Jump to content

User talk:Vexations: 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
Line 470: Line 470:
== Mark Gottlieb (Literary Agent) Speedy deletion ==
== Mark Gottlieb (Literary Agent) Speedy deletion ==


Hey he is highly notable within the literary agents and belongs to one of the oldest firm, I missed who placed that tag of notability, he is notable for sure, you can check his presence within the market and field. I can enhance it by adding more resources. Also, his firm is very old and his father is from the field.
Hey he is highly notable within the literary agents and belongs to one of the oldest firms, I missed who placed that tag of notability, he is notable for sure, you can check his presence within the market and field. I can enhance it by adding more resources. Also, his firm is very old and his father is from the field. [[User:HeatherMPinchbeck|HeatherMPinchbeck]] ([[User talk:HeatherMPinchbeck|talk]]) 20:50, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Revision as of 20:50, 20 June 2017


    Wikidata weekly summary #261

    Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.

    You can see all open tickets related to Wikidata here.


    June 2017 offerings @ WikiProject Women in Red

    Welcome to Women in Red's June 2017 worldwide online editathons.

    File:Nefertari.jpg

    (To subscribe: Women in Red/English language list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 20:48, 24 May 2017 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

    Please comment on Talk:Alone in the Universe

    The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Alone in the Universe. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    A page you started (East-West Crude Oil Pipeline) has been reviewed!

    Thanks for creating East-West Crude Oil Pipeline, Mduvekot!

    Wikipedia editor Sulaimandaud just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

    Can you add a see also on your article to put it more on context

    To reply, leave a comment on Sulaimandaud's talk page.

    Learn more about page curation.

    Sulaimandaud (talk) 06:43, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Wikidata weekly summary #262

    Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
    • Development
      • Attending WikiCite
      • Showing badges on other projects (phab:T73887)
      • Improving label tracking (phab:T151717)
      • Working more on statements on forms in order to support lexicographical data

    You can see all open tickets related to Wikidata here.

    You've got mail

    Hello, Vexations. Please check your email; you've got mail!
    It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

    Artilectual14 (talk) 17:26, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Thank you!

    Hi Mduvekot, the issues seems to be being resolved. I appreciate your willingness to help. Artilectual14 (talk) 20:04, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    A barnstar for you!

    The Citation Barnstar
    Thank you! Artilectual14 (talk) 01:20, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Please comment on Talk:Emmett Till

    The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Emmett Till. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Yves Kreins

    Hi, you added a "disputed" template to Yves Kreins without indicating what exactly you take issue with either in the template or on the talk page. It is very hard to address issues that have not been raised. --Andreas Philopater (talk) 09:42, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Hello Andreas Philopater Thanks for requesting clarification. You're right, that tag wasn't clear. I've removed the tag and will make suggestions on the talk page. Mduvekot (talk) 22:43, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    NPP Barnstar

    The New Page Patroller's Barnstar
    Thank you for your work on reviewing new pages. Your dedication and effort is noticed and appreciated. TonyBallioni (talk) 19:00, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Please comment on Talk:Nome King

    The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Nome King. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Wikidata weekly summary #263

    Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
    • Discussions

    You can see all open tickets related to Wikidata here.


    Thanks for the help with Tamara Bower

    Hi, just wanted to say thanks for tagging Tamara Bower; I put a note in the talk page for anyone else who might have the time for it—given my connection I don't think there's any good way for me to correct the page to be more neutral and just wanted to check with someone more experienced that leaving a note like that on the talk page was an appropriate way of handling the issue. Thanks again! Mehmuffin (talk) 14:13, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    The number 431

    Why do you keep reverting my edits to 431 (number)? 431 is a fun number. It should have its own article. Bobby Jacobs (talk) 21:35, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Because you're going against consensus. The number articles are developed in groups of 10s or 100s until there is sufficient material to sustain an individual article. Provide the material and 431 can have its own article. Mduvekot (talk) 22:05, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Article

    The article Ramdas Ransing would actually need Deletion as, someone who works with education articles here, I can say he's not notable. However, I'm messaging to let you know that regardless, our academics notability guidelines never judge the subject by their own cited publications or how they're primary since this itself would show they're significant in their field, as stated by WP:PROF. Actually, any publications stated in any academic article wouldn't be considered primary sources at all since the publication would likely be professionally published by an independent entity. Independent sources reporting about subjects only the primary authors would ever know would not be considered as reliable and WP:PROF is clear about this, such as scientific papers or research. SwisterTwister talk 23:39, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    I think what I meant to say in my feedback to the author of the article was that you cannot use a paper by the subject of an article to establish that a subject is known for his contributions to a field. You need secondary sources, or per criterion 2 of WP:PROF, demonstrate that the subject is an author of highly cited academic work. If you think it should go to AfD, why not take it there? Mduvekot (talk) 00:02, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Please comment on Talk:James Bond in film

    The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:James Bond in film. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Wikidata weekly summary #264

    Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.

    You can see all open tickets related to Wikidata here.

    NJFX

    Hi - I just got a speedy deletion notice from you for NJFX, and before I could even contest it it was deleted. Can you explain why you thought it was promotional? In over six years, I've never had an article deleted before, let alone speedy deleted. Wikipedia is weak on info about data centers and cable landing stations. I've been focusing a bit more in this area recently, including updating info on Windstream, Tata Communications and Hibernia Networks. Thanks. Timtempleton (talk) 14:36, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Hi - I wanted to let you know that I reread the NJFX article with a fresh perspective and took out a few sentences that could be considered borderline promotional. I just resubmitted and it sits here Draft:New Jersey Fiber Exchange (the restoring editor changed the title). Please let me know if you still think it's too promotional, and if so, what specific info you think I should delete. I appreciate that you patrolled the article. It was this specific article being held up in NPP that led me to this project and the submission I made Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Analysis and proposal#A modest proposal to clear the patrol backlog. What do you think of better triage? Timtempleton (talk) 15:34, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Hello Timtempleton I see you've received your WP:REFUND and that the article is now at AfC, a good way make sure the article represents a neutral point of view. Why did I think it was promotional? The quality of your sources, mostly. The article is patched together from minor rewrites in industry publications, not sourced to substantial coverage from independent, reliable sources. The abundance of the phrase "NJFX announced" in the sources, and even the article, is a bit of a giveaway. Of course, NJFX writes press releases all the time, and some of that gets reported on. But what doesn't happen is follow-up on those announcements; in-depth coverage. So while you manage to put together something that is entirely "factual", in that everything is referenced to a source, the purpose of the article as I read it was not to inform its readership, but to promote a business, because promotion of the business is at the root of all of its sources. You may find reading WP:CORPDEPTH helpful. All the best, Mduvekot (talk) 11:17, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks Mduvekot for the clarification. Wikipedia is weak on telecommunications infrastructure articles. There's just not a lot of editor interest in subsea cables, cable landing stations and data centers. Even the telco templates are ignored - I noticed two weeks ago that there was no template documentation for the Template:Infobox network service provider template, which I tried to fix - and half succeeded. My call for template formatting help on the talk page has been ignored. So most of the news in this area is going to be in trade publications. I've done a lot of telecommunications articles and have a telco background, so the trade pub names are more familiar to me. I agree that a lot of articles are seeded by PR - that's how things work in this day and age of media staff cutbacks - but I try to avoid using anything but reliable third party sources when writing an article. One rule of thumb is that if I can't write an article about a company without referring to its web site, it's not notable enough. With NJFX, I found everything I needed in 3rd party trade pubs. There's a lot more coverage, but I didn't want to overlink - I thought that would look promotional. But since the draft is being reviewed, I'll Google them again and see if I can find sources that might be better known outside of the industry. I realize that this is no longer on your plate, but wanted to reach out and share my thoughts. On an unrelated note, I see on your talk page that you have an interest in art. My first article (before I knew what COI was and recused myself) was for my father Robert Templeton, a portrait artist who painted the portrait of President Carter that sits in the National Portrait Gallery, several TIME magazine covers, and numerous leaders from the world of politics, business and entertainment. Cheers. Timtempleton (talk) 02:05, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Speedy deletion nomination of Stevie Haston

    It is the bio of one of the best all round climbers of the world and certainly the best in Britain. Such a person definitely warrants a wiki page! Dunno how the page seemed promotion when source of all the info was given. Request this page to be restored. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashishchanda (talk • contribs) 13:05, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Hello Ashishchanda. The problem was with the way it was written, promotional. Haston is very likely a notable subject, and substantial coverage from independent, reliable sources may exist. Requests to have an article restored must be made to the deleting administrator Ad Orientem, not the editor who nominated the article (me). Please see WP:REFUND. All the best, Mduvekot (talk) 13:34, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Please comment on Talk:CeCe Peniston discography

    The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:CeCe Peniston discography. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Regarding "Ways to improve Natascha Drubek"

    Hi Mduvekot,

    Thanks for your comments and sorry for my slow response. I removed some sources which seemed to me to be potentially non-independent. I wanted to ask if this should cover it or if I should find more third-party sources?

    Cheers,

    Minusiplus — Preceding unsigned comment added by Minusiplus (talk • contribs) 09:59, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Wikidata weekly summary #265

    Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
    • Development
      • Improvements to Wikidata Query Service UI
      • Continued work on importing property constraints from statements (phab:T102759)
      • Started to add support for Senses of Lexeme entities (phab:T160053)
      • More experimenting with the new front-end framework
      • Added RDF mapping for "tabular data" data type (phab:T167951)

    You can see all open tickets related to Wikidata here.


    Mark Gottlieb (Literary Agent) Speedy deletion

    Hey he is highly notable within the literary agents and belongs to one of the oldest firms, I missed who placed that tag of notability, he is notable for sure, you can check his presence within the market and field. I can enhance it by adding more resources. Also, his firm is very old and his father is from the field. HeatherMPinchbeck (talk) 20:50, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Vexations&oldid=786666354"