Jump to content

User talk:Theroadislong: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Bob isat (talk | contribs)
27 edits
Bob isat (talk | contribs)
27 edits
Line 516: Line 516:
[[https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anticor]]
[[https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anticor]]


The goal of the page in en.wikipedia is to understand the fights, history and purposes of this intersting NGO (Anticor) worldwide.
The goal of the page in en.wikipedia is to understand the fights, history and purposes of this interesting NGO (Anticor) worldwide.


Can you please help me understanding the issue and the progress to be done to pass the notability test?
Can you please help me understanding the issue and the progress to be done to pass the notability test?

Revision as of 17:05, 22 May 2022

←

Welcome to my talk page. Click here to leave me a message .


Thank you Theroadislong for reviewing Michael P. Snyder's page so quickly!

I very much appreciate the feedback regarding links to Wikipedia/Amazon & I am going through the document now to remove these links, replace as many as possible with non-Wikipedia/Amazon links!

Cheers, McGuire Snyderlab|talk McGuire at Stanford Snyderlab (talk) Dec 17th 1:05PM Pacific Time

Request For

Linda Adler-Kassner Draft Article Updates

In response to - "press releases and YouTube are not reliable independent sources." - these items for [draft article] have been replaced with independent sources. Thank you.

mr o

Dear Kind Young Gentleman,

so i forgor to put the full list of students who look up to mr o (a lot) and his notable achievements. I will next draft.

Thank you, Jack

May 2022 at Women in Red

Women in Red May 2022, Vol 8, Issue 5, Nos 214, 217, 227, 229, 230


Online events:


See also:


Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Innisfree987 (talk) 04:57, 2 May 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

May 2022 at Women in Red

Women in Red May 2022, Vol 8, Issue 5, Nos 214, 217, 227, 229, 230


Online events:


See also:


Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Innisfree987 (talk) 10:07, 2 May 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Removed COI Tag

COI Tag Removed in Draft: Aniebiet Inyang Ntui since I don’t have any relationship with the subject or her employer. ElontheWikiEditor (talk) 17:23, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:ДЕДА КУРЧИНА

Hi Theroadislobg. I was going to add the same notification/user warning as you until I used Google to translate what was being posted. The post seems like a possible candidate for REVDEL. — Marchjuly (talk) 21:13, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes indeed, unpleasant stuff, cheers. Theroadislong (talk) 21:18, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Just for reference. — Marchjuly (talk) 03:27, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

keeping Wikipedia clean is a good thing

Hello Theroadislong,

thank you for keeping Wikipedia clean.

You stated: "we require multiple in-depth coverage in independent sources, not their own website."

There is independent sources and I cited them subsequently.

You stated that the change of the article GHCup (Draft:GHCup) "...is disruptive and pointless to re-submit with zero improvement."

If that would be the case then I would say delete the "junk".

You tried your best by focusing on keeping Wikipedia clean - I suppose - is't it?

Regarding disruptive

I created (not destroyed) a page that would have been valuable for me - and I know that this would have been valuable for others. I am a paying, active member of Wikimedia Deutschland – Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V. - focusing on free knowledge. I get not a pence for this article - and not any money, and privileges. The only benefit that I have is same as yours. We share a value, and we can say contribute voluntarily, and I gain trust when I post my next article. Now, I provided further links that are not just links to their own website - but to news, univerisy websites and Q&A sites.

Regarding pointless

GHCup is new to me and probably new to a lot of Haskell users. However GHCup is considered basic - and is demanded by common IDE plugins for Microsoft Visual Studio Code. That why I started a recherche also in Wikipedia. Again, I consider this tool as basic for Haskel users because it is - and the source is citetd now.


If this is not sufficient - please contact me beforehand.


If you re-consider, after careful review, please release the article.


Thank you.


Best regards

Jörg Brüggmann

Notability???

Hey mate, hope you are doing well.

You said my Draft: Aniebiet Inyang Ntui is not notable but there is a Wiki article for Boma Obi someone with a similar profile but with even less references. Isn’t that a double standard??? ElontheWikiEditor (talk) 10:41, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

See other poor quality articles exist for that argument, it should probably be deleted. Theroadislong (talk) 10:44, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I see. That means my article doesn’t also qualify.

Do have a great day! ElontheWikiEditor (talk) 10:56, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Versvs

Hi there,

I have seen your comment "not clear how they pass WP:NSINGER?". The sources provided are from extremely reliable sources that are respected. Please let me know how to proceed. I have added additional sources for the "Early Life and Background section" as that was the comment for my recent draft — Preceding unsigned comment added by KeyvanLBJ12 (talk • contribs) 16:50, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This [1] is a blog and press release so not reliable. This [2] has no content. Theroadislong (talk) 16:55, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good how do you recommend I proceed to get approval? Should I delete the sources? KeyvanLBJ12 (talk) 16:35, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
KeyvanLBJ12 You need to delete the unreliable sources and find reliable ones that discuss the topic in-depth with significant coverage. Theroadislong (talk) 16:41, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 18:15:46, 3 May 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Njames1234


Hello! thank you for your time, Can you specify why the articles provided dont prove notability? I understand they cannot be passing references but 3 of the articles are actually interviews with Henry himself. If 3 is not enough can you provide me with a number of articles that would be necessary to prove notability? Thank you again for your help.


Njames1234 (talk) 18:15, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Interviews are not independent sources so confer zero notability. Theroadislong (talk) 18:17, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kimberly Hardin

Why is this page being declined?

This page is not about myself. I just want to create this page for this person. I think she is notable and deserves a page. She's doing great things.

I would like for you to google this lady, she is one of the first black women to be a casting director in Hollywood. She deserves a wikipedia page.

What other information do you need? Her films were Oscar nominated.

RE: Kimberly Hardin — Preceding unsigned comment added by Media updates2021 (talk • contribs) 18:18, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Draft:Kimberly Hardin In order for an article’s subject to be considered notable by the Wikipedia community, we require that it receive significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject this is what you base an article on. Your draft has zero references, you need to cite sources for each and every fact. Theroadislong (talk) 18:22, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

User:Pioeral/sandbox

I just noticed that after my declination of your G11 tag of User:Pioeral/sandbox, you re-tagged it under the same criterion, meaning that ToBeFree had to decline it. Even if we look past the fact that the tagging was excessive, doing so again after being declined is coming very close to admin-shopping. Please do not do so again. Sdrqaz (talk) 23:12, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sdrqaz and Theroadislong, I had blocked the account in the meantime, which may have been interpreted as a kind of confirmation for the speedy deletion tagging, and as a reason for re-requesting. Before the re-tagging happened, I thanked Sdrquaz for the decision, as these pages (in my eyes) are often speedily deleted a tad too liberally. I had also thanked Theroadislong for making the UAA report, and specifically for the UAA report and not for the identical AIV report.
In this specific case, I hope it's objective to say that the article does describe "its subject from a neutral point of view", and that it is a "plausible draft" exempt from WP:U5 as well. There's no damage done to the encyclopedia by keeping the page until it qualifies for WP:G13, which will likely happen as the page does contain an AFC submission template. For the same reason, there'd probably be not much damage done to the encyclopedia by deleting the page either.
There's another not unlikely interpretation of the re-tagging, though: The surprising lack of a template Theroadislong thought to have added, fixed by quickly opening Twinkle and re-performing an action that seemed to have failed for technical reasons. Yes, Theroadislong should have had a look at the revision history, but I'm sure they had looked at the page history before and simply saw no need to do so again, as the page content didn't change since. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:28, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I hope that the interpretation in the third paragraph is correct, ToBeFree. I suspect that declining all of the inappropriate U5s would spend all my time I spend here, but that's a rant for another time. I hope that the interpretation in the first paragraph was not true, and if that is being used, that it is stopped pretty quick (and, for that matter, similar G11s to this). Sdrqaz (talk) 01:40, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Correct I interpreted the block as "a kind of confirmation for the speedy deletion tagging" I won't do that again, I review thousands of drafts I will no longer tag any for speedy deletion and will leave them for the 6 months period. Thank you. Theroadislong (talk) 06:16, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Understandable and no worries from me. Sounds fine to me and might make noticing sockpuppets or recognizing repeated submissions of declined drafts easier. Thank you for all the draft reviews! ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:35, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Content written like an advertisement on page

Hi; thank you for your very quick edit.

Would you please advise exactly what content on the page is written like an advertisement? There is extensive source material cited, with third-party attribution.

If any material on the page is written like an advertisement - or differs in a notable way from the format of any other Wikipedia entry for a humanitarian organization (such as International Rescue Committee, World Vision, Mercy Corps) - please advise so it can be fixed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ed1t0r14J (talk • contribs) 08:38, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Content like this...“Under James’ leadership as executive director, engineers, other tech-oriented workers and volunteers began joining the organization’s efforts to help disaster-affected people” “Over the next few years, the organization expanded and built more partnerships with aid organizations including UNICEF, World Vision, Save the Children and others to serve disaster- and conflict-affected individuals in additional countries” “Field Ready employs from the areas of relief and development using human-centered design, engineering and various forms of making and manufacturing, and has developed a five-step process that is employed in numerous situations” “Field Ready works in three Pacific island countries (Fiji, Vanuatu, Samoa) to reduce disaster-risk concerns and prepare people for future disasters with a focus on WASH, accessibility for physically challenged people and disaster preparedness” “With local partners, Field Ready mapped and surveyed more than 40 hospitals and healthcare facilities in Northwest Syria, where the healthcare system has been decimated” all of this is promotional. Theroadislong (talk) 08:48, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The content isn't promotional - it's all verifiable summation. I will go back in and provide the necessary citations for all claims.
That last sentence you used as an example *is* already cited - as written, the citation is at the end of the next sentence. I will either move it up, and repeat the citation, or add a semi-colon so that it is included in the existing citation.
Please advise about any sentences you believe are promotional. Ed1t0r14J (talk) 09:50, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
As "promotional" doesn't mean "unverifiable", noting that "it's all verifiable summation" doesn't mean it isn't promotional. It may very well, for example, have occurred "under James' leadership"—it might even be because of James' leadership—but the tone is that of inviting the reader to marvel over James' leadership skills, which is out of place here.
Even reliable sources may present material in a style meant to laud its subject or to inspire and impress the reader. Wikipedia style is not that. So even if factual information may be taken from those sources, the tone has to change and portions of the source material that were appropriate in its context may not be appropriate in Wikipedia's context. Largoplazo (talk) 11:12, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Freddy Alejandro IV

Thanks for commenting on that draft. I personally think this is either a non-existant person (royal of Spain???) or a personal page of that new editor (User:Leonardinho Báez) that should never become a Wikipedia article. Pierre cb (talk) 13:22, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

'Just an advert'?

Hi there,

I appreciate that as I am associated with the company that I am trying to establish a Wiki page for that it will be regarded with extreme scrutiny in terms of neutrality, but having fulfilled the original grounds for rejection by adding independent references, I wonder if you could please advise me as to why this is still 'just an advert', as per your comment?

I genuinely want to get this page up and running as a reference, not an advert, and to interconnect the other Wiki pages (yet to be established) including the film production arm which is verifiable and reference-able having worked with numerous brands and television channels.

Please could you specify what makes this appear like an advert so I can attempt to amend?

Thank you for your time! HannahBASE (talk) 14:19, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) @HannahBASE: Thanks for disclosing your paid affiliation. Given how phrases like [...] aims to inspire readers to live more adventurously and [,,.] showcases a mix of awe-inspiring feats by accomplished athletes [...] are used, I'm not surprised Theroadislong called it [...] just an advert, as that would be something I'd expect to find in ad copy. WP:IMPARTIAL mentions The tone of Wikipedia articles should be impartial, neither endorsing nor rejecting a particular point of view (emphasis mine).
I am not a reviewer, but they generally don't like external links in the body of an article. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:47, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for your considered and constructive feedback. As someone with entirely no prior experience using Wikipedia, it's very useful to receive detailed feedback like this and I have taken your comments on board and amended the language you mentioned. HannahBASE (talk) 13:18, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page watcher) Yes, the prose still reads like ad copy, indeed. Moreover, I don't see a single reliable third-party source among the footnotes you have added, Hannah. Your sources are advertisements in themselves. How is something like this, or these two films from BASE magazine that I have to turn off my ad blocker to see, or this remotely "independent"? Please read about sourcing at Wikipedia:Reliable sources, especially this section. Bishonen | tålk 15:19, 4 May 2022 (UTC).[reply]
Thank you for this, the link to sourcing guidance is very helpful. Unfortunately given that the company is relatively young, there seems to be a lack of indie articles to link to. As to having to turn off your ad blocker - I am not tech-savvy enough to comment on that, but it isn't a problem for me! I have amended the prose, but unfortunately it seems that my assigned editor is still unhappy with the tone. Thanks again for your feedback, it is appreciated. HannahBASE (talk) 13:23, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@HannahBASE: Perhaps your editor should read Wikipedia:Ownership of content and Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. If an article is successfully created and makes it into the main namespace, BASE would have no control over what content goes into the article or ask for it to be deleted because the company doesn't like it. This includes any hypothetical negative attention if it's sufficiently sourced. Furthermore, if it does get approved, unless there's blatantly obvious vandalism to be removed, you (and anyone else with a conflict of interest for BASE) would be strongly discouraged from directly editing it, and be asked to make edit requests on the article's talk page instead. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:53, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Tenryuu I have a feeling that "my assigned editor is still unhappy with the tone" refers to me as a draft reviewer but I could be mistaken? Theroadislong (talk) 15:03, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Possibly, but she seems to works for a magazine, so it's up in the air as to who she means. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:11, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Learning Wikipedia

I posted two pages earlier but both of them got rejected. I want to learn what mistakes i am making and what i need to make sure to do so the page stays? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ethan98.Connor (talk • contribs) 19:33, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

They were draft articles not pages. A Wikipedia article summarises what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a topic showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable business Your drafts had no such sources. Theroadislong (talk) 19:42, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Help getting draft approved

Hello Theroadislong

We have added the paid contribution disclosure for the page - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Arunabha_Ghosh#cite_note-:1-2

Can you please help by removing the paid contribution mark so that the draft is approved?

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vrushabhj (talk • contribs) 09:50, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft Draft:Arunabha Ghosh was rejected it won't be approved or considered again. Theroadislong (talk) 11:13, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please verify my page

Please verify my page YashMane (talk) 11:27, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have created a draft about yourself (not a page) your draft will not be accepted because it has no sources and there is nothing to suggest that you are notable, sorry. Theroadislong (talk) 12:03, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Why my create page deleted you& Arazahmadov (talk) 12:55, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like it was deleted because it was unambiguous advertising which only promoted a person. Theroadislong (talk) 15:17, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
Thank you for being generous with your time and knowledge! SleepyWhippet (talk) 03:05, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

edits

so sorry, i was just experimenting and didn’t even mean to click post on this articles, i was trying to exit out!

i never knew sandbox existed, i may use that in future.

thank you Mikeconnolly11 (talk) 14:58, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:George Weinstein

Hello I just read your message regarding what wikipedia requires for an Author in the link you provided..... Initially I had to address the [citation needed] which the first Editor asked me to do, which I then did with the source from the Southern Literary Review. Then the article that Editor Gusfriend suggested I created a citation for, but the next editor didn't agree with Gusfriend. All total I've found about seven or eight articles which include this author, obviously I can't include all of them because you can't have eight citations for an article that is one paragraph with a small infobox. Should I just keep resubmitting this with different combinations of these eight articles, or should I include all of them. It's just that it was a bit confusing that Editor 1 said do this, and I did that but Editor 2 said no that's not good enough do this, then I did that but Editor 3 said no what Editor 1 and 2 says isn't good enough either do this.

Should I include every article I've found as a citation? Or just remove all the citations and redo it entirely by only using the ones that the Editors either suggested or asked for? Raleigh80Z90Faema69 (talk) 16:00, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Raleigh80Z90Faema69 I would suggest adding more content from the reliable sources and remove anything not sourced, where for instance did you find that “He lives with his wife and her two daughters in Marietta, Georgia" ALL personal details need solid sources per WP:BLP. The list of books requires publisher details and ISBN numbers.

The fact that a book cover of his won an award is irrelevant unless you are suggesting he designed it? You need to show how they pass the criteria at WP:NAUTHOR.Theroadislong (talk) 16:11, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ok fair enough, but seriously I included the list of the books, publishers, publishing dates and ISBN's and was basically told to remove them.... So I need to take all of the sources and put them back in, again, and make sure that every book is cited, again?
In regards to the book cover yes ok that's perfectly understandable the only reason I included that was because there is a link to the Indie Book Awards and I thought it would be worth including a link to something being as it is a Wikipedia page and there weren't many things to link for George Weinstein aside from the town he is from.... That I included because it was at the bottom of his author website page, but I didn't include a source to the author webpage because I didn't think that was a reliable source..... Should I include his webpage in the infobox then?
Is there enough sources here for this page assuming I include the ISBN and publisher information for each book? Or being as hi
His best known book does not have its own Wikipedia page should I create a page forinstead that since it seems as though the acceptable source articles mostly only pertain to that particular book.
Also, I see your point how it is kind of irrelevant to mention an award for a cover but I thought it was relevant in the sense that it is a source that mentions a different book than the other sources. I thought since it is his book that won an award, even though it was likely a pro cover designer who won the award (I am assuming this, he might have done his own cover I honestly do not know) it still seemed relevant in that it was his book and without the book there certainly would never be a cover thanks--- Raleigh80Z90Faema69 (talk) 22:13, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Theroadislong hello, did you not get the chance you review my post up above from May 10th... Or do I have to tag your name otherwise you won't see it?
I've been a Wikipedia editor for a few years, but you'll have to excuse me as I don't really know as much about editing as serious Wikipedia editors who work here every day.
I generally only edit when I see a typo or for serious writing contributions to Tour de France articles and only really know how to edit pages and make citations, but when you get the chance could you reply to my post above.... Thanks Raleigh80Z90Faema69 (talk) 18:26, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Raleigh80Z90Faema69 If there are multiple sources that cover the novel Hardscrabble Road in significant detail, you could try a draft on that, the criteria is here Wikipedia:Notability (books). I see the George Weinstein draft has been declined three times so probably not worth pursuing that. Theroadislong (talk) 18:40, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Theroadislongyes actually all of the sources cover Hardscrabble Road, there were no sources that included the other books aside from the passing mention for the Indie book cover award. The sources regarding Hardscrabble Road were written specifically about that book so they do have significant detail.
So it would be better to delete the page for George Weinstein and create a page for Hardscrabble Road? Then if I want to create a George Weinstein page in the future I'll have to wait until I find another source, for example if he releases a new book and does an interview with Publisher's Weekly or a newspaper or local tv station or something?
Thanks Raleigh80Z90Faema69 (talk) 19:19, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Please note that interviews are not considered reliable or independent though. Theroadislong (talk) 19:25, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Theroadislong will do. I'll go back through the sources I've collected and read them again and make sure I only include the ones that are relevant. Then also take a look at the notability for books link you left. Raleigh80Z90Faema69 (talk) 19:59, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Theroadislong hey there, I went back and re-read the sources I have. It turned out one of them is an "interview" but the other two sources are both "reviews", both of which appear to be from literary magazines and exclusively cover the book.
As such when I create this "Hardscrabble Road" page will including these two "reviews" from the literary magazines as well as the ISBN and publisher information meet the requirements?
I also looked up some other Wikipedia pages of novels to learn what a Wikipedia page for a 'novel' should look like. The only thing I noticed that I will not be able to do is upload a picture, I noticed that most novel pages have a picture of the book cover in the infobox, but being as I only edit from my phone I don't know how to upload a picture from a mobile device. Of course that is something that can be added in later by someone else I suppose.
I created the infobox and am going to write/create the article tonight or tomorrow when I get an hour or two.
Thanks,
Raleigh80Z90Faema69 (talk) 17:54, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your comment on AfC Draft:Jessica_Corr

Thank you for your helpful comment on the draft I've been working on about the language and awards. I followed your advice; tried to change the language and took off the awards. I was wondering if you could take a look when you get a chance and tell me if you think the concerns were sufficiently addressed? Also what's the typical protocol for the comments left on drafts? Do I keep it there even after the suggestions have been implemented and they'd automatically disappear once article is submitted? Thanks SleepyWhippet (talk) 01:39, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments remain until the draft is accepted, but tone is improved. Theroadislong (talk) 06:16, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your help @Theroadislong I made some further edits and finally added the printed references I'd found -- would you say the draft is good enough to be submitted at this point? If I can, I'd like to move on to a few of other Designers and Design Institutions that I discovered do not have Wikipedia articles through this process. SleepyWhippet (talk) 19:43, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Theroadislong Hey, sorry I realized you were making comments/edits as I was also trying to re-write some parts and make sure the citations are in place. I will stop for now so you can make your comments. Let me know when you're done. SleepyWhippet (talk) 14:18, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
SleepyWhippet That was 40minutes ago? Please make sure your content is actually supported by the sources. Theroadislong (talk) 14:20, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Theroadislong Yes, I was in the process of going through the citations and comparing them against the content and the edits. Somehow I can't use the visual editor anymore, So I have to parse through lots of inline markup code and have to keep publishing it to see what's where.. SleepyWhippet (talk) 14:27, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Theroadislong I was also wondering if you'd be kind enough to give me your opinion on another draft I'm worked on: Faye Toogood -- I understand this is a short one or a stub -- but I thought there is enough content to get the article started, and then it can be improved over time. There just seems to be such glaring omissions of female designers on Wikipedia. SleepyWhippet (talk) 14:35, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Theroadislong with regards to the source relating to Corr's work with LEF -- what I have written was triangulated from multiple sources -- but another reviewer suggested I delete a couple of the Forbes one because the author was technically a "contributor" -- so I just added two more sources. WWD and Luxury daily. SleepyWhippet (talk) 15:20, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draft: Propel Manila

I saw your comments on the draft I made and removed some sentences that sounded too advertisement-like. I would like to kindly ask if these published sources satisfy WP:Independent_sources and Wikipedia:Spam#Advertisements_masquerading_as_articles. Links: https://manilastandard.net/showbitz/digital-media/370044/rewriting-classic-stories-to-honor-lgbtq-representations.html and https://www.lionheartv.net/2021/11/tale-as-bold-as-pride-globe-and-pridetech-rewrite-classic-stories-to-honor-lgbtq-representation/ I think that these sources do not satisfy both of the requirements regarding advertisements. Thank you very much for your help. ShiriEditsTalk 13:48, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The content of those two sources is identical, so they are just press releases and not independent. Theroadislong (talk) 14:18, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Bhushita Ahuja for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Bhushita Ahuja is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bhushita Ahuja (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

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

~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 17:48, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Zerdava

Hello, Theroadislong. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Zerdava".

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.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 23:31, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Test article

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page you created, Draft:Test article, was tagged as a test page under section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

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. RoanokeVirginia (talk) 19:18, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Metropolitan_International_United_College

hi how are you there are other source also added in the article which are totally independent source like this 

https://london.ac.uk/ways-study/metropolitan-international-united-college  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Creativewriting498 (talk • contribs) 04:02, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Clearly that is not remotely independent as they are affiliated! Please read up on what constitutes a reliable independent source. Theroadislong (talk) 07:33, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draft page on Robert D Channon

Hi, thank you for your comment, and for letting me know emails are not suitable references.

In order to evidence the article I have contacted 2 of the doctors that Channon collaborated with, by email. Both are now quite elderly. Is it ok that I simply quote what they told in those emails?

It is hard to find other sources - apart from press coverage - given that Channon is not an academic and therefore has not published papers.

Any advice would be very welcome.

Cheers — Preceding unsigned comment added by FrankThomas65 (talk • contribs) 10:45, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid not, ALL sources on Wikipedia need to be published, so they can be verified. Theroadislong (talk) 10:48, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Page up for review

Hello - I'm working on this page to post on behalf of Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and the Environmental Molecular and Sciences Laboratory. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:William_R._Wiley Our team cannot identify the reason for the page being declined and would like to be reconsidered. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by EMSLCommunications (talk • contribs) 20:30, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The reasons for the decline are in the LARGE pink box at the top of the draft. User accounts are strictly single person use and you need to disclose your paid status. Theroadislong (talk) 20:53, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the rapid review and was hoping to have some confusion cleared up

Hi, I can understand removing the external link. I assumed it was something that should be included but it does make more sense to leave it in the infobox. However, I thought I removed anything that wasn't pertinent to what the company does, how they were formed and who its customers are. I was hoping you could guide me a bit as to what items are causing friction so I can address them for any future entries. Diving into Wikipedia is a lot to learn, so I could really use some of your direction. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DanGreen23 (talk • contribs) 16:56, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You are being paid to edit by Resource Advantage, presumably you convinced them you were able to do the work? (I can't imagine how) I suggest you spend a few months editing other articles to get a feel for how Wikipedia operates. Because your draft is absolutely no where near appropriate. Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about something, Wikipedia summarises what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a topic, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability. Your draft has zero sources.

Zac Hiller Biography Article

Hi Theroadislong,

I understand your concern about the advertising for the agency, so I have subsequently removed the final section titled "LAA Sports & Entertainment". Also, I could understand if you interpreted the articles as being used for advertisements, but they were strictly used for their explicit references of Zac throughout. Finally, concerning the table at the top of the page, many agents have used a similar format with titles of their own personal websites, so what would be the problem with Zac doing the same?

Schrist21 (talk) 17:40, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

“prestigious award” “Hiller's reach has broadened to the entertainment industry, where he represents multiple clients including social media personalities Bob Menery, Kush Papi, and artist Ray Emmanuel.” “a successful nightlife and event planning company” “negotiating over $100 Million in contracts before his 30th birthday” “formed LAA on the principle of what has driven his success to date; LOYALTY to those that support and believe in him.” “prestigious award is received by the world's most successful entrepreneurs“ is all just blatant marketing promotion and has no place on Wikipedia. You can get other opinions at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk. Theroadislong (talk) 17:51, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References for Eqlid Sugar Company

hi Reference for the article (Eghlid Sugar Company) is included in the official website of the company. Please state the exact reason for its rejection. https://eqlidsugar.com/en/introduction-of-eghlid-sugar-collection — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ali mahmood nazary (talk • contribs) 08:15, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Their own website is NOT an independent source. Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about something or someone Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a topic, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability.

article review

hello Theroadislong first, thanks for your review. for DirectDL, i can send some refrences, but that is local refrenses.is that possible? E V I L044 (talk) 08:54, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You need to add them to the draft Draft:DirectDL not send them to me. Theroadislong (talk) 08:58, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

yes i know that, but i ask because i dont know you accept local refrences or not. i add that in article and aak you to review. thanks alot <3 E V I L044 (talk) 09:02, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

i add some new refrences. please review the article thanks E V I L044 (talk) 09:14, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I Need Your Help

Rich day to you my name is Abrham A Momodu, my user name is Zionzina working on: Osagie Ekhorutomwen. Please I need your assistance in working on the page. 

This is my first article and the man in the article is my boss.

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zionzina (talk • contribs) 09:59, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

please make the required paid editing disclosure on your user page, however I doubt that your boss is notable in Wikipedia terms. Theroadislong (talk) 10:02, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

draft: Bear's Paw

bro they don't even have the same name. y r u telling me that it's the same? Nolan Ryfa (talk) 08:13, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nolan Ryfa Your draft Draft:Bear's Paw Galaxy says "The galaxy NGC 2537 is known as the Bear Paw Galaxy" there is already an article called NGC 2537 which you have been repeatedly asked to edit instead. Theroadislong (talk) 19:08, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Help me to improve the Article

I just saw your message on the the talk page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Bavincis. I am new on this platform, this is my first draft I have made, Please guide me my weak points so I can improve the draft. Thank you in advance and God bless you

FYI

Draft:Hush Puppy - (band) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:57, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am at a loss to understand it seems like all their disruptive editing has been rewarded! Theroadislong (talk) 17:29, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It is quite strange. There's this WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Sammanson going on, don't know if that will shed any light on it. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 18:22, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This Article Is Not Created for payment.The Author is directly connected with the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mvprofessionals (talk • contribs) 10:05, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NARTIST criteria

Good day, how can I present facts in order to pass the WP:NARTIST criteria? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tsber1979 (talk • contribs) 16:25, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just find the reliable sources that cover her in-depth, has she got work in any museums or notable collections? Theroadislong (talk) 16:27, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Pierre Scheemackers

Thank you hugely for your feedback and advice, including how quickly you read my draft after I submitted it. Your comments have been most helpful and I hope I have fully incorporated all changes needed to satisfy Wikipedia page criteria. I will resubmit the draft to you shortly for further review. If not yet satisfactory, I would be glad of any further advice. Thanks again Sandra1813 (talk) 21:47, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Docket Health, Inc. Page

Hi Theroadislong -

Thanks for reviewing my submission. I've been trying to overcome the noteworthy requirements for Wikipedia. I included three new news articles in the latest submission, one from NY Times and one from Washington Post. What else could be useful to Wikipedia to satisfy requirements? The Docket® app has 2.7 million users across three states, so I'm sure it's noteworthy. Please let me know what you think could get us over this hurdle. Thank you!

Sincerely, Michael — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mperretta12 (talk • contribs) 18:22, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You had already been warned that blogs and press releases were not reliable independent sources but you added even more? Theroadislong (talk) 19:59, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Multitude of Voyces

Hi Theroadislong, thanks for your advice on this. I'll go back and find some further sources, but I'm kinda confused as to why this is getting such criticism when other pages are sourced much worse. I largely modelled this on the Stainer & Bell page which, as far as I can see, has 0 independent sources... Anyway I've replaced the MoV website and youtube sources so hopefully it'll be ok now. Cheers. Foodopera (talk) 18:44, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Stainer & Bell is appalling and should probably be deleted, see other crap exists. Theroadislong (talk) 18:46, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough! When I find some time I'll see if I can improve it. Have updated MoV so I hope it's now sufficiently sourced; let me know if there's anything further I need to do. Thanks for your help! Foodopera (talk) 18:57, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Theroadislong.

I am not sure how to do this but will make the attempt.

You will see that the draft Hume's Pass has been radically altered from its original arrangement and resubmitted. As far as I am able to tell it now consists of independent original historical documents from the past that provide the whole of the factual evidence about the location "Hume's Pass. The reference to a published research paper in the refereed literature is solely that I assembled these documents. If necessary I can take that out also.

Are you able to advise me as to what to do next.

Incidentally, it does not fit into the Hume and Hovell wikipedia article as it is separate information, though I do appreciate your thought. Also that page has a great deal of relevant and very well documented historical facts missing from it and I do not have the time nor inspiration to rewrite it. I can only make that comment because I have researched very deeply into this particular historical journey.

Thank you in advance for you assistance.

Martin

Mwill66

Mwill66 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 06:49, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Hume's Pass

Sorry. You need a title.

Draft:Hume's Pass Dear Theroadislong. I am not sure how to do this but will make the attempt. You will see that the draft Hume's Pass has been radically altered from its original arrangement and resubmitted. As far as I am able to tell it now consists of independent original historical documents from the past that provide the whole of the factual evidence about the location "Hume's Pass. The reference to a published research paper in the refereed literature is solely that I assembled these documents. If necessary I can take that out also. Are you able to advise me as to what to do next. Incidentally, it does not fit into the Hume and Hovell wikipedia article as it is separate information, though I do appreciate your thought. Also that page has a great deal of relevant and very well documented historical facts missing from it and I do not have the time nor inspiration to rewrite it. I can only make that comment because I have researched very deeply into this particular historical journey. Thank you in advance for you assistance. Martin Mwill66 Mwill66 (talk) 07:02, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You will need to reference the the last two paragraphs, which read like original research and then re-submit for review. Theroadislong (talk) 08:17, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Need some help with a draft...

Hey!

My draft submission 'Flanquette' was rejected by you.

You wrote: "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."

Thing is, this page already exists in German, this was just a translation... I just don't know how to link them together.


I'd appreciate your help - what are the changes I need to make to get this approved?


Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by LoanLiKnowledge (talk • contribs) 10:58, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Submission declined: misunderstanding

Dear Theroadislong,

Thanks for having take care of my draft here:

[[3]]

I noticed you declined the article but authorize myself to contact you to understand the notability issue.

Indeed, my draft, copied here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Bob_isat/Anticor is full the translation of a Wikipedia in french webpage here, which passed the notability test:

[[4]]

The goal of the page in en.wikipedia is to understand the fights, history and purposes of this interesting NGO (Anticor) worldwide.

Can you please help me understanding the issue and the progress to be done to pass the notability test?

Maybe there is a confusion with my draft (full translation) and the partial translation from december 2021 that you originally saw ?

Kind regards,

--Bob isat (talk) 16:58, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Theroadislong&oldid=1089230425"