User talk:Pbrks

DYK for Cloud9 League of Legends

On 2 May 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Cloud9 League of Legends, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Cloud9 League of Legends division won back-to-back League of Legends Championship Series titles in their first two seasons of existence? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Cloud9 League of Legends. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Cloud9 League of Legends), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

—valereee (talk) 00:02, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Esports

Why this revert? There look to have been multiple changes by anon IPs since the cleanup took place. Deb (talk) 15:14, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

@Deb: There has been one (non-reverted) anon IP edit since cleanup (diff), which only reorganized the intro. Pbrks (talk) 15:21, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Does that not look to you like a promotional edit? It does to me. Deb (talk) 15:25, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

@Deb: Not at all. Compare:

Stalwart Esports is an Indian professional esports organisation focused on mobile gaming. It was founded in January 2020 and in September that year donated its slot in the PUBG Mobile Pro League South Asia qualifiers to Pakistani Esports organisation Freestyle Esports after PUBG Mobile was banned in India. Stalwart Esports has teams competing in PUBG Mobile, Free Fire, Call of Duty: Mobile, Clash Royale, and Pro Evolution Soccer. They train young esport athletes from India.

versus

Stalwart Esports is an Indian professional esports organisation focused on mobile gaming. It was founded in January 2020. Stalwart Esports has teams competing in PUBG Mobile, Free Fire, Call of Duty: Mobile, Clash Royale, and Pro Evolution Soccer. They train young esport athletes from India. In September 2020, They donated their slot of the PUBG Mobile Pro League South Asia to Pakistani Esports organisation Freestyle Esports after PUBG Mobile was banned in India.

It literally only rearranged a couple sentences. Pbrks (talk) 15:28, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Okay. Maybe I was misreading that. Deb (talk) 15:32, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 6

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited F0rest, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dignitas.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:09, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Streamer article moves

Hi, I've reverted some of your moves of pages of streamers from "Example (streamer)" to "Example (gamer)". Kitboga, for instance, does not play games. Destiny was a starcraft pro many many years ago, but he is most notable for his current streaming career. You should only be moving these articles if it actually applies to the subject. ‑‑Volteer1 (talk) 18:13, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

@Volteer1: You're right, apologies, that was a gross oversight on my part. Pbrks (talk) 18:21, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

All good, don't sweat it :) ‑‑Volteer1 (talk) 18:22, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 13

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Lil Poison

added a link pointing to Halo

Sander Kaasjager

added a link pointing to Quake

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:09, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Eustachio Pisani

Hi, thank you for the review. I can't understand what to improve on the page I proposed, could you help me understand what to improve specifically? Thanks in advance --Romanitass (talk) 23:47, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

@Romanitass: Hello, thank you for reaching out. I declined it for two reasons.

1. It lacks inline citations for multiple claims, e.g. Orphaned at an early age, he pursued his goals with tenacity, dividing himself between working during the day and studying in the evening. and ... where he was hired at the Cartiere Meridionali as an assistant until he became head of manufacture.
2. It has a WP:TONE issue. A few examples of issue-sentences are ...he pursued his goals with tenacity ... and He showed great affection towards the employees of his company.... We need to impartially describe what he did. In other words, these portions of the sentences could be left out, and nothing would be lost from the article.

I am unsure of whether or not this draft passes the general notability guidelines (since I do not speak Italian and cannot verify whether or not the sources are reliable), which is why I did not include that as a reason for declining. However, that is another possible issue, and for that reason, even if the above issues were fixed, I personally would not be able to pass it. If you have any other questions, don't hesitate to ask. Pbrks (talk) 02:05, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

@Pbrks: Thank you very much, you have been very kind! I suspected those two sentences might be the problem, but I finally have confirmation. I also fixed the references. As for the latter, the page is a translation of the one already present in the Italian Wikipedia. The references include acts of the Italian government and government agencies, of which I have linked the original documents and I believe they are the most significant to certify what is written. Then I mentioned books, two of which published by the General Confederation of Italian Industry and a university thesis. I also cited an interview with the President of the General Confederation of Italian Industry of Frosinone, as well as some newspaper articles. I hope I have done everything correctly, I will try to resubmit the review request... Thanks again for your help! --Romanitass (talk) 22:56, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

@Romanitass: You're welcome, and best of luck! Pbrks (talk) 04:50, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Request on 17:54:47, 24 May 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Marek Sobola

• Marek Sobola (talk · contribs)
  • User:Marek Sobola (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Marek Sobola (talk) 17:54, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

Dear Pbrks, Thank you for reviewing the Servare et Manere article. You write that I infringed copyright because I copied information from the website www.tofp.eu. This website deals with the NGO Servare et Manere project. I am the CEO of Servare et Manere, therefore as the highest executive and administrative body I have all the copyrights to the texts on the official websites of Servare et Manere: www.tofp.eu and www.servaremanere.sk

@Marek Sobola: Hello, thank you for reaching out. Currently, the content on these two websites are clearly copyrighted, as seen at the bottom of the pages. If you are the owner of this content, there are several ways you can give permission for Wikipedia to use it. The easiest way is to put that permission explicitly on the site where that material is posted (known as a copyleft). You can read WP:DONATETEXT for more more detailed information, including what exactly must be written, and for other ways to give permission. Pbrks (talk) 18:02, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

Dear Pbrks, Thank you very much for the instructions. I understand that I could have caused certain problems out of ignorance. On the other hand, I am very happy that Wikipedia protects copyright. I proceeded by sending Granting the permission to copy material already online / Declaration of consent for all enquiries to permissions-en@wikimedia.org. Permission applies to all wiki articles related to Tree of Peace. I do not receive absolutely any compensation for the articles I published on wikipedia, nor do I expect it. I try to write encyclopedically and objectively. I publish all articles under my real name Marek Sobola. I do not consider the fact that I wrote an article about Servare et Manere to be a bad practice. It is a general NGO that does beneficial work. The information is factual, without any indication of advertising. I hope this is understandable. Kind regards

@Marek Sobola: Thank you for your contribution, I'm sure it will be handled soon. Also, I have tagged the conflict of interest that you may have on the appropriate articles. Pbrks (talk) 19:11, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

Dear Pbrks, Thank you for your time and work. I would like to ask when and under what circumstances you will remove the conflict of interest from the marked articles. How to proceed? What is the ideal next step? Thank you.

@Marek Sobola: The conflict of interest tags can be removed once the articles have been reviewed by an independent editor to ensure that the content has a neutral point of view. This may take some time, as there are quite a few articles that you and/or your organization have written about yourselves. Pbrks (talk) 19:35, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

@Pbrks: Thank you! I understand. I don't know if I can - could I ask you to independently review the tagged articles? Would you be so kind? I think you are the right and independent person. Can you do it please? I realize that as a volunteer and editor of wikipedia you have a lot of work ... Once again, thank you very much. Best regards

@Marek Sobola: I'm sorry, but I think it would be best if a different editor took on that task. Pbrks (talk) 22:48, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

A message from Mattstead

Dear Pbrks,

You declined my Wikipedia submission yesterday. It is an article describing a new open source format MED that is the next evolution of an existing open source format MEF for which there IS a Wikipedia page. I am the creator of all MEF format versions, as well as MED. I do not understand why MEF is worthy of a Wikipedia page, but MED is not. I was not the author of the MEF Wikipedia page; is this the issue? I can confidently assert that MED is a very substantial improvement on all MEF versions, because I created them all.

Thanks, Matt Stead

Mattstead (talk) 22:35, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

@Mattstead: Hello, thanks for reaching out. I declined the submission because, in its current state, it does not demonstrate notability. Please add reliable sources that are independent of the topic (that is, the "inventors" of MED are not independent sources) to demonstrate notability. That is not to say that the MED draft can't be an article, but it is not ready. In regards to the MEF article, I did not review that article, and "x article exists, so y should too" is generally not a good argument for the creation of articles. Best of luck on improving your draft! Pbrks (talk) 22:47, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

A message from Mattstead

Dear Pbrks,

Thanks for your prompt reply. I can't fix the the issues you raise as the source you request is basically me. I will say this, MED is a substantial and highly developed open source body of work. It exists, like Wikipedia, in the spirit of sharing work, and in the hopes of fostering progress in neurophysiology. If you'd like to follow the link through MED Format to GitHub and skim through the code base and documentation, I think you'd agree.

I routinely donate to Wikipedia, for what that's worth.

Thanks, Matt Stead

A message from Mattstead

Dear Pbrks,

Thanks again for your prompt reply. I really believe this warrants a Wikipedia entry, but I cannot satisfy the standard conditions for conflict of interest. I DO NOT stand to gain from this, nor does any company. It is a description of a publicly available open source neurophysiology format, to which anyone can contribute. So does Wikipedia have a mechanism to appeal publication decisions?

Thanks for your time, Matt Stead

@Mattstead: I'm sorry, but there are rules for the inclusion of an article on Wikipedia (see WP:GNG). If the file format is as important as you say, then this is a relatively new format, it may be a case of WP:TOOSOON. To be clear, the decline was not made due to your conflict of interest. Pbrks (talk) 03:49, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

A message from Akarniel

Dear Pbrks,

My name is Amihai, I have written the draft "Draft:Shlomo Laufer" that you recently declined. I urge you to reconsider your decision, as I think the standards you hold this draft are not adequate, taking into account the status of the person at hand. The main issue is a sort of "Gridlock" that you and previous reviewers have placed this draft in. On one hand, reliable sources are requested. On the other hand, I was asked to remove anything Hebrew-related from the draft. Mr. Laufer is a well-established and experienced Israeli poet, but he is not a "Superstar" of Israeli poetry, so most of the sources I can verify from are Hebrew journals, publishing houses, etc. Each and every English mention on the web was added as a source to the draft. but not a lot of his work was translated. Some of his work is being translated nowadays, and once published can be added to the draft.

Moreover, on a more personal note, he is an old man, with progressive dementia. His family wished me to help with writing this article, I am not compensated for this work in any way. They are seeking to have his life and work documented in English as well, for historical purposes. Another disturbing issue was that one of the early drafts of it was copied and published by Wikitia without permission, and published fully. Now they added a mistake about the citizenship of Laufer. they wrote it as Polish, while Laufer is Israeli. He survived the Holacoust. Writing him as Polish (Which for him are the people that killed his entire family) is touching a delicate nerve for the family. I guess what I am trying to say is that I think this article will not be visited often, and no major harm will happen to Wikipedia if you choose to allow its creation "as is", with lower standards. As for verification of the information, you can ask a Hebrew speaking colleague to compare this draft to the Hebrew Wikipedia article, which was published and verified a while back. He/She will see that we did not add any outraging claims that were not verified by Hebrew Wikipedia.

Kind regards,

Amihai Karniel.

Akarniel (talk) 05:20, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

@Akarniel: Hello. I'm sorry to hear the current situation you are in. Unfortunately, the decision I made is justified and I cannot accept the article in it's current state for the reasons I described. Looking at the previous editors' comments, I don't see them say anywhere that you cannot use non-English references; the only comment was that the text in the body of the article must be English. In fact, it is a policy that you are allowed to use non-English reliable sources (see WP:RSUE). If a reliable source for a statement does not exist, you should just remove it. We cannot use the Hebrew Wikipedia as a point of reference, since Wikipedia itself is not considered a reliable source, and we will not accept an article at a lower standard because "no harm will happen" (see WP:NOHARM). Best of luck on improving your draft, and let me know if you have any other questions. Pbrks (talk) 14:10, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

A message from Jonguy86

Just saw your response regarding recent edits to Draft:Waltron. I'm trying to do this right! As for references -- when I compare this with a lot of similar company pages, I think we have a lot more detail that is supported by actual references and documents. The history of Bull & Roberts and Alvin Purdy is meaningful to a lot of people in the water chemistry space; would it be better to separate that out and make a "Bull & Roberts" page? Then the company page for Waltron could be much shorter, only referencing the B&R history page. Jonguy86 (talk) 22:26, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Jonguy86 I understand the confusion, I think. Take a look at say, Microsoft. Notice how after just about every sentence or two, there is a hatnote -- this tells the reader where that information came from so that they can verify it, if need be. That should be the goal for your draft as well. I highly recommend reading Wikipedia:Citing sources as well, as drafts that have poor or incomplete references tend not to do well with in articles for creation. For example, reference 8 in Draft:Walton is "Marine News, Sep 1930", but that really isn't sufficient. We need to know what page or article to look at as well. Good referencing is key. Pbrks (talk) 23:08, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

A message from Kitkat8892

Hi,

Thank you for your review of my article. I have made the edits you suggested, please let me know if there is anything else I need to change before it is approved. Thanks! Kitkat8892 (talk) 02:00, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

@Kitkat8892: All set! Great work. Pbrks (talk) 03:07, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 28

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Eminent domain, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Eminent Domain.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

SuanShu article rejected

Hello Pbrks,

Thank you for reviewing the article. Unfortunately, it is rejected.

Can you let me know how I can improve the article please? I believe that it is already in a neutral tone without any references to saying anything positive about the subject. I merely state some facts.

Also, I have cited a number of articles from referred journal articles and books. I thought they would count as "independent, reliable, published sources".

I am not sure what to edit to make it satisfy the requirements. Can you please give me some advice please? That would be very much appreciated.

Thanks in advance! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.155.39.74 (talk)

@120.155.39.74: Hello, thanks for reaching out. The issue is with the body of the draft (which is completely unsourced). It reads like an advertisement because it basically just says:

• Here's what we can do
• You can use it under these terms
• Here's how to use it

Moreover, that references given do not seem to contain significant coverage of the subject, which is okay, but it does not demonstrate notability. We need secondary, reliable, independent sources with significant coverage of the subject (see WP:GNG). Pbrks (talk) 14:49, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

For the body of the draft, can you suggest how I can modify the tone so it satisfies the requirements. I basically copied from another accepted article on a similar topic. I am not sure why that article got thru and this one does not. Also, what do you mean by "unsourced"? Do I need to cite anything to justify the body of the draft.

Also, for the reference, the first reference is a book published by a significant publisher APress on the subject. The entire book is about how to use SuanShu. The other references shows the adoption of using SuanShu in various academic areas. I am not sure how much more notable it can get. All these sources are secondary and are in referred journals.

Can you take a second look at the draft again or please give some suggestions? Your help is much appreciated.

@120.155.39.74: I do not compare drafts with articles already in existence, as not articles really should be in the article space (see WP:OTHERSTUFF). Okay, let's run through it.

• The author of the book is Dr. Haksun Li, who is also the CEO of SuanShu (or its parent company), so that source is not independent of the subject.
• It is the only open-source Java implementation of a complete suite of standard optimization algorithms: linear programming, quadratic programming, second order conic programming, semi-definite programming, sequential quadratic programming and heuristic methods. The source is https://math.nist.gov/javanumerics/, but on that page, all I see is "SuanShu, a large collection of Java classes for basic numerical analysis, statistics, and optimization." Am I missing something?
• It implements a parallel version of the adaptive strassen’s algorithm for fast matrix multiplication. Is there a source for this?

Initially, I would have like to have seen a source for its features and the licensing, but that should be found on the official website. In regards to what should be included and how it should be organized (which would likely fix the tone), take a look at MOS:COMPSCI under the appropriate section. Pbrks (talk) 15:41, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Request on 12:55:13, 28 May 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Wyattbk2912

• Wyattbk2912 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:David Edward Reichle (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I do not understand the stated reasoning for rejecting the article. It seems to be vague as I included numerous references and citations. I'm not sure what is missing - PLEASE let me know.

As for the photo possibly violating copyright by Elsevier, the copyright to the photo was not signed over to Elsevier. However, we will replace the image with a new image that has not been previously published.

Thank you for your assistance.

Wyattbk2912 (talk) 12:55, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Wyattbk2912 Hello, thanks for reaching out. I rejected the draft because it is not properly sourced. Every statement needs to be backed by a reliable source. As it stands, almost the entire "Biography" section is unsourced as well as the "Ecosystem Research". Note that there may be more issues with the article, as I have not read it over in detail since unsourced content is the current issue. Pbrks (talk) 14:54, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Physics of Holography draft

You have removed a large section of this draft article because of "copyright violations". All the material you have removed is currently in the Holography article, and I wrote most of it in 2012.

https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Holography&direction=prev&oldid=453253607

I proposed to add this new article to Wikipedia, and remove the more complex stuff from the original article to here in response to criticism that it was too technical.

I've looked at the article which you claim has copyright, and it looks as if it has taken material from the holography article. It has certainly taken photos from there including one I added.

https:/upwiki/wikipedia/commons/a/a0/Broken_hologram.jpg

I know there is no problem with anyone copying and publishing material from Wikipedia, but it is hardly reasonable to then claim copyright. Epzcaw (talk) 09:34, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

@Epzcaw: I see, it looks like they indeed just copied Wikipedia. Apologies for that. I noticed you blanked the draft because you believe it "false accusation of copyright violation renders it obsolete." While it does not, if you would like, we can simply revert the draft to its previous state. Let me know. Pbrks (talk) 14:51, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

@Pbrks: If you can revert it without the "Copyright Violation Notice", that would be fine. Thanks. We all make mistakes..... Epzcaw (talk) 16:13, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

@Epzcaw: Good deal, you're all set. Pbrks (talk) 16:23, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Johan Bejerholm WIKI

Hi!

It seems almost impossible for me to get this page through. I see so many simple and badly executed pages that I can't believe have passed scrutiny. Anyways, please help me get this show on the road! You say claims need to be verified. Sure, but in biography (as an example) there is very little to prove. Date of birth etc and family situation... Where can that be verified? Artist history... Most of that happened before the dawn of Internet... I guess I can take things out instead, but I would like some helpful pointers instead of a general thumbs down, if you please.

Best Regards

Lommagubben (talk) 12:50, 2 June 2021 (UTC)Lommagubben

@Lommagubben: Hi. Yes, it's true that many articles are not up to snuff, but due to the shear vast number of articles of Wikipedia vs the number of editors willing to fix those kinds of issues, well, we can only do some much at a time. In regards to your draft, also yes, Wikipedia does not allow original research (see WP:OR); if you are unable to find a reliable source for given information, you have to leave it out. Generally, that kind of information would be found in interviews or on the subject's official website. I also notice that reference #16 is sourced to Wikipedia. Wikipedia itself cannot be used as a reference, as it is user-generated content (see WP:UGC). Tidy up and remove any unverifiable information, and give it another go. If you have any other questions, let me know. Best of luck! Pbrks (talk) 13:59, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Okidiki! I will give it a shot! Thanks!! Lommagubben (talk) 15:35, 2 June 2021 (UTC) Lommagubben

Verfiable Identity based Encryption submission declined

Hi Pbrks,

I would like to have, if possible, some clarification about your review of my article named Verifiable Identity based Encryption.

I personnaly use Wikipedia to find very technical article like Identity-based Encryption, Elliptic Curves, Computational Diffie Hellman Problem. Those articles are as technical as what I wrote, and they also talk about a subject very close to the subject of my article. This is why I linked those wikipedia pages in my article.

I don't understand why those articles have been published on wikipedia and not my article. Can you help me?

Have a good day.

Cryptoaddict (talk) 13:18, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

@Cryptoaddict: Hi. Yes, technical articles are absolutely okay; however, the articles you linked are presented much differently than yours. As someone with only a background in mathematics, I can follow Identity-based encryption extremely closely. The article starts with the section "Usage" -- very laid out, in simple terms. For example, you have not even told the reader that $\mathbb {Z} _{p}^{*}$ is the multiplicative group of integers between 1 and p-1. What do the indices mean for ${\textsf {usk}}[{\textsf {id}}]_{1}$ and ${\textsf {usk}}[{\textsf {id}}]_{2}$? There needs to be more context. Moreover, the body of the article contain no references -- please include references (see WP:OR). Pbrks (talk) 14:27, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 4

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sentinels (esports), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Overwatch.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:30, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

My article draft Raja Rasalu

I get it. My article draft has been declined so many times because they say "no reliable sources" 😭😂. I try my best to search for sources and find some, but almost all are unreliable. Guess I have to shorten the article then.. Oh and yes, I just used the term- 'legendary' because he is mentioned in only LEGENDS, and no concrete evidence of his existence is there. It's not puffery exactly but I'll remove the term anyway. Wish me good luck finding reliable sources :) (i followed ur guidelines so plis XD) Tulika and Satvik (talk) 15:19, 4 June 2021 (UTC)Tulika and Satvik (talk) 15:19, 4 June 2021 (UTC) Tulika and Satvik talk