User talk:Reconrabbit

This user is aware of the designation of the following topics as contentious topics: gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them pseudoscience and fringe science They should not be given alerts for those areas.

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3

The article Radium you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Radium and Talk:Radium/GA4 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 22:43, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On 22 October 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Rabbit, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that rabbits can control their body temperature with their ears (pictured)? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Rabbit. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Rabbit), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:02, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Reconrabbit, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the new page reviewer user right to your account. This means you now have access to the page curation tools and can start patrolling pages from the new pages feed. If you asked for this at requests for permissions, please check back there to see if your access is time-limited or if there are other comments.

This is a good time to re-acquaint yourself with the guidance at Wikipedia:New pages patrol. Before you get started, please take the time to:

• Add Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers to your watchlist to follow NPP-related discussions
• If you use Twinkle, configure it to log your CSDs and PRODs
• If you can read any languages other than English, add yourself to the list of reviewers with language proficiencies

You can find a list of other useful links and tools for patrollers at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Resources. If you are ever unsure what to do, ask your fellow patrollers or just leave the page for someone else to review – you're not alone! Hey man im josh (talk) 15:03, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Recon, you had a good question I corrected the access-date. I simply copy-pasted the info already known on the plan of establishing the stable, I didn't thought of the date coherence. Cheers ! :) - OtharLuin (talk) 17:08, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Reconrabbit 17:12, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I wan to publish a page called Nepal In Data, this organization has been used as reference in many wiki pages like Falgunanda Highway, can you help publish my draft. Draft:Nepal In Data. Straw Holdings (talk) 17:38, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The way it is written now it is not clear why Nepal in Data should have a Wikipedia article. Maybe you can use information from other sources to make this more clear. As it is now it isn't any more distinct than any other Nepal related source of data (like those listed in this article: [1]). You can look on Google to find more sources like this one [2] or this [3]. Reconrabbit 18:00, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Thank you again for reviewing my Draft: Thriveworks Article. I appreciate your feedback and want to ensure I fully address the concerns regarding notability.

I believe Thriveworks meets Wikipedia’s notability criteria, and the sources I provided are in-depth, reliable, secondary, and strictly independent of the company. However, I would value your insight on why these sources may not be considered sufficient, and how I can ensure the article meets the necessary standards.

According to Wikipedia's guidelines, a primary test of notability is whether independent, unrelated individuals have published non-trivial works focused on the subject. I believe the sources provided meet this standard, as they are unbiased news outlets with no vested interest in Thriveworks. Additionally, Wikipedia requires independent content to include original opinion, analysis, and fact-checking, which I feel is evident in our sources.

Given this, can you reconsider your position? Else can you advise what I can do in the article to adjust it. Please know I'm committed to making any necessary adjustment to meet Wikipedia’s guidelines given my COI.

Thank you for your time and guidance. Mfunderburk (talk) 13:11, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reaching out. I will admit that the structure of the draft is rather bare after restructuring it according to Bonadea's instructions. I will also note that editors including myself are cautious about the provenance of extremely local news sources like Patch Media and articles like those from Behavioral Health Business that describe business transactions in the organization's own words. I will make some small changes - as I feel like more can be drawn from each of these sources while maintaining neutral point of view - and request a third opinion from the Articles for Creation reviewers. Reconrabbit 13:40, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Mfunderburk, I'm another AfC reviewer and have taken another look at your draft. @Reconrabbit was correct to decline it based on the sources: I agree that every source is reliable but what I am not seeing is independence. Every source is based off a press release or interview with the CEO, and there is not enough independent analysis and discussion to quite put us over the edge of notability yet. I would class quite a few of the sources you've used as churnalism and therefore we can't use them to establish notability.

If you can give me three, just three, really strong sources that each meet the following requirements: reliable, independent, significant coverage. We really want to see in-depth independent analysis separate to a regurgitated press release or interview.

Let me know if you have any questions. Qcne (talk) 15:55, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Qcneand @Reconrabbit, Thank you both for the detailed feedback—it’s truly helpful, and I appreciate the time you’ve taken to help me navigate this process. I completely understand your points about the need for reliable, independent, and in-depth sources that go beyond interviews or press releases. I’ll keep that in mind for future drafts.

For the ‘top three’ sources, following the additional instructions provided at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:RoySmith/Three_best_sources, I’d recommend these as our strongest:

-https://medcitynews.com/2024/08/eleanor-health-thriveworks-launch-partnership-to-support-patients-with-sud/

-https://www.phillyvoice.com/happiness-america-mental-health-attitudes-counseling/

-https://www.buyoutsinsider.com/regal-hcp-earns-healthy-returns-with-thriveworks-dental365/

Additionally, I had a question about sources that reviewed our company completely unprompted and independently—no conflict of interest exists with these. However, I was cautious about including them since they sometimes read like a marketing piece. These sources are:

-https://www.forbes.com/health/mind/thriveworks-review/

-https://www.everydayhealth.com/emotional-health/thriveworks-counseling-review/

I've seen similar pages sourced in articles on other mental health companies, so I wanted to confirm if these might be acceptable. If they qualify, I believe they could provide additional independent analysis needed to strengthen our case for notability.

Thanks again for your time and guidance. It’s genuinely appreciated! Mfunderburk (talk) 18:35, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Qcneand @Reconrabbit just thought I'd check back up here! Thank you both so much for your time! Mfunderburk (talk) 15:16, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I accepted the draft following this analysis. Will be copying these comments to the talk page of the article to keep the record in one place. The article will also be reviewed by a new page patroller so a third (fourth?) opinion will be forthcoming. Reconrabbit 15:57, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Reconrabbit -

Recently, you reviewed a draft article about bioethicist Nancy Neveloff Dubler (deceased), and dismissed it on the grounds that it was overly promotional of Dubler, and had insufficient references.

I am not the original author - but I am an autoconfirmed Wikipedia user and a professional familiar with Nancy Dubler's work and significance. Your criticisms were valid. But since the date of your comment, the author and I significantly edited the draft to

(1) make it neutral, formal and more like an encyclopedia entry;

(2) add criticisms of Dubler's work, with references, and

(3) add far more independent references.

This is now a neutral and thoroughly referenced article - it appears to me far more extensively referenced than many Wikipedia biographical entries of this modest size.

I regarded the revised draft as ready to move to the main space, and I just did so. But I see it still recites your criticism at the start of the article . Could you please look at the article again - I'm sure you will find that your criticism has been addressed. And if so, please remove that comment. Thank you, and thank you for your comments which resulted in an improved article.

User: Rswidler

Rswidler (talk) 18:33, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly, I've taken a second look at the article, and take no issue with you publishing it from a draft manually. The comments and other notices at the top of the article were left over, as an article published through Articles for Creation will normally be cleaned up and all those comments removed by a script.

Do take note that the article is considered an "orphan" for the moment as it is impossible for anyone to reach the page from elsewhere without searching for it. I can add some categories and do further cleanup to make sure it meets the standards of the manual of style here. Reconrabbit 18:56, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article Radium you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Radium for comments about the article, and Talk:Radium/GA4 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 21:21, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I see that you delinked a name in a caption. I was wondering what the MOS basis is for that. Thanks. See here. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Alan_Rosen_(restaurant_owner)&diff=prev&oldid=1253912229 184.153.21.19 (talk) 19:11, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I delinked the name as my interpretation of MOS:LINKONCE in that the name of the company is already stated in the text of the section where the image and caption is present. I do not see it as helpful to provide a fourth link to the same location in the article. Reconrabbit 20:32, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I believe you misread it. It is referring to more than one link in the text of the section. See "Link a term at most once per major section... Other mentions may be linked if helpful, such as in ... image captions." --184.153.21.19 (talk) 21:04, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't make that connection. I'll keep that in mind for the future. The change was reverted. Reconrabbit 21:14, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Enjoy the day. --184.153.21.19 (talk) 00:44, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I was not sure if you were aware that the review for Good Article designation is underway. I have only received confirmation so far, not any comments or requests for alterations. I am watching the article, but if you see anything that needs attention and can do it, please do! BoatnerdJenn (talk) 13:59, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I had missed it on my watch-list, but am now aware. Thanks! I'll keep an eye on it. Reconrabbit 14:06, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I added some more to the article and made some other small edits. I should be totally done with it by noon tomorrow. In the meantime, fresh eyes are always good for editing! BoatnerdJenn (talk) 04:17, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll see if there's anything in there that i can help with, thanks for helping to make it more comprehensive! Reconrabbit 12:15, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think I have done what I can do for now, hopefully it is enough because finding that information takes a lot of digging. Big Turtle put in some subheadings. I did some edits, but needed to focus on putting in the information. Let me know if I missed anything! BoatnerdJenn (talk) 16:49, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@BoatnerdJenn, when you cited Grant 2017, did you mean Grant 1997 as in the International Directory of Company Histories? Reconrabbit 16:57, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

yes, thank you for catching that! BoatnerdJenn (talk) 17:19, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good evening! Thank you for reviewing my pages! Ricco Baroni (talk) 23:46, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome, you have a very straightforward method of writing! Reconrabbit 23:47, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is this bad or good? English is not my first language, my apologies Ricco Baroni (talk) 10:18, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is good. The text is easy to read. Reconrabbit 11:24, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, sir! Ricco Baroni (talk) 17:28, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How can I help you sir --ERNEST99t (talk) 06:34, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know. How can I help you? There is a note on your talk page now. Reconrabbit 13:28, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome, welcome, welcome Reconrabbit! I'm glad that you are joining the November 2024 drive! Please, have a cup of WikiTea, and go cite some articles.

Cielquiparle (talk) 12:58, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Standard-winged nightjar you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:44, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

		The Minor Barnstar
		Your noteworthy contribution (5 points total) helped reduce the backlog by more than 250 articles! Here's a token of our appreciation. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 19:48, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article Standard-winged nightjar you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Standard-winged nightjar for comments about the article, and Talk:Standard-winged nightjar/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:02, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of Standard-winged nightjar at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yakikaki (talk) 22:32, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there! I've been relatively inactive on Wikipedia recently, and I just wanted to say thanks for your work on improving Group 5 element, and to wish you good luck with the other element articles currently at B. ¹⁴¹Pr -_\contribs/- 20:41, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, for bringing it to GA. Much of my focus has turned to European rabbit and related articles. I still do my best of course. Radon is next. Once I can get my hands on Inorganic Chemistry by Holleman and Wiberg. Reconrabbit 21:12, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Praseodymium-141 just taking note, based on your inactivity you might want to turn off your mentor status for now, you're getting some messages on your talk page. Reconrabbit 21:36, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reminding me - I've turned it off for now. ¹⁴¹Pr -_\contribs/- 18:05, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]