User talk:Cphweise

This is Cphweise's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Andriy Lyubka (December 4)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by David.moreno72 was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of people, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Andriy Lyubka and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

David.moreno72 00:34, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Cphweise, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! David.moreno72 00:34, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Andriy Lyubka (January 20)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Chetsford was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of people, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Andriy Lyubka and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Andriy Lyubka, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and save.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Chetsford (talk) 22:53, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Andriy Lyubka (February 10)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by SshibumXZ was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of people, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Andriy Lyubka and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Andriy Lyubka, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and save.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Regards, SshibumXZ (Talk) (Contributions). 19:51, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Andriy Lyubka

Hello, Cphweise. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Andriy Lyubka".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Sam Sailor 20:07, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Sam, thanks for your info, I followed your instruction and keep on correcting-publishing also in the english wiki Best regs ChristianCphweise (talk) 20:23, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Andriy Lyubka (October 27)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by K.e.coffman was:

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Andriy Lyubka and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Andriy Lyubka, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

K.e.coffman (talk) 23:45, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:

Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
No edit warring or abuse of multiple accounts.
If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.
Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.
Do not use talk pages as discussion or forum pages as Wikipedia is not a forum.

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 07:48, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dear SshibumXZ, always nice to read in English the rules I try to follow up in my German contributions for wiki. Thanks a lot! Best Regards Cphweise (talk) 11:41, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

specific points in translating

Some of these are English style in general, some are enWP peculiarities.

Please watch out for capitalization. e.g. Jewish not jewish , German not german.
Please check for idiomatic word order : "In 1998 she defended her dissertation "The poetical prose of Vladislav Khodasevich" at the Russian State University for the Humanities in Moscow ", not "In 1998 she defended in Moscow at the Russian State University for the Humanities her dissertation The poetical prose of Vladislav Khodasevich."
and idiomatic wording "pedagogian" or "pedagog"is in English almost always "teacher"
Italicize all book titles every time they are used.
State the most important factor for notability in the first sentence.
Avoid all adjective such as renowned , well-known etc.
Unless a list is very long, use paragraph format, and word as compactly as possible. Lists belong in CVs. The exception is lists of publications . For publications, include all books, but not articles or book chapters, List all translations, or at least give their language.
Do not use internal links: Change them from " He was a fellow at [http:.... Whatever] " to "He was a Fellow at Whatever <ref>[http...] </ref>"
We call Weblinks "External Links" The Further Reading section should be books, not web links.
For authors, include references to all important published reviews.
Don't say "in such newspapers as X and Y" , but in "X and Y" .

You might want to look through your current articles and drafts and fix these things. They're not necessary for an article to be accepted but it helps to get it right. In practice, long lists of journal articles often get an article rejected for advertising. At this time some reviewers, in my opinion incorrectly, are insisting on outside sources to verify even basic biographical facts. They are in my opinion totally wrong--an official CV is more reliable than almost any secondary source for academic details, but it's better to add them than to argue about it. An easy one is to the record for the doctoral thesis in the national library. The best source for a prize is from the awarding institution, not the person's own university.

I work here ma inly on bios of academics, and I can help you with any difficulties. DGG ( talk ) 17:02, 29 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dear DGG thank you very much! During the week I am working in a language school and we have native speakers here. I wrote on sunday at home (and even did not translate - my english simply not perfect). And to tell the truth: I am not so much familiar with the english wiki - in contrast to the german one. Well I am coming from humanities, but sometimes crossing the borders. The rules are really quit helpfull. You keep them in mind when you are regulary writing texts for wiki. I am doing that only from time to time. Concerning the Further Reading Paragraph in the Petrowskaja article: The Munzinger Archiv - see english wiki and to compare with the german text - still exists in the printed form for some people. So for Katja Petrowskaja, because this text comes from IBA - Internationales Biographisches Archiv (first section in german article under "Loseblattsammlung"). In times digitalisation Munzinger as well shows the texts online, for readers in universities full text. Same with BBKL - Biographisch-Bibliographisches Kirchenlexikon, where I published articles already 20 years ago. When you are working with biographies - do you know the WBIS https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/World_Biographical_Information_System_Online. I started to use it in times of microfiches. Actually I still have an other open draft. The one on Katja I wrote after the recent canceling on Andryi Lyubka. How to cooperate? Via talk page? Via email? Best regs, ChristianCphweise (talk) 19:15, 29 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is considerable disagreement over what language competence is needed in translation for WP--the ideal is someone with native competence in the language being translated from (the source language) and near-native in the language being translated to (the target language), who also knows at a professional level the subject area under discussion, knows the cultural and linguistic nuances between the two languages and the two cultural areas in general and in the subject area, and is familiar with the relevant guideline and conventions of the source and a good knowledge of the relevant ones in the target wiki. There are actually a few such wikipedians, and some of them insist that nobody but they should do translations here. Most of us working on translation and revising translation have much more limited skills, and know enough not to attempt more than they can handle.

For myself, I have only a limited college knowledge of German--I can read with occasional use of a dictionary a German magazine article on a general subject or a paper in my academic field of biology, (and similarly in French)--I'm an academic from a generation where this knowledge was expected even of Americans.

I usually limit my work to very straightforward and obvious corrections of what I know to be common machine translation errors, or to translations of straightforward biographical articles of academics--an area where I know the cultural differences between the US, UK, and several European academic and publishing systems, and also the usual language used to describe them and their work. For example, I know which of the many titles and awards given to Russian scientists are actually top-level.

I will look at your other draft. DGG ( talk ) 05:12, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have worked on such articles in the English WP for 12 years ever since retiring as a librarian

Your submission at Articles for creation: Hans-Herbert Kögler (November 1)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Bradv was:

The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Possibly notable per WP:NACADEMIC, but requires references to reliable sources to verify. Where does all this information come from?

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Hans-Herbert Kögler and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Hans-Herbert Kögler, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Brad v 14:05, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Andriy Lyubka (November 1)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by AngusWOOF were:

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.

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). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

This reads like a resume. Needs more details on the works he has presented in his biography and how it was received. Need sources independent of the subject to review it, not just catalog stores that publish his material.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Andriy Lyubka and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Andriy Lyubka, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:49, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Andriy Lyubka has been accepted

Andriy Lyubka, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Missvain (talk) 05:42, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Hans-Herbert Kögler

Hello, Cphweise. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Hans-Herbert Kögler".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. CptViraj (📧) 11:34, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of New Eastern Europe (Journal)

The article New Eastern Europe (Journal) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable journal. Not indexed in any selective databases, no independent sources. Does not meet WP:NJournals or WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Randykitty (talk) 13:45, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]