This is Spinster300's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments. |
|
Archives: 1, 2, 3 |
I don't know how to tag you but you can restore your version back to how it was. Also thank you for making it more understanding on why you did the changes. Veganpurplefox ( talk) 17:25, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
Hi Spinster300. Thank you for your offer to help research and develop draft pages that have been submitted for review. On my Talk Page you suggested you would do this by going through the drafts mentioned there, however I think it would be more productive for you to go directly to the list of new draft pages submitted for review. Several of the draft pages mentioned on my Talk Page are fundamentally flawed for acceptance onto Wikipedia, and I would be concerned that you could be wasting your time trying to improve pages that simply will not be able to meet the relevant criteria, and attempting to do so could generate undesirable activity from authors who appear to be paid for creating pages and are not genuine editors. For this reason I am posting this here on your Talk Page rather than on mine. I trust you understand my reasoning. Cabrils ( talk) 22:46, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
Hello, can i also have your help in my other draft Draft:To Dream it was declined but maybe it exists reliable articles that i havent cited that i though they were not reliable. Veganpurplefox ( talk) 00:32, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider
.Thanks again, and happy editing!
Tagishsimon ( talk) 01:24, 26 September 2023 (UTC)Hello, i believe he is notable and i looked him up in this website: https://www.bfi.org.uk/preview/page/cfa4a40b-c655-4699-9fcc-b0e97551371b/working-copy/1684234680/6_p2ELUsFyId3V-mwEy3ObfGotrJtoAqvgVjVUYKZZs , that im making a draft for Draft:Mattias Inwood ,the same website you used for Edward Hayter. But when I opened up it doesn't work, and same with Ed ,nothing can be seen. Do I add it or do I not add it for the draft? Veganpurplefox ( talk) 12:21, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
His name was again deleted from the user mrOllie in the Will (TV series) .how can we get him in the cast? Veganpurplefox ( talk) 22:31, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
Women in Red October 2023, Vol 9, Iss 10, Nos 251, 252, 284, 285, 286
See also
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
-- Lajmmoore ( talk) 10:54, 29 September 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Hello. Minor problem over at Clare Kenny: there are over a dozen inbound links from all the bands the AFD'd musician was in, and none for the artist. Also, the dab page currently only has one entry. Shall I unlink all the music articles? Are you planning to add another entry to the dab? Thanks, Wikishovel ( talk) 21:06, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
This article has 16 legitimate sources, which exceeds most Wikipedia pages and matches Shelley Herman husband's page /info/en/?search=Randall_Carver.
There is nothing "highly promotional" about the tone. It simply states the facts, which have been backed up by the 16 legitimate news links. No product or service is being sold or promoted. Please site the specific promotional tone you claim. exists.
The claim that Shelley Herman's published book is only "celebrity anecdotes" is reductive and incorrect. The book is far more than that, but I would be flagged for a "highly promotional" tone for going into anymore detail.
Interestingly, another writer who wrote about his experience as an NBC page has not had his page flagged, in fact, he has fewer references than Shelley Herman /info/en/?search=Herbie_J_Pilato LosAngelesWriter ( talk) 00:35, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
Hi @ Spinster300.
You declined the draft Monica Gagliano yesterday due to lack of sources and because it was written like an essay.
I just wanted to point out that under WP:NACADEMIC she met the criteria, being a former Fellow of the Australian Research Council so technically didn't need lots of secondary sources. WP:NACADEMIC often trips me up on that aspect, I always forget its different to the normal people criteria. Just something to watch out for!
The editor asked for some help on the Teahouse and they did add a few more secondary sources, and I accepted the draft. Qcne (talk) 23:07, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Hi @ Spinster300,
Curious what you think about this one? I've cleaned up based on the previous reviewer's comments. They have a lot of coverage, particularly for one film. I couldn't find any bio material about them except
here, which looks to be not secondary or independent.
Filmforme (
talk) 19:00, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for your excellent edting and acceptance of the article. BFP1 ( talk) 09:59, 11 October 2023 (UTC) Better than my editing of this message!
Women in Red November 2023, Vol 9, Iss 11, Nos 251, 252, 287, 288, 289
See also Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
-- Lajmmoore ( talk) 08:23, 26 October 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Hi Spinster300 –
You recently declined my submission due to not having enough sources for Carlton Heard. I have supplemented the material with additional sources to strengthen the discussion on the subject. Should you have any recommendations for improvement, I would greatly appreciate your insights. Thanks!
-Blackspace7 BlackSpace7 ( talk) 00:52, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
Hello Spinster300:
WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long
Backlog Drive!
The goal of this drive is to reduce the backlog of unreviewed drafts to less than 2 months outstanding reviews from the current 4+ months. Bonus points will be given for reviewing drafts that have been waiting more than 30 days. The drive is running from 1 November 2023 through 30 November 2023.
You may find Category:AfC pending submissions by age or other categories and sorting helpful.
Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.
Dear @ Spinster300,
Thank you for your feedback on my submission. I wanted to let you know that I've made some adjustments to my submission based on your feedback regarding its tone, which didn't meet the encyclopaedic standards. I've also removed any unnecessary sources and made the information more succinct. If you have any further suggestions for improvement, I would welcome your insights. Kind regards, Plushwiki21 ( talk) 10:17, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
Hi there! Thanks so much for your speedy review of my draft entry. I'm just a little confused at your comment "We need more reliable sources about the subject, not just reviews of the subject's work" as none of the sources are reviews of the author's work? I was hoping you could give me a steer on this - maybe I'm completely misinterpreting what the comment means! - as I'd really like to revise and resubmit this entry. Many thanks! Mareotis ( talk) 21:12, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Hi @ Spinster300, I believe this draft passes WP:NACTOR but would like to know what you think. Thanks — Filmforme ( talk) 18:33, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
Women in Red December 2023, Vol 9, Iss 12, Nos 251, 252, 290, 291, 292
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
-- Lajmmoore ( talk) 20:24, 27 November 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 00:50, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Hello Spinster 300,
The Nadja Tesich draft that I submitted for review is only my second Wikipedia entry. Can you tell me where I went wrong, as far as citations? 24.105.145.198 ( talk) 20:58, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
New Page Patrol | January 2024 Articles Backlog Drive | |
| |
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. |
MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 02:10, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Spinster300. Thank you for your work on Dipesh Raj. DreamRimmer, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:
I have marked Dipesh Raj and Rajesh Pullarwar as unreviewed. How did they pass WP:GNG? I don't see any significant coverage. The sources used are mostly databases, interviews, and self-published selling profiles.
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|DreamRimmer}}
. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~
. (Message delivered via the
Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
– DreamRimmer ( talk) 17:04, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Spinster300. Thank you for your work on Rajesh Pullarwar. DreamRimmer, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:
I have marked Dipesh Raj and Rajesh Pullarwar as unreviewed. How did they pass WP:GNG? I don't see any significant coverage. The sources used are mostly databases, interviews, and self-published selling profiles.
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|DreamRimmer}}
. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~
. (Message delivered via the
Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
– DreamRimmer ( talk) 17:05, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
Voting is now open for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards for 2023! The the top editors will be awarded the coveted Gold Wiki . Cast your votes vote here and here respectively. Voting closes at 23:59 on 30 December 2023. On behalf of the coordinators, wishing you the very best for the festive season and the new year. Hawkeye7 ( talk · contribs) via MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 23:56, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar | |
Thank you for your participation in the Articles for Creation's November 2023 Backlog Drive! You made a total of 49 reviews, for a total of 68 points. – robertsky ( talk) 06:50, 25 December 2023 (UTC) |
– robertsky (
talk) is wishing you
Happy Holidays! This greeting (and season) promotes
WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user
Happy Holidays, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the cheer by adding {{ subst:Happy holidays}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
– robertsky ( talk) 06:50, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
Women in Red | January 2024, Volume 10, Issue 1, Numbers 291, 293, 294, 295, 296
Announcement
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
-- Lajmmoore ( talk) 20:18, 28 December 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
The article Jean-Marie Rausch has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Very short page with only one paragraph. Also has some unreliable sources.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
BlakeIsHereStudios (
talk) 16:16, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jean-Marie Rausch until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.BlakeIsHereStudios ( talk) 16:17, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
Hi @ Spinster300! Thanks for reviewing the draft Draft:Józefa Bramowska submitted. However, I am surprised as to the reasons given for its rejection. The subject is notable and backed by reliable references. The "clean up" you mentioned, I believe, is a task you ought to have taken as part of your review process. It could have been more worthy not to attempt than the reasons given for its rejections. As a collaborative effort, others would have noticed areas for improvement and worked on the article. Regards. Atibrarian ( talk) 21:08, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
Hi. Please do not decline articles for NPOV in cases where there is no neutrality issues, such as you did at Draft:Józefa Bramowska. An article simply being poorly written is not non-neutrality, and is generally not a valid reason for declining unless it is so bad it is detrimental to the readability of the article. The draft establishes notability ( WP:NPOL), is sufficiently cited (the ILC decline only applies to WP:BLPs), is neutral, and is readable, thus should be accepted. For comparison, Draft:Angelo C. Scott is a case where a quality decline (essay-like) is likely fine. Curbon7 ( talk) 00:58, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
Hello @ Spinster300, thank you for leaving me a message about my draft submission (I created a new page about "Sandra Kobanovitch", french film director). I just tried to make it more "neutral" and less "peacock terms" and resubmited it now. Can you please tell me if that looks good for you? If there is still problems can you point them out? Thank you for your help. (By the way, I just translated the french version of the Wikipedia article, which seems already neutral to me but I made it ever more neutral now, I hope it's good). Calembourgs ( talk) 11:27, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
Hello,
I was wondering if you might be able to direct me to which bits of prose read more like an essay than an encyclopaedia entry on the Charles Knight artist page that was recently rejected again. I’ve added more citations but am slightly at a loss in terms of tone as I thought I had kept it objective. Any specifics or direction would be so helpful, thank you! Matthewfoliverathotmaildotcom ( talk) 11:06, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Hello,
I would like to ask why you have shortened the text of the Wikipedia entry "Carl Rechlin" so much. This article is based on the German Wikipedia entry https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Rechlin, the content of which has been checked in every detail.
Best regards User Rechlins Rechlins ( talk) 13:37, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Hello. I have seen that the article I created and you revised is now extremely short and, to me, quite uninteresting. I wanted to complete it, but now I dont know what I should do, especially as I don't quite agree with the little that's left of what I originally wrote. Can you please me advise me as to what I should now do ? Thanks. Rouncival ( talk) 23:03, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Hello, I'd like to get your input on this draft. I had trouble finding better sourcing for their accolades and theater history, but I think they may meet WP:NACTOR or WP:PRODUCER without it. Filmforme ( talk) 06:14, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
Women in Red | February 2024, Volume 10, Issue 2, Numbers 293, 294, 297, 298
Announcement
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
-- Lajmmoore ( talk 20:11, 28 January 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Hi, thanks for your work on these banners. Just a note that there is generally no purpose in adding |year=2024
and 293
because 293 is a 2024 event so it will automatically be categorised as such under that year. The |year=
parameter is for cases where the exact meetup is not known. Regards — Martin (
MSGJ ·
talk) 12:49, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for creating Manara Valgimigli! IgnatiusofLondon ( talk) 17:37, 1 February 2024 (UTC) |
Hello @ Spinster300, I have added and edited references on the draft article on artist Natalie Beridze that you have revised and declined for publishing. Please note that the page already exists in German language and the draft is addition in English. I have updated/edited references, and i believe the references ara comprehensively covering all points mentioned in the article, some other improvements were also made. I would be grateful you could revise the article once again. 31.146.234.210 ( talk) 12:42, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
Dear @ Spinster300, I have been fixing the draft article on Felipe Castanhari that you revised and declined for publishing. Is there anything else I need to do before it gets approved? ElegantEgotist ( talk) 20:50, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
The article Gillian Hart has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Absolute mess, unsourced, and includes text that seems to be written by a person close to article subject. If someone has a reason to save this, please do so by fixing the amount of issues present.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
AlphaBetaGamma (
Talk/Report any mistakes here) 04:33, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
Hi @ Spinster300,
I just wanted to say thank you for taking the time to review the draft article I have been writing Draft:Max Mezo.
I have taken your notes and have tried to improve the article to the best of my ability. Although, I am very open and hoping that you could take another look at it and possibly make any adjustments you think are necessary to have it ready to be published. This is my first article and I've been working on it for quite awhile now. It has been fun learning more about the process and how wiki pages come to fruition.
Thanks so much! Limekiwi29 ( talk) 01:31, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
Women in Red | March 2024, Volume 10, Issue 3, Numbers 293, 294, 299, 300, 301
Announcements
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
-- Lajmmoore ( talk 20:23, 25 February 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Good morning, @ Spinster300! I'm very sorry if I'm abusing your patience, but I'd like to ask your help in yet another issue. Earlier I was working on another draft, Draft:Wendel Bezerra, but it got denied as well because, once again, Portuguese-language Wikipedia (from where I translated it) doesn't give us much to work with. As soon as you're unoccupied, would you try to work your magic on it as well, or is it unsalvageable as it is??
Best regards and thanks for your work on Felipe Castanhari! ElegantEgotist ( talk) 13:39, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
I think you accidentally hit the wrong review button, marking him with "not neutral" when there is nothing (for an academic) that is not neutral in that. I therefore have accepted it, but also tagged it with a need for more secondary sources. Ldm1954 ( talk) 00:29, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
Hi Spinster300,
Thanks for your feedback that the article needed to be written more neutrally before it was ready for mainspace. I've done a bit of a rewrite to make it look like less of a resume. Can you advise me if what I've done is adequate and whether I should resubmit it to AfC or in your opinion does it need more work? TarnishedPath talk 09:06, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
Hi Spinster300, Thank you for your advice to rewrite the article more neutrally. Apparently, you have considered the mention that "the Index for Jewish Art is the biggest digital repository of Jewish art and material culture in the world" to be a judgmental statement. It is, however, an objective truth: there is no such another project, which collected so many documentation materials. Despite that, I have deleted this part not to provoke anyone. I think now the article contains no judgmental statements at all and is completely encyclopedic. I hope now it can be accepted for publication. CatherineOlesh ( talk) 11:08, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
Hello Spinster 300,
Thank you for your valuable feedback and taking the time to read this draft. As I am new to creating Wikipedia articles, I need all the constructive criticism I can gather. FYI, I'm going to carefully read WP:Writing Better Articles; WP:BECONCISE; your link to "not a publisher of personal essays;" and WP Avoiding Common Mistakes. I really do want to learn as much as I can about this style of writing, as I'm planning on writing more articles in the near and distant future. Additionally, I did see the Manual of Style (MoS), and I may selectively read parts of that one.
Thanks to your discussion regarding Ed Hayter, I now know that there's a list of requested articles out there.
I do have a question for you, however: after I make the corrections to this draft, will you be informed that it's ready to be re-reviewed when I re-submit it? That would be helpful on my part - to work with the same editor, rather than another random one. Is it possible to request the same reviewer for a draft?
Thanks again - Karl8704 Karl8704 ( talk) 20:17, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
Hello Spinster, I do not quite understand what you mean by: Several sections of the article need to be rephrased or rewritten for the article to pass. I am author of multiple full length articles on Czech Art (Mikuláš Medek, Adolf Hoffmeister, Theodor Pištěk, Zbyněk Sekal, Vladimír Janoušek, etc.) which were reviewed without any objections. Can you specify what should be "rephrased or rewritten"? Thanks. NoJin ( talk) 12:57, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
Thanks so much for reviewing Mimaki-hime! I'm actually over the moon💛 Camillz ( talk) 08:54, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
On 15 March 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Charles Knight (artist), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Charles Knight's wartime painting activities led to him being mistaken for a German spy? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Charles Knight (artist). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Charles Knight (artist)), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
theleekycauldron ( talk • she/her) 00:03, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
Hi, Spinster300. Thank you for your review of my article on Matthew Jordan Smith (Photographer). Draft:Matthew Jordan Smith (Photographer) I see it was declined. In this submission of it, I added a lot more citations than the first submission (went from 3 to 16 sources). If possible, I would love to know which specific areas you feel need more citation or if there are sections you think I should just delete from the article so that it can be approved. Thank you so much for your time. Jennifer Bak ( talk) 23:07, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
Spinster300, please tell me what is not reliable and what you consider to be reliable in the draft at Draft:James Fox (filmmaker). Just declining it as unreliable sources without providing what works/what doesn't is not helpful. Thank you. 50.200.118.243 ( talk) 06:58, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
@ Spinster300 request you to review my draft once again, i have tried to keep the content in an encyclopedic, non-promotional tone. Draft:Tarun S. Anand MSatindia ( talk) 13:54, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
I have followed whatever has been flagged by you(& the flagged in the previous comment by GSS). Kindly check as all the government official website link has been provided. Although contents are in pdf format. ThePerfectYellow ( talk) 17:57, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
Dear Spinster300,
Thank you for your quick read and review. I will revise and attempt a more neutral, encyclopedic tone (which I thought I had approached, having removed all marketing/promotional language from my description of Mr. Longo's life & career and entrepreneurealism. Of course, the lingua franca of his industry is breathlessly promotional and ecstatic, so there's only so much I can do to make the "maestro of make-up" seem like a materials scientist.) Perhaps you could point to an example or two of the kind of diction and or rhetoric that is considered not-neutral? That would be very welcome!
Now, as to the issue of reliability, please know that my sources are 2000 + pages of tear sheets--actual pdf's of print journalism in newspapers and magazines that cover fashion, beauty, celebrity, entertainment and, yes, gossip. There was a time--not that long ago--when people used clipping services to keep track of their appearances in the press. Vincent was one of those. Now--I have cited 50 plus publications that are authoritative in their industry---such as Vogue, Elle, US Weekly, Hello, OK, InStyle, Town & Country, Make-up Artist Magazine, Houston Post, Cosmopolitan. etc.. In these publications, Vincent is often the subject, or even more frequently, one of the experts solicited for comment or advice. Because I no longer have University Research Library privileges, I am not able to cite J-stor, etc., or other digital sources that archive these print publications from the 80's, 90's and early 00's, but I understand that that was one of the tools available to editors like yourself? I mostly have HARD copies, as it were, which I naively thought would be a gold standard. I also have a spreadsheet of major magazine covers for which Vincent earned the make-up credit, but I’m not sure how to cite such professional success. We are awaiting digitization of the VHS recordings of his many regular broadcast TV appearances, otherwise, I’d have cited those, too! (The introductory clip from the Miss American Broadcast, produced by D. Trump and featuring Melania Knauss Trump as a fellow judge seated right next to Vincent—confirms this claim. Appalling proximity, but true.)
I fear that the issue complicating matters for Wikipedia and, perhaps, yourself as its representative editor, is that Vincent Longo is a Brand, as well as a man, and his brand derives from his talent, his friendships, his access, his celebrity, his philanthropy and the penumbra of luxury that surround his life’s work. I have attempted in this bio to document those interlocking aspects of his biography.
My belief--and I think it a widely held one-- (see the Lear Center at Annenburg, USC, for example) is that entertainment was one of the major developments of the 20th century and it sure seems to be cannibalizing the 21st. And so also is branding a major cultural/economic/political phenomenon that has impacted our world (for better and often for worse). The publications that I’m referencing are the media organs for entertainment, branding & celebrity culture, but you say they are unreliable. And yet, if an American History Professor taught a course about these topics and wrote an article about Vincent as an exemplar (reaching a couple of hundred people, rather than millions) that would be a more credible source, it seems.
On a related matter, I think you would be dismayed to read the contempt voiced by one of the editors who volunteers to answer questions and assist would be contributors (at Libera Chat, fyi)—and not just toward me, but to others whose comments were visible to me in our dialogue stream. I kept being "helped" by the same person, who scorned my work and ignorance, though I was able to request a different person to answer my questions about formatting. (I also retained an Upwork consultant and expert on Wikipedia formatting to assist me--since Wikipedia's automated approach is buggy and doesn't even include Magazines as a possible option). Please forgive me if I feel hostility toward myself as a paid writer and toward my subject.
As you may have read in my bio, I am a reasonably well published academic by training, but have worked primarily in movie marketing (and taught that subject at UCLA Film School) and as a documentary researcher and writer. (7 significant projects under my belt—I lecture on the subject at international organizations and was recently invited by PBS to address their in-house documentary makers.). My Ph.D is in English (UCSB). I do not consider myself a hack (nor do my clients) and my work on the history of film marketing has been "borrowed" for the wikipedia article on Andrew J. Kuehn ( Andrew J. Kuehn) and also for the architect, Eileen Gray.
All of which is to say is that I would appreciate your consideration and some specific advice. I am working hard to get over the hurdles, but the explanation for why the wealth of references I have supplied are not sufficient is not one I find persuasive. (I dropped the NY Post from my citations, even though with regard to Page 6 Celebrity Gossip, they are as reliable as anyone. There appears to be no nuance here in assessing such organs of the media.) When a subject, like Vincent, has been the subject of scores of articles and profiles and mentioned hundreds of times in the publications of his industry--that also happen to be publications of MASS media circulation--I have to believe that he is notable and his inclusion in wikipedia relevant and deserved. I’m eager to make that happen. I welcome your assistance.
Fred Greene, Los Angeles Flgreene13 ( talk) 17:09, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
Hello @ Spinster300,
I hope you are well, I have went through the draft created and was wondering if you could have a look at it before I submit it again. Any advise would be appreciated.
Have a great day DanielHicksAss ( talk) 01:42, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
Women in Red | April 2024, Volume 10, Issue 4, Numbers 293, 294, 302, 303, 304
Announcements
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
-- Lajmmoore ( talk 19:43, 30 March 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Hello Spinster300,
Backlog update: The October drive reduced the article backlog from 11,626 to 7,609 and the redirect backlog from 16,985 to 6,431! Congratulations to Schminnte, who led with over 2,300 points.
Following that, New Page Patrol organized another backlog drive for articles in January 2024. The January drive started with 13,650 articles and reduced the backlog to 7,430 articles. Congratulations to JTtheOG, who achieved first place with 1,340 points in this drive.
Looking at the graph, it seems like backlog drives are one of the only things keeping the backlog under control. Another backlog drive is being planned for May. Feel free to participate in the May backlog drive planning discussion.
It's worth noting that both queues are gradually increasing again and are nearing 14,034 articles and 22,540 redirects. We encourage you to keep contributing, even if it's just a single patrol per day. Your support is greatly appreciated!
2023 Awards
Onel5969 won the 2023 cup with 17,761 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 50/day. There was one Platinum Award (10,000+ reviews), 2 Gold Awards (5000+ reviews), 6 Silver (2000+), 8 Bronze (1000+), 30 Iron (360+) and 70 more for the 100+ barnstar. Hey man im josh led on redirect reviews by clearing 36,175 of them. For the full details, see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone for their efforts in reviewing!
WMF work on PageTriage: The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers deployed the rewritten NewPagesFeed in October, and then gave the NewPagesFeed a slight visual facelift in November. This concludes most major work to Special:NewPagesFeed, and most major work by the WMF Moderator Tools team, who wrapped up their major work on PageTriage in October. The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers will continue small work on PageTriage as time permits.
Recruitment: A couple of the coordinators have been inviting editors to become reviewers, via mass-messages to their talk pages. If you know someone who you'd think would make a good reviewer, then a personal invitation to them would be great. Additionally, if there are Wikiprojects that you are active on, then you can add a post there asking participants to join NPP. Please be careful not to double invite folks that have already been invited.
Reviewing tip: Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages within their most familiar subjects can use the regularly updated NPP Browser tool.
Reminders:
MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 16:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
New Page Patrol | May 2024 Articles Backlog Drive | |
| |
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. |
MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 16:15, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
This is Spinster300's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments. |
|
Archives: 1, 2, 3 |
I don't know how to tag you but you can restore your version back to how it was. Also thank you for making it more understanding on why you did the changes. Veganpurplefox ( talk) 17:25, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
Hi Spinster300. Thank you for your offer to help research and develop draft pages that have been submitted for review. On my Talk Page you suggested you would do this by going through the drafts mentioned there, however I think it would be more productive for you to go directly to the list of new draft pages submitted for review. Several of the draft pages mentioned on my Talk Page are fundamentally flawed for acceptance onto Wikipedia, and I would be concerned that you could be wasting your time trying to improve pages that simply will not be able to meet the relevant criteria, and attempting to do so could generate undesirable activity from authors who appear to be paid for creating pages and are not genuine editors. For this reason I am posting this here on your Talk Page rather than on mine. I trust you understand my reasoning. Cabrils ( talk) 22:46, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
Hello, can i also have your help in my other draft Draft:To Dream it was declined but maybe it exists reliable articles that i havent cited that i though they were not reliable. Veganpurplefox ( talk) 00:32, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider
.Thanks again, and happy editing!
Tagishsimon ( talk) 01:24, 26 September 2023 (UTC)Hello, i believe he is notable and i looked him up in this website: https://www.bfi.org.uk/preview/page/cfa4a40b-c655-4699-9fcc-b0e97551371b/working-copy/1684234680/6_p2ELUsFyId3V-mwEy3ObfGotrJtoAqvgVjVUYKZZs , that im making a draft for Draft:Mattias Inwood ,the same website you used for Edward Hayter. But when I opened up it doesn't work, and same with Ed ,nothing can be seen. Do I add it or do I not add it for the draft? Veganpurplefox ( talk) 12:21, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
His name was again deleted from the user mrOllie in the Will (TV series) .how can we get him in the cast? Veganpurplefox ( talk) 22:31, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
Women in Red October 2023, Vol 9, Iss 10, Nos 251, 252, 284, 285, 286
See also
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
-- Lajmmoore ( talk) 10:54, 29 September 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Hello. Minor problem over at Clare Kenny: there are over a dozen inbound links from all the bands the AFD'd musician was in, and none for the artist. Also, the dab page currently only has one entry. Shall I unlink all the music articles? Are you planning to add another entry to the dab? Thanks, Wikishovel ( talk) 21:06, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
This article has 16 legitimate sources, which exceeds most Wikipedia pages and matches Shelley Herman husband's page /info/en/?search=Randall_Carver.
There is nothing "highly promotional" about the tone. It simply states the facts, which have been backed up by the 16 legitimate news links. No product or service is being sold or promoted. Please site the specific promotional tone you claim. exists.
The claim that Shelley Herman's published book is only "celebrity anecdotes" is reductive and incorrect. The book is far more than that, but I would be flagged for a "highly promotional" tone for going into anymore detail.
Interestingly, another writer who wrote about his experience as an NBC page has not had his page flagged, in fact, he has fewer references than Shelley Herman /info/en/?search=Herbie_J_Pilato LosAngelesWriter ( talk) 00:35, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
Hi @ Spinster300.
You declined the draft Monica Gagliano yesterday due to lack of sources and because it was written like an essay.
I just wanted to point out that under WP:NACADEMIC she met the criteria, being a former Fellow of the Australian Research Council so technically didn't need lots of secondary sources. WP:NACADEMIC often trips me up on that aspect, I always forget its different to the normal people criteria. Just something to watch out for!
The editor asked for some help on the Teahouse and they did add a few more secondary sources, and I accepted the draft. Qcne (talk) 23:07, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Hi @ Spinster300,
Curious what you think about this one? I've cleaned up based on the previous reviewer's comments. They have a lot of coverage, particularly for one film. I couldn't find any bio material about them except
here, which looks to be not secondary or independent.
Filmforme (
talk) 19:00, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for your excellent edting and acceptance of the article. BFP1 ( talk) 09:59, 11 October 2023 (UTC) Better than my editing of this message!
Women in Red November 2023, Vol 9, Iss 11, Nos 251, 252, 287, 288, 289
See also Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
-- Lajmmoore ( talk) 08:23, 26 October 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Hi Spinster300 –
You recently declined my submission due to not having enough sources for Carlton Heard. I have supplemented the material with additional sources to strengthen the discussion on the subject. Should you have any recommendations for improvement, I would greatly appreciate your insights. Thanks!
-Blackspace7 BlackSpace7 ( talk) 00:52, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
Hello Spinster300:
WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long
Backlog Drive!
The goal of this drive is to reduce the backlog of unreviewed drafts to less than 2 months outstanding reviews from the current 4+ months. Bonus points will be given for reviewing drafts that have been waiting more than 30 days. The drive is running from 1 November 2023 through 30 November 2023.
You may find Category:AfC pending submissions by age or other categories and sorting helpful.
Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.
Dear @ Spinster300,
Thank you for your feedback on my submission. I wanted to let you know that I've made some adjustments to my submission based on your feedback regarding its tone, which didn't meet the encyclopaedic standards. I've also removed any unnecessary sources and made the information more succinct. If you have any further suggestions for improvement, I would welcome your insights. Kind regards, Plushwiki21 ( talk) 10:17, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
Hi there! Thanks so much for your speedy review of my draft entry. I'm just a little confused at your comment "We need more reliable sources about the subject, not just reviews of the subject's work" as none of the sources are reviews of the author's work? I was hoping you could give me a steer on this - maybe I'm completely misinterpreting what the comment means! - as I'd really like to revise and resubmit this entry. Many thanks! Mareotis ( talk) 21:12, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Hi @ Spinster300, I believe this draft passes WP:NACTOR but would like to know what you think. Thanks — Filmforme ( talk) 18:33, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
Women in Red December 2023, Vol 9, Iss 12, Nos 251, 252, 290, 291, 292
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
-- Lajmmoore ( talk) 20:24, 27 November 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 00:50, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Hello Spinster 300,
The Nadja Tesich draft that I submitted for review is only my second Wikipedia entry. Can you tell me where I went wrong, as far as citations? 24.105.145.198 ( talk) 20:58, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
New Page Patrol | January 2024 Articles Backlog Drive | |
| |
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. |
MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 02:10, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Spinster300. Thank you for your work on Dipesh Raj. DreamRimmer, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:
I have marked Dipesh Raj and Rajesh Pullarwar as unreviewed. How did they pass WP:GNG? I don't see any significant coverage. The sources used are mostly databases, interviews, and self-published selling profiles.
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|DreamRimmer}}
. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~
. (Message delivered via the
Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
– DreamRimmer ( talk) 17:04, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Spinster300. Thank you for your work on Rajesh Pullarwar. DreamRimmer, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:
I have marked Dipesh Raj and Rajesh Pullarwar as unreviewed. How did they pass WP:GNG? I don't see any significant coverage. The sources used are mostly databases, interviews, and self-published selling profiles.
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|DreamRimmer}}
. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~
. (Message delivered via the
Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
– DreamRimmer ( talk) 17:05, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
Voting is now open for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards for 2023! The the top editors will be awarded the coveted Gold Wiki . Cast your votes vote here and here respectively. Voting closes at 23:59 on 30 December 2023. On behalf of the coordinators, wishing you the very best for the festive season and the new year. Hawkeye7 ( talk · contribs) via MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 23:56, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar | |
Thank you for your participation in the Articles for Creation's November 2023 Backlog Drive! You made a total of 49 reviews, for a total of 68 points. – robertsky ( talk) 06:50, 25 December 2023 (UTC) |
– robertsky (
talk) is wishing you
Happy Holidays! This greeting (and season) promotes
WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user
Happy Holidays, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the cheer by adding {{ subst:Happy holidays}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
– robertsky ( talk) 06:50, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
Women in Red | January 2024, Volume 10, Issue 1, Numbers 291, 293, 294, 295, 296
Announcement
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
-- Lajmmoore ( talk) 20:18, 28 December 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
The article Jean-Marie Rausch has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Very short page with only one paragraph. Also has some unreliable sources.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
BlakeIsHereStudios (
talk) 16:16, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jean-Marie Rausch until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.BlakeIsHereStudios ( talk) 16:17, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
Hi @ Spinster300! Thanks for reviewing the draft Draft:Józefa Bramowska submitted. However, I am surprised as to the reasons given for its rejection. The subject is notable and backed by reliable references. The "clean up" you mentioned, I believe, is a task you ought to have taken as part of your review process. It could have been more worthy not to attempt than the reasons given for its rejections. As a collaborative effort, others would have noticed areas for improvement and worked on the article. Regards. Atibrarian ( talk) 21:08, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
Hi. Please do not decline articles for NPOV in cases where there is no neutrality issues, such as you did at Draft:Józefa Bramowska. An article simply being poorly written is not non-neutrality, and is generally not a valid reason for declining unless it is so bad it is detrimental to the readability of the article. The draft establishes notability ( WP:NPOL), is sufficiently cited (the ILC decline only applies to WP:BLPs), is neutral, and is readable, thus should be accepted. For comparison, Draft:Angelo C. Scott is a case where a quality decline (essay-like) is likely fine. Curbon7 ( talk) 00:58, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
Hello @ Spinster300, thank you for leaving me a message about my draft submission (I created a new page about "Sandra Kobanovitch", french film director). I just tried to make it more "neutral" and less "peacock terms" and resubmited it now. Can you please tell me if that looks good for you? If there is still problems can you point them out? Thank you for your help. (By the way, I just translated the french version of the Wikipedia article, which seems already neutral to me but I made it ever more neutral now, I hope it's good). Calembourgs ( talk) 11:27, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
Hello,
I was wondering if you might be able to direct me to which bits of prose read more like an essay than an encyclopaedia entry on the Charles Knight artist page that was recently rejected again. I’ve added more citations but am slightly at a loss in terms of tone as I thought I had kept it objective. Any specifics or direction would be so helpful, thank you! Matthewfoliverathotmaildotcom ( talk) 11:06, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Hello,
I would like to ask why you have shortened the text of the Wikipedia entry "Carl Rechlin" so much. This article is based on the German Wikipedia entry https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Rechlin, the content of which has been checked in every detail.
Best regards User Rechlins Rechlins ( talk) 13:37, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Hello. I have seen that the article I created and you revised is now extremely short and, to me, quite uninteresting. I wanted to complete it, but now I dont know what I should do, especially as I don't quite agree with the little that's left of what I originally wrote. Can you please me advise me as to what I should now do ? Thanks. Rouncival ( talk) 23:03, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Hello, I'd like to get your input on this draft. I had trouble finding better sourcing for their accolades and theater history, but I think they may meet WP:NACTOR or WP:PRODUCER without it. Filmforme ( talk) 06:14, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
Women in Red | February 2024, Volume 10, Issue 2, Numbers 293, 294, 297, 298
Announcement
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
-- Lajmmoore ( talk 20:11, 28 January 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Hi, thanks for your work on these banners. Just a note that there is generally no purpose in adding |year=2024
and 293
because 293 is a 2024 event so it will automatically be categorised as such under that year. The |year=
parameter is for cases where the exact meetup is not known. Regards — Martin (
MSGJ ·
talk) 12:49, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for creating Manara Valgimigli! IgnatiusofLondon ( talk) 17:37, 1 February 2024 (UTC) |
Hello @ Spinster300, I have added and edited references on the draft article on artist Natalie Beridze that you have revised and declined for publishing. Please note that the page already exists in German language and the draft is addition in English. I have updated/edited references, and i believe the references ara comprehensively covering all points mentioned in the article, some other improvements were also made. I would be grateful you could revise the article once again. 31.146.234.210 ( talk) 12:42, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
Dear @ Spinster300, I have been fixing the draft article on Felipe Castanhari that you revised and declined for publishing. Is there anything else I need to do before it gets approved? ElegantEgotist ( talk) 20:50, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
The article Gillian Hart has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Absolute mess, unsourced, and includes text that seems to be written by a person close to article subject. If someone has a reason to save this, please do so by fixing the amount of issues present.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
AlphaBetaGamma (
Talk/Report any mistakes here) 04:33, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
Hi @ Spinster300,
I just wanted to say thank you for taking the time to review the draft article I have been writing Draft:Max Mezo.
I have taken your notes and have tried to improve the article to the best of my ability. Although, I am very open and hoping that you could take another look at it and possibly make any adjustments you think are necessary to have it ready to be published. This is my first article and I've been working on it for quite awhile now. It has been fun learning more about the process and how wiki pages come to fruition.
Thanks so much! Limekiwi29 ( talk) 01:31, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
Women in Red | March 2024, Volume 10, Issue 3, Numbers 293, 294, 299, 300, 301
Announcements
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
-- Lajmmoore ( talk 20:23, 25 February 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Good morning, @ Spinster300! I'm very sorry if I'm abusing your patience, but I'd like to ask your help in yet another issue. Earlier I was working on another draft, Draft:Wendel Bezerra, but it got denied as well because, once again, Portuguese-language Wikipedia (from where I translated it) doesn't give us much to work with. As soon as you're unoccupied, would you try to work your magic on it as well, or is it unsalvageable as it is??
Best regards and thanks for your work on Felipe Castanhari! ElegantEgotist ( talk) 13:39, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
I think you accidentally hit the wrong review button, marking him with "not neutral" when there is nothing (for an academic) that is not neutral in that. I therefore have accepted it, but also tagged it with a need for more secondary sources. Ldm1954 ( talk) 00:29, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
Hi Spinster300,
Thanks for your feedback that the article needed to be written more neutrally before it was ready for mainspace. I've done a bit of a rewrite to make it look like less of a resume. Can you advise me if what I've done is adequate and whether I should resubmit it to AfC or in your opinion does it need more work? TarnishedPath talk 09:06, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
Hi Spinster300, Thank you for your advice to rewrite the article more neutrally. Apparently, you have considered the mention that "the Index for Jewish Art is the biggest digital repository of Jewish art and material culture in the world" to be a judgmental statement. It is, however, an objective truth: there is no such another project, which collected so many documentation materials. Despite that, I have deleted this part not to provoke anyone. I think now the article contains no judgmental statements at all and is completely encyclopedic. I hope now it can be accepted for publication. CatherineOlesh ( talk) 11:08, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
Hello Spinster 300,
Thank you for your valuable feedback and taking the time to read this draft. As I am new to creating Wikipedia articles, I need all the constructive criticism I can gather. FYI, I'm going to carefully read WP:Writing Better Articles; WP:BECONCISE; your link to "not a publisher of personal essays;" and WP Avoiding Common Mistakes. I really do want to learn as much as I can about this style of writing, as I'm planning on writing more articles in the near and distant future. Additionally, I did see the Manual of Style (MoS), and I may selectively read parts of that one.
Thanks to your discussion regarding Ed Hayter, I now know that there's a list of requested articles out there.
I do have a question for you, however: after I make the corrections to this draft, will you be informed that it's ready to be re-reviewed when I re-submit it? That would be helpful on my part - to work with the same editor, rather than another random one. Is it possible to request the same reviewer for a draft?
Thanks again - Karl8704 Karl8704 ( talk) 20:17, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
Hello Spinster, I do not quite understand what you mean by: Several sections of the article need to be rephrased or rewritten for the article to pass. I am author of multiple full length articles on Czech Art (Mikuláš Medek, Adolf Hoffmeister, Theodor Pištěk, Zbyněk Sekal, Vladimír Janoušek, etc.) which were reviewed without any objections. Can you specify what should be "rephrased or rewritten"? Thanks. NoJin ( talk) 12:57, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
Thanks so much for reviewing Mimaki-hime! I'm actually over the moon💛 Camillz ( talk) 08:54, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
On 15 March 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Charles Knight (artist), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Charles Knight's wartime painting activities led to him being mistaken for a German spy? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Charles Knight (artist). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Charles Knight (artist)), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
theleekycauldron ( talk • she/her) 00:03, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
Hi, Spinster300. Thank you for your review of my article on Matthew Jordan Smith (Photographer). Draft:Matthew Jordan Smith (Photographer) I see it was declined. In this submission of it, I added a lot more citations than the first submission (went from 3 to 16 sources). If possible, I would love to know which specific areas you feel need more citation or if there are sections you think I should just delete from the article so that it can be approved. Thank you so much for your time. Jennifer Bak ( talk) 23:07, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
Spinster300, please tell me what is not reliable and what you consider to be reliable in the draft at Draft:James Fox (filmmaker). Just declining it as unreliable sources without providing what works/what doesn't is not helpful. Thank you. 50.200.118.243 ( talk) 06:58, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
@ Spinster300 request you to review my draft once again, i have tried to keep the content in an encyclopedic, non-promotional tone. Draft:Tarun S. Anand MSatindia ( talk) 13:54, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
I have followed whatever has been flagged by you(& the flagged in the previous comment by GSS). Kindly check as all the government official website link has been provided. Although contents are in pdf format. ThePerfectYellow ( talk) 17:57, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
Dear Spinster300,
Thank you for your quick read and review. I will revise and attempt a more neutral, encyclopedic tone (which I thought I had approached, having removed all marketing/promotional language from my description of Mr. Longo's life & career and entrepreneurealism. Of course, the lingua franca of his industry is breathlessly promotional and ecstatic, so there's only so much I can do to make the "maestro of make-up" seem like a materials scientist.) Perhaps you could point to an example or two of the kind of diction and or rhetoric that is considered not-neutral? That would be very welcome!
Now, as to the issue of reliability, please know that my sources are 2000 + pages of tear sheets--actual pdf's of print journalism in newspapers and magazines that cover fashion, beauty, celebrity, entertainment and, yes, gossip. There was a time--not that long ago--when people used clipping services to keep track of their appearances in the press. Vincent was one of those. Now--I have cited 50 plus publications that are authoritative in their industry---such as Vogue, Elle, US Weekly, Hello, OK, InStyle, Town & Country, Make-up Artist Magazine, Houston Post, Cosmopolitan. etc.. In these publications, Vincent is often the subject, or even more frequently, one of the experts solicited for comment or advice. Because I no longer have University Research Library privileges, I am not able to cite J-stor, etc., or other digital sources that archive these print publications from the 80's, 90's and early 00's, but I understand that that was one of the tools available to editors like yourself? I mostly have HARD copies, as it were, which I naively thought would be a gold standard. I also have a spreadsheet of major magazine covers for which Vincent earned the make-up credit, but I’m not sure how to cite such professional success. We are awaiting digitization of the VHS recordings of his many regular broadcast TV appearances, otherwise, I’d have cited those, too! (The introductory clip from the Miss American Broadcast, produced by D. Trump and featuring Melania Knauss Trump as a fellow judge seated right next to Vincent—confirms this claim. Appalling proximity, but true.)
I fear that the issue complicating matters for Wikipedia and, perhaps, yourself as its representative editor, is that Vincent Longo is a Brand, as well as a man, and his brand derives from his talent, his friendships, his access, his celebrity, his philanthropy and the penumbra of luxury that surround his life’s work. I have attempted in this bio to document those interlocking aspects of his biography.
My belief--and I think it a widely held one-- (see the Lear Center at Annenburg, USC, for example) is that entertainment was one of the major developments of the 20th century and it sure seems to be cannibalizing the 21st. And so also is branding a major cultural/economic/political phenomenon that has impacted our world (for better and often for worse). The publications that I’m referencing are the media organs for entertainment, branding & celebrity culture, but you say they are unreliable. And yet, if an American History Professor taught a course about these topics and wrote an article about Vincent as an exemplar (reaching a couple of hundred people, rather than millions) that would be a more credible source, it seems.
On a related matter, I think you would be dismayed to read the contempt voiced by one of the editors who volunteers to answer questions and assist would be contributors (at Libera Chat, fyi)—and not just toward me, but to others whose comments were visible to me in our dialogue stream. I kept being "helped" by the same person, who scorned my work and ignorance, though I was able to request a different person to answer my questions about formatting. (I also retained an Upwork consultant and expert on Wikipedia formatting to assist me--since Wikipedia's automated approach is buggy and doesn't even include Magazines as a possible option). Please forgive me if I feel hostility toward myself as a paid writer and toward my subject.
As you may have read in my bio, I am a reasonably well published academic by training, but have worked primarily in movie marketing (and taught that subject at UCLA Film School) and as a documentary researcher and writer. (7 significant projects under my belt—I lecture on the subject at international organizations and was recently invited by PBS to address their in-house documentary makers.). My Ph.D is in English (UCSB). I do not consider myself a hack (nor do my clients) and my work on the history of film marketing has been "borrowed" for the wikipedia article on Andrew J. Kuehn ( Andrew J. Kuehn) and also for the architect, Eileen Gray.
All of which is to say is that I would appreciate your consideration and some specific advice. I am working hard to get over the hurdles, but the explanation for why the wealth of references I have supplied are not sufficient is not one I find persuasive. (I dropped the NY Post from my citations, even though with regard to Page 6 Celebrity Gossip, they are as reliable as anyone. There appears to be no nuance here in assessing such organs of the media.) When a subject, like Vincent, has been the subject of scores of articles and profiles and mentioned hundreds of times in the publications of his industry--that also happen to be publications of MASS media circulation--I have to believe that he is notable and his inclusion in wikipedia relevant and deserved. I’m eager to make that happen. I welcome your assistance.
Fred Greene, Los Angeles Flgreene13 ( talk) 17:09, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
Hello @ Spinster300,
I hope you are well, I have went through the draft created and was wondering if you could have a look at it before I submit it again. Any advise would be appreciated.
Have a great day DanielHicksAss ( talk) 01:42, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
Women in Red | April 2024, Volume 10, Issue 4, Numbers 293, 294, 302, 303, 304
Announcements
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
-- Lajmmoore ( talk 19:43, 30 March 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Hello Spinster300,
Backlog update: The October drive reduced the article backlog from 11,626 to 7,609 and the redirect backlog from 16,985 to 6,431! Congratulations to Schminnte, who led with over 2,300 points.
Following that, New Page Patrol organized another backlog drive for articles in January 2024. The January drive started with 13,650 articles and reduced the backlog to 7,430 articles. Congratulations to JTtheOG, who achieved first place with 1,340 points in this drive.
Looking at the graph, it seems like backlog drives are one of the only things keeping the backlog under control. Another backlog drive is being planned for May. Feel free to participate in the May backlog drive planning discussion.
It's worth noting that both queues are gradually increasing again and are nearing 14,034 articles and 22,540 redirects. We encourage you to keep contributing, even if it's just a single patrol per day. Your support is greatly appreciated!
2023 Awards
Onel5969 won the 2023 cup with 17,761 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 50/day. There was one Platinum Award (10,000+ reviews), 2 Gold Awards (5000+ reviews), 6 Silver (2000+), 8 Bronze (1000+), 30 Iron (360+) and 70 more for the 100+ barnstar. Hey man im josh led on redirect reviews by clearing 36,175 of them. For the full details, see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone for their efforts in reviewing!
WMF work on PageTriage: The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers deployed the rewritten NewPagesFeed in October, and then gave the NewPagesFeed a slight visual facelift in November. This concludes most major work to Special:NewPagesFeed, and most major work by the WMF Moderator Tools team, who wrapped up their major work on PageTriage in October. The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers will continue small work on PageTriage as time permits.
Recruitment: A couple of the coordinators have been inviting editors to become reviewers, via mass-messages to their talk pages. If you know someone who you'd think would make a good reviewer, then a personal invitation to them would be great. Additionally, if there are Wikiprojects that you are active on, then you can add a post there asking participants to join NPP. Please be careful not to double invite folks that have already been invited.
Reviewing tip: Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages within their most familiar subjects can use the regularly updated NPP Browser tool.
Reminders:
MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 16:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
New Page Patrol | May 2024 Articles Backlog Drive | |
| |
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. |
MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 16:15, 17 April 2024 (UTC)