Jump to content

User talk:Theroadislong/Archive 31

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 25←Archive 29Archive 30Archive 31Archive 32Archive 33→Archive 35

Netta Eames

Hi. Please don't delete the article Netta Eames. She is was the editor of a well known and historic magazine and recognized writer. She was effectively the mother in law of the author Jack London along with being his mentor and promoter as a writer in his early years. It's a bit of a skeleton right now, but I hope to be growing it in the next day or two. Please view my profile. I have a longstanding participation at WP and a good reputation. I have been less involved lately, but in the early days was very involved in developing the notability guidelines and am deeply devoted to the project. I would not include an article which is detrimental to the best interest of the project. Hopefully with the spirit of collaboration among other editors we can build this to very meaningful article. Best regards! --Kevin Murray (talk) 17:50, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks! I really appreciate you taking a second look. Best regards! --Kevin Murray (talk) 18:43, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I'm wondering whether you feel that the Netta Eames article now meets the notability standard sufficiently that we can remove that tag. If so, I would like to invest more time and start with inline citations. Thanks! --Kevin Murray (talk) 00:18, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

I'm sorry but it's not remotely clear why she is notable? Theroadislong (talk) 00:24, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
Bummer. I guess being fairly immersed in Jack London research right now, I see her as important to the story, but too much to be merged into his article. In the context of early San Francisco, California and turn of that century culture, she is notable. But in the greater context of life today, maybe not so much. Maybe think on this as a less egregious violation of the guidelines and doing an old wiki-has-been a favor. Thanks! --Kevin Murray (talk) 16:52, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello Theroadislong, thank you for your efforts in reviewing new pages!
The NPP backlog at the end of the drive with the number of unreviewed articles by creation date. Red is older than 90 days, orange is between 90 and 30 days old, and green is younger than 30 days.

Backlog update:

  • The new page backlog is currently at 3819 unreviewed articles, with a further 6660 unreviewed redirects.
  • We are very close to eliminating the backlog completely; please help by reviewing a few extra articles each day!

New Year Backlog Drive results:

  • We made massive progress during the recent four weeks of the NPP Backlog Drive, during which the backlog reduced by nearly six thousand articles and the length of the backlog by almost 3 months!

General project update:

  • ACTRIAL will end it's initial phase on the 14th of March. Our goal is to reduce the backlog significantly below the 90 day index point by the 14th of March. Please consider helping with this goal by reviewing a few additional pages a day.
  • Reviewing redirects is an important and necessary part of New Page Patrol. Please read the guideline on appropriate redirects for advice on reviewing redirects. Inappropriate redirects can be re-targeted or nominated for deletion at RfD.

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. 20:32, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your comment. Have removed the links as you suggested and resubmitted. Philacevedo (talk) 20:41, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Professor T (German TV series)

Hello Theroadislong, you've declined my submission of the above mentioned article because the submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. The German TV series is in fact very notable like the series Der Kriminalist, which is on Wikipedia and by the way doesn't have any sources at all. Also the Belgian original series Professor T. has an english Wikipedia article, so why shouldn't the German (which is very popular) have one? If I add some more sources, would you accept the article? KatharinaRB (talk) 10:51, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

The fact that there are other poorly sourced and written articles is not a valid reason for creating this one, as User:Bradv points out, the press releases and reviews are insufficient to establish notability. Theroadislong (talk) 11:18, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Request on 12:04:44, 8 February 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Mina-tonic


Hi, Theroadislong. I am really struggling with this article. Could you please clarify whether the problem is the tone or choice and quantity of references. Also it would help if you could highlight the areas that read like an advert. Please keep in mind that I do not mind changing any section of the article to make it strictly factual and not advertising.

Mina-tonic (talk) 12:04, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

The whole draft is promotional in tone for example...
  • "delivering multibrand in multi-market food solutions and reaching over 150 branded units across the GCC region."
  • "YYT provides its customers with F&B concepts in both fast casual and quick service sectors"
  • "Centered on a live cooking experience, the Yum Yum Tree Food Court offered fast food at comparatively affordable prices."
  • "to meet the high demands of investors for innovative investment solution"
  • "Vanellis has been serving fresh Italian food for over 30 years across Canada and worldwide"
  • "Subway is the world's largest submarine sandwich chain known for the quality and variety of its sandwiches prepared on demand"
  • "Menchie’s is the ambassador of frozen yogurt quality worldwide"
  • "The Tandori restaurants take customers on a journey with the cuisine of Northern India"

None of this is acceptable for a neutral encyclopedia. Theroadislong (talk) 12:13, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Newark Renaissance House

Your comment about the photos is wrong. Photos showing people engaged in addiction therapy are highly relevant to an article about an addiction treatment center. Photos of nurses and teachers working with children affected by substance abuse are also highly relevant. There is nothing about those photos that could be reasonably considered "self-promoting" or "self-congratulatory." Please stop looking for ways to limit my efforts. I am following the rules. You are obstructing.DocSavageNJ 14:22, 8 February 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by DocSavageNJ (talk • contribs)

Have these patients given their permission to be photographed? Group photos of patients add absolutely nothing to our understanding of the article's subject and their copyright status is in question, did you take the photographs? Feel free to discuss this on the article talk page or at the Wikipedia:Teahouse. Theroadislong (talk) 14:31, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the response.

Hi there,

First time editing wikipedia, so a bit new to this. I work for Vision Express UK ltd and noticed that there was a problem with our wikipedia page. It contains a 'Controversy' section which includes several items relating to SEO malpractice, which I believe are down to vandalism.

Firstly, there's reference to a situation in Sept 2010. This is way before any of us started, but it links to an article which claims there was an event of spammy practice.

Secondly, there is mention of Vision Express editing their own wikipedia page in an attempts to gain links from wikipedia and further keyword relevance. This is not something I've been aware of during my time working at Vision Express. Like I said this is the first time, I've ever edited a wikipedia article!

Thirdly, we have had television articles featuring both Trevor McDonald and Julie Walters respectively, but I'm not sure why these would be listed as controversial.

Charliephair (talk) 11:52, 9 February 2018 (UTC)Charlie Phair

I have removed the poorly sourced content, but please note that the page is NOT yours (our wikipedia page), Wikipedia has articles about subjects but you have little control over correctly sourced content, if the blog spamming was reported in reliable sources it could be added back. If you need any more changes made please suggest them on the article talk page. The vision Express article was edited for some time by an employee against best practice. Theroadislong (talk) 12:04, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Connor Morgans

Sorry, think we ended up edit-conflicting. But to the same end. All the best. KJP1 (talk) 22:35, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

NPP Backlog Drive Appreciation

Special Edition New Page Patroller's Barnstar
For completing over 500 reviews during the 2018 NPP New Year Backlog Drive please accept this Special Edition Barnstar. Thank you for helping out at New Page Patrol! There is still work to do to meet our long term goals, so I hope you will continue your great work. Cheers! — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 03:03, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
Geneva Drive
For maintaining a streak of at least 50 reviews per week during the 2018 NPP New Year Backlog drive, you are awarded the Geneva drive. Well done! Keep up the good work. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 03:03, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Arguments for your edits to "The National memo" page

Dear Theroadislong please provide arguments for your latest edits to The National Memo article (deletion of the e-books section) at The National Memo Talk page]. Thank you. -- Bbarmadillo (talk) 12:45, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Edit on Answers in Genesis article

Hello,
I recently edited the article Answers in Genesis. You reverted this edit, claiming it is wrong. Your revert changed "Critics state that Creation science, which is promoted by AiG, is a pseudoscience that "lacks the central defining characteristic of all modern scientific theories"." to the previous version, "Creation science, which is promoted by AiG, is a pseudoscience that "lacks the central defining characteristic of all modern scientific theories"." You claim this is "incorrect information" and "could be interperted as vandalism," while this is not what is shown at WP:Vandalism: "On Wikipedia, vandalism has a very specific meaning: editing (or other behavior) deliberately intended to obstruct or defeat the project's purpose," (emphasis from source). This edit was not made with any negative intention. By no means or interpertation is this false. Critics certainly do state that this is a pseudoscience. All we are left with is which state of the article better meets WP:NPOV. I would say that my edit is a more neutral point of view. The sentence cites two sources. Both are books, so I cannot read either at short notice, but I am fairly certain that they are both written by critics of AiG (of course, that's a large portion of the scientific community at this point). Because of that, my statement is not wrong, and labeling it as such is. The original statement states this extremely factually - which, I would say, is biased towards critics.
Please let me know why you think otherwise, and if I'm missing anything.
Thanks,
LittlePuppers (talk) 21:36, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

It is a fact! Wikipedia has a bias towards science, creation science is pseudoscience and is not given equal weight, it is not just critics who state that creation science is pseudoscience it is the whole of modern science in general. Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution. Theroadislong (talk) 22:04, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
I'm not saying they're wrong (and I'm afriad that's a subject we'll probably never come to terms on - this isn't the place for a creation/evolution debate), however you yourself say that "Wikipedia has a bias". That's exactly what we're trying to aviod! I say that evolution doesn't make sense. Evolutionists say that creation doesn't make sense. That's their opinion, and obviously one of those opinions is right - again, this isn't really the place to debate it. There are quite a few Christian scientiscts who would dispute that, although, again, that is a minority of scientiscts and, again, this isn't the place to debate it. The point I'm trying to make is that critics do state that, and it is factually correct (isn't that the basis of science?)


What is factually incorrect about the statement, "Critics state that Creation science, which is promoted by AiG, is a pseudoscience that "lacks the central defining characteristic of all modern scientific theories"."


I find no factual errors in that statement.
Thanks again,
LittlePuppers (talk) 22:36, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
It is not just "critics" it is the whole of modern science!!!! Please take this discussion to the article talk page where it belongs. Theroadislong (talk) 22:44, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
Then either "the whole of modern science" can and should be considered critics or this should be moved out of the criticism section. LittlePuppers (talk) 22:52, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
@Theroadislong:
If you check the article history you will see that actually User:Roxy the dog reverted your edit, it was a revert with which I agree, please take the discussion to the article talk page. Your opinions (or mine) on evolution are of no interest to Wikipedia, we merely report what the reliable sources say. Creation science is pseudoscience and is not given equal weight. Theroadislong (talk) 23:09, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
Continued on the talk page. LittlePuppers (talk) 23:30, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Thank you

Many thanks for your quick review of my User:Aarre/Committee on Payments and Market Infrastructures submission! I appreciate the feedback. I will work on it. —Preceding undated comment added 16:52, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

DECENT Network edit

Hey Theroadislong,

yesterday I made some edits for DECENT Network wiki page as I noticed the information which was published is outdated and incorrect. Could you please explain me the reason why you have removed most of my edits and verification links? Those were technical information about their system which was verified by links.

Thanks, Naward

@Naward: Please check the edit history, I removed one external link from the body of the article (we don't use them) and I edited for neutral tone. Please be aware though that for everything you write, you need a source unaffiliated with the company (newspaper articles by professional journalists, etc. are good independent sources). Wikipedia has essentially no interest in anything that a subject says or wants to say about itself: it is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject have published about it, in reliable places Theroadislong (talk) 13:05, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Reply to Harvey Newquist II

Hi,

I just wanted to respond to your comment regarding Harvey Newquist II's page. I do have sources but they're all primary sources, would these still be okay to include? I was told I would need more online sources but most of the references mentioning his career are all from primary data. Wafflesandpancakes (talk) 14:29, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Sources do not need to be online, but they do need to be [[reliable. As a paid editor I would have expected you to be aware of this. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, which summarises what independent sources have published about subjects. Theroadislong (talk) 14:33, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

17:24:56, 16 February 2018 review of submission by Thines Shankar


This article is a translation from non-english wiki. Heres the non-english version: https://ms.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sekolah_Menengah_Kebangsaan_Anderson

If so, how can I improve the article more to be accepted? Thanks

Thines J Shankar (talk) 17:24, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

@Thines Shankar: Other language Wikipedias have less stringent notability guidelines. The English Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Your draft has no such sources so cannot be accepted. Theroadislong (talk) 17:29, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Garden Window

Hi! I noticed you somehow decided a garden window was a plastic box hung outside a sash window, causing a minor edit war. In the future, consult google to find pictures of things for which there is nothing of the sort anywhere on Wikipedia. I shall now revert garden window to its original content. --John Moser (talk) 21:22, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

@Bluefoxicy: If you check the edit history I tagged it for notability and lack of references, it was user User:Bluefoxicy who made it a redirect. The article requires independent reliable sources, Google search is NOT remotely suitable. Theroadislong (talk) 21:57, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

About protest-too-much people at Teahouse

Thanks for note. I just felt that it should not have to be you who pokes the troll back. David notMD (talk) 22:13, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

A question on your note

Hi,

I noticed an amendment to a draft that I submitted today (Ana Khouri) but am unsure which changes you were recommending that I make. Apologies to bother, but was hoping you might be able to elaborate here.

Thank you in advance.

JamesGoodman (talk) 22:42, 16 February 2018 (UTC)James Goodman James

Please read WP:REFB as suggested. I have formatted reference 3 and 4 as an example for you, it will help get the article accepted if the reference formatting is corrected. Theroadislong (talk) 22:58, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

?

Could you possibly explain just what condition is the reason for issuing this warning of a conflict of interest? Just when is it a conflict of interest when I see a film, review the plot on WP, see errors and attempt to edit them? Should I consider this a sign of conspiracy thought among WP'ians just the same as there about accusations about being a sock puppet, or the inability to understand that I cannot sign into a registered user account name because I do not have one and have no intention of establishing one --and that WP needs to deal with how the technology reacts in a way that i have absolutely no control?2605:E000:9143:7000:4541:FEA4:B7BA:FDE9 (talk) 15:34, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

I posted the conflict of interest notice because your IP addresses are assigned to you by Time Warner in Los Angeles. Theroadislong (talk) 17:12, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
Pardon my expression but I find that the most incredible stupid reason when everyone's IP is provided by the provider. I have absolutely no control about an IP or that system. Why out of the thousands of people connected with WP you decide that there is a conflict of interest is mind boggling! This I have to rank among all those that cast aspiration about my participating on WP and because my IP changes that somehow I am involved with some sort of conspiracy to deceive people when anyone reviewing my edits will see that they are limited to certain activities. And then i get the "suggestion" that i should establish a registered user name when all that I am doing is using the system endorsed by WP of using my IP address as my identifier. I find this conspiratorial attitude among those that are far more invested in WP than to be astounding and not in a positive way. That is what happens when a web site functions on a decentralized system. What next, there will be some other warning issued because sometimes my spelling goes in and out of British/American English? That somehow in that manner I am attempting to deceive people in some evil manner? And then by voicing my concerns I get labled as uncooperative and hostile and therefore undermining WP? What next from what people would like to describe their minds as so developed? It's incredible and unbelievable.2605:E000:9143:7000:4541:FEA4:B7BA:FDE9 (talk) 17:33, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
My humble apologies, I didn't realise that Time Warner was an IP provider I am an arse. Theroadislong (talk) 06:18, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Articles for creation: sandbox (February 18)

Thank you for your prompt review of my draft entry for SPICMA, a charity. You have turned down my request for approval, citing my CoI and a lack of verification for encyclopaedic content.

I wish to challenge your review, on the following grounds:

1. My CoI has been declared. Moreover, I am a volunteer, as is everyone who works for/ assists this charity. Consequently, the only risk raised by my CoI is that the charity receives more donations than otherwise. I fail to see how this outcome constitutes a 'conflict' - of any kind.

2. Every statement of fact is verified by links to the website of the UK Government's Charity Commission, where SPICMA's financial returns and other details may be viewed in full. These returns and details are independently audited and continuously subject to review by the Charity Commission. There can be no more solid or independent verification.

3. The draft entry appears to conform to the precedents set by existing entries for charitable organisations, such as CAFOD (https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/CAFOD), OxFam (https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Oxfam), and Save the Children (https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Save_the_Children).

Please reconsider your review of SPICMA's entry in light of the above.

Thank you for your attention.

82.163.147.49 (talk) 14:11, 18 February 2018 (UTC) Shane Norman

In order to demonstrate notability, you need to provide references to articles written about SPICMA in unrelated, independent journals, magazines, books, etc. Wikipedia has no interest in what the articles subject wants to say about itself, only what reliable sources have reported. You have a very clear conflict of interest. Theroadislong (talk) 14:36, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Lida Sherafatmand

Hello Theroadislong. Thanks for your note regarding the COI policy. I have basically provided the academic URL links for the references asked for this article. Is that ok please..is there a standard form for declaration about having provided reference links please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lidasher (talk • contribs) 15:43, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

I'm not sure what your question is? You do need to declare your conflict of interest on your user page though. Theroadislong (talk) 15:51, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Hello again Theroadislong.. I found the standard template for COI declaration and added it.. Thanks again for your feedback. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lidasher (talk • contribs) 15:56, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

This is what I was looking for:

... I did not know how to add it :-)

thanks

Theroadislong, may I please one more question: I uploaded photo of a painting of mine, but I could not find the right "licence" to contribute to it, so it has been deleted. Could you please help me: basically I want to show the photo of my art only for reference, academic, or journalistic use. I do not want to give permission for commercial users to use the photo of my painting. In this case, WHICH LICENSE number should I contribute to it please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lidasher (talk • contribs) 16:53, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

I think the answer is you can't! Please see [1]. Theroadislong (talk) 16:57, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Oh I see. Just read the "free enough" section. yes so I am afraid I cannot allow my art photos on Wikipedia...because some online sites have already taken the images and selling them without my permission. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lidasher (talk • contribs) 17:07, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

European Center of Sustainable Development

It looks like the article has been sustained (pun not truly intended) almost entirely by COI accounts; I'm dubious as to whether it's notable. Do you think this merits AfD? Thanks, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 13:25, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

I was thinking the same! Theroadislong (talk) 13:29, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
I've requested a block on the primary account, with the observation that she's apparently using multiple accounts. 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 13:37, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Update Adler and Allan page/article

Dear Theroadislong,

hope you can help me.

i believe you just deleted most of the information on the Adler and Allan article/page, which has been there for quite a few years. however would the below content be ok to change the current content on the adler and allan page?

Revised Wikipedia contentItalic text

The Adler & Allan Group is an international provider of oil and environmental services, including 24/7 emergency response to protect essential assets from environmental risk and damage, throughout the UK and in selected overseas markets. Adler & Allan started trading in 1926 as a Coal and Coke Merchants in London, since then it has grown and diversified, to become a provider of a range of Oil, Environmental, Compliance and Asset Resilience services. They have been involved in the clean-up of some of the UK’s most infamous disasters, including Buncefield and the extensive floods of 2007 and 2013. Following Storm Desmond in 2015, they worked closely with the Environment Agency and where involved in the clean-up operation, sanitising equipment and preventing pollution as well as helping communities in Cumbria access available flood grants. As part of its work to help flood-hit regions, they became a founding member of BERG (Business Emergency Resilience Group), BERG is part of the BITC (Business in the Community), an initiative of His Royal Highness The Prince of Wales, BERG helps businesses and communities across the UK to prepare for, respond to and recover from emergencies such as flooding, cyber-attacks and civil unrest. In 2008, Adler & Allan were chosen by the Olympic Development Authority (ODA) to run a secure supply chain for fuel to the London 2012 Games construction-phase site contractors. Supplying the fuel for the 600-plus generators and providing main-line and back-up power to over 40 Olympic venues around the country. The group’s services are provided from 24+ depots nationwide 24/7/365, including a purpose-built Technical innovation centre in Brize Norton. Company History 1926: • Adler & Allan begin trading as Coal and Coke Merchants in London 1967: • Company diversifies into oil tank cleaning 1969: • Oil distribution begins 1974: • Ceased coal and coke sales 1993: • Mark Calvert (CEO) joined 1998: • Henry Simpson (Commercial Director) joined 1999: • Started fuel distribution operation in the West Midlands – first base outside London 2000: • Acquired Environment Management Ltd, with oil spill response bases in Hartlebury, Stansted and Exeter. 2002: • Acquired the tank cleaning division of Shanks based in Rainham, Essex • Acquired Tank Clean Group based in Manchester 2003: • Acquired CW Tankers of Thetford 2004: • Rainham depot granted a licence as a Special Waste Transfer Station 2005: • Adler & Allan Yorkshire established with a base in Sheffield 2006: • Acquired the assets of Dew Remediation Ltd. • Appointed principal contractor for the clean-up of the Buncefield oil terminal following the catastrophic fire that destroyed 20 tanks. Work completed April 2008. • Acquired the business of Cerva Ltd., a division of Conder Environmental plc, becoming the new Separator Services division at New Alresford • Set-up a specialist Tank Services Division providing OFTEC compliance audits, tank installations and maintenance • Established Adler & Allan South based at Crowborough, East Sussex with particular emphasis on spill response and hazardous waste handling 2007: • Attracted the backing of Aberdeen Asset Management Private Equity • Acquired the distribution and fuel services businesses of Meridian Petroleum and Nexus Petroleum in Watford • Adler & Allan Rainham Waste Transfer Facility awarded ISO14001 and PPC Permit 2008: • Acquired the business of Fuel Installation Services Ltd. in St Albans • Acquired the goodwill and assets of Tramar Tankering of Stowmarket • Adler & Allan Manchester Waste Treatment Facility awarded ISO14001 and PPC Permit • Established Adler & Allan Scotland based at Montrose • Acquired the goodwill and assets of the UK response business of OSRL/EARL • Adler & Allan were chosen by the Olympic Development Authority (ODA) to run a secure supply chain for fuel to the London 2012 Games 2009: • Stratford depot moves to Barking as part of the Olympic redevelopment • New National Enquiries Centre opened at Barking • Acquired the goodwill and assets of Cleanex Ltd based in Liverpool • E&S Environmental join Group • Waste transfer station opened at Standlake, Oxon • First major project in Ireland at Tarbert Power Station 2010: • Goodwill & assets of Abzorboil Ltd. acquired • New base in Doncaster opens 2011: • Transfer of Briggs Environmental Services business in England & Wales to Adler & Allan including base at Droitwich • Tank projects in Nigeria, Sierra Leone, The Falkland Islands & Canary Islands 2012: • Acquired the assets of Alpha Environmental in GB • New purpose-built depots open at Waltham Cross, Tunbridge Wells, Doncaster & Manchester • Delivered the fuel for the London 2012 Olympic Games 2013: • Acquired the goodwill and assets of AMW Ltd. based in Carlisle • Acquired the business of Aquilo Environmental Services Ltd based in Teesside 2014: • Henrik Pedersen (Business Development Director) joined • Andrew Clarke appointed Operations Director • Acquired the business of Aalto Technical Services Ltd. in Manchester • New private equity investment from Lloyds Development Capital • Adler & Allan Teesside Service Centre opens at Wilton • Acquired the goodwill and assets of GNE Ltd. in Exeter and UK Spill Response Ltd in Burford, Oxon • Awarded contract with the Environment Agency for emergency spill response and hazardous waste handling • Acquired the goodwill and assets of Baker Environmental Lining Services Ltd • Adler & Allan becomes a founding member of BERG (Business Emergency Resilience Group), helping homes and businesses affected by Storms Desmond and Eva 2015: • Nick Horler appointed Chairman • New Technical Innovation Centre opened at Brize Norton • New National Operations Centre opened at Eynsham near Oxford • Acquired the goodwill and some assets of King Tanktechnic in Manchester • New Scotland Service Centre opened at Uddingston near Glasgow • Acquired the business of MTB Environmental Ltd. in Hamble near Southampton 2016: • Acquired Worcester Electrical Services Limited (WES) • Acquired the goodwill and assets of Contra Corrosion Services Ltd • New office opened in Swansea • New office opened in Edinburgh • A&A Federal Services LLC registered in San Antonio, Texas • UKAS accreditation achieved for A&A’s fuel testing laboratory 2017: • Adler & Allan’s Rainham waste management depot expands • Adler & Allan starts delivering Cathodic Protection services • Win the Barclays Award for building resilient business 2017

External sites / references 1. "Adler & Allan Facilities Management (FM) Microsite". http://fm.adlerandallan.co.uk/. External link in |website= (help) 2. "Adler & Allan Defence FM Microsite". http://fm-defence.adlerandallan.co.uk/. External link in |website= (help) 3. "Adler & Allan Asset Resilience Microsite for DNO's and Water Industry". http://assetresilience.adlerandallan.co.uk/. External link in |website= (help)

Right hand side information. Industry Environmental services

Founded 1926 Headquarters Harrogate, United Kingdom

Key people BoB Contreras (Chairman), Mark Calvert (CEO) , Henry Simpson (Commercial Director), Henrik Pedersen (Business Development Director), Keith Potts (Compliance Director), Andrew Clarke (Operations Director) Products JBAR®, Sockit™, Soakbag™,, Ethanol Coalescing Filter®, Tank Technic Linings™ , ContraCorrosion™ , BoxSep™, Flexibund™, EquiSeal™ Services Compliance & Asset Resilience, Tank Services, Spill Response, Waste Management, Fuel & Forecourt Services, Pollution prevention, 24/7 Emergency Response (Oil, Chemical, flood, fuel spills and oxygen depletion), Protective Coatings & Linings, Tankering, Contaminated Land Investigation & Remediation, Spill Training, Consultative Services, Non-Destructive Testing (NDT), Site Decommissioning, Flood services, PPM and testing Number of employees 600+ (2017) Subsidiaries E&S Environmental , WES (Hazardous electrical services) Website http://www.adlerandallan.co.uk

Absolutely NOT. Wikipedia has essentially no interest in what you or I have to say about your company. We only summarise what reliable, independent published sources have to say about a subject. Theroadislong (talk) 12:20, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

But the above history and intro are reliable and factual they are not for any commercial gain or marketing, they are indeed factual! i am confused by what can and cannot be said on Wikipedia as i see pagess with more commercial and company information than the information provided?

please help as i am getting slightly confused about what the information should consist off. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rene Willemsen (talk • contribs) 12:27, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

As I've said twice on your user talk page, Wikipedia articles can only contain information found in independent reliable sources, sources from third parties not associated with your company. Unless your company's history is written about by third parties not associated with your company, it cannot be on Wikipedia. You should use your company's website to post information about what it sees as its history. Company representatives like yourself are usually too close to the subject to write about it with the proper neutral point of view and do not understand that we have no interest in what an article subject wants to say about itself. 331dot (talk) 12:53, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
You should post your declaration on your own user page instead of this page. Thank you for making it. 331dot (talk) 12:53, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
I'll try this another way; in order to be able to contribute any information about your company, you need to forget everything that you know about it and only contribute information you can find that does not come from your company. 331dot (talk) 12:56, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

thank you for you help so far 331dot:

i have added the deceleration on my own page and have done some investigation adding the required references / independent 3rd party resources, relating to the content and the left the history out.

Changes have been made below including the added references / resources.


The Adler & Allan Group is an international provider of oil and environmental services, including 24/7 emergency response to protect essential assets from environmental risk and damage, throughout the UK and in selected overseas markets. Adler & Allan started trading in 1926 as a Coal and Coke Merchants in London, since then it has grown and diversified, to become a provider of a range of Oil, Environmental, Compliance and Asset Resilience services. They have been involved in the clean-up of some of the UK’s most infamous disasters, including Buncefield and the extensive floods of 2007 and 2013. '- Reference hhttps://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/78981/buncefield-recovery-plan.pdf' Bold text

Following Storm Desmond in 2015, they worked closely with the Environment Agency and where involved in the clean-up operation, sanitising equipment and preventing pollution as well as helping communities in Cumbria access available flood grants. Reference - http://www.yorkshirebusinessdaily.co.uk/2017/07/06/adler-allan-wins-bitc-award-flood-support-services/ Bold text

As part of its work to help flood-hit regions, they became a founding member of BERG (Business Emergency Resilience Group), BERG is part of the BITC (Business in the Community), an initiative of His Royal Highness The Prince of Wales, BERG helps businesses and communities across the UK to prepare for, respond to and recover from emergencies such as flooding, cyber-attacks and civil unrest. Reference - https://www.bitc.org.uk/node/359403

In 2008, Adler & Allan were chosen by the Olympic Development Authority (ODA) to run a secure supply chain for fuel to the London 2012 Games construction-phase site contractors. Supplying the fuel for the 600-plus generators and providing main-line and back-up power to over 40 Olympic venues around the country. Refence - http://fueloilnews.co.uk/2013/06/crossing-the-finishing-line/ Bold text

In 2017 the Adler & Allan Group has expanded its range of services with the acquisition of specialist environmental consultancy, OHES Environmental. - Reference https://forecourttrader.co.uk/news/fullstory.php/aid/14218/Adler___Allan_buys_OHES_to_expand_its_services.html'Bold text'

The group’s services are provided from 24+ depots nationwide 24/7/365, including a purpose-built Technical innovation centre in Brize Norton. - Refenrence https://forecourttrader.co.uk/news/archivestory.php/aid/11717/Green_demo_centre.html'Bold text'

'Infobox company information.'Bold text

Industry Environmental services

Founded 1926 Headquarters Harrogate, United Kingdom

Key people Bob Contreras (Executive Chairman), Mark Calvert (CEO) , Henry Simpson (Commercial Director), Henrik Pedersen (Business Development Director), Keith Potts (Compliance Director), Andrew Clarke (Operations Director) Products JBAR®, Sockit™, Soakbag™,, Ethanol Coalescing Filter®, Tank Technic Linings™ , ContraCorrosion™ , BoxSep™, Flexibund™, EquiSeal™ Services Compliance & Asset Resilience, Tank Services, Spill Response, Waste Management, Fuel & Forecourt Services, Pollution prevention, 24/7 Emergency Response (Oil, Chemical, flood, fuel spills and oxygen depletion), Protective Coatings & Linings, Tankering, Contaminated Land Investigation & Remediation, Spill Training, Consultative Services, Non-Destructive Testing (NDT), Site Decommissioning, Flood services, PPM and testing Number of employees 600+ (2018) Subsidiaries E&S Environmental , WES (Hazardous electrical services) , OHES Environmental Website http://www.adlerandallan.co.uk


Hopefully by mentioning and adding in the independent resources this is now ok to post and update the article.

kind regards,

Rene — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rene Willemsen (talk • contribs) 13:23, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

None of this belongs here, you need to make your suggestions on the article talk page here Talk:Adler and Allan. This [2] is NOT a secondary source? Theroadislong (talk) 13:27, 20 February 2018 (UTC)


regarding this link - [3] is NOT a secondary source? the link has been changed see above, however you not just now added this - 11:40, 20 February 2018‎ Theroadislong (talk | contribs)‎ . . (Reference edited with ProveIt add reliable reference). how can it be that the above links are not found reliable. i have done everything you mentioned previously but now you are saying that this is still not correct. also why is the Infobox company information been taken down and the new info not allowed as this was and is genuine company information. i even referenced it.

kind regards,

rene

I am saying that none of this conversation belongs on my talk page you need to discuss this on the article's talk page here Talk:Adler and Allan. Theroadislong (talk) 13:52, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

my apologies i just asked for your help as you deleted all the content that has been there for many years this morning that is all — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rene Willemsen (talk • contribs) 13:56, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Dachshund

How do I pull what I posted from the archive to include the sources? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shayrubess (talk • contribs) 14:51, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Women's History Month 2018 at Women in Red

Welcome to Women in Red's March 2018 worldwide online editathons.


Historically, our March event has been one of the biggest offerings of the year. This year, we are collaborating with two other wiki communities. Our article campaign is the official on-line/virtual node for Art+Feminism. Our image campaign supports the Whose Knowledge? initiative. Women's History Month 2018

Continuing: #1day1woman Global Initiative

(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 16:09, 20 February 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Thanks

Hi there! I seem to have lost the ability to thank (is that everyone, or just me?). Anyway, that gives me an excuse to drop by and thank you for your edits at George Dury (and please don't take my talk-page post there as criticism). It seems I've upset that editor; yet again, it seems that no (attempted) good deed goes unpunished. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:06, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

No worries at all! I have also lost the ability to thank! Theroadislong (talk) 19:09, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
It's a known technical issue. Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Thanks_not_working --NeilN talk to me 19:11, 20 February 2018 (UTC)


How to modify a Draft title?

Hello Theroadislong, I wish to ask how can modifications to the TITLE of a draft be made please? Lidasher (talk) 23:00, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

You use the move function from the toolbar under "More". What would you like it changed to? Theroadislong (talk) 23:13, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Theroadislong oh thanks so much for the quick reply. Well not to change it actually..but just to add in front of it in brackets (Fine artist). So the title instead of "Lida Sherafatmand" will be "Lida Sherafatmand (Fine artist)". Where is the "move" button? :-( sorry I don't see it.. Lidasher (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:20, 20 February 2018 (UTC) Theroadislong found the 'move'...! thanks(talk)

Unless there is another Lida Sherafatmand then the fine artist qualifier is not required. Theroadislong (talk) 23:22, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Theroadislong(talk) oh really? I thought to add it only because a reviewer left a comment about "person in-depth" information, and since this is basically about an 'artist' I thought maybe it should be added. Now what should I do please? I already added it...shall I delete the 'fine artist' and leave it as it was ? Sorry for all these questions! Lidasher (talk) 23:26, 20 February 2018 (UTC) Theroadislong Ok I put it as it was once it is not required. Thanks Lidasher (talk) 23:33, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Articles for Creation barnstar
for your great work at AfC. L293D (☎ • ✎) 16:00, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Review of Draft for Ron Baird

Hi Theroadislong,

Thank you for your prompt review of my Draft for Ron Baird, Although its decline is disappointing, I understand your reasoning and hope you will continue to assist me in the creation of the article. here are the current steps I will take (let me know what you think)

reference all the rewards to the website/news-article that shows his acomplishment
hook up the other references in the reference section to pieces of the article with live URLs

My only question is to the response that the rewards are not in a neutral tone, if you have recommendations to make it more neutral, I would like to hear them.

Thanks for your time,

Sincerely ,

Artscanada (talk) 02:31, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

It wasn't the awards section that was non neutral it was parts of the article in general, I have pointed these out in the comment now. The awards are mostly not notable, it would be better to concentrate on two or three that have articles about them with reliable sources. "'Best of Show' prizes for his prints and sculptures" for example is just plain puffery. Theroadislong (talk) 10:13, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

13:04:23, 25 February 2018 review of submission by Vliander


Good afternoon, I finished the required corrections from your side in the meanwhile. May I kindly ask you to give your approval for publishing of the WIKI article. Thank you in advance.

Vliander (talk) 13:04, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

re: emma freud

That was an enormous error on my part in mistaking the page for that of Emma Chambers. I'll not venture outside my expertise again. Thanks for catching it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joinks (talk • contribs) 22:17, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

09:58:10, 26 February 2018 review of re-submission by Vliander


Dear Theroadislong,


Thank you for your fast reply. Here my reply to your comment or query.

As far as I can tell, independent journalists wrote the newspaper articles. But the press articles were published years ago before the times of the Internet, and the online archives provide no direkt links for this time period.

That's the reason I can't provide you direct links to those items. However, the newspaper articles themselves have been written by independent journalists and were published by independent and well-known newspapers.


Sincerely,

Vliander


Vliander (talk) 09:58:10, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Sources don't have to be online, it is YOUR conflict of interest I am questioning. Theroadislong (talk) 09:46, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
<3 Nasavishal (talk) 11:40, 26 February 2018 (UTC)


Approval

we are awaiting for our page approval which was re-submitted. We hope for the positive response. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nasavishal (talk • contribs) 11:38, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

https://steemit.com/life/@sencopglobal/social-enterprise-network-cooperatives-sencop-project. Theroadislong (talk) 13:16, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

I wish to delete Draft page

Dear Theroadislong (talk), I am thinking to delete the Draft: Lida Sherafatmand. This is because I get the impression that the reviewers discredit the material due to COI of the editors, despite the fact that there are major newspapers/TV/Radio of different countries quoted (they all have carried out full interviews and full articles, plus academic journals which have no connection whatsoever to the subject in the article. But I would like to be sure, that in case I delete this draft, will this prevent other people in future to create an article about it? ...because if 13 major media and over 5 academic reportages discussing the subject is not enough, I feel there a bias from the side of the reviewers due to the COI of the editors. So best is to delete it, and whoever in future wishes to recreate the article is welcome. These are the media which have given full coverage which are still not considered 'notable' puzzling enough:

Rahavard Iranian Studies Journal (Los Angeles, U.S.A), Radio Free Europe (from Paris), Voice of America TV (from Paris), Kayhan London (from London), Times of Malta, The Independent (Malta), The Guardian (UK), Xinhua (China), Radio Rossi, Main National Radio (Russia), NTV , Main national TV station (Russia), Lark News English Newspaper (Pakistan), International World Business Communicator (Pakistan), Prima Edicion (Argentina).

I do not need any Wikipedia 'promotion/advertising'. This article submission was just to inform the general public who use internet to be informed about artists who may not be on auctions passing at millions of euros/dollars, but who are known on grassroot levels in many different countries. Lidasher (talk) 18:09, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Writing an autobiography is probably the MOST difficult thing to do on Wikipedia and is STRONGLY discouraged. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, which summarises what independent sources have published about subjects and has essentially no interest in what anybody says or wants to say about themselves, on Wikipedia we need reliable sources independent of the subject. Your draft doesn't really establish what makes you notable I'm afraid. Interviews are not considered reliable sources. When notability is clearer someone will write an article about you, that is for certain, I might even write it myself! All good wishes. Theroadislong (talk) 18:44, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for replying Theroadislong (talk). Ok as long as someone can still propose it in future, it is fine by me..because I thought maybe the name of the draft 'gets registered' or something. Well the notability is basically the 'Humanitarian Art Mnifesto', which was indeed to be included in the 2nd edition of acclaimed book "100 Artists' Manifestos" by the British philosopher professor Alex Danchev -expert in art and international relations-. But he sadly passed away two years ago before completing that. That manifesto is now "Florescencism", which is counter-balancing the Duchampian trend. But I definitely refrain from any further editing indeed, no time for that in all honesty. Better someone else writes it later on. With thanks and appreciation for your attention once again. Lidasher (talk) 21:19, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Fixed the source of information

Sir please check out this page as I've fixed it now. Just waiting for your approval. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Rahul_Singh Nakulsharma.2001 (talk) 17:54, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Improved the page

Sir please check, this page https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Rahul_Singh and please remove your comment. Nakulsharma.2001 (talk) 17:59, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Sorry but this [4] doesn't look like a reliable source and it appears that you have copied and pasted your content from there which is strictly not allowed. Theroadislong (talk) 18:04, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

I've added the reliable source of information

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Rahul_Singh please check this page now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nakulsharma.2001 (talk • contribs) 18:08, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

22:02:25, 28 February 2018 review of submission by Controlerna


The article only describes a software product. Why is this one declined and similar articles are accepted? See the article for Maximo (MRO)

What is my intention to add this article:

  • i work for a public company in Germany, we were looking for a software solution for a public railway fleet (tram)
  • our research was difficult, not all of the relevant software solutions are to find in just one internet database or in wikipedia
  • we know, that many other municipal institutions in Germany have the same issues with research
  • for the current project we saw presentations from Maximo, "zedas asset" and "boom software"
  • only one of them is currently to find in wikipedia, we would like to add the other 2

Maybe you can let me know how to write the article in a right way. Thanks in advance.


Controlerna (talk) 22:02, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

You have used a VERY poor example article Maximo (MRO) to copy, I have nominated it for deletion. Theroadislong (talk) 22:19, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Help Please?

Hi Theroadislong,

I'm curious to know why Paragon Footwear was rejected. Please guide me in writing it better. I'm still trying to collect more information about the brand from news sources and have also tried to contact the brand themselves. Wikipedia is a tiny project I've taken upon myself to upskill and your help will be really appreciated. Bad brahmin (talk) 11:57, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

It didn't appear to be written in a neutral tone. I would strongly suggest NOT contacting them, Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, which summarises what independent sources have published about subjects and has essentially no interest in what anybody says or wants to say about themselves or their company, on Wikipedia we need reliable sources independent of the subject. Theroadislong (talk) 11:59, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

MR draft

Hi,

If I can't use IMDB - which source do you recommend to verify the work?

Thank you, Paige

You are being paid to edit Draft:Mubina Rattonsey please read the links in the decline notice which indicate what reliable sources are required. Theroadislong (talk) 08:00, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

William Branham reversion

Hello, you reverted an edit I recently made. I believe there is consensus. The only user who is favor of keeping it, based on talk page review is Taxee (also known as Darlig Guitarist). Me, DoctorG (articles GA reviewer), Rev107, DEvan, Electseed, Danpeanuts all support removal. I can provide quote from the talk page, or you can review yourself. Are you in favor of keeping? Right now consensus is clear. —Charles Edward (Talk | Contribs) 20:15, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

I'm not seeing any consensus at the section headed "Reply 27-FEB-201" ? Theroadislong (talk) 20:19, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
You are right, the discussion is across two sections. Check the section "Branham and Jim Jones" and also section Jim Jones. Between both of those sections there is only one editor in favor of keeping it. It appears consensus to remove has existed for some time, and just not been followed through with. I am agreeing with prior consensus and making the change. I am open to compromise. :) —Charles Edward (Talk | Contribs) 20:22, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
Well I don't suggest you are lying, but I can't myself see any consensus, just you agreeing with a user that works for his ministry. It seems that the article will be a whitewash. Theroadislong (talk) 20:31, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
I obviously disagree. But I will leave it as is. I do think it is an issue though. Here is my personal opinion: everyone involved with article except me, DoctorG, and StevieTheMan all seem to be biased and are twisting sources to fit their agenda... I think fair read of the talk page will demonstrate as much. :) —Charles Edward (Talk | Contribs)
I have no interest in Branham per se, I am only concerned that we have a well sourced, neutral Wikipedia article. Theroadislong (talk) 20:47, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
Ok thanks. :) I think you will find it is not white washed after you read through. All the criticism has been kept intact and actually expanded. I think it has been improved by making it more thoughtful and contextual than it previously was. The sole part I want to remove is the Jones part, primarily because it was not in a single one of his biographies, including the most critical. Its sole valid source is to a biography on Jones (Reiterman), and one primary source (Collins) which sites Reiterman as it's source. —Charles Edward (Talk | Contribs) 21:13, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Bald Knobbers post addition

I appreciate your note about what can be posted. I am quite new to the process and clearly didn't understand what was appropriate for adding. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rsgraves1 (talk • contribs) 12:40, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

14:25:54, 3 March 2018 review of submission by Sannanmahboob

Sannanmahboob (talk) 14:25, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Draft:I want you a long time

You're such a killjoy. And stop biting the newbies. I've rarely seen a more suitable submission. And it made me cry. KJP1 (talk) 19:12, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Heart wrenching reading! Theroadislong (talk) 19:14, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Submitting article

Hi, I'm Jonblz, and I'd ask you why my article was rejected. The page refers to a company that is new, so what references would I insert? I only have the site and a pdf with several informations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonblz (talk • contribs) 22:33, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Ecumenical Order of Charity

Ecumenical Order of Charity is a Religious Order of Monks and Nuns - not a charity. Brphillipoc (talk) 00:22, 7 March 2018 (UTC) Brphillipoc (talk) 00:18, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

I didn't say it was a charity? I declined the article because it read like an advert for them and has no independent sourcing. Theroadislong (talk) 07:55, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Deletion of Draft:CEJN

Hi,

I didn't create the page for promotion or advertising but it was more inclined towards Carl achievements and success and history of him. I have read the rules and regulations for publishing content on the wiki. I request you to keep the content drafted for CEJN so that I can make modifications and change the content according to the wiki guides. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kanikacejn (talk • contribs) 07:27, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Please see the comments here [5] your draft was totally unacceptable, Wikipedia is not a means to promote your business. Theroadislong (talk) 07:43, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Solution for Draft: CEJN

Can you tell me what could be done so that I can start with the same topic again? I am looking for solutions. Please guide me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kanikacejn (talk • contribs) 08:05, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

You are a paid editor trying to promote your business I am not prepared to help. Theroadislong (talk) 08:36, 8 March 2018 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Theroadislong/Archive_31&oldid=1212159406"