This is an archive of past discussions with User:Noyster. 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.
My article "Dhevaakar Suppiah" is still not yet published. I have created that as to write about a notable actor. I believe I have given a good references too. Already a month but still not approved to publish.
User: Dhevaakar Suppiah Actor
dheva_pro@yahoo.com
dheva_pro@gmail.com Dhevaakar Suppiah Actor (talk) 15:17, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
Dhevaakar Suppiah Actor You have been warned before about attempting to use Wikipedia for self-publicity. The current contents of your user page are very far removed from what would be accepted as an article. In particular, the page is still full of self-praise such as He made his life with the a meaningful journey and A man with many talents and a heart that cares and shares to quote but two examples. It completely lacks any references to independent sources (which does not include other Wikipedia articles) to demonstrate notability. If you continue in this way I have to warn you that your editing privileges are likely to be removed. The only alternative is to create a neutrally worded, factual and well-referenced draft and submit it for review using the process explained in Your first article: Noyster (talk),18:39, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
Hello again Bbarmadillo. You have created a page with the correct title Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maxwell The Cat, but it hasn't been transcluded to today's log. I should ask for speedy deletion of your page (WP:G7) and start again. The process is set out here, but much the simplest way is to install Twinkle (if you haven't already). Then open the article in question, go for the "xfd" tab, type in your reason and the thing's done.
I would also suggest offering a stronger argument than "I think...", focussing on absence or inadequacy of coverage in reliable independent sources – and you will be expected to have looked for such sources yourself, not rely just on the fact that the article doesn't refer to any (see WP:BEFORE). What counts is not whether the video may be considered "viral" but whether it has received substantial independent coverage in the media. The deletion policy page sets out valid grounds for deleting an article. Regards: Noyster (talk),22:55, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
Thank you. He was a cool guy, legendary in his field. I changed the birth date to birth year and also changed the template for death date. -- Bbarmadillo (talk) 15:18, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
Re: Real Madrid Castilla
Not only is that the current name of the team, but it was also the name of the team when Juan Mata played for them, which is the more pertinent fact, IMO. – PeeJay11:54, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
Fixed In your link you correctly used a capital T in Technologies, but the article linked incorrectly used a small t. I've moved the article title: Noyster (talk),08:41, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
Please help me to understand the sequence of actions for recovering Marisa Peer article. This is COI entry, but I haven't been able to state it after the warning from user Rentier, the article has been deleted too fast. I think that Marisa Peer is a notable person, she has been featured in several UK and US TV shows and authored 4 books. Her life and biography is covered by the US and UK press. I contacted the nominator and got negative feedback. I think this article should be nominated for slow deletion so that the community could decide it's fate. Maybe it should stay but in abridged version. Find the details on my request here talk. -- Bbarmadillo (talk) 10:26, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
Bbarmadillo, I'm sure you wouldn't want your article deleted by any mechanism. I didn't read it when live and now, of course, can't assess it. Especially for a known paid editor, it's sometimes a fine line between showing why a topic is important enough for an article ("notable" in our terms) and seeming to be promoting it or doing PR for it.
Here's my suggested course:
Have a good look at WP:NAUTHOR and ask yourself if you could make a reasonable policy-based case for asserting her "notability".
If so, add the title to your COI declaration.
Then go once more to Seraphimblade. Say you are disclosing your COI. Say briefly why you think the topic is notable and ask for "userfication" of the page so that you can work on it further and remove any apparent promotionalism.
If this too fails, I hope you have kept the materials to reconstruct the article – just make a new one ensuring that it is well-sourced and avoids any hint of promotionalism. Perhaps put it through Articles for creation for a review before it goes live.
Thank you WikiOriginal-9, I have duly changed the reason in the PROD, but the link – a bare results table once on the website of one of the participating clubs – does very little to establish "notability", so for me the PROD stands. If you know of independent sources with sufficient coverage of the tournament to establish notability, by all means add them to the article and remove the PROD: Noyster (talk),20:45, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
Wikkkk9 Thanks for asking for clarification of my message. I don't read Bulgarian and have no opinion on your contributions to Bulgarian Wikipedia. But as regards the draft article in English on Kristina Krasimirova Dimitrova, I was concerned with what appeared to me a promotional tone. It helps that you removed the sentence beginning "The mission of Interlaced...". You may want to look again at such wording as Influential Journalist/Blogger, Often in front of (and behind) the camera, and the talk about "passions". This sort of language seems like "spin" and is not what we would expect to see in an encyclopedia.
However, the decision whether to accept the article is not up to me, and now that you have submitted it to Articles for creation it will be best to await the review there. Make sure that you have assembled the best possible sources giving some detail about the person, meaning that the sources are independent (not connected with the person or influenced by her) and reliable (accurate and unbiased).
Hello again Bastien. I don't think you have quite grasped the basic principle of Wikipedia, that its articles are based on reliable, independent sources. We cannot accept an article based on what Nery has said or written about himself, whether in speeches, interviews, or books. These we call self-published sources and they do not meet our requirement of verifiability. The other problem was that the additions were full of statements that did not convey facts but just seemed to be aiming to show the subject in a good light: I already gave a few examples on your talk page. This violates another principle we have, that of neutrality.
If you still consider that the existing article should be improved, my advice is to start again and seek out factual information that other people unconnected with Nery have published about him. Summarise what they say, add a reference and express it neutrally – the idea is to tell the world important facts about Nery, not to lead the reader to think "that's a fine man".
Please do read some of the links to Wikipedia policy that I am providing for you. After that, if I can make the message any clearer then please ask me: Noyster (talk),16:27, 8 November 2017 (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 SwisterTwister was:
This currently serves in its current condition as an advertised business profile, and the information and sources are equally trivial; what we need instead is emphasis on only the best significant independent news without influences or ties to announcements or notices.
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:HACEMOS and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
Hi. Please take a look at this article Cold Water Cowboys. It is at AfC process now. I have a question about the "sort" parameter at "Cast". I really copied the tab from another article and don't really understand how the "sort" parameter works. What should it do? Is it a problem that 2 different entities have the same sort parameter "Kerrivan"? Thank you. -- Bbarmadillo (talk) 17:41, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
Bbarmadillo Turns out that template {{sort}} is "deprecated" now. If you want a table to sort differently from the natural order, the advice is to use data-sort-value, as explained here. The "data-sort-value" would come immediately before the cell contents. Hope this helps: Noyster (talk),20:29, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
Not sure I understand what you're getting at here, but the idea is to have the table sortable on surname while still presenting the surname as the second of two names, like "Rick Crane". That way, for instance, the Kerrivans father and son will appear one below the other. There are always alternatives: you could have separate columns for first name and surname, or you could present the names surname first like "Crane, Rick": Noyster (talk),08:19, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
Hi. Please take a look at this page. Should it be turned into a draft? How to do it? I don't think I understand the difference between the userspace and draft. What is the right place to create upcoming articles for the AfC? Thank you in advance. -- Bbarmadillo (talk) 18:46, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
Drafts submitted to AfC are normally located in the Draft namespace, and that is where drafts created using the article wizard are automatically placed. Indeed AfC reviewers will often move a submitted user draft to Draft space in the course of reviewing. So the recommended approach is to develop a draft in a user subpage, then when you consider it ready for submission, to move it to Draft space yourself.
In other respects, the distinction between user drafts and those in draft space is not hard and fast, but user drafts are regarded as more "private" and will not normally be edited by others. It's worth knowing that pages lingering untouched in Draft space, whether declined at AfC or never submitted, may be speedy deleted as stale drafts after six months: Noyster (talk),23:38, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
Hi. Please take a look at Ken Banks. I wonder if I am using sfn template correctly or not for citing several times the same book(Social Entrepreneurship and Innovation: International Case Studies and Practice). This article is a bit misleading. Thank you in advance. -- Bbarmadillo (talk) 19:08, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
Sure, you can add a section heading "Sources" or "Bibliography". Practice varies but especially if the list is short I see no harm in leaving them as bulleted items at the end of the References. Bracket them with {{Refbegin}} and {{Refend}} to get typeface and indentation matching the numbered refs: Noyster (talk),22:28, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
Jamanka, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
Hello, Noyster. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
