User talk:Sulfurboy

If you're here about an article that I declined/rejected please read these quick rules first...or you might be ignored.

1) Post new sections at the bottom of the page. You can do this by clicking the "New Section" tab near the top of the page.

2) PLEASE LINK TO YOUR ARTICLE, I go through a myriad of pages a day, I won't know what you're talking about unless you link your article.

3) Please do not just ask "why did you decline my article?". The answer is given in the decline message on the draft. If you need clarification beyond that, or have questions about the linked policies then please ask away.

4) Please don't request me to re-review your article unless I've specifically asked you to do so. If you feel it's fixed then resubmit. AfC is incredibly backlogged and someone will get to it when they can. This can take 8 weeks or more.

I welcome anyone to comment or reply to others on my page, but please be kind and if their post breaks one of the above four rules, please ignore them as well.

Your draft article, Draft:John William Helton

Hello, Sulfurboy. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "John William Helton".

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 nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! Celestina007 (talk) 09:23, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Draft article, Draft:Cafetran_Espresso

Hello,

After last year's debacle (multiple submissions declined and then rejection), I am trying to rewrite the page on Cafetran Espresso, starting from scratch. This time, I will directly liaise with the people in charge of the evaluation in the past (same message on their talk page), and ask for your assistance.

Disclaimer: I am not at all involved in the development of CTE. I am just a professional translator whose bacon was saved by the tool. Being quite active in various translator communities, I know for a fact that CTE is one of the most mentioned (which of course does not mean used) standalone CAT tool after SDL Trados, MemoQ and Wordfast (the other current big players being Cloud-based). It is particularly important for people under Linux, being quasi the only professional-grade tool. For us, CTE is not just notable. It is vitally important.

The conundrum I face is that, being in 2020, the immense majority of software comparisons are via blogs. CAT tools are not groundbreaking technology warranting a publication in research journals. And all other types of articles are now published via blogs or forums (personaly, I cannot remember the last time I read a magazine, even online). This issue would be met with any CAT tool develop today.

So I started by deleting all the boasting, as well as the detailed technical descriptions, which can be re-introduce later if needed. I think what remains is more than a stub. I would appreciate your help to grow it until the point it can be acceptable as a page, without adding material that would fire up new controversies. Nicolas Gambardella (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 13:54, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

• (talk page stalker) Hi Nicolas Gambardella Sulfurboy has not been active the last couple of months due to real life work demands - I would suggest your better off asking at the Wikipedia:Teahouse for advice. Or use the "Ask for advice" button on the last reject notice. I would suggest first doing a good search to find any good reliable sources to show notability and adding them. Once notability is achieved, content tone etc can be more easily fixed with advice. Regards KylieTastic (talk) 14:14, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

• Thanks Kylie, I will do my best (370000 hits when we Google "cafetran espresso" is not bad for a start) It is just a matter of finding sources that are acceptable as reliable. This is where we will need constructive advice rather than unspecific statements and blanket rejections. We will get there. Nicolas Gambardella (talk) 15:25, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Draft article, Draft:Brian_Jean-Mary

Hello, regarding this draft, I can't think of any way to improve it, it looks nearly identical to several other football coaches' pages, with "significant coverage in published, reliable, secondary sources". Brian is the only "red link" on the Michigan coaching staff, I'd like to fix that. Mrgate3 (talk) 13:46, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

• (talk page stalker) Hi Mrgate3 Sulfurboy has not been active the last couple of months due to real life work demands - I would suggest your better off asking at the Wikipedia:Teahouse for advice, or maybe Wikipedia:WikiProject American football. Regards KylieTastic (talk) 13:54, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Social Ecology Article Submission

Heyo 👋

Quick question on the Social Ecology article submission- we tried to draft it like other articles on political schools of thought & were wondering if a solution would be starting the article off small & building it up using verified neutral party sources? We were a bit uncertain how drastic the changes would need to be for submission.

Thanks! Phohammer (talk) 09:24, 5 October 2020 (UTC)