17:35:04, 19 June 2016 review of submission by 203.106.156.98
- 203.106.156.98 (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Ma Su Chen 1972 ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
I ask you to explain, instead you go to the mentioned sites to remove the added information and references. Then posting a idiotic template that is a consequence of you removing the references. Incompetent scumbag! You are only worth fucking yourself and eat your own shit! Damn you all, especially you and the first reviewer! This proves my point of what I said below.
The wikipedia reviewer(s)who posted the "templates" for "Furious Slaughter', Fist of Fury', Intimate Confessions of a Chinese Courtesan, and 'Insomnia Lover) is/are incompetent prejudicial idiots! Rejecting article submissions for movies base on individual whims and fancies. Why? The "template" was not posted for these articles until being informed about the inconsistencies in accepting or declining a submission. These are only on the surface. There more of these type of articles. Idiot! One of the "template" posted is the consequence of the idiot reviewer removing two or three of the citation sources.
07:25:43, 20 June 2016 review of submission by 1.9.100.170
- 1.9.100.170 (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Ma Su Chen 1972 ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Check out these movie articles https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Movie..._In_Your_Face , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chow_Ken . The way these articles are presented and you all still accept them??!! What happen to notable and verifiable? This is plain double standards
07:34:26, 20 June 2016 review of submission by 1.9.100.170
- 1.9.100.170 (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Ma Su Chen 1972 ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Check out these movie articles https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Movie..._In_Your_Face , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chow_Ken . The way these articles are presented and you all still accept them??!! What happen to notable and verifiable? This is plain double standards.
17:36:38, 29 June 2016 review of submission by 86.132.14.205
- 86.132.14.205 (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Graeme Kirkpatrick ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
This is not a request for a re-review just a clarification, take on board the points re guidance and reviews and considering redrafting,but would the convention for Wiki be to include references to reviews of his books etc within the article?
12:50:03, 4 July 2016 review of submission by Tukombo
Yes, the BBC link is still working. Thanks for the heads up and suggestions. So much appreciated.
12:13:58, 22 July 2016 review of submission by Librarian1849
- Librarian1849 (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Victoria Carter ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Hi LaMona, thanks for your comments. I have made the changes you requested. I think that Victoria is notable, founding Cityhop, and contributing significantly to the Auckland Kindergarten Association and the Auckland Arts Festival, outside her former Councillor role. Other articles on Auckland Councillors (see Category:Auckland Councillors at the bottom of the page) are shorter/arguably less notable yet they have been published. Would appreciate it if you could review the article again. Thank you.
Reference test
This is the text that you are going to verify with a reference.[1]
References
- ^ Reference details go here
Daniel Hasidim page
Hello
Why did you deleted Daniel Hasidim page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Hasidim)?
Their is no problem with copyright issue with the page of the zionist billionaire forum [8].
Both pages were writen by the same man.
I added the page as a source.
What is the problem? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daniel12121 (talk • contribs) 20:20, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
- First, I didn't delete it, but I did mark it as being a copyright violation. Someone else will have deleted it. There are strict rules on WP about copyright. It doesn't matter if they were written by the same person - no copyrighted material can be included in Wikipedia. The page on Daniel Hasidim reads: "© 2016 Zionist Billionaires Forum " - that means that legally it is copyrighted by the forum. If, instead, the notice read "CC-0" or "CC-BY" then it could be used. You can reword in the information in your own words, and then it can be used.
- Now, another thing, if "both pages were written by the same man" are you saying that User:Daniel12121 is Daniel Hasidim? If so, that violates the WP policies on Conflict of Interest and wp:AUTOBIOGRAPHY. Please read these carefully. You must declare your conflict of interest and show that you will abide by the policies in place. That includes agreeing not to make direct edits to the article although you can create it as a draft article (without the copyrighted material). Persons with a conflict of interest may not edit the articles for which they have a conflict in the main wiki space. You can, however request changes to the article on the talk page, and others who are not in conflict may make those changes. LaMona (talk) 22:30, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
12:31:45, 4 August 2016 review of submission by Jobmuel
Hello there! I have amended the language, as suggested, to make it more formal. Apologies, it is my first one. Thank you!
16:18:37, 4 August 2016 review of submission by Majestyk99
- Majestyk99 (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Mitchell S. Jackson ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Thank you for your input. I tried asking the last reviewer what needed to be changed and received absolutely no help. Had I been told that my citation formatting was wrong (I matched it to one official template but apparently that is no longer in use), that the awards section did not fit the criteria, or that there were too many external links, I would have happily changed them.
Can you please show me an example of how a citation should be formatted? I've seen multiple methods so it would be very helpful to see how it should be done.
Thank you for your time.
-M
- Hi, User:Majestyk99. First, here on talk pages you need to sign your messages with four tildes, like ~~~~. Next, the easiest way to format the citations is the use the templates that are in the edit mode. I don't know which mode you are using, but here is a place that gives instructions: Help:Referencing_for_beginners#Using_refToolbar. Basically that will give you boxes to fill in, such as last name, first name, title, etc. You can also ask for help at the teahouse. If you are using the visual editor, the section on that page is Help:Referencing_for_beginners#Using_VisualEditor. You probably should scan that entire help page because it has other sections (like reusing references) that can help you. LaMona (talk) 16:32, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
Wvhy radio station page
I have added a reference from Fcc web site for my Radio Station Information. I currently have three other pages wgsw, WSIZ and wtty. This is a new radio station that serves a very rural area. It is a brand new station. It's license was issued by the fcc just weeks ago. The Wikipedia article will be added to links in the communitys it serves. There are no articles about this new fm Broadcast station. What else needs to be addressed? I (radio warrior) am the broadcast licence holder. Radiowarrior (talk) 00:06, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
- Hi, User:Radiowarrior - Wikipedia is not a directory, it is an encyclopedia. Therefore, it is a compendium of things, places, people who have been proven to be notable. If there are no published articles about this station, then it isn't notable. In fact, small radio stations are often not considered notable. Read Wikipedia:Notability_(media)#Broadcast_media, which says " Notability can be established by either a large audience, established broadcast history, or unique programming." However, that notability has to be established through sources. The fact that the FCC licenses it does not make it notable. The articles you have created for the other stations also lack references, and I have marked them as such. Please read WP:N to understand sourcing for Wikipedia. LaMona (talk) 15:38, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
16:50:52, 7 August 2016 review of submission by CASGMT
Hi, just a quick one. Where you say I can't use her own website - do you mean the charity websites?
Thanks. CASGMT (talk) 16:52, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
- CASGMT, I mean her "Saying Goodby" site, which is written in the first person and is not an independent third-party source. Also her LInkedIn site. LinkedIn cannot be used as a source at all. Ditto her HuffPost profile, which was probably submitted by her. You need well-regarded sources that have published about her. You should avoid PR sites (they exist to promote), blogs, and marginal sites. What you need are regular publications with a good reputation. LaMona (talk) 17:47, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
Ok thanks for your help! Will have another crack. CASGMT (talk) 08:10, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
Hickies Draft Rejection
Dear Editor,
Thanks for the review! You declined my submission, stating it looked to much like an advertisement. The comment stated that I have a personal affiliation to the company, which I do not. I am currently a Mexican student in my first year of college, and have nothing to do with the company. I am writing about them because they helped my down syndrome brother a lot, and have always wanted to do a Wikipedia article. All of the references I used are third party sources, and I honestly do not understand why it was rejected. The company is notable enough to have a Wikipedia article. If you could consider reviewing it in an unbiased way that would be great. (Here is the link Draft:Hickies)
Cheers, Emarcosb (talk) 18:22, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
- First, I don't know where you get the idea that my review is "biased" - we simply do not allow advertising on WP, and companies must meet WP:CORP. Since I am the second reviewer to reject the draft for that reason, you might want to consider that the article is overly promotional. Of the promotional aspects is the Endorsements section -- which is the result of promotion by the company. ("And to get the brand some glitz, he got a number of athletes and celebrities to try out the product, including Australian triathlete Rebekah Keat, professional golfer Danny Willett, actress Chloe Grace Moretz, designer Diane von Furstenberg, and comedian Baratunde Thurston." - it's an advertising campaign.) And beyond that you haven't shown that there is anything other than business as usual - doing a kickstarter is not notable, having a product is not in itself notable. As for the sources, they must be both third-party and reliable. Press releases, blogs, and sources with no reputation behind them are not reliable. It is always best to limit the article to reliable sources rather than to include ones that do not meet the criteria, even if that means that the article may be shorter. Remember that no article is ever finished, and more can be added later. As for the COI notice, it does NOT say that you have a personal affiliation, it asks for you to state IF you have a personal affiliation. We often ask that of people who have done no editing except to create an article for a company. In many cases the editor is working for the company, and we need to know whether or not that is the case because WP has policies about that. LaMona (talk) 18:55, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
Request on 21:47:56, 7 August 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Julie Bif
Hi there! Thank you for your input of Mr. Guest's draft. I have been working on it for a few months and it doesn't seem he is qualified enough, sadly. I was wondering if there was a way I could at least get him a thumbnail in Wikipedia? Would that be possible? He has numerous talents and I think he is well deserved to have at least that! :) Please let me know what you think! Your input makes a lot of sense and I really appreciate it!
Looking forward to hearing back from you! Julie Bif (talk) 21:47, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
- Julie Bif, no, the only way to have an article in Wikipedia is through notability. There's no "thumbnail" version. Consider, though, that he may become notable in the future, at which point an article would be appropriate. LaMona (talk) 14:29, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
Request on 10:11:29, 8 August 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Hannahmgodfrey
- Hannahmgodfrey (talk · contribs)
- Draft:MedAccred ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Re-submission of MedAccred page
Hi there,
Thanks for reviewing my first draft of the MedAccred page. I have made changes to the opening line to address your concerns regarding the initial description of the program. Hopefully this is now clear and in much simpler language, avoiding marketing-speak.
Looking forward to receiving additional feedback!
Hannahmgodfrey (talk) 10:11, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
- Hi, Hannahmgodfrey, it is clearer now. You have large parts of the article without references, though. Articles must be built from third-party sources about the subject, and all information in the article has to come from those references. No unreferenced information is allowed. You should begin with sources and create the article from those rather than writing an article from knowledge that you have. If there are not enough sources to provide a sufficient article, then the subject does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability. LaMona (talk) 14:33, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
Request on 18:08:12, 8 August 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Julie Bif
So, there is nothing I can do for Mr. Guest? He is an author, professor, musician and lawyer. But since he is not nationally known, he cannot have a Wiki page? A lot of hard work went into this and I really don't want it to not be published somehow. Can I reduce some or do you think that it just won't get approved at all? I really appreciate your input!
Julie Bif (talk) 18:08, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
- Julie Bif, it's not a question of being nationally known, but of not having been written about in reliable sources that support notability. Read WP:NOTABILITY, WP:MUSICIAN, WP:NACADEMICS. Those explain what the criteria are. For professors, it's being known in their field, holding a named chair, or being highly cited. For musicians it is recording on major labels and charting. For everyone, it is based on sources. (I'm condensing this down quite a bit - you need to read those pages.) And, as I said, for many people, notability may be in their future if it isn't in their present. LaMona (talk) 20:17, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
Ok, thank you so much for your input! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Julie Bif (talk • contribs) 22:57, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
Requesting help on Morale Patches page
Hi,
I tried to create a page for morale patches and it was declined. But if you search wiki for morale patches or google scholar for morale patches, there are hundreds of inclusions of the term. I believe it deserves, and needs a wiki page. Please tell me how I can clean up this page and make it pass https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Morale_Patch Wikipage2016 (talk) 07:16, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
- Wikipage2016, the problem with the page you created is not the topic, but the fact that much of the article is unreferenced. Here's what I told you there: "The article must be built from information found in third-party sources (newspapers, magazines) that are independent of the subject of the article. Those sources must be referenced in-line with the text they support. No un-referenced material is allowed." You must create the article from sources that you reference - all information must be verifiable in those sources. LaMona (talk) 14:47, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
Anthony Charles Robinson
Regarding Anthony Charles Robinson, which I have just published from draft; appointment as an Officer of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire irrefutably confers notability. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:33, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
- Do you have a cite for that? I recall that there are hundreds per year (although I may be thinking of a related honor). Also, notability isn't the only thing I look for in a draft - large amounts of unreferenced material or bad refs (as in this case) are a good reason to keep them back, IMO, keeping the editor working on it until a higher quality is reached. But we each have our own take on AfC. LaMona (talk) 18:22, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. the section is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents #Damage done by declining AFC --RexxS (talk) 14:43, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
07:32:26, 10 August 2016 review of submission by Nathitchcock
- Nathitchcock (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Micko Westmoreland ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
I am not presently requesting a re-review at this time
Dear LaMona,
Thank you for taking the time to review my wikipedia submission. I have checked the guide lines for musicians notability and feel my article cites that the artist has produced 2 or more albums released by a major record company & has had independent articles printed by publications such as New Musical Express, Melody Maker, Uncut, The Guardian & The Independent broadsheet newspapers plus many others. I see that the sources of discogs and IMDB are unsuitable & will be removed. I am looking for some more assistance if possible as I have spent a long time on this submission. Any further advice you feel you are able to give as to how to improve the chances of this article being approved would be gratefully received.
Many thanks
Natalie Hitchcock
- Nathitchcock, first, here on talk pages you need to sign your messages with four tildes, like ~~~~. One thing that you can do is to give full information for the albums, including the label. That could help support notability. Simple lists of titles aren't very informative. Also, link to any professional reviews of the albums or cuts that show that the work got the attention of music reviewers. (Fan and amateur reviews should not be used.) It is better to reduce the article to what you can source rather than use poor sources, as those somewhat tarnish the notability. You don't need to have every work that the person recorded, just some that gained the person notability. Wikipedia is not a CV or a personal web page, so including only highlights is not only fine, it is preferable. LaMona (talk) 17:19, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
Request on 17:54:40, 10 August 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Wiki.isimm2
- Wiki.isimm2 (talk · contribs)
- Draft:International Society for the Interaction of Mechanics and Mathematics ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Dear editor/reviwer,
I appreciate your (and the previous reviewer) care about the initial version of the page for ISIMM (International Society for Interaction between Mathematics and Mechanics), but I indeed do not understand what we should make more to put it into life. Yours comments that "References must be 1) about the organization 2) independent of the organization 3) linked inline to the text they support. No unreferenced material is allowed." does not give me any hint what I should improve at this moment. Reflecting the previous comments, I included many links to other wikipedia pages and some other serious web pages, and thus reduced unreferenced material as much as I could, expecting that some other distinquished individuals around this distinguished organization with several decades tradition can later continue completing it. It is now much richer than many of existing wiki-pages. I start feeling it as a certain discrimination of ISIMM in contrast to some other similar organizations as Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Amer. Math. Society, ASME, etc, etc. which have their wiki-pages. I would really ask you for being more specific why you do not approve the (initial iteration) of the ISIMM page.
Hoping that I will evnetually start this page lining, at this occassion, I would like to ask you for a hint how the language mutation of this page can be created. I did not find any hint for it. (It would be relativel easy for us to translate this page into Italien, German, Polish, Czech and some other languages as this organization is truly international.)
Many thanks in advance for you help and your toleranace.
prof. Ing. Tomas Roubicek, DrSc.
Wiki.isimm2 (talk) 17:54, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
- Wiki.isimm2, you have a list of "references" at the end of the article, but they are not linked to the inline text they support. Think about an academic article with numbered footnotes throughout the text - that's the form that Wikipedia uses. The instructions on how to do that are at referencing for beginners. If that does not suffice, you can ask for help at the TeaHouse. That's the first comment I have. The next is that you should read about notability, which says: "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list." That means that you need sources that are about the organization itself. What matters on Wikipedia for notability is what reliable sources have said about a topic. Also look at Verifiability, which is that all facts on Wikipedia, much like in academic writing, must be verifiable. That is what the references in academic sources provide. Last, there is no automatic process that produces articles in the Wikipedias of other languages. You can of course create articles in those languages for those Wikipedias, but I should caution you that each Wikipedia has its own set of standards and culture, so it is not a given that what is appropriate for one will be welcomed in others. It is a good idea to visit those Wikipedia's and see what the help pages say about accepted topics. LaMona (talk) 22:03, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
Request on 23:31:12, 11 August 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by 74.62.240.37
- 74.62.240.37 (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Kash Hovey ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
74.62.240.37 (talk) 23:31, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
- There's no message here - if you have a question, please ask. LaMona (talk) 01:43, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
Request on 16:56:35, 13 August 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Bandspace
Thank you for making contact. I have recently edited my declined submission following reviewers' reasons for not accepting it. I am new to wikipedia so hope I have done the right thing. I was wondering if reviewers could simply remove passages they felt did not meet the criteria.
Bandspace (talk) 16:56, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
- Bandspace, sometimes it is possible to just remove some extraneous paragraphs and "fix" an article, but often it would require a whole re-write. Given that there are often around 600-800 articles waiting to be reviewed, we wouldn't get far if we spent hours on each article. So the work reverts to the creator -- it's discouraging, but we hope it also is a good learning experience. LaMona (talk) 17:58, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
Leaving?
I'm very sorry to hear that you are leaving Wikipedia. I just wanted to say that you've done a very solid job in reviewing AFC drafts, and your work will be missed. Also, you've consistently beaten me to reviewing
No matter what transpires online, I wish you the best of luck. Regards,