User talk:Livitup

GOCE March drive newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors March 2012 backlog elimination drive update GOCE March 2012 Backlog Elimination progress graphs Greetings from the Guild of Copy Editors March 2012 Backlog elimination drive! Here's the mid-drive newsletter. Participation: We have had 58 people sign up for this drive so far, which compares favorably with our last drive, and 27 have copy-edited at least one article. If you have signed up but have not yet copy-edited any articles, please consider doing so. Every bit helps! If you haven't signed up yet, it's not too late. Join us! Progress report: Our target of completing the 2010 articles has almost been reached, with only 56 remaining of the 194 we had at the start of the drive. The last ones are always the most difficult, so thank you if you are able to help copy-edit any of the remaining articles. We have reduced the total backlog by 163 articles so far. Special thanks: Special thanks to Stfg, who has been going through the backlog and doing some preliminary vetting of the articles—removing copyright violations, doing initial clean-up, and nominating some for deletion. This work has helped make the drive a more pleasant experience for all our volunteers. Your drive coordinators – Dianna (talk), Stfg (talk), and Dank (talk) To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

GOCE May mid-drive newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors May 2012 backlog elimination drive mid-drive newsletter Participation: Out of 49 people signed up for this drive so far, 26 have copy-edited at least one article. It's a smaller group than last drive, but we're making good progress. If you've signed up but haven't yet copy-edited any articles, please consider doing so. Every bit helps! If you haven't signed up yet, it's not too late. Template:J Progress report: We're on track to meet our targets for the drive, largely due to the efforts of Lfstevens and the others on the leaderboard. Thanks to all. We have reduced our target group of articles—January, February, and March 2011—by over half, and it looks like we will achieve that goal. Good progress is being made on the overall backlog as well, with over 500 articles copy-edited during the drive so far. The total backlog currently sits at around 3200 articles. Hall of Fame: GOCE coordinator Diannaa was awarded a spot in the GOCE Hall of Fame this month! She has copy-edited over 1567 articles during these drives, and surpassed the 1,000,000-word mark on May 5. On to the second million! – Your drive coordinators: Dank, Diannaa and Stfg >>> Sign up now <<< To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 14:34, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

New Page Triage/New Pages Feed

Hey all :). A notification that the prototype for the New Pages Feed is now live on enwiki! We had to briefly take it down after an unfortunate bug started showing up, but it's now live and we will continue developing it on-site.

The page can be found at Special:NewPagesFeed. Please, please, please test it and tell us what you think! Note that as a prototype it will inevitably have bugs - if you find one not already mentioned at the talkpage, bring it up and I'm happy to carry it through to the devs. The same is true of any additions you can think of to the software, or any questions you might have - let me know and I'll respond.

Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 13:28, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

New article

Hey, I've got the new article into mainspace. It's not urgent, but if you want to copyedit it within the next couple weeks, that would be great. The article is Clarence 13X, he was a gambling aficionado who came to believe that he was Allah incarnate, and started his own religion. He had some very unconventional (and initially quite racist and misogynist ideas) but became a lot more mainstream as he aged. Interesting guy, in my mind. It's probably not as polished as the last couple articles that I've handed to you, so it might take some extra work. The one big thing is, he went by three different names over the course of his life, so I'm not sure what to refer to him as. Use your best judgment, I guess. Thanks! Mark Arsten (talk) 04:14, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Cool... I'll start taking a look on my flight Saturday night. I remember an instruction in the MOS for dealing with name changes—I'll have to dig it up before I leave. Livit⇑^Eh?/_What? 14:45, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

RoomSurge up for deletion

Hello, Regarding roomsurge.com, I was the one who initiated this page. Sorry I didn't cite more sources as I didn't feel more were necessary. I believe the article in question is a spin-off company off another Fortune 200 company which in my view is significant enough :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emilytisch (talk • contribs) 15:09, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

The bar that you have to pass is the Wikipedia notability policy which states "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article or stand-alone list." Your article cites one article with significant coverage. The first reference is trivial coverage, and since it comes from the college where the site was founded, it could be argued if it is "independent" coverage. Sorry, but being a spin-off of a Fortune 200 company doesn't prove notability. However, if one or more reliable sources took note of the spin-off and documented it in articles, then you would be able to cite them in the article and be well beyond the notability criteria. I did some quick searching before I nominated the article, and I couldn't find any such coverage, but if you know of some, use it to improve the article, cite it, and comment at the AfD! Livit⇑^Eh?/_What? 15:14, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Sure, but I have seen a LOT of articles on Wikipedia about small start up companies that have similar sources. For example, Wiggio uses several sources as the basis for the Wiki page's statements. They might use CNET as a source, but upon further examination, the author of the "Cnet" article is actually a college blogger who was given permission to blog on Cnet's technology blog. Would that be considered as "independent" reporting? I think not! So what is the difference here? And one of the sources on RoomSurge's page is from SeekingAlpha which is heavily known in the finance community. Emilytisch (talk) 15:21, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Please read WP:OSE. The fact that there are other non-compliant articles out there is not a good reason to keep the one you're lobbying for. "He did it first," never worked for me as a kid with my parents (usually said right after I punched my older brother in the arm...). Livit⇑^Eh?/_What? 15:24, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

My point is, when creating that page, I used the models from other similar companies who have been on Wikipedia for a while now (and thus, proving in my view that they are valid submissions to Wikipedia). I tried my best to follow the models of several of those websites that weren't deleted and yet, mine was put up for deletion within 10 minutes. I'm not sure how or what you do to determine which pages stay or why some pages are deleted within 10 minutes that are worded in the exact same way that MANY companies on Wiki are worded. I tried to word this in the most neutral way possible as I have no incentive to advertise this company since (A) I do not work for them and (B) I do not work for the Fortune 500 company that it spun off of. But now I question whether certain editors do have an incentive to keep certain companies on here and delete others... Emilytisch (talk) 15:31, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Please don't make this about me... I'm just as likely to go nominate Wiggio for deletion as I am Roomsurge.com. My point is that you have selected a flawed model to use as a template. If your goal is to copy the Mona Lisa, you shouldn't start by buying a print of The Scream. In my first response, I pointed you to how it is determined which articles are nominated for deletion: it's those that don't meet WP:N. Especially read the first section (which has it's own shortcut, WP:GNG), and it should tell you everything you need to know. Livit⇑^Eh?/_What? 15:38, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Alright, so I have selected a flawed model to copy off of. But then I guess half the companies on Wikipedia would be up for deletion as well. I'm just confused as why the page I spent time to write up for no financial incentive whatsoever was considered more as "advertising" than, say, SeekingAlpha, which is actually one of the sources I cited. I know, you said not to talk about precedent again but if American court system uses 99% of the time, precedents - verdicts and opinions of judges from PREVIOUS cases, to determine the fate of present landmark cases I can use that here. So I just can't understand what else I'd have to add (or delete) in order to make my article valid. Do you just want one more cited source? I didn't even name the website itself as a source - a practice I've seen tons of others do - which shows I really tried my best to make this one neutral. Emilytisch (talk) 15:47, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

If I were to cite one more "notable source" that hasn't been cited yet, will you remove the deletion proposal? Emilytisch (talk) 17:16, 1 June 2012 (UTC)