Jump to content

User talk:Qcne

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

Archives (Index)

This page is archived by ClueBot III.
Skip to top
Skip to bottom

Draft: Eric Vuong

[edit]

Hi @Qcne. I have made the suggested changes and shortened the content of Draft:Eric Vuong as per your recommendations. Could you kindly visit and review it at your earliest convenience?

Your feedback would be greatly appreciated. Kathytran2000 (talk) 19:03, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Left a message on your talk page :) qcne (talk) 21:51, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I’ve conducted research on this individual, and his work is largely represented through his projects and companies. I can provide you with several sources authored by reputable news organizations, including established and well-known outlets, as well as some run by government entities:
https://vnexpress.net/ra-mat-lien-minh-nft-4540283.html
https://vnexpress.net/cong-ty-blockchain-viet-nam-nhan-dau-tu-gan-1-5-trieu-usd-4273703.html
https://vietnamnet.vn/bi-quyet-dua-doanh-nghiep-vuot-song-dai-dich-cua-ceo-trustpay-jsc-825706.html https://baodautu.vn/jade-forest-capital-rot-100-trieu-usd-vao-quy-dau-tu-khoi-nghiep-fundgo-d163456.html He also recently spoke at an international event along with the Deputy Minister of Science and Technology of Vietnam. https://vsta.org.vn/viet-nam-se-xay-dung-co-che-uu-dai-chao-don-doanh-nghiep-doi-moi-sang-tao-han-quoc-24388.html
I put a lot of work into this article, but it just didn’t quite make it. There are some articles that didn’t fully meet the criteria yet still got accepted. For instance, some of these people have no references or media coverage, which seems a bit strange. https://vi.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/V%C5%A9_V%C4%83n_Quy%E1%BA%BFt
https://vi.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nguy%E1%BB%85n_V%C4%83n_Bi%E1%BB%83n
Kindly help me revise this so it meets the requirements while incorporating all the current sources. I’m also working on drafts about other companies but facing challenges as some articles are not being treated the same.
Kathytran2000 (talk) 17:03, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Quick question: With all the current sources, could you please help me remove any content that may appear promotional in the article and leave only straightforward information about this guy, such as his position and educational background? Would that increase the chances of the article being accepted? I’m trying to be non-promotional as much as possible, staying one step ahead because he’s heavily involved in numerous projects used by millions of people. Kathytran2000 (talk) 07:10, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Kathytran2000 going through the sources one by one:
  1. A brief mention, doesn't show significant coverage.
  2. Based on what Vuong said, so not independent.
  3. Just reporting what he said with no independent analysis.
  4. Again, as above.
  5. As above.
So none of those sources are any use I'm afraid.
Each Wikipedia language project is entirely separate and unaffiliated, with different policies and guidelines. What may be acceptable on the Vietnamese project may not be acceptable on this one. The English language Wikipedia project generally has the strictest notability, referencing, and content requirements of any of them.
As for promotional text in the draft: I don't see any anymore. But, notability-wise I just don't think he quite passes. qcne (talk) 12:58, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]


Permission for Submission of Draft:Era Joshi for Review

[edit]

Please provide me with the permission to submit Draft:Era Joshi for review because I can change the draft to address the concerns of the reviewers. Zoe Sharma (talk) 12:44, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Zoe Sharma. Make your changes to the draft, click Publish changes, then let me know and I will take another look. qcne (talk) 12:51, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Qcne I have made changes to the draft and have published changes. Please take another look. Zoe Sharma (talk) 13:40, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There are now no sources...? qcne (talk) 13:54, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Can you see them now ? Zoe Sharma (talk) 14:12, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have added the sources again. Please take a look. Can you see them now ? Zoe Sharma (talk) 14:27, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, @Zoe Sharma. I still see no indication she meets WP:NPEOPLE. qcne (talk) 14:38, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Zoe Sharma: you added the same source that you have been explicitly told is inappropriate – what is more, you have been explicitly told that adding multiple copies of a source is disruptive, and despite this you added three copies of the same paid promotional piece. --bonadea contributions talk 15:36, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – January 2025

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2024).

Administrator changes

added Sennecaster
readded
removed

CheckUser changes

added
readded Worm That Turned
removed Ferret

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The Nuke feature also now provides links to the userpage of the user whose pages were deleted, and to the pages which were not selected for deletion, after page deletions are queued. This enables easier follow-up admin-actions.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:47, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Insulting

[edit]

Posting comments such as "Perhaps editing is not for you, and you should do something else, or come back in a few years?" can be construed as insulting. A more positive approach would be to advise new editors to put in some time working on improving articles before attempting to create drafts. David notMD (talk) 04:43, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the feedback, @David notMD qcne (talk) 14:32, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

[edit]
The Guidance Barnstar
For all your valuable help at AfC and IRC. It takes real kindness and patience to handle so much of this kind of thing without losing your mind. Thank you. -- asilvering (talk) 14:50, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hear, hear! -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:08, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! qcne (talk) 21:03, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

[edit]

Hi Qcne,

need your help with my article! I have resubmitted, can you review it for me please! Islamaeve (talk) 14:03, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Islamaeve. You need to format your references correctly first - we need the information in the draft to be accompanied by an in-line reference, this is mandatory. Check out the referencing tutorial at WP:INTREFVE. Following that tutorial will create an automatic reference list with all six of your sources sprinkled throughout the draft as in-line citations with little [1] numbers next to each piece of information. qcne (talk) 17:31, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have corrected it as advised, will you let me know if its sorted. Islamaeve (talk) 10:44, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
also please review and guide me. Islamaeve (talk) 10:47, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks @Islamaeve, the sources looks better. Now let's go through each of your sources. Remember: every source should be independent AND reliable AND published and devote significant coverage to Jithin himself. Click the table below to see my assessment...
Source assessment table
Source Independent? Reliable? Significant coverage? Count source toward GNG?
The Times of India
 Yes Yes No Is a review of the movie, and doesn't provide significant coverage to Jithin. ✘ No
Cinema Express
 ~ Mostly based on what Jithin says in an interview. Yes ~ ~ Partial
Onmanorama
 Yes Although an interview, has enough critical analysis to be independent. Yes Yes ✔ Yes
The New Indian Express
 Yes Yes No Is a review of the movie, and doesn't provide significant coverage to Jithin. ✘ No
Lensmen Reviews
 Yes Yes No Is a review of the movie, and doesn't provide significant coverage to Jithin. ✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.
As you can see, then, there's not quite enough significant coverage of Jithin himself in your sources yet to establish notability. qcne (talk) 11:04, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the feedback @QcneI will work on it and update you at the earliest Islamaeve (talk) 12:22, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Qcne, can you please check if this could be a good source https://www.deshabhimani.com/special/weekend/1151034 Islamaeve (talk) 21:40, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's an average source - it mentions Jithin briefly and has some analysis, though is mostly about his films. qcne (talk) 13:18, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please let me know if these are good or not.
1. https://www.manoramaonline.com/movies/interview/2024/12/01/mc-jithin-interview-on-success-of-sookshmadarshini.html
2. https://www.pinkvilla.com/entertainment/south/sookshmadarshini-not-nazriya-nazim-but-a-leading-bollywood-actress-was-supposed-to-headline-mc-jithin-directorial-1367119
3.https://www.vanitha.in/celluloid/movies/mc-jithin-director-special-interview.html
Thank you, Islamaeve (talk) 16:32, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  1. An interview, so not a good source.
  2. This is an okay source.
  3. Mostly an interview, so not a good source.
So we've got a couple of okay sources... and quite a few not very good ones. I would recommend trying to write the draft with the good sources and remove the bad ones, and we can see where we are? qcne (talk) 11:11, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
can i take the source that is partially approved Islamaeve (talk) 11:31, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, let's try it- add in those average to okay sources and then we'll be able to see them in context. qcne (talk) 11:37, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
i have resubmitted the draft, please review and advise. Islamaeve (talk) 15:04, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think that just about passes our criteria now, so have accepted :) qcne (talk) 17:09, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
thank you qcne! you have been a great support, and showed patience to help me achieve my goals. thank you so much! I appreciate you. Islamaeve (talk) 20:01, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. :) qcne (talk) 20:05, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
what should i do next! Islamaeve (talk) 20:06, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Have you checked out the WP:TASKCENTER which includes links to things that need doing on Wikipedia, from basic to advanced? I'd really recommend it. qcne (talk) 20:12, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
hi qcne, the article while i searched its showing as talk page not as article what might be the reason? Islamaeve (talk) 12:17, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Islamaeve, unfortunately we don't control search engine indexing: the article will be indexed after 90 days usually, so you'll have to wait. qcne (talk) 14:59, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Qcne Islamaeve (talk) 11:48, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the Draft Draft:Murder of Hauwa Liman

[edit]

Hello @Qcne

I hope this message finds you well. I am writing regarding the Draft:Murder of Hauwa Liman. I wanted to inform you that the issues previously identified with the draft have been addressed. Efforts have been made to ensure the content adheres to Wikipedia's guidelines for neutrality, verifiability, and reliable sourcing.

I would also like to clarify that I was not the original creator of this draft but came across it and decided to contribute by making improvements to align it with Wikipedia's standards.

I kindly request your review of the updated draft and would appreciate any further feedback you might have. Thank you for your time and effort in maintaining the quality of Wikipedia. Afro 📢Talk! 22:22, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Legacy section is still written inappropriately. Was it written with the help of an AI large language model chatbot? qcne (talk) 11:58, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Qcne No it wasn't I think I get it now I we take my time and do some clean up. I have bn busy with stuff. Afro 📢Talk! 16:47, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Qcne I have done the clean up. Cheers thanks for your feedback Afro 📢Talk! 16:49, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've accepted that now after some more minor cleanup, @Afrowriter. qcne (talk) 09:18, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
cheers thanks @Qcne Afro 📢Talk! 09:38, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:EY Centre

[edit]

Draft:EY Centre - Wikipedia I was told That u could look over my Draft to see what the problems are Thanks Tt1514 (talk) 23:47, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Tt1514, we spoke on the IRC Live Chat yesterday. Still written like an advert unfortunately - it does need a total re-write from scatch, not just a piecemeal approach. qcne (talk) 09:20, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Luc Hensill rejection

[edit]
Extended content
Hello, could you provide me more informations on why my page was declined so quickly please ?

As references, I've another wikipedia page : https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luc_Hensill (in french) also this ISNI number : https://isni.org/isni/0000000503135100 Thanks for your help. Raoni86 (talk) 11:31, 13 January 2025 (UTC) SORRY FOOTNOTES, OK. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Raoni86 (talk • contribs) 11:34, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Raoni86. I only declined, not rejected. Declined means you can improve and resubmit. Three reasons for the decline:
  1. Each language Wikipedia is a separate project and what may be acceptable on the French Wikipedia may not be acceptable here. The existence of another language article doesn't automatically mean an English version will be accepted. The English Wikipedia also has the strictest referencing and notability requirements of all the language projects.
  2. Your references do not show that Luc meets our notability criteria for people. Of your four references, one is to the French Wikipedia (circular references to other Wikis are not permitted), one is to his personal homepage (so not independent), one to the band he was part of (not independent), and finally one to a database listing. Wikipedia notability requirements require multiple sources that are each reliable, published, secondary, independent, and provide significant coverage. Nome of your sources do that, unfortunately.
  3. We require in-line citations for biographic articles. You have none. Please follow the tutorial at WP:INTREFVE.
Let me know if you have any more questions, and check my User:Qcne user page which has some explanatory writings about notability. qcne (talk) 11:37, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I see thanks, but I don't know how Luc Hensill doesn't meet notability criterias, ok, the french wikipedia is circular and not valid but still, if it met the criteria on wikipedia france it means this page is a bit meant to be in english too ? Is the database source is valid at least ? I also have all the albums covers but I can't upload them for copyright reasons. And there is also this website who covers belgian big artists in the 70's. There is also a tv program who talks about the big artists that marked Belgium but I don't have any link to this, but I may find one with the help SONUMA. (belgian audiovisual archives). Thanks for your help. Raoni86 (talk) 12:05, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The French Wikipedia is separate from the English Wikipedia. It has its own policies, and what is acceptable there is not necessarily acceptable here. If this text is acceptable on the French Wikipedia, you should focus your efforts there. 331dot (talk) 13:49, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
could you provide me a single reliable source that may be accepted PLEASE. Raoni86 (talk) 13:52, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
ALSO Luc Hensill is also written on this page of this movie : https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Flesh_Color that's wikipedia ENGLISH, it means it's accepted on another page HERE. Raoni86 (talk) 13:53, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again @Raoni86, please do not SHOUT. As I said, the French Wikipedia and the English Wikipedia are different projects so have different criteria for inclusion.
And, a mention on an existing article is not a criteria for inclusion. That does not mean he automatically should have an article written about him.
If you can find three strong reliable sources that are each independent and secondary, let me know and I will have a look at them. qcne (talk) 14:04, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
could you tell me what's considered valid sources, i may have one, but right now i don't see any valid sources,I provided everything I could but everything was deemed invalid. Also it's not shouting, it's only caps to emphases this word, it doesn't hurt your eyes like your ears might. Raoni86 (talk) 14:09, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Raoni86 if you provide me with the source, I can evaluate if it's a good source or not.
Sources should be:
- published (not your father's personal diary);
- reliable (not from social media like Facebook or a blog);
- secondary and independent (not from a book your father wrote himself or entirely from an interview with your father);
- provide significant coverage (not just a single credit line on an album, or a database listing). qcne (talk) 14:11, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I gave external websites with interviews, i gave imdb, i gave others wikipedia articles who mention the names, (the articles have incredible strong sources so it must be reliable even if user writeen ?). I gave books, tv shows, records, interviews. There is nothing else to add. There are movies and tv shows about him. I don't need this shit for him to be known, I don't sell anything to his name. There was already an article who got removed a while back on wikipedia EN.
https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Flesh_Color : his name is mentionned here, it should be deleted then ??? Raoni86 (talk) 14:17, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Raoni86 Your draft has 8 sources, let's go through them one by one:
  1. Official Luc Hensill Website: obviously not an independent source.
  2. memoire60: An interview with a band member, it does mention Luc a few times. It's an average source.
  3. isni: A database listing, not significant coverage.
  4. fr-academic.com: not reliable, as it draws sources from open sources like Wikipedia.
  5. filmcentrum: A single credit, not significant coverage.
  6. retrojeunesse60: A single mention, not significant coverage.
  7. A book: this look to be a self-published book? Not reliable.
  8. unitedclassics: A credit, not significant coverage.
If this is all there is, your father does not meet our notability criteria. I'll remove the redlink from Flesh Color. qcne (talk) 14:23, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There are multiple records, the most important thing for a musician, you don't accept discogs, but all those discs all exists.
So i have 1 average source, also multiple others wikipedia articles (if we follow your logic everything is backed up by strong sources, (while it's not)).
There are tv shows, movies, also this book is not made at all by me, it appears to be more like a list who list all belgian musicians or guitarists. I wouldn't go so far just to mention my father here. Raoni86 (talk) 14:30, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Raoni86 TV shows, movie, books that all devote significant coverage to your father? Could you please source them?
For info on why we don't consider Discogs a reliable source, see Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources#Discogs. qcne (talk) 14:32, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Axios HQ review

[edit]

Hi there. I should have marked the Draft:Axios HQ article as under review, my bad for not doing so. I was editing it while you reviewed it. There are at least two strong sources, non-ORGTRIV, that bring it over the line of NCORP for me: https://www.wsj.com/articles/axios-wants-to-help-companies-write-like-its-reportersfor-10-000-a-year-or-more-11610632800 (added by me) and https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/07/business/media/axios-local.html. I also removed promotional language and dumb formatting of Smart Brevity, etc. If you want to take a second look, I think it's ready to move to mainspace (and props to the page creator for going through AfC after the first attempt was draftified). Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:46, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is fine now, feel free to move to mainspace. qcne (talk) 11:32, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:06, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:The_University_of_Maryland_Applied_Research_Laboratory_for_Intelligence_and_Security_(ARLIS): Review

[edit]

Hi Qcne, I need your help with my article DRAFT: University of Maryland Applied Research Laboratory for Intelligence and Security. Do these references suffice? And do I include them in addition to the ones I already have? Will you be able to review and approve once I upload these? I have disclosed my employer like you required as well.

IonQ Awarded $5.7 Million Contract With Applied Research Laboratory For Intelligence And Security. Quantum Insider. Retrieved Jan. 14, 2025.

University of Maryland lands $500M Pentagon contract, its largest ever. WBAL-TV. Retrieved Jan. 14, 2025.

Applied Research Laboratory for Intelligence, Security Launches at University of Maryland. DOD News. Retrieved Jan. 14, 2025.

Vice President for Research shares expertise with DOD to support technological partnerships with HBCUs. University of the District of Columbia. Retrieved Jan. 14, 2025.

Morgan State University Receives $350,000 Grant for Quantum Computing Research in Collaboration with UMD and ARLIS. Morgan State University. Retrieved Jan. 14, 2025.

Pilot Projects for the ARLIS Intelligence and Security University Research Enterprise Academic Consortium. Defense Technical Information Center. Retrieved Jan. 14, 2025.

Strategic Outreach -- University Affiliated Research Centers. Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Research and Engineering). Retrieved Jan. 14, 2025.

Deputy Secretary of Defense Dr. Kathleen Hicks and Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence & Security Ronald S. Moultrie Deliver Remarks at Applied Research Laboratory for Intelligence and Security (ARLIS) Ribbon-Cutting Ceremony. DOD News. Retrieved Jan. 14, 2025.

University of Maryland and DoD open security research lab. Security News. Retrieved Jan. 14, 2025. Mpage-arlis (talk) 20:52, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mpage-arlis (talk) 21:47, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Mpage-arlis.
None of your existing references on the draft are particularly good: they're all primary sources (to ARLIS's own website/documents). I would suggest removing them all from the draft.
The references you've given above look a bit better: they're a mixture of secondary sources and primary ones but do give significant coverage. Please replace the references with those ones, and make sure to follow the referencing tutorial so you format your references with in-line citations.
What we're trying to do is see if ARLIS meets our notability criteria for organisations. In Wikipedia context, you should think of "notability" as "noted in secondary sources".
Thank you for disclosing.
Let me know if you have more questions and when you're ready for me to take another look at the draft with the new references. qcne (talk) 11:36, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your help - I resubmitted it for review. https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Draft:The_University_of_Maryland_Applied_Research_Laboratory_for_Intelligence_and_Security_(ARLIS) Mpage-arlis (talk) 18:54, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again @Mpage-arlis. It's just been declined by @Ktkvtsh. two issues:
  1. It's still written like an advert. We don't care what ARLIS has to say about itself, we care what independent sources have to say about ARLIS.
  2. Please follow the referencing tutorial to format all your references as in-line citations. Currently you have a mixture.
qcne (talk) 18:59, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 15 January 2025

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:55, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An Inspector Calls

[edit]

Hi. I see that you requested protection a week or so ago due to repeated IP vandalism. I've just reverted the page twice for the same reason. I see your request was denied but that you were invited to re-apply if the problem recurred. No doubt the twit who keeps doing this will get bored in due course, but I'm just flagging it to you so you are aware. Thanks Point of Presencetalk 10:31, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for requesting again :) qcne (talk) 10:33, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again. It’s now semi-protected for a month. Point of Presencetalk 13:36, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Good to hear! Thank you. qcne (talk) 13:39, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 16:08:07, 20 January 2025 for assistance on AfC submission by Brucenmi56

[edit]


I understand the first rejection of my proposed article (no references). However, the rationale for the second rejection is vague and seemingly arbitrary. Specifically, why is an article on a minor American politician (William Cowger) allowed in Wikipedia but not an article on Gary Cowger, a renowned figure in auto manufacturing? Far more people have driven vehicles built by GM during Gary Cowger's leadership than were impacted by anything William Cowger did, either in Kentucky or in Washington DC.

Brucenmi56 (talk) 16:08, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Brucenmi56. We generally require three sources to prove notability, and you only have one source.
Wikipedia has millions of existing articles, tens of thousands of which are poor quality but no one has gotten around to improving or deleting them yet. That doesn't justify adding more poor quality articles to the project. I'll also note that according to our policies, elected politicians to state-level bodies and above are "inherently" notable, and so can get away with sparser sourcing, but I agree the existing William Cowger article is very light on sourcing. No volunteer editor has put in the effort to finding more sources.
If you can find three sources that discuss Gary Cowger, his life, career, etc, then let me know and I will take another look.
We would also need more content in the draft other than a single line. qcne (talk) 16:13, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I've done as you've asked. But I'm getting Cite errors which I cannot figure out; something's wrong with my [1] citations but I'm a newbie and am stumped.
Please, can you coach me through this? Brucenmi56 (talk) 17:51, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You had double <ref> tags one after the other, so removing the first set fixes the error (I've done this for you). You might have an easier time using our Visual Editor which is a bit like Microsoft Word, check the referencing tutorial at Help:Introduction to referencing with VisualEditor/1.
I do have good news, however! I now see no issue with the draft, so have published it for you after some minor cleanup. Let me know if you have any further questions. qcne (talk) 18:01, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks so much for your help! Brucenmi56 (talk) 20:03, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Draft:Syed Fakher E Haider

[edit]

Hello Qcne. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Draft:Syed Fakher E Haider, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Promotional, but not TNT level. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 16:42, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Whpq, no worries. qcne (talk) 16:43, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Jonathan Frantz - specifics?

[edit]

Hi @Qcne,

Thank you for reviewing the article. I’ve worked to ensure it's well-sourced and neutral.

I revised the article removing adjectives or phrases that may have come across as promotional. Other than that, the article is well sourced with medical journals, as well as local and national news coverage.

Could you point out specific areas where the tone seems promotional so I can address them? Or if this is satisfactory, would you remove the rejection?

Thank you in advance. I always appreacite the guidance of editors as I work to improve!

~~~~ Editora89119 (talk) 21:41, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's better, thank you - you can therefore re-submit for review by clicking the big blue Resubmit button. qcne (talk) 21:59, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Done! And once again, thank you! I appreacite all of the editors' guidance, suggestions and help! Editora89119 (talk) 22:06, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]


Assistance

[edit]

Hi @Qcne I would appreciate your guidance on the following points regarding the citations used on Wikipedia: 1. Should the articles be categorized as "spammed" or "non-spammed"? Please clarify the preferred level of quality or format. 2. What is the minimum or ideal domain authority (DA) for the websites publishing these articles to ensure compliance with our objectives?Hurricanethunder (talk) 21:37, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Hurricanethunder!
  1. I am not sure what you mean by "spammed" or "not-spammed". New articles have categories, which groups similar articles into topic areas. But I don't think that's what you mean. Could you clarify?
  2. Domain Authority, the search engine ranking score, isn't the best indicator for reliability of a source. Instead, you will have to use your own judgement and investigate many different things to see if a website is reliable or not; does it have an editorial team? does it publish user-generated content? is the content AI-generated? is the content referenced? how old is the website domain? is the content sponsored or spammy? etc. There is the Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard which includes years worth of sources that have been discussed by the community. My first step on checking to see if a source is reliable or not is to see if it's previously been discussed there. The following essay is applicable to Wikipedia articles but I think also works really well for assessing external sources too: Wikipedia:Assessing reliability.
Let me know if that helps, qcne (talk) 21:57, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draft: Syed Muhammad Faisal Sami

[edit]

Hi @Qcne, thanks for your feedback. What can I do to improve the chances of a successful submission? I have worked hard writing the article and citing independent reputable sources, what am I missing out on, can you guide on or give me a breakdown of the things I can include in the submission for it to be accepted?


Thank you. HumanitarianServices (talk) 22:17, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @HumanitarianServices. The problem is that most of your sources are just not giving significant coverage of Syed. They are award credits or brief mentions. I agree that your sources are independent and reliable but they just fail the test on Wikipedia:Significant coverage.
As an example, we would be looking for multiple non-local news articles that provide in-depth critical analysis of Syed.
I've rejected the draft for now which means you can't re-submit for review, but if you do find at least three strong sources that provide significant coverage let me know and I will take another look. qcne (talk) 22:20, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you @Qcne for your reply and assistance.
Could these independent and non-local articles be what you're looking for:
1) https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cp4wpjl87k2o.amp
2) https://www.geo.tv/latest/558017-british-pakistani-receives-top-citizen-award-at-uk-parliament
3) https://www.highsheriffwestmidlands.com/awards-post/syed-muhammad-faisal-sami/
4) https://epwing.gov.pk/NewsDetail/ZmUwNDZlYWMtMmY4NC00ODg2LWI3NjUtZmIwZjhmY2IwMDVk HumanitarianServices (talk) 22:35, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @HumanitarianServices, the BBC is an okay source. The High Sherrif West Mids and the Epwing sources are both primary, so don't count towards notability at the moment. geo.tv is average.. I feel it's a bit promotional in tone.
So, could you try going back to the draft and cutting out all the information and associated sources that are primary and provide only the briefest mention. Then see if you can find maybe two more strong secondary sources with significant coverage. I'd much rather see, say, three or four really good sources vs 20 average to poor ones. qcne (talk) 22:39, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks @Qcne. Understood.
Here a few sources that solely talk about Syed, and that I'd like your take on if they count towards the sources that are not primary:
1) https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cp4wpjl87k2o.amp
2) https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/birmingham-campaigner-told-you-saved-29604965.amp
3) https://www.inyourarea.co.uk/news/birmingham-resident-honoured-with-british-citizen-award
Could these be the three good sources that outweigh the others and that count towards a successful submission? HumanitarianServices (talk) 22:46, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe. Could you go back to the draft and cut down the content to the good sources. It would be useful to see them in context. qcne (talk) 09:07, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks @Qcne. I'll edit that in to the draft. As its been rejected, how do I go about re-submitting it with the changes? HumanitarianServices (talk) 10:30, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Let me know when you've edited the draft, and I'll take another look at it @HumanitarianServices qcne (talk) 10:32, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Qcne, I have made those edits and used the strong sources instead of weak and passing through comments. Please could you take a look?
Thank you HumanitarianServices (talk) 13:44, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I should have been more clear: in biographic articles we can't have any information unsourced, and currently a bunch of info is unsourced in the draft. Either remove those pieces of information without sources, or source them to some average sources. I would recommend cutting the content of the draft down a bit to just the essentials. qcne (talk) 13:46, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Qcne, I have made those changes by cutting down the extra info and only keeping that info that can be easily sourced via strong sources.
Thanks HumanitarianServices (talk) 14:08, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, @HumanitarianServices. Much better. I will undo my rejection. qcne (talk) 15:43, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you @Qcne, your guidance and valuable tips have been incredible. Truly appreciate what you do and the work you put in for authentic and reliable Wikipedia pages.
Now that the rejection has been undone, are you in charge of accepting it? Or would I have to wait that out until another user accepts it?
Thanks HumanitarianServices (talk) 15:58, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No problem at all. Because I've rejected and declined it already, I'll leave it to another reviewer to review it if that's okay, just to let others have a chance of looking at the draft with fresh eyes. qcne (talk) 16:15, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi@Qcne, absolutely, no problem at all. Thank you once again! HumanitarianServices (talk) 16:28, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Qcne, the article just got rejected. Could you please help me with this as the guidelines given back as feedback have already been amended and adjusted according to the rules.
Thanks HumanitarianServices (talk) 12:41, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @HumanitarianServices, only declined not rejected. Declined means you can improve and re-submit.
It would be worth reaching out to @RangersRus for some detail on what they feel is missing. qcne (talk) 13:34, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Taylorjeanobrien (03:43, 24 January 2025)

[edit]

Hi, how do I create a page? --Taylorjeanobrien (talk) 03:43, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Taylorjeanobrien, I see you've created an article at User:Taylorjeanobrien - that's actually the wrong place to host an article (your User page is only for writings about you as a Wikipedia user).
What I have done is moved the article to Draft:Roberto_Alves for you. You'll now see a big blue button Submit the draft for review!. If you click that, it'll go into our review pile and a reviewer will review it at some point.
Hope that helps, and welcome to Wikipedia. Let me know if you have any further questions at all. qcne (talk) 09:04, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Review draft Wiki Page (Word doc)

[edit]

Hi again,

I have modified the wiki page based on the feedback from the previous editor and I would like your kind support in reviewing the page (Currently In Word) as you have thoughtfully offered to me which I am grateful.

Thanks MagentaIbex70 (talk) 16:46, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi QC, I have sorted out the references and the text. Please can you give me your opinion and help me edit the link for https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Draft:Professor_Mark_Whiteley. Also, I am not sure why I have a speedy deletion on this page. What does that mean? this is a draft page so not sure why i got this. MagentaIbex70 (talk) 20:00, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi QC,
I have fianlised the page and done the references. Please can you help we transfer this page to the current draft for submission. Much apprecaited MagentaIbex70 (talk) 23:06, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi QC, I got feedback and the submission was declined due to foodnotes I think. I would appreciate your 2nd opinion 94.201.147.130 (talk) 04:50, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ ...
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Qcne&oldid=1272543523"