User talk:Bellerophon

User page Go to my user page

Talk Click here to goto my talk page, where you can leave a message for me.

Email Please do not email me for routine matters! Only email me for matters you do not wish to discuss on-Wiki.

Adoption Check out my adoption school

Awards My awards and recognitions

Contribs Click here to see my contributions to Wikipedia

Sandbox Take a look at my work in progress

Tools Tools

Edit count Take a look at my edit count

SEMI-RETIRED

This user is no longer very active on Wikipedia.

Messages on this talk page are archived after 1 month by a bot. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15

Kezia Noble

Thanks for reviewing my article, I am very frustrated, the article was long to begin with, it had tons of references backing it up, I had all of the newspaper articles backing up the article, then the reviewer Cerebellum rejected my article because of the following reason:

For a living person we have a high standard of referencing. Every substantive fact you assert, especially one that is susceptible to potential challenge, requires a citation with a reference that is about them, and is independent of them, and is in WP:RS. That pretty much rules out the Daily Mail! Lose the bad references. If you can't replace them then lose the alleged facts they cite

Many of the references are regurgitated press releases and PR material. These must be replaced or removed, please. They provide an aura of faux notability which is not required and adds no value. Indeed it diminishes Wikipedia's value. Get rid of them. If you can't replace them then lose the alleged facts they cite.

I then removed some references, then left the reviewer a message, he told me to remove even more references, then I did, he said it's not enough, then he went and removed 3/4 of the article, he removed EVERY one of the references and only left 2. Then he said "now you have a better chance at getting your article reviewed."

I've spent hundreds of hours on this article, now I just want to do anything to get it accepted. I have honestly lost all hopes after trusting all the past reviewers, and now I saw your reason for rejection and I can't help but think of all the hard work gone to waste after a reviewer just decided to remove all of my references and hard work. Is there any way you can accept it? Wiki.017 (talk) 18:19, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

This is a message the past reviewer left me: I removed the entire "Media Appearances" section; those interviews, for the most part, don't help us to write a good article about Noble. We need to know what she has done (the Romance Files interview is good for that), not her opinions on topics like "What is the best pickup line you have ever heard."

I had an entire media appearances section and he just went and removed the entire thing. This is SO unfair. I know you will understand my frustration, it's been going on for months and I just want to see the article accepted - is there any way you can help? The article might not contain her media appearances anymore, but it's still credible. I can always expand on the article in the future, once I gain a little hope after it's been accepted. Thanks Wiki.017 (talk) 18:26, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

@Wiki.017: I do understand your frustration. Opinions on the reliability of Huffington Post and the Daily Mail do vary on Wikipedia (admittedly the DM rarely escapes a slating) but Articles for Creation is not the venue to rule on such matters. The appropriate venues for such matters are the reliable sources noticebord and/or articles for deletion. I see that an article for Kezia was deleted in 2010, but the resulting discussion was painfully thin and that decision is now four years old. That being a reasonable amount of time for Kezia's notability to improve (potentially). The articles for creation process is a basic filtering service that allows new or unregistered users to propose an article for creation. It is not, per se, a system of peer review. The standard reviewers normally operate to is 1) "Does the article violate policy to such an extent that it would be eligible for speedy deletion" 2) "does the article stand a chance of surviving an AfD nomination". If it passes both those tests, typically it is accepted. I cannot pass comment on User:Cerebellum's rationale as I did not see the state of the draft at the time of their review. You have two problems with this draft: 1) it is about a living person, therefore biographical information must be attributed to sources that can reasonably be presumed to be accurate and reliable. Obviously, controversial information must be held to higher scrutiny than uncontroversial information. 2) both the content of article and the references that support the content of the article, must, when taken together, demonstrate why the subject of the article is notable enough to be included in an encyclopaedia. Newspaper articles covering the subject typically confer some measure of notability, but may not be reliable sources of biographical information. Typically, sources written by the subject, such as their website, are considered worthless for establishing notability, but are usually reliable for establishing basic biographical information, such as their full name or date of birth. Niche publications, including magazines and blogs that have a limited reader base are typically of no value at all. Make sense? Bellerophon _{talk to me} 19:51, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Here is what the article looked like before I had a go at it. Not sure if I improved it or not, and it's quite possible my review was too harsh. --Cerebellum (talk) 03:07, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

User:Cerebellum, thank you for the preview of what the article used to look like. :@Bellerophon.017: Please could you take a look at it and let me know what you think of the article prior to getting the media appearances deleted? Would you be able to approve of it if I re-added the media appearances? Wiki.017 (talk) 17:09, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

@Wiki.017: In order for me to accept this draft, you will need to add reliable reference(s) that evidence her biographical info (date of birth, where she was born, height etc), that's the reason I declined it. Don't re-add the media appearances section, it's smacks of being needlessly self-effacing. The draft could do with a few more good quality sources to shore up her notability; however, now I know there are some I don't mind adding them myself once you're fixed the problem with verifying her biographical info. Bellerophon _{talk to me} 17:47, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

@Bellerophon: I have referenced her birth date, and the same website states her birth place too. However, her height isn't referenced on any live online sources. Shall I remove her height? I just want to do whatever it takes to get the article live, I know you understand me and I really appreciate your help. Wiki.017 (talk) 20:24, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

@Wiki.017: I have made some changes to the draft in order for it to pass muster. I am currently waiting on a response from the administrator who protected the article title from creation in 2010. If he removes the protection, I will create the article. Also, please stop using the ping template on my talk page, you don't need to ping me to my own talk page. Similarly, my username is just Bellerophon not Bellerophon.017... Bellerophon _{talk to me} 17:03, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Ok thank you, and apologies for using the ping. Let's hope he removes the protection! Wiki.017 (talk) 20:28, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Your signature

Hello, Bellerophon. Like a lot of other users, I have the syntax highlighter gadget turned on in my preferences. It highlights URLs in blue, tags in pink, comments in green, etc., in the edit window, to make it easier to deal with the wikicode. However, because the tags in your signature are out of order, everything on talk pages from there on down is miscoloured. Would you mind moving the two "/span" tags before the square brackets instead of after, so that they match their corresponding "span" tags? It shouldn't change the appearance of your signature. Thanks! —Anne Delong (talk) 05:14, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Anything for you, Anne :p I trust that has fixed it? Bellerophon _{talk to me} 08:27, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Yes, thanks! —Anne Delong (talk) 00:41, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Category:Fellows of the Royal College of Radiologists

Hi Bellerophon,

You recently declined my request for the creation of the above category for the following reason 'reliable source conferning memebership please'....

This is the first category request I have made and I'm not sure what you are asking me to do?!!

Are you asking for confirmation of the existance of the organisation or for confirmation that the three example articles have all been elected as fellows?

I was not asked to verify any of this information when I created the page!!!....so why now???...and where am I supposed to place the source to verify the information...not at all clear to me...

Thanks, Gomach (talk) 22:37, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

@Gomach: Yes, I'm asking for a source that demonstrates they are fellows of the society in question. You can leave a link to the source here, on my talk page, if you like. What do you mean "I was not asked to verify any of this information when I created the page!!!....so why now???". Verifiability is one one of the pillars of Wikipedia. All content must be attributable to reliable sources. Bellerophon _{talk to me} 00:38, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi Bellerophon,

I was referring to the actual 'category request form' itself, there is no mention of verifiabilty.

I took the three example articles from the main wikipedia page of the Royal College of Radiologists and automatically assumed that the FRCR information had been verified.

I will look for the information and hopefully have everything in place later today.

Thanks, Gomach (talk) 09:35, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Hello again,

I think the articles are ready for you to review. Thanks. Gomach (talk) 16:59, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Resolved

Bellerophon _{talk to me} 16:08, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Moved comment

Moved your comment [1] to be with the rest of the yes / no's to make it easier for the eventual closer -- you're more than welcome to revert, of course. NE Ent 22:58, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Many thanks. It just wasn't paying enough attention. Bellerophon _{talk to me} 00:26, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

2014 Jerusalem synagogue massacre RfC

I noticed you closed the RfC as consensus for "attack", but didn't make the page move. Would you mind doing so now (and also removing the dispute tag at the top of the article page)? Thanks, ThaddeusB (talk) 17:13, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

FormerIP has now done so. Bellerophon _{talk to me} 17:45, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Great. Thanks for the very thorough closing rationale, BTW. --ThaddeusB (talk) 18:25, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

You're welcome. I like to think: the more I say at the time, the less people will ask me after the event. It doesn't always work... Bellerophon _{talk to me} 18:38, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Category:Fellows of the Royal College of Radiologists

Hi,

Not sure if you read/noticed my last message above.....

Do I need to complete a new 'category request form' or can you edit the original you declined?

Thanks. Gomach (talk) 09:49, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

@Gomach: I was just about to create that cat for you when I saw some else already has. Was Category:Fellows of the Royal College of Radiologists the only category you requested in this field? Bellerophon _{talk to me} 16:07, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

@Bellerophon: Hi there,

Yes, that was my only request. Thanks for letting me know. Gomach (talk) 16:14, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

WP:PERM Request

Hi Bellerophon, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the autopatrolled right to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the patroller right, see Wikipedia:Autopatrolled. Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! — xaosflux ^Talk 17:26, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2015!!!

Hello Bellerophon, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2015. Happy editing, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:01, 25 December 2014 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of {{U|Technical 13}} to all registered users whom have commented on his talk page. To prevent receiving future messages, please follow the opt-out instructions on User:Technical 13/Holiday list

Disambiguation link notification for January 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Druk Air, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bumthang. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:57, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

Interview for The Signpost

This is being sent to you as a member of WikiProject Articles for creation

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Articles for creation for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Thanks, Rcsprinter₁₂₃ (chat) @ 20:42, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

The page I created on Exostar was deleted, after I took out the items that could be construed as promotional. On the speedy deletion memo, it said the page would be fine if I deleted anything that was promotional. The page is about a joint venture.