have a look at WP:SUR, which tells us that with a few specific language- and culture-related exceptions, articles titled "Forename Surname" are categorised as "Surname, Forename", so that they'll be listed in that order in the category lists. As there don't seem to be any exceptions that cover your recent changes, you may want to self-revert the ones you've done and please, don't start changing any more. thanks, Struway2 (talk) 09:12, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi there - Haven't checked back in a while because it seemed to be taking some time but saw the rejection on the draft for Andrew Herr. Understood the incorrect citations in a couple places that can be addressed, but curious your rationale for it not meeting the notability criteria. Many of Andrew's roles prior to Letterkenny were indeed more secondary roles but he's had a fair number and Letterkenny now has a good amount of coverage itself and Herr stars in every episode. I'm curious to know more as to what would be needed to prove he meets this criteria in order for the article (once free of improper citations) could be accepted. Thanks.
Hello WPooya. I'm not an expert in this genre. I've been in trouble for messing things up in past. So, I stopped reviewing the drafts that I'm very weak at. I would recommend you to talk with Calliopejen1. He has got some contributions in music-related articles. He'll come here. Best wishes. KenTonyShall we discuss?18:04, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi, After four weeks, the draft was still not reviewed, although the number of articles submitted for review was much smaller. How do I find a user interested in music to review this draft? WPooya (talk) 06:02, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
The past is the set of all events that occurred before a given point in time. Pictured is the oil on canvas painting Everything is in the past, painted by Vassily Maximov in 1889.
Transfermarkt is one of the verified and most reliable sources, I don't know why you found it less reliable than the one you provided. Debankantalk10:15, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
Hello Debankan Mullick. Transfermarkt is an unreliable source in Wikipedia. No article uses it as a source. If there are Transfermarkt sources in an article or draft, it will be removed. If you have anymore doubts about it's unreliability, you can ask someone in WT:FOOTY. KenTonyShall we discuss?10:39, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Stefan2 (talk) 16:38, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
The copy edit you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Harmanjot Khabra has been completed.
Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.
A couple of suggestions. Unless a statement in an article is controversial only one reliable source is needed for the citation. Many sentences in this article have two and sometimes three citations. Website names do not need the "www" - simply goal.com, for example. Use one date format for all the dates in the article including the citations. This makes the article look much neater. Be mindful of using a neutral point of view in the writing. This "winning on a big margin of 5–0" is better written "won 5-0" which is neutral.
Best of luck with the article moving forward.
@Ken Tony: I forgot to mention an issue with some of the citations. A number of them contain, for example, information in the author field which is not actually an author's proper name. This is discouraged. Only the actual information the field name specifies should be in the field. Twofingered Typist (talk) 16:06, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
@Twofingered Typist: I don't type citations. I generate citations from Zotero. They automatically include 'www.example.com' in website names in some cases. Sometimes, they also add something random to the author's slot. I could removed them manually but that is a bit time consuming. That is why I leave it as it is. KenTonyShall we discuss?16:28, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
@Ken Tony: That explains the issues, then. Do keep in mind if you were to decide to submit the article for GA status the citations would all need to be "cleaned" up. At the very least you'll want to make sure the date formats in the citation is the same as the one you are using in the article. Twofingered Typist (talk) 11:41, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
Hello! Can you add a section for personnel and kits. Which describes who were the managers and who were sponsors and kit suppliers?.
Yours sincerely, Sondre --62.73.207.204 (talk) 16:47, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
1990-91 and 1991-1992 Football League First Division Personnel and kits
Hello! Can you add a section in both the 1990-91 Football League First Division and the 1991-92 Football League First Division for personnel and kits which describes who were managers and which sponsors and kit suppliers the teams had. And also add that for previous seasons as well.
Yours sincerely, Sondre --62.73.207.204 (talk) 16:49, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
Hey bud is there any new works to do . If there just leave it in my talk page . Make sure that it is related to football. Cheers. Godson JR Jr 11110 Here We Go . 09:34
18 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi The above article was declined many times citing that is does not qualify for a wiki article. Vatsala Mehra has published 17 albums sold internationally (links on apple music included in references). She performed in major venues and festivals in India and USA over the last 40 years. So why wouldn't she qualify for a Wikipedia article? What am I missing?
Are you able yo help in this regard and guide me or freelance for fixing the article so it can be published? Please let me know
I just checked my draft Wikipedia page and saw that it was declined and I am a bit confused about the exact reason why. Is there an issue with the sources or is the issue that she does not qualify for a Wikipedia page based on the information provided.
Hello Chemstudent22. The draft was declined by me three months ago. I've left the reason on the draft as well as on your talk page. Now I'm kinda retired from reviewing drafts as I decided not to review anymore drafts that doesn't come under my scope of interest. So, you may submit the draft again. Some other reviewer will come and review your draft. Hope you can understand. Thank you. KenTonyShall we discuss?17:09, 25 September 2021 (UTC)
Questions on Page decline on B.S Sannaiah
Hi Ken,
Thanks for the review of the Page that i created for B.S Sannaiah. The reason that is putforth is about the references. I have tried to put many references of the local news papers where B.S Sannaiah's work is referred by many other authors , editors etc. Also few links of the sapna book house site where his works can be directly seen. A the moment i am confused what else is the expecation ? could you please help me here ?
Regards
Ashwini
Hello AshwiniHarsha. I reviewed the draft three months ago, and now, I've minimised reviewing the topics that doesn't come under my scope of interest. It also came to my attention that the draft hasn't been modified that much since the declining. So, you may work on that and resubmit it again. Some other reviewer may come and inform you the report. Best wishes. KenTonyShall we discuss?15:37, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
Declined Wikipedia page for The Charles Close Society
Hello Ken,
Would it be possible if you could let me know where the additional context/sources are needed in our copy and then I'll attempt to fix.
I/we as a Society are novices at setting a Wiki page up, and duly read-up beforehand how to build a successful page/get it agreed. Clearly we failed.
I'm keen to get the detail out there for the masses to inform the public, please help if you can.
Many thanks,
Ashley Lawrence. Webmaster, The Charles Close Society
Hello Longhead68. The draft lacks cited sources. Unreferenced drafts are not allowed to be moved to the mainspace. You should also declare COI if you are connected to the topic/if you have personal interest in it. KenTonyShall we discuss?16:43, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
A geographer is a physical scientist, social scientist or humanist whose area of study is geography, the study of Earth's natural environment and human society, including how society and nature interacts. Pictured is The Geographer (1668-69), by Johannes Vermeer.
A geographer is a physical scientist, social scientist or humanist whose area of study is geography, the study of Earth's natural environment and human society, including how society and nature interacts. Pictured is The Geographer (1668-69), by Johannes Vermeer.
Fish sauce is a liquid condiment made from fish or krill that have been coated in salt and fermented for up to two years. Pictured is Cambodian sweet fish sauce mixed with chopped chili peppers and slices of garlic.
In reference to my submission for Lourdes Celtic Football Club wikipedia article.
You mentioned that one reason for rejection was the 'The club is also not competing in a fully professional league' but there are hundreds of non-professional clubs featured on Wikipedia. In fact, several other schoolboy clubs, who are identical in set-up and league affiliation to Lourdes Celtic, have their own Wikipedia entries.
Given the large number of reliable third party media references provided in the article, and the fact that Lourdes Celtic is referenced in over 30 other Wikipedia articles, I suggest their is strong case for a Lourdes Celtic wikipedia entry.
Happy to discuss if you have the time and appreciate any feedback you may have.
Hello, Ken Tony. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Paulius Ragauskas, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Hello, Ken Tony. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that User:柴田バネッサ/sandbox, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Hi brother, I hope you're well. I have an appeal to you—if possible, plz archive all references in a particular article named List of foreign football players in India. That would be great and thank you in advance (I'm unable to archive all references at a time in an article because of editing through mobile—not through computer) ❤️ keep smiling :) Billjones94 (talk) 11:19, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
@Billjones94: Yeah sure! Considering the size of the article and the amount of sources cited, the job will be done by a bot and I've submited for it. I don't know when the task will be completed by the bot, but it will be done. Cheers! KenTonyShall we discuss?12:09, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2021–22 Kerala Blasters FC season, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Forward. 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.)
Wholesaling or distributing is the sale of goods or merchandise to retailers; to industrial, commercial, institutional or other professional business users; or to other wholesalers (wholesale businesses) and related subordinated services. Pictured is the Birmingham Wholesale Markets at 4:00 AM.
Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
You seem to hasve been declining a number of drafts that are not BLPs, or in some case not even articles about people, such as [Draft:Basic igneous silicate rocks]] as "The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations". Our requirement for inline citations applies only to BLPs and to disputed or controversial material elsewhere. You might want to see WP:MINREF . It's good practice to have therm, but an article will not be deleted from afd for lack of them, if there are not other problems. DGG ( talk ) 06:50, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
@DGG: It's been months since I took part in the AfC as a result of my various continued errors in my reviewing. But I do have declined a lot of drafts citing the reason. I agree with that. Thank you for letting me know about this. I'll make use of this once I gain full confidence in myself, on the day I believe I'm 100% right in making a decision. Thank you, once again! KenTonyShall we discuss?13:40, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
.jpg)
.jpg)
![[7]](https://cimarindia.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/884f086a-b12c-4e89-9f65-3977a9bf19e621-2.jpg){kind=link}