User talk:Timtrent

Messages for Fiddle Faddle and for Timtrent should be left here. This is the home account for Fiddle Faddle, which is both my nickname and my alternate account. When you begin a new message section here, I will respond to it here. When I leave message on your Talk page, I will watch your page for your response. This maintains discussion threads and continuity. See Help:Talk page#How to keep a two-way conversation readable. If you want to use {{Talkback}} to alert me about messages elsewhere, please feel free to do so.

It is 4:19 AM where this user lives. If it's the middle of the night or during the working day they may well not be online

I do not remove personal attacks directed at me from this page. If you spot any, please do not remove them, even if vile, as they speak more against the attacker than against me.

In the event that what you seek is not here then it is archived (0.9 probability). While you are welcome to potter through the archives the meaning of life is not there.

From Tgweeze

Thanks for your help back on August 6. I will contact Missavan as you suggested and just keep plugging away. Thanks again. I'm sure I'll talk to you soon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tgweeze (talk • contribs) 20:29, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Organic Division Page

Hi thanks for reviewing the Page I created on the ACS Organic Division. I do understand the need for references and I am looking around to see what I can use. The organization is mostly referenced in trade journals (scientifically peer reviewed) that other Wikipedia editors may not not be able to access the entire article...but they will be able to see abstracts. I hope that will suffice. I am trying to learn and I think it is important to add this resource to the Wikipedia Encyclopedia.

Brian J. Myers (talk) 18:22, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

@Bjmyers: Peer reviewed papers are fine. Abstracts are useful provided you are certain the org is subject to significant coverage within the paper, not just a mention. A lovely solid mention in mainstream media would be excellent, too. Fiddle Faddle 18:28, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

@Timtrent: I believe I have made a good amount of progress in adjusting the page. I am thinking that I need to add about 5-10 more references. I wanted to ask you to look it over and let me know if you feel I am now on the right track with this before working on it more and resubmitting the article. Full disclosure: I did reference my own History article on the National Organic Symposium and I hope this isn't construed as a conflict of interest.Brian J. Myers (talk) 04:16, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

@Bjmyers: The answer is that, while it appears that you are doing sterling work, as someone without access past the abstract stage, and with the abstracts not doing more, if at all, than mentioning the org in passing, I truly cannot tell. So, to bolt this draft into place as an article I suggest you are very selective in finding references from this search which are about the org and pass WP:42. All we need to make this unassailable is a pair, literally, of references that every reader can have access to.

Now, to be clear, even without those it will be acceptable, and can be accepted, but those extra two will be worth the effort. The trick is to find them, see what they say, see if there is a point already in the draft where they can be used as a reference, or, if not, to write that part based upon using them as a reference.

Your own paper: It would be churlish to view one entry as COI. Obviously ten such entries would be a different matter Fiddle Faddle 16:33, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

@Timtrent: Thanks for staying with me on this. As you can see I am making some progress on the page as I find time. Your point on the bullets is a good one. I will move to adjust that. I still have more references that I have to add first though. Once I do those two things, I will resubmit the article. I just wanted to have everything in place with best practices before proceeding. Right now, my only frustration is trying to learn how to best communicate with people like yourself on things like this. Also, I see a message from Teahouse and I ned to learn about that. I feel I am leaning on you a bit at present. I appreciate your comments so far. Brian J. Myers (talk) 16:55, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

This route seems to work well. I'm keeping a quiet eye on the draft and simply adding pointers for you. This is a race won by the best, not the fastest, so I commend your quiet patience. Fiddle Faddle 16:58, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

September 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to A Leading Man may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• '''''A Leading Man''''' is an American drama film distributed by [[Mance Media]]<ref>{{Cite web|last=Latham |first=Brandon |title=Exclusive: Mance Media Acquires 'A Leading Man,' Which

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:18, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Stealth Inc. 2 article disapproval.

Hi Timtrent

Thanks for reviewing the article. I was sad to see that the article got declined. However you raised some point which I want to answer.

It was mentioned in the note that I was knowingly or unknowing marketing the game which is uncalled for. I created the article because I see a lot of indie games not getting any page at wikipedia and I did it to improve wikipedia gaming coverage. I have contributed to few articles as of now still learning about various stuff. However I felt hurt when someone blame me for doing PR for some company which I don't even know.

You mentioned something about WP:N, I don't understand it correctly but giving a brief look I can say I have tried to cover reliable source from IGN, NintendoLife, Joystiq and various others to make it a reliable article. As for game popularity, the game is a sequel to a very popular indie game Stealth Bastard- thus I still think it deserve a page.

The third point you raised is "we require reference" - I have provide multiple ref. from IGN, NintendoLife, Joystiq. What else do you need?

I have also tried to keep the article clean and simple with proper named references and links. I am still not sure why it got rejected. I can still find wikipedia pages for many unreleased games/indies as well but not sure why this doesn't fit the bill.

Will be waiting for your response. I hope this is the right way to reply at talk pages since I am new, I am not sure if its ok.

Link to article - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Stealth_Inc._2:_A_Game_of_Clones

Best Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shashpant (talk • contribs) 04:25, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Despite your assertions, my opinion of the draft remains unchanged. You need to work on it. You need to understand WP:N, and WP:RS. You have provided multiple poor references. Provide ones that pass WP:42 please.

Our role as reviewers is to seek to ensure that an article will not immediately be subject to one of our deletion processes when it is accepted. That is why we push it back to the author. We want to accept articles. PLease make it possible to accept this one. Fiddle Faddle 09:03, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

---

Hi

I am not sure what's your judgement of "solid reference" because from what I see IGN, Nintendolife and Joystiq are the quintessential gaming media for news maybe not for you. I am also baffled by the criteria of WP:N

because either that or the moderation seems hypocritical to me. I find game and half backed pages such as Caffeine (video_game), BlueStreak (video_game), Space Hulk: Deathwing - mostly one liner article approved but not this. Even games like Shin Megami Tensei X Fire Emblem which has no info at all and I repeat no info at all, just 2s teaser and no news but probably that's more notable than a game with more news. Its fine because you are the boss but I think one should be more rational and practice they preach. I am completely fine with article not getting approved but what's baffling is the boatloads of one liner "game" article approved which are not even notable and new Ip. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shashpant (talk • contribs) 13:24, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

@Shashpant: WP:RSN will give you a definitive answer on your proposed references. Link to the draft and ask the precise question "IN this article are these considered reliable sources?" and quote with accuracy the source where you ask the question.

I understand your frustration with seeing other articles. We do not, ever, allow article A to be a precedent for article B. The rationale is that using a less perfect article as a precedent provides an increasingly steep slippery slope, and we head to Idiocracy. If you see a poor article you are at complete liberty to propose it for deletion, or to improve it.

I am not the boss. I am just a volunteer reviewer. Other reviewers will have their views, too. Our role as reviewers is to seek to ensure that an article will not immediately be subject to one of our deletion processes when it is accepted. That is why we push it back to the author. We want to accept articles. I;d love to feel I can accept this one. I simply feel it needs the work.

I can see that you disagree, so asking for different eyes at the articles for creation help desk is wholly appropriate. Please do. Fiddle Faddle 14:09, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

ADAC article

Hi Timtrent,

I never made a wikipedia article before. I tried to add 3 new references but I don't know if they're much better than the existing ones.

ADAC xml files will eventually be used by all civil engineers and surveyors who design new housing estates or who survey existing ones in the area of member councils. The standard will be adopted by more councils in future, so it will become more and more noteworthy. So - I think it is significant. I have a vested interest - I'm associated with one of the applications used to create/edit ADAC files - "ADACX".

I'd appreciate any advice or examples of how to improve the article. Thanks! Damianharkin (talk) 06:37, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

I have also looked for sources, though my search was restricted to Google. I can find none. You may be forced to conclude that your topic is not yet notable. The clue is in your word "eventually" above.

Keep searching for references that meet WP:42, keep adding them. Fiddle Faddle 06:50, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for sharing your valuable comments. I am editing my entry in accordance with these comments and will resubmit when completed.Childrenofheart (talk) 11:48, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

@Childrenofheart: I hope you find the sources the article needs. Even if not it is likely that it will be notable at some point in the future. Fiddle Faddle 11:51, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Draft:Richard Pick (musician)

Thanks - I appreciate all of the good input and direction. There is quite a learning curve for a beginner here (ME) so please bear with me. I am in the process of collecting other resources, references and contacting Mr. Pick's former students and publisher for any other articles or background detail available. My aim was just to get a short bio for Richard Pick into the site and then pass the torch to those other interested parties, but maybe it makes more sense for me to just collect, organize and post all the material. Thanks again and I shall return after further research and homework. - mark bayer — Preceding unsigned comment added by Horse Attack Mark (talk • contribs) 13:21, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

@Horse Attack Mark: All you need to do is to show sufficient to pass WP:BIO. So make sure that what you collect is genuinely useful. You roriginal concept of doing the bare minimum is a good one. Fiddle Faddle 13:57, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: NERA Economic Consulting (September 23)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! The submission has not been accepted because it included copyrighted information, which is not permitted on Wikipedia. You are welcome to write an article on the subject, but please do not use copyrighted work.

The existing submission may be deleted at any time. Copyrighted work cannot be allowed to remain on Wikipedia.

• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also get real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Revent^talk 04:44, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

@Revent: How bizarre. I have no recollection of this draft at all. I must have placed a submission template on it for the original author. Fiddle Faddle 06:31, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Quick question

[1]

Hi Timtrent,

Thank you for looking at my submission. You rejected it over my misunderstanding over what a reference is.

Here is the para in question:

Ivor Dembina is a Jewish stand-up comedian from London, UK.[1]. He runs the Hampstead Comedy Club in London, which he founded in 1994[2] He has been cited as an influence by many fellow comedians such as Stewart Lee1[3], Alan Davies[4], Jo Brand[5], Arthur Smith[6], Malcolm Hardee[7] and others. He wrote for the first season of the Omid Djalili Show on BBC1[8]. He appeared in the first season of Eye Spy as 'Jewish Dad' on Channel 4 [9] He is openly critical of Israel’s conduct in the West Bank and Gaza [10]. Ivor’s comedy focuses on his Jewish background and his political outlook[11]. He was the first stand-up comedian to perform comedy at the Houses of Parliament[12].[13] He toured the Middle East with his show This is Not a Subject For Comedy[14]

If I removed the following sentence from the para (which I only included to help with notoriety) "He has been cited as an influence by many fellow comedians such as Stewart Lee1[3], Alan Davies[4], Jo Brand[5], Arthur Smith[6], Malcolm Hardee[7] and others." would the para then meet the required standard?

Thanks for your help.

Martin (Newcastleton) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.138.39.97 (talk) 12:45, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

The immediate question posed by my comment is resolved in this area, yes. The question them remains "Are the rest of the references sufficient?" I am travelling at present so have no time to answer fully. I suggest you make the change you have written, and ask on the AFC Help desk. Fiddle Faddle 15:34, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Draft:Angel Sessions

Hi Timtrent,

You reviewed and declined the Draft:Angel Sessions on September 3, 2014 because it lacked reliable sources. It has been re-submitted to AfC by which is no big deal and I'm sure is something that happens all of the time. However, I saw this post as Commons:Village Pump#Angel's Logo.png flagged for deletion by El Grafo made by the same user who is trying to get the page added to Wikipedia. This is, in my opinion, and obvious COI issue, but since it is only a draft I am not sure what, if any action, should be taken. Is it normal to tag drafts with stuff like {{COI}} or {{Connected contributor}}, etc. so that reviewers are made aware of such things. This is completely unchartered territory for me. Thanks in advance. - Marchjuly (talk) 11:41, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: You could place {{Connected contributor}} with all parameters filled out on the talk page of the draft. Use the permalink at https://commons.wikimedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Commons:Village_pump&oldid=135270396 where the editor places the ownership comment on Commons on the otherlinks= parameter. Drafts tend to find COI editing 'acceptable' because they get the COIness ripped away during the process. Fiddle Faddle 11:59, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the speedy reply. Do you tagging it in such a way at this stage would be considered "overkill" and "biting a newcomer". I don't want to discourage the guy, but if the draft gets accepted, I think it's fair to assume he will continue to edit it. - Marchjuly (talk) 12:07, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: I would have no hesitation at putting CC on the talk page. I would not put a COI banner on the draft article itself. CC is polite, factual and germane. COI just feels like a slap in the face. Fiddle Faddle 12:09, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks again. Maybe it might be best to post something at their talk first, but not sure. I need to think about it. Posting a CC template out of the blue might be mistaken as an attack of some kind by a newcomer, and they might just remove it as such. -Marchjuly (talk) 12:16, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: Whatever you feel to be appropriate. I tend to prefix it with {{talkpage}} to flesh the page out somewhat. Fiddle Faddle 12:18, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Siegfried Werners entry

Hello

We last communicated some 2 months ago. I'm trying to get an entry about my father-in-law, retired Surinamese diplomat Siegfried Werners, accepted, but don't so far have the necessary citations. It's proving ridiculously tricky trying to find acceptable substantiation for his erstwhile diplomatic positions, not least because the government archives of Suriname for the relevant period are either non-existent or poorly managed at best! And we're talking about posts he held some 30 years ago. Would a scanned letter from a government official do the job? Any further suggestions would be most gratefully received...

With thanks

Joe Yapp

Peppler64 (talk) 15:16, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

@Peppler64: The challenge is that such a letter would prove that he exists, but not that he has notability. We require references from significant coverage about the topic of the article, and independent of it, and in WP:RS please. See WP:42. So coverage, online or print media (etc) about the gentleman is important. You could ask this precise question at WP:RSN for an authoritative answer. Fiddle Faddle 15:53, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion contested: Paul Kinsman

Hello Timtrent, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Paul Kinsman, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The hint of notability is that he was awarded a high honor - the Honorary Life Membership. There are also 11.2 Million hits which suggest notability. This may be better served at AFD. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Dusti^{*Let's talk!*} 16:29, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

I think I'll let the community decide at AfD. Thanks for letting me know. Fiddle Faddle 17:03, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Submission rejection - Copyrighted material?

Tim - I reviewed your review and rejection of my submission for Mark Anthony, The Psychic Lawyer where you said the submission included copyrighted material. I didn't see reference of which material included in the submission was protected by copyright.

Was there content in the submission that violates copyright protections, or was there a link or citation that linked to protected material?

I am new to this and any assistance you could provide would be welcome.