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 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 |
Hello Shadowowl! I understand only one of the articles can be submitted. However, the other article was already declined, so mine could still be accepted. And thank you for answering!
Ok, I will! Could you tell me what should I improve on the other article, in order for it to be accepted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cristinaclcardoso ( talk • contribs) 22:04, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
Ok, I will do that now! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cristinaclcardoso ( talk • contribs) 00:59, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
Hello! Shadowowl,
I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the
Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the
Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there!
My name isnotdave (
talk/
contribs)
07:57, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
|
When marking a draft for submission, please make sure not to select the "yourself" option. Instead, select either the "most recent submitter" or the "page creator" option. This way, you will not receive decline messages like the one above by My name is not dave and the one I mistakenly added here, which I have removed in the following edit. GeoffreyT2000 ( talk, contribs) 02:35, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
In this edit and this other edit, you submitted for AfC Draft:Antiquary's Books series and Draft:Aspen HYSYS, both drafts that had been dormant for at least 6 months, making them potential material for CSD G13. In the first case, I didn't fix the u= parameter in time, but I caught it in the second. ( Legacypac, by the way, manages to do these submissions without imprinting them with their own username, I'm not sure how that works.)
In looking at some of the oldest entries in the AfC backlog, I've seen several drafts that had also been unedited by their initial creator for more than 6 months and were submitted by AfC editors.
Can I ask what's going on? I'm very new to AfC, but this pattern I've described seems to pointlessly add to the AfC backlog and waste reviewer time. Since the articles are in no fit condition to be accepted and now, as I understand it, are not eligible for G13 for another 6 months, they just get declined and go back to Draft: space with nothing having been accomplished (except perhaps to wake up the original contributor). Is this part of some master plan that I'm just too inexperienced to see? — jmcgnh (talk) (contribs) 05:21, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
Dear Shadowowl,
I see that you reviewed our article submission and declined it on 13 July. It was declined for the 3rd time, so I thought we might need a little help. Could you please give a piece of advice what should we do exactly to get it accepted? As far as I can see, the main problem was with the style and the references. As for the references, the festival is only in its 3rd year, therefore the amount of publications in the international media is limited. However, we have well-renowned and credible sources e.g. Wired, The Next Web or Big Think.
As for the style, could you higlight a few parts that seem like advertisement and make suggestions how to rewrite them?
Thanks in advance.
Rekabodzan ( talk) 14:04, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
Unformatted references is not a good or valid reason to decline a submission. This can be cleaned up when the article reaches mainspace. There are plenty of WP:GNOMEs who relish doing this. It is best to get authors focused on the most serious issues first. In this case, lack of WP:INDEPENDENT sources to demonstrate notability. ~ Kvng ( talk) 16:00, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
The deletion is not contested, as there is simply no sign of the cult classic being made into a movie. EF 20:12, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
Hi Shadowowl,
I note that
on 06:04, July 15,
DGG (
talk ·
contribs) moved
Draft:Zbyszek Darzynkiewicz to the mainspace article
Zbyszek Darzynkiewicz.
Perhaps this should also be discussed with that user?
Pete AU aka --
Shirt58 (
talk)
09:44, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
The article is of fairly low quality and needs improvement, but it can be improved in mainspace. The standard for moving to mainspace is that it will pass AfD. DGG ( talk ) 18:32, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.
Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!
Sulfurboy ( talk) 00:38, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
Dear Shadowowl,
Please let me know the reasons for rejection of the wikipedia page creation.
There are 2 points 1. Reference Improvement: Like to know which reference I need to improve for the article. 2. AFCH 0.9 : Like to know what I need to improve here.
Regards
praveensms — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
223.186.51.58 (
talk)
05:09, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
Hello,
The reason why I am requesting a re-review is because I was told that there wasnt enough references throughout this article. I am confused on what else needs to be added in regards to references. The published publications and books are referenced and listed at the bottom of the document and are cited throughout the article. Please advise?
Thanks so much,
Christina
Hi there,
The first three links in the reference section are from subsections of the UK official music chart, which is cited by Wikipedia as number 2 on the Album notability section: The single or album has appeared on any country's national music chart.
On the Record Chart section of Typical sources for record charts and archives, by country, the OOC is listed as an acceptable source. I don't understand why links from subsections of this Chart/website have been deemed to not be an 'acceptable source'
This is the link from the UK chart that is acceptable, according to the Wiki article: http://www.officialcharts.com/charts/albums-chart/
This is the second link that I've cited: http://www.officialcharts.com/charts/independent-albums-chart/20170714/131/
It's the same website.
Please can you explain your reasoning on this, as I'm really struggling to understand it.
Many thanks for your help.
Danielle2017! ( talk) 15:36, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
Added some inline citations to the article that was rejected. Please let me know if you feel this is sufficient before I resubmit.
Thank you for reviewing the page /info/en/?search=Draft:Harold_L._Paz,_M.D.,_M.S. Could you please help us figure out the issue with the sources? Didn't realize that Wikipedia wouldn't be allowed. Were there any other issues we need to fix? This is a very senior C-Suite executive at a Fortune 50 company and we provided 31 references for his biography, including respected industry journals, Washington Post, etc. thank you for any and all help!
Brandfog ( talk) 18:48, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
Hi there!
Please could you let me know which bits need sources and I will amend or remove. Many thanks.
Danielle2017! ( talk) 14:08, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
On July 11 you declined DraftResearchfish giving the reason that "The external links should be put at the end of the article, not in the middle.". There are several good reasons why that article is not ready for mainspace, but that is not one of them. It's the sort of thing that is trivial to fix in the course of normal editing.
On Sept Sept 6 you declined a draft for BBSShowbizfor not having inline citations. You used a similar reason for Draft:Cane Handle Camera. That rule applies only to BLPs.
I think you missed the problem at aft:Jack M. Kartush
Draft:Haildhar Madrasah seems an acceptable article on a secondary school. The tone is not perfect, but its good enogu handshould passAfD, which is the criterion for accepting an article.
DGG ( talk ) 03:33, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
Hi there, you rightly wrote that the draft lacked reliable external sources. I had already pointed out on the draft's talk page that there already is an article on the university under its former name. Should I have written that elsewhere? I created two drafts myself, Draft:Guayaquil International Film Festival, and Draft:Philippe Fix. Could you please give me some advise on them? Crotopaxi ( talk) 08:02, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
The references I have cited are a journal from Purdue University and a book by the author. They are available for checking the authenticity of the quotes I cited. I have read the rules many times, and am at a loss as to how to satisfy the reviewer. I would love to see what changes I can make to get the submission accepted.
Selfmagnet ( talk) 15:28, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Would you help me to understand why you rejected my input into this Draft? I read your input on that, but I need to understand better. What is the encyclopedic format this Draft did not follow? Why is the problem with "range of independent, reliable, published sources"? I took those sources from the Internet, so they were officially published.
Would you help me with this editing, or just underline the selected text on which I can work again to expend or delete the text. The article is not big, so it will not take much of your time to help on it. Thanks in advance, Hta94 ( talk) 16:51, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
Hta94 ( talk) 16:51, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Would you check again. I made some corrections in the article, and would like to know your opinion. Is it enough to submit again, or I need to do something else? Waiting for your response. Thanks. Hta94 ( talk) 20:49, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Would you check again. I did the fixed, you suggested, and did some restructuring of the Article, so it would be easier to follow the text and References. Thanks for your input! Hta94 ( talk) 18:30, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
Hello, I deleted a "blog" in the reference number, and substituted by another path. Would you check again if it is OK now, and I can submit this Draft? Thanks. Hta94 ( talk) 18:57, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
Would you confirm, if it is OK now and I can submit the Draft for review? Thanks. Hta94 ( talk) 15:36, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.
Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!
RileyBugz 会話 投稿記録 19:56, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for pointing out that I need to get more citations. I have contacted many libraries and publishers for more info on Alfred Still to no avail. I was hoping that his dozen books on engineering subjects, and his autobiography would suffice to get him the recognition on Wikipedia. I am sorry it wasn't enough.
Selfmagnet ( talk) 16:26, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
==Career==
in wikitext. --
Thank you for pointing out that some of the links in the Ellen Susman article are not able to verify the statement that they footnote. I will edit these.
The YouTube links are videos of the subject interviewing guests (Rosanne Cash, Chris Evert, etc) on the public television show that she hosted. They are not meant to prove that the show existed but as a reference for Wiki readers who may be interested in the content of the interviews. Should these be listed as external links?
Thanks in advance for your help.
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.
Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!
joe decker talk 16:07, 12 October 2017 (UTC)Please shorten your signature to the limit of 255 characters as specified at
WP:SIGLENGTH. Right now it sits at 676 characters long, which is particularly disruptive to editing. Additionally, please remove the {{
!}}
from your signtature per
WP:SIG#CustomSig. If you wish to include the pipe (|
), you can use |
. Lastly, the color does not adhere to WCAG AA standards per
WP:SIGAPP: see
here and
here. This is your current signature:
<span class="nounderlinelink plainlinks" style="font-weight:bold;color:#aaa;font-variant:small-caps;font-size:8pt"> <span class="sigexpand"> » <span class="sighidden" style="white-space:nowrap"> [[Owl|<span style="color:#7aa">Shadowowl</span>]] [[User:shadowowl|<span style="color:#777">Marcos Rodriguez</span>]] {{!}} [[User_talk:Shadowowl|<span style="color:#8bb">t</span>]] {{!}} [[wp:SPI|<span style="color:#aqua">SPI</span>]] {{!}} [[wp:AIV|<span style="color:#aqua">AIV</span>]] {{!}} [[wp:SAND|<span style="color:#aqua">Sandbox</span>]] {{!}} [[wp:HELPDESK|<span style="color:#aqua">Helpdesk</span>]] <span style="color:#ddd">»</span></span></span> </span>
This has been brought to your attention before, so please correct your signature to adhere to the guidelines. To be honest, the SPI, AIV, sandbox, and helpdesk links should probably be removed as well. Thanks! Nihlus 17:41, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
<span style="font-weight:bold;color:#aaa;font-variant:small-caps;font-size:10pt"> » [[User:shadowowl|<span style="color:#525252">Shadowowl</span>]] | [[User_talk:Shadowowl|<span style="color:#4F7D7D">talk</span>]]</span>
I hate to bring this up again, but your signature is still in violation of policy after being told to correct it multiple times. Do you plan on fixing it? Nihlus 20:01, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
How is that a hoax? -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 18:05, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
Dear Shadowowl, at the time you have moved my article in creation from the sandbox to drafts. It has been refused until now twice. And to be honest: I am bit despeared because I did introduce a lot of changes that should fulfill all the criteria. Could you please advise me? Thanks a lot! G. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Georgweinand ( talk • contribs) 10:28, 23 October 2017 (UTC) @ user:Georgweinand, There are only 3 references, while 1 of them is from himself, so non-reliable. Another one is a website, and it is not clear which page in that website. Regards, -- » Shadowowl | talk 12:15, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
Hi, can you please explain why this is not notable when it appeared in eg. major Czech tech media? Thanks
@Shadowowl Thanks for your reply.
Beranovaiveta ( talk) 14:41, 24 October 2017 (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 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 |
Hello Shadowowl! I understand only one of the articles can be submitted. However, the other article was already declined, so mine could still be accepted. And thank you for answering!
Ok, I will! Could you tell me what should I improve on the other article, in order for it to be accepted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cristinaclcardoso ( talk • contribs) 22:04, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
Ok, I will do that now! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cristinaclcardoso ( talk • contribs) 00:59, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
Hello! Shadowowl,
I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the
Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the
Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there!
My name isnotdave (
talk/
contribs)
07:57, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
|
When marking a draft for submission, please make sure not to select the "yourself" option. Instead, select either the "most recent submitter" or the "page creator" option. This way, you will not receive decline messages like the one above by My name is not dave and the one I mistakenly added here, which I have removed in the following edit. GeoffreyT2000 ( talk, contribs) 02:35, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
In this edit and this other edit, you submitted for AfC Draft:Antiquary's Books series and Draft:Aspen HYSYS, both drafts that had been dormant for at least 6 months, making them potential material for CSD G13. In the first case, I didn't fix the u= parameter in time, but I caught it in the second. ( Legacypac, by the way, manages to do these submissions without imprinting them with their own username, I'm not sure how that works.)
In looking at some of the oldest entries in the AfC backlog, I've seen several drafts that had also been unedited by their initial creator for more than 6 months and were submitted by AfC editors.
Can I ask what's going on? I'm very new to AfC, but this pattern I've described seems to pointlessly add to the AfC backlog and waste reviewer time. Since the articles are in no fit condition to be accepted and now, as I understand it, are not eligible for G13 for another 6 months, they just get declined and go back to Draft: space with nothing having been accomplished (except perhaps to wake up the original contributor). Is this part of some master plan that I'm just too inexperienced to see? — jmcgnh (talk) (contribs) 05:21, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
Dear Shadowowl,
I see that you reviewed our article submission and declined it on 13 July. It was declined for the 3rd time, so I thought we might need a little help. Could you please give a piece of advice what should we do exactly to get it accepted? As far as I can see, the main problem was with the style and the references. As for the references, the festival is only in its 3rd year, therefore the amount of publications in the international media is limited. However, we have well-renowned and credible sources e.g. Wired, The Next Web or Big Think.
As for the style, could you higlight a few parts that seem like advertisement and make suggestions how to rewrite them?
Thanks in advance.
Rekabodzan ( talk) 14:04, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
Unformatted references is not a good or valid reason to decline a submission. This can be cleaned up when the article reaches mainspace. There are plenty of WP:GNOMEs who relish doing this. It is best to get authors focused on the most serious issues first. In this case, lack of WP:INDEPENDENT sources to demonstrate notability. ~ Kvng ( talk) 16:00, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
The deletion is not contested, as there is simply no sign of the cult classic being made into a movie. EF 20:12, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
Hi Shadowowl,
I note that
on 06:04, July 15,
DGG (
talk ·
contribs) moved
Draft:Zbyszek Darzynkiewicz to the mainspace article
Zbyszek Darzynkiewicz.
Perhaps this should also be discussed with that user?
Pete AU aka --
Shirt58 (
talk)
09:44, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
The article is of fairly low quality and needs improvement, but it can be improved in mainspace. The standard for moving to mainspace is that it will pass AfD. DGG ( talk ) 18:32, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.
Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!
Sulfurboy ( talk) 00:38, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
Dear Shadowowl,
Please let me know the reasons for rejection of the wikipedia page creation.
There are 2 points 1. Reference Improvement: Like to know which reference I need to improve for the article. 2. AFCH 0.9 : Like to know what I need to improve here.
Regards
praveensms — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
223.186.51.58 (
talk)
05:09, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
Hello,
The reason why I am requesting a re-review is because I was told that there wasnt enough references throughout this article. I am confused on what else needs to be added in regards to references. The published publications and books are referenced and listed at the bottom of the document and are cited throughout the article. Please advise?
Thanks so much,
Christina
Hi there,
The first three links in the reference section are from subsections of the UK official music chart, which is cited by Wikipedia as number 2 on the Album notability section: The single or album has appeared on any country's national music chart.
On the Record Chart section of Typical sources for record charts and archives, by country, the OOC is listed as an acceptable source. I don't understand why links from subsections of this Chart/website have been deemed to not be an 'acceptable source'
This is the link from the UK chart that is acceptable, according to the Wiki article: http://www.officialcharts.com/charts/albums-chart/
This is the second link that I've cited: http://www.officialcharts.com/charts/independent-albums-chart/20170714/131/
It's the same website.
Please can you explain your reasoning on this, as I'm really struggling to understand it.
Many thanks for your help.
Danielle2017! ( talk) 15:36, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
Added some inline citations to the article that was rejected. Please let me know if you feel this is sufficient before I resubmit.
Thank you for reviewing the page /info/en/?search=Draft:Harold_L._Paz,_M.D.,_M.S. Could you please help us figure out the issue with the sources? Didn't realize that Wikipedia wouldn't be allowed. Were there any other issues we need to fix? This is a very senior C-Suite executive at a Fortune 50 company and we provided 31 references for his biography, including respected industry journals, Washington Post, etc. thank you for any and all help!
Brandfog ( talk) 18:48, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
Hi there!
Please could you let me know which bits need sources and I will amend or remove. Many thanks.
Danielle2017! ( talk) 14:08, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
On July 11 you declined DraftResearchfish giving the reason that "The external links should be put at the end of the article, not in the middle.". There are several good reasons why that article is not ready for mainspace, but that is not one of them. It's the sort of thing that is trivial to fix in the course of normal editing.
On Sept Sept 6 you declined a draft for BBSShowbizfor not having inline citations. You used a similar reason for Draft:Cane Handle Camera. That rule applies only to BLPs.
I think you missed the problem at aft:Jack M. Kartush
Draft:Haildhar Madrasah seems an acceptable article on a secondary school. The tone is not perfect, but its good enogu handshould passAfD, which is the criterion for accepting an article.
DGG ( talk ) 03:33, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
Hi there, you rightly wrote that the draft lacked reliable external sources. I had already pointed out on the draft's talk page that there already is an article on the university under its former name. Should I have written that elsewhere? I created two drafts myself, Draft:Guayaquil International Film Festival, and Draft:Philippe Fix. Could you please give me some advise on them? Crotopaxi ( talk) 08:02, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
The references I have cited are a journal from Purdue University and a book by the author. They are available for checking the authenticity of the quotes I cited. I have read the rules many times, and am at a loss as to how to satisfy the reviewer. I would love to see what changes I can make to get the submission accepted.
Selfmagnet ( talk) 15:28, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Would you help me to understand why you rejected my input into this Draft? I read your input on that, but I need to understand better. What is the encyclopedic format this Draft did not follow? Why is the problem with "range of independent, reliable, published sources"? I took those sources from the Internet, so they were officially published.
Would you help me with this editing, or just underline the selected text on which I can work again to expend or delete the text. The article is not big, so it will not take much of your time to help on it. Thanks in advance, Hta94 ( talk) 16:51, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
Hta94 ( talk) 16:51, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Would you check again. I made some corrections in the article, and would like to know your opinion. Is it enough to submit again, or I need to do something else? Waiting for your response. Thanks. Hta94 ( talk) 20:49, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Would you check again. I did the fixed, you suggested, and did some restructuring of the Article, so it would be easier to follow the text and References. Thanks for your input! Hta94 ( talk) 18:30, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
Hello, I deleted a "blog" in the reference number, and substituted by another path. Would you check again if it is OK now, and I can submit this Draft? Thanks. Hta94 ( talk) 18:57, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
Would you confirm, if it is OK now and I can submit the Draft for review? Thanks. Hta94 ( talk) 15:36, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.
Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!
RileyBugz 会話 投稿記録 19:56, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for pointing out that I need to get more citations. I have contacted many libraries and publishers for more info on Alfred Still to no avail. I was hoping that his dozen books on engineering subjects, and his autobiography would suffice to get him the recognition on Wikipedia. I am sorry it wasn't enough.
Selfmagnet ( talk) 16:26, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
==Career==
in wikitext. --
Thank you for pointing out that some of the links in the Ellen Susman article are not able to verify the statement that they footnote. I will edit these.
The YouTube links are videos of the subject interviewing guests (Rosanne Cash, Chris Evert, etc) on the public television show that she hosted. They are not meant to prove that the show existed but as a reference for Wiki readers who may be interested in the content of the interviews. Should these be listed as external links?
Thanks in advance for your help.
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.
Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!
joe decker talk 16:07, 12 October 2017 (UTC)Please shorten your signature to the limit of 255 characters as specified at
WP:SIGLENGTH. Right now it sits at 676 characters long, which is particularly disruptive to editing. Additionally, please remove the {{
!}}
from your signtature per
WP:SIG#CustomSig. If you wish to include the pipe (|
), you can use |
. Lastly, the color does not adhere to WCAG AA standards per
WP:SIGAPP: see
here and
here. This is your current signature:
<span class="nounderlinelink plainlinks" style="font-weight:bold;color:#aaa;font-variant:small-caps;font-size:8pt"> <span class="sigexpand"> » <span class="sighidden" style="white-space:nowrap"> [[Owl|<span style="color:#7aa">Shadowowl</span>]] [[User:shadowowl|<span style="color:#777">Marcos Rodriguez</span>]] {{!}} [[User_talk:Shadowowl|<span style="color:#8bb">t</span>]] {{!}} [[wp:SPI|<span style="color:#aqua">SPI</span>]] {{!}} [[wp:AIV|<span style="color:#aqua">AIV</span>]] {{!}} [[wp:SAND|<span style="color:#aqua">Sandbox</span>]] {{!}} [[wp:HELPDESK|<span style="color:#aqua">Helpdesk</span>]] <span style="color:#ddd">»</span></span></span> </span>
This has been brought to your attention before, so please correct your signature to adhere to the guidelines. To be honest, the SPI, AIV, sandbox, and helpdesk links should probably be removed as well. Thanks! Nihlus 17:41, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
<span style="font-weight:bold;color:#aaa;font-variant:small-caps;font-size:10pt"> » [[User:shadowowl|<span style="color:#525252">Shadowowl</span>]] | [[User_talk:Shadowowl|<span style="color:#4F7D7D">talk</span>]]</span>
I hate to bring this up again, but your signature is still in violation of policy after being told to correct it multiple times. Do you plan on fixing it? Nihlus 20:01, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
How is that a hoax? -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 18:05, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
Dear Shadowowl, at the time you have moved my article in creation from the sandbox to drafts. It has been refused until now twice. And to be honest: I am bit despeared because I did introduce a lot of changes that should fulfill all the criteria. Could you please advise me? Thanks a lot! G. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Georgweinand ( talk • contribs) 10:28, 23 October 2017 (UTC) @ user:Georgweinand, There are only 3 references, while 1 of them is from himself, so non-reliable. Another one is a website, and it is not clear which page in that website. Regards, -- » Shadowowl | talk 12:15, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
Hi, can you please explain why this is not notable when it appeared in eg. major Czech tech media? Thanks
@Shadowowl Thanks for your reply.
Beranovaiveta ( talk) 14:41, 24 October 2017 (UTC)