Jump to content

User talk:StraussInTheHouse/Archive 4

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7

Draft:Neurosexism

I am trying to recover the text of Draft: Neurosexism, a draft article you declined on March 16 that has now been deleted. Can you help me with this? J.birch2 (talk) 20:49, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Got the text now. J.birch2 (talk) 21:50, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
Hi Richard Nevell (WMUK), I cannot access the text, please can you email it to me so I can examine it? Many thanks, SITH (talk) 20:23, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
Email sent. Richard Nevell (WMUK) (talk) 09:57, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
I have restored the text to Draft:Neurosexism with three differences.
  1. In section Definition, I have added a {{long quote}} tag. While quoting is fine, when long quotes are used when it could be put into original wording, it can cause copyright issues. Please see Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria#Policy and Wikipedia:Non-free content#Guideline examples for more information. The source in this instance is this.
  2. In section Criticism, I have done the same as I have for #1, with the source being this, under the same rationale. The issue is more noticeable because the majority of two sections rely on direct quotes.
  3. In section Alleged examples in science journalism, I have added a {{copy edit inline}} tag next to a sentence which closely paraphrases this.
These are issues which can be worked on, but they are not egregious enough to warrant deletion. I have null-edited for attribution.
Many thanks, SITH (talk) 10:41, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for taking a look at this. For the first quote 75 words is a pretty decent chunk, but I would be tempted to keep it as it is a key definition. One for the talk page perhaps. For the second one, I think there's a case to be made for replacing the quote with a summary, though I can see the appeal of including it. Good spot with point #3, that definitely needs changing.
The article was put together by a group of students, so it would be useful to have the page history restored to show who did what. @RHaworth:, would this be possible? Richard Nevell (WMUK) (talk) 11:01, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
RHaworth: feel free to G6 my recreation and Special:Undelete the other version which I can then apply my edits to per the above discussion for attribution. Many thanks, SITH (talk) 11:06, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
  • "G6 my recreation" - that is gobbledegook. Yes, there are 80 deleted edits to draft:Neurosexism by a number of different editors but copyvios are not allowed even in edit histories. I am very sorry: I do not have the patience or inclination to trawl through 80 edits checking which ones are not copyvios. Please find another admin. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:40, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
Yes – I saw this discussion. The problem now is that the article as recreated (in undoubted good faith) still contains content copied from the sources: "spatial tasks correlated with the volume of interconnecting white matter", for example, is taken from Cordelia Fine (2005), Delusions of Gender: The Real Science Behind Sex Differences. At this point I can either blank it and list it at WP:CP, or reduce it a bare-bones stub – checking it word by word for further problems just isn't practicable. Strauss, @Richard Nevell (WMUK) and J.birch2:, what is your preference? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 15:27, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
Justlettersandnumbers, I say stubify. SITH (talk) 15:34, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for restoring the page history. I would prefer to put the article back to the students and give them some time to work on the article and address the issues. That way it should use up less editor time because they're more familiar with the text and which areas might need changing, and they get the opportunity to learn from the experience. There's a decent article here and, while there are some phrases too close to the source material, I don't think we're at the stage where it needs to be razed to the ground to be rebuilt. Richard Nevell (WMUK) (talk) 15:50, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
I would like to try the approach suggested by Richard above. J.birch2 (talk) 17:09, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Declined Draft: Fano Jazz by The Sea

Hello SITH, I added more sources as asked. Some of them are in italian, as the event take place in Italy. Despite this, I added a few references in english, like a festival review by an american magazine and a live album recorded at the festival. Thank you for your help, just let me know what else can be done. Sicurocanasta (talk) 11:00, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Sicurocanasta, no problem, it's looking better. Sources don't have to be in English, just the actual text of the article. Many thanks, SITH (talk) 13:02, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
StraussInTheHouse perfect, thank you very much, I'll wait for the review and in the mean time I try to improve the article. Sicurocanasta (talk) 13:11, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Just got your message, thank you for the input- new problem

please review this action

17:14, 16 March 2019 RHaworth (talk | contribs) deleted page Draft:Sexual and Gender Minority Research Office (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement of https://isgmh.northwestern.edu/2017/01/20/21st-century-cures-act-calls-for-expanded-nih-focus-on-sexual-and-gender-minority-health/, http://sites.nationalacademies.org/cs/groups/dbassesite/documents/webpage/DBASSE_191476.PDF) (thank)

I find the action taken above does not warrant a g12deletion.

I believe even with a copyright symbol at the bottom of a NATIONAL ACADEMIES website page, they are a government agency and therefore all content is public domain when published.

I also know that 95% of the cut and paste work from Northwestern University was the actual line by line text of the 21st Century Cures Act of 2016 which has its own wiki article but not any reference to the portions of this legislation I was including in my article.

THESE ARE SERIOUS WORDS WHERE THE LGBT COMMUNITY IS IDENTIFIED BY THE US GOVERNMENT AS A MINORITY POPULATION. You do cut and paste in such cases, so you are certain you did not leave anything out. Would you prefer I add this information from the National Register instead of a decent University.

I like your work and your user handle. Will you handle the BOTBOY's abusive deletion please and chastise them for not giving me sufficient time to tackle the issues you pointed out to a few hours ago.

Much appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrphilip (talk • contribs) 04:22, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi Mrphilip, I have taken a look at Draft:Sexual and Gender Minority Research Office. Per 17 USC s.105 only documents of the Federal Government of the United States are in the public domain (see Wikipedia:Public domain#U.S. government works. As far as I can see, National Academies staff are not directly employed by the United States Federal Government and therefore their work does not fall under the exemption of "work prepared by an officer or employee of the United States Government as part of that person’s official duties" (per 17 USC s.101). I don't know what you mean by BOTBOY, the deleting administrator was RHaworth and you can leave a request on his talk page if you wish to have a copy sent to you. The deletion certainly wasn't abusive and I am in no position to either desire or have grounds to chastise anyone over this. Many thanks, SITH (talk) 12:06, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
StraussInTheHouse Thank you for the exacting research. Extremely helpful clarification. I will be sure to avoid these complications moving forward. Mrphilip (talk) 14:39, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Avoid deletion of G-Core Labs page

Hello! Esknyazeva (talk) 12:55, 21 March 2019 (UTC)I added links to all of the facts on the page G-Core Labs company Esknyazeva (talk) 12:55, 21 March 2019 (UTC)made information about the company more neutral Esknyazeva (talk) 12:55, 21 March 2019 (UTC)added big customers of our company with proof links to reliable sources (all our customers which I wrote about gave me a permission to write about them and our business relationship) Esknyazeva (talk) 12:55, 21 March 2019 (UTC)page about G-Core Labs isn't an orphan page anymore, there are two links to the page: from page about [[1]] and from the page of [of Tanks] Please, look at our page once again and tell me how to avoid deletion.

Review page Draft:WebRatio

Hi, I've resubmitted the page Draft:WebRatio. Can you please review again? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paolorivius (talk • contribs) 15:59, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Paolorivius, please see A quick note at User:StraussInTheHouse/I declined your draft. Thanks, SITH (talk) 22:16, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Review - J. Smoke Wallin

Hey, you recently rejected my Draft:J. Smoke Wallin article and I was curious about what I can do to improve the submission so it is accepted next time! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hanszalay (talk • contribs) 18:27, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Hanszalay, my decline was based on copied content which has now been removed. However, another reviewer, Justlettersandnumbers has since declined a resubmission because There are some sources here, but none that I've seen seem actually to discuss this person in any depth or detail. What he says or is reported as having said contributes exactly nothing to a determination of his notability by Wikipedia standards. I am inclined to agree, have you considered whether Wallin passes WP:BIO? Many thanks, SITH (talk) 22:16, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Minecraft: The Movie

Hi! Did I miss anything here? – if so, do please say! You seem to have a good eye for this stuff, and thanks for noticing problems with this one. However, it's my feeling that a page with several years of history and contributions from a number of different editors is (relatively) unlikely to be eligible for speedy, and listing at WP:CP is likely to be the better option in such cases. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:02, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi Justlettersandnumbers, thanks for your message! Yes, that might be the way to go. The Plot section, while only one line, is copied from GamePedia, which is GamePedia is CC BY-NC-SA 3.0, however, the Plot section there appears to be taken from Variety, which isn't free-license. Aside from a bit in the middle of the Production section also from Variety, the start of the Production section seems to be taken from this is from what appears to be a mirror of Wikipedia's page on Minecraft, so the only issue is the variety bit. I have no problem with a WP:CP listing. Many thanks, SITH (talk) 19:15, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Hey sorry


I am sorry that I copied and pasted text from the Minecraft Wiki and put it on the draft one on Wikipedia. However I am still learning the rules so ya. MoMoCool2005 | Talk•••Contributions 19:16, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi MoMoCool2005, no problem. As I discussed above, GamePedia appears to be CC BY-NC-SA 3.0, however there is probably less moderation there and the copyright violation was only by proxy due to that article copying from Variety. If you do import freely licensed user-generated text, you can always run it through this to make sure there's no copyright issue. Many thanks, SITH (talk) 19:20, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
Oh yeah just so you know you can also find me on this Wiki https://minecraft.gamepedia.com/User:MoMoCool2005 MoMoCool2005 | Talk•••Contributions 19:24, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Help understanding revisions/copyright violation

Hey thanks so much for reviewing my submission and for providing feedback. Please forgive my limited knowledge as this is my first submission and entry point into this great community. I was wondering if you might help me understand what you've done. It looks like you deleted the beginning and redacted another part? I def didn't intend to violate any copyright but I do see that I might have used similar language that they did in the article that was cited...was that the mistake? Sorry again for the newb questions but any guidance is much appreciated! --HIYAthatsmyshoe (talk) 22:03, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi HIYAthatsmyshoe, no problem. The issue was that the lead sentence was copied from this, which doesn't have a free license. You may continue working on your draft and replace the {{redacted}} template with your own words or free license text which serves the same purpose and resubmit. An administrator will look at the revision deletion (which just means removing the non-free text from the page history) in due course. Many thanks, SITH (talk) 22:07, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
Oh ok that makes total sense now thanks I def should have written that in my own words. I'm sure this is dumb question too but is there a way for me to revert back and see it before the redaction? I ask because there were like 3-4 citations in that lead sentence that editor RedAlert helped me with and I'd love to keep those and rework my text around them if that makes sense. Thanks again so much for the help and swift reply. It can be daunting getting into this but you guys have been super helpful. --HIYAthatsmyshoe (talk) 22:17, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
NM think I found it on my own. Trying to stand on my own legs lol lot to learn :) --HIYAthatsmyshoe (talk) 22:23, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
@HIYAthatsmyshoe: no problem, I've restored the citations to the page so they don't get removed from the history. Many thanks, SITH (talk) 22:36, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. I just fixed the lead sentence and published and somehow a ton of the other text from the article dropped off! I don't know how that would have happened. Could you possibly help me restore? I'd hate for it to be reviewed right now all messed up.--HIYAthatsmyshoe (talk) 22:59, 22 March 2019 (UTC) Dang someone reviewed while the content was down. Ugh can't believe that happened :( HIYAthatsmyshoe (talk) 23:16, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

(edit conflict) HIYAthatsmyshoe, that content "disappeared" because it was copied from various sources, mostly the website of the charity, so I removed it. Everything you write in Wikipedia must be in your own words; you may not copy content from other sources (whether web pages or printed materials) and paste it here. That is what we call copyright violation, and is fairly strictly not permitted. If you have some connection to the organisation you should disclose it; if you receive any kind of monetary payment from it, you must disclose. Strauss or I will help you with that if necessary, just ask. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 23:20, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Ok thanks @justlettersandnumbers that makes sense now. I did pull some of the bullet points from their website when RedAlert had asked me to talk about services they provide. I realize now that too was a dumb move. I will work on it I really do appreciate the help. And no I'm not connected or employed other than living in the triad and having attended events and seen stuff they do. Thought it would be a good topic to get my feet wet on wiki Im def learning a lot. --HIYAthatsmyshoe (talk) 23:30, 22 March 2019 (UTC) Or if you guys think prudent to scratch this and move on to trying a new topic I'm open to your guidance. Thanks again. --HIYAthatsmyshoe (talk) 23:41, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Declined draft: Sedimentary Isostasy

Hi SITH, Thank you for your suggestions for improvement of my draft. I can see from the Wiki guidelines that your criticisms are valid although I had thought that my subject matter was already supported by primary and some secondary sources. My style became rather verbose because most readers, even professional geologists may not be familiar with all of the inter-related concepts and evidence that need to be treated carefully and together to assist comprehension. This explains your impression of an essay rather than an encyclopaedia article. The fundamental observation of sedimentary isostasy was made by Darwin in his account of the Voyage of the Beagle, and many experienced geologists have touched on this difficult subject over the intervening 180 years. My submittal was an attempt to meet the challenge of thorough explanation head-on, as I have found no other encyclopaedia that attempts to clarify these concepts as an integrated whole. I should certainly appreciate any further guidance from you or other Wiki editors that might improve my draft. Geologician (talk) 19:47, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi Geologician, no problem, feel free to resubmit once it's been reworded a bit and we'll take another look at it. Thank you for your contributions! SITH (talk) 20:21, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Round robins

FYI, please see Template:Talk page of redirect#Usage, which tells us that talk pages should have content when this template is used. When a round-robin set of page moves results in deleting the original talk page, and you need to re-create that talk page, it is best to re-create it as a hard redirect as I've done at Talk:Aashish Chaudhary. This saves editors a click and takes them from their link to the correct page where the RM has been closed. Thank you! Paine Ellsworth, ed.  put'r there  16:41, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Paine Ellsworth, thanks for letting me know, I've used {{tpr}} on a few RMs recently, should I fire up AWB and convert them to hard redirects? Best, SITH (talk) 17:25, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
Yeah, that's kinda like when I go through my early contributions. I was so surprised at how many errors I made back then. I don't think I make as many mistakes now, but I still find 'em once in awhile. So I guess my point is... never think you're the only one makin' mistakes, because we all do. Best to you SITH! Paine Ellsworth, ed.  put'r there  21:06, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

RE: Proposal of Deletion

Hello SITH, thank you kindly for contacting me yesterday on the article about J-Subculture to point out about the deletion proposal. I have added an edit summary line for explanation today. If you could check it by occasion and consider it, I would much appreciate.

It was my first article and I tried to work it out carefully for format, references, inter-linkage with related articles etc., modelling it after similar Wiki articles. I'm aware that it may have consisted of deficiencies from the beginning, but always hoped others would help with contributions and improvements of content. It is an original text that I have created in person and put in research on the topic. The creation of the article took time & labor.

If the article is not deemed appropriate for the platform, I don't object the deletion per se, as I don't want to swim against stream. Nonetheless I would regret seeing all the labor & time invested disappear, so if you could advise what needs to be done to safe it and therewith could reconsider the proposal, I would be much obliged. Thank you very much for your time and guidance, greetings RockmanY RockmanY (talk) 02:37, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

RockmanY, thanks for letting me know. No problem, I will send it to AfD instead, so other users, yourself included, can provide input on the matter. Regards, SITH (talk) 17:28, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
StraussInTheHouse thank you for getting back to me speedily and your support by posting it to the AfD, so other users can have a look at it. Then I hope others can help to give some input on how to maintain the article properly. Greetings RockmanY (talk) 23:50, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Talk:Bonaire League RM

Why did you close the discussion as no consensus? Hhkohh (talk) 16:14, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Hhkohh, because it'd been relisted twice and neither relist had generated clearer consensus. You're welcome to speedily renominate. SITH (talk) 17:26, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
Matt recommended Kampionato Bonaire while I suggest Kampionato (Bonaire). Other editors only state the source is Kampionato before first relist. My and Matt conclusion is similar. So I cannot believe this is a no-consensus RM. I know the discussion is not a vote per WP:NOTAVOTE Hhkohh (talk) 22:34, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
Hhkohh, very well, I've undone the closure. I'll leave it to another admin / page mover / uninvolved editor to determine. SITH (talk) 09:19, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi StraussInTheHouse. Thank you for your interest in copyright clean-up. I noticed that you have recently listed some drafts at WP:CP. Perhaps you didn't realize it, but whenever you list something there for investigation, you have to notify the person who added the content. There's a template for you to do this - please see the instructions on the copyvio core template. Then the user is supposed to have one week to address the issue before an administrator deals with the case. WP:CP is intended only for the most complex cases. For most cases, the preferred action is for you to remove the copyright material yourself, notify the user of the problem, and then request revision deletion. Please let me know if you have any questions. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:21, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi Diannaa, apologies, I will do that in future. I'll look into the requesting revdel where possible in the ones I nominated today. Many thanks, SITH (talk) 22:26, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
Make sure you notify people what they did wrong. Part of the job is educating users as to what our copyright policy is! A lot of people seem to assume that we accept copyright content, since many sites do. Thank you ! — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:33, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
Diannaa, I've converted them all to revdel templates and G6'd the log as I was the only person to report to CP yesterday. Many thanks, SITH (talk) 09:56, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Article Amrah bint Abdur Rahman

Hello StraussInTheHouse,

Thank you for reviewing my article. I would like to ask about the reason for rejection and as far as I see the reason for deleting the text. As far as I have understood the problem is in the copyrighted content or too big citation that I have used from the source Al- Muttawa. But I used the reference marks and it looked alike a long citation. Now I would like to see the text, is it possible to reconstruct it? Daria Lebedieva (talk) 17:41, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi Daria Lebedieva, the issue with the draft was that it heavily copied this. That text's copyright status is unclear so if there is reasonable suspicion that a submission isn't worded originally, we must assume that it is copyrighted. Many thanks, SITH (talk) 19:13, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

Regarding review of Draft:Bindumadhav Khire

  • Thanks for reviewing the draft, I have made some changes in it, can you have a look at it and let me know what else I should change?
  • I am still working on the tone of article too. But if you could see the current state and suggest changes needed, that would be great help to me. thanks QueerEcofeminist "cite! even if you fight"!!! [they/them/their] 18:34, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
QueerEcofeminist, that's much better, feel free to resubmit! Many thanks, SITH (talk) 19:10, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
StraussInTheHouse, Thanks for taking time, I have resubmitted the draft. QueerEcofeminist "cite! even if you fight"!!! [they/them/their] 03:13, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Template_talk:Key_press#Requested_move_8_March_2019

Hi StraussInTheHouse, I overturned the closure at this page, as I see there is continuing room for discussion. It was already a rather "close" consensus, if pressed I'd be leaning more on the side of "no consensus" then in support of the requester. I wanted to leave you a note in case my edit summaries were misleading, the additional listing is only for that reason, not because it was a "non-admin closure". I think there is room for more information, and left a specific question for one editor - would like to give them a chance to respond now. Best regards, — xaosflux Talk 22:51, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

Xaosflux, sure, I've no problem with a relist. SITH (talk) 12:00, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Jan Peterson

I see the Jan Peterson draft has been flagged for possible copyright violations, but a look at the Copyvio report shows that many of the flagged text sections are book titles, place names, organization names, and even dates. Not sure how these could be written any differently (?) Thanks VanIslander1234 (talk) 18:42, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

VanIslander1234, the copyvio report I've got (link) seems to suggest that the majority of the copying comes before the books section. Thanks, SITH (talk) 19:14, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
It's seems like there isn't an opportunity to make corrections? Can I ask why that is? VanIslander1234 (talk) 20:10, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
If you edit in source mode (the little pencil icon in the top right), you'll be able to see the content between the template. SITH (talk) 21:56, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
Thanks, I've edited the problem text. I'm not sure what needs to happen next. VanIslander1234 (talk) 02:52, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
I'll have another look at the source text in due course and if it's clear we can replace the template with a revision deletion request to redact the page history. SITH (talk) 12:01, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Elad I. Levy Draft

Hi StraussintheHouse, you recently reviewed my articlr submission on Dr. Elad I. Levy on February 4th, i have made the changes you requested, i cut the article down quite a bit and added in the references for the notable research contributions, and also added in references for his awards and recognition's section. I had resubmmited it and apparently there a two pending submissions for Levy. I would like the one titled "Elad I. Levy" reviewed not the one titled "Elad Levy" reviewed. I appreciate your help with this project, please let me know any other edits you would like made, another reviewer did review it and said they would review the one titled "Elad Levy" since it was a duplicate, but i made all the revisions based on your comments to Elad I. Levy". Please let me know any other advice you have for this page so that it can get accepted! thank you so much! Ashamkhan123 (talk) 01:23, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi Ashamkhan123, please replace the content of the duplicate page you no longer require with {{db-u1}}. Many thanks, SITH (talk) 14:06, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Draft in wrong place

Hi, I have been working on an article on photographer, Jason Thrasher. I submitted a draft but I may have confused things by putting the template in my sandbox. Thank you for the inline citation recommendation. They are in the draft. (https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Draft:Jason_Thrasher)--I am not asking for special attention just making sure I complied with your suggestions. I am glad to wait my turn. Thank you for all you do to make this enterprise work.Kmccook (talk) 02:46, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi, are you referring to Draft:Jason Thrasher? I don't seem to have edited it. Many thanks, SITH (talk) 14:08, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Amiran Patarkalashvili

Hi I wanted to add the information about Georgian Architect-designer Amiran Patarkalashvili, He has his pages in social media and is the founder of CPA Central PArtnership Foundationa. Why did u decline my article? I don't understand what is the problem — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ninogogitidze18 (talk • contribs) 10:25, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi, I assume you're referring to Draft:Amiran Patarkalashvili. The problem is it's unreferenced. You need to cite significant coverage in independent, reliable sources. SITH (talk) 14:09, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Declined draft: Sedimentary Isostasy

Hi SITH, I have resubmitted my Sedimentary isostasy draft after making a careful edit to address the concerns mentioned your first review, using Evolution wiki as a model. The range of vocabulary and concepts used in this model have been around even longer than those of Evolution, although they are less familiar to earth scientists. Therefore a Wiki linked approach to publication is indispensible if these related, well-established, concepts are to be considered in their proper context by peers.Thanks Geologician (talk) 10:44, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Geologician, no problem, I or another reviewer will take a look within the stated time frame. Thanks, SITH (talk) 14:10, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you!

For taking the time to review the article on the Free Burghers. Bhistory 14:20, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Anastasiya Makarevich

Hello! I added links and further refined the article in the draft that You checked Draft:Anastasiya_Makarevich. Please check the new version. Also in the future I will improve the article. Savcheg (talk) 09:21, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

A reviewer will be with it in the stated time period. SITH (talk) 14:39, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Draft: Hans Baldauf

Hi Strauss, this is my first time working through the submission process. Can you please let me know what information I need to include inline citations for? Are inline citations the same thing as regular citations? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PeterMa1234 (talk • contribs)

Hi PeterMa1234, inline citations are the preferred system of referencing on Wikipedia, and it's required for biographies of living people. You can find out how to use the system here. Thanks, SITH (talk) 14:41, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Draft: Free Burghers

Thank you for taking the time to review my draft on the Free Burghers. The article is my first. In regard to the copy right violation on one of the items in the article, please accept my sincere apologies. Reason being purely lack of experience. Thank you for the correction thereof. Please accept my commitment to not repeat said again. Kind Regards Bhistory 14:15, 28 March 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boershistory (talk • contribs)

No problem and thanks for the coffee! SITH (talk) 14:42, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Draft:Jason Lewis

Hello StraussInTheHouse. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Draft:Jason Lewis, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Copyrighted text is mostly a list of books. The rest can be dealt with through revdel. Thank you. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 21:03, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

Apple evangelist

You mentioned consensus in your edit summary. Can you please point me to the discussion? Thanks. - PaulT+/C 21:30, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

Psantora, Special:Permalink/514597377 strongly suggests that, despite the lack of discussion, with multiple users finding the content to include original research and/or be unencyclopedic, a merge was conducive of consensus. If you want to challenge it and split out Apple evangelist, that's fine, but it's probably best to start afresh instead of reintroducing original research. Many thanks, SITH (talk) 21:36, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for pointing that out but all I can see there (and all I saw when I removed the redirect(s) earlier today) are two editors disagreeing. Nothing approaching consensus, at least as far as I have seen. I agree that the article is/was in a sorry state – I was in the process of rehabilitating it – but there was never any substantive discussion about redirecting it. Now, I understand that the redirect happened back in 2012 and there doesn't seem to be anyone who even noticed or cared enough to comment on it, which in theory does count as the weakest form of consensus, and so I'll leave it as a redirect for now despite my disagreement that there was any consensus for the redirect in the first place. I think an XfD to support the redirect would have been the appropriate next step instead of a unilateral revert without discussion. I do intend to fix it up and turn it into an appropriate article. Unfortunately, rather than making those edits directly to the page I'll have to start in userspace and then I guess merge the page history?... Not the end of the world, but still annoying and pretty unnecessary. - PaulT+/C 21:58, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
Psantora, I know, but it still technically is consensus because it wasn't totally undiscussed. If you want to do a userspace that's fine, there's no need for a history merge but I can assist with implementing your version as I will be able to do a round robin swap. SITH (talk) 22:34, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

Declined Draft:Bai_cao

Hi SITH, Thank you for your confirmation of my article. I had read your comment about why my article was declined. May you give me some advices as how to preference "Reliable sources". I'm new in making contribution to Wiki so I must be made some mistake in preference it. About the article that I submitted for review, I translated it from another Wiki's page, and Im a native and used to do what was wrote in the article so I can verified what in it was true. I'd glad to making more attribution to Wiki if you can help me on how to improve my article. Thank you. 113.161.84.98 (talk) 13:47, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for your translation. The issue is, on English Wikipedia we have a policy which prevents us from citing ourselves as a source (WP:CIRCULAR). A reliable source might be an encyclopedia entry on the game, a book written about it, or even a how to play guide found in a major publication on the internet. Many thanks, SITH (talk) 13:52, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

'Baaghi 3' submission declined

I created a draft for 'Baaghi 3', which is the third part in the 'Baaghi' franchise. This was declined. The filming and release of this film is imminent. At what point should I revive the draft and resubmit? The lead actor, Tiger Shroff is one of India's biggest stars and the last film 'Baaghi 2' collected about 259 crore rupees or approximately $35 million. So, it is a notable film. Maybe not enough has been published in the media yet. https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Baaghi_2 https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Tiger_Shroff — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thomas t5 (talk • contribs) 16:41, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Losing Patience

I assume that you mean that you are losing the assumption of good faith with regard to the portal creator that you expressed in your comment on the Arbitration request. Yes. That's why Aaaa applies. That refers to the 880-hertz A tone that was stuck in the brain or ear of Robert Schumann, but also the annoyance that I am getting at the damm portals. With Schumann, the Aaaa eventually caused him to pass through the portal to the next world. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:42, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Robert McClenon, correct. Aaaaa sums up my feelings while adding the MfD tags with AutoWikiBrowser to a bunch of them. SITH (talk) 19:07, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
Hey, I like both of you, so no passing through any portals to the next world over Portals please :P ♠PMC♠ (talk) 20:38, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
Premeditated Chaos, sure just let me get up to 88 mph :P SITH (talk) 21:38, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
I didn't go through the portal to the next world in July 2018 and I am told that I should be good for another ten years. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:24, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

WEB Marketing company page

Hi, you've just reviewed my page but I don't know how I could fix it and make it better? You wrote this: Symbol opinion vote.svg Comment: Relies too heavily on SPS / CORPSPAM sources. What does that mean? How can I make my sources better? I've already inputted 27 of them, so I feel like that shows coverage and they're all either from respectable news sources or It sites. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.147.97.136 (talk) 14:08, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Link please. SITH (talk) 14:39, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Draft:WEB_Marketing_(company) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.147.97.136 (talk) 07:06, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

OPEN community

Sir, you declined my draft stating that introduction is appearing more like an advertisement. This is the link sir - Draft:OPEN_Community

Sir, i have just stated the aims and motives of community. There is no other way they can be stated. I have not stated anything in favour of community.With due respect sir, i think stating the aims isn't advertising. Also, stating the aims is crucial so that people can know what our community is aiming to do. This is for informational purpose. I request you to accept my draft submission .

thank you sir. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ManushiKapoor (talk • contribs) 05:49, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi, a good place to start would be turning the bullet points into prose. The next thing to do is make the tone more neutral, so instead of using questionable terms like enrichment and innovative, just describe it and say (but don't copy) what reliable sources say about it. SITH (talk) 13:54, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
Thank you so much. I have changed the tone of bullet points. What can be done next sir? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ManushiKapoor (talk • contribs) 14:22, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
Further tone work but also the structure needs changing. You need to remove the bullet points and write in prose. Paragraphs of text, not bullet-pointed items. SITH (talk) 14:28, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
Thank you. I have made further changes. Anything else to be done sir? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ManushiKapoor (talk • contribs) 14:42, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
sir, it would be really helpful if you will just once tell me what other changes are required or is it fine now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ManushiKapoor (talk • contribs) 12:37, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Vipul D Shah

Dear Sir, I tried to create the article for writer and producer VIpul D shah. i have also put a lot of references but i got a message This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article.

sir i have so many articles about him but still it doesn't qualify. what should i do

https://www.mumbailive.com/en/television/colors-tv-launches-season-3-rising-star-33960 https://www.mid-day.com/articles/indias-first-live-interactive-show-on-television-comes-alive/20565191 https://www.iwmbuzz.com/television/personalities/beautiful-journey-kya-haal-mr-paanchal-enjoyed-making-producer-vipul-d-shah/2018/12/22 https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/tv/news/hindi/Copying-Kapil-will-only-bring-us-criticism-Optimystixs-producer-Vipul-D-Shah/articleshow/50653788.cms https://www.mumbailive.com/en/television/colors-announces-courtroom-sacchai-haazir-ho-swara-bhaskar-32924 https://bestmediainfo.com/2019/02/colors-launches-crime-legal-drama-courtroom-sacchai-haazir-ho/ https://indianexpress.com/article/entertainment/television/we-are-not-promoting-polygamy-through-kya-haal-mr-panchaal-producer-vipul-d-shah-4825192/ https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/tv/news/hindi/girija-oak-boards-the-ladies-special/articleshow/65898816.cms https://www.indiatoday.in/television/what-s-hot/story/comedy-circus-coming-back-with-a-new-season-to-replace-family-time-with-kapil-sharma-1210676-2018-04-12 https://www.televisionpost.com/sony-sab-to-air-comedy-drama-super-sisters-from-6-aug/ https://www.indianprimebuzz.com/ladies-special-2-star-cast-real-name-season/ http://www.tellychakkar.com/tv/behind-the-lens/it-s-no-laughing-matter-content-poaching-and-comedy-circus — Preceding unsigned comment added by Movingframes (talk • contribs) 10:12, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Movingframes, add them as citations where appropriate! Some of those aren't included in the draft. SITH (talk) 16:11, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Transradio

Hi, StraussInTheHouse, thanks for examining my Draft:Transradio. It's my first attempt to add a completion to Wiki:en and so I made all mistakes, I could make, I think. Sorry for this. I only will ask you for deleting the draft after this, because the article now is updated... Many thanks and have a good day! --OldfashionFreak (talk) 06:41, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

OldfashionFreak, no problem, I've tagged the draft version for deletion. Many thanks, SITH (talk) 16:10, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Thank you and again sorry! --OldfashionFreak (talk) 16:51, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Dominic Lau Hoe Chai

Dear StraussInTheHouse, thank you for reviewing my submission, it was 46 days ago. I have made amendment and resubmit, however the process tooks longer than I expected. Appreciate if you can review it again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Simpson goh (talk • contribs) 09:17, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Simpson goh, AFC is currently severely backlogged with 2634 pending submissions, it might take some time as we are all volunteers. Many thanks, SITH (talk) 10:13, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

waiting for review: Apeiron - Research and Publishing Institute for Security and Defence Studies

Hi StraussInTheHouse, we've been corresponding about the article on Apeiron. @AngusWOOF: was also involved. It's been two months since the last review, and I'm wondering if there is a chance to review it any soon? If there is any more work to be done with this draft, please let me know. Cheers Jakub Dusza (talk) 03:05, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Jakub Dusza, AFC is currently severely backlogged with 2634 pending submissions, it might take some time as we are all volunteers. Many thanks, SITH (talk) 10:13, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Talk:The Great Replacement

Just a heads up: Someone un-archived your close at Talk:The Great Replacement and added a !vote. Station1 (talk) 18:30, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Station1, thanks, will discuss below. SITH (talk) 18:40, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Close of The Great Replacement

The Great Replacement conspiracy theory - I undid the close here, in retrospect I realize that may have screwed up some part of the process, so I apologize if that's not the proper approach, but I do think this was hasty. The move discussion was 6 days old. Four supported the move (counting the nominator), one contested, and others hadn't voted and were still discussing other options. I was in the process of adding a !vote against the move when you closed. Nblund talk 18:34, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Nblund, thanks for letting me know. If it was an edit conflict, I'm not sure, I've not come across it before. Either way, I don't mind, and the point you raised in your !vote is a valid one. I think it was over seven days old, it was in the elapsed section. I will re-add the {{requested move/dated}} tag and a note for another page mover, admin, or non-involved party to decide whether to relist or endorse the closure. Many thanks, SITH (talk) 18:45, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Lonnie McFadden

Hi, SITH: Thanks for reviewing my Lonnie McFadden page. Your comment says that the Early Life section needs inline citations. All the information from that paragraph is verifiable at the cited article. I'm not sure what to add. Can you give me a suggestion? Should I put that same reference throughout the paragraph, say, at the end of each sentence? Thanks AG Kansas City AG Kansas City (talk) 03:08, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

AG Kansas City, if possible that would be good. It's a bit stricter for biographies of living people because we need to be able to say where exactly a particular claim comes from for verifiability. SITH (talk) 10:14, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Draft:Lonnie_McFadden — Preceding unsigned comment added by AG Kansas City (talk • contribs) 19:27, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, SITH. I have added more references inline to that citation and I've done the same in a couple of other places. I hope this helps. AG Kansas City, AG Kansas City (talk) 19:54, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Efraim Barak

Hi StraussInTheHouse, Thanks for reviewing the draft. I would like to ask about the reason for rejection – the mentioned reason is that "The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes". However, the draft includes footnotes. Could you let me know what actions need to be done regarding the inline citations? Thanks Romika64 (talk) 15:53, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Romika64, I added a comment alongside, the issue is that the Biography section is unreferenced. Please add citations there as well to verify the content. Many thanks, SITH (talk) 16:12, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
Thanks StraussInTheHouse, I've added 3 references to the Biography section. Are they sufficient? Romika64 (talk) 18:18, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
Hi, StraussInTheHouse,can you check the updated draft? I'll be happy to get a feedback from you, and if necessary add more references to the Biography section. Romika64 (talk) 13:01, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Jacob Lipkin declined for peacock terms

Thanks for your feedback, and you are right. (Just learning Wikipedia protocols for new pages.) I will make the changes to this language and resubmit.CANdo-artreview (talk) 19:25, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

I made many changes to the Draft:Jacob Lipkin page and resubmitted for review April 1st, 2019. I appreciate your feedback and expect that I have resolved the problems. Many thanks. CANdo-artreview (talk) 14:00, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Draft: Digital Product Studio https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Draft:Digital_product_studio

Dear SITH. Sincere thanks for taking the time to review my draft. https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Draft:Digital_product_studio

In regards to reliable sources for Digital Product Studio, it's a chicken and egg situation. If you type in "Digital Product Studio" into Google you get pages and pages of results.

https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=%22digital+product+studio%22&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

and in the news section the phrase is mentioned over and over https://www.google.com/search?q=%22digital+product+studio%22&client=safari&rls=en&source=lnms&tbm=nws&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjamPu7oMPhAhUrTt8KHQkDDHsQ_AUIESgE&biw=2015&bih=1150

So this industry model 100% exists. This is also why I am trying to write about them. I do not know how to solve the chicken and egg situation and would love your help in getting this draft over the line.

Deep thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ezyjules99 (talk • contribs) 14:54, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Ezyjules99, unfortunately existence isn't enough to prove notability. Of the sources displayed in the search results you gave above, which are independent, reliable and cover the topic in significant detail? Many thanks, SITH (talk) 18:30, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Tagging

Please see the input and conversation here https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Draft_talk:Harry_Gideonse#Comment, on your tagging an article and keeping it from being promoted. Thanks.--2604:2000:E010:1100:A066:E3A3:DD44:3FFC (talk) 16:17, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi, to see removed content (provided it hasn't been deleted from the page history), please click "view history" and choose the difference you wish to examine. Thanks, SITH (talk) 18:32, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Difficulty in sourcing for Ningen Dock topic

Hi SITH

I see you rejected the Ningen Dock article and understand why - but I've (am not the original author) have been searching for information on Ningen Dock for weeks - and I can tell you the language barrier is farking real! It seems to be a ubiquitous topic in Japan and almost a secret everywhere else.

I was thinking - would references from an English medical journal like Lancet or BMJ be credible enough? Assuming I understood the problem - I'm new to wiki editing. Thanks - I.N. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Internautnotes (talk • contribs) 10:24, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Internautnotes, please can you provide a link to the page in question? Many thanks, SITH (talk) 18:33, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Draft: Aggrelin

Hello SITH,

thank you for your constructive feedback on my "AGGRELIN" article. I have reviewed the parts that you have pointed out and I've rewritten them accordingly. I would be happy, if you could look into it once again and tell me what you think, before I send it in once more.

Many thanks, Honorandrespect (talk) 10:15, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Honorandrespect, thank you for the edits, I or another reviewer will be with it shortly. Unfortunately, most reviewers, myself included, don't review drafts on request, otherwise our talk pages would be very long! Many thanks, SITH (talk) 18:33, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Confused

Hi. I'm confused.

You indicated that there were 2 blatant copyright violations in an article awaiting adoption. I do not understand how either of those are blatant copyright violations.

The article is Draft:Amy Wax

Sentence 1 which you said is a blatant copyright violation says "She worked as the Assistant to the Solicitor General in the Office of the Solicitor General at the U.S. Department of Justice in the late 1980s and early 1990s."

The words I bolded can't be copyright violations. They are her title, the office title, the department title, and the years.

The only words left are "She worked as the .. in the .. at the ... in the ... and." Can you explain how those words are a blatant copyright violation? I cannot imagine it.

Plus -- the first of the above words (which I've bolded) are not even in the supporting ref here. So that can't be a blatant copyright violation.

What we have left are the words "as .. in the .. at the .. in the .. and." Are you saying that is a copyright violation? Please point me to some policy that support that. I do not think it is true.

Or if you insist it is - can we please have and admin comment? Perhaps user:DGG? I see you are doing this a lot, and I wonder what effect it has on well intentioned editors who might be driven away from contributing. Copyright is important, but I do not understand you interpretation of it.

(The second sentence has similar issues .. "seven years" and "University of Virginia Law School" being in the ref and the text cannot be a basis for a "blatant copyright concern."). 2604:2000:E010:1100:34D4:FB55:EBA9:BA18 (talk) 21:27, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

DGG appears to have cleaned up the submission and moved it to the mainspace. Many thanks (to both), SITH (talk) 18:37, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Draft disappeared: Ziad Alexandre Hayek

Hello! My last submission of the draft was rejected for being highly promotional but that was fixed and the picture titled: "own picture" is taken by me in the office with a professional camera and uploaded manually on Wikimedia (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ziad_Hayek.jpg#filelinks). Today i cannot find my draft though I edited it yesterday. Could you please help me? Thank you NicoleKhaw (talk) 09:22, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi NicoleKhaw, Graeme Bartlett has restored it. Many thanks, SITH (talk) 18:39, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Submission of Ji Golpor Ses Nai

A draft for an upcoming Assamese movie Ji Golpor Ses Nai was declined. The subject is the first anthology film of Northeast India which makes it a notable film. Many references have been given about the film. Kindly look into it. Prodyut Kumar Deka (164.100.149.245 (talk) 11:25, 5 April 2019 (UTC)).

Hi, please see WP:NFILM. I agree it's a borderline case, but citing major reviews or critical reception would help. Many thanks, SITH (talk) 18:35, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
Sir, thank you for your advice. The draft is re-written and submitted again for your approval.

Prodyut Kumar Deka (164.100.149.245 (talk) 06:11, 10 April 2019 (UTC)).

help!

Hi

thanks for replying to me. But I have no idea how to format or how to add an addition to my page - is there someone I can write to or message who can do it? I am not a tech person at all. These are the additions


I hope you are well and you can help. I have two very large changes to make to my Wiki site - or to add.

I have been named a 2019 Guggenheim Fellow (Non Fiction) announced today on Page A5 of the New York Times (I can also send the letter that told me I have received one) https://www.gf.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/New-York-Times-Ad-2019.pdf


and I am currently also a Senior Fellow at Yale University Jackson Institute for Global Affairs http://jackson.yale.edu/person/janine-di-giovanni/

and a 2018 Edward R. Murrow Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations


Please can you add these? My page is locked so I can not do it

Thank you so much Janine di Giovanni — Preceding unsigned comment added by Janinedigi (talk • contribs) 18:27, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Janinedigi, I've made a request on your behalf at Talk:Janine di Giovanni (diff). SITH (talk) 18:48, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
 Done by Spintendo. Many thanks, SITH (talk) 20:10, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Anil K. Chauhan Follow Up

How do you suggest I improve my sources? I have 6 references in the "PhD Section and Research" and below included 22 "Key Publications" further expanding on his work in this area. Furthermore, how is this page I submitted any different than the following pages: Jim McKelvey, Herbert W. Virgin. James Watson, Francis Crick, Stephen Hawking. I look forward to receiving your response and improving this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RYANMICHAELMILLER (talk • contribs) 00:22, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Building a group nomination?

Interested in helping build this group nomination? Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal MFD Results/people Legacypac (talk) 21:48, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Legacypac, sure, I'd be happy to provide technical assistance, although I echo Northamerica1000's sentiment on the linked page. Let's get the ones created automatically by topic-banned portalspammers done first, then focus on the wider issue of portal scope. I've done a few AfD trainwrecks in my time, so I'm well-used to using AWB to properly bundle so ping me when needs be and I'll assist. Many thanks, SITH (talk) 10:13, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
Legacypac, I'm working on a Quarry query which lists all portals which have fewer than twenty pages, I'll keep you up to speed with that. SITH (talk) 10:16, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
USE enwiki_p;
SELECT p.page_title
FROM page p
INNER JOIN category.cat_title ON <insert pseudotable>
WHERE
	p.page_namespace = 100 AND c.cat_pages < 20
so far but I'm wondering how best to proceed. Would using an inner join and an if exists concurrently be the most efficient way of doing it?
Many thanks, SITH (talk) 10:33, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Draft Hendrik Jan Leonard Ankersmit

"Submission declined on 28 March 2019 by StraussInTheHouse (talk). 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."

Dear Sir, we have recently noted that our article was declined by you. In order for clarification I would like to know which information was not accurately referenced. Since I am working in research for many years, proper referencing is my second nature and I would never publish anything that is not based on facts and proper peer-review. All publications underwent rigorous reviews and are state of the art. I would like to ask you how we can improve this current submission.

With best regards Hendrik Ankersmit — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ankersmit1 (talk • contribs) 13:37, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Ankersmit1, the Life section of the article is unreferenced. Per the biographies policy, we require claims about living people to be sourced with inline citations. Many thanks, SITH (talk) 15:09, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Submission declined

I had submitted a page on a company and i see that you have declined the approval since 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 organizations and companies). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

I wanted to improve upon the article and make it worthy for approval according to wikipedia. I wanted to know how much time do i have to all this brfore the deletion of article. Kindly let me know the details.

In the mean time read the guidelines on organisation. Thanks

Asikm03 (talk) 10:30, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
Asikm03, please see WP:CORPDEPTH. You need to demonstrate the company has had multiple instances of significant coverage in independent, reliable sources. SITH (talk) 17:57, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Future of Life Award article

Thanks StraussInTheHouse for your feedback on the initial draft. Two questions:

You declined it stating that this submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Please clarify specifically which aspects of the sourcing are inadequate, to facilitate improving the draft: 

 - Is it the quality of the referenced sources for who won the awards? (The Guardian, The Times, etc)
 - Is it that the references are fine but don't appear in the right places in the article?
 - Which specific claims in the article are inadequately sourced? 
   Claims about who won each of the awards? Claims about the amount or purpose of the award?

Also, the image of Arkhipov was removed as non-free-use, even though it is simply the same image that has for many years appeared in the Wikipedia article about Vasili Arkhipov, which contains copyright information suggesting that it is in fact usable for Wikipedia, so what exactly is the issue here?

Thanks in advance for clarifying and helping improve the article! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikinator7 (talk • contribs) 12:45, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Wikinator7, thanks for your message. It would be good if you could consolidate the references into inline citations as opposed to external links (see WP:REFB for help), but the issue is that the coverage cited is an In the media section. Please use them as references for substantive content as opposed to a list (that's what {{reflist}} is for!) Many thanks, SITH (talk) 17:59, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Bradley Cooper (politician)

you rejected the article being published because you said soundcloud and twitter are not reliable sources but if you were to look at them and what they are referencing you will see that the soundcloud is for an interview that brad was in and the twitter sources were tweets made by organizations and people tweeting about brad and his movements so these sources are proving that the tweets we talked about are actually tweets. So if you look at these sources you will see that while they might not be considered reliable they are there to prove that the claims we have made are true — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smallman1093 (talk • contribs) 13:28, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Smallman1093, I'm sorry, but tweets simply don't convey notability. You can cite the interview using a range of citation templates though. Thanks, SITH (talk) 17:59, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Audiodog

Hi SITH,

Draft:Audiodog is my first crack at creating a new article, and I used an existing article about another album by the same artist, Transformer, as a model for creating mine. You declined Audiodog for not meeting notability guidelines; can you help me understand whether/how the Transformer article does meet those guidelines while my draft does not? It seems thin on references as well (as does another related article, Union). Have I chosen a bad example to emulate?

Thanks for your help,
Lardofdorkness (talk) 18:27, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Lardofdorkness, I think the album will pass WP:NALBUM, it's just the draft in the submitted state didn't make the cut in terms of multiple, reliable reviews. I see you've made some edits to it since; feel free to resubmit! SITH (talk) 18:01, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Todd Hiscock Article

Hi StraussInTheHouse,

thank you for the suggestion on imporving my article. I aksed for help on the chat forum and hopefully got the article right this time. COuld you please let me know if I have to work on any more improvements?

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcela McLeod (talk • contribs) 03:46, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Marcela McLeod, please can you let me know which "chat forum" you're talking about? It's best to ensure the only places you ask for Wikipedia help is on-wiki or via the IRC help channel. Many thanks, SITH (talk) 18:36, 9 April 2019 (UTC);
Hi StraussInHouse, I used Wiki help forum of course. I wonder if you hve a feedback to my updated article or if I need to ask other editors to look at it. Marcela McLeod (talk) 23:22, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
If it's Draft:Todd Hiscock and inline citations have been implemented, then feel free to resubmit it. SITH (talk) 18:07, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Move review for Utrecht tram shooting

An editor has asked for a Move review of Utrecht tram shooting. Because you closed the move discussion for this page, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the move review. 182.239.117.54 (talk) 04:49, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Declining Drafts as CV

I've gone through a few of your RD1 requests on drafts (which is appreciated, fwiw) and I've noticed a few of them where you declined based on copyright violations but you only removed a sentence or two (e.g. Draft:Horiyasu). A copyvio decline should really only be used if a vast majority of the text was removed and what's left after redaction isn't enough to demonstrate notability (such as Draft:Etta D. Pisano).

As a minor note, I've never seen it used like this but I don't think you need to use {{redacted}} when you remove the text - it looked like a few users were confused by this and thought they were supposed to keep the template there. Primefac (talk) 18:20, 14 April 2019 (UTC) (please do not ping on reply)

Hi Primefac, thanks for your message, I'll take that into account. Congratulations on the RfB by the way! SITH (talk) 13:07, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Imagine This Women's International Film Festival

Draft:Imagine This Women's International Film Festival

Hello there, thank you for reviewing my draft. I'm a bit confused - but I did make changes to the page and kept the redaction. Would you mind taking another look and giving me advice if there are more improvements needed? Thank you!

Trish10876 (talk) 00:01, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

Trish10876, I'm pinging AngusWOOF, the reviewer who declined the latest draft. Many thanks, SITH (talk) 13:08, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Luna Melis

Good evening,
Youtube and Twitter are only two of the sources I have listed. If necessary, I will remove them and leave only the other, which include more reliable sites, like sky.it and genius.com, as well as Italian websites and online newspapers (not blogs). Sardinia Post e.g., one of the sites the pages links to in the section "Sources", is an Italian online newspaper based in Sardinia. I personally think that it could be enough, do you agree? Thanks for the attention. --62.10.245.254 (talk) 17:25, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
Edit: I have just removed links to Youtube and Twitter. In the "References" and "Sources" section, all the information written in the article can be verified. Thanks again. --62.10.245.254 (talk) 17:31, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Usurped by subsequent discussion at User talk:I dream of horses#Draft:Luna Melis. SITH (talk) 13:09, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

09:08:58, 12 April 2019 review of submission by Ed Emery 2015y_2015/sandbox/Hama_Jaza_-_Kurdish_singer

The person is eminently suitable for a Wiki page. He is a very important historical and cultural figure

The problem is that the only sources available are sources in the Kurdish-Sorani language - a language which I do not read or understand.

That is the reason why the article needs to be posted in its present form, so that we can then build on it.

The other problem is that the verification data for the singer's activities is contained in the many YouTube clips of his performances.

But Wikipedia does not permit me to include YouTube clips.

In short... what do you suggest is the best way to proceed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ed Emery 2015 (talk • contribs)

  • Foreign-language sources are fine, however just asserting they exist won't cut it. We don't allow unreferenced articles (and when we find them, we try to source them). SITH (talk) 18:03, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply.
May I ask:
Does the following online news reference constitute an adequate reference for the associated information contained in my article?
https://ekurd.net/mismas/articles/misc2010/10/state4252.htm
And does this posted article constitute an adequate reference for pointing to YouTube clips that cannot be posted directly to Wikipedia?
https://notesfrombelow.org/blog/kurdish-singer-hama-jaza
Signed Ed Emery 2015 (talk) 19:50, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
ALSO: Would you consider this peer-reviewed article aan adequate reference source for the writing about Hama Jaza's song "Maro maro"?
Ed Emery 2015 (talk) 20:00, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
Namely:
http://www.ictm.ie/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Radical-Ethnomusicology-Towards-a-politics-of-No-Borders-and-insurgent-musical-citizenship-Calais-Dunkerque-and-Kurdistan.pdf
Ed Emery 2015 (talk) 20:02, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
@Ed Emery 2015: of those sources, 1 is the most valuable. While I'm unfamiliar with the source, it appears the least affiliated. 2 is a blog, so its reliability and independence are questionable. I also note this source, along with 3 are authored by yourself, which makes them original research. SITH (talk) 13:14, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

DRV?

Given how 1300 and 1100 odd and other smaller batches of portals can be bundled and deleted based on who made the same kind of pages and how, I found this close poor. Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:T. E. Lawrence. When I renominated them one by one I was accused of flooding MFD and threatened with a topic ban from MFD. Perhaps the most efficent way is DRV? Had they been not already batched rhey would be in a bigger group nom and perhaps gone already. Legacypac (talk) 12:41, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Legacypac, eh, I think the close was fair enough if the discussion is taken out of context but considering the context of the other deletions and the community consensus I think a relist was better. I would have renominated them too, I'm surprised BrownHairedGirl is taking this line as no consensus closures are usually without prejudice against speedy renomination. I guess the two options now are speedy renomination as a bundle or deletion review. SITH (talk) 13:06, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
Well renominating the bundle would go against the close. How do you split up the 17 names into more logical groups? People that lead countries vs not rulers? By gender? Dead vs alive? One by one seemed the most simple. I formulated noms, but moved them to User:Legacypac/sandbox for now while we figure out what to do. Legacypac (talk) 13:14, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
Legacypac, I don't think it does. While the closer made a closing comment saying it was perhaps a trainwreck, the closure was no consensus which usually means, unless advised otherwise in the closing statement, that it is without prejudice against speedy renomination to gain further consensus. Maybe they could be bundled better along with other biographies. I'll have a look at your sandbox and do a couple of PetScan searches and Quarry queries and get back to you. Either way, I would prefer further deletion discussion as opposed to a deletion review. For now, withdraw the individual nominations and we will look at how to better bundle them and construct a nomination argument. I know it's frustrating that we have to put effort into giving rationales for things which were created with no effort whatsoever, but that seems to be the only route of recourse. SITH (talk) 13:18, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

I should clarify my view here.

  1. If @Legacypac does not accept the close, then this is a DRV matter. Per WP:MULTI, centralise discussion: problems with the close should be discussed at one venue, not at 17 venues
  2. If @Legacypac does accept the close, then the 17 should indeed be renominated individually, but
    • There should be no sniping at the close, i.e. no allegations of a supervote.
    • The nominations should clearly respond to issues raised at the previous discussion, and should ping all the participants there (otherwise it is WP:FORUMSHOPping)
  3. Regardless of what is done about the 17, the total of 36 individual nominations is wildly excessive, especially when many of the noms are of poor quality. The community would be much better served if Legacypac spent more time and care on each nomination, and made fewer better nominations with more regard to the ability of the community to assess them.

Hope that helps. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:37, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Scrap Clicker 2

Hi SITH, why exactly is Wikia/FANDOM not a trustable source? The wiki at that host I linked is the most used source for help for that game and also controlled every day by the admins, of which two have a very good contact with the developer and was already approved by him almost a year ago already. I have seen no wrong information there so far. If that host is just generally declined on wikipedia (for whatever reason), would it be ok then if I just remove all references as there is no other good source? Have a good day, --88.76.149.54 (talk) 10:53, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your message. The issue with Wikia is that it's not got any editorial oversight. You can find out more about Wikia and FANDOM in relation to reliable sources here. Many thanks, SITH (talk) 18:06, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
Hello again, aren't admins editorial oversight too? And as it's listed as "generally unreliable" at the page you've linked, it can be reliable in some cases, I think? --88.76.149.54 (talk) 09:44, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
I'm not sure, I can open an RfC discussion on your behalf to clarify this issue if you want. SITH (talk) 13:10, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
Admins are not editorial oversight, because they are volunteers just like at Wikipedia; they are not paid to make sure facts are correct or things make sense. Wikia is no better than Wikipedia in that respect, and if we cannot use Wikipedia as a source then it stands to reason that we cannot use Wikia as a source. Primefac (talk) 14:23, 15 April 2019 (UTC) (talk page stalker)

Don't use Template:Redirect to say a page redirects to itself

Use Template:Other people for cases like this. – wbm1058 (talk) 15:32, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Wbm1058, sure, I was looking through WP:HATNOTE and just chose the one which did the job. I don't know, I think if {{redirect}} is left without parameters it should assume it is the base page name plus disambiguation (see errors in page history). Many thanks, SITH (talk) 15:39, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
No, leaving it without a parameter is an error. Stating that the redirect "John Higgins" redirects to the article titled "John Higgins" is an error because "John Higgins" is an article, not a redirect – so that is not a hatnote which "does the job"... unless the "job" is creating work for me to do. Such hatnotes populate Category:Articles with redirect hatnotes needing review. wbm1058 (talk) 16:16, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
Wbm1058, yes, I know, I'm saying perhaps the template should be modified so it doesn't produce the error and automatically append (disambiguation) to it. Second part, sure, apologies. SITH (talk) 16:21, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:StraussInTheHouse/Archive_4&oldid=1140048069"