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.

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Bitcoin. Legobot ( talk) 04:25, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Hello, so now it's been a while and I may ask if you might see the changes concerning the "Michael Tojner"-Draft. Would be my first major contribution. Of course I can change other things though I think I've cited enough independant sources. Best wishes, ole Shipyardworker. Shipyardworker ( talk) 15:29, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Social policy of Donald Trump. Legobot ( talk) 04:25, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2018).

Administrator changes

331dot • Cordless Larry • ClueBot NG

Gogo Dodo • Pb30 • Sebastiankessel • Seicer • SoLando

Guideline and policy news

• Administrators who have been desysopped due to inactivity are now required to have performed at least one (logged) administrative action in the past 5 years in order to qualify for a resysop without going through a new RfA.
• Editors who have been found to have engaged in sockpuppetry on at least two occasions after an initial indefinite block, for whatever reason, are now automatically considered banned by the community without the need to start a ban discussion.
• The notability guideline for organizations and companies has been substantially rewritten following the closure of this request for comment. Among the changes, the guideline more clearly defines the sourcing requirements needed for organizations and companies to be considered notable.
• The six-month autoconfirmed article creation trial (ACTRIAL) ended on 14 March 2018. The post-trial research report has been published. A request for comment is now underway to determine whether the restrictions from ACTRIAL should be implemented permanently.

Technical news

• There will soon be a calendar widget at Special:Block, making it easier to set expiries for a specific date and time.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee is considering a change to the discretionary sanctions procedures which would require an editor to appeal a sanction to the community at WP:AE or WP:AN prior to appealing directly to the Arbitration Committee at WP:ARCA.

Miscellaneous

• A discussion has closed which concluded that administrators are not required to enable email, though many editors suggested doing so as a matter of best practice.
• The Foundations' Anti-Harassment Tools team has released the Interaction Timeline. This shows a chronologic history for two users on pages where they have both made edits, which may be helpful in identifying sockpuppetry and investigating editing disputes.

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:The Great Courses. Legobot ( talk) 04:27, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2018).

Administrator changes

None

Chochopk • Coffee • Gryffindor • Jimp • Knowledge Seeker • Lankiveil • Peridon • Rjd0060

Guideline and policy news

• The ability to create articles directly in mainspace is now indefinitely restricted to autoconfirmed users.
• A proposal is being discussed which would create a new "event coordinator" right that would allow users to temporarily add the "confirmed" flag to new user accounts and to create many new user accounts without being hindered by a rate limit.

Technical news

• AbuseFilter has received numerous improvements, including an OOUI overhaul, syntax highlighting, ability to search existing filters, and a few new functions. In particular, the search feature can be used to ensure there aren't existing filters for what you need, and the new equals_to_any function can be used when checking multiple namespaces. One major upcoming change is the ability to see which filters are the slowest. This information is currently only available to those with access to Logstash.
• When blocking anonymous users, a cookie will be applied that reloads the block if the user changes their IP. This means in most cases, you may no longer need to do /64 range blocks on residential IPv6 addresses in order to effectively block the end user. It will also help combat abuse from IP hoppers in general. This currently only occurs when hard-blocking accounts.
• The block notice shown on mobile will soon be more informative and point users to a help page on how to request an unblock, just as it currently does on desktop.
• There will soon be a calendar widget at Special:Block, making it easier to set expiries for a specific date and time.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee is seeking additional clerks to help with the arbitration process.

Obituaries

• Lankiveil (Craig Franklin) passed away in mid-April. Lankiveil joined Wikipedia on 12 August 2004 and became an administrator on 31 August 2008. During his time with the Wikimedia community, Lankiveil served as an oversighter for the English Wikipedia and as president of Wikimedia Australia.

Hi, you stated "a Google search doesn't turn up any other suitable sources on the subject." Did you also search using the name "岩里祐穂"? Was there nothing suitable on the Japanese Wikipedia entry https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%B2%A9%E9%87%8C%E7%A5%90%E7%A9%82 ? There doesn't appear to be a English Wikipedia project related to Japanese creative professionals or music, nor help to meet notability criteria specific to Japan. Is there any help on the English Wikipedia for finding notable sources for Japanese subject matter, in particular Japanese creative professionals? For lyricists and composers, http://www.jasrac.or.jp might be one place to find information, e.g. http://www.jasrac.or.jp/sakka/vol_33/ and http://www.jasrac.or.jp/profile/prize/2009.html For authors, the National Diet Library found a few titles using the search: http://iss.ndl.go.jp/books?rft.au=%E5%B2%A9%E9%87%8C%E7%A5%90%E7%A9%82+%E8%91%97&search_mode=advanced Splouge ( talk) 10:44, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

@ Splouge: The deletion discussion is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yūho Iwasato. I can't see the article anymore since it has been deleted, but I did review every references listed in the article, and I did look at the Japanese page as well. The Japanese page doesn't contain any reliable sources either – I see a link to the subject's website, and a catalog entry for a single book. If you want to work on this, you can ask an admin to restore the page as a draft, but the current sources are really not sufficient for an article. Brad v 14:44, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick reply. The deletion discussion page is now archived which is why I used this page to mention it. Google searches on the kanji name 岩里祐穂 find a few things, but based on /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Notability_(music)#Criteria_for_composers_and_lyricists and Yūho Iwasato being the lyricist of https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/PIECE_OF_MY_WISH which was a million seller and television show theme, and being the lyricist of many other notable songs, the page should meet notability requirements. How would I ask an admin to restore the page as a draft? Splouge ( talk) 15:32, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

@ Splouge: You would need to put together some reliable sources for those claims. Catalog entries, fan sites, or entries on other Wikipedias will not satisfy the notability requirements. Brad v 15:38, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Would an award like http://www.jasrac.or.jp/profile/prize/2009.html (Silver award being for second highest royalties for a particular song in the year April 2008 to March 2009) be an achievement giving notability with reliable source? It seems to be difficult finding reliable sources for notability in Japan. Splouge ( talk) 15:52, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

@ Splouge: The event may be notable, but it really depends on coverage. Do you have any newspaper articles, books, or magazines that cover the subject? The key here is third party, reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Brad v 16:39, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Would something like https://books.google.com.au/books?id=9A8EAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA59-IA3&lpg=PA59-IA3&dq=%22PIECE+OF+MY+WISH%22+million&source=bl&ots=-OnqpzlMBX&sig=aNbjHfWlRjdN8_rnN9o7lZWx7OM&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjdgdm5yIXbAhWJWLwKHdM_BS8Q6AEIJzAA#v=onepage&q=%22PIECE%20OF%20MY%20WISH%22%20million&f=false qualify? It returns an image from an article in Billboard from which the particular issue and page can be obtained, which lists the sales for Piece of My Wish. The JASRAC Silver award 2009 to Genesis of Aquarion is mentioned at a third party source https://animeanime.jp/article/2009/05/20/4649.html Splouge ( talk)

@ Splouge: That might be sufficient to back a particular claim, but you still need reliable sources that talk about the subject. As this is a biography of a living person, every single statement in the article needs to have a source, and you don't have enough yet to write more than a one-line article. Brad v 19:08, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

For the article, I'm wanting to provide links to existing Wikipedia pages of artists, songs, anime or games that Yūho Iwasato provided lyrics for songs used in the anime or games or sung by the artists. Reliable sources for those could include JASRAC and recording company sites. Splouge ( talk) 04:04, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Sean Hannity. Legobot ( talk) 04:23, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

Here's a cold one on me! Haven't seen you around in a bit - just wanted to drop by and say hey! -- Dane talk 05:12, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi BradV,

Thank you for reviewing the proposed Encyclopedia page.

Please take a look at the Encyclopedia of Library and Information Science By Allen Kent,page 300

at

https://books.google.com/books?id=kNUzgbXrjukC&pg=PA300&lpg=PA300&dq=%22Proposed+Encyclopedias%22#v=onepage&q=%22Proposed%20Encyclopedias%22&f=false

As you can see,the term 'Proposed Encyclopedia', appears in the subject heading on page 300. (10th line of the left hand column).

This an accepted term used by some Library and Information science professionals (the Encyclopedia of Library and Information Science is a highly respected multi-volume reference work). Accordingly, I believe my contribution abides by the NO "Original research, synthesis, or made-up terms" rule. I will be continuing to improve this page and hope others engage with this as well.

My contribution references two major proposed encyclopedias, one by Francis Bacon and one by HG Wells. Modern science and professional scientific societies are based on the precepts provided by Francis Bacon.

I would appreciate more specificity on what you think is wrong or missing.

Thanks Emoritz2017 ( talk) 02:32, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

I would suggest finding some sources that discuss the term "proposed encyclopedias" in depth. Brad v 04:01, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

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

Hello, I have updated references and have been using other UK playwrights wikipedia page as reference when referencing. These are CREDIBLE sources I am using and I really do not understand how to progress my submission at this stage. /info/en/?search=Roy_Williams_(playwright) There is the link to the playwright I have been basing it off they have been published with far less info/ relevance than mine. Any help is appreciated.

Oswaldhein ( talk) 12:23, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

@ Oswaldhein:: Your article User:Oswaldhein/sandbox contains no references at all. Please read WP:YFA and the instructions given at WP:REFB. Brad v 12:26, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi,

Thanks for reviewing the page about the Academy of behavioral medicine research (ABMR; /info/en/?search=Draft:Academy_of_Behavioral_Medicine_Research). I have updated references multiple times and to my knowledge, I have provided sources that discuss ABMR (its creation, mission, etc.) at length. This is mainly discussed in the book that I have cited. I really do not understand how to progress my submission at this stage. This is a Wikipedia page for a related organization in the behavioral medicine field ( /info/en/?search=Society_of_Behavioral_Medicine). I do not understand how/why this is ok to publish but not my page. I am quite frustrated and would appreciate any help in moving out of the draft phase and into the published one.

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.71.55.34 ( talk) 06:09, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

@ 97.71.55.34: I would recommend shortening the article to include only that which can be supported by reliable sources. Also, if the purpose of your edits here are to promote this organization, you should be aware that advertising and promotion are prohibited on Wikipedia. Brad v 15:14, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 16:08, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

@ Dennis Brown: If you have questions about something in particular I'm open to discussion and review. I am currently working according to the guidelines at WP:NPPDRAFT and WP:DRAFTIFY. I am currently reviewing articles created by new users (currently there are about 80 in the queue) at Special:NewPagesFeed. Undersourced articles on possibly notable topics can be moved to draft-space for further improvement rather than tagged for deletion. The authors of these articles are being notified on their talk pages, and all of my actions are logged at User:Bradv/Draftify log. I respond to any concerns promptly on my talk page, and any editor can freely revert a draftification.

Also, please note that I hold both the new page reviewer bit and the page mover bit, and both of these are subject to WP:ADMINACCT. And of course I am willing to discuss any of my actions on my talk page. Brad v 16:27, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

• • I'm not upset with you at all, and I tried to make that clear. I've been an admin for a long time, but I've just never looked at page moves before, and you just happen to be who I noticed. I opened it for a discussion in general, not really about you, but I obviously needed an example. The Draft page isn't exactly policy, and I'm concerned about moving pages this way, but it is in no way pointing fingers at you specifically for any particular move. I'm hoping to get pointed to an RFC or similar on this. Since it is effectively deleting an article, I want to understand the checks and balances, but I don't really see any. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 16:48, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Okay, no problem. I would just rather discuss things here before getting my name dragged across WP:AN. The particular set of articles I am reviewing were all created between the time WP:ACTRIAL ended and WP:ACREQ started, so all of these articles would otherwise be created as drafts. The intent is specifically to avoid deletion. Many new users create articles that don't meet our requirements, and it's unfair and unwelcoming to drag them straight to AFD. If you look through the set I've reviewed (and you can check my patrol log for ones I've passed as well), you'll see that I'm trying to give new users more time to improve their articles before they go live (and get indexed by Google). Drafts and AFC is intended to be a collaborative place where articles can be worked on without the danger of having their hard work deleted. The standard on whether an article is moved to mainspace (or stays in mainspace) is whether the article is likely to pass AFD. Because this is a unilateral decision, it is subject to WP:BRD in that anyone is free to revert me and discuss (or take it to AFD for further review). I hope that helps. Brad v 17:01, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Again, I took it there as a means of a larger discussion on the general topic, not about your actions in particular. If I found actual fault with your actions, I would have come here and done my admin thing, but it was the general idea that concerned me, not your actions. I think everyone there sees it exactly as I intended, no one has mentioned you in particular. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 07:26, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

I was wondering if you really meant to do this. The outcome has been that the draft has been moved back to article space without significant improvement. Deb ( talk) 12:23, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

That one could have gone either way. NPP guidelines call for more than one reference, which it now has. If I were reviewing this through AFC I would accept it as it's not likely to fail AFD. Brad v 12:40, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

No, that's the trouble. They leave it and leave it and only clean up the article when they can't avoid it. Deb ( talk) 12:56, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

New articles that are not likely to pass AfD belong in draft-space. This article should have been created in draft-space in the first place, but now it looks okay, imho. Or are you suggesting it should go to AFD? Brad v 16:36, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Singapore Airlines destinations. Legobot ( talk) 04:23, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Dear Bradv. The user whom you thought I was harassing was harassing me. I am an editor as well, and I created a page for video game fans and he deleted it for no reason. Please reconsider who you are accusing and return my lost page. :)

MicroMaster64 ( talk) 21:55, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

@ MicroMaster64: Your page is not lost, it is at Draft:Terra blade. Feel free to work on it there. Brad v 21:56, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Oh. Thanks Brad.

MicroMaster64 ( talk) 23:03, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2018).

Administrator changes

None

Al Ameer son • AliveFreeHappy • Cenarium • Lupo • MichaelBillington

Guideline and policy news

• Following a successful request for comment, administrators are now able to add and remove editors to the "event coordinator" group. Users in the event coordinator group have the ability to temporarily add the "confirmed" flag to new user accounts and to create many new user accounts without being hindered by a rate limit. Users will no longer need to be in the "account creator" group if they are in the event coordinator group.
• Following an AN discussion, all pages with content related to blockchain and cryptocurrencies, broadly construed, are now under indefinite general sanctions.

Technical news

• IP-based cookie blocks should be deployed to English Wikipedia in June. This will cause the block of a logged-out user to be reloaded if they change IPs. This means in most cases, you may no longer need to do /64 range blocks on residential IPv6 addresses in order to effectively block the end user. It will also help combat abuse from IP hoppers in general. For the time being, it only affects users of the desktop interface.
• The Wikimedia Foundation's Anti-Harassment Tools team will build granular types of blocks in 2018 (e.g. a block from uploading or editing specific pages, categories, or namespaces, as opposed to a full-site block). Feedback on the concept may be left at the talk page.
• There is now a checkbox on Special:ListUsers to let you see only users in temporary user groups.
• It is now easier for blocked mobile users to see why they were blocked.

Arbitration

• A recent technical issue with the Arbitration Committee's spam filter inadvertently caused all messages sent to the committee through Wikipedia (i.e. Special:EmailUser/Arbitration Committee) to be discarded. If you attempted to send an email to the Arbitration Committee via Wikipedia between May 16 and May 31, your message was not received and you are encouraged to resend it. Messages sent outside of these dates or directly to the Arbitration Committee email address were not affected by this issue.

Miscellaneous

• In early May, an unusually high level of failed login attempts was observed. The WMF has stated that this was an "external effort to gain unauthorized access to random accounts". Under Wikipedia policy, administrators are required to have strong passwords. To further reinforce security, administrators should also consider enabling two-factor authentication. A committed identity can be used to verify that you are the true account owner in the event that your account is compromised and/or you are unable to log in.

Regarding Genode ( /info/en/?search=Draft:Genode), sorry there are not many third party or reliable resources for Genode available. It has been around for ten years so. The article was not written by the core developers but by an independent person who was enthusiastic about it. The only independent resource I can provide is Wikipedia itself - for cases were Genode has been already mentioned/referenced by other people:

/info/en/?search=VirtualBox /info/en/?search=ARM_architecture /info/en/?search=ODROID /info/en/?search=Comparison_of_operating_systems /info/en/?search=List_of_operating_systems /info/en/?search=Rump_kernel /info/en/?search=Timeline_of_operating_systems /info/en/?search=List_of_software_under_the_GNU_AGPL /info/en/?search=L4_microkernel_family /info/en/?search=Libre_Computer_Project /info/en/?search=PandaBoard /info/en/?search=M-Labs

otherwise please have look at osnews.com and news.ycombinator.com or phoronix.com - just search for Genode.

Regards,

Sebastian from Genode Labs — Preceding unsigned comment added by Swampling ( talk • contribs) 08:02, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia can't be used as a source as it doesn't meet our definition of a reliable source. The best course of action would probably be to put a list of those articles from osnews, ycombinator, and phoronix, and link those as sources in the article. Any content that can't be attributed to a source can then be removed. Brad v 12:39, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

@Bradv: Thank you for your suggestions, since we (Genode Labs) are now involuntary involved in this article I gonna forward your recommendations and I hope the changes will be made accordingly, let me know if something goes wrong. Sebastian — Preceding unsigned comment added by Swampling ( talk • contribs) 07:57, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

13:55, 6 March 2018 (diff | hist) . . (+5,097)‎ . . N Draft:Pratik Uppal ‎

Hi sir, I resubmitted this article and was rejected by you. Earlier the article was rejected by shadowowl saying that i just have to remove YouTube as reference as it is not considered as a reliable source and resubmit it and it will be accepted. Sir i am from India and a the reference i gave are pretty big deal here. I respect your knowledge and seek your help /advice to what i have to do to get the article published as it is very important for me and my family. Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Angadjjm ( talk • contribs) 13:35, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

There are other comments given at Draft:Pratik Uppal. The bottom line is that more references are required to third-party, reliable sources that are independent of the subject. News articles, books, magazines, etc. Self-published biographies are not sufficient. Brad v 13:41, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

• Draft:Charles Rudolf Legéndy ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Dear Bradv —

I do not understand which of my inline citations does not meet minimum standards, since all the scientific papers referenced are published in peer-reviewed journals.

The version of the Draft you reviewed contains 19 inline references; and while it is true that 9 of these have Legéndy as author or co-author, I maintain that this does not invalidate the contents. Since by definition the referees of the papers have judged their contents valid, there is third-party approval of the materials contained in them.

Please note that your colleague DGG, an editor of much seniority like yourself, already dealt with this draft (22 May, 18 May, 26 April). After I fixed the items listed in DGG’s rejection note (of 26 April), DGG made detailed corrections to the draft, moving a segment of it to the Wikipedia article on Helicons. The nature of the changes was such that they appeared to be steps preliminary to acceptance.

In my correspondence with DGG I listed three third-party references that explicitly affirm Legéndy’s contribution to Helicon theory, brain capacity estimation, and Neuronal spike train analysis.

OAKS222 (
talk) 15:26, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Just because articles are peer reviewed does not mean we can use them to write articles about their author. These are considered primary sources, rather than secondary sources. The difference between these is explained here. Brad v 15:55, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

• Trishhoffman ( talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Jeff Fisher (American Author) ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I am a news journalist who interviews numerous people and I find Jeff Fisher's story to be extremely interesting and noteworthy as he's created an incredible independent high school sports media company that led to him being chosen by Skyhorse Publishing to author a Texas high school football book. My sources show why he is noteworthy and I don't understand why my submission was rejected. Trishhoffman ( talk) 17:29, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

@ Trishhoffman: When I reviewed it there were many statements that did not cite a reliable source. Since then I see you have made some improvements, but there is still some room to grow before it fully meets the policy on biographies of living persons. Keep working on it and gathering more sources, but I'm going to leave it for another reviewer. Also, I would recommend you declare your conflict of interest on the talk page of the draft, per WP:DISCLOSE. Brad v 19:58, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Yes - of course - Sorry!

Here are three secondary-source references to Legéndy’s contributions, two of them from the “Draft: Charles Rudolf Legéndy” and one from the Wikipedia article “Helicon (physics)” :

1. Hebb (1976) (Reference 16 in the Draft)

— Here Hebb, (who has the subject of two Wikipedia articles - “Donald O. Hebb” and “Hebbian theory”) cites the Legéndy (1967) paper (reference 13 in the Draft) in his Introduction.  Hebb writes, “Legéndy (1967) according to Alwyn Scott (1975), has made a conservative estimate of the number of basic ideas or ideational components the brain is capable of developing: one thousand million. A "conservative" estimate which means that these basic ideas must be formed at the rate of one per second for 30 years, sleep included, or one per second for 45 years of waking time.” 

2. Gourevich and Eggermont (2007) (Reference 9 in the Draft)

— These authors offer a critique of the “Poisson Surprise” test (of Legéndy and Salcman, reference 8 in the Draft), but put their critique in perspective in the Abstract, where they state: "the Poisson-surprise (PS) method [of Legéndy and Salcman, 1985] has been widely used for 20 years"; and in the "Discussion" section, which states: "The PS method ... has been the most widely used method of burst detection ..." 

3. Boswell (1970) (Reference 10 in the Wikipedia article “Helicon (physics)”)

— Here Boswell (in the "Preface to the internet edition" section, dated August 2004) includes the sentence: "Charles Legendy, one of the real pioneers of the helicon game, ..." 

OAKS222 ( talk) 15:52, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Could you check Draft:Lu Yanzhi and consider moving it back to mainspace, please? Prisencolin is blocked and can't hit the request button, but I think I've done all I can there since it is not an area in which I have expertise and I can't read Chinese; however, I believe I've demonstrated notability and Wikidata still links the now-redlinked article with Chinese and French articles, so if it does look ok now, I don't think it should languish in draft space. Thanks in advance, Yngvadottir ( talk) 16:09, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

I've submitted it for review on your behalf. Unfortunately I don't have time to look it over right now, but it is now in the queue. Brad v 20:11, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Lu Yanzhi, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Zanhe ( talk) 00:33, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:24, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:InfoWars. Legobot ( talk) 04:24, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello Bradv, You declined my article for : This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. I have added links to interviews and articles. Kindly let me know if the article suits now. Any advices or recommandations are more than welcome. Thank you /info/en/?search=Draft:Eleonora_Ottaviani_Moroni — Preceding unsigned comment added by TCG2017 ( talk • contribs) 09:53, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Just a friendly heads up on Kri Kri S.A.. I declined your no context speedy, because there was plenty of context in the info box -- clearly a Greek company in the dairy products industry [1]. However, since the user had also made a draft version with the same infobox, I deleted the article under A7, no importance asserted.---- Fabrictramp | talk to me 21:12, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Either way works. It's better that it gets worked on in draftspace. Thanks. Brad v 21:18, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to United States anti-abortion movement. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. 2600:8800:1880:91E:5604:A6FF:FE38:4B26 ( talk) 23:01, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Nice try. This article is under discretionary sanctions, so I suggest you take this to the talk page fast. Brad v 23:12, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Please read this notification carefully, it contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

A community decision has authorised the use of general sanctions for pages related to the blockchain and cryptocurrencies. The details of these sanctions are described here. All pages that are broadly related to these topics are subject to a one revert per twenty-four hours restriction, as described here.

General sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimise disruption in controversial topic areas. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to these topics that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behaviour, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. An editor can only be sanctioned after he or she has been made aware that general sanctions are in effect. This notification is meant to inform you that sanctions are authorised in these topic areas, which you have been editing. It is only effective if it is logged here. Before continuing to edit pages in these topic areas, please familiarise yourself with the general sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Smallbones_{( smalltalk)} 18:53, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

I think your revert on Bitcoin was all wrong. As documented in the article, 8 Nobel laureates in economics say that bitcoin is a bubble, and other economists agree, as well as central bankers, investors like Warren Buffett and George Soros, and other important business execs as well. Don't you think we should inform our readers that this is the case? What could possibly be more important to a reader than to know that experts consider this to be a bubble, i.e. an investment where you're very likely to lose all your money? Please revert your reversion or explain your edit on the bitcoin talkpage. Smallbones_{( smalltalk)} 19:06, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

@ Smallbones: I am not arguing that it is not a speculative bubble — according to many experts it is, and that information deserves to be in the article. However, your addition placed that information as the very first sentence, which is completely out of proportion. The topic needs to be defined before it can be criticized. Brad v 23:29, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Let me take an extreme example. Would you say that the lede of Bernard Madoff should not say that his entire asset management business was a scam? Of course you wouldn't say that. That is the single most important thing to know about Madoff. You might argue that Madoff has been convicted. But so have many people running the most important parts of the "bitcoin system" e.g. Mt. Gox's owner (the exchange that did 70% of trading in bitcoin at the time), and bitcoin was the exclusive currency used in the Silk Road marketplace (yes there have been convictions), and the problems continue. You might say "Mt. Gox only stole $350 million, Madoff stole $20-68 billion (with a b)." But look at the amount invested in bitcoin. (Market capitalization $110 billion (with a b), down from about $300 billion in December.

The most important thing to know about bitcoin is that it is a bubble where you're very likely to lose anything you invest. Smallbones_{( smalltalk)} 01:17, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

WP:NPOV is policy. Brad v 02:15, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Absolutely, that's why we need NPOV in bitcoin articles. Smallbones_{( smalltalk)} 04:36, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello Bradv. Saw your review on /info/en/?search=Draft:Obinwanne_Okeke. I have added more authentic sources like you requested. Kindly check again to see if it is good to go. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dinovate ( talk • contribs) 21:21, June 18, 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. Keep working on it, and when you are happy with the sourcing resubmit and another reviewer will take a look. Brad v 22:26, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Moses Sanchez, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Republican ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver).

( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:10, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi Brad. Re [2] - please just bear in mind what AFC exists for - if the end result of a process is that the article gets to mainspace then the rest doesn’t matter. Fish+ Karate 17:43, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

@ Fish and karate: There's a process at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Reviewing instructions#Step 4: Accepting a submission which the AFC reviewers follow. It ensures that WikiProjects are tagged, BLPs are correctly tagged, and that authors are notified in a friendly manner. It's a little frustrating when admins ignore all of those instructions, and then tell us that it "doesn't matter."

If I ignored these instructions it wouldn't be long before someone showed up at my talk page to tell me off.

I'm grateful to you for moving the page, and to RHaworth for moving the other one, but it would be better if it were done in a way that followed the community-accepted process. Brad v 17:52, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

• Unlike F+K, I do apologise for not following procedure. In future, I shall leave moving drafts to the experts. — RHaworth ( talk · contribs) 18:06, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Thank you RHaworth. I'm not an expert, though. I'm just trying to help. Brad v 19:36, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

I'm not bothered about the procedure, as the procedure shouldn't be more important than the article. Articles that don't go through the AFC procedure still get tagged for the right projects/BLP as required, and I would imagine the author(s) will notice it's now in mainspace. That being said, just as RHaworth says, I'll leave the procedure to be followed in future, I don't want to cause more work for people. Cheers, Fish+ Karate 09:49, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

	The Special Barnstar
	Good work The Satyam 17:28, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

• Draft:Matthew Lansburgh ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi - You recently reviewed an article I created for the writer Matthew Lansburgh. Thank you for taking the time to review the article. Since I am new to creating a Wikipedia entry, I'm having a hard time following all of the rules. Are there services that can help me finish this article for a fee? Or do you have any more specific advice? Many thanks, Stan StanNYC ( talk) 19:11, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

@ StanNYC: It sounds like you may have a conflict of interest regarding this subject, and it would probably be best if you worked on some other topics that you aren't connected to. Undisclosed paid editing is forbidden by policy, as Wikipedia is a volunteer project. That said, if the subject truly is notable, someone will come along and write an article anyway, or you can request it at Requested Articles. I hope that helps. Brad v 19:31, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback. I know the author but am certainly not being paid to write this. I simply like his work. Thanks for your time. StanNYC ( talk) 19:53, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi and thanks for review “ Laya Abbasmirzaei “ article , I have added footnotes as you said could you please check it again. And thanks for your help. Fighting12 ( talk) 14:05, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

@ Fighting12: I'm just looking through it for evidence that it meets our notability criteria for actors. Can you tell me whether it meets any of the following three criteria?

1. Has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions.
2. Has a large fan base or a significant "cult" following.
3. Has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment.

Thank you. Brad v 14:09, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

For the first question; She is a well_known tv presenter ( tv host ) in iran , you can see some news site at the reference which are added recently by me about her. For the second question ; She has 32.2 k fan on Instagram, you can see ( @laya_abbasmirzaei) And the last question; She made a program in iran which called “ khatere “ ( in Persian: خاطره) that people like it and continued 3 season on television.also there is page in Wikipedia about her ( لعيا عباس ميرزايي) https://fa.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D9%84%D8%B9%DB%8C%D8%A7_%D8%B9%D8%A8%D8%A7%D8%B3_%D9%85%DB%8C%D8%B1%D8%B2%D8%A7%DB%8C%DB%8C Fighting12 ( talk) 14:26, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Team Colombo. Since you had some involvement with the Team Colombo redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Pam D 08:41, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Team Kandy. Since you had some involvement with the Team Kandy redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Pam D 08:44, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Team Galle. Since you had some involvement with the Team Galle redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Pam D 08:45, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Blanchard's transsexualism typology. Legobot ( talk) 04:24, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

		Special Edition New Page Patroller's Barnstar
		For completing over 50 reviews during the 2018 June Backlog Drive, please accept this Special Edition Barnstar. Thank you for helping New Page Patrol and keep up the good work. Cheers! — Insertcleverphrasehere ( or here) 18:59, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2018).

Administrator changes

Pbsouthwood • TheSandDoctor

Gogo Dodo

Andrevan • Doug • EVula • KaisaL • Tony Fox • WilyD

Bureaucrat changes

Andrevan • EVula

Guideline and policy news

• An RfC about the deletion of drafts closed with a consensus to change the wording of WP:NMFD. Specifically, a draft that has been repeatedly resubmitted and declined at AfC without any substantial improvement may be deleted at MfD if consensus determines that it is unlikely to ever meet the requirements for mainspace and it otherwise meets one of the reasons for deletion outlined in the deletion policy.
• A request for comment closed with a consensus that the {{ promising draft}} template cannot be used to indefinitely prevent a WP:G13 speedy deletion nomination.

Technical news

• Starting on July 9, the WMF Security team, Trust & Safety, and the broader technical community will be seeking input on an upcoming change that will restrict editing of site-wide JavaScript and CSS to a new technical administrators user group. Bureaucrats and stewards will be able to grant this right per a community-defined process. The intention is to reduce the number of accounts who can edit frontend code to those who actually need to, which in turn lessens the risk of malicious code being added that compromises the security and privacy of everyone who accesses Wikipedia. For more information, please review the FAQ.
• Syntax highlighting has been graduated from a Beta feature on the English Wikipedia. To enable this feature, click the highlighter icon ( ) in your editing toolbar (or under the hamburger menu in the 2017 wikitext editor). This feature can help prevent you from making mistakes when editing complex templates.
• IP-based cookie blocks should be deployed to English Wikipedia in July (previously scheduled for June). This will cause the block of a logged-out user to be reloaded if they change IPs. This means in most cases, you may no longer need to do /64 range blocks on residential IPv6 addresses in order to effectively block the end user. It will also help combat abuse from IP hoppers in general. For the time being, it only affects users of the desktop interface.

Miscellaneous

• Currently around 20% of admins have enabled two-factor authentication, up from 17% a year ago. If you haven't already enabled it, please consider doing so. Regardless if you use 2FA, please practice appropriate account security by ensuring your password is secure and unique to Wikimedia.

Hello,

Thanks for your review and comments. I'm a bit confused though. This subject meets the following notability criteria for academics:

5. The person holds or has held a named chair appointment or distinguished professor appointment at a major institution of higher education and research (or an equivalent position in countries where named chairs are uncommon). - This would be the KF or Korea Foundation Chair, of which there are only three in the world and only one in Europe.

8. The person is or has been the head or chief editor of a major, well-established academic journal in their subject area. - This would be Millennium: Journal of International Studies, ranked top-20 in terms of impact in the field by International Relations scholars according to the TRIPS survey.

I have added some more information and more independent sources, but if there is anything else missing please let me know. I am aware that some of the sources are in Korean, which reflects the subject's field. But from what I understand the language of the source is not relevant.

Best regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Koreabuff ( talk • contribs) 13:55, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Swiss sovereign money referendum, 2018. Legobot ( talk) 04:25, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Hello there,

Thank you for your review of the page for Brig. Gen. Vladimir Avdiaj, commander of the Albanian Air Forces. I have since added additional sources to support more statements made on the page, and have tried to keep a balance between primary and secondary sources. I do also believe that the use of primary sources on this page is warranted. A comparable page for someone like the USAF Chief of Staff David L. Goldfein only has 3 sources, all of which are primary, and only 2 of which constitute most of the sourcing for the article text. This existing and otherwise poorly referenced article is in article space, and is heavily linked to several categories and articles.

I see no reason why this article shouldn't be in article space. It meets notability guidelines, is comparatively well sourced, especially given the few available sources on this otherwise notable person, and adds to a lacking section of Wikipedia.

If you could give this draft ( [3]) a look again, I would definitely appreciate it.

My best, Shillyshally ( talk) 03:14, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

Hi @ Shillyshally:. I made some changes to the draft and approved it. Thanks! Brad v 03:32, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

Apart from being blatant advertising it is also a copyright infringement. Dan arndt ( talk) 03:25, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

I've removed the infringing text. Tagging drafts for deletion 45 minutes after they are created is a little WP:BITEy. It still has to go through the AFC process to become an article, so we can afford the author plenty of time to get things in order. Brad v 04:29, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:University of the People. Legobot ( talk) 04:25, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

Graphs are unavailable due to technical issues. There is more info on Phabricator and on MediaWiki.org. Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months. ( Purge)

Hello Bradv, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

June backlog drive

Overall the June backlog drive was a success, reducing the last 3,000 or so to below 500. However, as expected, 90% of the patrolling was done by less than 10% of reviewers.
Since the drive closed, the backlog has begun to rise sharply again and is back up to nearly 1,400 already. Please help reduce this total and keep it from raising further by reviewing some articles each day.

New technology, new rules

• New features are shortly going to be added to the Special:NewPagesFeed which include a list of drafts for review, OTRS flags for COPYVIO, and more granular filter preferences. More details can be found at this page.
• Probationary permissions: Now that PERM has been configured to allow expiry dates to all minor user rights, new NPR flag holders may sometimes be limited in the first instance to 6 months during which their work will be assessed for both quality and quantity of their reviews. This will allow admins to accord the right in borderline cases rather than make a flat out rejection.
• Current reviewers who have had the flag for longer than 6 months but have not used the permissions since they were granted will have the flag removed, but may still request to have it granted again in the future, subject to the same probationary period, if they wish to become an active reviewer.

Editathons

• Editathons will continue through August. Please be gentle with new pages that obviously come from good faith participants, especially articles from developing economies and ones about female subjects. Consider using the ' move to draft' tool rather than bluntly tagging articles that may have potential but which cannot yet reside in mainspace.

The Signpost

• The next issue of the monthly magazine will be out soon. The newspaper is an excellent way to stay up to date with news and new developments between our newsletters. If you have special messages to be published, or if you would like to submit an article (one about NPR perhaps?), don't hesitate to contact the editorial team  here.

---

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{( or here)} 00:00, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Editor Worm That Turned submitted the following nomination for Editor of the Week:

I nominate Bradv to be Editor of the Week for a number of reasons. I first came across Bradv when he was trying to fix a tag and ended up mediating a dispute admirably. Looking at his contributions (10.000 edits plus), he spends the majority of his time helping, be it at the Teahouse or at Articles for Creation. He has been away for a while, but has recently returned and I'd like it known how much his work is appreciated.

Bradv

Improves the encyclopedia

Editor of the Week for the week beginning May 8, 2016

10K to mainspace, uses the summary 97% of the time, recently re-activated, fights vandalism. The majority of his time is spent helping other editors.

Recognized for

Fighting Vandalism

Nomination page

Thanks again for your efforts! Buster Seven Talk 19:34, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

• Congrats! Welcome back, thank you for your help and hope you stay around. - NQ (talk) 21:51, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
• Congrats! Nice job. (And thank you for reviewing my AfC Draft:Maryland Psychiatric Society. I will improve the sources.) Drdaviss ( talk) 00:49, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2018).

Administrator changes

Sro23

KaisaL • Ymblanter

Guideline and policy news

• After a discussion at Meta, a new user group called " interface administrators" (formerly "technical administrator") has been created. Come the end of August, interface admins will be the only users able to edit site-wide JavaScript and CSS pages like MediaWiki:Common.js and MediaWiki:Common.css, or edit other user's personal JavaScript and CSS. The intention is to improve security and privacy by reducing the number of accounts which could be used to compromise the site or another user's account through malicious code. The new user group can be assigned and revoked by bureaucrats. Discussion is ongoing to establish details for implementing the group on the English Wikipedia.
• Following a request for comment, the WP:SISTER style guideline now states that in the mainspace, interwiki links to Wikinews should only be made as per the external links guideline. This generally means that within the body of an article, you should not link to Wikinews about a particular event that is only a part of the larger topic. Wikinews links in "external links" sections can be used where helpful, but not automatically if an equivalent article from a reliable news outlet could be linked in the same manner.

Technical news

• The WMF Anti-Harassment Tools team is seeking input on the second set of wireframes for the Special:Block redesign that will introduce partial blocks. The new functionality will allow you to block a user from editing a specific set of pages, pages in a category, a namespace, and for specific actions such as moving pages and uploading files.

Thank you for the encouragement. Although I have requested for my page to be deleted, I learnt many new things about writing in Wikipedia. The idea was to experiment to begin with. Much appreciated. Tonrene ( talk) 05:57, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

This is from autoctono~enwiki. I'm stuck. How do I submit my new article (in user page)for publication? Please help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Autoctono~enwiki ( talk • contribs) 20:26, August 6, 2018 (UTC)

@ Autoctono~enwiki: I've moved your draft to Draft:Boris Rotman. You may click the "Submit your draft for review" button when you are ready for someone to review it. Brad v 23:14, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for the prompt action. Congratulations on your award. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Autoctono~enwiki ( talk • contribs) 21:24, August 8, 2018 (UTC)

I tried to edit Draft:Boris Rotman, but the link to Wikipedia articles appear to be broken. Please help again — Preceding unsigned comment added by Autoctono~enwiki ( talk • contribs) 00:20, August 9, 2018 (UTC)

@ Autoctono~enwiki: What do you mean? It looks fine to me. Also, please remember to sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~). Brad v 12:14, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

I would like to place links to Wikipedia but the "link" button doesn't work. For example, the phrase "single-molecule experiment" should be linked to the corresponding article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Autoctono~enwiki ( talk • contribs) 21:15, August 9, 2018 (UTC)

@ Autoctono~enwiki: You already placed lots of links in that article, how did you manage to do that? Also, that article should have gone through the AfC process by clicking the "Submit for review" button, rather than moved directly. And, like I said above, please remember to sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~). Brad v 01:28, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

Answer: I do not know what happened. The link button became active for the last version of Draft:Boris Rotman. Question: The draft article has 10 references to peer reviewed journals. Four are reviews mentioning particularly the single enzyme molecule article.One of the reference (Knight) devotes half the review to discuss the article. What do you mean by "article does not have enough sources and citations"? Thank you. Autoctono~enwiki ( talk) 20:31, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for signing your post. Regarding sources, we are short on sources that actually discuss the subject of the article. It would also help if some of these sources were available online so that others can verify this information. I spent some time yesterday searching for potential online sources for the subject, and found very little. Do you know of any news articles or books that discuss Boris Rotman? Brad v 23:33, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Political activity of the Knights of Columbus. Legobot ( talk) 04:25, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi Bradv,

Thanks for leaving feedback on my draft /info/en/?search=Draft:PlagiarismSearch I have personally worked with grading students' papers and evaluating them through different plagiarism detection software. I am working on including various checkers in order to enrich Wikipedia, since I have seen a couple of them presented here like Unicheck, Turnitin and others.

Could you please tell me how can I improve my article? I realize that more full coverages are needed rather than mentions. I have to extend my research. Anything else?

Thank you for your help. Regards, Kelsey. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kelsey2848939 ( talk • contribs) 07:17, August 14, 2018 (UTC)

@ Kelsey2848939: Looking at the article again, this is a close call. There are a few references to blogs and a Youtube video (which are not reliable), but there may still be enough coverage to make this notable. If you can find anything to add, go ahead and add it and resubmit and another reviewer will take a look. Brad v 20:58, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Hello Bradv,

You recently declined my submission for the McClure Twins wikipedia page with the comment "YouTube videos cannot be used as reliable sources,"

However, on Liza Koshy's Wikipedia page, citation #39: 'Flama (February 17, 2016), When People Think You're Mexican ft. Liza Koshy, YouTube, retrieved < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1TjLILV574E>' was used to cite the claim "From kindergarten until 5th grade, she was placed in a dual language educational and cultural program, where she learned how to speak Spanish fluently."

Please advise as to the difference of using YouTube to cite a source on Liza Koshy's Wikipedia page versus the McClure Twins Wikipedia Page.

Best, LaWr123 ( talk) 03:37, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

@ LaWr123: That would not be considered a reliable source either, especially as it's a video of the subject stating things about herself. Wikipedia does not rely on self-published sources as there would be no way to ensure any level of accuracy or verifiability. Instead, we write articles based on third-party reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Brad v 03:46, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Hello Bradv,

I’m confused as to how Liza Koshy’s Wikipedia page was approved given the fact that it doesn’t abide by Wikipedia’s standards.

Is there an editor I can be directed to that can clarify?

Please advise.

Best, LaWr123 ( talk) 04:07, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

I removed the poorly sourced statement that you brought to my attention. I do not know who added it, but the article has been around since 2016. Brad v 04:10, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for all of your help and support, Bradv. I will definitely take all of your comments into consideration and resubmit the page. I appreciate your timely responses and assistance. Have a great day. Congratulations on editor of the week!

Best, LaWr123 ( talk) 05:40, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks again, Bradv.

My fault! The keywords I gave you to enter in Google were confused by my quotation marks. Please enter Boris Rotman -school -management. You should get 58,900 answers. Best regards. Autoctono~enwiki ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:55, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

I have declined the G12 tag on the above draft. As I noted on the talk page, the text that would normally constitute a copyright violation has been provided under a suitable free license, so that is not a rationale to delete the page. This is without comment on whether the page may or may not be suitable for deletion on other grounds. ~ Rob₁₃ ^Talk 03:13, 19 August 2018 (UTC)