Jump to content

User talk:Nearlyevil665

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by AnnLWSFebruary84wiki (talk | contribs) at 23:53, 29 September 2021. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Request on 17:05:29, 11 May 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Orphix3

Clarification on validity of sources and number required, specifically with regard to declined article: Draft:Adjy

I was unaware that press releases count as trivial information, but upon review of the rules I see the specific mention and also the logic behind the rule.

When I compile the list of anything resembling non-trivial coverage I have only a few, and I need help identifying their usability:

  • 1. An interview published in issue #53 of Substream Magazine (Sep 2016), which I can only access in print. [1]
  • 2. A review of the 2016 EP on Indie Vision Music. [2]
  • 3. A review of the 2016 EP on Sputnikmusic by a Staff Writer. (I did not include this in the first draft) [3]

Aside from databases like Allmusic, Dicogs, Musicbrainz, lyrics databases like Genius etc.

I'm assuming the entry on the subject of their lyricism is also too free. I thought by referencing the source text (and treating it like a primary source) would be acceptable in combination with the references and coverages elsewhere.

Am I correct in thinking now that all I can really reference is the reviews of the records themselves, and all "history" information or "music and lyrics" insight needs to come from those same sources?

  1. ^ Florence, Kyle (Sep 2016). "Adjy: Organizing art through human connection". Substream Magazine. Substream Magazine.
  2. ^ https://www.indievisionmusic.com/reviews/adjy-prelude-3333/
  3. ^ https://www.sputnikmusic.com/review/73814/Adjy-Prelude-.3333/

Orphix3 (talk) 17:05, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, unfortunately reviews and interviews are not independent, reliable and secondary sources. Furthermore, notability is not inherited, hence even if the EPs were notable, it wouldn't automatically imply the band is notable. You can read more about band notability at WP:BAND and about general notability at WP:GNG. At this moment I'm not seeing a pass of either. nearlyevil665 17:13, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I see. I looked at the articles for bands in similar circles-- Free Throw (band) and Annabel (band) -- for a kind of template. But I see that the coverage by sources like Pitchfork, Stereogum, and Alternative Press, and A.V. Club is considered notable there? That would make a kind of intuitive sense. The only thing I'm confused about is that the majority of sources in both of those articles seem like reviews and interviews. Are those things only clear to be used after the minimum notability criteria is passed? Orphix3 (talk) 17:22, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I would be careful looking at other articles as a sort of benchmark, see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Hundreds of articles get tagged every day because they fail to demonstrate notability. For a non-exhaustive list of good sources, see WP:RSPSOURCES.nearlyevil665 17:26, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Aware of this tiny tool?

Hi, I think it might be helpful for you here (regarding CSD G4 Nominations and AfD in general): User:Writ Keeper/Scripts/deletionFinder.js CommanderWaterford (talk) 18:41, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Is this some sort of malware that would prevent me from making CSD nominations unless 15 minutes have passed? nearlyevil665 18:45, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Nearlyevil665 lol, not exactly :) It does show you immediately if the article had been previously deleted and why. CommanderWaterford (talk) 19:03, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I guess MoveToDraft and CiteHighlighter from @Novem Linguae you already have installed, no!? ;-) CommanderWaterford (talk) 19:06, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The MoveToDraft I had already installed but the CiteHighlighter will be super useful. Thanks! nearlyevil665 19:18, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]


WEIRD

i find u uninformable

Please do not spam my talk page. If you need any assistance with the declined draft, feel free to ask any pertinent questions. nearlyevil665 19:03, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That is a very rude remarks . How have you rejected my page when it followed the format of Wikipedia and there are numerous such pages Infantry28 (talk) 07:11, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. You rejected my page for Kathleen Hermesdorf which had a lot of citations so I’d like to better understand what is needed before publishing an entry for this important artist. Please and thanks. Keith Keith2842 (talk) 17:41, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Submission declined | Karzan Hisham


Hi, the person I write the article is a youtuber and a popular and famous phenomenon in his own way is called a reputation in tiktok and instagram, therefore I think that an article is suitable for an article, if there is a mistake and an error article, please let's make a mistake to correct it. I guess there is a mistake from me and I don't know Nedved2021 (talk) 10:42, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, the references in the draft article do not provide a pass of WP:GNG. It is irrelevant if the subject is popular or has a reputation, what matters is that there are multiple WP:RS that cover said subject in secondary sources. nearlyevil665 10:48, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Timothy J. Yen

Hi, just a comment - 10 seconds of google search, inserting the Google Scholar Link et voila... ;-) Is sometimes easier and faster at AfC (or NPP as well, of course). Keep up the good work! CommanderWaterford (talk) 20:56, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, definitely, but I want to be fair to everyone and as far as I know AfC is reviewed on the merits of provided references and there is no obligation for reviewing outside references, unlike NPP. I did actually find the Google Scholar for the subject but who knows, maybe there is a name coincidence of a sort. So I'd really rather leave it for the author to provide, at least while I'm a trial AfC reviewer! But definitely will be more proactive as I'm more confident. nearlyevil665 05:28, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
CommanderWaterford, on a relative note, could I get a second opinion on Draft:Nicola_Whitton? Would it be reasonable to say that five publications with over 100 citations is a pass of WP:PROF? I usually expect at least 200 citations, but not sure if this field is a high-citation one. nearlyevil665 08:29, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Nearlyevil665 You can use @Novem Linguae essay as a rule of thumb here User:Novem Linguae/Essays/Nuances of SNG#WP:NACADEMIC (G) CommanderWaterford (talk) 08:32, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Nearlyevil665 I would also suggest taking WP:NPP School if you are interested in. You could try to ask User.Atsme or User:OneI9569 if they have slots available. It is a tough training but afterwards you feel much, much more confident with our policies. CommanderWaterford (talk) 08:33, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Super useful, thanks. Based on that, I feel comfortable accepting. BTW, I'm nearing the completion of my NPP course. nearlyevil665 08:35, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
  • If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to the submission and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
  • If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
  • If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
  • If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.
Katiepiatt (talk) 08:03, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your feedback on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Nicola_Whitton - I've edited down the Bibliography and added in some references. Please could you take another look for me? Thanks so much, Katie.

Thank you for speedily integrating the feedback. It has now been accepted! nearlyevil665 08:38, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 12:43:23, 19 May 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Ervare


Hello Nearlyevil665. I was trying to fill the gap in this article. You see the red line on Sergius Both https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbert_W._Franke

Ervare (talk) 12:43, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, unfortunately the mere existence of a red-linked subject doesn't indicate that said subject is notable. You still have to demonstrate through multiple reliable secondary sources that the subject passes Wikipedia's notability requirements or other subject-specific guidelines, in this case WP:AUTHOR. As of now you have provided only primary sources and this isn't sufficient for a pass. nearlyevil665 12:52, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Help on Draft:ScalaMed

Hi Thanks for the reivew. I added a few additional reliable secondary sources to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:ScalaMed, please review whenever you get time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bricketernal (talk • contribs) 06:27, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you!

Thank you for your help, i hope to have done everything correctly.

Celia Stefania Centonze (talk) 14:06, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, all is good, but remember that you need to indicate whenever you translate content from other wiki pages. See WP:TFOLWP for more on this. I have already made the necessary disclosures instead of you for Draft:Marco Nereo Rotelli. Let me know if you have any questions. nearlyevil665 14:09, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 17:17:52, 24 May 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Lekha Prakash



Lekha Prakash (talk) 17:17, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Hello, from the discussion about the review, I followed up on the "Notability" , the person im writing about Manoj S is the only Sri lankan who has been contributing to the Art fraternity in the Karnataka state of India. This is considered a major achievement and it is very notable in terms of Art and Culture. Since Srilankan has way major controversies on Tamils the reach which this individual has made in an unknown territory has to be told. Do help me write this article successfully and review it so that this person can reach many people to inspire them to This person already had a Wikipedia Page but was deleted due to some glitch (Reference : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manoj_S.).

It wasn't deleted due to a glitch. It was deleted due to a community decision. You can find the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Manoj_S.. nearlyevil665 21:14, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft request

Hello, from the discussion about the review, I followed up on the "Notability" , the person im writing about MANOJ S who is the only Sri lankan who has been contributing to the Art fraternity in the Karnataka state of India. This is considered a major achievement and it is very notable in terms of Art and Culture. Since Srilankan has way major controversies on Tamils the reach which this individual has made in an unknown territory has to be told. Do help me write this article successfully and review it so that this person can reach many people to inspire them to. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lekha Prakash (talk • contribs) 17:10, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, while you might consider said person to be notable as per his achievements, you still need to demonstrate that he is notable as per WP:GNG and/or WP:ARTIST. nearlyevil665 09:31, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you!

Thank you for the help, i would like to make adjustment on some part, for the point list, that when i edit i see them correctly, but when is published they are not listed, but one after the other. In the italian version of Marco Nereo Rotelli page, the editable page is more easy, in this editable version is more difficult for me to edit. There is some specific way how to arrange this? thank you so much

Celia Stefania Centonze (talk) 17:41, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm not really sure I follow. Could you explain what exactly is the problem? nearlyevil665 09:31, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 11:27:29, 25 May 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Mridula Mukhia


Hi Nearlyevil665, could you kindly make some suggestion on my article. I work for the company and this is my assignment.

Mridula Mukhia (talk) 11:27, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, the draft was already deleted as unambiguous promotion, so I assume it was not written from an encyclopedic perspective and instead read like an advertisement. Furthermore, I see that you have not made the proper disclosures as a paid editor, which you are obliged to. Please read WP:PAID and make the proper disclosures before writing and submitting another draft, otherwise you might be blocked. nearlyevil665 11:37, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewing of Draft:Terra0

Hi Nearlyevil665, thank you for reviewing my (first) article. I understand the reasons for the rejection and have tried to fix them to the best of my knowledge. Could you give me a brief feedback before I resubmit? PLTPRX (talk) 12:33, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thank you for the message. Unfortunately I don't speak German and I don't feel comfortable reviewing the new sources and establishing notability. I would thus abstain and let another editor make the review. nearlyevil665 12:40, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Tigran K. Harutyunayn has been accepted

Tigran K. Harutyunayn, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting 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. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

nearlyevil665 05:57, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Great job, congratulations to you👍🌸🌈 Ashlesha.vr (talk) 15:27, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft: Steven Schuurman

Thanks for looking at the initial submission for the page on Steven Schuurman, and for your feedback. I have now added references as best as I understood the wiki guidelines and resubmitted. Many thanks for your work on Wikipedia! Bartholomeus1613 (talk) 08:24, 4 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Small question

Hi! I saw your comment and I understand. Thank you for sharing some feedback on how to help me improve my article. Was wondering does magazine or on print magazines work for reliable sources and also do published dissertation pieces work too? I’m new to Wikipedia and I really want to work on fixing my article so it can be approved next time I submit it. Thanks again PinkLoveDragon (talk) 23:02, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 10:08:27, 5 June 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Claudio.andre.neto.77


My submission was rejected due to lack of references. I don't understand what kind of references you would like since there is very litle to reference in my personal user page. Can you give me an example please ?

Claudio.andre.neto.77 (talk) 10:08, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please bear in mind that not every subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. You need to be able to demonstrate that your page passes WP:GNG and has multiple, independent and reliable sources (see WP:RS). Your personal page or any other source that is affiliated with you is not a viable reference. nearlyevil665 10:13, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Ishwar Puri

I have improved it as per your feedback. You can check and accept if you'd like. Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 14:01, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I've taken another look and made some further trimming. It has now been accepted into mainspace. Congratulations! nearlyevil665 14:15, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi5 nearlyevil!

Help me to summit draft article Abhinav Gautam

Hi this is Abhinav Gautam, I created a draft page of biography kindly help me to summit this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ag.abhinavgautam (talk • contribs) 07:51, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"European Photography"

Dear nearlyevil665 - in order to address the issue of notability (or other) that has prompted your support for deletion of this article on a significant long-running academic journal, can you please set out your reasoning? I'll make improvements accordingly. Perhaps the issue is calling it "European Photography" rather than "European Photography (magazine)"? That's easy to change. I've chased up links to it in other articles sop now "What links here" turns up plenty. Thank you for your advice, Jamesmcardle(talk) 06:23, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for the message. The very beauty of AfDs that everyone gets to chime in, especially with their subject matter knowledge. As these AfDs are resolved by the quality of the arguments presented and not by the number of votes, you need not worry if believe what you've presented establishes notability for the magazine. nearlyevil665 06:29, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I've made further changes European Photography#Academic resource that confirm notability.Jamesmcardle(talk) 12:47, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Nomination of Krzysztof Skrzyński for deletion

Hi, I'm just curious as to why you have tagged this for deletion. The player played over 100 appearances and for 4 clubs in the II liga (the old name for Poland's second division), meaning he passes WP:NFOOTBALL.

OLLSZCZ (talk) 13:29, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oversight on my end on the name change part. Will withdraw the nomination promptly. Thanks for the heads up! nearlyevil665 13:37, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Template:Saints1968DraftPicks

Hey just letting you know that you declined this template draft earlier today: Template:Saints1968DraftPicks, for "Formatting is off and there is no content other than a template". However, templates are allowed to come through AfC, as are disambiguation pages. See this section at the project page. Also, 9 times out of 10, formatting is not a valid reason for declination, as these types of issues are usually quickly fixed in mainspace by other users or can be easily fixed by yourself (that is referred to in this section). Curbon7 (talk) 19:44, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the heads up! Very useful! nearlyevil665 19:49, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Is there anything I can do?

Hi! I recently published the page about Fantech (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Fantech), Draft: Fantech , which is a notable gaming company. I've included credible third party (non-English) sources, as well as two sources about a major controversy involving the brand (in English). The controversy was met with a large amount of coverage and views online. May I ask, what other sources/types of sources shall I include to make this appropriate for Wikipedia?

I've checked the guidelines and I believe the references meet them, as they are from independent, notable, and unaffiliated sites. I did include a reference that is to their "About us" page, as I've seen other articles do that. If that is the reference that isn't allow, I can remove it! :)

Thank you! Sorry for the trouble.

LythPython (talk) 10:50, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thank you for the message. I declined the article as I couldn't find Wikipedia:SIGCOV in multiple reliable, secondary sources that aren't trivial or run-off-the-mill. The controversy bit reads like a one-off event. You are of course free to resubmit if you don't agree, I will let another reviewer give it a shot! nearlyevil665 11:32, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! I'll double check everything, and will fix what I can! The controversy section, it was a very notable event that happened involving them, and had major repercussions for that streamer and happened over the course of a few months. Might be the biggest dramatic thing that happened involving the company, haha. I'll do my best to check out some other articles and see how they phrased it. Thank you for the feedback! Have an awesome day and stay safe.
EDIT: Do you think it would be better to move the controversy content into the History of the company? I see the some articles have done this, as to not make a separate section based upon one event. LythPython (talk) 01:36, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I would not say that makes any practical difference towards establishing notability. It would be purely stylistic at this point. nearlyevil665 05:24, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Noted! Thank you for the clarification! I've added more sources, and clarified a bit of the information. LythPython (talk) 05:30, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Great! Best of luck! nearlyevil665 05:58, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you again! I appreciate the advice and I've done my best to get it all up to par! LythPython (talk) 06:30, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Deprodding of OgTs₄

I have removed the {{proposed deletion/dated}} tag from OgTs₄, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think this article should be deleted, please do not add {{proposed deletion}} back to the page. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! an source has since been added --Tautomers(T C) 21:00, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rali Mampeule question

Please can you explain to me why the Rali Mampeule article I have submitted is not "independently verified"? It contains six external citations to publications of which 3 are major South African daily newspapers and one is the local version of GQ Magazine. I am unclear how one should possibly cite more reliable sources than this, or why an entry about the very first black South African to become the owner of a real estate agency and who last year launched a major UN partnership at Davos should not be considered newsworthy. This seems slightly biased or racist against African news sources and people? Can you please explain? I am not sure how to improve this situation if references to legitimate South African news sources are considered insufficient.

Innotivity (talk) 21:30, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for the message. Interviews are a poor source for establishing notability as they are not independent. Once these interviews are taken out of the equation there is little to suggest Wikipedia:SIGCOV with the references provided. nearlyevil665 21:39, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Norris B. Herndon

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Norris B. Herndon you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kncny11 -- Kncny11 (talk) 20:42, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Norris B. Herndon

The article Norris B. Herndon you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Norris B. Herndon for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kncny11 -- Kncny11 (talk) 21:42, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nominated my post for deletion - request reasoning

You had my post deleted for unreliable sources, but the sources were all reliable and from a variety of third party sites. What can I do to fix it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crispan1974 (talk • contribs) 16:56, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for the message. I don't have the authority to delete pages, are you perhaps referring to the declined draft at Draft:Silverstream® System? I only see one reference on that draft, and it's to a Shell internal page. nearlyevil665 18:16, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for Creation July 2021 Backlog Elimination Drive

Hello Nearlyevil665:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running until 31 July 2021.

Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.
There is currently a backlog of over 1800 articles, so start reviewing articles. We're looking forward to your help!

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for Creation at 21:54, 7 July 2021 (UTC). If you do not wish to recieve future notification, please remove your name from the mailing list.[reply]

Draft:Cerebral (company)

Hi Nearlyevil665. I was hoping to get more input on Draft:Cerebral (company). It has citations to in-depth articles in Bloomberg, WSJ, and the Los Angeles Times. Your contribution history infers you spent less than one minute on it, which is not enough time to have accessed and reviewed the paywalled citations that form the basis for notability. I can provide pdfs of the paywalled citations if you have a minute to review them against the notability criteria. Parisrosaries (talk) 21:08, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for the message and sorry for not being able to reply in detail. The decline was based on perceived run-off-the-mill coverage about raising funds or valuation indexes. Also I'd be careful inferring reviewing practice through the contribution history - everyone has their own approach and it wouldn't be out of the ordinary for someone to glance through your draft submission and get back to it a later time for a final review. You are free to resubmit and another reviewer will take a look - I'm not in the position to do so now due to health reasons. Best of luck! nearlyevil665 05:25, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you
Could you take another look at the page News444 (talk) 16:04, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Courtney_Kelleigh

Is acceptable?

I have a small doubt.Is the verifiability of my draft article Draft: First Bell is perfect? You can see that there are many articles and news about First Bell. If I add more independent sources,then will it be acceptable for becoming an article?

Request on 09:21:08, 16 July 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Rocio rs


Hi,

I'm not sure why this article hasn't been approved: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Music_Ally It's very similar in every way to what other publications have on Wikipedia. Can you help? I used good references like Billboard, Rolling Stone, MBW, Princeton

Thanks!

Rocio rs (talk) 09:21, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for the message. Wikipedia requires significant coverage of the subject in reliable and secondary sources. While the references you have provided are from reliable and reputable magazines, they are trivial. Also I'd be careful to use other articles as a benchmark as hundreds of articles get tagged for deletion every week for failing notabiltiy criteria. See Wikipedia:OTHERCONTENT nearlyevil665 10:05, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 14:58:13, 17 July 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Kees3125


Hello Nearlyevil665,

Thank you for your comments on the draft article. I see the problem with it, so I did some more research, and found more information, and a book about Jacqueline Hick.

I revised the draft, using material from the book, adding references to the book and to galleries/museums her work is at, and rewards and honors awarded to her.

She is also mentioned in eight other Wikipedia articles already, and I cross-referenced to a couple of them.

Would this suffice to show 'noteworthiness' and does this provide sufficient reliable, secondary sources?

Thanks.

Kees3125 (talk) 14:58, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for the message. Unfortunately, it is irrelevant how many other articles the subject is referenced in. What matters is that the subject has significant coverage in multiple reliable and independent secondary sources as per Wikipedia:Notability or subject specific notability requirements, in this case Wikipedia:ARTIST. I don't see how the current references provided meet these requirements. If you think I'm wrong, I'd advise reading those guidelines and resubmitting, I will recuse from a re-review. Best of luck! nearlyevil665 15:03, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

NPP School Graduate

NPP School Graduate
On behalf of the New pages patrol School, congratulations! You have successfully completed all assignments and have now graduated from the School. Well done!
It's been a real pleasure to work with you and I hope you gained something from this course. All the best and thank you so much for your willingness to help Wikipedia in this role. Cassiopeia(talk) 08:43, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nearlyevil665, You could apply for NPP reviewer user right at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/New page reviewer. Do mention you have graduated from NPPS and my name incase they need to verify. Thank you and stay safe. Cassiopeia(talk) 08:43, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for the guidance and mentorship! It has been a pleasure learning from you! I have applied for the role and tagged you. Thank you once again for the incredible work! nearlyevil665 09:56, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Nearlyevil665, Congratulations for gaining the NPP right. I believe you will do a great job in this roll and thank you so much for your willingness to be part of NPP group. You work will always be appreciated. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia(talk) 23:03, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

New page reviewer granted

Hi Nearlyevil665. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group. Please check back at WP:PERM in case your user right is time limited or probationary. This user group allows you to review new pages through the Curation system and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or nominate them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is vital to maintaining the integrity of the encyclopedia. If you have not already done so, you must read the tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the deletion policy. If you need any help or want to discuss the process, you are welcome to use the new page reviewer talk page. In addition, please remember:

  • Be nice to new editors. They are usually not aware that they are doing anything wrong. Do make use of the message feature when tagging pages for maintenance so that they are aware.
  • You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted. Please be formal and polite in your approach to them – even if they are not.
  • If you are not sure what to do with a page, don't review it – just leave it for another reviewer.
  • Accuracy is more important than speed. Take your time to patrol each page. Use the message feature to communicate with article creators and offer advice as much as possible.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you also may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In cases of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, or long-term inactivity, the right may be withdrawn at administrator discretion. signed, Rosguill talk 21:21, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

En stjerne til dig!

The Teamwork Barnstar
Thank you!! Sune Martini (talk) 11:13, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 17:10:48, 19 July 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by AnandPrasun


Please let me know are references the only reason or neutral point of view the reason


AnandPrasun (talk) 17:10, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Article submission for Rajdeep Bailung Baruah

Hi Nearlyevil665, I NEDMGroup (talk) 17:22, 19 July 2021 (UTC) tried creating a page for a notable journalist here in our land. It was declined, and I understand it to be the lack of credible references. So, were the Assamese news pieces talking about him and his achievements problem? Should it be only in English? Shall I try a submission in Assamese language instead of English?[reply]

Looking forward to your reply,

Best Regards,

Syed.// NEDMGroup NEDMGroup (talk) 17:22, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dispatch Science submission

I have added 4 links to my submission regarding Dispatch Science, including one from the Financial Post, and one from Tech Company News. If this is still not enough, I would appreciate some help in obtaining approval for the submission. --Jacqueslamontagne (talk) 20:37, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for the message. You need multiple reliable secondary sources that provide significant coverage about the company. I cannot help you obtain such references; the onus is on you to search and include them in the draft. Please see Wikipedia:Reliable sources and Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). nearlyevil665 07:57, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Generation Lab -- Declined Article

Hey there! Thanks so much for your feedback on the Generation Lab draft article. You mentioned that the references I used do not demonstrate "significant coverage" of the Generation Lab but rather represent "just passing mentions." Although the articles I cited only reference the Generation Lab once, the entirety of the article revolves around the data that the Generation Lab provided to them. The data collected by the Generation Lab was exclusively provided to Axios and as a result, the article would not exist without the Generation Lab's contributions. Let me know what you think and if you have any advice. Thanks so much!

Hi, thanks for the message. It is irrelevant for the purpose of establishing notability what data produced by the Generation Lab was used by a third-party. You need to provide multiple independent secondary sources with significant coverage of the Generation Lab, and not simply references to byproducts of its work used by other sites. I'd suggest reading WP:GNG. Best of luck! nearlyevil665 19:41, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

RE:

Dear User,

Thank you for your quick feedback and comments. I am not a lawyer and I am not paid to write this page, but I agree with you that some parts are not objective enough. Thank you for your advice, I will be making improvements.

Regards,

Genuine69 (talk) 20:23, 22 July 2021 (UTC)Genuine69[reply]

A little confused

I don't understand what's wrong with the article. I sourced multiple different news sites covering him. I'm alittle confused Lilzlulz (talk) 09:34, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

FBOY Island

Thanks for reviewing. I will revise and resubmit once the show is more established and there is more critical coverage.

Jhofferman (talk) 19:30, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Page mover granted

Hello, Nearlyevil665. Your account has been granted the "extendedmover" user right, either following a request for it or demonstrating familiarity with working with article names and moving pages. You are now able to rename pages without leaving behind a redirect, move subpages when moving the parent page(s), and move category pages.

Please take a moment to review Wikipedia:Page mover for more information on this user right, especially the criteria for moving pages without leaving redirect. Please remember to follow post-move cleanup procedures and make link corrections where necessary, including broken double-redirects when suppressredirect is used. This can be done using Special:WhatLinksHere. It is also very important that no one else be allowed to access your account, so you should consider taking a few moments to secure your password. As with all user rights, be aware that if abused, or used in controversial ways without consensus, your page mover status can be revoked.

Useful links:

If you do not want the page mover right anymore, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Thank you, and happy editing! Primefac (talk) 11:23, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 21:59:05, 24 July 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Magicofwiki



Magicofwiki (talk) 21:59, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

hi im not compensated for this post - im simply creating a page to reflect the company which owns a variety of brands that already have wiki pages like datpiff, whisper etc all of which are hyperlinked and medialab is mentioned on each of those pages

Notice of noticeboard discussion

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Heycambry (talk) 15:42, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 19:43:11, 29 July 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by A list music


Identifying unreliable sources


Hi, I created a page about a film composer mentioned clearly at IMDB, and the sources are reliable. Can you tell me which are the "unreliable" sources you state as a reason for not allowing the article?

A list music (talk) 19:43, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 01:57:01, 30 July 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Fadzi02


I am writing to ask why my article was not accepted for submission. It is very much similar to other biographical articles of that nature. I am writing about a woman who has been extremely remarkable who is the first African woman in her field. I looked at Dr. Claire Karekezi who is approved on wikipedia and I don't see any difference between the two. I would appreciate your insight. Thank you very much.

Fadzi02 (talk) 01:57, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is no Wikipedia article about Claire Karekezi (there is a photo in Commons). Karekezi is Rwanda born, US & Canada trained, and has chosen to pursue her career as a neurosurgeon in Rwanda. David notMD (talk) 10:09, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback granted

Hi Nearlyevil665. After reviewing your request, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when using rollback:

  • Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
  • Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
  • Rollback should never be used to edit war.
  • If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
  • Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into trouble or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! - TheresNoTime 😺 12:09, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Diana Burnwood Deletion

Hi, On a recent article I posted about Diana Burnwood you tagged it for deletion, under the reason she's a tertiary character and doesn't qualify. Burnwood has appeared in nearly every game to date, and in some games has over fifty minutes of dialogue. She had the Hitman comic series developed about her parents' loss, was the most related to Agent 47, etc. How is she 'tertiary?' She was very important i most of the games.

Thanks, Eye Ay En

Draft:Impaakt Submission declined on 17 August 2021.

Hi,

Thank you very much for reviewing my work and for your help. I really appreciate it.

I am part of the Impaakt community and I was searching for Impaakt on Wikipedia. Since I could not find an article about the platform I thought that initiating one could be interesting for the experience and because Impaakt and Wikipedia work on the same model. Moreover, I hoped that more experienced Wikipedian would contribute to my article.

While searching, I found this page: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impak_Finance about a similar company. However, I struggle to understand how it was possible that this article was published: (https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impak_Finance) and that mine (Draft:Impaakt) was rejected. In fact both articles look quite similar. Do you know the reason?

Would you have any additional advices to help me get my first article published on Wikipedia? Is there a way for me to get contributions from experienced Wikipedians on my Draft:Impaakt ?

Once again, thank you very much for your help and your time.

Best-

Creation of article

Please how can my article be approve Samiyun (talk) 14:19, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Creation of article

hi. whats wrong with my first article? ty https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Parallel_Finance --EDS2020 (talk) 19:18, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's not supported by reliable sources. See Wikipedia:Reliable sources. Also of use could be Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). nearlyevil665 19:25, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

LA Post, executive.berkeley.edu, www.entrepreneur.com, bloomberg and coindesk reliable sources? --EDS2020 (talk) 19:48, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's not simply a matter of the subject being mentioned in a reliable outlet. There are other factors as well, such as that it shouldn't be a trivial coverage or routine reporting. I'd suggest reading up on Wikipedia:SIGCOV. nearlyevil665 19:53, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations from WikiProject Articles for Creation!

The Articles for Creation Barnstar & The Teamwork Barnstar
Congratulations! You have earned The Articles for Creation Barnstar and The Teamwork Barnstar for reviewing an outstanding 390 drafts and doing 39 re-reviews during the WikiProject Articles for creation July 2021 Backlog Drive. Also, well done for scoring 6th place overall. Thank you for your work to improve Wikipedia!
On behalf of WikiProject Articles for Creation, Enterprisey (talk!) 00:17, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Revision for Draft

Good afternoon Sir/Ma'am, I have gone ahead and updated a research section and included a variety of sources. Please let me know if there's more that I need to do to integrate your advice. Thanks and sending best regards.

New Page Patrol newsletter September 2021

New Page Review queue September 2021

Hello Nearlyevil665,

Please join this discussion - there is increase in the abuse of Wikipedia and its processes by POV pushers, Paid Editors, and by holders of various user rights including Autopatrolled. Even our review systems themselves at AfC and NPR have been infiltrated. The good news is that detection is improving, but the downside is that it creates the need for a huge clean up - which of course adds to backlogs.

Copyright violations are also a serious issue. Most non-regular contributors do not understand why, and most of our Reviewers are not experts on copyright law - and can't be expected to be, but there is excellent, easy-to-follow advice on COPYVIO detection here.

At the time of the last newsletter (#25, December 2020) the backlog was only just over 2,000 articles. New Page Review is an official system. It's the only firewall against the inclusion of new, improper pages.

There are currently 706 New Page Reviewers plus a further 1,080 admins, but as much as nearly 90% of the patrolling is still being done by around only the 20 or so most regular patrollers.

If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process or its software.

Various awards are due to be allocated by the end of the year and barnstars are overdue. If you would like to manage this, please let us know. Indeed, if you are interested in coordinating NPR, it does not involve much time and the tasks are described here.

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. Sent to 827 users. 04:32, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Reinhard Schneider

Hi Nearlyevil665. Do you have any feedback for me here yet [1] ? Kind regards, --Fastnacht (talk) 11:04, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, as these are German sources I'm a bit torn if they qualify sufficiently so I'd prefer to leave this draft for a German-speaking editor. nearlyevil665 20:23, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note that you have to hit resubmit at the draft page for it to get resubmitted for repeat review. nearlyevil665 20:24, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 04:19:05, 27 September 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by TheBandShirleyFan


May I request for a reconsideration of my submission on the grounds of the subject having significant coverage in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. The following articles featured the subject extensively: Modern Parenting and Esquire Magazine.

Let me also add that I included citations to the academic articles written by Dr. Rica Cruz published in a peer-reviewed journal. May I know if these are considered "published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject"? In the guidelines for determining notability, it specifically says for academics, which Dr. Rica Cruz is, "Many scientists, researchers, philosophers and other scholars (collectively referred to as "academics" for convenience) are notably influential in the world of ideas without their biographies being the subject of secondary sources."

I would also like to ask how to improve the article since the subject has proven notability mostly in social media. References that suggest this are in the form of video recording of shows that are aired on national TV. Again, according to the guidelines on notability of entertainers, the subject has also had significant roles in multiple notable television and radio programs, and made prolific contributions as a journalist in several online media platforms. I wonder how these could be referenced in the article to improve it.

Thank you!

TheBandShirleyFan (talk) 04:19, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Academic publications by the author himself are primary sources, not secondary. Furthermore, articles where the subject is mentioned in a trivial manner or where the subject is expressing opinions in an expert capacity do not qualify as a pass of notability. We need reliable sources that cover the subject, not sources where the subject expresses their expert opinions. As to your point about the subject meeting Wikipedia:NENT, I don't see how the subject meets it.
You are free to resubmit and another reviewer will take a look at it. nearlyevil665 08:29, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 04:26:53, 27 September 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by TheBandShirleyFan


TheBandShirleyFan (talk) 04:26, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 23:53:55, 29 September 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by AnnLWSFebruary84wiki



AnnLWSFebruary84wiki (talk) 23:53, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply] 

This is a reference for my submission for the LESBIAN WRITERS SERIES

https://escholarship.org/uc/item/3r89c3cc I was told that the article I submitted - the LESBIAN WRITERS SERIES did not sire reliable sources - here is a link to the web story on the UCLA website:

https://escholarship.org/uc/item/3r89c3cc

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Nearlyevil665&oldid=1047271037"