User talk:KylieTastic
It is approximately 10:20 PM where this user lives (Cambridge, UK). |
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...
|
You have deleted my sybmition for creation on my talk page. where should I post that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Manar Wehbe (talk • contribs) 21:08, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Manar Wehbe I see you have already worked out the answer - submissions go on article pages, not talk pages. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 21:13, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
Why did you declined the Spring Hill draft article request. References are already added to the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Richard Raleigh (talk • contribs) 22:03, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Richard Raleigh I assume your talking about Draft:Spring Hill Elementray. All new articles on Wikipedia have to show the subject is notable (See WP:N) which in most cases requires significant coverage in multiple independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS). In this case note WP:NSCHOOL and WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES. The references just show it exists, there is nothing to show it is notable. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 22:08, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
Thanks User:KylieTastic i will respond back after i read the details before asking about summitting. Richard Raleigh (talk) 22:11, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
Everything is good. Please go check out the Draft:Spring Hill Elementray article. Im happy to support with you. Richard Raleigh 23:00, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Richard Raleigh thanks for taking the time to improve the article and add more sources. I see you have re-submitted, but note to be fair to all submitters I don't review/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 did see "The MCS Website is an random website. If you click it you will see the truth" - a random website is not a valid source - and mcsk12.org looks to originally been for "Morristown Central School". Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 09:06, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
You made some minor edits to Draft:Moon Bin. Are you recommending that it be accepted, or were you just making minor edits to it and leaving it to the judgment of another reviewer? Robert McClenon (talk) 20:51, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Robert McClenon if I was thought it was acceptable or unacceptable I would have accepted or declined. I was just doing a pass through the new submissions which I do to find easy accepts/declines and bookmark those I want to come back to, and on the way I tend to do basic tidy ups. I didn't look at the sources, but in general most members of such bands are not notable on their own and I would guess this will be the same, but tbh I've had enough of BLPs and pass most over as 99% and just levels of being nothing of note. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 21:06, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
- User:KylieTastic - Okay. I had previously declined it as not providing individual evidence of notability, and had said that any resubmission should explain, in AFC comments or on the draft talk page, why the subject satisfied individual musical notability separate from the band. It was resubmitted with very little change. So the submitter is just being tendentious. Thank you.
Robert McClenon (talk) 02:46, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
draft review
plaese can you approve publishing my personnel article called mohamed alsalami — Preceding unsigned comment added by M Alsalami 60 (talk • contribs) 15:45, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
- M Alsalami 60 to be fair to all submitters I don't review/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. KylieTastic (talk) 18:31, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
Please help
Hi Mr. Please we want you to edit the page and adjust it according to rules,you better than us and you can even change the page title to Ali Sarhan Shamran You can search for Ali Sarhan Shamran in Google for example and you will see that he is known and notable Please create the article by yourself and publish it,your experience is better and the person is known https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Ali_Shamraan ThanksAmeerjarvoe (talk) 17:08, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
- I have no desire to write an article for someone who I've never heard of and has lots of self-published sources. It just looks like self promotion. KylieTastic (talk) 08:47, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
Hello KylieTastic,
First, sorry for the username change, forgot old password.
Anyways, do you mind elaborating on why the Complete Reprint of DC Comics Draft was declined from being an article? I'm not Wikipedia-savvy nor tech-savvy, so I could be missing an appropriate article to help strengthen the webpage. But, I think this article should have its own webpage because when younger DC Comics fans begin their journey reading comics, they may enjoy seeing a condensed web article that helps them decide what comic books to get (especially if no one else in their area reads comics). I look at this idea like a crossover show, without a condensed page comprising the whole story, people can miss out or wonder if it's worth reading.
I hope this makes sense and thank you for your consideration. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Someoneelsesomethingelse (talk • contribs)
- Hi Someoneelsesomethingelse all new articles on Wikipedia have to show the subject is notable (See WP:N) which in most cases requires significant coverage in multiple independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS). Draft:DC Comics Complete Reprints has no references at all. That's the key issue and it;s not about being "Wikipedia-savvy" or "tech-savvy" as others will usualy tidy-up/wikify articles as long as the basic content and sources are provided. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 20:51, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
Delete article
Hi Why you deleted my article? This is unice content. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexandr Husak (talk • contribs) 14:29, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Alexandr Husak your article Draft:Alex test works is not yet deleted but it will be as the notices on your talk page say. It is almost a direct copy of https://www.interracialdatingsites.online/quickflirt/ so it is a copyright infringement, also it reads just like an advert not an Encyclopedic article. Wikipedia is not for promotion - See WP:NOTPROMOTION part of Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 14:35, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
F.P Nevins & Co
Hi Kylie,
I do not understand the specific problem with the article. It was previously rejected for being a primary source. That was fixed. Could you please explain why it was rejected and how to fix this issue.
Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by SineofTan (talk • contribs)
- Hi SineofTan all new articles on Wikipedia have to show the subject is notable (See WP:N) which in most cases requires significant coverage in multiple independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS). In this case Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) is the more specific guideline. The references are clearly not independent, they are just listings, so for Wikipedia notability there is currently none. I doubt that many real estate agencies are notable enough for an encyclopedic article. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 10:05, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed that you have declined my submission of this article draft. I used News sources for the citings as it is approved by wikipedia as explained in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources#News_organizations. Could you please advise me on your expectations to approve this article. Thanks. comment added by Sandra Patel
- Hi Sandra Patel, those are not "News organizations" they are PR outlets and each one clearly states they were posted by the company themselves. In fact I note that allthough the first three are different websites they all have the same PRF tab icon, and they all appear to just be "PRFree" and all state they are a "press release distribution service". All new articles on Wikipedia have to show the subject is notable (See WP:N) which in most cases requires significant coverage in multiple independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS). Regards KylieTastic (talk) 09:59, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
Elder Gary e Stevensin
Is it possible for you to put a picture of elder Gary e Stevenson in for me or suggest what picture you will allow of him to me Dgmitchell91 (talk) 16:38, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
Is my picture of him ok now if not can you put one in so I don't run the risk of getting blocked which I don't want Dgmitchell91 (talk) 16:56, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Dgmitchell91 You tried to add File:Elder Gary E Stevenson (1600272511611973976754).jpg and then File:Gary E .Stevenson.jpg (16002745797351833224960).jpg neither of these are valid images. Images must be uploaded WP:UPIMAGE (copyright allowing)). You have not uploaded any image to wikipedia, or Wikimedia Commons. Also I can find no images already uploaded by others either. I don't know where to find a 'freely' licenced image so I can't help upload one. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 17:02, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Dgmitchell91 I see you had at one point "content://com.android.chrome.FileProvider/images/screenshot/16002745797351833224960.jpg" which suggests firstly that it's on you phone not uploaded, and secondly that it is a screenshot so probably copyrighted. Wikipedia/Wikimedia take copyright very seriously. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 17:06, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
hey
Can you please make it a bit easier to understand what I have missing that I am required to have for my Wikipedia article to be approved?
Jonyk56 (talk) 18:18, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
- Hey Jonyk56 all new articles on Wikipedia have to show the subject is notable (See WP:N) which in most cases requires significant coverage in multiple independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS). Draft:Xent has two sources, the first is it's own website so not independent, the other is not about the subject at all as books from 2004 son;t mention things from 2020. You would require things like in depth reviews and articles about it. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 18:23, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
Actual references in the Draft:Funpak.
I actually liked how User:ChowderRulez finally added the references. Please, accept the draft, and make it an article. --73.6.75.134 (talk) 05:58, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
- They have added sources and re-submitted it will be reviewed again by someone at some-point. KylieTastic (talk) 13:48, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
Hi i still dont understand why my "Karthik Muthukumar" was declined. Can you please help me create the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tamizh Alchemist (talk • contribs)
- Hi Tamizh Alchemist all new articles on Wikipedia have to show the subject is notable (See WP:N) which in most cases requires significant coverage in multiple independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS). Draft:Karthik Muthukumar has four sources from IMDB which is not a reliable source as it is user created content with no sources, also they are just name mentions and nothing in-depth. The other source again is just a mention. People are not notable for just doing a job, hence why we generally require "significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources". Regards KylieTastic (talk) 13:47, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
@Sphilbrick, KylieTastic, and Gibbygibson987: This doesn't appear to be a copyright violation of text from an external website. It appears to have been WP:COPYWITHIN-d from Four Past Midnight#The Langoliers, and the external website has itself copied the text from the English language Wikipedia article. Pete AU aka --Shirt58 (talk) 09:39, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
- Hey Shirt58 thanks for the heads-up, I've reverted the decline and re-reviewed as such and informed and welcomed the submitter. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 11:02, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
- Shirt58, Thanks for the heads up. Our copy patrol software doesn't check to see if matching text might match existing articles, so new articles creating or articles expanded using text from another article often show up as false positives in the tool. They should not get flagged and reverted if the copywithin guidelines is followed, so that the edit has the appropriate edit summary but if editors are unfamiliar with that guideline, those edit sometimes get reverted. S Philbrick(Talk) 17:39, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
- Shirt58 and Sphilbrick the article still get deleted by Anthony Bradbury even with the attrib tag and AfC comment added to clarify after the original speedy deletion tag was added. I did wonder about removing it myself but thought best to leave to the admins. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 18:33, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
- KylieTastic, I'm not quite sure what to say. It was technically a violation of our copyright policy — editors are permitted to use material from existing Wikipedia articles but only with attribution and that wasn't done so it was a violation. My preference would have been to cure the violation by adding the attribution. I don't know whether the deletion was done based on the copyright issue or other issues — perhaps Anthony Bradbury can weigh in. if the deletion rationale was copyright, one option is to restore it and add the attribution, another option is just to re-create it which might be faster and easier. S Philbrick(Talk) 12:57, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
- Sphilbrick, Anthony Bradbury did restore it last night and then it was redirected to the source article. Not that it really mattered but all sorted now. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 14:10, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
- KylieTastic, OK thanks, that helps explain why I wasn't seeing what I expected to see. S Philbrick(Talk) 18:28, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
- Sphilbrick, Anthony Bradbury did restore it last night and then it was redirected to the source article. Not that it really mattered but all sorted now. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 14:10, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
- KylieTastic, I'm not quite sure what to say. It was technically a violation of our copyright policy — editors are permitted to use material from existing Wikipedia articles but only with attribution and that wasn't done so it was a violation. My preference would have been to cure the violation by adding the attribution. I don't know whether the deletion was done based on the copyright issue or other issues — perhaps Anthony Bradbury can weigh in. if the deletion rationale was copyright, one option is to restore it and add the attribution, another option is just to re-create it which might be faster and easier. S Philbrick(Talk) 12:57, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
- Shirt58 and Sphilbrick the article still get deleted by Anthony Bradbury even with the attrib tag and AfC comment added to clarify after the original speedy deletion tag was added. I did wonder about removing it myself but thought best to leave to the admins. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 18:33, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
I was frankly shocked to read your prod of this article. You wrote that there was "no … indication it passes WP:BOOKS". The article stated when you prodded it, and I was quickly able to confirm, that it received the 2001 Prix Femina. That is a clear indication of passing NBOOK #2. Would you mind explaining your reasoning? AleatoryPonderings (talk) 05:47, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
- Hi AleatoryPonderings tbh I don't remember PRODing that :/ I don't know why I didn't just leave as tagged as unsourced which I had just done just before! However I believe it was probably because the history showed it had been created in 2013 and was still unsourced. NBOOK #2 says "major literary award" and when I think of "major" I think of ones like the Booker Prize where every winning book has an article and for that prize even almost every shortlisted book does as well. I had never heard of Prix Femina and although I'm not sure if I checked the awards article but it is tagged for better sourcing and most of the other books do not have articles not making it look "major", but I'll happily accept that it is on your say. Also NBOOK does say "is notable if it verifiably meets, through reliable sources" so technically it fails as it stood in isolation. However that was very sloppy of me and I clearly did not google it or it would have been obvious and I would have added a source myself - hence i guess your "shock". Partly the trouble of working at AfC where there are dozens of submission a day that claim notability for awards that mean little to nothing or made up, but I clearly failed due diligence on this one. I always hope that any actual notable subjects PRODed the creators will add a source once notified, but this editor does not appear to address the many notification they've got. I also just noticed they did add a source when created, but it was removed as dead rather than fixing or marking as dead. So yes sloppy PROD from me so thanks for catching and fixing up, always rather have an article than see deleted. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 14:04, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks so much for your detailed explanation :) I really appreciate it! Apologies for the accusatory tone above—I probably should have phrased that better. All the best. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 14:56, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
Apologies
I am very sorry for changing atgerberg´s surname, I look it up online and got no results. Now I realize that his surname was VAN Atgerberg and that makes a lot of sense. Recently I have been changing inconsistencies with Dutch artists and their surnames because some have German surnames while others dont.
My apologies, Kohl Thompson
- Hi, OK but please note that such things should be sourced and the sources in the article used the existing name. Some people have different spellings so Wikipedia uses the most common name see WP:COMMONNAME. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 16:15, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Question
Is Pot Dutch?