This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 |
Dear fellow editor,
I am Piotr Konieczny, a sociologist of new media at Hanyang University (and User:Piotrus on Wikipedia). I would like to better understand Wikipedia's volunteers who edit medical topics, many associated with the WikiProject Medicine, and known to create some of the highest quality content on Wikipedia. I hope that the lessons I can learn from you that I will present to the academic audience will benefit both the WikiProject Medicine (improving your understanding of yourself and helping to promote it and attract new volunteers) and the wider world of medical volunteering and academia. Open access copy of the resulting research will be made available at WikiProject's Medicine upon the completion of the project.
All questions are optional. The survey is divided into 4 parts: 1 - Brief description of yourself; 2 - Questions about your volunteering; 3 - Questions about WikiProject Medicine and 4 - Questions about Wikipedia's coverage of medical topics.
Please note that by filling out this questionnaire, you consent to participate in this research. The survey is anonymous and all personal details relevant to your experience will be kept private and will not be transferred to any third party.
I appreciate your support of this research and thank you in advance for taking the time to participate and share your experiences! If you have any questions at all, please feel free to contact me at my Wikipedia user page or through my email listed on the survey page (or by Wikipedia email this user function).
The survey is accessible through the LINK HERE.
Piotr Konieczny
Associate Professor
Hanyang University
If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from
the mailing list.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
22:24, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
Hey, page for Dexerto was declined for lack of "significant coverage" in sources. It has 14 sources total, The subject of the article is one of the top 40 gaming websites in the US, but given the nature of news websites, it is near impossible to provide the sources suggested in Wikipedia's 'general notability guidelines' - most news websites are not the subject of coverage themselves.
When reviewing the Wikipedia pages of similar websites, there are no such references given (in fact almost all that I have checked have far fewer independent sources, and some none at all). I am informed that rules around this have changed which is why these websites have pages with such scant references.
Could you please advise on the best approach here, or if it is simply not possible, given the oddly specific notability guidelines which seem to not apply to news websites at all, to have a Wikipedia page for such a large and well-read website? This would strike as odd given the size of the site, and the state of other wiki pages about smaller websites, with fewer references.
Thanks
Calcium17 ( talk) 14:26, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for volunteering as a Host at the Teahouse. Wikipedia is a community of people working together to make knowledge free. You are an important part of that effort! By joining as a Host, and by following our expectations, you are helping new users to get started here at Wikipedia, and aiding more experienced users who just have a question about how something works. We appreciate your willingness to help!
Here are some links you may find helpful as a Host:
Hello. I have edited Draft:Brooks Rehabilitation draft for review and would like some feedback before submitting for approval. You were involved in reviewing a previous draft. I would like to improve the article and am looking for help to ensure I am meeting the Wikipedia Guidelines. I believe the content is written from a neutral point of view and the sources meet the criteria. I would appreciate any direction you can provide. To be fully transparent, I have a declared COI with Brooks Rehabilitation.. Thank you Lauradavis44 ( talk) 18:39, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
Hi Liance,
I wanted to discuss the reasoning for the above-referenced Articles for Creation submission being declined and I hope the decision can be re-evaluated.
First, I'm hoping you can clarify your comment: Evaluating as organization as almost all coverage appears to be about the foundation. Lacks significant (non-trivial) coverage in multiple reliable sources. YouTube, crypto news outlets are not considered to be reliable sources. -Liancetalk/contribs 10:25, 17 February 2022 (UTC). What I don't understand about this, is "evaluating as organization as almost all coverage appears to be about the foundation." None of the coverage is about the foundation. The foundation was recently formed and there is only one line about the foundation that was included in the article itself, for thoroughness. All of the news coverage is about Pawthereum, the cryptocurrency, so I do not know how you reached the conclusion that you did.
Second, the reason for the submission being declined: This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
I did read the page on notability, etc. that lays out the guidelines for what sources count, and by that guideline, I believe the article should qualify. I'd like to go through the sources one by one and discuss the ones that I believe should qualify (I don't necessarily agree with you that crypto news outlets aren't reliable sources but I understand the reasoning, so we can agree to not count those. I also understand the reasoning regarding Youtube but it is strange that an AMA from the largest cryptocurrency subreddit wouldn't count considering, 1. it is very significant, especially considering the significance of the guest speaker and size of that subreddit and 2. the AMA is 100% independent from Pawthereum).
Anyway, I think arguably these should count: Source #5, NewsTimes
From what I understand the number of sources needed is 3. Are we saying that, disregarding all of the other sources I didn't mention, that there aren't at least 3 sources out of these 6 that qualify?
I appreciate you taking a look and reviewing this article, but I don't see the reasoning being applied to the decision lining up with Wikipedia's guidelines, so I do not agree with the decision making here and would appreciate a response to the points I've raised. If the decision can be re-evaluated, that would be ideal. If the reasoning can be explained and the reasoning is supported by Wikipedia's guidelines, I can accept the decision, but otherwise I will have to respectfully contest this decision.
Thank you,
CatDadoftheYear ( talk) 19:26, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
Thanks, this does help clarify things. Appreciate your feedback. CatDadoftheYear ( talk) 00:21, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
Hello Liance,
Many thanks for accepting/editing my new article "membrane scaling" in Wikipedia. I see a message that this article has an issue:
I added links to my article and also to other articles where "membrane scaling" was just mentioned. So the reader in other articles can check in detail what membrane scaling is. But, I still see that my article is shown as orphan. How to resolve this?
Thank you!
I don't understand why my submission hasn't been accepted.
Hi there,
I have submitted a lengthy bio for me as a musician/artist and included all of the information required whilst looking up other professional musicians with a similar template. Can you please explain in detail what it is I need to change as I am incredibly keen to get my wikipedia page up and running.
LeonidasNSFW ( talk) 20:57, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Liance,
It doesn't look like the draft you want to move to main space is ready to appear in the article space of the project. It seems like it is still in the process of being reviewed. Until it is "main space ready", it is unlikely that an administrator will complete this move that you requested. Eventually, there might be an admin who will decide, "What the heck, I'll do the move" but I'm not sure how long that will take. Most moves from Draft space to main space look like regular articles without all of the AFC tags. Just giving you a head's up, from a patrolling admin's perspective. Liz Read! Talk! 01:27, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
Greetings, I'm Fico. I thank you for what you did for the "Shin Japan Heroes Universe" draft. However, I must admit I need from people who really know more about those franchises than I do. In my country, I barely know a little about Godzilla, and then, nothing more. Therefore, I would appreciate the need of more help from other users. Thank you so much. Sincerely, Fico. (Perhaps, other live action and animated intellectual properties from other third parties can join this project, but of course, it is too soon to speculate.) Fico Puricelli ( talk) 16:46, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
how can there even be any other sources/citation, that all sites there are. There are only two original sources online. Those are the only source of published content. There isnt any other way to do anything. Also, what other sources are there for a webcomic than the webcomic itself? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChiserYT ( talk • contribs) 19:09, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
Hi Liance, could you please give me more explanation as to why my draft was declined?
Hey Liance! Thank you for taking the time to review one of my first significant contributions. I have resubmitted the page for review, maybe you could take another look and let me know if there is anything more I need to do for it to reach the required level of satisfaction to be published on the Wiki please. I've contributed to other pages but it would be cool to have contributed a whole page. Congratulations on 21,000 edits too, that's some milestone! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Knowall23 ( talk • contribs) 16:00, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
Reliable sources like where? I put all reliable-looking English web pages that a google search returned for this university in the page. Can you provide an example that would have this entry accepted?
Zade.ali ( talk) 18:07, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
significant coverage in unaffiliated, reliable sources
-
WP:GNG has a good overview which goes in-depth regarding what defines a source as reliable. Ranking websites and links to entries in database websites, which you cited, don't qualify as significant nor reliable coverage. Hope this helps. -
Liance
talk/
contribs
21:07, 24 February 2022 (UTC)Extended content
|
---|
Sir last time you rejected my draft 'The Walking Zombie 2' ( /info/en/?search=Draft:The_Walking_Zombie_2) but compared to that time I have made extensive changes in it. Sir please check it again and approve it for an article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Billapartygang123 ( talk • contribs) 08:27, 27 February 2022 (UTC) Extensive Changes DoneLiance sir, please check my draft of the walking zombie 2. I have done extensive changes to it compared to last time. please confirm it for an article. Billapartygang123 ( talk) 07:37, 28 February 2022 (UTC)Billapartygang123 PLEASE HELP!!!!!😨😭Hi LIance sir, please approve my draft of [ Walking Zombie 2]. Now it's perfectly fine for a Wikipedia article to have many independent sources. If you don't check it I will keep spamming messages to you every day. Billapartygang123 ( talk) 12:42, 1 March 2022 (UTC) please dont send threats or it wont get your drafts accepted — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.184.29.235 ( talk) 18:33, 4 March 2022 (UTC) Please Read This Liance Sir/info/en/?search=User:Billapartygang123 Billapartygang123 ( talk) 15:25, 1 March 2022 (UTC) Draft: Grand Theft Auto 6Hi Liance, please at least acknowledge my posts let alone approve my draft lease reply something or I will report you to Wikipedia moderator/admin. Billapartygang123 ( talk) 06:29, 2 March 2022 (UTC) |
Hi Liance, Can you please tell me the things I need to edit for the Gorilla Tag draft? It would be much appreciated if you did! :D
- OGxSLAY3R
Hi, this is a sincere apology from a Wikipedian for threatening you continuously. Sorry. Billapartygang123 ( talk) 11:45, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
Hello Liance Thanks for reviewing Draft:MC Stan, As I can understand that the draft was not much elaborated but as you declined it on behalf of not having WP:RS, I feel it does have enough RS although if you can guide me a bit with what is wrong with its sources as it does have sources like [ GQ] and [ Rolling Stone], Have you declined them cuz they are Interviews? Thanks Suryabeej ⋠talk⋡ 13:20, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
Why this is being flag as copyright? How can I add a logo that a organization is using? https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Puffy-Logo.png — Preceding unsigned comment added by Liptapp ( talk • contribs) 17:26, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
This is wrong because, as an elected member of a state legislative assembly, Tripathi meets WP:NPOL.
The draft was a terrible mess, mind you (I've started cleaning it up), and I'd definitely want to check that the sources all say what they're claimed to, but there was absolutely a reasonable claim for notability. DS ( talk) 18:59, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
Hello Liance,
Thank you for your feedback on the draft submitted by myself previously.
What would be required for the draft to be accepted as a notable figure? I just want to clarify that it must include further citings in notable media proprietors and remove the sources which you deemed to not be suitable for Wikipedia. Hypothetically, if a multitude of new sources are included, should I submit again and with a higher chance of approval?
Thank you Liance.
Roostermau5 ( talk) 06:44, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
There’s another tweet from another former employee who worked at Blue Sky that confirmed that the series was coming out that I forgot to add to the Development section, but other than that there isn’t any reliable/notable news articles covering the tweets from the employees. Even if another tweet from another former employee isn’t enough, should I just remove the entire section for Pre-release controversy per your suggestion? SlySabre ( talk) 14:39, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
Hi Liance!
I hope all is well! It seems that the Vaad HaBadchanim is not a notable enough organization to receive an article about it. What makes an organization notable or not? For context, the VHB is a known and respected source in the Jewish world for its humor, and runs an annual tournament with the best of Jewish humor that gets tens of thousands of votes.
Thank you so much for your time, and I appreciate all of the work that you put in to make Wikipedia a great website.
Best, Schwartzavij ( talk) 17:29, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
Pkilla Musik Net Worth -- Pkillamusik1 ( talk) 19:56, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
Thank you for rejecting this non-article. This is just a bad test by a newcomer while all info in it is already in the article Storm Prediction Center. This user should not be allowed to create a redundant article.
Pierre cb ( talk) 03:30, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
User:Pkillamusik1 i was deleted i want my page back? -- Pkillamusik1 ( talk) 20:25, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
Hi Lance. The article draft for Twisted Wood Guitars cites a respected paper which discusses the company in detail, the largest ukulele publication in the world which produced a full 4 page spread about the company, a top 5 wide-reaching industry magazine which discusses the company in detail, and the largest ukulele review site in the world which published a several hundred word review about one of their instruments.... I query how that doesn't constitute significant coverage from reliable secondary sources independent of the subject. I appreciate your desire to be zealous, but in this case, I think perhaps look into these citations in further detail. Many Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Learningtouke ( talk • contribs) 21:13, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
1. Ukelele Magazine might be good for establishing notability about the company's product, but there are maybe 1-2 sentences max that discuss the company itself. We are looking for significant coverage about the company, not their products. Also may not qualify as a reliable source.
2. Retailer constitutes trivial/routine coverage (see WP:NCORP#Examples of trivial coverage) and is little more than a business announcement. Also is less than WP:100WORDS in total.
3. Got A Ukelele same as the first source, maybe 1 sentence max actually concerns the company itself rather than its products.
4. St. Albert Today appears to be mostly an interview and quotes from the company's founder which makes it non-independent and a primary source. Additionally please see WP:LOCALCOVERAGE.
Learningtouke Next time, please read through the entirety of cited guidelines like WP:NCORP before requesting additional help, as it would have answered any questions you had regarding your draft. Additionally, if you believe you have a conflict of interest with the company or were paid to contribute please WP:DISCLOSE your connection or you may face a block from Wikipedia. Best, - Liance talk/ contribs 22:00, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
Reviews that narrowly focus on a particular product or function without broader context (e.g. review of a particular meal without description of the restaurant as a whole) do not count as significant sources.
- it's on the same page that you cited, and in the two reviews you linked there was at the very most one or two sentences about the company mentioning little other than the company's name or location. As mentioned earlier these sources are also self-published blogs which do not qualify as
WP:RS. Additionally I was not threatening a block in any way, I was just adding a reminder that conflicts of interest must be declared as it seemed that you had some relationship to the subject you are writing about, and I apologize if it came off as a threat. Regards, -
Liance
talk/
contribs
16:09, 17 March 2022 (UTC)How would you no if the is insufficient context in a artical if you are unfammilair with the subject? not passing the Dig Down Concept / Alan B Christ for this reason is just bad editing by pepole that have no knowledge of the subject matter
70.190.172.188 ( talk) 23:47, 16 March 2022 (UTC)Alan B Christ
Hi there Liance!
Thank you for reviewing my submission for article review. I read your critique carefully, and removed all reference to the 'Liberty Block' citations. Frankly, I do not think they were necessary to any part of the article, but included them as redundant source material on top of the existing secondary sources. Several include ABC and NBC news rooms, and the concomitant write ups. I believe that this should now be good enough for a basic starter article. Though of course I will continue to work on it further over time, but this should meet the minimum requirements as I understand them at this stage. Thank you very much. ♥ Th78blue ( talk)♥ 01:13, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
This segment is paid for by Las Vegas Coin Company
is listed at the bottom of the page) meaning it is not a suitable source. KSL looks OK but local news coverage generally do not strongly indicate notability (for example see
WP:LOCALCOVERAGE). The subject is not mentioned by name in any other qualifying sources, so
WP:GNG is not met. If you find additional sources that are independent, reliable, secondary, and demonstrate significant coverage, you can resubmit the draft and have a reviewer take another look. Hope this helps. -
Liance
talk/
contribs
01:24, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
Th78blue Sounds good. No problem with having primary sources in an article to verify information if there are no good secondary substitutes. However do note that primary sources do not contribute to establishing notability, so you will still need to locate two more qualifying, secondary sources. Best of luck! - Liance talk/ contribs 01:35, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
Th78blue I tend not to review AfC submissions more than once in a row for the sake of fairness and to let a fresh set of eyes have a look in case I missed anything. If you submitted the draft a reviewer should get to it at some point or you could ask at the AfC helpdesk. - Liance talk/ contribs 16:52, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
Crypto news sites are among the only sources that exist about crypto games, so it is often impossible to find other sources. Since it is an emerging industry, most of the established news sites are not covering every development in the industry. All sources cited are legitimate journalists that do original reporting for the crypto industry. Please reconsider given the lack of resources to learn about these kinds of games, projects, companies in general. The only sources available on these topics are crypto news sites, in a large amount of cases. All sentences in this article are confirmed by the game and company's own websites and blog posts. If you advise that it would better to cite those instead, please let me know. But I thought it better to cite third parties. Bbpetro20 ( talk) 03:06, 19 March 2022 (UTC)bbpetro
I am very confused on how to use this website. Ives tried to read messages that were sent to me but it won’t show me them. -- Justinbeibergirly ( talk) 04:00, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
Why is it that there are so many "stub" articles on the encyclopedia with little to no references and stuff? I am not meaning this question to be confrontational at all, but I am genuinely curious if you could help inform me as to how all of those passed muster and an article like mine (that I believe—albeit with a personal bias of course—is much better and better sourced and written etc.)? Thank you! ♥ Th78blue ( talk)♥ 21:46, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
...just one more "historical" question then. I don't know if you have been around long enough to gather the answer to this one, but when did that change? c. 2005? c.2010? More recent even? 2015 or 2020? I have not been editing long enough to know myself, but was just curious if you might know. Thanks! ♥ Th78blue ( talk)♥ 04:54, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
Hi Liance, thank you for your feedback regarding Memgraph. I've updated the draft with new sources: scientific papers, conference proceedings, etc. I hope that this is now up to Wikipedia standard :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Autorko ( talk • contribs) 08:30, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
Hi Liance! Thank you for your feedback for Memgraph. I've added reference sources from research papers, conference proceedings, etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Autorko ( talk • contribs) 09:02, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
Hello,
Can you take a look at /info/en/?search=Draft:Fusion_Blockchain and maybe leave a comment in the "talk" section with some advice on how to proceed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.193.46.20 ( talk) 16:26, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
Hi Liance, I've added some additional sources hoping to get the /info/en/?search=Draft:Elizabeth_Moore Elizabeth Moore page acceptable to be live. I'm hoping you can take a look. I know there is a backlog, and my hope is to get it approved by the end of week Friday so it can be counted as an accomplishment in our edit-a-thon taking place this week. Thank for your time, Beth Jane Toren 18:57, 22 March 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by BethJaneToren ( talk • contribs)
hello, I just wanted to say thank you. being able to edit on wiki is not something i will probably ever do but just knowing I can means so much to me. its the first real change i have seen in over 4 years. thank you thank you thank you I feel alive again -- MCVLTRAIX ( talk) 06:31, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
Hi User:Liance: Thank you for reviewing the submitted Vercel article. I just have one question. It looks like the article is still in the draft space. Will it remain there so that I might work on improvements? I know that a draft article will be deleted after six months of no activity. Thank you and best, LeepKendall ( talk) 17:23, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect TDEE and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 March 25#TDEE until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. — Mhawk10 ( talk) 05:02, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Start point and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 March 25#Start point until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. — Mhawk10 ( talk) 05:07, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
Awesome Draft Reviewer | |
Stay awesome :) FlantasyFlan ( talk) 18:50, 27 March 2022 (UTC) |
You are highly welcome. Benedict Maluil Akok ( talk) 21:25, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
You made multiple large edits without giving an edit summary, please remember to give an edit summary unless you are making a minor edit. Idontknowwhattouseasmyusername300 ( talk) 12:58, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | ||
A Barnstar for being one of the best reviewers! |
- Free Barnstar from OGxSLAY3R!
Thanks for your feedback Liance. The entry has been updated based upon your input. Additional reliable sources added. Liz Marks ( talk) 15:09, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
I want to delete this message -- Home Service99 ( talk) 17:56, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello! What pages need creating? -- Helloheart ( talk) 00:28, 8 April 2022 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 |
Dear fellow editor,
I am Piotr Konieczny, a sociologist of new media at Hanyang University (and User:Piotrus on Wikipedia). I would like to better understand Wikipedia's volunteers who edit medical topics, many associated with the WikiProject Medicine, and known to create some of the highest quality content on Wikipedia. I hope that the lessons I can learn from you that I will present to the academic audience will benefit both the WikiProject Medicine (improving your understanding of yourself and helping to promote it and attract new volunteers) and the wider world of medical volunteering and academia. Open access copy of the resulting research will be made available at WikiProject's Medicine upon the completion of the project.
All questions are optional. The survey is divided into 4 parts: 1 - Brief description of yourself; 2 - Questions about your volunteering; 3 - Questions about WikiProject Medicine and 4 - Questions about Wikipedia's coverage of medical topics.
Please note that by filling out this questionnaire, you consent to participate in this research. The survey is anonymous and all personal details relevant to your experience will be kept private and will not be transferred to any third party.
I appreciate your support of this research and thank you in advance for taking the time to participate and share your experiences! If you have any questions at all, please feel free to contact me at my Wikipedia user page or through my email listed on the survey page (or by Wikipedia email this user function).
The survey is accessible through the LINK HERE.
Piotr Konieczny
Associate Professor
Hanyang University
If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from
the mailing list.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
22:24, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
Hey, page for Dexerto was declined for lack of "significant coverage" in sources. It has 14 sources total, The subject of the article is one of the top 40 gaming websites in the US, but given the nature of news websites, it is near impossible to provide the sources suggested in Wikipedia's 'general notability guidelines' - most news websites are not the subject of coverage themselves.
When reviewing the Wikipedia pages of similar websites, there are no such references given (in fact almost all that I have checked have far fewer independent sources, and some none at all). I am informed that rules around this have changed which is why these websites have pages with such scant references.
Could you please advise on the best approach here, or if it is simply not possible, given the oddly specific notability guidelines which seem to not apply to news websites at all, to have a Wikipedia page for such a large and well-read website? This would strike as odd given the size of the site, and the state of other wiki pages about smaller websites, with fewer references.
Thanks
Calcium17 ( talk) 14:26, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for volunteering as a Host at the Teahouse. Wikipedia is a community of people working together to make knowledge free. You are an important part of that effort! By joining as a Host, and by following our expectations, you are helping new users to get started here at Wikipedia, and aiding more experienced users who just have a question about how something works. We appreciate your willingness to help!
Here are some links you may find helpful as a Host:
Hello. I have edited Draft:Brooks Rehabilitation draft for review and would like some feedback before submitting for approval. You were involved in reviewing a previous draft. I would like to improve the article and am looking for help to ensure I am meeting the Wikipedia Guidelines. I believe the content is written from a neutral point of view and the sources meet the criteria. I would appreciate any direction you can provide. To be fully transparent, I have a declared COI with Brooks Rehabilitation.. Thank you Lauradavis44 ( talk) 18:39, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
Hi Liance,
I wanted to discuss the reasoning for the above-referenced Articles for Creation submission being declined and I hope the decision can be re-evaluated.
First, I'm hoping you can clarify your comment: Evaluating as organization as almost all coverage appears to be about the foundation. Lacks significant (non-trivial) coverage in multiple reliable sources. YouTube, crypto news outlets are not considered to be reliable sources. -Liancetalk/contribs 10:25, 17 February 2022 (UTC). What I don't understand about this, is "evaluating as organization as almost all coverage appears to be about the foundation." None of the coverage is about the foundation. The foundation was recently formed and there is only one line about the foundation that was included in the article itself, for thoroughness. All of the news coverage is about Pawthereum, the cryptocurrency, so I do not know how you reached the conclusion that you did.
Second, the reason for the submission being declined: This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
I did read the page on notability, etc. that lays out the guidelines for what sources count, and by that guideline, I believe the article should qualify. I'd like to go through the sources one by one and discuss the ones that I believe should qualify (I don't necessarily agree with you that crypto news outlets aren't reliable sources but I understand the reasoning, so we can agree to not count those. I also understand the reasoning regarding Youtube but it is strange that an AMA from the largest cryptocurrency subreddit wouldn't count considering, 1. it is very significant, especially considering the significance of the guest speaker and size of that subreddit and 2. the AMA is 100% independent from Pawthereum).
Anyway, I think arguably these should count: Source #5, NewsTimes
From what I understand the number of sources needed is 3. Are we saying that, disregarding all of the other sources I didn't mention, that there aren't at least 3 sources out of these 6 that qualify?
I appreciate you taking a look and reviewing this article, but I don't see the reasoning being applied to the decision lining up with Wikipedia's guidelines, so I do not agree with the decision making here and would appreciate a response to the points I've raised. If the decision can be re-evaluated, that would be ideal. If the reasoning can be explained and the reasoning is supported by Wikipedia's guidelines, I can accept the decision, but otherwise I will have to respectfully contest this decision.
Thank you,
CatDadoftheYear ( talk) 19:26, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
Thanks, this does help clarify things. Appreciate your feedback. CatDadoftheYear ( talk) 00:21, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
Hello Liance,
Many thanks for accepting/editing my new article "membrane scaling" in Wikipedia. I see a message that this article has an issue:
I added links to my article and also to other articles where "membrane scaling" was just mentioned. So the reader in other articles can check in detail what membrane scaling is. But, I still see that my article is shown as orphan. How to resolve this?
Thank you!
I don't understand why my submission hasn't been accepted.
Hi there,
I have submitted a lengthy bio for me as a musician/artist and included all of the information required whilst looking up other professional musicians with a similar template. Can you please explain in detail what it is I need to change as I am incredibly keen to get my wikipedia page up and running.
LeonidasNSFW ( talk) 20:57, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Liance,
It doesn't look like the draft you want to move to main space is ready to appear in the article space of the project. It seems like it is still in the process of being reviewed. Until it is "main space ready", it is unlikely that an administrator will complete this move that you requested. Eventually, there might be an admin who will decide, "What the heck, I'll do the move" but I'm not sure how long that will take. Most moves from Draft space to main space look like regular articles without all of the AFC tags. Just giving you a head's up, from a patrolling admin's perspective. Liz Read! Talk! 01:27, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
Greetings, I'm Fico. I thank you for what you did for the "Shin Japan Heroes Universe" draft. However, I must admit I need from people who really know more about those franchises than I do. In my country, I barely know a little about Godzilla, and then, nothing more. Therefore, I would appreciate the need of more help from other users. Thank you so much. Sincerely, Fico. (Perhaps, other live action and animated intellectual properties from other third parties can join this project, but of course, it is too soon to speculate.) Fico Puricelli ( talk) 16:46, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
how can there even be any other sources/citation, that all sites there are. There are only two original sources online. Those are the only source of published content. There isnt any other way to do anything. Also, what other sources are there for a webcomic than the webcomic itself? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChiserYT ( talk • contribs) 19:09, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
Hi Liance, could you please give me more explanation as to why my draft was declined?
Hey Liance! Thank you for taking the time to review one of my first significant contributions. I have resubmitted the page for review, maybe you could take another look and let me know if there is anything more I need to do for it to reach the required level of satisfaction to be published on the Wiki please. I've contributed to other pages but it would be cool to have contributed a whole page. Congratulations on 21,000 edits too, that's some milestone! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Knowall23 ( talk • contribs) 16:00, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
Reliable sources like where? I put all reliable-looking English web pages that a google search returned for this university in the page. Can you provide an example that would have this entry accepted?
Zade.ali ( talk) 18:07, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
significant coverage in unaffiliated, reliable sources
-
WP:GNG has a good overview which goes in-depth regarding what defines a source as reliable. Ranking websites and links to entries in database websites, which you cited, don't qualify as significant nor reliable coverage. Hope this helps. -
Liance
talk/
contribs
21:07, 24 February 2022 (UTC)Extended content
|
---|
Sir last time you rejected my draft 'The Walking Zombie 2' ( /info/en/?search=Draft:The_Walking_Zombie_2) but compared to that time I have made extensive changes in it. Sir please check it again and approve it for an article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Billapartygang123 ( talk • contribs) 08:27, 27 February 2022 (UTC) Extensive Changes DoneLiance sir, please check my draft of the walking zombie 2. I have done extensive changes to it compared to last time. please confirm it for an article. Billapartygang123 ( talk) 07:37, 28 February 2022 (UTC)Billapartygang123 PLEASE HELP!!!!!😨😭Hi LIance sir, please approve my draft of [ Walking Zombie 2]. Now it's perfectly fine for a Wikipedia article to have many independent sources. If you don't check it I will keep spamming messages to you every day. Billapartygang123 ( talk) 12:42, 1 March 2022 (UTC) please dont send threats or it wont get your drafts accepted — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.184.29.235 ( talk) 18:33, 4 March 2022 (UTC) Please Read This Liance Sir/info/en/?search=User:Billapartygang123 Billapartygang123 ( talk) 15:25, 1 March 2022 (UTC) Draft: Grand Theft Auto 6Hi Liance, please at least acknowledge my posts let alone approve my draft lease reply something or I will report you to Wikipedia moderator/admin. Billapartygang123 ( talk) 06:29, 2 March 2022 (UTC) |
Hi Liance, Can you please tell me the things I need to edit for the Gorilla Tag draft? It would be much appreciated if you did! :D
- OGxSLAY3R
Hi, this is a sincere apology from a Wikipedian for threatening you continuously. Sorry. Billapartygang123 ( talk) 11:45, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
Hello Liance Thanks for reviewing Draft:MC Stan, As I can understand that the draft was not much elaborated but as you declined it on behalf of not having WP:RS, I feel it does have enough RS although if you can guide me a bit with what is wrong with its sources as it does have sources like [ GQ] and [ Rolling Stone], Have you declined them cuz they are Interviews? Thanks Suryabeej ⋠talk⋡ 13:20, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
Why this is being flag as copyright? How can I add a logo that a organization is using? https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Puffy-Logo.png — Preceding unsigned comment added by Liptapp ( talk • contribs) 17:26, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
This is wrong because, as an elected member of a state legislative assembly, Tripathi meets WP:NPOL.
The draft was a terrible mess, mind you (I've started cleaning it up), and I'd definitely want to check that the sources all say what they're claimed to, but there was absolutely a reasonable claim for notability. DS ( talk) 18:59, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
Hello Liance,
Thank you for your feedback on the draft submitted by myself previously.
What would be required for the draft to be accepted as a notable figure? I just want to clarify that it must include further citings in notable media proprietors and remove the sources which you deemed to not be suitable for Wikipedia. Hypothetically, if a multitude of new sources are included, should I submit again and with a higher chance of approval?
Thank you Liance.
Roostermau5 ( talk) 06:44, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
There’s another tweet from another former employee who worked at Blue Sky that confirmed that the series was coming out that I forgot to add to the Development section, but other than that there isn’t any reliable/notable news articles covering the tweets from the employees. Even if another tweet from another former employee isn’t enough, should I just remove the entire section for Pre-release controversy per your suggestion? SlySabre ( talk) 14:39, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
Hi Liance!
I hope all is well! It seems that the Vaad HaBadchanim is not a notable enough organization to receive an article about it. What makes an organization notable or not? For context, the VHB is a known and respected source in the Jewish world for its humor, and runs an annual tournament with the best of Jewish humor that gets tens of thousands of votes.
Thank you so much for your time, and I appreciate all of the work that you put in to make Wikipedia a great website.
Best, Schwartzavij ( talk) 17:29, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
Pkilla Musik Net Worth -- Pkillamusik1 ( talk) 19:56, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
Thank you for rejecting this non-article. This is just a bad test by a newcomer while all info in it is already in the article Storm Prediction Center. This user should not be allowed to create a redundant article.
Pierre cb ( talk) 03:30, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
User:Pkillamusik1 i was deleted i want my page back? -- Pkillamusik1 ( talk) 20:25, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
Hi Lance. The article draft for Twisted Wood Guitars cites a respected paper which discusses the company in detail, the largest ukulele publication in the world which produced a full 4 page spread about the company, a top 5 wide-reaching industry magazine which discusses the company in detail, and the largest ukulele review site in the world which published a several hundred word review about one of their instruments.... I query how that doesn't constitute significant coverage from reliable secondary sources independent of the subject. I appreciate your desire to be zealous, but in this case, I think perhaps look into these citations in further detail. Many Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Learningtouke ( talk • contribs) 21:13, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
1. Ukelele Magazine might be good for establishing notability about the company's product, but there are maybe 1-2 sentences max that discuss the company itself. We are looking for significant coverage about the company, not their products. Also may not qualify as a reliable source.
2. Retailer constitutes trivial/routine coverage (see WP:NCORP#Examples of trivial coverage) and is little more than a business announcement. Also is less than WP:100WORDS in total.
3. Got A Ukelele same as the first source, maybe 1 sentence max actually concerns the company itself rather than its products.
4. St. Albert Today appears to be mostly an interview and quotes from the company's founder which makes it non-independent and a primary source. Additionally please see WP:LOCALCOVERAGE.
Learningtouke Next time, please read through the entirety of cited guidelines like WP:NCORP before requesting additional help, as it would have answered any questions you had regarding your draft. Additionally, if you believe you have a conflict of interest with the company or were paid to contribute please WP:DISCLOSE your connection or you may face a block from Wikipedia. Best, - Liance talk/ contribs 22:00, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
Reviews that narrowly focus on a particular product or function without broader context (e.g. review of a particular meal without description of the restaurant as a whole) do not count as significant sources.
- it's on the same page that you cited, and in the two reviews you linked there was at the very most one or two sentences about the company mentioning little other than the company's name or location. As mentioned earlier these sources are also self-published blogs which do not qualify as
WP:RS. Additionally I was not threatening a block in any way, I was just adding a reminder that conflicts of interest must be declared as it seemed that you had some relationship to the subject you are writing about, and I apologize if it came off as a threat. Regards, -
Liance
talk/
contribs
16:09, 17 March 2022 (UTC)How would you no if the is insufficient context in a artical if you are unfammilair with the subject? not passing the Dig Down Concept / Alan B Christ for this reason is just bad editing by pepole that have no knowledge of the subject matter
70.190.172.188 ( talk) 23:47, 16 March 2022 (UTC)Alan B Christ
Hi there Liance!
Thank you for reviewing my submission for article review. I read your critique carefully, and removed all reference to the 'Liberty Block' citations. Frankly, I do not think they were necessary to any part of the article, but included them as redundant source material on top of the existing secondary sources. Several include ABC and NBC news rooms, and the concomitant write ups. I believe that this should now be good enough for a basic starter article. Though of course I will continue to work on it further over time, but this should meet the minimum requirements as I understand them at this stage. Thank you very much. ♥ Th78blue ( talk)♥ 01:13, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
This segment is paid for by Las Vegas Coin Company
is listed at the bottom of the page) meaning it is not a suitable source. KSL looks OK but local news coverage generally do not strongly indicate notability (for example see
WP:LOCALCOVERAGE). The subject is not mentioned by name in any other qualifying sources, so
WP:GNG is not met. If you find additional sources that are independent, reliable, secondary, and demonstrate significant coverage, you can resubmit the draft and have a reviewer take another look. Hope this helps. -
Liance
talk/
contribs
01:24, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
Th78blue Sounds good. No problem with having primary sources in an article to verify information if there are no good secondary substitutes. However do note that primary sources do not contribute to establishing notability, so you will still need to locate two more qualifying, secondary sources. Best of luck! - Liance talk/ contribs 01:35, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
Th78blue I tend not to review AfC submissions more than once in a row for the sake of fairness and to let a fresh set of eyes have a look in case I missed anything. If you submitted the draft a reviewer should get to it at some point or you could ask at the AfC helpdesk. - Liance talk/ contribs 16:52, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
Crypto news sites are among the only sources that exist about crypto games, so it is often impossible to find other sources. Since it is an emerging industry, most of the established news sites are not covering every development in the industry. All sources cited are legitimate journalists that do original reporting for the crypto industry. Please reconsider given the lack of resources to learn about these kinds of games, projects, companies in general. The only sources available on these topics are crypto news sites, in a large amount of cases. All sentences in this article are confirmed by the game and company's own websites and blog posts. If you advise that it would better to cite those instead, please let me know. But I thought it better to cite third parties. Bbpetro20 ( talk) 03:06, 19 March 2022 (UTC)bbpetro
I am very confused on how to use this website. Ives tried to read messages that were sent to me but it won’t show me them. -- Justinbeibergirly ( talk) 04:00, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
Why is it that there are so many "stub" articles on the encyclopedia with little to no references and stuff? I am not meaning this question to be confrontational at all, but I am genuinely curious if you could help inform me as to how all of those passed muster and an article like mine (that I believe—albeit with a personal bias of course—is much better and better sourced and written etc.)? Thank you! ♥ Th78blue ( talk)♥ 21:46, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
...just one more "historical" question then. I don't know if you have been around long enough to gather the answer to this one, but when did that change? c. 2005? c.2010? More recent even? 2015 or 2020? I have not been editing long enough to know myself, but was just curious if you might know. Thanks! ♥ Th78blue ( talk)♥ 04:54, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
Hi Liance, thank you for your feedback regarding Memgraph. I've updated the draft with new sources: scientific papers, conference proceedings, etc. I hope that this is now up to Wikipedia standard :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Autorko ( talk • contribs) 08:30, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
Hi Liance! Thank you for your feedback for Memgraph. I've added reference sources from research papers, conference proceedings, etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Autorko ( talk • contribs) 09:02, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
Hello,
Can you take a look at /info/en/?search=Draft:Fusion_Blockchain and maybe leave a comment in the "talk" section with some advice on how to proceed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.193.46.20 ( talk) 16:26, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
Hi Liance, I've added some additional sources hoping to get the /info/en/?search=Draft:Elizabeth_Moore Elizabeth Moore page acceptable to be live. I'm hoping you can take a look. I know there is a backlog, and my hope is to get it approved by the end of week Friday so it can be counted as an accomplishment in our edit-a-thon taking place this week. Thank for your time, Beth Jane Toren 18:57, 22 March 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by BethJaneToren ( talk • contribs)
hello, I just wanted to say thank you. being able to edit on wiki is not something i will probably ever do but just knowing I can means so much to me. its the first real change i have seen in over 4 years. thank you thank you thank you I feel alive again -- MCVLTRAIX ( talk) 06:31, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
Hi User:Liance: Thank you for reviewing the submitted Vercel article. I just have one question. It looks like the article is still in the draft space. Will it remain there so that I might work on improvements? I know that a draft article will be deleted after six months of no activity. Thank you and best, LeepKendall ( talk) 17:23, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect TDEE and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 March 25#TDEE until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. — Mhawk10 ( talk) 05:02, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Start point and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 March 25#Start point until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. — Mhawk10 ( talk) 05:07, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
Awesome Draft Reviewer | |
Stay awesome :) FlantasyFlan ( talk) 18:50, 27 March 2022 (UTC) |
You are highly welcome. Benedict Maluil Akok ( talk) 21:25, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
You made multiple large edits without giving an edit summary, please remember to give an edit summary unless you are making a minor edit. Idontknowwhattouseasmyusername300 ( talk) 12:58, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | ||
A Barnstar for being one of the best reviewers! |
- Free Barnstar from OGxSLAY3R!
Thanks for your feedback Liance. The entry has been updated based upon your input. Additional reliable sources added. Liz Marks ( talk) 15:09, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
I want to delete this message -- Home Service99 ( talk) 17:56, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello! What pages need creating? -- Helloheart ( talk) 00:28, 8 April 2022 (UTC)