User talk:Theroadislong

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99

This page has archives. Sections older than 20 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.

Welcome to my talk page. Click here to leave me a message .

Hello Theroadislong,

thanks for your comments on the page about Puck Koper i am working at. I have a question reading this comment. In general I understand that Goodreads and Youtube can be unreliable sources. In this case I used Goodreads to establish the bibliography and found 2 interviews with the subject where she speaks about her work. It is no issue for the page to just erase the references but i would like to lean why in this case I should not use them. In my humble opinion in the way I use them I consider them very reliable. Is it a general wikipedia rule not to use these kind of sources? Roepot (talk) 23:27, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Goodreads is user generated so not remotely reliable and the YouTube video is an interview so not independent. Theroadislong (talk) 08:07, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

can you please help me bring this back to main space ? Ildivino1010 (talk) 06:21, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You need to submit it for review, but before that you need to address the paid editing. Theroadislong (talk) 08:09, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea about this paid editing. How would I even start to address it ? I'm asking for your help because I have no clue how to get this page back up. It says paid editing and non reliable sources ? National news paper is not reliable ? Can you please advise how I would go about this. I appreciate the reply Ildivino1010 (talk) 07:48, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

again I will continue to repeat the same messages. I AM NOT A PAID EDITOR I HAVE NEVER RECEIVED ANY PAYMENT. Instead of repeating the same thing can someone help ? Ildivino1010 (talk) 09:31, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have said on your talk page that the person works for you, this would mean that you would be considered to be a paid editor. Theroadislong (talk) 09:35, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think you understand. I am scout who works for a football club and he works for another football club. In what way am I a paid editor ? I do not get paid to make a Wikipedia page ? This is becoming very frustrating. Can you just delete the page then since no one is willing to help ? I really don't understand why you guys keep giving a hard time. Mikhail meets all criteria and yet you keep going on about paid editing which I have disclosed a million times and you keep bringing up the same thing. He does.not work for me and I am not paid to make.wikipedia edits Ildivino1010 (talk) 10:09, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Theroadislong, you seem very knowledgeable and experienced in AfC matters, so I wanted to ask you something before making any decisions. Draft:Lewis Josselyn was recreated and recently submitted after having been deleted by AfD community consensus in September. Is it ok for it to just be submitted straightaway like this? Or does it need to undergo deletion review at WP:DRV? The submitting user was very active in the AfD, and even acknowledges the AfD on the draft talk page, so he is well aware. Left guide (talk) 10:44, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes this is allowed, I'm not an admin so can't compare the different versions. The draft looks like it might pass though because his work has been included in the permanent collections of several renowned galleries and museums. I'll leave it for another reviewer though as I always seem to be declining his drafts. Theroadislong (talk) 10:50, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I appreciate that you took the time to leave a comment on a draft bio that another reviewer rejected with the comment "References not formatted in the appropriate way."

You suggested "Please read WP:REFB for help with correctly formatting sources.

"

I know that I'm new here, but I had read that. All sources were live web links to reliable sources and I don't see anything in guidance about inline citations that I would have violated. The original reviewer said simply "use footnotes," but the draft has footnotes for each inline citation.

Can you help provide any guidance? Amp-e728 (talk) 22:01, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure you have read WP:REFB? We simply don't use any "live web links" in article space. Theroadislong (talk) 22:11, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know how I missed that. I will go back and learn it and edit appropriately. Amp-e728 (talk) 02:18, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) The References section is empty. Where are the footnotes that should go in there? Please also read Links normally to be avoided. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:26, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will. Thank you Amp-e728 (talk) 02:17, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Gmcbphysiology (talk · contribs)
  • User:Gmcbphysiology/sandbox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Dear Theroadislong, thank you very much for your review, basically i am planning to create page for helath profession educator of india who have contributed lot in improvement of health profession education in India. I reallise that reference for the same are not enough, Please guide me how to create page as its gratitude to the senior eductors who spent their whole life and now retired and still working for improvement in Health profession educaiton. your help will be of great help

Gmcbphysiology (talk) 06:24, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red | April 2024, Volume 10, Issue 4, Numbers 293, 294, 302, 303, 304 Online events: New: Alphabet run S & T | Gender studies | Health Continuing: #1day1woman | Education (year-long initiative) Announcements The second round of "One biography a week" begins in April as part of #1day1woman. Tip of the month: If you run into technical problems, you might find help on our Tools and technical support page Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events and add any general ideas on developing the project. Follow us on social media: Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk 19:44, 30 March 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Dear TheRoadisLong,

I hope all is well. Thank you for your comments on this draft. After taking these into account I have removed a number of the sources which you suggest are not appropriate for the article.

All my Love,

TopG1985 Topg1985 (talk) 19:01, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No the draft Draft:William John Titus Bishop remains the same with refbombing and issue. Theroadislong (talk) 19:06, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear TheRoadIsLong,

I was under the impression more references were a good thing. What do you mean by the ‘draft remains the same’, I’ve just removed three references, and re-written it several times?

All my Love,

William Topg1985 (talk) 19:14, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK but you had not yet edited the draft when you posted to my page. It will need much more hacking back of junk sources see WP:REFBOMBING. Theroadislong (talk) 19:20, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Where is Kate? is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Where is Kate? (3rd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

IgnatiusofLondon (he/him • ☎️) 12:19, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Could you put this into where it's supposed to be? 92.249.183.225 (talk) 13:59, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No there is no reason to send the article to WP:AFD? Theroadislong (talk) 14:02, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's April Fools... - 92.249.183.225 (talk) 14:07, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So? Theroadislong (talk) 14:15, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Joke deletion discussions are allowed. - 92.249.183.225 (talk) 14:19, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Could you link me that policy? Synorem (talk) 14:22, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently it is allowed according to WP:Rules for Fools but clearly competence is required and I have no desire to partake in the foolery. Theroadislong (talk) 14:28, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also odd for a new IP editor to know bout 'joke' AfD discussions - smells of old socks KylieTastic (talk) 15:51, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Theroadislong,

Backlog update: The October drive reduced the article backlog from 11,626 to 7,609 and the redirect backlog from 16,985 to 6,431! Congratulations to Schminnte, who led with over 2,300 points.

Following that, New Page Patrol organized another backlog drive for articles in January 2024. The January drive started with 13,650 articles and reduced the backlog to 7,430 articles. Congratulations to JTtheOG, who achieved first place with 1,340 points in this drive.

Looking at the graph, it seems like backlog drives are one of the only things keeping the backlog under control. Another backlog drive is being planned for May. Feel free to participate in the May backlog drive planning discussion.

It's worth noting that both queues are gradually increasing again and are nearing 14,034 articles and 22,540 redirects. We encourage you to keep contributing, even if it's just a single patrol per day. Your support is greatly appreciated!

2023 Awards

Onel5969 won the 2023 cup with 17,761 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 50/day. There was one Platinum Award (10,000+ reviews), 2 Gold Awards (5000+ reviews), 6 Silver (2000+), 8 Bronze (1000+), 30 Iron (360+) and 70 more for the 100+ barnstar. Hey man im josh led on redirect reviews by clearing 36,175 of them. For the full details, see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone for their efforts in reviewing!

WMF work on PageTriage: The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers deployed the rewritten NewPagesFeed in October, and then gave the NewPagesFeed a slight visual facelift in November. This concludes most major work to Special:NewPagesFeed, and most major work by the WMF Moderator Tools team, who wrapped up their major work on PageTriage in October. The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers will continue small work on PageTriage as time permits.

Recruitment: A couple of the coordinators have been inviting editors to become reviewers, via mass-messages to their talk pages. If you know someone who you'd think would make a good reviewer, then a personal invitation to them would be great. Additionally, if there are Wikiprojects that you are active on, then you can add a post there asking participants to join NPP. Please be careful not to double invite folks that have already been invited.

Reviewing tip: Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages within their most familiar subjects can use the regularly updated NPP Browser tool.

Reminders:

• You can access live chat with patrollers on the New Pages Patrol Discord.
• Consider adding the project discussion page to your watchlist.
• To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have seen that useful peace of information you left with me. I'm in dilemma: I've read somewhere that Wikipedia articles can't cross reference themselves. So I relied heavily on external sources. Assuming you'll have time to go through it, please advise me on how I do it. Thanks. Dee Soulza (talk) 16:53, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Theroadislong. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Pedro Esqueda Ramirez, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 23:06, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Theroadislong, you commented on the draft wikipedia page on Jan Poolman that looks like it is has been copied and pasted from somewhere. This is not the case. I wrote the page myself - I prepared it in word and later in my wiki-sandbox. There are some citations in there but they are indicated by "". So if that is the only reason why you rejected the page I wonder if you can accept it after this response of me.

note that I also have written the wikipedia page in dutch - If I need to add that that is also fine with me I can do that. The Dutch version is a translation of the English version.

Please let me know what I should change to get it accepted.

best Wikicluck44 Wikicluck44 (talk) 17:13, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The reason I thought it might have been copied and pasted from somewhere is the weird repeating of the phrase "brontekst bewerken". Theroadislong (talk) 18:36, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Theroadislong, ok I see your point - "brontekst bewerken" is Dutch and is there I think because I am new to this and I prepared the text in the Dutch wikipedia sandbox...and copy pasted it to the English wikipedia - it didn't catch my attention because I thought it was there because it was not published yet. I will remove those texts. And I will also work on your other comments by removing the succesfull / prolific wording. Will do so coming days and will resubmit. Thank you for reviewing the text so fast and to give me your feedback! Appreciated a lot.

best Wikicluck44 Wikicluck44 (talk) 19:47, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I have removed all "succesfull", prolific, the (R)s and other non-neutral wording. Could you please review again?

Best Wikicluck44 Wikicluck44 (talk) 06:31, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Theroadislong, I adjusted the wording into neutral wording, removed all the (R)s. Could you please review and approve to publish? Or otherwise indicate how I could improve the text so that you will approve it?

Best Wikicluck44 (talk) 07:02, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi theroadislong, thanks for checking my draft wikipage, still under construction... You commented the following:"Please don't add external links to the body of the draft, we don't use them." I am struggling a bit with this. So if I place a reference with the text - and there is a pdf or full text of it available, how can I best add the external link to the reference? Should I do this within the reference list? And I see in other wikipages a section with external links - can I create such a section and add relevant external links there? e.g. the researchgate external link shows the number of articles Jan Poolman has written but also the number of reads and citations, which give an impression whether he is indeed seen as an expert in the field of bacterial vaccines by others. Wikicluck44 (talk) 16:45, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes best to keep external links in a section called "External links" at the bottom of the article. Theroadislong (talk) 16:49, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See Draft:Family Star#Critical reception. The film already released and has 5 reliable reviews. We can redirect Draft:The Family Star to Family Star after moving it. DareshMohan (talk) 19:28, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please u have declined my article twice and I don't know the mistake I have done, please tell me the mistakes and give me the solution to it and break down your English because I am an African so use simple English please 🙏 Hellboi flick (talk) 06:41, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft Draft:Kidi rexon has no sources, reliable sources are what we base articles on, find the sources that support the content and add them, but be aware that Kidi Rexon will need to pass the criteria at WP:NSINGER first. Theroadislong (talk) 07:13, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please what is WP:NSINGER Hellboi flick (talk) 07:21, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NSINGER click the link, is the criteria that they need to pass in order to justify having an article about them. Theroadislong (talk) 07:25, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

kk but it suits all criteria perfectly, u can confirm it your self on google search and etc, therefore if a program is held and there is no kidi Rexon the program will be canceled course no 1 will come for the event Hellboi flick (talk) 07:54, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I think there may be a language barrier here, there is zero evidence in your draft to suggest that they pass the criteria at WP:NSINGER. Theroadislong (talk) 08:05, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh kk then I think I am the 1 that's not explaine or put things in place well

The u want me to start the draft all over with a new article and start everything afresh?

Sorry for disturbing u kk, buh I need to do this for my artist Hellboi flick (talk) 08:52, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

...at all. I tried to log on earlier, only that I got thrown out repeatedly. The primary one was to have been terminated, as I had to set up one to avoid a bug. Stated this on wp:an about this matter. Is there a bug here? I have found some sources that I am trying to place here, two are in wp:teahouse. I just joined up when this happened. I'll ask about this to a Admin. Four of Sixteen (talk) 08:17, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Contrib history: the wp:an had the matter on it referring to the FACT that I had repeatedly got thrown out everytime I tried by to log in. So does .y Contrib history. As stated, some kind of 🐛 bug kept throwing me out every time I tried to log in with the old account, so I had to create a new one so that I can log in here. I am at the wp:teahouse trying to get help placing sources when this appeared. Four of Sixteen (talk) 08:36, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Quack, quack, quack. Theroadislong (talk) 14:17, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not only disclosed, but terminated because of a 🐛 bug on Userpage per regs. Appreciate the reminder. Four of Sixteen (talk) 09:05, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comment "Please remove all external links from the body of the draft," sorry to be clunky can I just clarify what an external link is? I'm not up to speed with all the precise language of wiki, can they usually be replaced with a citation?

Love your pics of pots Mornington Glory (talk) 13:58, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Changed the wiki ref (4) knew that was wrong but kept not fixing it Thanks Mornington Glory (talk) 14:07, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The external links include [1], [2], [3], [4] and [5]. Theroadislong (talk) 14:13, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies, now I'm very confused, I thought these were citations - info where they can be found listed in References at the end From what you are saying it looks as if all the citations references should be removed Mornington Glory (talk) 14:32, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You can turn them into citations (see WP:REFB for help) but at the moment they are just bare external links. Theroadislong (talk) 14:45, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I will have a go later Mornington Glory (talk) 15:05, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I noticed that you declined my submission, I was wondering if you could help me with my article! Catcarrillo (talk) 17:06, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft Draft:Kitty Noir doesn't show how the subject would pass WP:NSINGER and please note that interviews are not considered to be reliable independent sources. Theroadislong (talk) 17:11, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A draft article on Emilia Roosmann was submitted by Zeuz3000 on 22 November 2023 but was declined by you. That user contacted me for help (see here). I replied on their talkpage (here) but never heard from them. Today I had a go at improving the draft so that it could be resubmitted for creation.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 06:57, 9 April 2024 (UTC)10:17, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I just accepted it. Cheers. Theroadislong (talk) 07:02, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks mate.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 10:17, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• HistoryofJournalism (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:New Book Authors Publishing (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Question: I spent several hours writing an article. One of the reasons it was declined is lack of notability. However, the company falls under the same umbrella as other print on demand publishers that have Wikipedia pages. Also Dorrance Publishing uses its own website links as sources to at least 5 references on its Wikipedia page. I see a few Amazon links too, so the policy is confusing.

In terms of the company I wrote about, I found independent information about the company, mostly business related articles, trademark, or government references. Does that suffice for sources?

Some of the authors published by this company have their own Wikipedia pages and those books are listed on their own Wikipedia pages. If the people being published by this company are notable enough for a Wikipedia page, and their books are notable enough to be mentioned in a Wikipedia article, then why wouldn't the publisher of these books not be notable enough for its own Wikipedia page? They seem to be a go-to for journalists and even some politicians. Given the high number of Google searches and high page rank, the company appears to be well known. I also noticed that a number of similar companies that are listed on Wikipedia and publish using similar publishing models have Wikipedia pages.

I don't want my past few hours to have been spent in vain so hopefully you can answer the questions about the sources. Thank you! DJ HistoryofJournalism (talk) 14:40, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See other poor quality articles exist for that argument Dorrance Publishing Company is not a good example to follow though it doesn't use Amazon as a source as you suggest. The fact that they publish notable people has no relevance at all as notability cannot be inherited, the company needs to pass WP:NCORP which very clearly doesn't yet. Theroadislong (talk) 14:46, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please also read WP:REFB your sources are dumped in an external links section, they need to be positioned directly after the content that they support. Theroadislong (talk) 14:48, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

iam new here. Can you give me any solution for my article. KERALAMAN (talk) 15:11, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you were starting to learn engineering, would you make your first project to build a car from scratch? If you took up a musical instrument, would you arrange a public recital as the first thing you did? No, you would practise on less demanding projects while you learnt the craft.

I would very strongly advise you that you will save yourself a great deal of frustration and disappointment if you forget about creating a new article for several months, while you gradually learn about how Wikipedia works (and most particularly about Verifiability, reliable sources, and Neutral point of view) by making improvements to some of our six million existing articles. Theroadislong (talk) 15:17, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I just spent ages researching, writing, creating and correcting an article about a scientist deceased at the end of last century. It was a draft and I'm a beginner. I am trying to recover the article that I wrote so that I don't have to redo all my work. Can you please help advise? Gcwcd (talk) 16:11, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It was deleted because it was copied and pasted from The Independent newspaper, copyright violations can't be restored, you need to write everything here in your own words. The deleting admin User:Drmies can probably tell you more Theroadislong (talk) 16:14, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks--I left a note on their talk page. Drmies (talk) 16:18, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for doing this. I really appreciate your help and input. Unfortunately there is still only a very small portion of the article and all its citations. I didn't copy anything from the Independent newspaper. I cited an article in the paper (the obituary of the scientist who was the subject) but didn't quote anything from it. Gcwcd (talk) 17:12, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey I was wondering if it is possible to unsubmit a draft without losing any of the work that has been done on it? I was told by user NoobThreePointOh that you might know how to do that. The draft in question is Draft:Charles Keating IV. On NoobThreePointOh's talk page there is more info on the situation. 98.97.43.27 (talk) 17:37, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Theroadislong (talk) 18:29, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. 98.97.43.27 (talk) 01:01, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

the article about Yusuph Kileo GMako6 (talk) 18:32, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hellow Theroadislong. Through your guidance, I managed to exercise patience and corrected such errors and inadequacies. Now, am about to make a resubmission and your scrutiny is as important as ever. I wish you a good day. Dee Soulza (talk) 16:29, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK I try not to review twice in a row, so will leave it for another reviewer. Theroadislong (talk) 16:41, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Have a great day. Dee Soulza (talk) 18:54, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for having me here. Dee Soulza (talk) 19:19, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

i am unable to meet the crtiteria can just plz suggest me what i am lacking in my article Manya2707 (talk) 03:29, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I gave them my standard deletion notice which is chock full of helpful links -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 04:29, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello sir, I submit to Stiven Mikhail's drafts every time But Stiven Mikhail's draft is declined every time.Please help me fix this draft.If Stiven Mikhail's draft is not fixable So please delete Stiven Mikhail's draft as soon as possible.It will be your great kindness. Gairathimonikagairathi (talk) 07:19, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) @Gairathimonikagairathi: please don't go around asking for reviewers to improve the draft, that's not our job. And it's pointless you requesting for it to be deleted, either, as it's not your draft (as in, you didn't create it, and aren't the sole or even a major contributor to it) so that request couldn't be actioned in any case. Thank you. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:41, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! I think I managed to improve the article Draft:Yana Deliradeva, if possible can you see it and tell me if I did a good job with it? I did everything you and DoubleGrazing told me to, I added every reliable source information I could get my hands at, including some scientific papers, radio articles, degree proof from a reliable source and fixed the inline external links from the body text. Skimliii (talk) 12:03, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• https://stsc.odisha.gov.in/sites/default/files/2020-02/ScheduledCast_List.pdf 2020 recent Government reliable source This source List number -19 was Chamar and Chamar Subcaste , List -86 was Siyal and Siyal subcaste, This source is provided Chamar and Siyal two different caste.

Ramachbehera1 (talk) 13:51, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://stsc.odisha.gov.in/sites/default/files/2020-02/ScheduledCast_List.pdf 2020 recent Government reliable source This source List number -19 was Chamar and Chamar Subcaste , List -86 was Siyal and Siyal subcaste, This source is provided Chamar and Siyal two different caste. Remove Chamar word in siyal caste article. Ramachbehera1 (talk) 14:54, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's a 75 year old primary source, you might be better finding something more recent and independent, the entire article appears to be rather archaic in tone. Theroadislong (talk) 14:59, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://socialjustice.gov.in/writereaddata/UploadFile/CONSTITUTION%20(SC)%20ORDER%201950%20dated%2010081950.pdf 1950 Govt reliable source.This is 74 year old primary source was proved that siyal and Chamar two different caste. Ramachbehera1 (talk) 15:16, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

One source can't be write a article. All the source proved siyal and chamar two different caste.Source are like *Singh, K.S.: People of India: Odisha (2 pts.) (1992) and all other book. Ramachbehera1 (talk) 15:19, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete this source because it create social violence in our society and our State. Ramachbehera1 (talk) 15:21, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What sources would help. Rosalie is deceased and she doesn't have many sources. This is from my article on Rozalie Martinez. Smartfunnypeople (talk) 17:05, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but the lack of sources is a clear indication that Martinez is not notable in Wikipedia terms. Theroadislong (talk) 17:23, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Theroadislong,

Thank you for your response regarding our Wikipedia draft page for the Fibrolamellar Registry (i.e. the Fibroregistry). We would like to clarify a couple of points regarding your description of our draft page. You say that our draft page, “reads like an advertisement”.

In fact, the page was modeled after a number of other non-profit patient advocacy groups, such as the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cystic_Fibrosis_Foundation

Far less descriptions of activities and successes were included than in the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation page, thinking such would sound aggrandizing. Instead the focus is on the science issues that are enabled by the work of the Fibroregistry.  Therefore, it is confusing why you would think the draft page sounds like an advertisement given the content existing in the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation page.  Indeed, unlike these other groups, none of the Fibroregistry personnel are paid for their involvement, and all are either patients or care-givers: Not hired non-profit workers.

The references cited are in high-impact peer-reviewed scientific journals. These include Nature Reviews Cancer (impact factor 69.8), Cancer Discovery (impact factor 39.4), and Science Advances (impact factor 13.6), etc.  

Further, the Fibroregistry is cited as the source of valuable information in articles published in peer-reviewed science journals with high impact factors including the Nature Reviews Cancer (impact factor 69.8), Science Advances (impact factor 13.6), JCI Insight (impact factor 8), Hepatology Communications (5.7) and Cancers (impact factor 5.2).

We feel the draft page is well referenced to peer reviewed science journals, the Fibroregistry itself is highly cited in peer-reviewed science journals, and the Fibroregistry draft page is more rigorously sourced than many of the existing Wikipedia pages.

Could you please point out some of the sentences in our draft Fibroregistry page you feel are “Advertising” so we can either reword, or remove, them?

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

1979HondaMoped 1979HondaMoped (talk) 19:45, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but the whole draft reads just like advertising to me. Wikipedia is NOT for merely providing information. A Wikipedia article about an organisation must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about them, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable organisation. Wikipedia has no interest in what you want to say about it only in what others unaffiliated with the business choose to say about it. Also see other stuff exists. You are free to resubmit and get other opinions. Theroadislong (talk) 19:54, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol | May 2024 Articles Backlog Drive
On 1 May 2024, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each review will earn 1 point. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:15, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]