User talk:Sulfurboy

Yes I am back :) But likely still in a limited capacity and there might be gaps again in which I don't edit depending on how the relief from work goes. I should still be available if you ping me to something.

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.

== Re: erik duetsch == https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Erik_Deutsch

Deutsch plays in the dixie chicks which is a multi award winning band. he spent 4 years with leftover salmon which is certainly at the top of the jam band music scene. i don't see why this doesn't qualify him relating to WP:MUS, WP:MUSIC, WP:BAND Mistephake (talk) 02:30, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Playing in a notable band doesn't makes someone notable. They have to have independent notability. Sulfurboy (talk) 02:31, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

thank you for taking the time to clarify. I would site his albums as a leader (7 mostly indie legit labels) and the articles referencing these releases might be prongs of notability? WP notability states: Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself. Cites 2, 3 (NY Times is not a trivial publication) 3. is Denver post. 8. is a feature article on the artist. 10. is a review in jazz times magazine. I see dozens of pages every day on wikipedia with far less to support reasoning for being accepted. I am relatively new at this so i appreciate the process. Mistephake (talk) 18:16, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Cite 2 isn't about the subject. Cite 3 is a basic quip of an upcoming show and would be considered trivial. Denver post is a solid source, but it's mostly quotes from an interview from the artist and would be considered WP:PRIMARY. The Boulder Weekly article looks to come from what's basically a glorified news blog site, I don't see any indication of editorial oversight that it would show it is WP:RELIABLE. If you see other pages with far less support you're welcome to nominate it, see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Throwing other pages under the bus is a terrible strategy for getting your draft approved. Sulfurboy (talk) 18:24, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

I have updated the article with several new cites (4 & 12) are from a notable nationally recognized magazine and 12 is from the boston globe. the reviews are about this artist and one is a feature article Mistephake (talk) 02:18, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Regarding the MSIWPARB rejection

Link to the draft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Maritime_Space,_Inland_Waterways_and_Ports_Act_of_the_Republic_of_Bulgaria

Hey! I see that the reason to decline is that there are not enough references? The article is about an act regarding the Bulgarian Maritime Law. I myself am a student in a naval academy in Bulgaria, but I'm an international student -not Bulgarian-, thus my study is in English (and I don't speak Bulgarian fluently). The words on the article were entirly taken from my Maritime Law's book. My Maritime Law's book is an absolutely reliable source. Literally, the ONLY English source on it is from my Maritime Law's book. Unfortunately, since I'm not a Bulgarian speaker and I can't simply translate Bulgarian sources on the MSIWPARB, I can't contribute more on the article. What I could do was that. And that was just enough, since it consisted of founded information. I don't see the point of rejecting it. Is it better to have nothing rather than having those few yet true words on this act?

Kindly, "tsiplikov"

You clearly didn't read WP:REFB like was suggested.Sulfurboy (talk) 14:07, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Your advice

Hello and seasonal greetings to you. Can you please take a look at Draft:Damien Echols. It is a properly stated WP:COI contribution. I would like to hear your advice on this. I did a full re-write of a declined version. Do you feel that it should be improved or changed somehow? Thanks! --Bbarmadillo (talk) 13:00, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

My article

nvm. thank you very much for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KidBoots (talk • contribs) 07:58, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Sai Gon Joint Stock Commercial Bank

Hi Sulfurboy It is a large bank based in Vietnam I would like to update its information from the English version Print here https://vi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ng%C3%A2n_h%C3%A0ng_Th%C6%B0%C6%A1ng_m%E1%BA%A1i_c%E1%BB%95_ph%E1%BA%A7n_S%C3%A0i_G%C3%B2n

Some other banks also update similarly

https://vi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ng%C3%A2n_h%C3%A0ng_th%C6%B0%C6%A1ng_m%E1%BA%A1i_c%E1%BB%95_ph%E1%BA%A7n_%C3%81_Ch%C3%A2u https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asia_Commercial_Bank

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kimsunri (talk • contribs) 02:45, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Editor's Barnstar
	For a clear dedication to the mission of the encyclopedia. Rustic / Talk 07:43, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Help with Data Science and Predictive Analytics (Book page)

Thanks for your review/comments on Draft:Data Science and Predictive Analytics (book page).

You mentioned that the current page draft does not qualify for a a Wikipedia article because:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject.

I've reviewed the Wikipedia instructions on Wikipedia:Common_sourcing_mistakes_(notability), Wikipedia:Notability_(books), and Help:Referencing_for_beginners.

I am just trying to get a confirmation from you, and others, if the following 2 types of criteria are insufficient, per Wikipedia:Notability_(books) criteria. Or alternatively, if the current references provided in the Draft:Data Science and Predictive Analytics book page may not be clearly and appropriately stated in the article.

• Wikipedia:Notability_(books) Criterion 1: The book has been the subject of two or more non-trivial published works appearing in sources that are independent of the book itself. This can include published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, other books:
  • Independent scholarly reviews by journal editorial staff (independent of the book publisher or author).
    • International Statistical Institute (ISI) Review .
    • Journal of the American Library Association review .
    • Many dozens of citations in scholarly literature that cites this textbook .
  • Note that the above are not really "just passing mentions". Rather these represent dozens of independent published works that provide deep scholarly reviews the textbook and directly cited the work.

• Wikipedia:Notability_(books) Criterion 4: The book is, or has been, the subject of instruction at two or more schools, colleges, universities or post-graduate programs in any particular country.
  • There are at least 2 universities (UM and UCLA) that offer classes using this textbook .
  • The book is used in at least a dozen libraries .

Many thanks your help with this clarification and for your Wikipedia dedication, in general.

Some references cited above:

99.19.71.139 (talk) 02:05, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

You've linked to four different sources of supporting evidence that aren't available in the draft itself. See the problem? There is also an issue of neutrality, the article comes across as an advert for the book chock full of buzzwords like "hands on experience" or " transdisciplinary graduate-level textbook blends mathematical foundations" sounds like something that was written up by the book's publisher and isn't formal or neutral. An article about a book such as this should explain what it is and why it's notable. It shouldn't be attempting to sell something to the reader. Clean that up and incorporate the above sources and it'll likely be approved on the next go around. Sulfurboy (talk) 02:25, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

For Draft: Ben Hum

I understand the reason was due to insufficient notability but I would like to clarify that in my country, said person is a singer-songwriter who has received media coverage from our local media news channel and even overseas news platforms. For Notability (music), I believe said artiste has fulfilled the following:

- Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself

- Has been a featured subject of a substantial broadcast segment across a national radio or television network.

- Has won first, second or third place in a major music competition.

Would like to seek some advice as per, what is wiki's standard of 'notability' since I checked that there are 'less notable' figures being approved so would need some help right here on how you think I could improve on the article. Appreciate your kind assistance.

So as part of a temper tantrum over your draft getting rejected, you come onto my talk page and try to throw other random wiki pages under the bus? Let me know how that strategy works for you.Sulfurboy (talk) 06:44, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

What? No so sorry don't get it wrong am not throwing tantrum neither am i trying to throw other pages under the bus. I was being polite no? I just wanted to seek help and advice on how I can improve?!