User talk:LaMona

Rejection of Draft Page for Nicolas Michaelsen

Hi LaMona, I just saw your message about COI, however I could not find a link to that document in the post. Would you mind sharing it with me again?

Best, Pesanteur — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pesanteur (talk • contribs) 20:18, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

• Pesanteur, you can find the information at wp:coi. As the page says: "Conflict of interest is not about actual bias. It is about a person's roles and relationships, and the tendency to bias that we assume exists when roles conflict." Note that while there is some stigma to COI editing on WP, those who are upfront about it and follow the guidelines are appreciated. Remember, also, that on talk pages you have to sign your messages by adding four (4) tilde's to the end of the message. There is a reminder at the bottom of the edit box, but it often scrolls off screen for me, so you may not have noticed it. LaMona (talk) 20:42, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

Rejection of Draft Page for James O'Connell

Hi LaMona, I just saw your detailed message. Thanks so much! I will make the changes accordingly. Best, Jimaning

Comment on draft page for Augustus Martin

Hi LaMona Thanks for your feedback, that was really helpful. I have changed the references for the Augustus Martin page and added dates, authors and company. I hope this time it passes

Please let me know anything else I need to do

The Wikipedia Library needs you!

The Wikipedia Library

Call for Volunteers

Did you know that Wikipedia has its own library? The Wikipedia Library is seeking volunteers from those in galleries, libraries, archives and museums.

• Become an account coordinator to distribute research accounts to editors
• Get involved in some of our special projects:
  • Expand our Resources page with free resources for editors in all subject areas
  • Help develop a template for citing archival collections
  • Write guides to accessing and using library resources

Sign up to help here :)

Talk back

Hello, LaMona. You have new messages at Artfiend1's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Subject: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Mara_Ahmed

Hi LaMona. Thank you for your suggestions on how to include more references in the body of the article and on how to use specific links that talk about the work being referenced. Changes have been made accordingly. There are now a large number of references in the article which link to a large number of well-known sources such as PBS (WXXI), The Hindu, City Newspaper, etc. Please let me know if the article can be formatted any better. Thank you once again for all your help. Artfiend1 (talk) 02:23, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi LaMona. Thank you for making changes which integrate references much better into the article's text. You help is much appreciated (and was much needed). Pls let me know if the article needs anything else. This is the first article I've edited for Wikipedia and your suggestions are most welcome. Look forward to hearing from you. Artfiend1 (talk) 21:31, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Artfiend1 - You're welcome. However, I didn't actually finish because I ran out of "awake time" last night, so if you could see if there is any more of that kind of editing that you can do, it might soon make sense to re-submit. LaMona (talk) 21:56, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi LaMona. Wonderful to hear from you. You edited most of the text - once again thank you so much. I looked at her Art section and her Writing section. The Art section is short and straightforward with the correct references it seems. Her Writing section is organized based on the topics she writes and speaks about i.e. Pakistan, diversity, etc. Each of those topics are cross-referenced with things that she's written or presented. Is that ok? I see that you also looked at her articles and fixed the formatting. Pls let me know what you see as missing and I will be happy to fix. Thanks! Artfiend1 (talk) 23:15, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Finished correcting the formatting of all the references based on your corrections. Should the article be resubmitted? Pls let me know your thoughts. Thanks so much. Artfiend1 (talk) 17:58, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Artfiend1 - yes, resubmit! LaMona (talk) 18:39, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

thx LaMona. Just resubmitted! Artfiend1 (talk) 19:54, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Dear LaMona, thank you so much for all your help with the article. You are obviously a brilliant editor but also an extremely generous contributor to the Wikipedia community. Thank you for being so supportive and accessible. Artfiend1 (talk) 14:34, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello, LaMona. You have new messages at DASonnenfeld's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hi LaMona-- Thank you for your feedback on the Anchor Graphics article I'm writing. I added more outside references. I do appreciate your comments so please let me know if this is ready, or closer to being ready. Thanks again-- Marilyn Propp — Preceding unsigned comment added by Proppjones (talk • contribs) 03:38, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

Proppjones - I wish it were possible to get a PDF of the demo3 issue because I think there is good stuff in there but the fancy formatting makes it impossible to read. I think that there is much more to be said about Anchor, but a WP article is never really finished. I'm going to let someone else give it final approval since I've been editing it. If it doesn't make it through then we need to dig more into Demo and see what we can pull out. LaMona (talk) 06:13, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi LaMona-- I DO have the DEMO article as a pdf-- How can I attach it so you can have it? Thank you-- Marilyn Propp — Preceding unsigned comment added by Proppjones (talk • contribs) 06:39, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

Proppjones There isn't a way to attach it here, and it is undoubtedly copyrighted so it can't be uploaded. Do look through it for more content for your article. It seemed to me that there was quite a bit in there. LaMona (talk) 14:49, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

A puppy for you!

Golden Retriever puppy

Thanks, LaMona! This is helpful. I've deleted the two Frick references that aren't just links to taped lectures, and edited out the over-exuberant sentence. I'll be very grateful for any other advice you can offer.

(I noticed you already have kittens and thought you might like a broader menagerie!)

Draft page for John Biggins

LaMona--I wasn't able to find the other version of the page (the one with author). Can you possibly delete that one or provide me a link? The one that you thought was correct is the right one. Beowulf (talk) 02:23, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

@Rchillyard: Aha! I didn't look closely enough - it's not yours, but it is another John Biggins article in draft: Draft:John_Biggins_(author). It looks like they are referring to the same person. If so, we'll need to contact the editors there and negotiate a consolidation. LaMona (talk) 14:34, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

@Rchillyard: I checked the talk page for the Draft:John_Biggins_(author) page and it looks like it has not been edited in 6 months and will be deleted. That should solve the problem. I'll go back to your page and see if there is other work to do. LaMona (talk) 15:03, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

@LaMona: What's the status on this page now? Beowulf (talk) 14:20, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

@Rchillyard: We can ignore the "duplicate" page since it will get deleted due to the age of the draft. Your draft needs more references, and especially references that would provide notability for the author. These would be newspaper or journal articles about the author and/or his books. They need to be from un-related sources, that is, not from a publisher or sales site. As it stands, your author does not appear to be notable, so you need more proof. LaMona (talk) 14:44, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of publicised titan arum blooms in cultivation, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Berkeley (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

AfC notification: Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/John Sibley Williams has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/John Sibley Williams. Thanks! The Average Wikipedian (talk) 14:29, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: John Sibley Williams has been accepted

John Sibley Williams, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Fiddle Faddle 20:47, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Draft:The Berkeley Observer

Hi LaMona--

I'm not sure where to go from here or how to properly source this article since the information comes directly from the horses mouth...me. Do I need to have another Wikimedia editor write this for me? The Berkeley Observer is, in fact, a legitimate news outlet. However, no other outlets have written about it--even if they did, I would still be the source of the info.

There are other similar outlets with Wikipedia pages containing less information on their Wiki page than what The Berkeley Observer has:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Moultrie_Observer

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Albany_Herald

Can you tell me what you suggest I do? Any help is appreciated.

Thanks, Nikki Gaskins

BTW, this is my first attempt at a Wikipedia page. Obviously, it's not going so well :-(

Nikki Gaskins (talk) 18:40, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

@Nikkigaskins: - First, Nikki, I must say that your WP page was absolutely perfectly "formed" -- much better than many first attempts, so give yourself credit for that. Next, that you can find pages on WP that seem to be the same or lesser to yours doesn't mean that those pages are acceptable; any page can be subjected to a delete proposal at any time. The Moultrie page does have third-party references, although they are weak. It might not survive a delete challenge. The Albany Herald page is a stub. A stub is a special kind of page, one where someone has created a nearly blank page and intends to come back and fill it in later, or hopes that someone else will find it and complete it. If a stub is not filled in after a while, it appears on a list and may be challenged or summarily deleted. (If you want to see what the deletion process looks like, look at wp:afd and scroll down to a link for a single day's deletion activity.) The stub is expected to be pretty much blank at the start, but not forever.

Many people see WP as a way to promote their business or activity. In fact, WP is not for promotion. (Your article is promotional in tone, and even if you find sources it would need to be greatly edited to remove all promotional language.) WP is an encyclopedia. To keep it honest, everything in it has to meet certain criteria. Many subjects do not meet those criteria. The main criteria for a local newspaper, I believe, would be Wikipedia:Notability_(organizations_and_companies) and that requires verifiable evidence. That means that someone reliable and unrelated to the newspaper has to have found it to be of interest and has written about it. I don't find any exceptions for local news outlets. However, having a separate article is not the only solution. Using Wikipedia:Notability_(organizations_and_companies)#If_it.27s_not_notable you might find that you can add information about the newspaper to a page for the region it serves, or for a parent company (if there is one). Even these entries, however, require third-party neutral references, but the information is not likely to be deleted if those are missing. On that page you should include only a paragraph with a few facts, no promotion. You can always add the paper to the list List_of_newspapers_in_South_Carolina, and that does not require sources, just a link to the paper. LaMona (talk) 20:01, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Goldy Baroa Thank you for your comment. Your advice is very clear and I understand your opinion. Thank you for your kind advise in improving my article. The Company is noteworthy for WP for two reasons : The company is the first Credit Bureau of the Philippines. The company's share of building the credit awareness is massive not to mention its effect in credit and background investigation. I added some sources on the works of the company. Thank you again for your comment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goldybaroa (talk • contribs) 01:34, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Judy Wood

Hi, I wanted to let you know that the reason I didn't include any information on her book ("Where Did the Towers Go?") was that I couldn't find any discussion of it in reliable sources. Best, Everymorning talk 15:57, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Everymorning, you can still say that she wrote it, and there is proof of that.You can add the web site for the book to the external links. There is as much evidence of this publication as her academic publications, no? The big problem with the book is that it is self-published, so that detracts from her credentials, and the only reviews are in "fringe" sources. But it seems odd not to at least include the book in her list of publications. Include the ISBN and it becomes linkable. LaMona (talk) 17:52, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

AfD== Thanks for the hlelp with the veery clear explanation. DGG ( talk ) 22:32, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

Abelardo

Hello, I'm Carlos Vicioso, I recently submitted my article about my father, Abelardo Vicioso, a Dominican writer, and already placed all the reliable references required (34 references), but still no answer. Is it still in process? Regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carvic65 (talk • contribs) 00:00, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

@Carvic65: Your article does not appear in the list of draft articles. Did you re-submit it? If so, please reply to me the URL and I will try to find it. Also, on talk pages you have to sign your messages with four consecutive tilde's. There's a reminder at the bottom of the edit box that you can just lick on. Note that since you are writing about a relative, you should read carefully through Wikipedia's Conflicts of Interest policy. The advice there will help you avoid going against policies for writing and editing in areas where you are not just a neutral observer. LaMona (talk) 00:24, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Request on 14:57:32, 13 August 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Latimeria bg

• Latimeria bg (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Drug2Gene (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi LaMona,

First of all, thank you for your review and your comment.

I asked for help from Sulfurboy, too, as he was also a reviewer to the Drug2Gene draft after resubmission following your initial decline.

I would like ask for some more advice and explanations on what is lacking to prove subject's (Drug2Gene database) notability and what makes the references not verifiable and not able to prove notability?

You have commented that except for the sole article on this subject, there is only one more mention that is by one of the same authors as that article, and some promotional listings found through a Google search, but no third-party neutral sources for this topic are available. However, 5 references were included in the article, 1 on the Drug2Gene database, and 4 other publications entirely independent on the subject, non of them having the same author as the authors of the Drug2Gene publication.

Is the problem that the referencing does not adequately support the statements in the article, or that references are not enough in number to prove notability, or that they are not discussing Drug2Gene importance and usability? Three of the cited sources find Drug2Gene important enough to mention it as available public drug-target database, along with DrugBank, ChEMBL, TTD, MATADOR, KEGG Drug, etc., one of them (Glaab et al) is commenting its usefulness: "Drug2Gene [29], the currently most comprehensive meta-database, may provide a first point of reference for most types of queries".

Could you please advice me how should be improved in the Drug2Gene draft so it could become worthy for inclusion in Wikipedia?

Thank you very much in advance!

Latimeria bg (talk) 14:57, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Latimeria bg (talk) 14:57, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Latimeria bg, in the draft article, there is a journal article about the database, then some journal articles about the general topic of data visualization in the field in question that mention the database. Mentions are not sufficient to establish notability. You need more sources that are about the database itself, or that have significant coverage of the database (more than a mention or a single paragraph). LaMona (talk) 15:19, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Request on 07:58:05, 14 August 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Latimeria bg

• Latimeria bg (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Drug2Gene (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi LaMona, thanks a lot for your reply. I understand.

I have added two more citations in the resubmitted version on Aug 11. However, they also seem not to be enough.

So, we need more articles on the database itself, as well as independent resources referencing/mentioning Drug2Gene and discussing its usability with a deeper coverage, or at least one of them, right?

Thanks again!

Latimeria bg (talk) 07:58, 14 August 2015 (UTC) Latimeria bg (talk) 07:58, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Latimeria bg, that's right. You need to show that others have considered it important enough to write about it. The articles don't have to be solely about the database, but they need to have more than a short mention of it - perhaps a review of databases and the relative advantages of each? (Don't know if your field does that kind of thing.) If it hasn't gotten that attention yet, you may need to wait until it does. If you wait, it is a good idea to create a copy of the article on your own computer because old drafts can get deleted. LaMona (talk) 15:32, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia! Need a hand?

Hello! LaMona, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about why your article submission was declined please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Snowycats (talk) 20:00, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

23:33:06, 16 August 2015 review of submission by Roma247

• Roma247 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Joseph F. Rigge (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello LaMona, I'm not sure how this talk thing works so I hope I've got this right.

Thanks for your comments on my article. You're right, the tone needed some work. Ironically, I was just representing in my own words the actual source material, but nevertheless, it did need to be toned down. I edited it for this and I think I removed anything that sounds too much like peacock language. Let me know if I missed anything.

I hear you about the primary sources, but in this case, since I'm not making any conclusions, I'm only using that as a way of citing my facts (dates, places, etc.) hopefully that shouldn't be a problem? Roma247 (talk) 23:33, 16 August 2015 (UTC) Roma247 (talk) 23:33, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

@Roma247: I was able to easily find two books that at least mention him, and that may provide information for the article:

• [1]
• [2]

This tells me that there are secondary sources for information about him, and secondary sources are preferred over primary sources (like you have now). So I would advise adding in secondary sources where you can find them -- probably from book sources.

P.S. I find the talk page thing confusing as well. LaMona (talk) 23:41, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

@LaMona: Thanks again for the advice...I was able to find several more references above and beyond those you pointed out and even found some new facts to improve the article. Now resubmitted.Roma247 (talk) 03:35, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Rejection of Draft Tring-Albania

Hello,

I removed much of the content of the article Tring Albania and changed many of the sentences. Please can You review it once again, and maybe suggest me what else should I removeor change so the article can be acceptable for Wikipedia? Many of the references are in albanian. Some of them are statistics written by government agencies.

We would like to have an article similar to Digit-alb and Sky.com

Thanks in advance!

Andjelo Dragovic (talk) 17:04, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Andjelo Dragovic I looked again at the article today. Unfortunately, you still do not have many sources that are ABOUT the TV network - and the ones that are either by the network or by affiliates do not support wp:notability. Also, you cannot use Wikipedia articles as references - you can link to them in the text of your article as internal links (that show up blue, and are text surrounded by two sets of square brackets), but you can't use them as references. What you need to do is find newspaper or magazine articles, or business journal articles, about the network. If you can find some in English, that is a plus, but they do not have to be in English. LaMona (talk) 16:14, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Rejection of Draft of Graydon Hoare

Hello LaMona,

Thanks for your comments on the article! I followed your advice and added links/references to interviews involving the subject before resubmitting. I am not sure why those modifications are not appearing since you mentioned you could not see any changes. Please let me know how I should proceed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.45.154.86 (talk) 19:49, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Well, if you look at the history tab of the article, there are no edits there after mine. Are you sure that you are saving your changes? LaMona (talk) 23:51, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

This is the diff I see between the initial rejection and the changes I made thereafter: https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Draft%3AGraydon_Hoare&type=revision&diff=676230101&oldid=676000384 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.45.154.86 (talk) 23:52, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Yes, sorry, now I see it. Perhaps I did the wrong diff. However, the article is still only two sentences, and you don't have any "reliable sources", that is, sources that are about the subject of the article, not by him. Although you can glean info from interviews, they don't establish notability. The programming languages themselves are notable, but it is quite possible that the individuals who wrote them are not independently notable. (Tip: sign your messages on talk pages by putting four tildes at the end. See the hint at the bottom of the edit box.) LaMona (talk) 16:11, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

16:41:11, 18 August 2015 review of submission by Nick Saturday

• Nick Saturday (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Marcin Przybyłek (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi LaMona,

thanks for your explanations and suggestions. I tried to do what you told me. I hope I managed to show the external resources and that I edited everything properly. Please tell me if the text (and sources) are fine now or if I still need to correct something.

Nick Saturday (talk) 16:41, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Nick Saturday (talk) 16:41, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

• User:Nick Saturday Thanks for getting in touch. You still have many sources that are not considered reliable. It is actually better to remove those than to just add more sources. Sources that are not reliables are: Wikipedia (you still have a reference to a WP article); blogs; fan sites; Facebook, Youtube, and other social sites that are not governed by an editorial policy; any site that sells his material or that promotes him in some way. I am not familiar with Polish gaming sources, and for gaming it is difficult in general to find references in the mainstream press (newspapers, etc.). I cannot advise you as to particular sources that would be considered reliable, but using the list I have given you try to reduce the number of un-reliable sources, which will detract from the perceived value of the page. Do read the suggestions for reliable sources at wp:rs. p.s. I may do some editing for style on the article, if that's ok with you. LaMona (talk) 18:02, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Dear LaMona, thanks for another set of ideas. I'll try to do my best. Unfortunately with games, it's virtually impossible to omit promo as here sellers and producers and publishers are often closely linked. Przybyłek & his publishers often give access to his books in electronic version, hence many pages about him, have direct connections to shops... which also sell his game... Any mainstream magazines are actually gamers magazines which also advertise & sell games... I've got the same problem with omitting Facebook & Youtube. The Facebook page is not about Przybyłek, but about his creation, Gamedecverse... More than half of his writing is related to that. And the game as well... His Youtube Channel is the way he takes part in public discussions. If I omit that, then I'm nor reliable? Blogs I present belong to literature and game aficionados... They are highly specialised and very often quite critical. The two sites about gamedecverse are not fan sites but are managed by Przybyłek. Should I remove them? Is that advertising? When it's a source of info about the author and his publications, convents, etc.? I do understand that I need to edit my sources, but most of those are best you can find.

Nick Saturday (talk) 20:57, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Nick. To be sure I'm not leading you astray, I suggest you pop over to the Wikipedia video games project: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Video_games/Sources#Video_games. That describes some reliable sources in the video games arena. Most are English-language sources, but you can also ask on the talk pages for that project about the sources you have. Let me know if you do and I'll follow the discussion -- it'll be a good education for me, as well. As for his Youtube channel and his Facebook page, those can go in the external sources section of the article. That's where you put sources that are relevant but aren't usable as references. (I'm so glad you keep coming back! And I want to work with you to get this article into shape for main space.) LaMona (talk) 21:30, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

08:03:51, 22 August 2015 review of submission by Theorignal JD

• Theorignal JD (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Sabina Brennan (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi, first of all thank you for reviewing this article. I have added new references many from reliable TV interviews with the subject on National News station and TV talk Shows. Also additional references from the print media. Are these now sufficient - perhaps you can advise now or should I just resubmit

http://www.rte.ie/radio1/marian-finucane/programmes/2014/0222/506035-marian-finucane-saturday-22-february-2014/?clipid=1424195#1424195

http://www.tv3.ie/ireland_am_video.php?locID=1.65.74&video=76440

http://www.rte.ie/news/player/2014/0218/20528192-researchers-at-trinity-college-develop-online-videos-on-brain-health/ Hello Brain

http://www.rte.ie/radio/utils/radioplayer/rteradioweb.html#!rii=9%3A20659401%3A0%3A%3A

The Lancet Neurology|date=March 2015|volume=14|issue=3|page=251}}</ref>

http://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/health-family/buff-up-your-brain-power-1.1954869?mode=sample&auth-failed=1&pw-origin=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.irishtimes.com%2Flife-and-style%2Fhealth-family%2Fbuff-up-your-brain-power-1.1954869

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/282964.php%7Cwebsite=Medical News Today

http://www.rte.ie/news/player/the-week-in-politics/2015/0412/#page=2

http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/ireland/article1387505.ece

My apologies I didnt know that IMBD doesn't count - do I need to remove those references?

Theorignal JD (talk) 08:03, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Theorignal JD It is best to remove the IMDB references -- the article looks more "serious" without them. I'll take another look at the article today. LaMona (talk) 16:08, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Re- submit Dafna Lemish page - by Lihi NT

Hi LaMona,

I've made some changes in Dafna Lemish page, according to your suggestions: I've added several links containing information on her Public engagement and voluntarism,an announcement in the college newspaper regarding revciving an award, another artical she wrote for a convetion she has participate, and a video - an interview about her research on children and media.

Also, i've eddited the References - it looks much better now :).

I realy hope you'll confirm the artical now. It's very important to me, and i think this page is truly reliable and accurate; as most of the information has been given to me by Dafna Lemish herself.

I hope to hear good news. Have a good week

LihiLihi NT (talk) 16:12, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Lihi NT Unfortunately, that you got your accurate information from Lemish herself is a problem. All information in Wikipedia needs to be sourced to third-party, neutral sources. Please read reliable sources. You still have large portions of the article that do not have suitable references, probably because the information came from her. The information that you got from her and that you cannot cite to a published source should be removed from the article. Information that comes directly from the subject of the article is considered original research: "The phrase "original research" (OR) is used on Wikipedia to refer to material—such as facts, allegations, and ideas—for which no reliable, published sources exist." For the article to be accepted into Wikipedia main space it must use information only from published resources. However, I am convinced that there are suitable published resources (although the article will not have some of the personal information about the subject) and that the subject probably meets the guidelines for academics (another page you should read). LaMona (talk) 14:56, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Article on Jason Smart

• 62.80.166.138 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Jason J Smart (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Per footnote 22, it does directly mention Smart, here is the quote, "27 апреля руководители партии Ф. Кулов и Алиев Э.Т.приняли директора Евразийского отдела Международного Республиканского Института/США/ Стефена Никса (Stefen B. Nix,Esq. Director Eurasia Division IRI) и директора Международного Республиканского Института в Бишкеке Джейсона Смарта (Jason Smart Resident Country, Director IRI)." It is towards the bottom of the page. I verified that nearly all (though you are right about the Cruz quotes), directly mention him in English or Russian.

62.80.166.138 (talk) 11:23, 25 August 2015 (UTC)