Jump to content

User talk:KylieTastic

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Tomnewman72 (talk | contribs) at 12:12, 26 April 2020 (→Sheikh Jalal ud-Din page). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


View this userbox's documentationIt is approximately 10:45 PM where this user lives (Cambridge, UK).Refresh the time

I try to answer all questions, but I also have a busy real-life - If you have a general question it may be quicker to ask at the Wikipedia:Teahouse

Click to start a Question/section — Deleted image issue? Look up the files history here...


AfC Drafts NOTE: To be fair to all submitters I do not review/re-review on request, I just pick new and old submissions at random...

Current Backlog: 1,436 pending submissions

 


Spoiler Country Article

Hello,

Hoping this is how it works to get clarification. In attempts to get information out about the Spoiler Country podcast I used examples from other articles on Wikipedia. Could you maybe clarify what sections or exact issues caue this article to be rejected?

reasons for rejection:

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 (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

are press releases needed?


Thank you, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rslavinsky (talk • contribs) 20:09, 3 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Post that was nog good

hello i am Richard Jansma (RichardJansma)

and i made a post/sandbox with the tile opensea. its my first article i would like to write and i try my best. i would like to know what I can do to make my article accepted (I want it to grow on its own)

now I see that I may not have used correct references but I would like to learn how to do it correctly.

i look forward for your feedback

yours sincerely,

Richard Jansma — Preceding unsigned comment added by RichardJansma (talk • contribs) 13:26, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey thanks for your reply. i would love to make my post good (its my first post) and I'm trying to make it as good as possible, I have added some sources and I will build it up. is there maybe a way you could help me out with getting familiar with he Wikipedia system/writing.... maybe outside of Wikipedia but that's up to you (just search my name on the internet) also what would you suggest for learning the systemand writing good posts... i would love to hear from you.

yours sincerely,


Richard Jansma — Preceding unsigned comment added by RichardJansma (talk • contribs) 18:40, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Article waiting for review for long

Hi, I had created an article on Wikipedia Draft: Ass torture two months ago. However, since then it is in draft stage and is pending for review. I think you are one of the persons who reviews draft articles. In case you have time available, pls review my article.

Pls note that you can change the article name from "Ass torture" to "Anal torture". Thanks Dugro (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:14, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Resubmission of Narendra Kumar (fashion designer) page

I have corrected the page you declined, may you kindly review it again. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Narendra_Kumar_(fashion_designer)

  • Hi Innolawrence I see you have added a number of sources so thanks. To be fair to all submitters I don't re-review on request, I just pick new and old submissions at random, so it may or may not be myself who reviews it next. Also I'm currently not doing much editing do to real life issues. Regards KylieTastic (talk) 19:13, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

talk thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Innolawrence (talk • contribs) 19:18, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tanaza - Disapproved articles

Hello KylieTastic,

we don't really understand why the articles dedicated to Tanaza are always rejected by Wikipedia. We have tried every type of writing style, we have followed the Wikipedia guidelines, tested different levels of information. We are sure that our content is not commercial. It simply describes what Tanaza is and what it does.

I hope you can help us to understand the reasons before this decision against Tanaza.

Thank you so much.

Marco Papavero

American Revolutionary Party article

Hello, Kylie Tastic I created an article about the American Revolutionary Party and it has been declined because it isn't notable. Which I understand, but what exactly is considered "notable"? As far as I know, the American Revolutionary Party (ARP) is famous on Instagram as they have around 1000 followers.

Spill Article

Hi Kylie Tastic! The Spill article is my first submission. A quick note - it is a book and not a movie. Not sure how to change that in the title. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jshipley528 (talk • contribs) 19:51, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Title

It is 'Sayeed Mohammed' only. Could anyone please correct it ? Riyyan Farooq (talk) 11:10, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Winston Ellis

What relaible sources would you accept? IMDB is the generally accepted source for film credits? Any advice would be appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C8:108:8F01:7D68:10ED:EF7D:885A (talk) 18:15, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi, IMDB along with Wikis (including Wikipedia) are not deamed reliable sources as they are user-generated and while popular films may be mostly accurate we have many submissions where the IMDB entry was created or changed recently. And unlike Wikipedia, no sources to check anything is correct. See WP:RSPSOURCES for the list of most used sources and which are good and bad. There are lots more, but they should not be linked to the subject, user-generated, publishers of submitted works. See Wikipedia:Reliable sources for more information. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 18:29, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Specific References I Need for Approval

Hi KylieTastic I would like to get your recommendation on what types of specific references I should enter to have this article approved https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Spill_(book). Is the most important thing to have lots of ref links within the body that appear in the References section at the bottom of the article? Or is it more valuable to have more Templates cite web, cite news, cite book, cite journal references? I feel like there are enough references to this novel out there on the web; I just need to know what would count the most to getting it approved. The author, Les Standiford, has a wikipedia page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Les_Standiford, his own author page http://www.les-standiford.com/ . Should I look at the references used in Standiford's Wikipedia article to see if I can find more on this novel Spill in them? Any feedback would be appreciated. I really liked this book and would love to have the article published! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jshipley528 (talk • contribs) 22:03, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi Jshipley528 I see you had asked the same at WP:WPAFC/HD and had no reply - unfortunately we are all just volunteers and things get missed, especially at the moment when some frequent editors are doing less (such as myself) or nothing due to real life issues. Firstly it is more important to have a few very good references that lots, and yes it is always good to have them in the body of the article rather than just listed at the bottom so information can be verified WP:V more easily. See Help:Referencing for beginners for the key guide, note that you can use the same source in many places see the same reference used more than once section. Although using the cite templates helps people locate the sources, especially for bare urls to preserve extra information for if the url changes, but it's not essential. The most important thing here is all new articles on Wikipedia have to show they are notable subjects (See WP:N) which in most cases requires significant coverage in multiple independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS). Just because Les Standiford is notable does not mean every piece of work is also notable on it's own. The key criteria for a book is Wikipedia:Notability (books) in particular WP:BOOKCRIT. Currently your three sources are the book (not independent), the second appears to just be the book blurb (not independent), the last is IMDB (not a reliable source) and is about the film adaptation. So what you need to find is the independent sources, normally at least 3, for instance reviews and any awards won. Hope that makes sense - all the best, keep safe KylieTastic (talk) 11:39, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request for editing, creating Amit Bhadana

Hi, I do not have much knowledge of English language. Therefore, I probably made mistakes in editing the article. Therefore, I request you to contribute in the article Draft:Amit Bhadana (youtuber). Please do contribute to Amit Bhadana (youtuber) article. I hope for you. Mr Tejal (talk) 15:32, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please Accept my Edit

Hey Kylie I Have Submited a One Wikipedia Page But You Have Declined Can You Tell me Why I Have Submitted all Proofs Like a Website Facebook Twitter Instagram Please Approve This Page So Indian Small Business Grow And Get More Reach Please From India

when you approve then i will submit a every correct information of this page on every three month

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:JPixelite_Studios#Changed — Preceding unsigned comment added by James3354 (talk • contribs) 16:54, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

English Wikipedia page for Josef Mitterer

Dear KylieTastic, many thanks for taking the time to review my draft! The Austrian philosopher Josef Mitterer has been increasingly received outside the German speaking world for years, so I think it is time for an English Wikipedia entry. I hope I have responded appropriately to your objections with the additional references and I will continue working on it. You mention that you have a busy life and so do I. However, I would be very grateful if you could take another look at the draft. Best wishes. Bronsky 2020. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bronsky 2020 (talk • contribs) 12:59, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi Bronsky 2020, well a big improvement from no references, so thanks. I've tided it up a bit. My German is minimal but I think another source that could be used to show the impact of his work is https://science.orf.at/v2/stories/2921821/ and that also gives other sources. I think your correct that they probably meet our notability standards, but if you could add a bit more from that source or others, and any news stories about him then I think it will be acceptable. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 15:08, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi and thanks again for your feedback! I've added the link you suggested and one more reference from the Austrian newspaper Die Presse. Also I've added a part on Mitterer's philosophy (as a start this is mainly a translation from the German Wikipedia site) and a list of selected talks and presentation. Best wishes Bronsky 2020--Bronsky 2020 17:33, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Help!!!

Hi . I need a help. How can I put a reference on my draft ? Tanisha priyadarshini (talk) 16:00, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I mean what ref. Should I put over? Tanisha priyadarshini (talk) 16:01, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yahh I have seen that but still I'm so confused that what ref should be the correct one ? Tanisha priyadarshini (talk) 16:04, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Minerva Academy Football and Cricket Club

Why did you reject my article?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Minerva_Academy_Football_and_Cricket_Club — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sisanchobraut (talk • contribs) 19:03, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Woodsworth

I've moved the tagged redirect into hyperspace and accepted the disambiguation page. A strange exercise, but it gets the encyclopedia improved slightly. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:22, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Thank you for resolving error Maizbhandariya (talk) 18:56, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ,can you please tell me when will this article become live thanks Maizbhandariya (talk) 20:08, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi Maizbhandariya, sorry there is no timescales - like everything on Wikipedia reviewing is done by volunteers. Many submissions are reviewed in the first couple of days, however some get left as no one immediately wanted to accept or decline. Currently there 1995 submissions waiting , which is better than the 4000+ it was at a couple of months ago. All the best KylieTastic (talk)

Actually I thought that you are a new page reviewer ,so asked this question sorry and thanks again Maizbhandariya (talk) 20:28, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thanks Maizbhandariya (talk) 20:37, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,I beg to your kindness for my draft to be review by another experienced editor than previous one who do not share any sort of good or bad relationship with the article,so that an unbiased decision will be made.thanks have a nice e Maizbhandariya (talk) 04:36, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi Maizbhandariya, you don't appear to have asked the last reviewer for any more feedback. Other options you have is to use the "ask us a question" link on the decline notice to ask the AfC Help desk, or you can ask for the Wikipedia:Teahouse. However I see AaqibAnjum has been making changes and has marked as doing more. They are also an AfC reviewer so maybe they are working on getting it into a state for acceptance. I would suggest waiting to see what they do, and if not accepteed asking them for advice on what is needed. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 09:52, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks dear KylieTastic. I've copy edited the draft. Maizbhandariya may resubmit it to AfC for acceptance. I've done my best to bring the article close to WP:NPOV. I can see it passes WP:GNG easily and other criterias do meet. The creating editor has been troublesome at places by undoing my edits. That should not be done. Aaqib Anjum Aafī (talk) 09:58, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks have a nice day Maizbhandariya (talk) 09:56, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I Thank you from the bottom my heart for your relentless effort for the publication of my article may Almighty bestow his mercy on you with true path Thanks once again Maizbhandariya (talk) 12:15, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi , actually I want to add the beliefs and practices of Saqib Iqbal Shami as a spiritual leader draft:Saqib Iqbal Shami with reliable independent sources but user:Aqib Anjum is reverting my edits without any reason can you please help me for this,also I have added the reliable sources to draft; khwaja Abdullah chishti as it was declined for not adding reliable sources, he is also reverting it without any reason, you are requested to kindly solve this issue, an unbiased decisions is hoped Maizbhandariya (talk) 11:34, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't do disruptive editing on the Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not everything where you share the beliefs, in lists. Noting that Saqib Iqbal Shami is a Sufi and Barewli - it automatically adds up his beliefs. Moreover, you do not have enough knowledge about referencing, please see WP:REFB and that the Draft:Khwaja Abdullah Chishti is being looked after by User:Shahbazakhter99, you should and must not disrupt his editing, unless he clears the issue. You can add up resources on the talk page instead because you are right now ignorant of WP:REFB and why are you removing maintenance tags from Saqib Iqbal Shami? Aaqib Anjum Aafī (talk) 12:24, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Still Aqib Anjum is deleting the reliable sources from draft: Khwaja Abdullah chishti which can be seen as an unbiased editing as he is a believer of deobandi ideology mentioned on his user page so he wanted to edit the pages on his personal interest,a strict action is requested against this user aa early as possible thanks have a nice day ,be safe Maizbhandariya (talk) 12:28, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Events

File:Aaqib Anjum Deoband 1.jpg
Wikipedian Aaqib Anjum Aafi at one day Urdu Wikipedia workshop in Deoband


Maizbhandariya (talk) 12:30, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Maizbhandariya, did I not copy edited your article about Saqib Iqbal Shami. Why are doing personal attacks on me? The above image is from a Wikipedia Workshop that I arranged in a town known as Deoband. You are newbie and I welcome you too to learn some policies of Wikipedia. You are welcome always. But do not do this disruptive editing. - Aaqib Anjum Aafī (talk) 12:32, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Kylie,there is also evidences that user: Aqib Anjum had made many article on deobandi figures which can be seen as his deep connection with the deobandi movement thanks have a great day keep safe ⭐ for you Maizbhandariya (talk) 12:38, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Are Deobandi personalities not deserving a place on Wikipedia? At least any of my article does not fail in referencing like yours. You have used a number of unreliable references on Saqib Iqbal Shami, and I would request you, please stop doing vandalism and be fear with Wikipedia policies. You seem to be a stubborn. - Aaqib Anjum Aafī (talk) 12:44, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Maizbhandariya and AaqibAnjum after a very long day I have no desire to get involved however I will make some comments/observations...
  • Maizbhandariya maintenance tags should not be removed as you did here without addressing the issue (i.e. when it's clear, such as no categories that is easy to understand and fix). If a tag such as "Unreliable sources" is placed that disputes your own work you should either discuss with the editor who added the tag and/or start a discussion on the article talk page possibly using {{help}} to get other editors attention; or just leave for another non-involved editor to review. It is also fine to ask for input/opinion at a general help forum such as the Wikipedia:Teahouse or the Wikipedia:Help desk.
  • If a tag is removed, or other such edits and then reverted both editors should preferably discuss on the article talk page as per Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle (WP:BRD) and not keep reverting - beware the The three-revert rule (WP:3RR)
  • Maizbhandariya if you have an issue with another editor you should not go to Wikipedia talk:Username policy but Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (WP:ANI) or the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard
  • Maizbhandariya I am aware there are many different factions/movements/groups in Islam (like most/all religions) but I have no interest in the frictions between such groups. I have no knowledge of Deobandi. Any editor is allowed to edit in there area of interest, as long as they have no Conflict of interest (WP:COI) and the articles meet the guidelines that is not just OK but normal. Many if not most of the editors who create articles have a subject or subjects that interest them - be that roads, plants, a band, a sport, a science, ete. So if AaqibAnjum has mostly created Deobandi related articles that is fine. It is expected that such things are balanced out by other editors interested in other areas.
Collaborative editing is not an easy thing to do, especially on subjects that relate to religion & politics and other such emotive subjects. But Wikipedia is collaborative editing based on the current guidelines that where created collaboratively. The best advice is always to step back from any conflict, give it time, get other opinions and try not to escalate.
To both of you stay safe, be happy, as that's what matters most KylieTastic (talk) 18:01, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Theta Nu Psi

Greetings. And thank you for the quick review. Can you please provide me guidance in what particular Reliable sources do you need? We have our 501 from the IRS and are Incorporated from Virginia. Again thank you for any guidance you can provide.

  • Hi Ru9ture, Wikipedia uses a concept of notability as described at WP:N, which basically means articles generally require significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic. While details of a 501 are indeed independent and reliable it is not any in-depth coverage. The point is not to show subjects exist, but has the world "noticed" - if Wikipedia just required it to be proved subjects exist every company, organisation, brand, person, book, film, sports team etc would have a page. Usually 3+ independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS) with significant coverage (not just a passing mention) is required. Hope that explains things. Keep safe KylieTastic (talk) 19:55, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes it does actually. But what if the recognition is done via social (i.e. FB, Twitter, etc.)? Again thanks for the quick response.
  • Hi Ru9ture, generally not as most stuff on social media is from unverified sources, and trivial in nature. Most is classified as "Self-published sources" see WP:RSSELF. However obviously this is not always the case, otherwise a lot of what Trump says could not be referenced without finding another reliable source re-quoting, etc. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 20:44, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • KylieTastic You are AWESOME!!!! LOL! Good point! Let me do some digging around and I'll look into resubmitting.

Hi

Please accept iran bar association Transaction this page persian https://fa.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/%DA%A9%D8%A7%D9%86%D9%88%D9%86_%D9%88%DA%A9%D9%84%D8%A7%DB%8C_%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%AF%DA%AF%D8%B3%D8%AA%D8%B1%DB%8C_%D9%85%D8%B1%DA%A9%D8%B2 (Behrouz asbahi sis (talk) 16:30, 15 April 2020 (UTC))[reply]

hi but nobody dont translation this pages i try know my bar but can not . thank you Behrouz asbahi sis (talk) KylieTastic


Page under review: added rightful citations (non urgent! take care!)

I have added rightful citations to the page you declined, may you kindly review it again? Thank you so much for your work, in any case this is not urgent :) https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Draft:PALA_Psychedelics_Association_of_Lausanne_for_Awareness&oldid=951137540

What is considered a 'Reliable Source'

Dear, KylieTastic You recently declined my article about the Origin of the Funderburk Name. You said that neither cites seemed liked "Reliable Sources" but please hear me out. I am new to this Wikipedia stuff, and don't know much about what is considered a reliable source. However, I know what I am taking about on that page. I decedent of the 'Von Der Burg' family. I am positive I don't need a thousand reliable sources when I am one. 

                                                                                                     -Patriot History2nd
                                                                                                              Please message me back at my talk page on
                                                                                                                           User:Patriot History2nd
  • Hi Patriot History2nd for the full answer on what an RS is see Wikipedia:Reliable sources - however let me explain on the particular ones on Draft:The History of the Funderburk Name. The first forebears.io states that it's distribution map is from a "global database of over 4 billion people" so fine, however the other information is marked as "User-submission" and "User-submitted" so not suitbale to Wikipedia. I'm sure they were probably submitted in good faith and could have come from valid sources, but also could be just a story that has been passed down in the family with no historical reality - basically there is no way to verify correctness (WP:V). The second funderburk.de appears to be someone's personal website. Now the history section may be correct as it starts "Several books have been written Of the Family Funderburk" which is good if they used sources, but Wikipedia would expect the original books to be used as references. Some of these home Genealogy projects are very well done, others take a more poetic stance - i.e. preferring interesting sounding stories, and famous relatives rather than worry about factualness. Being a "decedent of the 'Von Der Burg' family" has no merit here - you will have either got your information from reliable sources or not, if the first they should be used here. We don't need or want a "thousand reliable sources", generally 3+ good sources, or 2+ excellent sources are desired to show notability and in general all key facts should be backed by at least 1 source. Look for some more sources to add, having these more informal sources is a great way to start locating better ones. You could also seek help/advise at Wikipedia:WikiProject Genealogy. Cheers, keep safe KylieTastic (talk) 08:51, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

Dear KylieTastic, I am personally sorry for the disruptive edits that the another editor has made at your talk page concerning me. I would request you too to make him understand basic principles of Wikipedia. Regards - Aaqib Anjum Aafī (talk) 13:15, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi Aaqib Anjum Aafī, these things happen now and then no worries. The only thing I would say is when a disagreement moves as it did to Wikipedia talk:Username policy it's best to step back and let other deal with it. It stops the other party feeling hounded and when a third party (in this case an admin) sees the post they can bring balance and an independent judgement to the issue. One thing I always try to do is to not make things one editor vs another (even if I really think the other party is wrong, unless mindless vandalism) - so for instance if I reject an AfC submission twice in a row and they just resubmit I wont reject as much as I may want too, but I leave for another to reject so they can see that it's not just that one persons opinion. I do appreciate the sentiment though and thank you. Keep happy, keep safe, all the best KylieTastic (talk) 18:13, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks dear KylieTastic for your humble advises. Love. - Aaqib Anjum Aafī (talk) 21:06, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Todd Burns (producer)

Can you tell me what needs to be done here?

Draft:Look (company)

Draft:Look (company) is good to go now. BaldBoris 14:10, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi Bald, looks much improved - but to be fair to all submitters I don't re-review on request, I just pick new and old submissions at random, so it may or may not be myself who reviews it next. However with the backlog shrinking daily hopefully it wont be to long. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 09:49, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    OK thanks. It wasn't a request, just a heads up. This is my first meeting with Afc. I only saw the outright crime of not allowing it in the first place, and backed whoever submitted it. I can't accept anything but a pass. BaldBoris 11:17, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you!

Thank you for your feedback Kylie. Sorry I'll be bumbling about for a bit while I learn my way.

Jennifer T. Coen (talk) 16:36, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Request on 20:26:46, 17 April 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Jack Fangles


Jack Fangles (talk) 20:26, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Jack Fangles No question? But I see Schazjmd has improved the article for you. As a place on NRHP it is notable, but it would be good to see a bit more content and sources. If you can find any to add great, and then either way re-submit and an AfC reviewer will re-check. Stay safe KylieTastic (talk) 10:14, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks KylieTastic. I am basically just trying to figure out an appropriate subject that warrants a contribution. I am trying to cut down on the possibility of spending time writing on a subject that won't get approved. I initially wanted to add to the Raymond Chandler page and create a "subheading"? for "Raymond Chandler and Los Angeles" which catalogues all of the Los Angeles locations associated with the writer and his work. This is all very daunting, though, Especially because I am working under a deadline for university. Any help, clarity, or just all around good vibes are welcomed and appreciated. Jack Fangles (talk) 19:17, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi Jack Fangles writing new articles is one of the hardest things on Wikipedia, the same as for many tasks starting with nothing. I've always been baffled when I see someone trying to create new articles linked to outside education, at least without a solid mentor. Also with AfC in the past being up to a 5 month wait, really not appropriate for educational tasks IMHO. With over 6 million articles finding a good topic that isn't covered isn't easy (or at least I don't find it so). Wikipedia:Requested articles is supposed to be a place to start, but many requests are without sources or any indication of notability. WikiProjects are also a place some find ideas, but there are only a few that are active. Another place to start is look at subjects your interested in and look for any red-links for related topics, then see if you can find sources to show notability. You could ask at a more general forum such as the Wikipedia:Teahouse so that many editors will see the question and can give advice. All the best, stay safe KylieTastic (talk) 10:03, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you delete my article?

Hi there.

I want to know why you deleted my Wikipedia entry when it was more or less mirrored this ACCEPTED Wikipedia article - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hello_(social_network).

This article that I submitted did not break any rules that Wikipedia currently have standing. Also, you did not provide any comments on what needed to be improved on to be accepted.

Looking forward to your response,

Michael

Review

Hello KylieTastic,

Good day....

I have resubmitted an article reviewed and declined by you. I believe, I have written and sourced in a better way. Kindly have a look and review the same. Best: DreamSparrow Chat 09:27, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hey DreamSparrow, good work clearly very much improved content and references. However to be fair to all submitters I don't re-review on request, I just pick new and old submissions at random, so it may or may not be myself who reviews it next. Cheers, stay safe KylieTastic (talk) 10:23, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Amulya

Please review and help me publish the article.She is one of upcoming actress in Kannada Film industry. Cinemapremi (talk) 11:15, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Two Different Personalities considered as same person

Hi, The page that I have created Draft : Amulya has been linked to wrong person.Amulya is Kannada actress who mainly works in Kannada Film Industry. Nisha Ravikrishnan is an actress who primarily works in Kannada television industry. These two are two different actors working in Kannada Film Industry. Cinemapremi (talk) 11:14, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Thanks for your response . Respect your time and suggestions. This article was moved to Draft : Amulya as Nisha Ravikrishnan plays character with that name. Could you please help me move it with Nisha Ravikrishnan. Please help me in reviewing it.

  • Hi Cinemapremi - it has now been moved to Draft:Nisha Ravikrishnan - to be fair to all submitters I don't re-review on request, I just pick new and old submissions at random, so it may or may not be myself who reviews it next. However I would point out that it's not clear if any of the references cover the sections Biography, Career, and Works. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 11:59, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello kylie

I am having the problem with citation when ever I am citing a source a message below source is arriving with`` text web ignored|help can you please help me to resolve this issue thanks cheers Maizbhandariya (talk) 19:51, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for the presumption.

Hi again, Kylie.

Okay, so do you have a link to what would be considered as an independent, reliable source? We have Medium posts regarding the app that are currently up - would articles and citations like these be reliable?

Thanks in advance.

  • Hi Michael Walliam the main guideline is Wikipedia:Reliable sources. Unfortunately no easy answer, but most major newspapers independent websites etc - the main thing to avoid is any user-generated content (Wikis, IMDB, etc) and any that publish for money, or publish press releases - there is now a lot of websites that look like news but just repost a mix of real news from other news sites, and mix in paid content to give it credibility. Another way to think about it is any source that has actually written the content mostly themselves, such as proper independent reviews. There is a non-exhaustive list of often discussed sources at WP:RSPSOURCES - Medium is marked as "generally unreliable" as it's a blog site and thus user-generated content. Hope that helps explain things KylieTastic (talk) 08:37, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Requires significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources to show notability"

The first reference is a Article that discusses the person I wrote about> That article also References a book that has the same information. The second reference is a Article by a notable news site for military members. The third reference is a Article by a notable military news journalist.

How are these not relevant or valid sources? There was MULTIPLE and INDEPENDENT sources. There are 1000's of Wikipedia pages that are created with less reliable sources and less reliable information. Any other "References" would just be redundant information.

  • Hi, the first ref was a brief mention, the second was by the subject so not independent - yes many Wikipedia articles created before the current standards would not be accepted, and slowly are being found and improved or deleted. KylieTastic (talk) 20:47, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • I am not sure what more you want, the guy worked for DELTA FORCE. A brief mention is still a reliable source. Maybe you guys should have a Military Moderator/Admin do reviews who understand this stuff. It's not like they publish their stores often. There is now 11 References to include interviews. There is not much more you can post for someone who worked for Delta Force and USASOC for 20 years. And I've been on here for 10 + years they are not slowly being improved or deleted. And last there was significant proof he was in the band, I am not sure what you are looking for as "proof". These are more than reliable sources for a college paper, they should work for Wikipedia...76.184.194.146 (talk) 20:55, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Great so you've improved the sourcing, that's what we want. Wikipedia "notability" is not about has a subject done worth while things, but have they been noted by the world. So unfortunately that means a "celebrity" who has done nothing but self promote can qualify, but many people who have done great things with their lives, helped the world, even saved mankind but no one writes about them don't. It's far from a perfect system, but having to have verifiable sources that are independent and non-trivial keeps the hundreds of people, companies, quack ideas from using Wikipedia to promote themselves each day. The guidelines and policies make Wikipedia better than most social media and blogs, but less than it could/should be if it had staff working on content like other encyclopedias. Regards, stay safe KylieTastic (talk) 21:15, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for Creation: Sandbox rejected - Potential stub?

Hi Kylie, Hope you and everyone around you are doing well. My submission at Articles for Creation: Sandbox was rejected, as it lacked significant coverage, and contained only passing mentions. However, the subject is well known for his works on social media and has over 100 million views on YouTube. Can we consider it as a potential stub, which we can keep updating with time? Thanks. Bling.a.ding (talk) 07:43, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Leinster Trophy contest deletion

Hi there, My article on the Leinter Trophy was based upon an article also written by me (I have the copyright). https://motorsport.ie/2018/09/12/leinster-trophy-75th-anniversary-facts-figures-by-brian-manning/ Can you advise on how I might proceed? Thanks BrianF1Man (talk) 16:29, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi BrianF1Man, even if you have the copyright then you have to have given permission to use under the licence Wikipedia uses (when you save an article it says just above the public button what that means). So if previously published Wikipedia needs to be able to verify that the copyright holder is actually realising the text - See Wikipedia:Copyrights for the whole topic and Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for how to donate. However the other issue is if you have written the text then it sounds like possible "original research" so see Wikipedia:No original research - so you would still need to provide reliable sources for it to be usable. Copyright is something Wikipedia takes very seriously due to the legal problems that could arise, so I hope you understand why the original action was taken, we have a lot of people just taking other peoples text and images without permission. All the best, keep safe KylieTastic (talk) 17:34, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can I re-access the article to edit it appropraitely? I have references for all the data in the article but hadn't completed including the references yet. This is my first Wikipedia article that I've written and a friend told me that an edit review would take 6 months (not 1hr!!!) and I would have had plenty of time to complete all the edits and references that I wanted to include as well as expand it. Can I just have it as a draft and then resubmit for editing once it is ready for review? Thanks for the encouraging words and please excuse my naivety when it comes to writing my first attempt. BrianF1Man (talk) 18:34, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi BrianF1Man, yes the AfC process backlog did get up to a horrendous 5 months and approx 5000 submitted articles backlogged with hundreds of new ones a day - however we've been fighting it hard recently (like all editors we are just volunteers who 'choose' to help) and it's down to < 1700 and only 36 left that have been waiting 3+ months. Several of us check the new submissions for copyright violations, attack pages, spam, promotion, easy accepts so yes many articles get reviewed in the first 24 hours, but then tend to wait till they reach the other end of the queue - so hours or many months. A horrible situation, but we have way more submissions than we have volunteer experienced editors. I'm not an admin so I cannot access your deleted draft and until the text is donated it could not be restored as it still counts as a copyright violation. So you can jump the copyright issue by following the process on Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials and then ask for it to be restored, or possibly you can ask the deleting admin Jimfbleak to email a copy if you plan to significantly reword the text to avoid copyright issues. Remember writing new articles is not an easy thing to start with but if you work though the issues creating them is rewarding - oh and the Wikipedia:Teahouse is there to help new editors out. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 19:03, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello kylie

Thanks for your reply to my request ,with your blessings I have sorted out the previous editing issue but Dear Kylie I need your help again to check my new Draft: Shakir Ali Noorie whether it is meeting Wikipedia's general notability and If not than please guide me accordingly so that it will become live,also you are kindly requested to please look onto other issues if possible ,help from the blessed and experienced editor like you will be my fortune...... cheers...have a nice time... thanks again17:22, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Dear Kylie what is your personal opinion whether it is fit for submission? Maizbhandariya (talk) 18:12, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi Maizbhandariya sorry I've run out of energy for Wikipedia, on top of real-life work it's making days really long, so I have no energy to review and to be fair to all submitters I don't re-review on request, I just pick new and old submissions at random. I also find biographies difficult as I have no personal interest in most people, I'm more interested in scienc0e, engineering, or the works of people. I would note that the "Spiritual lineage" has no reference, and such lineages from the Prophet onwards would need good references. You may also be able to find some editors with an interest in helping, and more knowledge than I have in Wikipedia:WikiProject Islam. Other than that I would say look for any other good reliable sources that have talked about the subject to add then once finished submit. Remember a decline is not a reject, it's just part of the review process. You could also ask for feedback from the Wikipedia:Teahouse where lots of experienced editors will see the question. ALl the best KylieTastic (talk) 19:18, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 17:37:53, 21 April 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Phug846


Oxford PPE Society draft page Hiya thanks for responding to my draft so quickly! Was wondering which part of your notes I should pay most attention to, to improve it. WP:42 mentions significant coverage from reliable sources independent of the topic.

Significant coverage: covered in relevant newspapers, official Oxford University website Reliable sources: official website, nationally acknowledged newspapers, official University site Independent of the topic: I am sorry but I'm not sure what this means.

Phug846 (talk) 17:37, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi Phug846 the basic criteria for an organisation can be found at WP:ORGCRIT - so yes national newspapers, independent websites, books, magazines etc are all good. The Oxford university website is somewhat, but they are obviously not totally independent. oxfordppesoc.com is completely non-independent while oxfordstudent.com although probably independent in one sense is there to report on oxofrd uni related subjects so not independent as Wikipedia means. For "Independent of the topic" see WP:INDY - basically is the source reporting because they have links to the subject or not, i.e. local interest only. A way to think about it is if no one outside of the Oxford University linked outlets have 'noticed' then it's not yet notable enough for a worldwide encyclopedia. Hope that helps, so tired I'm struggling to think of the words tbh! Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 19:34, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kindly do not revert my today's edits. I am only fixing broken links and you are bringing back the dead ones. Thanks.

  • No Vassiliades you have been reverting to your versions of the articles mostly from 2018 adding back many broken links, invalid categories, and other issues other editors over the years have addressed. If there are broken links fix them but don't do it based from your very old versions disregarding all other editors. KylieTastic (talk) 20:13, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I was searching through my old contributions and corrected the broken links there. I was not aware that the whole page was coming back. How should I revert them, since I made more than 100 changes today?
  • Hi Vassiliades it looks like you only made 43 edits today (other than here) see Special:Contributions/Vassiliades I know it often feels like more. I only reverted the ones that looked like large reversals and/or introducing errors (but I may have missed some). To see your changes to each article look at the history (the 'hist' link on the left of your edits on Special:Contributions/Vassiliades). From looking at the edits were you just trying to remove the "en/" and fix links from "https://elinepa.org"? If you notice any others you accidentally edited more than expected you can use the "undo" next to your edit on the article history, then re-edit the article from the edit at the top-right of the article to do the fixes you actually meant to do. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 20:36, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Vassiliades if you want I can easily revert all the other edits, and you can then just re-do the link corretions you meant to do. Regards KylieTastic (talk) 20:46, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks. That will be helpful. I just made a change on a page now though the edit. Hope it works ok now.
  • Thanks a lot and sorry for the trouble caused. Best Regards.
  • Hey Vassiliades no trouble at all, we all make mistakes. You meant to fix broken links and improve articles, and I'm happy to help anyone with such good intentions. Wikipedia is built on millions of those good intentions that together make what Wikipedia is. All the best, stay safe KylieTastic (talk) 21:08, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism on Meles Zenawi, Hailemariam Desalegn and Abiy Ahmed

Hi KylieTastic, If you're patrolled can you protect the page of three articles (Meles Zenawi, Hailemariam Desalegn and Abiy Ahmed), which heavily abused by an IP editor by deliberately changing office position chronology. If you doesn't so, can you ask other administrator for attention of these articles? The Supermind (talk) 11:35, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

looking to improve

Hi Kylie, I am trying to improve an article written on Bruce Pawsey. I read the inital guidance and have since resubmitted but Im wondering if there is anything specific that needs to be improved. thanks NedNedSuskin (talk) 12:36, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi NedSuskin just a quick note as I'm at work but you said you have resubmitted but User:NedSuskin/sandbox has not yet been resubmitted, so if you had meant to please note you have to click "Publish Changes" (bottom left) after "Resubmit". Although the notability guidelines are long and nuanced the general gist is that all new articles on Wikipedia have to show they are notable (See WP:N) which in most cases requires significant coverage in multiple independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS). Also that all major claims made should have a reference - see Help:Referencing for beginners for help on that. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 08:47, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

how to create wikipedia page?

how to create wikipedia page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tejastrivoli (talk • contribs) 12:24, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

About the article palath

Hi,

The article i've drafted is about a small village in calicut city in kerala not about a person or a product to have more citations to follow.There are so many articles published in wikipedia without proper sources regard to the same content mentioned above.Citations are only available in native malayalalm language that is not much useful for english version of wikipedia.Requesting you to look in to this article and guide us to expand it with available sources.--Outlander07 Outlander07 (talk) 19:47, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi Outlander07, yes other poorly sourced article do exist but generally they were created many years ago before the current standards for article existed. The Other stuff exists argument is more likely to get the existing articles either improved or deleted. The current procedures and guidelines are there to try to make sure the encyclopedia improves in quality. However, the good news is your wrong about non English sources - they are acceptable, especially for notability and key facts. Also please check the wiki-links are what was intended as it currently states "Palath is a small village in " then links to Chelannur which says it "is a village". A village within a village? Cheers, keep safe KylieTastic (talk) 08:28, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Krista Bradford entry

Thanks for the heads up. --Mark — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leewilliams23 (talk • contribs) 20:40, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Inferno the Fire Breather

You were absolutely tight abut those sources, big guy - lnferno first appeared in ZIP #10, not STEEL STERLING.Glammazon (talk) 03:17, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation message

Greetings! Please excuse this intrusion on your talk page, and allow me to invite you to participate in the newly-formed Wikipedia Contribution Team (WP:CONTRIB for short)! The goal of the team is to attract more and better contributions to the English Wikipedia, as well as to help support the fundraising team in our financial and editing contribution goals. We have lots of stuff to work on, from minor and major page building, to WikiProject outreach, article improvement, donor relations, and more—in fact, part of our mission is to empower team members to make their own projects to support our mission. Some of our projects only take a few minutes to work on, while others can be large, multi-person tasks—whatever your interest level, we're glad to have you.


If this sounds interesting, please visit WP:CONTRIB and sign onto the team. Even if there does not appear to be anything that really speaks out as being work you'd like to do, I'd encourage you to join and follow the project anyway, as the type of work we'll be doing will certainly evolve and change over time. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me, or ask on the team talk page. Regards, Tbiw (talk) 20:34, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hendrix MfD

Was there a reason you edited my MfD comments here[1]or was it just an accident? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Sulfurboy (talk) 21:06, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Need your help !

Dear , actually I have made a draft on children's story . So, I just need your help to check my Draft:THE SAINT AND THE MOUSE ! whether it is meeting Wikipedia's general notability and if not please guide me accordingly so that it will become live , also you are kindly requested to please look onto other issues if possible. Tanisha priyadarshini (talk) 15:49, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi Tanisha priyadarshini to be fair to all submitters I don't re-review on request, I just pick new and old submissions at random, so it may or may not be myself who reviews it when you submit it - it is not yet submitted. However I would say its unclear what the reference is I can find any mention of a book "Become mouse again". Also one reference is never enough for WP:GNG and see Wikipedia:Notability (books) for book notability guidlines. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 15:57, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok but I just wanna know how /what changes should I do for getting it fit for submittion? Tanisha priyadarshini (talk) 16:05, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Actually its not a book , it was picked from a part of a book , but the book is not about it . So, what should I do now ? Tanisha priyadarshini (talk) 16:17, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ohhh..... OK , I got it . Thanks for your help. With lots of love 💞Tanisha priyadarshini (talk) 16:28, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please Help Me...For...Biography and Awards of Ramin Sharifian

Hi please help me. I want to register my biography on Wikipedia, but I don't know. I could only write like this, but I know that's not enough. I also want this biography to be displayed correctly as an artist when I do a Google search for "Ramin Sharifian". Like biography: Selena Gomez, Ramin Djavadi and ... But I don't know. Please help me. And if you can, please please make my biography.

Thank you

this is my bio link: Draft:Ramin_Sharifian

Q

THANK YOU but one of my references got error after this change. please check it :) I'll try to be better on wiki. thanksRa_Ka 18:22, 25 April 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by راضیه کاشی (talk • contribs)

THANK YOU

I want to tell you thank you. When you declined the publishing you helped me so much to learn. I am new to editing on this level and I really appreciate your support and guidance. I hope I did better on the next submission — Preceding unsigned comment added by NQCethos (talk • contribs) 21:52, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sheikh Jalal ud-Din page

Hello,

Can you tell me what I need to do to have this web page posted on Wikipedia? I believe that this is a figure that requires a wiki page for the purpose of communication with the multitude of international actors that he interacts with - allowing them to know what he is doing and who he has met with without having to check references. Please tell me what I can do to meet requirements, thank you—Tomnewman72 (talk • contribs) 12:42, 26 April 2020‎ (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi Tomnewman72 Wikipedia is for articles for subjects already deemed notable not for "the purpose of communication with the multitude of international actors") all new articles on Wikipedia have to show they are notable (See WP:N) which in most cases requires significant coverage in multiple independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS). Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 11:52, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

the progression and welfare of human right is a rather notable subject matter but I understand and I retire thank you - cheers

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:KylieTastic&oldid=953246429"