User talk:WikiDan61/Archive20191220

Archive created 2019.12.20

regarding editing of page AKM Abdur Rouf

dear wikidan61,

all the information used in editing the mentioned page is from the authenticated source. I have bunch of files that that can verify it, only i don't know the proper way to upload it. please help me to construct this page for the honor of a great man of Bangladesh.

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Greenwiki911 (talk • contribs) 13:28, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Greenwiki911: Files that you have that can verify this information don't really count as reliable sources as we have no idea of the provenance of those files. Wikipedia relies on information published in reputable publications (newspapers, magazines, books, etc. that have editors and fact-checkers) and websites that exercise a degree of editorial oversight. If you can reference such sources, great. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 13:31, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No Sources - Site Development Group

Dear WikiDan61,

Thanks for replying so quickly.

I received your comment with respect to No Sources. However the only source would be the company their website which I set as a source: www.sitedevgroup.com in addition I could add the Wyoming publication of this company would that be sufficient to get the article approved ?

Thank you, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boyschook (talk • contribs) 14:38, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Boyschook: No. Wikipedia is not a business directory covering every existing company. To be included in the encyclopedia, a subject must meet the criteria for inclusion, with specific criteria covering companies. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 14:42, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

manish kr jha wiki page

Hello SIR , I Have created the Manish kr jha wiki page , I have tried to give as much as relevant sources and information for MR manish kr jha . You have marked me to write at position he is associated in PJP Group , I have corrected this as "CHIEF MARKETING OFFICER (CMO) . this details also mentioned in Pandmmall.com of prakash jha , his nephew Mr manish kr jha . can you guide me to remove this deletion warning on my page . I will be helpful for your kind support . as I changed some details as "position" . can I remove this deletion warning on my article by my side or it will be auto removed . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Manish techguru (talk • contribs) 08:17, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Manish techguru: You may not remove the Articles for Deletion notice from Manish kr Jha. You may comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Manish kr Jha with any information that you think will help inform the community about why you think this article should not be deleted. When the discussion has run its course (usually 7 days, but possibly longer if there has not been sufficient input after 7 days), an administrator will either decide to keep the article and remove the notice, or to delete the article. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 11:41, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 13:07:04, 27 March 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Bostongeorge86

Bostongeorge86 (talk · contribs)
- Draft:DataHjelpOslo AS (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I created a page exactly like this: https://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intility, why mine is not been approved?

Bostongeorge86 (talk) 13:07, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Bostongeorge86: Your submission (Draft:DataHjelpOslo AS) has the following problems:

It is written in Norwegian. This is the English language Wikipedia: all content must be written in English. If you wish to contribute an article in Norwegian, contribute it at the Norwegian Wikipedia.
It contains no references other than the company's own website, meaning there is no indication of the significant coverage in independent media that is needed to show that this organization merits inclusion in Wikipedia.

Yes, your article is substantially similar to Intility, but since that article is on the Norwegian Wikipedia, it is appropriately written in Norwegian. As for the lack of useful sources on that page, that's a problem for the no.wiki community to resolve. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 13:13, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Harlequins Foundation

Hi Dan,

Just got your message about the Harlequins Foundation page. Harlequins foundation is an independent (and registered) charity - an organisation in its own right, whilst being associated with Harlequins FC. Additionally, there is no information on the wikipedia page of Harlequins FC about the charity. The draft is just the beginning of the page. It has its own company logo, website, CEO and staff etc.

Does this not deserve its own page?

Best wishes,

Pat — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pat.Metcalfe.Jones (talk • contribs) 15:26, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Pat.Metcalfe.Jones: Based on the coverage you have provided, it does not apear to deserve its own page. And yes, the charitable foundation surely has its own registration number, it would certainly not exist or have relevance outside of its association with the rugby team. If the article about the team doesn't contain information about their charitable foundation, I suggest you add it. (A small section -- one or two paragraphs -- with suitable citations should do.) WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 15:29, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting of Paul Westwood page

I am trying to edit the above page which has a deletion message can you please let me know why? Thanks Joyce Gyimah — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joyce Gyimah (talk • contribs) 21:23, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Joyce Gyimah: If you go to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paul Westwood, you'll see that I have explained my deletion rationale: I have found no significant coverage of Westwood or his work. He wrote a book, but I can't find any reviews. He has recorded some stuff, but I find no evidence of any awards won for his music, or any significant coverage of him as a musician. (See WP:MUSIC for relevant criteria.) WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 21:33, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Westwood/Deletion/Evidence

Dear Dan, many thanks for your reply.

Please find below websites that reference Pauls work in the industry.

All Music https://www.allmusic.com/artist/paul-westwood-mn0000956164/credits

Review of Bass Bible. https://www.thomann.de/gb/ama_verlag_e-guitar_school1.html

Dewolfe https://www.dewolfemusic.com/search.php?code=eUeJG2&id=14521944

Licklibrary https://www.licklibrary.com/store/49370/paul-westwood-az-of-bass-guitar

apm/ Paul Michael Westwood music https://www.apmmusic.com/search/%5B%7B%22field%22%3A%22composer%22%2C%22value%22%3A%22Paul%20Michael%20Westwood%22%2C%22operation%22%3A%22must%22%7D%5D — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joyce Gyimah (talk • contribs) 10:53, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Joyce Gyimah: Arguing the case here will do you no good. The deletion discussion is open; it cannot be closed until it has run its course. You are free to add your thoughts here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paul Westwood. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 11:48, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 16:41:45, 5 April 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Nikolai Petrovich

Nikolai Petrovich (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Tatiana Stupak (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Dear User:WikiDan61, as I had updated the article with additional proof and links can you kindly review and provide your comments again?

Nikolai Petrovich (talk) 16:41, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Nikolai Petrovich: The changes in the article since I reviewed it appear to be the removal of images by the BOT because of copyright issues, your removal of a citation to Stupak's own website, and the addition of a citation to a website that, although I cannot open it at the moment (office firewall), appears to be an announcement of Stupak's appearance at a charity event. These changes do not alter my initial conclusion that this musician does not yet merit inclusion at Wikipedia (or, at the very least, that you have not yet demonstrated that she merits inclusion). WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 16:46, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Confusion about Feedback

Hello,

I'm trying to post a page about a nonprofit organization that states it mission and gives a quick overview of the programs it has. I wrote the material specifically for Wiki. While there will be similarities in the descriptions of the programs, this text was not copied from another source. Can you please point me to what the specific issues are with the article?

I want to be in compliance with Wikipedia's terms and conditions and I appreciate your guidance!

Best, Mariah — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mgwen19 (talk • contribs) 17:59, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Mgwen19: The material that exists presently at Draft:The Andrew Goodman Foundation does not appear to be a copyright violation, but the material that was posted 3 days ago was. (There are tools available at Wikipedia for users and administrators to compare the text of the page and the relevant source pages, so claiming that the old copy was not in violation is a pretty hard sell.) Since you have rewritten the material to avoid direct copyright violation, that is no longer a problem, but the present text is still largely promotional. I was not the one who tagged the present draft for deletion, but I don't disagree with the rationale of the editor who did tag it. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 18:50, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nexus Development Security

Dear, thank you for your comment. i am doing a lot of researches now and every book that i have read so far, describe the phenomena that i describe as " Nexus Development Security. well i don't know if some people use the term like you name it but i don't know if whether i must change the title or not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yuzjm (talk • contribs) 13:33, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Yuzjm: Perhaps the books you're reading are not written in English? In English, the noun of this phrase is Nexus; it is a nexus of issues concerning both economic development and security, so the phrase Development-Security is an adjective describing the nexus: hence Security-Development Nexus. In foreign languages such as French or Spanish, the adjective might naturally follow the noun, but not in English. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 11:53, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Yuzjm: Also:

The Security-Development Nexus. World Bank
The Security-Development Nexus: Conflict, Peace and Development in the 21st Century. International Peace Academy
Conflict, Crisis and Security-Development nexus. European Commission
Whither Post-Post-Conflict Development? Development in the Security-Development Nexus. Africa at LSE

I could go on, but I think I've made the point. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 12:39, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

no litigation

we have observed a concern that you have published an article mentioning of sexual harrassment allegations. This is highly harassment and misconducted.

After the article, deservedly there has been no litigation. We kindly ask you to remove this urgently and never post it again on his or any other places on Wikipedia.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Helene1982 (talk • contribs)

@Helene1982: Although it is customary not to remove content from other users' talk pages, I will take your removal as a recantation of the prior legal threat you had posted here. Thank you. As for the content of the article, I urge you to enter into the discussion at Talk:Greg Kadel. There you will find that I was originally in agreement with you on the matter, but since the allegations (unproven, perhaps, but not yet retracted) have resulted in loss of significant contracts for Kadel, Wikipedia's policy on biographies of living persons would have us retain the information in the interest of fairness and neutrality. Again, I urge you to discuss this matter at Talk:Greg Kadel so the entire community can weigh the alternatives. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 16:04, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you WikiDan61 for your kind advices. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Helene1982 (talk • contribs) 16:15, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Is everything oki now? or can other people go in and give their edit comments?Many thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Helene1982 (talk • contribs) 16:34, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Helene1982: I'm not sure what you mean by "is everything OK now?" I've reported your recantation at the Administrators' noticeboard, so that should end that process, but an admin may decide differently (I doubt it). As for the Greg Kadel page, I note that you have not yet commented at the talk page, so that page remains in a state that you disagree with. You are free to engage in the discussion, in a civil manner. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 16:56, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again, many thanks for you beeing so quick back to me. Are you talking about taking the edit back to the: Revision as of 18:20, 5 February 2017 ???

is that the one you will take it back to? My english is not perfect, so I dont understand where to leave my comments on your edit?

I just want him to grow again as he is working for various famous magazines and brands again. Since it has not been any actions towards him and the girls doesnt say their names I think it should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Helene1982 (talk • contribs) 17:12, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Helene1982: I'm sorry. I don't understand your question. The Greg Kadel page continues, as of this moment, to contain information about the allegations against him, and his loss of contracts due to those allegations. If you would like to see that information removed, you need to edit Talk:Greg Kadel and make your case there. If your English is not good enough to understand these instructions, I cannot help you further. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 17:16, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

re: 'Causes of Seperation'

Hi,

'Causes' is a published novel.
Available to the public.
Has decent sales numbers.
Is book 2 in a series - the first book merits inclusion in Wikipedia.

I believe the preceding points, and not it's award nomination, merit inclusion in Wiki.

How can I patch up the article so it passes scrutiny?

~bdunbar — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bkdunbar (talk • contribs) 18:02, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Bkdunbar: Taking your points in order:

Being a published novel is not, in itself, a sign of notability (especially given that Morlock Publishing seems to exist solely for the purpose of publishing Corcoran's books).
Ditto "available to the public."
Define "decent sales numbers" (which are unmentioned in the draft, by the way).
I would argue that the first book does not merit inclusion at Wikipedia, but that's my opinion, and not necessarily shared by the community, but notability is not inherited.

As Causes of Separation has only been nominated for, but not yet won, the Prometheus Award (which does not appear to constitute a "major" literary award, even in the sci-fi genre), it may be too soon for its own article. However, if you can demonstrate that the novel has received significant coverage in independent media, you might make a case for promoting this draft to article status. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 18:26, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Elisabeth Scott

Dear Dan, I have read your message re citations. If you kindly take a look at the webpage www.sigbi.org/bournemouth/Our Inspirational member! you will see an entry regarding Elisabeth Scott. Perhaps you would advise as to whether this will suffice. We have not yet added Dr Doris Odlum. Sylvia A Fox (talk) 13:54, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Sylvia A Fox: It's a weak reference (wherein an organization if claiming for itself the honour of having had a notable member, which is a nice claim to fame, but not independently verified). I'd prefer a stronger reference for the claim, if possible. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 19:57, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Algiers: Capital for revolutionaries

Hello, I saw your notification that my draft about Algiers as a capital for revolutionaries is against the neutrality principle. Since I'm writing for the first time a Wikipedia Article, I wanted to ask if only the title is the problem or also the content? Could you maybe give me some more details?

Thanks for your help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Silserchranz (talk • contribs) 21:16, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Silserchranz: Predominantly the title. A better title would be "Revolutionary activities in Algeria". Concentrating on the activities (which the draft mostly does) without giving the impression that Algeria is more or less a hotbed of such activities (unless such a comparison can be drawn from reliable sources which specifically compare revolutionary activity in Algeria to anyplace else) would be a good start. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 21:33, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedy deleted as an unambiguous copyright infringement, because... I am sohel sk, Besically I manage the official website of Dev Entertainment Ventures, That Article (http://www.deventertainment.in/password.php) also Written by me its not a copy, so please Remove The Copyright claim as soon as Possible from The Wikipedia page of Password (2019 film) --Sohel1997 (talk) 13:35, 19 April 2019 (UTC) @WikiDan61:

@Sohel1997: The Password page at Deventertainment.in clearly displays a Copyright claim at the bottom of the page. Its text can therefore not be included here at Wikipedia unless someone who can be verified to work with this organization contacts the Wikimedia Foundation. (See WP:Donating copyrighted material.) But if you do this, anyone can take this text and use if for any purpose; is this really what you want? I'm also curious: did the title of the film change from Dark Net to Password sometime during development? The synopsis says that "Dark Net delves into...", but the film's title is Password so the synopsis makes no sense. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 16:02, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Sohel1997: You also need to read that pages on WP:COI and WP:PAID. If your job involves editing Wikipedia, you need to make the disclosures on WP:PAID. Ravensfire (talk) 22:31, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate drafts with different titles

The duplicates are Draft:Algiers: Capital for revolutionaries and Draft:Revolutionary activities in Algeria. Mitchumch (talk) 05:15, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I brought this to your attention because you last looked at "Draft:Algiers: Capital for revolutionaries" on 16:48, 18 April 2019. It looks like the creator of the draft you looked at decided to circumvent your assessment that "It is unlikely to be accepted for publication." and published the content the next day on 19 April 2019 under the title "Draft:Revolutionary activities in Algeria". Should I go elsewhere to resolve this issue? Mitchumch (talk) 09:10, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Mitchumch: I contacted the user on their talk page and gave advice on neutralizing the article, including changing the title. Apparently, not knowing about page moves, they chose to recreate the article at a new title. I still think the draft is problematic. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 11:31, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

My concern is the editor may not return to Wikipedia. Their edit history only consist of two days worth of work - 18 April 2019 to create "Draft:Algiers: Capital for revolutionaries" and 19 April 2019 to move "Draft:Revolutionary activities in Algeria" into article space. Mitchumch (talk) 12:24, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Mitchumch: I believe the draft that has been published should be returned to Draft space. It is clearly not ready for publication. If the author chooses not to return to finish it, it will eventually be deleted as an abandoned draft. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 12:28, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Mitchumch: I see no evidence that Draft:Revolutionary activities in Algeria has been moved to article space. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 12:30, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. I thought the title may have the term "Draft" in it, but still register as an article space page. I think that may be what the author thought they were doing. Why else would that person create a second page with duplicate content and different title? Mitchumch (talk) 12:38, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Mitchumch: Because I told them to. (Well, not exactly, but I did tell them that the article title was highly problematic. (You can see the brief discussion here on my talk page, a few topics up from this one.) WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 13:13, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Do you want a new user to also initiate a deletion request for one of the articles? I can understand the move function, but it seems a bit much to ask a new user to clean-up this mess. Mitchumch (talk) 19:56, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

So, fix it. You found a problem. You don't need my permission to fix the problem. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 21:35, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Gasoline Lollipops

Hi Dan, this is Adam Perry from Gasoline Lollipops. I just came across a Gasoline Lollipops entry someone created, and wow, it looked messy and didn't include many references. I corrected some biographical history and added articles from six reputable publications on the band, which won Denver Westword's "Best Country Artist" award in 2016 and 2018 and has won Colorado Daily's "Best Local Band/Musician" award three times (2014, 2015 and 2017). Will you please confirm the Wikipedia entry for Gasoline Lollipops will go live? My email address is mppedro@gmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:300B:5CF:4000:18DF:6C3D:CC75:8C09 (talk) 17:23, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@2603:300B:5CF:4000:18DF:6C3D:CC75:8C09: Adam, I believe you've already been warned about the conflict of interest issues involved with writing about your own band. Also, your updates have already been reviewed by another editor and found still insufficient to move forward to publication. Basically, you might be a hot band in Denver, but Wikipedia wants a broader indication of notability. (See WP:BAND). WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 02:39, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Editing Jess Hynes

Sorry wikiDan - I am completely new to Wikipedia and only recently began to be concerned that my page seemed a bit out of wack and needed a bit of clean out and an update. I have only today been looking at the rules and realise that the information can only be changed by someone who isn't me, so have contacted Wikipedia for help and advice! The changes I have made tell a more expedient, accurate and updated story of my career so far and I would really like to keep them. Is there anything I can do? Mrs Adam Jessica Hynes (talk) 20:57, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Mrs Adam Jessica Hynes: As you have been advised, if there are changes you'd like to see on the Jessica Hynes page, please address your comments to Talk:Jessica Hynes. Make clear specifically what changes you would like to see, and offer as much evidence as possible (citations from reliable sources) to verify that your requested changes are legitimate. I'm not sure that "expedient" is a goal we're trying to achieve here at Wikipedia, although accurate and updated certainly are. I note that your changes removed some of the older biographical bits in the article. I'm not sure that's proper: early career history is as important as recent history in showing a full career arc. I also note that you've removed information about "Political activism" despite that information being well-sourced. I'm afraid that sort of information will probably remain in the article: notable persons' political views are considered valid content for an encyclopedia article, especially when the subject has been politically active (making public statements and appearances). As much as we all might like to whitewash our past, we don't get to do that here at Wikipedia. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 21:18, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou

Thanks for your time in replying. Wikipedia have also been in touch and explained the procedure and have been very helpful. I was interested in your statement that 'Wikipedia doesn't work like that' in reference to your speculation that I would not be able to make an edit and remove a section headed 'political activism'. Is 'Wikipedia' a committee of anonymous Internet users who decide what is or isn't relevant or factual via the talk page? If so, how many of you are there and could you explain specifically and in detail the procedure of deciding what is included and what is excluded please? Who makes the final decision? I absolutely and completely understand the need for verifiable facts on an encyclopedia page - although the internet itself is not as vigorously policed as Wikipedia its the best we've got I suppose. My issue is - it is the selection and curation of those 'facts' that may or may not constitute a bias or defamation of a persons life and character. For example - my sit-com 'Up the Women' which was nominated for a writers guild award, is a well documented and historical series given that it was the last one to be filmed at the old BBC TV centre, yet it is omitted from the career section of my page and a quote from a ten year old article in reference to childrens book 'Ants in the Marmalade' which I failed to get published, is included. One could come to the conclusion that in choosing to include a minor failed project from ten years ago over a major completed one that is more recent is deliberately intended to make my life and career look rather shabby. Also in reference to my 'political activism' this heading itself is absolutely misleading. I tweeted once about voting Labour, perhaps i shouldn't have but one tweet does not constitute as 'political activism' 'Political Activity' at most. The most 'political' thing I do is visit schools and support drama departments because they are struggling. I don't think this is political I just think it's the right thing to do. That is supportable fact and yet that is also omitted. You see my point - I have no desire to' white wash' my life but I look forward recieving a lengthy and detailed breakdown of exactly how the facts of my life and career are chosen, compiled and included in the worlds biggest online encyclopedia.

Thank you for your time, I'm sure you have better things to do but I'm thrilled if you don't. Kind regards Mrs Jessica Hynes Mrs Adam Jessica Hynes (talk) 05:04, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Mrs Adam Jessica Hynes: The Wikipedia community is comprised of people like you and me: regular people who decide they want to edit the encyclopedia. There is no "Wikipedia committee", there are just people who have registered an account to edit here. As to how decisions are made as to what content should stay and what content should be removed, it is a matter of discussion and consensus. If you feel that there is information on the page that does not belong, make your case at the talk page. Other users will weigh in on whether your request to remove the material is legitimate or not and if consensus is reached, the material will be removed. But the simple fact that you do not like that the material is there is not sufficient cause to remove it. (Working on the assumption that you are actually Ms Hynes here:) If you are uncomfortable with this publicisation of your past political activities, that discomfort in itself is not sufficient grounds to remove the material. If, on the other hand, you feel (and can verify through some reliable source) that the material improperly portrays your political activism (perhaps a single story was published that misrepresented your views), then the material should probably be removed. But it's all a matter of consensus. Make your point, seek opinions, and then we can move forward with whatever decision is made. (By the way, if you make the point at the talk page, and no one joins the discussion after a week or so, I would not object to you removing the information based on your attempt to build consensus. Just make the attempt.) WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 12:54, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Mrs Adam Jessica Hynes: I've removed the "Political activisim" section from the Jessica Hynes article. Clearly, one tweet and a parody video by the "Siobhan Sharpe" character do not make for political activism. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 20:23, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Joel's draft article "Luna Parc": removal of unrelated images.

Hi Dan,

I just looked at your work (on this article, and on some other articles), and am truly impressed. You keep the best interests of Wikipedia in mind. You contribute intelligently, objectively, civilly, and reasonably. Moreover, you articulate issues with extraordinary clarity. I'm proud to volunteer alongside such high caliber. Thanks for all you do, sir!

Yesterday 9-May-2019, you had removed an irrelevant Wikimedia Commons photograph from the "Luna Parc" draft article (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Luna_Parc&diff=896322631&oldid=896321345).

I agree with your action. The photo was just a placeholder until a Wikipedian could get an appropriate (relevant, quality, not in violation of copyrights, etc) image. I planned to try to email Luna Parc founder Mr. Boscarino to ask if he would upload a few illustrative images to Commons. I don't know how or if he'll respond - hopefully he doesn't dismiss me as a spammer. ;-)

Thank you for your vigilance, sir. I wholeheartedly share your desire for good content.

Sincerely,
Joel
JoelDougal (talk) 16:40, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@JoelDougal: There are placeholder images available at Wikipedia (see, for example, File:Placeholder.png). These images would better serve the purpose of showing that you intend to add an image to your draft, without giving the impression that you are trying to fool people into thinking the park looks different than it really does. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 20:13, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. You are correct. Thank you, sir. JoelDougal (talk) 21:36, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Joel's draft article "Luna Parc": removal of 2 See Also links

Hi Dan,

Again, thanks for all you do, sir! :-)

Yesterday 9-May-2019, you had removed two See Also links from the "Luna Parc" draft article (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Luna_Parc&diff=next&oldid=896322631).

I understand your position, and acquiesce to your action.

My goal was to facilitate rapid navigation to the world's two other architecturally-related parks. Notwithstanding, perhaps my hyperlinkage is not the optimal implementation. OK.

Thank you for your vigilance, sir. I wholeheartedly share your desire for good content.

Sincerely,
Joel
JoelDougal (talk) 17:01, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@JoelDougal: "See also" entries are supposed to link to other Wikipedia articles, not external websites. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 20:10, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Thank you, Dan.

Joel's draft article "Luna Parc": reliability of cited sources for claims made

Hi Dan,

Again, thanks for all you do, sir! :-)

Yesterday 9-May-2019, you suggested that the Luna Parc article lacked sufficient evidence that the topic has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable sources. (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Luna_Parc&diff=prev&oldid=896322905).

I've made approximately sixteen improvements to the draft article last night and this morning 10-May-2019 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Luna_Parc). These changes should resolve your concerns. Please give me another chance.

The claims made in the Luna Parc article are factual. They are not opinion, nor speculative. For example, the article does not make claims such as "recruited some of the finest musicians", "hoped that his youth and exuberance would rejuvenate", "thrived financially and artistically", "is seen by many as a beginning step toward great careers", nor "made a generous grant", nor "accomplished vocalist".

The factual claims made in the Luna Parc article are objective. They are not subjective.

The objective factual claims made in the Luna Parc article are neutral. They are not biased towards a point of view.

The objective factual claims made in the Luna Parc article are not based on original research. All claims are based on independent, unbiased, 3rd party, published, cited facts.

The objective factual claims made in the Luna Parc article are not controversial (e.g., allegations of sex abuse, athletes doping, political positions).

No claims made in the Luna Parc article are exceptional, challenged, or contrary to prevailing views of the relevant community. Thus exceptional sources are not required.

I believe the cited sources are highly reliable for exactly the narrow neutral objective factual claims that the Luna Parc article makes. In some citations Wikipedia can count on best-in-class editorial oversight over staff-authored journalistic pieces (New York Times, Tribune Publishing, Morris Communications, Globe Pequot Press, CNN). In some citations Wikipedia can count on excellent editorial oversight over staff-authored journalistic pieces (NJ.com, Discovery Channel, HGTV, Times-Herald Record, Leaf Enterprises, Lee Enterprises). In some citations Wikipedia can count on the publisher being the governing authority (IRS, Luna Parc - e.g., for hours of operation). In some citations Wikipedia can count on the publisher demonstrably being a subject matter experts (SME) and authority in the relevant field supporting the article claim (Oddities: Kralyevich "Weird US", Weird NJ "Weird NJ", Discovery Channel HGTV) (Art, especially sculpture and mosaic: SHAMc, SAMA).

In some citations Wikipedia can count on the narrow factual claim relying only on 3rd party published material that was a direct recording of reality (e.g., still photographs of property, still photos of art, audiovisual video recordings of artist being interviewed, audiovisual video recordings of property being physically toured). Thus somewhat less faith needs to be placed in the publisher or the publisher's fact-checking and editorial processes. For example, an visual image of the bright yellow and orange and green colors obviates a fact-checker evaluation of the journalist's text assertion "bright colors". Wikipedia's journalistic goal remain verifiable fact, and that goal is met by the image.

No source cited in the Luna Parc article has a poor reputation for checking the facts, or a real or apparent conflict of interest.

All sources cited represent pieces that are dedicated to Luna Parc. None were just indirect references, tangential discussions, or just passing mentions.

I've analyzed every citation below in an effort to honour your time. Hope this helps:

I believe reasonable Wikipedians would consider the following 4 publishing sources to be sufficiently reliable for most objective factual claims in Wikipedia articles regarding matters anywhere in the world:

New York Times (2 articles)
Chicago-based Tribune Publishing Company - formerly Tronc, Inc
Atlanta-based AT&T WarnerMedia Cable News Network (CNN)

I believe reasonable Wikipedians would consider the following 1 published source to be sufficiently reliable for many objective factual claims (existence, owner, structures, landscape, materials, appearance, artwork, artifact collection, artist, backstory) in Wikipedia articles regarding Home and Garden matters anywhere in the world:

Tennessee-based Discovery Channel HGTV show: https://www.hgtv.com/videos/luna-parc-0197276

I believe reasonable Wikipedians would consider the following 1 publishing source to be sufficiently reliable for most objective factual claims in Wikipedia articles regarding matters in or around New Jersey USA:

Advance Local's New Jersey On-Line LLC NJ.com

I believe reasonable Wikipedians would consider the following 1 publishing source to be sufficiently reliable for most objective factual claims in Wikipedia articles regarding matters in or around upstate New York USA:

New York-based GateHouse Media, LLC Times-Herald Record (including recordonline.com)

I believe reasonable Wikipedians would consider the following 1 publishing sources to be sufficiently reliable for many objective factual claims (location, what inspired artist, when did artist begin, hours of operation) in Wikipedia articles regarding unusual travel destination anywhere in the world even if the content were contributed by the destination's owner:

Washington DC-based Atlas Obscura - covers world

I believe reasonable Wikipedians would consider the following 3 published sources to be sufficiently reliable for many objective factual claims (tax status as charity, open house hours, uses of buildings, materials used by artist, images showing appearance of property, images showing personal art displayed at property, existence and charter of the managing Foundation) in Wikipedia articles regarding real property even though the content is published by the property's owner:

I believe reasonable Wikipedians would consider the following 2 publishing sources to be sufficiently reliable for most objective factual claims (existence, location, appearance, elements, significance, backstory) in Wikipedia articles regarding odd curiosity matters in or around New Jersey USA:

New York-based Kralyevich Productions, Inc "Weird US" TV show (all 50 states)
Bloomfield NJ-based "Weird NJ Inc" (books, TV show)

I believe reasonable Wikipedians would consider the following 1 publishing sources to be sufficiently reliable for most objective factual claims (legal name, director, purpose, tax exemption status, type of org) in Wikipedia articles regarding U.S. Federal Tax matters in the USA:

Cincinnati-based Internal Revenue Service (IRS)

I believe reasonable Wikipedians would consider the following 2 publishing sources to be sufficiently reliable for most objective factual claims (artist, artist medium, artist's expertise, artist's work) in Wikipedia articles regarding ceramic and other art matters in the USA:

Florida-based Safety Harbor Art & Music Center (SHAMc) - covers USA
Pennsylvania's Society of American Mosaic Artists (SAMA)- covers USA

I believe reasonable Wikipedians would consider the following 1 publisher source to be sufficiently reliable for most objective factual claims in Wikipedia articles regarding unique matters in any state within the USA:

California-based Leaf Group's "Only In Your State" - covers USA

I believe reasonable Wikipedians would consider the following 1 publisher source to be sufficiently reliable for most objective factual claims in Wikipedia articles regarding matters (including visiting artists and art exhibits) within approximately 21 states (40%), including Iowa, of the USA:

Iowa-based Lee Enterprises (NYSE-traded)

I believe reasonable Wikipedians would consider the following 1 publishing source to be sufficiently reliable for most objective factual claims (existence, location, appearance, elements, significance, backstory) in Wikipedia articles regarding odd curiosity matters in New Jersey USA:

Morris Communications Globe Pequot Press book "New Jersey Curiosities: Quirky Characters, Roadside Oddities & Other Offbeat Stuff"

To address your (legitimate) concerns, I erred on the side of citation clutter. At least that will protect Wikipedia from future linkrot.

Thank you for your vigilance, sir. I wholeheartedly share your desire for good content.

Sincerely,
Joel
JoelDougal (talk) 22:19, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

NPR Newsletter No.18

Hello WikiDan61,

WMF at work on NPP Improvements

Niharika Kohli, a product manager for the growth team, announced that work is underway in implementing improvements to New Page Patrol as part of the 2019 Community Wishlist and suggests all who are interested watch the project page on meta. Two requested improvements have already been completed. These are:

Allow filtering by no citations in page curation
Not having CSD and PRODs automatically marked as reviewed, reflecting current consensus among reviewers and current Twinkle functionality.

Reliable Sources for NPP

Rosguill has been compiling a list of reliable sources across countries and industries that can be used by new page patrollers to help judge whether an article topic is notable or not. At this point further discussion is needed about if and how this list should be used. Please consider joining the discussion about how this potentially valuable resource should be developed and used.

Backlog drive coming soon

Look for information on the an upcoming backlog drive in our next newsletter. If you'd like to help plan this drive, join in the discussion on the New Page Patrol talk page.

News

Following a request for comment, the subject-specific notability guideline for pornographic actors and models (WP:PORNBIO) was removed; in its place, editors should consult WP:ENT and WP:GNG.

Discussions of interest

A request for bot approval for a bot to patrol two kinds of redirects
There has been a lot discussion about Notability of Academics
What, if anything, would a SNG for Softball look like

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 7242 Low – 2393 High – 7250

Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.
Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.
Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of DannyS712 (talk) at 19:17, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

draft:Hugo Freund

@WikiDan61: Hello! A have a question about the article(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Hugo_Freund). Can you review this article and post it on the site? Thank you! Earth0001 (talk) 14:06, 22 May 2019 (UTC)Earth0001[reply]

@Earth0001: I've taken a look, but I do not choose to publish the draft at this time for the following reasons:

The draft does not use inline citations, which help readers understand which references verify which facts of the article.
The subject does not, in my opinion, meet the criteria for inclusion at Wikipedia. The sources you've listed are not evidence of significant coverage of Freund; rather, they are images of his jewelry store, of some products from his store that are currently for sale as antiques, and a database listing of him as one of the sadly too many victims of the Holocaust. (The fact that the entry is translated from cs.wiki is not significant. Each Wikipedia community maintains their own standards for what is and is not included; clearly the cs.wiki community has not (yet) decided that this article should be removed.)

Should you wish to improve the article and have it re-evaluated, I suggest you use the WP:AFC process so that your request for review will receive a wider audience. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 14:29, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

talk

Hello! I would like to write that this person is part of our family history and I am doing everything possible so that my grandfather was on Wikipedia. Yes, we, as a continuation of our family history, are trying to resume his business. But, first of all, naturally, it is about the person himself. In my opinion, every talented person who died during the Holocaust has a place to be on Wikipedia. This is a kind of encyclopedia in which worthy people deserve to be alive or dead. Please add this article just because other people can edit it and add new links.

Thank you! Earth0001 (talk)

@Earth0001: I applaud your dedication to your family history, but Wikipedia has rather strict rules about who or what gets included, and I'm afraid that your opinion about the inclusion of your grandfather's biography does not agree with those rules. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 22:43, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

talk

Sorry, but I had to search the magazine of the 1930s in the Czech archive, where there is a huge article about Hugo Freund. The same article was added to the article (https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugo_Freund_%26_Co). In my opinion, this is a serious confirmation of its significance and existence in general. What else do you need for add this article? Thank you in advance. Earth0001 (talk)

@Earth0001: I don't see the reference to the article you're talking about at either the en.wiki draft or the cs.wiki article. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 11:31, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You do not see my link? This magazine is in the article about his company “Hugo Freund & Co” (https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugo_Freund_%26_Co) on the Czech Wikipedia. Vintage black and white magazine in 1933. If you do not see it, I can send on email.Earth0001 (talk)

@Earth0001: No, I don't see a link to any magazine article on cs:Hugo Freund & Co. I see:

A link to a slideshare page with pictures of Freund's shop (but no magazine article)
A link to the Holocaust database listing for Freund
A link to a collectors' website listing a lipstick holder sold by Freund
A link to what appears to be a website that sells collectible paper artifacts, which in this case, happens to be a stock certificate from Freund's company

Did I miss something? WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 00:22, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I found these links on the Internet, the rest I found in the archives of the Czech State Library. The pages of the article are much larger (about 10 pages), I uploaded only a couple of photos. Naturally, I can provide you with a link to the whole article. I can add a photo directly to the article, if it helps me. What do you think?

Thank you WikiDan61 for your kind words and advices. I'll take them seriously. Thank you for communication. Earth0001 (talk)

@Earth0001: It took me a while to figure out that this link is actually a series of photographs of pages from the Czech magazine Časoměr. I don't speak or read Czech, so I can't be sure, but this appears to be an advertising supplement so I'm not sure it's a great source. In either case, rather than referencing the source as a slideshare page, I've recreated the reference as a magazine citation, with a link to the slideshare site as an archive. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 11:58, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@WikiDan61: Yes, this magazine is in Czech. If you want I will try to translate it. If I understand correctly, it is better to load all pages, for example, on a dropbox and add to the article as a source? would it help me?Earth0001 (talk)

@Earth0001: No, that would not be a good idea. Publishing material online that you don't own the copyright to is problematic. A citation that provides the name of the magazine and its publication date is sufficient: the magazine is likely archived somewhere that someone could access to verify, and that's sufficient. If you could please translate the magazine's date of publication, and update the citation template (replace "year = 1933" with "date = ...") to provide more accurate information about the publication, that would be terribly helpful. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 22:10, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@WikiDan61: Please, look at my article, I corrected the title of the link to the magazine and added two new categories. Earth0001 (talk)

@WikiDan61: Hello! I followed your instructions all the time. Tell me please, is this enough? Will you add an article? Thank you. Earth0001 (talk)

@Earth0001: I'm still not convinced of Freund's notability. A single article about his company is not even sufficient to establish the notability of his company, let alone of the man himself. I suggest you follow the directions at WP:AFC to submit the article for actual review through the AFC process: another editor may reach a different conclusion. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 12:51, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@WikiDan61: Please look now at my article. Did I specify the code for an open discussion correctly? Did you mean it? Thank you in advance. Earth0001 (talk)

@Earth0001: No. You need to add the "submit" template to the page. At the top of the page, type:

{{subst:submit}}

That will submit the draft for review. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 19:08, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@WikiDan61: Thank you! Tell me please, is it possible to somehow speed up the review process?Earth0001 (talk)

@Earth0001: Not that I'm aware of. Is there some particular rush? WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 21:39, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@WikiDan61: Yes there is. Earth0001 (talk)

@Earth0001: Care to explain? WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 11:46, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@WikiDan61: If it possible. Thank you. Earth0001 (talk)

Regarding editing of page Record Producers

My removal of information on that page was not a blanket deletion. There is blatantly misleading and false information in that section. The second paragraph begins by saying "They also discovered only 2 percent of music producers are women" which is false, inaccurate, and misleading. The study clearly states that the subset used were producers who had songs on the top 300 charts in america between 2007 and 2017. the data is not there to make such a blanket statement. Furthermore no other section mentions winning awards or chart placements, as it is not relevant to the topic of Record Producers. I don't believe this section should be entirely deleted but in it's current state, it does need to be heavily revised in order to be factual and neutral. MontclairReality (talk) 14:21, 3 June 2019 (UTC) comment added by MontclairReality (talk • contribs) 14:16, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@MontclairReality: Your edit was bold, but perhaps too bold. It's the kind of thing that should be discussed first. Now that you have opened a discussion, I have no problem with the edit as those who watch the page closely will weigh in on your arguments. (I no nothing of the topic, so I will not weigh in on the merits of the arguments.) WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 16:52, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dont kid urself pal u love d the edits realistically — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sherwoodoj (talk • contribs) 10:37, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Argh

Sorry for the mixup at Chemtrails; I don't know how I applied the wrong revert. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 17:28, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

GOCE June newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors June 2019 Newsletter

Hello and welcome to the June newsletter, a brief update of Guild activities since March 2019. You can unsubscribe from our mailings at any time; see below.

Election time: Nomination of candidates in our mid-year Election of Coordinators opened on 1 June, and voting will take place from 16 June. Coordinators normally serve a six-month term and are elected on an approval basis. Self-nominations are welcome. If you've thought of helping out at the Guild, or know of another editor who would make a good coordinator, please consider standing for election or nominating them here.

June Blitz: Our June blitz will soon be upon us; it will begin at 00:01 on 16 June (UTC) and will close at 23:59 on 22 June (UTC). The themes are "nature and the environment" and all requests.

March Drive: Thanks to everyone for their work in March's Backlog Elimination Drive. We removed copyedit tags from 182 of the articles tagged in our original target months October and November 2018, and the month finished with 64 target articles remaining from November and 811 in the backlog. GOCE copyeditors also completed 22 requests for copyedit in March; the month ended with 34 requests pending. Of the 32 people who signed up for this drive, 24 copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.

April Blitz: Thanks to everyone who participated in the April Blitz; the blitz ran from 14 to 20 April (UTC) inclusive and the themes were Sports and Entertainment. Of the 15 people who signed up, 13 copyedited at least one article. Participants claimed 60 copyedits. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.

Progress report: As of 04:36, 3 June 2019 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have completed 267 requests since 1 January. The backlog of tagged articles stands at 605 articles.

May Drive: During the May Backlog Elimination Drive, Guild copy-editors removed copyedit tags from 191 of the 192 articles tagged in our original target months of November and December 2018, and January 2019 was added on 22 May. We finished the month with 81 target articles remaining and a record low of 598 articles in the backlog. GOCE copyeditors also completed 24 requests for copyedit during the May drive, and the month ended with 35 requests pending. Of the 26 people who signed up for this drive, 21 copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Miniapolis, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95, Reidgreg and Tdslk.

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:30, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Can you let me know why you rejected Continuous Innovation Framework

Hi Dan,

Apparently, you rejected the page I suggested on the COntinuous Innovation Framework. Could you let me know what was wrong or missing, so that I can fix the propose a better version?

BR.

Arent — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arentvantspijker (talk • contribs) 20:00, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Arentvanspijker: I'm sorry my comments on the draft itself were not sufficiently clear. Let me attempt to clarify. In order to be considered for inclusion at Wikipedia, a topic (the Continuous Innovation Framework, in this case) must have been covered in some significant fashion by some media outlet that is independent of the topic. In this case, that would mean that a newspaper, magazine, scholarly journal or major website (one with a record of editorial oversight) has published a full article (not just a blurb or announcement) on the topic, not written by anyone involved with the topic. The references you provided in your draft link to articles about the concepts on which CoIn is based, but not to any articles that discuss CoIn at all. If you can show that this concept has been covered significantly, the draft can be re-reviewed. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 20:52, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Review newsletter July-August 2019

Hello WikiDan61,

WMF at work on NPP Improvements

More new features are being added to the feed, including the important red alert for previously deleted pages. This will only work if it is selected in your filters. Best is to 'select all'. Do take a moment to check out all the new features if you have not already done so. If anything is not working as it should, please let us know at NPR. There is now also a live queue of AfC submissions in the New Pages Feed. Feel free to review AfCs, but bear in mind that NPP is an official process and policy and is more important.

QUALITY of REVIEWING

Articles are still not always being checked thoroughly enough. If you are not sure what to do, leave the article for a more experienced reviewer. Please be on the alert for any incongruities in patrolling and help your colleagues where possible; report patrollers and autopatrolled article creators who are ostensibly undeclared paid editors. The displayed ORES alerts offer a greater 'at-a-glance' overview, but the new challenges in detecting unwanted new content and sub-standard reviewing do not necessarily make patrolling any easier, nevertheless the work may have a renewed interest factor of a different kind. A vibrant community of reviewers is always ready to help at NPR.

Backlog

The backlog is still far too high at between 7,000 and 8,000. Of around 700 user rights holders, 80% of the reviewing is being done by just TWO users. In the light of more and more subtle advertising and undeclared paid editing, New Page Reviewing is becoming more critical than ever.

Move to draft

NPR is triage, it is not a clean up clinic. This move feature is not limited to bios so you may have to slightly re-edit the text in the template before you save the move. Anything that is not fit for mainspace but which might have some promise can be draftified - particularly very poor English and machine and other low quality translations.

Notifying users

Remember to use the message feature if you are just tagging an article for maintenance rather than deletion. Otherwise articles are likely to remain perma-tagged. Many creators are SPA and have no intention of returning to Wikipedia. Use the feature too for leaving a friendly note note for the author of a first article you found well made or interesting. Many have told us they find such comments particularly welcoming and encouraging.

PERM

Admins are now taking advantage of the new time-limited user rights feature. If you have recently been accorded NPR, do check your user rights to see if this affects you. Depending on your user account preferences, you may receive automated notifications of your rights changes. Requests for permissions are not mini-RfAs. Helpful comments are welcome if absolutely necessary, but the bot does a lot of the work and the final decision is reserved for admins who do thorough research anyway.

Other news

School and academic holidays will begin soon in various places around the Western world. Be on the lookout for the usual increase in hoax, attack, and other junk pages.

Our next newsletter might be announcing details of a possible election for co-ordinators of NPR. If you think you have what it takes to micro manage NPR, take a look at New Page Review Coordinators - it's a job that requires a lot of time and dedication.

Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.
Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:38, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Rewritten - will this be approved?

PFA92 (talk) 08:57, 7 August 2019 (UTC) [reply]

Proposed copy for Advance A/S article

Advance is a Copenhagen-based advertising and marketing agency. It is currently one of the largest independent agencies in Denmark, employing over 60 people. The agency is known for its work with LEGO, Coloplast, Piz Buin and Ipren.

History

The agency was founded in Copenhagen in 1976 as a result of the Ted Bates network winning Playmobil as a new client. LEGO was a pre-existing client and having Playmobil as a new client meant there was a conflict of interest. The solution was to create a new agency. This resulted in the development of Advance, the new spin-off agency, who would continue working with LEGO.

Clients

LEGO

LEGO is Advance’s oldest client with a partnership totalling more than 40 years.

Advance’s defining moment with LEGO came with LEGO Bionicle – a subsidiary of the LEGO Technic series and, according to LEGO CEO (1979-2004), Kjeld Kirk Kristiansen, “… a huge contributing factor in reviving LEGO at a critical time”. Unlike previous LEGO themes, LEGO Bionicle utilized an original story universe disseminated across various media channels to prove a context for the toy. Set in an alternative fantasy universe it followed the good versus evil saga of the Toa – a tribe of heroic cyborgs. Launched in Europe and Australasia in 2000 and then the Americas in 2001, it became a bestseller for LEGO over its 10-year lifespan. Production was discontinued in 2010 before a 2-year revival in 2015.

The success of Bionicle led to Advance having input on other collaborative projects such as Hero Force and Eco Force, as well as creating campaigns and storytelling for the LEGO Friends, LEGO Disney and LEGO DC Super Hero Girls lines.

Adapting to change – Advance webpage

Coloplast

Coloplast is a Danish global company that focuses on creating medical devices and services related to ostomy, urology, continence and wound-care and is known for its innovative, state-of-the-art products. Since 2009, Advance has acted as Coloplast’s Global Lead agency for Continence and Ostomy Care.

As well as creating numerous materials and campaigns for Coloplast’s products, Advance worked with the brand to develop the interactive app, WheelMate, which allows users to find and asses wheelchair-friendly toilets and parking spaces so that others can locate and use these toilets when necessary.

There are now 100,000 WheelMate users around the world.

Piz Buin

Johnson & Johnson brand, Piz Buin, is a premium European sun care brand and has been client of Advance since 2009. In 2015, Advance created the “Where have you been?” brand platform which continues to drive growth in key markets. In 2016, Piz Buin achieved their highest market share goals to date.

IF

If is a property and insurance company with more than 3.6 million customers in the Nordics and Baltics. Since becoming a client in 2017, Advance have helped to create IF’s new strategic communication platform for the Danish market.

Ipren

Ipren is a brand of Ibuprofen in Sweden and a client of Advance since 2013. During Advance’s tenure, Ipren went from the #3 to the #1 painkiller brand in Sweden.

Widex

Widex is a Danish company, and sixth largest hearing aid manufacturer in the world. Advance have helped them develop several successful campaigns and product launches.

CHR Hansen

CHR Hansen is a global bioscience company that develops natural solutions for the food, nutritional, pharmaceutical and agricultural industries. Since being a client of Advance, the agency has helped them communicate their technical knowledge to multiple audiences, playing a key role in creating campaign concepts and communication strategies.

DOT

DOT is the public transport organisation which operates across Sjælland/ Zealand. Advance helped them to communicate the benefits of public transport across all media. In 2016, Advance helped them develop a new app, ‘Pendlertjek’. This app allowed commuters to check their journey time, the best mode of transport, costs per month, effects on transport and even how many calories can be burned depending on the transport chosen.

Nilfisk

Nilfisk is a company which specialises in professional cleaning equipment for industrial, commercial and consumer markets. They are headquartered in Denmark. As a client of Advance, the agency produces a full spectrum of global communications services, from B2B to B2C.

Takeda

Takeda is a global healthcare agency and one of the top 20 pharmaceutical companies in the world. As their agency, Advance help them to build their OTC portfolio as well as promote their individual’s product brands across many digital platforms in Norway and Denmark.

o.b.

Owned by Johnson & Johnson, o.b. specialise in feminine hygiene products around the world. Advance created the “Be comfortable in your own panties”, campaign through video, print and digital assets in the Nordic regions.

Coop

Coop is a Danish retail company and one of Denmark’s most successful online retailers. Since becoming a client of Advance in 2014, the agency has helped to promote their beauty offerings through visual identities and campaigns implemented on the company’s own platforms.

Awards

Advertising Effectiveness Award in Denmark & USA
Selected Partners
Responsive
Ghost VFX
IUM
Worldwide Partners
SEO.dk
Novasa
The NetworkOne
UserNeeds
Sir Lancelot
Geelmuyden Kiese
Verdens Bedste Kollega
Spring/Summer

@PFA92: This copy still reads largely as an advertisement for the Advance agency. It lacks any sources, and the company's claim of notability appears to be that it works with notable companies, but notability is not inherited. You'll need to tone down the promotional language, and provide independent sources to verify the article's claims and the company's notability. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 16:56, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request for clarification

Dear WikiDan61, Greetings for the day, Could you please let me know why my "Anant Chaturdashi link was removed" if any thing wrong in article please tell me i will correct for future articles.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by D CHANDRA MOHAN RAO (talk • contribs) 14:45, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Per Wikipedia's external links policy, only links to reliable third party sites that can provide information beyond that which is contained in the article should be included. The site you're linking too appears to be a personal blog site whose purpose is to advertise various Indian travel services, and therefore does not qualify as a reliable third party site. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 14:48, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Peterborough Ontario Mayor - Refusal to enforce bylaws

The mayor has stated publicly she refuses to enforce the by-laws. This is proven through her direct statements. https://www.thepeterboroughexaminer.com/news-story/9548432-despite-new-bylaw-peterborough-not-evicting-homeless-campers-mayor-says/ "Just know that even though there's a bylaw, it's not actively going to be enforced."

The statement that she refuses to enforce bylaws is accurate.

Can you help me understand what wasn't correct? Trevormerritt (talk) 20:14, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Trevormerritt: The version you have most recently added (On August 13, 2019, Peterborough City Council unanimously passed a by-law to eliminate camping in City Parks. Mayor Therrien has stated publicly she will not allow the police to enforce the bylaws as written.) is neutral. The prior version:

Ms. Therrien dragged around the argument 'The Parkway is an antiquated idea, and should not be built.' as one of her arguments. With the progression of the parkway and growth of business, she regrouped and has used her current position to continue her vindictive hatred toward progress. There has been a motion to waste $300,000 on a pair of houses that are in the path of the parkway. Ms. Therrien has also refused to allow police to enforce local by-laws. Victoria Park, located in the downtown core, has been overrun with a horde of drug addicted vandals and the park has become unsafe for the general public. Multiple stabbings have occured in and around the park]. Local business people have been robbed and assaulted.

was entirely non-neutral, specifically in the italicized sections. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 20:47, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Most of those statements are accurate and can be backed by citations. I will do better going forward.

Thank you for the input. I'll keep getting better. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trevormerritt (talk • contribs) 23:35, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Trevormerrit: Accuracy and neutrality are not mutually exclusive. While it may be true that Therrien made the argument that "the parkway is an antiquated idea", your choice of the language that she "dragged around" the argument makes the statement non-neutral. Similarly, while it may be factually true that she proposed spending $300,000 on renovations of two houses, your representation of that expenditure as a waste of money is non-neutral. Please do take care to avoid such injections of personal opinion into articles in the future. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 12:08, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Honey.

Seems that facts aren't quite what you're looking for. The stabbings in the park is associated, with the park. The stabbings of people from the encampment on the streets surrounding them, are from the park. You are not aware of the situation and your continued reverts show a bias against that which is documented, cited, and available for review by all.

Please show me what is inaccurate. I've cited all but 1 statment as I am unsure how to state that one hasn't done something and prove it. She hasn't made a statement on record, and the petiution is available. Given that its in the cited article, one can conclue its public and accessible to all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trevormerritt (talk • contribs) 12:35, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Much the way I can't cite that Canada has never invaded Pakistan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trevormerritt (talk • contribs) 12:38, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Trevormerritt: You added to the article In the weeks prior to the August 13th council meeting, a number of violent crimes were comitted by those camping in the park. You then proceed to list a number of crimes:attempted murder:

There was an attempted murder cited to this source which confirms there was a stabbing, but not that the suspect was someone camping in the park.
there was a local business person beaten and robbed cited to this source which explicitly states "It’s unclear if the suspects were staying at the park."
multiple stabbings cited to this source which makes no mention of the park or its homeless occupants; and this source which explicitly states "there was no immediate word on whether the stabbings were related to the tent cities."
the drug trade cited to this source which (you might be surprised) makes no mention of anyone from the tent city being involved in the drug trade.
and intimidation cited to this source which deals with the fear that the homeless experience living in these conditions, but not to intimidation (and specifically, not to intimidation by the park residents of other city residents).

The point is that you're citing a lot of crime in the neighbourhood and blaming it on the homeless in the park, whereas none of the sources do so. And by including all this material in the article on Diane Therrien, you are implicitly blaming her, even though none of the sources have done so. Your tone in replying to me indicates that you are more interested in airing your grievances than in having a meaningful discussion about the merits of your edits. If you continue to edit in this manner, I will be forced to take this matter to the Biographies of Living Persons Noticeboard where administrators will evaluate your edits and take appropriate actions. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 13:44, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your input.

@Trevormerritt: I'm going to respond to your points one by one below.

I am concerned for the safety of those being stabbed, robbed, and intimidated in and around the park. I apprecieate you are not at risk of being stabbed while you walk to work, but that is the reality that was not the case prior to the 'tent city' being established.

You need to rely on reliable sources that indicate that the presence of the tent city is the direct cause of problems experienced around the park. Your personal experience is not a reliable source.
You need to provide a reliable source that pins the blame for these problems on Ms Therrien. Your own personal opinion on the matter is not relevant.

I will happily document the history of the events on a page that links to Ms. T's page as her clear refusal to enforce bylaws, she has taken responsibility for it.

No, she has not taken responsibility for it (unless you can provide a reliably sourced quote wherein she takes responsibility for these events). You are pinning the responsibility on her because of your personal gripe in the matter.

You have also removed a number of items that are very clearly stated.

Here is a review with the specific statements from the cited articles.

Misinformation was spread claiming no availability of shelter beds[5]. - There has been empty beds the whole time. The table that was there and the items below show the number of available beds.

That table was unsourced.
Again, attempts to blame the mayor for this problem are your own interpretation of the facts; not an interpretation that has been found in any reliable source.

In the weeks prior to the August 13th council meeting, a number of violent crimes were comitted by those camping in the park. There was an attempted murder[6], - Micah Drynan, 27, of age of no fixed address <-- This stabbing was < 50M from the park, the stabber was staying in the park.

The sources do not say that the suspect was staying in the park. That is your inference.

there was a local business person beaten and robbed[7] - Noah Eggleston, 22, of no fixed address, has been arrested and charged with robbery <-- Again, resident of Tent City.

Not in the source cited. (Not all people who are homeless are staying in the tent city, presumably.)

- Jacob Collins, 32, of no fixed address, is charged with robbery. <--- Another tent city resident.

Not in the source cited.

multiple stabbings[8][9] The building at 610 George St. North is a known drug house. This may not be 100% tent city related, but shows the increased crime in the downtown core. The next citation has very little question. Perhaps more context relating to this article would be appropriate.

Known by whom? Is this documented in a reliable source?
How is this related to the tent city?
How is this related to Ms Therrien?

- Known drug city --> https://globalnews.ca/news/4027532/peterborough-police-seize-drugs-loaded-handgun-in-bust/

Not sure what your point is here. The link says that drugs and guns were seized at a location, and that the city has a drug problem. How is this related to anything in this discussion?

multiple stabbings[8][9] "Police say the stabbing injuries are related and may have happened at or near Victoria Park." "Yellow police tape was placed around the entranceway of the St. John Centre retirement home and along the sidewalk along Water Street leading up to the entranceway. There was also police tape up around the fountain in Victoria Park for the investigation.

Again, no statement in the sources ascribing these crimes to residents of the tent city.

A forensic investigation unit van was at the scene and officers searched the area with flashlights." "But there was no immediate word on whether the stabbings were related to the tent cities." - to summarize, the police say it may have happened where they had a forensic investigation using flashlights to collect evidence, while keeping those arrested in custody.

To summarize, a crime happened, but there is as yet no evidence to ascribe the crime to a resident of the tent city.

the drug trade[10] "The Peterborough Police Service says an officer on foot patrol observed alleged drug activity taking place in the park on Water Street shortly after 4 p.m." - The officer observed a drug transaction and arrested the person with cocaine. Sounds like drug activity.

Yep, that's drug activity. Nothing in the source to relate it to the tent city or to Ms Therrien.

- and intimidation[11]

"Donald Eric Robinson, 35, of no fixed address, was charged with causing a disturbance and resisting a peace officer. He was released and will appear in court Aug. 1."

No mention of the tent city. No ascription to Ms Therrien.

- Those in the park agree it is a dangerous place.[12]

"An unemployed and homeless personal support worker who's been living in a tent at Victoria Park since late June says she and her fiancé take turns sleeping at night for fear of being robbed." "She says one man with a mental health condition howls all night. Cars drive by and people pelt objects at the campers and yell at them to get jobs. Campers fight one another."

With these statements, one can conclude that the tenter is in fear and takes turns sleeping as there are dangerous conditions.

Yep, homeless people live in fear (whether in tent cities or in shelters). That's a universal problem. That doesn't make them all criminals. And your inclusion in the Therrien article implies that she is to blame, but there is not a single reliable source to back that assertion.

- To respond to the new grouping of homeless, City Council voted unanimously to open 30 additional beds on an emergency basis[13]

30 new beds opened. It was a good move for those in need.

- even though beds were still available[14].

4 beds were available before the 30 additional beds opened.

- One complaint in the shelters are drugs, violence, and sexual assault[15].

"Keith says he has stayed at the Warming Room and Brock shelters, but feels more comfortable in a tent once the weather warms. He says there are a lot of problems at the shelters, including drugs, fights and people stealing.

“I was in the Warming Room one time and somebody actually came and peed in my bed,” he explains." - Being urinated on is sexual assualt.

- One encampment is located at St. John's Anglican Church[16].

"St. John's congregation has been accepting of the campers, Smith said.

"I think most of the congregation understand that we have a front lawn and there are people who need a place to stay." "

- Neighbours of the St. John's Anglican Church site feel unsafe living next the encampment[17]

"Tenants at the apartment say it's been "hell" living next to the church for the last few weeks." ""We don't feel safe in this building," one woman said." ""I'm petrified now," Sanders said."

- Over 1700 members of the local community have signed a petition[18]

1701 had signed as of the time I looked.

- Therrien has not yet responded to the petition^{[citation needed]}

I am unsure how to cite something that hasn't happened. Much like Canada has never invaded Pakistan, I can't reference something that doesn't exist.

You cite a lack of action by citing a newspaper article that notes that she has yet to respond. Your own statement that she has yet to respond could indicate merely that you missed her response.

- On August 9, 2019, the church put up a sign indicating they did not want any additional campers[19]

I should have linked to the original Twitter post. https://twitter.com/patchcollecter/status/1159532595740385282

The table shows the numbers as reported by the city.

A link to a source for the table would be useful, if we are to include it.
It's actually irrelevant, because none of this material is germaine to the article about Ms Therrien, because no reliable source has stepped up to blame her for this problem.

I see some areas to adjust, I'm just curious how so many of them, with specific quotes from the articles, ruffles your feathers so much? Trevormerritt (talk) 00:12, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

So, with all the responses above, I'll summarize: you appear to be attempting to synthesize facts based on your own interpretation of the available sources so that you can use this information to air your grievances against Ms Therrien for not taking the actions you want her to take about this problem in your city. I get that. I will state again: Wikipedia is not the place to do this. I cannot emphasize that point strongly enough. At this point, I have given you all the warnings I can, and I will not engage with you further on my talk page. If you wish to open a discussion of the matter at Talk:Diane Therrien, please feel free to do so. If you attempt to replace this material in the article, I will have to take the matter to the appropriate noticeboard to allow Wikipedia administrators to evaluate the situation. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 13:35, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(@WikiDan61:)

Teachr

please checkout the article draft for Teachr. Ive included a couple TV credits and also collaborations with other street artists who have wikipedia pages such as WRDSMTH, who he taught the stencil technique to. to respond to your point of not enough evidence for reason oftransition from fine art to street art; ive included his fine art work and an interview where he states he transitioned due to cuts in the education budget. I also gave a few new articles to back it which also say the same. thank you

please help my username is JamzOG — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamzog (talk • contribs) 17:08, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(@WikiDan61:)

Dan can you please take a look at the article for re-review? ive added up to 12 sources for this amazing artist including TV credits. Thanks

Professional Music Technology review

Hi there, just letting you know I made the appropriate changes to my article. i hope that helps and you're happy with them! Thanks! Chewyisahero (talk) 14:02, 22 August 2019 (UTC)chewyisahero[reply]

@Chewyisahero: I've cleaned up your draft a bit (removed the trivia section -- we try to avoid those at Wikipedia). I'm still concerned about sourcing. Many of the links are either local coverage (PMT is coming to ...) or self-published (the company's own website and YouTube channel). That said, there are some good sources in the article, and the company's notability appears OK. I would definitely lose the list of awards: the MIA does not appear to be a notable organisation, and these kind of industry self-congratulatory awards are almost always considered fluff. I'm comparing your draft to the article about Sam Ash Music, a US music retailer of approximately equal significance. Based on the presence of this article, I believe your draft should qualify for publication when these matters are addressed. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 14:51, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, thanks so much for the insight. I've made the changes you suggested and removed the awards section. I apprecviate your help on this article. Please let me know if this is ok now. Chewyisahero (talk) 08:56, 23 August 2019 (UTC)chewyisahero[reply]

Re: Adonai Ha`Aretz Bnei Baruch Amity

Dear Editor,

I am sending this message due to uncertainty if my changes / corrections has succesfully transmitted to your editorial attention.

1) The term Amity is deriving from The most importanct Doctrine of the teaching of Rabbi Michael Laitman regarding (SPIRITUAL) LOVE & CONNECTION of Creatures as way of spiritual correction towards The Creator, hence the word AMITY meaning love/ Fraternity / fellowship.

Reference: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bnei_Baruch

2) Reference for notability of Adonai Ha`Aretz Bnei Baruch Amity:

- with 219 members and still increasing with time: https://www.facebook.com/groups/2186646508042618/about/ - Inauguration news: https://www.facebook.com/2102773899743179/photos/a.2123995567621012/2123995207621048/?type=3&theater

Thanks for understanding that I gave this extra message. I am new in the use of Wikipedia. I will be better with this in time. Thank you for the kindness.

All the best to Wikipedia, Celina Syuy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Celina Syuy (talk • contribs) 01:33, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Celina Syuy: You still haven't yet demonstrated that this is a notable organization. A group of 219 students of one particular branch of kabbalah is not likely to meet the criteria for inclusion. If you want to convince the community otherwise, you're going to have to provide evidence of significant independent coverage of the organization. That means a newspaper or journal article or article published on a major, fact-checked website about your organization not written by a member of your organization. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 02:04, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi dear Editor,

Thank you for the comment regarding the notability of Adonai Ha´aretz Bnei Baruch Amity. I´ll soon submit another source for this matter. However, as to the number of members, how many members should it be as criteria to enter Adonai Ha´Aretz as notable group? I don´t see it mentioned in the rules and criteria for notable group. Thank you for your kindness to answer. all the best, Celina Celina Syuy (talk) 12:16, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Celina Syuy: There is no guideline as to the number of members. There is a guideline as to the requirement for significant independent coverage. I point out the size of the group in relation to the likelihood of finding such significant coverage, which I believe is low. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 12:18, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Editor,

Thank you for the answer. I thought a lot over your comments and I think you were right about questioning the neccesity of this material of ADonai Ha`Aretz BB Amity as " ... significant independent coverage", when, in actual, it is a "branch" of Bnei Baruch, and also in fact, it is the motive of this editing for The Amity, that it should be noted in the right place in the map of Bnei Baruch. With this, I´d say I´ll be deleting this ( independent ) application and do the editing in the page of Bnei Baruch. Thank you for your good advice and guidance. All the best to Wikipedia, Celina Celina Syuy (talk) 22:30, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Editor,

Sorry, but it didn´t go well just adding information on the page of Bnei Baruch, it is deleted all the time without any explanation. So I´m back and continue working on this thread here afterall. So I´ll be back here with some more editing for this material soon. Thanks. Celina Syuy (talk) 01:54, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again dear Editor, I just want to ask, I went back and checked the page of Bnei Baruch. The page was now totally edited in such a negative uncontructive way, as if premeditatedly and viciously done with the purpose of destroying the name of Bnei Baruch and Rabbi Laitman, and they keep on deleting my additional positive information. Does Wikipedia allow such vicious editing? So sad .... Celina Syuy (talk) 02:06, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Celina Syuy: Wikipedia relies on reliable sources, especially when biographies of living persons are involved. The information about Laitman is completely unsourced. If you can find reliable sources about him, please feel free to add them. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 02:08, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Editor, yes, it´s exactly what I´m reporting to you. Please Check the page of Bnei Baruch, it´s unreliable information in there, just full of intrigue, and every time I edit it correctly, somebody deletes it wihtout any message why, and edit it with more false info. Seems like somebody is messing with it with malicious vicious purpose. I just hope Wikipedia should check who are those people or that person doing that. Anyway, Thank you. Celina Syuy (talk) 04:55, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Celina Syuy: In this version of the Bnei Baruch article, there is a vast amount of "Background" material regarding Michael Laitman, none of which is supported by any citations. Unsourced material may be removed at any time; it is then the responsibility of the editor who wishes to restore that information to provide reliable sources for that information. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 11:53, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

On reliable sources of Theory A

Hi Dan, thank you for reviewing my article. On the point of your rejection of my Theory A due to the lack of reliable evidence, I would like to offer my understanding that the currently proposed Theory A is a stub article. However, it is based on my more developed and evidenced Hyva Hypothesis proposal, which cites several different Universities' studies of various archaeological and cultural episodes of prehistoric Eurasia.

I request that I be able to develop the article on Theory A over time, as it is a much larger amount of research than the Hyperthesis that will need to be conducted to explain the origins of all Earth's present-day humans.

Thank you for your consideration,

Hya — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hyasky (talk • contribs) 14:14, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Hyasky: Even as a stub, in order to be acceptable for publication at Wikipedia, the article would need to be based on reliable sources. From what you've told me here, I presume that "Theory A" is a hypothesis of your own formulation, based on your own research. This is not suitable material to publish at Wikipedia. If you wish to try to publish your research in a legitimate journal that supports peer-reviewed original research, you should do so, and if the hypothesis stands up to the peer-review process, then we can include it here at Wikipedia, but not until then. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 14:39, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Are you asking me to extrapolate on the texts of my reliable sources via footnotes, or to remove my linguistic and cultural conjecture from my hypotheses in order to have them not be considered original research? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hyasky (talk • contribs) 15:09, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Hyasky: I'm asking you to provide reliable sources that talk specifically about "Theory A" or "Hyva Hypothesis". (I have been unable to find any relevant mention using Google.) The fact that these appear to be hypotheses that you yourself have created, and are attempting to use Wikipedia to disseminate, is problematic. If you believe you have done cogent research that should be disseminated, find a reputable journal to publish you work. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 17:11, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

teachr artist

(@WikiDan61:) hi dan, can you please give us a response on if we need more sources or what else is needed for approval? thank you

Your draft article, User:WikiDan61/Gabriel of Sedona

Hello, WikiDan61. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Gabriel of Sedona".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:03, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Help With Bera's Wikipedia Page

Hello WikiDan61,

Thank you for your edit and insight, I had no idea I couldn't edit Bera's page. I was wondering if you could help. It would be really helpful if you read my edited article (which I can't find anymore, or I would paste it here) and publish it along with your edits if there are any. I can send you a press release that we use for official purposes and other sources I have for my information.

Thank you in advance, I hope to hear from you soon.

Mariam — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mariamnozadze (talk • contribs) 15:47, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Mariamnozadze: Press releases from the subject of a biography are not considered reliable sources. You would need to produce better sources to accompany any requests for changes you would like to see. The version of the article as you edited it is available by viewing the page's history (click the "History" link at the top of the page). However, I would not wish to restore that version because of its tone and lack of neutrality. Again, if there are specific factual changes you would like to see, make a request at Talk:Bera Ivanishvili (not here at my talk page). WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 17:39, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Review newsletter September-October 2019

Hello WikiDan61,

Backlog

Instead of reaching a magic 300 as it once did last year, the backlog approaching 6,000 is still far too high. An effort is also needed to ensure that older unsuitable older pages at the back of the queue do not get automatically indexed for Google.

Coordinator

A proposal is taking place here to confirm a nominated user as Coordinator of NPR.

This month's refresher course

Why I Hate Speedy Deleters, a 2008 essay by long since retired Ballonman, is still as valid today. Those of us who patrol large numbers of new pages can be forgiven for making the occasional mistake while others can learn from their 'beginner' errors. Worth reading.

Deletion tags

Do bear in mind that articles in the feed showing the trash can icon (you will need to have 'Nominated for deletion' enabled for this in your filters) may have been tagged by inexperienced or non NPR rights holders using Twinkle. They require your further verification.

Paid editing

Please be sure to look for the tell-tale signs of undisclosed paid editing. Contact the creator if appropriate, and submit the issue to WP:COIN if necessary. WMF policy requires paid editors to connect to their adverts.

Subject-specific notability guidelines' (SNG). Alternatives to deletion

Reviewers are requested to familiarise themselves once more with notability guidelines for organisations and companies.
Blank-and-Redirect is a solution anchored in policy. Please consider this alternative before PRODing or CSD. Note however, that users will often revert or usurp redirects to re-create deleted articles. Do regularly patrol the redirects in the feed.

Not English

A common issue: Pages not in English or poor, unattributed machine translations should not reside in main space even if they are stubs. Please ensure you are familiar with WP:NPPNE. Check in Google for the language and content, and if they do have potential, tag as required, then move to draft. Modify the text of the template as appropriate before sending it.

Tools

Regular reviewers will appreciate the most recent enhancements to the New Pages Feed and features in the Curation tool, and there are still more to come. Due to the wealth of information now displayed by ORES, reviewers are strongly encouraged to use the system now rather than Twinkle; it will also correctly populate the logs.

Stub sorting, by SD0001: A new script is available for adding/removing stub tags. See User:SD0001/StubSorter.js, It features a simple HotCat-style dynamic search field. Many of the reviewers who are using it are finding it an improvement upon other available tools.

Assessment: The script at User:Evad37/rater makes the addition of Wikiproject templates extremely easy. New page creators rarely do this. Reviewers are not obliged to make these edits but they only take a few seconds. They can use the Curation message system to let the creator know what they have done.

DannyS712 bot III is now patrolling certain categories of uncontroversial redirects. Curious? Check out its patrol log.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:15, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

sorry for mistake

i'm really sorry sir i am new in wikipedia post editing so i don't know about the link pasting by mistake i will paste more than one link but next time i remember that thanks sir regards "himesh dangi" — Preceding unsigned comment added by "himesh dangi" (talk • contribs) 17:44, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Catholic Encyclopedia is public domain

While New Advent claims a copyright for their transcription, the Catholic Encyclopedia, published in 1913, is completely in the public domain. There was no need to revdel the article Prophecy of Seventy Weeks, and I've redacted the warning issued to good-faith editor @Truthbeb0ld:. Thanks. Elizium23 (talk) 06:14, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Wilson (philosopher) page

Hi,

Thanks for reviewing my article. I do not understand why I have not shown that the subject merits an article. He is an academic and meets the fifth criterion for notability for academics listed here - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(academics) - namely, that he 'has held a named chair appointment or "Distinguished Professor" appointment at a major institution of higher education and research.' The website of his academic department at the University of Pittsburgh identifies him as a distinguished professor. Is the problem that the website of his academic department is not an appropriate source for confirming this fact? The 'Specific criteria notes' for the notability of academics at the guideline site for the notability of academics say that 'For documenting that a person has held such an appointment (but not for a judgement of whether or not the institution is a major one), publications of the appointing institution are considered a reliable source.'

I'm new to this, but I really don't see what I'm missing. Please explain.

Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by HegelianCow (talk • contribs) 15:03, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@HegelianCow: Point taken. I had missed the "distinguished professor" part of WP:ACADEMIC when reviewing. I believe the draft is too short and not supported by reliable sources independent of the subject, but that can also be addressed. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 15:56, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@WikiDan61: Okay, I've added a bit more information, including references to independent, published, reliable, secondary sources (namely: discussions of Wilson's work in peer-reviewed publications in his academic discipline). Hope that does it. Thanks.

September 2019 GOCE Newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors September 2019 Newsletter

Hello and welcome to the September newsletter, a brief update of Guild activities since June 2019.

June election: Reidgreg was chosen as lead coordinator, and is being assisted by Baffle gab1978, Miniapolis, Tdslk, and first-time coordinator Twofingered Typist. Jonesey95 took a respite after serving for six years. Thanks to everyone who participated!

June Blitz: From 16 to 22 June, we copy edited articles on the themes of nature and the environment along with requests. 12 participating editors completed 35 copy edits. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.

July Drive: The year's fourth backlog-elimination drive was a great success, clearing all articles tagged in January and February, and bringing the copy-editing backlog to a low of five months and a record low of 585 articles while also completing 48 requests. Of the 30 people who signed up, 29 copyedited at least one article, a participation level last matched in May 2015. Final results and awards are listed here.

August Blitz: From 18 to 24 August, we copy edited articles tagged in March 2019 and requests. 12 participating editors completed 26 copy edits on the blitz. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.

Progress report: As of 03:00, 23 September 2019 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors had processed 413 requests since 1 January. The backlog of tagged articles stood at 599 articles, close to our record month-end low of 585.

Requests page: We are experimenting with automated archiving of copy edit requests; a discussion on REQ Talk (permalinked) initiated by Bobbychan193 has resulted in Zhuyifei1999 writing a bot script for the Guild. Testing is now underway and is expected to be completed by 3 October; for this reason, no manual archiving of requests should be done until the testing period is over. We will then assess the bot's performance and discuss whether to make this arrangement permanent.

September Drive: Our current backlog-elimination drive is open until 23:59 on 30 September (UTC) and is open to all copy editors. Sign up today!

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators, Baffle gab1978, Miniapolis, Reidgreg, Tdslk and Twofingered Typist.

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:58, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request a new page Bilal Bin Saqib

Hi, I am trying to request a new page but the review tells that the sources are not reliable. Can you please guide me through? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hafffsahh (talk • contribs) 08:51, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Hafffsahh: The article has more sources now than it did when I reviewed it, but it still doesn't appear that Bin Saqib meets notability guidelines. He is an elected representative of his graduate school student body, which is not sufficient for notability on its own; and he is the founder of what appears to be a relatively small non-profit organization that has introduced an idea created elsewhere into Pakistan. Bin Saqib may well become something someday, but I do not believe he has yet achieved anything worthy of an encyclopedia article. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 11:50, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks! Bin Saqib was also awarded a highly commended Masters Student of the Year, 2019 in the UK. Would that be a notable factor to mention? --Hafffsahh (talk) 13:08, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Hafffsahh: Doubtful. My Google search shows me that many different institutions award such an honor; unless Bin Saqib's award was presented at the national level (i.e. best Masters Student of the entire UK), it is not likely to be notable. If presented at the national level, and covered by a national level news organization (rather than simply by the organization that presented the award), that might be considered notable. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 14:13, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @WikiDan61:! Thanks for the explanation. However, the award was covered by various media houses in Pakistan. Such as: 1. https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/519385-highly-commended-award-for-bright-pakistani-student, 2. https://nayadaur.tv/2019/08/pakistani-student-at-london-school-of-economics-honoured-for-contributions-to-university/, 3. https://www.geo.tv/latest/246198-pakistani-student-receives-highly-commended-award, 4. https://acenews.pk/lse-elects-pakistani-student-as-postgraduate-students-officer/. Also, he was the only Pakistani to be given this award this year. What do you suggest now?--Hafffsahh (talk) 10:55, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Hafffsahh: I'm still not convinced of the notability of this award, or of the notability that it confers to the winner, but feel free to resubmit the draft (with these new references added) and see if anyone else chooses to promote it to article space. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 12:08, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your message on nspbharathi wrt Devanga page

Hi, I think links and evidences are hand picked to project bad view on the on caste those only removed and mentioned in the edit summary clearly. You should honour effort. If your intention is that then will see. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nspbharathi (talk • contribs) 19:29, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Nspbharathi: Your edits have been reverted multiple times. If there is an issue to be addressed, please take it up on the article's talk page. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 21:48, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Pardis Technology Park

hello dear WikiDan61.

I received your comments and thank you for responding me. last version of our page, with name "Pardis Technology Park" in Wiki had been updated in 2013, After that year, we developed in a lot of fiels and domains... so i want to refresh statistics and new information in that but you sent me this message with this concept that "these information appeared to be promotional." So, what do i have to do now? i just want to introduce our Technology Park (active in Science & high technology fields) and update our activities in Wikipedia and i don't intend for advertising or promotion or any other activities like that. thank you for your attention. I'm eagerly waiting for your respond. best regards and have a great day ahead...

--Arshia 61 (talk) 11:32, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Arshia 61: Based on your use of first person pronouns ("our Technology Park"), I assume that you are affiliated with Pardis Technology Park. Because of this conflict of interest, you should probably avoid editing the article directly. Rather, you should make any requests for changes as the article's talk page and let uninvolved editors evaluate your requests. If you insist on editing the page directly, you must refrain from any kind of promotion (phrases such as "PTP enjoys more comparative and legal advantages and better potential to become a major center for economic, research and scientific activities", "PTP is considered as the most pioneering technology park in Iran", etc.) and you must restrict yourself to statements that can be verified by reliable sources. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 11:39, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft: Eyitayo Ogunmola - ReviewApex Zy (talk) 15:00, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi WikiDan61,

Pursuant to the article i put out on Wikipedia, of which you rejected it publication due to the community policies. I'd suggest you see another version of the article i put out after moderation and following community best practices on Wikipedia.

Here's the link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Eyitayo_Ogunmola

I look forward to your response.

Thank you!

Hyva

Hi @WikiDan61: I've upload a new version of Hyva, after you declined the first version. Can you tell me if is it ok?

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by LucaColombo1990 (talk • contribs) 15:54, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@LucaColombo1990: By my reading, it does not yet merit inclusion. The sources all read very much like press releases issued by the company rather than truly independent coverage. Other readers may disagree. As a draft, it's available for review by more than just me. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 16:20, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

List of lingerie brands

Hi WikiDan61

As Wikipedia is not a business directory not all the notable brands you have removed do have a Wikipedia articles, even though they are some of the biggest and well-know companies in the industry. The reference given provides links to all the brands so a comprehensive study of the brands for users can be learnt too. Or more simply, as you stated regarding the word 'Notable', if this word was removed the article would resolve the nitpick issue.

Best Regards Jdgaller — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdgaller (talk • contribs) 17:43, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Jgdaller: As you have stated, Wikipedia is not a business directory, and therefore should not strive to list every possible entry in the category (here, lingerie brands). In general, Wikipedia list articles restrict themselves to items that already have Wikipedia articles. This is not universally true, but for a list that has given a specific criterion of listing notable brands, this should be true. If you take issue with the list criterion, and want a list of all brands, that would be a major change to the list's focus and would require a discussion at the list's talk page to get consensus for such a change. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 17:59, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @WiliDan61 Thank you for getting back so quickly. The focus must be on correct and relevant information, to be able to list as you have stated 'list every possible entry in the category' would be near an impossible achievement. As for the reference is one of the world forefront knowledge base sources in the industry and those brands the source provides should be given as a list criterion. To remove a more in-depth information base criteria is a not-to-provide bases for the article and I would suggest removing the article in it entirety so not the be shown/given a marketing advantage to those brands listed. Best Regards Jdgaller

The reference you provided ([1]) is a single retailer of lingerie. To define their inventory as the definitive list of "notable" lingerie brands would be ludicrous. The existing guidance on list criterion (WP:Write the article first) should be followed to prevent the list from becoming indiscriminate. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 18:51, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Fiifi Kwetey

Thanks for the quick work. Just so you're aware, this article is hit with a lot of socks which should be reported to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/JamesKofi1959. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 20:49, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

RD1 request

It looks to me that the material you removed in this edit:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Capitol_View_Neighborhood_Library&type=revision&diff=924036959&oldid=924036419

Came from the source: https://mayor.dc.gov/release/mayor-bowser-celebrates-modernization-capitol-view-library-ward-7

Which seems to have terms and conditions: https://dc.gov/node/900572

Specifically: Copyright Pursuant to federal law, federal government-produced materials appearing on this site or elsewhere are not copyright protected. The United States Government may receive and hold copyrights transferred to it by assignment, bequest, or otherwise. This does not apply to District or state produced material.

Creative Commons License

Except for third party content that is copyright protected or for content otherwise noted, content on this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License. Visitors to this site agree to grant a non-exclusive, irrevocable, royalty-free license to the rest of the world for their submissions to DC.gov under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

Do you think I missed something? If not, either you or I can revert that removal. If you think I missed something, please let me know.--S Philbrick (Talk) 21:54, 1 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted, let me know what you think. S Philbrick (Talk) 12:44, 2 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Good catch. I hadn't noticed the "copyright free" nature of the source. I still don't think it's great copy for Wikipedia; I may review for neutrality / tone. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 15:09, 2 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WikiDan61, I fully understand that concern. FTR, my review was only in the context of licensing, I didn't examine the editorial quality. S Philbrick (Talk) 21:59, 2 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Review newsletter November 2019

Hello WikiDan61,

This newsletter comes a little earlier than usual because the backlog is rising again and the holidays are coming very soon.

Getting the queue to 0

There are now 809 holders of the New Page Reviewer flag! Most of you requested the user right to be able to do something about the huge backlog but it's still roughly less than 10% doing 90% of the work. Now it's time for action.
Exactly one year ago there were 'only' 3,650 unreviewed articles, now we will soon be approaching 7,000 despite the growing number of requests for the NPR user right. If each reviewer soon does only 2 reviews a day over five days, the backlog will be down to zero and the daily input can then be processed by every reviewer doing only 1 review every 2 days - that's only a few minutes work on the bus on the way to the office or to class! Let's get this over and done with in time to relax for the holidays.
Want to join? Consider adding the NPP Pledge userbox.
Our next newsletter will announce the winners of some really cool awards.

Coordinator

Admin Barkeep49 has been officially invested as NPP/NPR coordinator by a unanimous consensus of the community. This is a complex role and he will need all the help he can get from other experienced reviewers.

This month's refresher course

Paid editing is still causing headaches for even our most experienced reviewers: This official Wikipedia article will be an eye-opener to anyone who joined Wikipedia or obtained the NPR right since 2015. See The Hallmarks to know exactly what to look for and take time to examine all the sources.

Tools

It is now possible to select new pages by date range. This was requested by reviewers who want to patrol from the middle of the list.
It is now also possible for accredited reviewers to put any article back into the New Pages Feed for re-review. The link is under 'Tools' in the side bar.

Reviewer Feedback

Would you like feedback on your reviews? Are you an experienced reviewer who can give feedback to other reviewers? If so there are two new feedback pilot programs. New Reviewer mentorship will match newer reviewers with an experienced reviewer with a new reviewer. The other program will be an occasional peer review cohort for moderate or experienced reviewers to give feedback to each other. The first cohort will launch November 13.

Second set of eyes

Not only are New Page Reviewers the guardians of quality of new articles, they are also in a position to ensure that pages are being correctly tagged for deletion and maintenance and that new authors are not being bitten. This is an important feature of your work, especially while some routine tagging for deletion can still be carried out by non NPR holders and inexperienced users. Read about it at the Monitoring the system section in the tutorial. If you come across such editors doing good work, don't hesitate to encourage them to apply for NPR.
Do be sure to have our talk page on your watchlist. There are often items that require reviewers' special attention, such as to watch out for pages by known socks or disruptive editors, technical issues and new developments, and of course to provide advice for other reviewers.

Arbitration Committee

The annual ArbCom election will be coming up soon. All eligible users will be invited to vote. While not directly concerned with NPR, Arbcom cases often lead back to notability and deletion issues and/or actions by holders of advanced user rights.

Community Wish list

There is to be no wish list for WMF encyclopedias this year. We thank Community Tech for their hard work addressing our long list of requirements which somewhat overwhelmed them last year, and we look forward to a successful completion.

To opt-out of future mailings, you can remove yourself here

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:33, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The ministry of silly walks

The fact that these women were "inspired" by the Monty Pythons to do their silly walk during the Grek national parade on 28th October 2019, does not mean that what they performed was indeed the silly walk, hence my objection. In fact, I believe that what they performed is a disgrace to them, therefore it should not be on the page. However, since I do not intend to engage in an edit war, do as you please as long as you accept my comment which is also true - that their action was met with severe criticism by the public. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blackadder1058 (talk • contribs) 06:50, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Blackadder1058: As I read the available sources, the women were engaging in a protest, and performing moves "inspired by" Monty Python. Their replication of John Cleese's gait may have been imperfect (somewhat irrelevant, as the Ministry of Silly Walks skit actually involved several silly walks), but the criticism directed against them was in regard to their protest and its motivation, not about their fidelity to Monty Python. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 12:46, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It is not up to us to decide whether some silly walks require funding from the ministry over others; that is the job of John Cleese. When it comes to the article, we use what sources say, which is that it is inspired by the sketch. I've changed it to say "a silly walk" rather than "the silly walk", as there are many silly walks that can be inspired by or are derived from the sketch. Vermont (talk) 13:38, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Joey Carbstrong, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Good Morning Britain (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 07:37, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Edits regarding Ashwini Baishnab page

Dear Dan,

I have edited the page and removed the content which may seem promotional. For the rest, I have added multiple references. Can you please let me know why my edits are being undone. I am new to this, I apologise if the content seemed promotional. I think there might be some confusion in the name. All the references are for Mr Ashwini Vaishnaw, but the title of the page is Ashwini Baishnab which is in Odiya (an Indian Language). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abhishek.anita12318 (talk • contribs) 15:31, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Abhishek.anita12318: You have not edit the Ashwini Baishnab page after me. You have created Draft:Ashwini Vaishnaw with essentially the same content that was previously reverted. Specific problems with the content include (but are not limited to) statements such as:

Ashwini has donned various hats over his career.
Not expressly promotional, but not really encyclopedic in tone either.
He has professed and showcased that sincerity, humility and a strong value system can go a long way in professional success and societal progress.
This sentence is purely subject opinion and promotion. It has no place in Wikipedia.
As a recognition of his good work,...
There is no source to verify that his move to the PM's office was in recognition of his good work. (Many people are given prestigious postings based on political connections rather than individual merit.)
The desire to serve the society called back...
This is subjective promotion rather than objective prose.
Ashwini is putting the unique experience of civil service, corporate working, and entrepreneurship to policy making.
Promotional.

You may continue editing the draft to improve it, but since there is already a page about this individual, your draft will not be publishable. Rather, you may be able to copy the text from the draft into the article, if it has been sufficiently cleaned up per the above comments. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 16:51, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@WikiDan61: Thank you for the notes, I will edit it accordingly and post it again.

More Details - History Of Sabalgarh - Descendant

(@WikiDan61:)

Hi WikiDan61, I respect and very thankful to you that you've noticed and allowing me to explain it further.

Well, Yes, you may take it the handwritten notes, but if you ever belong to India or can ask any Indian history professor/researcher then you can understand that these are the documents which are being handwritten by our official family historian called "Jaga" (Jagas are a social caste-based group of people higher up in the Hindu hierarchy who held the traditional job of genealogists of primarily Rajput, Gurjar and Meenas[1] families mainly in Rajasthan, India and surrounding states. jagas are the caste which keep record of all generations of an individual family. there record was written in a big yellow book called (pothi). they comes in a category of brahmins.) please check https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaga_(Rajasthan)

In India, every society & caste has its own "Jaga" to keep maintain the records of all generations from the last hundreds of year, Whenever a new marriage organized or a child born the "Jaga" visited the related cast/family to add the records of newly born child & newly married couple.

So, all the people in the town are known to the fact that Late. Mr. Sabal Singh Gurjar was my Great-Great Grandfather, and I especially captured those descendency written pages from Jaga pothi(genealogy book) to update the Wikipedia.

Please check a few posts from local researchers as they also used to visited Jaga and translated it to verify the facts. A beautiful video shoot done by my team for this historic contribution - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NK11d4k9u5o

I will get more details and verified content soon to help you and contribute my best efforts always!

You can reach me back anytime on below following---

Avtar Singh Gurjar, S/O Pratap Singh Gurjar Email: avtarsky9@gmail.com Phone: +91-7509112711 (WhatsApp also)

Thank you again WikiDan61 :)

@AvtarSinghGurjar: These notes may well be the result of your local jaga, but that does not make them admissible as a reliable source at Wikipedia. They would be the equivalent of local baptistry records here in the United States. Such records are of value as primary sources to historians, who can then examine them and evaluate them in the context of other historical records, but to us at Wikipedia, they are not admissible. If a historian has examined these records and created a published (and presumably peer-reviewed) history of your clan, that would be admissible (and preferably something more recent than 1908 -- recent historical research is found to be significantly more rigorous). Similarly, Facebook posts are not admissible as reliable sources either. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 21:12, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@WikiDan61: : Thank you very much of understanding the equivalent relationship of Indian Jaga^[1] to your local baptistry records, Well, We have a few historians in our district who were researching on town Sabal Singh Gurjar and the Fort Of Sabalgarh, I will talk to them and would try to bring the published notes if its newer than 1908.

I am afraid, If I could not find something admissible as per the rules of Wikipedia then the important information of my clan & society would not be able to reach to my upcoming generation, caste, community.

Whereas, in the upcoming future and in the age of quantum computing, only digital records like Wikipedia will be the only valid resource for this valuable knowledge of clans, caste, community, descendants, etc. and any type of paper records may not be working or valid as valued resource of knowledge in the future.

So, kindly help me that how can I keep posting these important pieces of information about our history if not having proper admissible content as per this platform, can we go with any undertaking sign up? or non-disclosure-agreement, of confidentiality contract or anything else?

Last but not least, what about the current information of the descendants that I have already modified, will it remain there on the page^[2] or will be removed?

please suggest!

Thank you again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AvtarSinghGurjar (talk • contribs)

References

@AvtarSinghGurjar: I understand your plight about wanting to pass this information down to your descendants. There are any number of other places to record such history. For now, I will go ahead and remove the information based on our above discussion. If you disagree, I recommend that you start a discussion of the matter at Talk:Sabalgarh. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 00:29, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@AvtarSinghGurjar: Based on the edit summary for this edit, you admit that you are aware that your edits violate Wikipedia policy, but you insist on them anyway. Any further attempts in that direction will likely get you blocked. Discuss your desired edits on Talk:Sabalgarh before restoring them. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 12:37, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:11, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft: Eyitayo Ogunmola - ReviewApex Zy (talk) 20:27, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi Dan, 8 weeks has passed on and you still do not want to approve this article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Eyitayo_Ogunmola that has been modified. I'd love to know why this article is pending.

Thank you for the great work you do.Apex Zy (talk) 20:27, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Apex Zy: I still do not think the amount an quality of coverage of Ogunmola merits inclusion in Wikipedia. The coverage seems to be not significant: either brief mentions, or somewhat promotional. However, as the article is still in the draft review stage, other editors are free to weigh in on the matter. I have chosen not to decline the draft for now, but also not to accept it, leaving it for other editors to weigh in on. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 21:20, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

GOCE December 2019 Newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors December 2019 Newsletter

Hello and welcome to the December 2019 GOCE newsletter, an update of Guild happenings since the September edition. Our Annual Report should be ready in late January.

Election time: Nominations for the election of a new tranche of Guild coordinators to serve for the first half of 2020 will be open from 1 to 15 December. Voting will then take place and the election will close on 31 December at 23:59 UTC. Positions for Guild coordinators, who perform the important behind-the-scenes tasks that keep our project running smoothly, are open to all Wikipedians in good standing. We welcome self-nominations so please consider nominating yourself if you've ever thought about helping out; it's your Guild and it doesn't run itself!

September Drive: Of the thirty-two editors who signed up, twenty-three editors copy edited at least one article; they completed 39 requests and removed 138 articles from the backlog, bringing the backlog to a low of 519 articles.

October Blitz: This event ran from 13 to 19 October, with themes of science, technology and transport articles tagged for copy edit, and Requests. Sixteen editors helped remove 29 articles from the backlog and completed 23 requests.

November Drive: Of the twenty-eight editors who signed up for this event, twenty editors completed at least one copy edit; they completed 29 requests and removed 133 articles from the backlog.

Our December Blitz will run from 15 to 21 December. Sign up now!

Progress report: From September to November 2019, GOCE copy editors processed 154 requests. Over the same period, the backlog of articles tagged for copy editing was reduced by 41% to an all-time low of 479 articles.

Request archiving: The archiving of completed requests has now been automated. Thanks to Zhuyifei1999 and Bobbychan193, YiFeiBot is now archiving the Requests page. Archiving occurs around 24 hours after a user's signature and one of the templates {{Done}}, {{Withdrawn}} or {{Declined}} are placed below the request. The bot uses the Guild's standard "purpose codes" to determine the way it should archive each request so it's important to use the correct codes and templates.

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators; Reidgreg, Baffle gab1978, Miniapolis, Tdslk and Twofingered Typist.

>>> Sign up for the December blitz! <<<

>>> Participate in the Coordinator elections! <<<

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:06, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

United Arab Emirates edit

Dear Dan, I am Emarat Deira, a Law Professor in the University of Dubai for over 40+ years. Please read to what I have said below very carefully: A constitutional monarchy is one that has its powers limited by the constitution, whether it is written, such as Spain, or unwritten such as the UK. An absolute monarchy is one that does not have it's powers limited by constitution, whether written, such as Oman, or unwritten, such as Saudi Arabia. The United Arab Emirates is, in reality, a Federal monarchy, as in the UAE constitution that is written in Arabic, it is called an elective Federal Monarchy. If the UAE is truly a constitutional monarchy, then why is it an absolute monarchy here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_monarchy, the monarch of the UAE does not their powers limited by the constitution, as per the Arabic text. This is why, technically, the UAE is actually an absolute monarchy. I do not want to start an editing war with you Dan, and will admit that I am wrong if I am presented with some authentic proof. Please reply as soon as possible. Thanks, Emarat Deira, 40+ years Law Professor in the University of Dubai — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emarat Deira (talk • contribs) 16:27, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Emarat Deira: you are free to take your discussion to Talk:United Arab Emirates and get consensus there. But your word as a law professor is insufficient to verify the claims you are making (since, for one thing, we have no way of verifying that you actually are a law professor). If you can provide reliable sources to back up your claim that the UAE is not a constitutional monarchy, then please do so. Pointing to their constitution and saying "It's right there in their constitution!" is not a valid argument, because that would be a primary source; we would require analysis in a reliable secondary source to verify the claim. As to your claim that you will "admit that you are wrong if presented with some authentic proof", you have the process backwards. You want to make the change, so the burden of proof is on you to prove that the prior content of the article was wrong and your version is better. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 16:57, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

United Arab Emirates edit continued

Hi Dan, Thanks for your response, but I have a question: Why is the United Arab Emirates mentioned as an absolute monarchy, as indicated in this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_monarchy? Because if I am wrong, then should we change this article as well? Please reply as soon as possible. Thanks, Emarat Deira --Emarat Deira (talk) 18:16, 6 December 2019 (UTC)Emarat Deira talk (Sorry if signature looks bad, it was my first time)[reply]

@Emarat Deira: Actually, the article on Absolute monarchy defines the UAE as a federal monarchy, which is something else again. The listing of the UAE in the absolute monarchy article could be argued to be erroneous, since it does not fully fit the definition. While each of the federated states is an absolute monarchy, the Federation as a whole is not. Again, I urge you to take up this discussion at Talk:United Arab Emirates. There, you can engage more editors than just me and possibly gain consensus for your views. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 22:59, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Radial Acceleration Relation

I would like to insert the new paragraph "Radial Acceleration Relation":

"The dark matter contribution to the total acceleration of a galaxy can be seen as the difference between the total acceleration of a galaxy g and the contribution due only to the baryonic matter gb. In the first analyses it was thought that g, and therefore the dark matter contribution to it, was a universal function of gb only. However a later work and 72 Low Surface Brightness (LSB) galaxies determined a relation, called GGBX relation. The GGBX makes evident how the total acceleration of a galaxy g depends, not only on the baryonic acceleration gb, but also on other quantities that differ from galaxy to galaxy. These quantities are the baryonic fraction, the Hubble type of the galaxy and the normalised radius with respect to the optical radius Ropt. The GGBX deviates from the Newtonian relation at larger galactocentric distance and from the previous result at smaller galactocentric distance."

under the section "Observational Evidences". I think this paragraph add new material even if the discrepancy between theoretical and experimental galaxy velocity was already mentioned. Infact was first thought (S. McGaugh, Stacy; Lelli, Federico; M. Schombert, James (19 September 2016). "The Radial Acceleration Relation in Rotationally Supported Galaxies". Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 201101 (2016).) that the dark matter contribution to the total acceleration of a galaxy was a universal function of the baryons therein present, while the recent article (Di Paolo, Chiara; Salucci, Paolo; Fontaine, Jean Philippe (17 January 2019). "The Radial Acceleration Relation (RAR): the crucial cases of Dwarf Discs and of Low Surface Brightness galaxies". The Astrophysical Journal 873(2) March 2019.) evidences how the dark matter contributes to the acceleration in a far more complex way than previously thought. I think it is good to mention recent results to give the idea of how things are proceeding in the study of dark matter and that things are far less simple than thought. Istudentphysics (talk) 09:48, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Istudentphysics: I recommend you bring this matter to Talk:Dark matter. I am not a subject matter expert, but you will find such experts on that talk page. It appears to me (an educated person, but not a physicist) that your changes add little to the material already present. But, if as you seem to imply here, there are new findings that contradict the material in the article, a discussion among the article's watchers will be useful. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 20:22, 10 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

xenbase page updates - npov

Hi. Thank you for your message. I changed the language for the edits to the Xenbase wikipedia page. I hope this is satisfactory. — Preceding unsigned comment added by VGP at Xenbase (talk • contribs) 16:46, 16 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@VGP at Xenbase: No, not yet satisfactory. Statements such as:

Its ... user-friendly interfaces allow investigators to quickly find, interrogate, and link to different data types in ways that would otherwise be difficult and time consuming.
Xenbase enhances the value of Xenopus data through high quality data curation and integration...
Xenbase plays an important role in making Xenopus data accessible to the broader biomedical community by continually providing annotated data updates to many organizations such as NCBI, UniProtKB, and Ensembl.
Xenbase helps to accelerate research discovery and plays a role in maximizing the NIH’s ~$100 million annual investment in biomedical research using Xenopus as a model. With community support and NICHD funding Xenbase’s functionality, content, and usage serves over 500 unique visitors a day.
Xenbase continues to be the primary site for housing the Xenopus genomes, managing gene name annotation, and upgrading to and utilizing a new genome browser (JBrowse).

are all unsourced, subjective opinion and largely promotional. Further, since you seem to be making edits to this page on behalf of Xenbase, you are obliged to disclose this relationship (see the linked page for instructions on how). WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 18:47, 16 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Khatik community

Khatik communities are not included in the SC category. Meenakshibadsiwalmeu (talk) 05:31, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Meenakshibadsiwalmeu: Yes, I gathered that was your position since you have repeatedly edited the Khatik article to dispute this fact. However, as the fact is cited,^[1] you'll need to cite a more reliable source in order to remove this information. Please do not change this article again without discussing the matter on Talk:Khatik and be prepared to provide a reliable source to back up your claim. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 13:13, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ "Demographic Profile of Scheduled Caste Dalits in India" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 14 February 2019.

New Page Review newsletter December 2019

Reviewer of the Year

This year's Reviewer of the Year is Rosguill. Having gotten the reviewer PERM in August 2018, they have been a regular reviewer of articles and redirects, been an active participant in the NPP community, and has been the driving force for the emerging NPP Source Guide that will help reviewers better evaluate sourcing and notability in many countries for which it has historically been difficult.

Special commendation again goes to Onel5969 who ends the year as one of our most prolific reviewers for the second consecutive year. Thanks also to Boleyn and JTtheOG who have been in the top 5 for the last two years as well.

Several newer editors have done a lot of work with CAPTAIN MEDUSA and DannyS712 (who has also written bots which have patrolled thousands of redirects) being new reviewers since this time last year.

Thanks to them and to everyone reading this who has participated in New Page Patrol this year.

Top 10 Reviewers over the last 365 days
Rank	Username	Num reviews	Log
1	Rosguill (talk)	47,395	Patrol Page Curation
2	Onel5969 (talk)	41,883	Patrol Page Curation
3	JTtheOG (talk)	11,493	Patrol Page Curation
4	Arthistorian1977 (talk)	5,562	Patrol Page Curation
5	DannyS712 (talk)	4,866	Patrol Page Curation
6	CAPTAIN MEDUSA (talk)	3,995	Patrol Page Curation
7	DragonflySixtyseven (talk)	3,812	Patrol Page Curation
8	Boleyn (talk)	3,655	Patrol Page Curation
9	Ymblanter (talk)	3,553	Patrol Page Curation
10	Cwmhiraeth (talk)	3,522	Patrol Page Curation

(The top 100 reviewers of the year can be found here)

Redirect autopatrol

A recent Request for Comment on creating a new redirect autopatrol pseduo-permission was closed early. New Page Reviewers are now able to nominate editors who have an established track record creating uncontroversial redirects. At the individual discretion of any administrator or after 24 hours and a consensus of at least 3 New Page Reviewers an editor may be added to a list of users whose redirects will be patrolled automatically by DannyS712 bot III.

Source Guide Discussion

Set to launch early in the new year is our first New Page Patrol Source Guide discussion. These discussions are designed to solicit input on sources in places and topic areas that might otherwise be harder for reviewers to evaluate. The hope is that this will allow us to improve the accuracy of our patrols for articles using these sources (and/or give us places to perform a WP:BEFORE prior to nominating for deletion). Please watch the New Page Patrol talk page for more information.

This month's refresher course

While New Page Reviewers are an experienced set of editors, we all benefit from an occasional review. This month consider refreshing yourself on Wikipedia:Notability (geographic features). Also consider how we can take the time for quality in this area. For instance, sources to verify human settlements, which are presumed notable, can often be found in seconds. This lets us avoid the (ugly) 'Needs more refs' tag.

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 16:11, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaga_(Rajasthan)

[2] ttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabalgarh

[3] "Demographic Profile of Scheduled Caste Dalits in India" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 14 February 2019.

[1]

[2]

[1]