User talk:CNMall41/Archive 7

Implying that I am canvassing
This is a serious charge. I definitely don't want to canvass. You linked to a page in which I engaged with an editor in the open on a noticeboard discussion about an RfC, asking them to share their opinion that they had already offered. In what sense is that canvassing? I read the policy page on both RfC and Canvassing, and by my reading what I did was actually encouraged. Thanks for the clarification ahead of time. DolyaIskrina (talk) 03:33, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
 * If you believe I am making an accusation that is unfounded, that would be considered WP:DISRUPT. You are free to go through that policy as it would also address your previous accusations of whitewashing against myself and at least two administrators who had a hand in doing heavy cleanup on that page (even more serious "charge"). Using ORN is a way to get clarification on original research and how it is used. You received multiple answers but then turned the conversation into getting someone else into a discussion that is already listed at RfC for discussion. It is borderline canvassing and based on how you respond (or fail to respond) to editors on that talk page (e.g., you have now failed at least three times to provide a source or even respond to the direct question about DGY being the one who designed and built the stillers), it seems to me that you have a single purpose here and want to get anyone on your side to help. Just my opinion. If I feel that your actions definitely cross the line into canvassing that other editors would agree with my assessment about, I would deal with it at a noticeboard. If you feel I am making a "serious charge" and feel you have WP:CLEANHANDS, please feel free to do the same. --CNMall41 (talk) 03:43, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the response. I think I understand what you are saying. I'll read those policies you linked, but want to say now that I didn't realize "whitewashing" was an actual charge, and I didn't mean to accuse you (or anyone really) of anything serious. I definitely wouldn't have put it as the header of the discussion had I known. I made a similar mistake with the word "tendentious" a while back. DolyaIskrina (talk) 03:58, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you for that. I am of the opinion that you are passionate about the topic and not as experienced with the policies of Wikipedia as others. That is why I have assumed good faith in most of the discussion. Where I am at is simple. I am not a protector of DGY. I think we can both agree that he didn't live a life that was something to brag about. I am however a firm believer in WP:NPOV. Sometimes a passion for a topic can lead to being unable to edit a topic with a NPOV and many people come to Wikipedia with their passion and don't see the guidelines as clearly as they should be. I am not saying that is happening here, but wanted to you let you know my two cents in case it applies. Thanks for the civility here. --CNMall41 (talk) 04:18, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Clay Millican
Thank you for your criticism. I have edited and corrected the article each time before resubmitting, but obviously not enough yet. I will strive to make it as neutral as possible. The article is entirely factual however, and I will locate sources where needed and again write in a more neutral fashion. Thanks again for your review and your critique. Pastormikeu (talk) 15:05, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Please review my recent changes. I'm interested in your opinion of the 'neutral' rewrite. Thank you in advance,Pastormikeu (talk) 16:43, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
 * , I would love to assist but based on your neutral rewrite and lack of reliable sources, I am unsure if I can. Again, it is a promotional biography, something that is more for his website and not for Wikipedia. You will need to place references inline which you have failed to do. Finally, the sources you introduced are not considered reliable according to Wikipedia. On a separate note, what is your relation with the subject? --CNMall41 (talk) 18:43, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I have known Clay for a number of years as I worked in the sport and we interacted occasionally. I will attempt to edit and will continue to find a path to being published, but I'm struggling with finding resources more credible, as the ones referenced are publications highly respected within the sport.  I suppose it would be better to not list them, but I'll need to research which ones would reference the subject outside the sport of drag racing. Thank you again for your time spent in responding.Pastormikeu (talk) 19:14, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that. I would suggest that you first read through WP:COI as it is relevant to any of your editing on the subject. For the references, while they may be highly respected in the field, they are more of industry publications when we would need more main stream media pieces. If these don't exist, there really is no path to Wikipedia as it is a requirement for notability. --CNMall41 (talk) 19:19, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

I don't disagree with the fact I need outside the industry references, but I'm curious as to why the Wikipedia article entitled Tony Schumacher used the same inside industry references as mine and yet was published? I have added references including USA Today this morning and I'm hoping that may be more inline with what you are wanting. I'm struggling with making the inline citations you need, but will persevere. Again thank you for taking the time out of your busy day to even respond!Pastormikeu (talk) 18:29, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
 * But you ignored my suggestion about reading through WP:COI as you have not made the proper disclosure. Please do so. You can also look at WP:OSE for the answer to your Schumacher question. --CNMall41 (talk) 01:52, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Actually, I did read the COI article but I wasn't sure where to announce that. Would I do it here and does that suffice, or do I post it on a noticeboard? Regarding that subject, I have known the subject of the article, Clay Millican, for about 30 years, as we both would see each other at different racing venues over the years. In no way did Clay approach me about writing the article and I'm not being paid for doing so. I did mention to him last fall that I could find no Wiki article on him, and asked if he would mind if I submitted one. Most of all of my research for the article has come from my scouring the internet, and from my own memory, as I have worked and have been in the Sport for over 45 years. Thank you again for direction. Pastormikeu (talk) 14:58, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * (Talk page stalker), and therein lies the BIG problem, Wikipedia cannot use ANYTHING which comes from your own memory. Theroadislong (talk) 16:24, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

I backed up every fact with references. Nothing stated is just my memory. The article is factual and substantiated. Obviously a wrong choice of words since I'm being stalked. You will note over 28 references if you read the article, Pastormikeu (talk) 16:30, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

To CNMall41, I have made the COI notation on the article. Continuing in my search to establish mainstream media sources. Thank you again for your patience. Pastormikeu (talk) 16:43, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * At this point, it is hard to assume good faith when you don't seem to get the guidelines and policies that are being pointed out to you. It is also clear that you are inexperienced as you have accused of stalking when it fact the terminology they used means they are simply watching my talk page. I feel that you are WP:NOTHERE and failing to take the time to gain experience and attempting to WP:BLUDGEON the process isn't something that will help you accomplish your goals. --CNMall41 (talk) 16:49, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

I am certainly inexperienced, and have never attempted to front any position otherwise. I only joined Wikipedia a week or two before I submitted my article. I am a complete novice, and not a very good writer at that, but was simply trying to have a man who has accomplished much in his sport be recognized,. Sorry that I angered you and the other person by seemingly not following the rules, but I didn't even know most of them. I will continue to edit the article to a place where it can be used if possible, and want no notoriety if that happens.Pastormikeu (talk) 17:30, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I am not angered and not sure why you would say that. I would recommend getting to know the rules of Wikipedia and gain some experience prior to attempting anything additional with this draft. Otherwise, you are a WP:SPA who's only interest is to promote someone who otherwise may not be notable for Wikipedia. A saying around here is that when a topic becomes notable, editors will take notice and likely create a page for that person. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:37, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:Kane Tanaka&#32; on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 20:31, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Draft:2020 Clemson vs. Notre Dame football game
Saw you decline this and I was borderline on changing my stance and accepting. What's compelling to me notability wise is that it was the most watched game of the 2020 season. Considering there's hundreds of games telecast each year, I find that pretty compelling. Thoughts? Sulfurboy (talk) 21:46, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
 * . Its a tough call. I was one of the many who watched it and think it was a good game. My decline was based on the fact that there was little improvement (and nothing compelling) since your initial decline which was my basis for denial. I did not review all of the details. I have no issue either way if you accept it. For future reference, I have no problem with reviewers overturning any decline I make as AfC is a very busy place so the more eyes the better. Cheers. --CNMall41 (talk) 01:27, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * , Yeah, I still like to reach out though or at least give a courtesy ping. I'm going to go ahead and accept it. The college football project is pretty great, so I'm sure when they see it in mainspace someone will step up and make the article better. Sulfurboy (talk) 02:20, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I do appreciate you reaching out. --CNMall41 (talk) 02:42, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:Joe Biden&#32; on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 08:30, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Sanjay Govil - sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia
Hello CNMall41 You had tagged "This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia." for Draft:Sanjay Govil. Hence refined contents, added and edited number of citations. Could you please review and help by providing further comments? Appreciated! Monir1975 Monir1975 (talk) 20:20, 22 February 2021 (UTC).
 * There was an articles for deletion discussion last month where the Wikipedia community determined this doesn't meet guidelines. This is based on the available reliable secondary sources on the subject. No amount of editing the draft is going to get it accepted. Since that discussion, there will need to be reliable in-depth sources that show how the subject is notable. Until that happens, I would advise editing in a different area of Wikipedia. --CNMall41 (talk) 21:38, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I also see that you are a declared WP:PAID editor. If you have received compensation on behalf of the subject of the draft it is very unethical knowing that they don't meet notability guidelines based on that deletion discussion. These are the type of behaviors that make paid editing on Wikipedia frowned upon by the majority of the community. --CNMall41 (talk) 21:43, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Apprecited your response. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Monir1975 (talk • contribs) 22:28, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Alphonso Romero II for review
Thank you for the quick review! I was having trouble telling if the article I'd created previously was up for review or just sitting in a draft so I resubmitted the same one. I'm new here and am still trying to navigate everything. Any advice on how to best proceed? I didn't see a submit option under the draft that was previously created for this page so I'm not sure what to do next.

Thank you! Notyourcupoftea (talk) 19:48, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I just sent in and submitted it on your behalf. You can view it at Draft:Alphonso Romero Jones II. --CNMall41 (talk) 19:51, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Please stop edit warring to retain redirects
Any administrator will tell you to take your concerns to AfD if a BOLD redirect of an article is reverted. It is never okay to edit war or repeatedly revert to retain a redirect. As you are a relatively experienced editor, you should know this. A discussion between two editors from two months ago is not a formal consensus and does not still justify you repeatedly reverting to retain a redirect. You're not redirecting an article with one source with no claim to notability; there is enough news coverage here per WP:NALBUMS. NALBUMS does not require dozens of feature articles to be written about an upcoming album before an article can be created on one. If you do not take this to AfD and want to keep reverting, I will take this up with an administrator. The album is being released in two days, and you are wasting your time still concerning yourself with it.  Ss  112   00:19, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , thanks for discussing the matter although I wish you would do so more civilly. It was redirected based on discussion which others and after someone attempted to remove the redirect (twice) it was reverted back to the redirect by another. Your threat of administration action ("ask an administrator to get involved and look into why both of you are still doing this") in an attempt to have the page live is also disheartening. If you feel administrator action is needed, then please get them involved. As far as saying its "guaranteed to have reviews in the music press published from tomorrow," then I guess we wait until tomorrow as Wikipedia doesn't report future events based on future guarantees. Happy to discuss more on the talk page. --CNMall41 (talk) 00:38, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Stop edit warring. One more revert and I'm informing an admin. The article is in use. BRD applies to you as well.  Ss  112   00:47, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

March 2021
Your recent editing history at Poster Girl (album) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you do not violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.  Ss  112   00:47, 3 March 2021 (UTC)


 * , As an "experienced" user yourself, you should know better than to WP:DTR. As I have stated a few times, I am happy to discuss civilly but your comments and tagging don't seem like you are willing. More WP:DISRUPTive than anything so you can address the issue on the article talk page, but no longer on this one. --CNMall41 (talk) 00:57, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

ClickUp
Hi CNMall41 - know there is a major backlog of submissions to review, but was hoping to see where things were at with the review of the ClickUp page. It was originally declined due to sources, but updated to include more independent and thorough sources. Thanks! GrooveDJ (talk) 19:44, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , every single reference talks about funding which does not meet WP:ORGCRIT. The only one that would be close is The Huffington Post but that is written by a contributor and not a staff writer so there is little (if any) oversight or fact checking involved. I will leave it for another reviewer as I would likely decline it again in its current state. --CNMall41 (talk) 01:00, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , thank you for the input. Just out of curiosity, do the sources from Diginomica and The American Genius, which don't mention funding, not count? Just helpful to understand where the sources miss the mark so I can ensure the page is properly sourced to Wikipedia's guidelines. Thank you for your help! GrooveDJ (talk) 18:33, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
 * . If you look at WP:ORGCRIT you will see a chart that will assist you. To determine if a source (such as Diginomica or The American Genius), you will need to see WP:RS. Basically, a reliable source will be known as unbiased and employs independent fact checkers. Hope that helps. --CNMall41 (talk) 01:37, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Forever Group
Dear CNMall41

Thank you for taking the time to review our Wikipedia page submission.

I understand more now about the need for external source coverage and notability.

Hopefully we will achieve this and resubmit in future.

Kindest regards,

Dave

Forevergroup (talk) 00:14, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

iMerit
Thanks for reviewing the iMerit page. When I created it, I'm not sure why the title is IMerit instead of the lowercase "i." Can that be changed? Also I would like to make the page less promotional. Any guidance you can provide would be helpful. Thanks again for your time with it.Miaminsurance (talk) 21:40, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Shiji Group
Kalimera from Crete CNMall41,

Thanks very much for your review and suggestions on my Draft:Shiji Group submission, I will follow your advice and add more 3rd parts resources. Also, on the controversy section I created, I will fix this too. I basically used Wikipedia pages like Hilton Hotels & Resorts, Wyndham Hotels & Resorts and some others as templates for creating the page for the Chinese conglomerate. Please, if you have any other suggestions, I would greatly appreciate your help. There are other pages I would like to create, especially notable subjects here in Greece not yet within the encyclopedia.

Thank you once again, for all your efforts. Philbutler (talk) 07:09, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:Nora Fatehi&#32; on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 04:48, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Red Turística de Pueblos Patrimonio de Colombia
Hi, CNMall41. Thank you for your warm welcome. After learning about the backlog for reviewing new pages through the drafts process, I developed a duplicate article (with a similar title) and published it directly myself, skipping the drafts process. I based the article on the already-extant Spanish-language Wikipedia page on the topic, and used a template from the English-language Wikipedia page on a closely-related topic. I would like to delete my original Draft (or merge it into the newly-published article), because it is now redundant. Would you be able to either delete the original Draft, or merge it into the newly-published article? Thanks for your help! -Matt

existing Spanish-language article on the topic: https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_de_pueblos_patrimonio_de_Colombia

existing English-language article on a closely-related topic (used as a template for the newly-published English-language article): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pueblos_M%C3%A1gicos_(Mexico)

newly-published English-language article on the topic (skipped the drafts process because of backlog): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pueblo_Patrimonio_(Colombia)

draft English-language article to be deleted or merged into the newly-published English-language article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Red_Tur%C3%ADstica_de_Pueblos_Patrimonio_de_Colombia

MattWeinstein (talk) 15:06, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Notability of Veleco
Hi CNMall41, you had recently reviewed submission of Draft:Veleco, and I was wondering if I could ask you to take another look maybe? I know there is a giant backlog of review submissions, but that draft lacked a notable source, which did show up today, as an independent Polish national newspaper made a coverage about Veleco company. I have added the reference to printed publication, but being fairly new on wiki I'm not 100% sure if this is enough for the required notability. If you could help out by checking it, that would be appreciated. If the independent newspaper source isn't enough, a feedback about it would also be appreaciated. Sorry to take up your time with this. MartinOrl087 (talk) 10:29, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Blackmores logo.png
Thanks for uploading File:Blackmores logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:05, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Wikipedia talk:Overcategorization&#32; on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 13:31, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Request on 00:57:58, 18 April 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by MegaSmike46
What does "Concur with original assessment" mean? I'd like to know why my draft of "List of animation studios owned by ViacomCBS" can't be accepted.

MegaSmike46 (talk) 00:57, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
 * , the first decline reason is listed on the draft and I concur with that assessment given by the reviewer. The content you provided is already existing in another Wikipedia page or can be added to it accordingly. --CNMall41 (talk) 19:23, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Question regarding ViacomCBS
I understand, for now. I've contributed to that other list of ViacomCBS assets. However do you think if the company ever delves further into animation studios, that a new separate is necessary. Until, then should it remain as draft until further notice?
 * That would be a bridge to cross if/when it happens. --CNMall41 (talk) 17:29, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Realtor.com
Hello! I've responded here, if you have a moment to revisit our discussion. Thanks so much! Inkian Jason (talk) 18:16, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
 * , stepping out for a few but will take a look in a few hours. Cheers!!--CNMall41 (talk) 17:29, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Inkian Jason (talk) 17:32, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
 * , I did what I could but still uncomfortable with the marketing information (i left notes on the talk page). Sorry to be that editor but I don't see any of it as encyclopedic (including the information that is already there). --CNMall41 (talk) 23:22, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

ByteDance layout - following up
Hi CNMall41. Thanks for commenting recently at Talk:ByteDance. Since then, no one else has commented in the thread, so would you mind implementing the improved layout for the article? I've taken care to only change the layout in the new version - the content itself should be the same as it is in the current version. Thanks, JatBD (talk) 02:15, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I am a little confused and hopefully you are able to clarify. The content in the new proposed layout is changed. Above you say that it should remain the same. --CNMall41 (talk) 17:25, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Sorry I wasn't clear enough. What I meant when I said "the content itself should be the same" is that in the new proposed layout here, no new material is added and no existing material is removed - I just re-organized the existing content in a more sensible way, mostly through the use of a standard History section. JatBD (talk) 01:10, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
 * , Okay, I understand. However, the content changes would need to be requested on the talk page to include reasoning for each change. The draft you prepared is substantially different. --CNMall41 (talk) 04:26, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I gave the reasoning for all my proposed changes when I wrote on the Talk page what my draft accomplishes: integrating most of the current overly long lead's content into the body of the article; and reorganizing most of the body into sections on History (with multiple chronological subsections), Technology, Leadership, Finances and Funding. I also cited WP:CSECTION to explain why it's inappropriate to have a section dedicated to Controversy (now inaptly renamed "Reception"). This explains every change that I'm proposing. To be more precise, here is a more detailed list of what my draft changes from the current version:
 * Shorten lead per MOS:LEADLENGTH and move the trimmed content (sentences about Musical.ly, Flipagram, Toutiao, the company's recent valuation and the company's alleged connection to the CCP) into new History and Finances sections.
 * Move the Leadership and Funding subsections from within the "Corporate affairs" section into their own primary sections later in the article.
 * Move the content of the Products, Acquisitions and Reception sections into the History section, with the paragraphs organized chronologically under subsections titled "2012-2014," "2015-2017," "2018-2019" and "2020-present."
 * I hope this makes sense. If it helps, I can re-post this at the Talk page and ping you. Thanks, JatBD (talk) 12:46, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
 * It makes sense, but you came to me with the premise that I would be changing the headings and slipped in the additional changes that I was unaware of. As stated, you will need to make these proposals on the talk page. No need to ping me. Please use the appropriate COI request template. The changes seem more substantial than just moving headings (they are more like a rewrite of the entire page). I may take a look at the individual requests but won't do the bulk edit as requested. --CNMall41 (talk) 15:50, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I certainly had no intention of misleading you as to the nature of my proposal. The title of my initial Talk page post referred explicitly to issues of MOS:LAYOUT and MOS:LEAD, which encompass much more than just changing the headings. So I thought I was being clear and transparent, and I apologize if I fell short of that. The reason I hesitate to use the COI request template is that for changes like this that would affect the article significantly, my understanding is that consensus must be obtained before using the template. In the absence of a broad consensus one way or another, I had hoped that you or another editor would agree to implement my draft boldly, but I respect your decision not to do so. If you have any thoughts on how to build consensus more effectively here, I'm all ears. JatBD (talk) 13:16, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
 * , I have no issues helping out COI editors who understand the process and edit in good faith with full disclosure. If you are able to find the policy of layout, lead, and bold, then you are able to fin WP:COIREQ. This would be the process you should follow. --CNMall41 (talk) 20:04, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Request on 23:32:35, 21 April 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Hemilmodi.noai
Hi, I am a new contributor to Wikipedia and I am just starting up with creating my first article to identify and highlight a crucial government inventor (Parimal Kopardekar) whose game changing contribution to the air traffic control/management sector is redefining how new and emerging air vehicles will integrated in the airspace. I understand that the content I used from the official NASA page is also used by another entity which might have copy righted it (not sure how government info is copy righted by others). Anyway, I kindly request to undelete/unlock the draft so that it can be edited and updated. Also a link to content guidelines would be great. Thank you very much for all your assistance.

Hemilmodi.noai (talk) 23:32, 21 April 2021 (UTC)


 * , you will need to reach out to the deleting admin . I will add that based on the tone above ("game changing" "redefining"), you will need to review Wikipedia guidelines on tone and promotion prior to doing any further submissions. --CNMall41 (talk) 17:00, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi, CNMall41, ! Draft:Parimal Kopardekar was declined by CNMall41 as a copyright violation (from this page), an action which also tagged it for deletion as WP:G12, unambiguous copyright violation; when I came to delete it, I added the deletion criterion WP:G11, unambiguous promotion, because of the unacceptably promotional tone in which it was written. Hemilmodi.noai, if you want to start a new draft about this person, your first step is to disclose your conflict of interest; your user-page, User:Hemilmodi.noai, is the place for that. You can then start a new draft, citing independent reliable sources (i.e., not his employer or self-written bio), and presenting the verifiable facts of his life and achievements in a neutral and encyclopaedic tone and manner. Please note that Wikipedia doesn't tolerate promotion of any kind. Thanks, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:34, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Life Pharmacy
Dear CNMall41

Thank you for taking the time to review our Wikipedia page submission.

I have tried my best to find some Reliable sources for the company for external source coverage and notability.

Would you please have a look at it and tell me if there is anything that needs to be updated.

Warm regards,

Rehman

Myeditss (talk)
 * , you used a press release and Wikipedia as a source. While press releases can be used in limited circumstances, they are never used to show notability. What is your connection to the topic?

Draft:BioFoodLab
Hi again. Following up on my below note. I have reworked this even further. Thanks!

Hi. Thank you for your comments! I wanted to let you know that I have added new references to business and technology media and removed the Entrepreneur and Forbes articles, which were written by contributors (I did not see this or know it was an issue originally). I am the creator of the draft and have no relation to the subject. I have rewritten the entry to sound more encyclopedic, as requested. I have done some more research just now and see some other things that are interesting in terms of even further establishing notability but I am not mentioning, because I don't know if that information is suitable for an encyclopedia entry. The company was apparently named Russia's Exporter of the Year by the government in 2017, the best food retail product by the Moscow Government, and similar things by Ernst and Young. I am leaving that out unless you think I should add it.

I just did some more digging around. Here are some of the things I referred to above and some more that I did not know. They are cited by news media, Ernst and Young and government websites (if the prizes were from the government). If any of this should be included in the entry with the appropriate references, please let me know:

- The company was named "Startup of the Year" in 2013 (Forbes Russia). - The founder received E&Y’s Entrepreneur-2014 award in the Food Project category. - The founder was Russia’s Ambassador at the Russia Expo2015 exhibition in Milan. - In 2015, the company was named "Project of the Year" as part of the "Made in Moscow" Contest by the Moscow Government. - In 2017, the founder was named "Woman of the Year" by the Skolkovo Business School. - In 2016, the company was named "Exporter of the Year" by the Russian Export Center. - In 2018, the company’s plant-based milk was named "Best Veg Product" by the Live Organic Awards, the largest annual all-national healthy living and ecology prize in Russia. In 2019, the company is named the "Healthy Brand of the Year" by the same organization. - The company’s production facility is certified for compliance with the ISO22000/HASP, FSSC22000, Halal, Vegan Society UK and Paleo Foundation USA standards. - The company’s products are present in 100 percent of Russia's hypermarkets and supermarkets. - The company’s marketing partners include such giants as Nike, Disney and WTA.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by JohannesburgBlues (talk • contribs) 06:12, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
 * , thanks for the note. As I am on the fence, I will leave this for another editor to review. --CNMall41 (talk) 20:17, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * , Okay, I have edited it further. If you have any feedback, let me know. I have included links now from many independent business news sources written by in-house editorial staff, including a CNN video report on the company and a TV episode on another TV channel dedicated to the business. So I think that I have established quite well the company's notability.--

Concern regarding Draft:The Action House
Hello, CNMall41. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:The Action House, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 06:02, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Fire in Little Africa
Dear Thank you for taking the time to review my article for Fire in Little Africa. I would still very much like to get the article published. I can see how you might reach the conclusion that the group/album is not notable based on what was mentioned and sourced in the article, but I must respectfully disagree. The group is signed to a major, national record label (Motown Records) and has received press from The Rolling Stone, The New Yorker, Billboard, Variety, The Recording Academy / Grammys, and more. There are many artists and bands with existing Wikipedia articles that have never and will never garner that level of press attention. Granted, I should have done a better job sourcing those mainstream media mentions in the article.

My current plan is to rework the article so that some more of these publications of note are referenced. As you suggested, I will also remove the section that describes the history of the massacre. If these changes are satisfied, do you think this is an article that could potentially be approved before the album comes out? (As a note, this is not intended to be an article about the album itself, but an artist page about the group/band that is making it. The album they're making just happens to be self-titled).

Again, thank you for the review and for volunteering your time to the community.

Sincerely, Okluschen (talk) 11:50, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

Edit: Hey, the album is now officially released and I made requested updates to the page. Let me know if anything else is necessary. Thank you! Sincerely, Okluschen (talk) 19:52, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
 * , thanks for the note. You note that there are "many artists and bands with existing Wikipedia articles...." I think at this point its best to leave it to another editor to review as I am not sure there is an understanding of notability. Being signed to a major label and "reveiv[ing]" press doesn't make something notable. It may well be notable but I will leave it to another editor to make that call. Cheers! --CNMall41 (talk) 20:21, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

RTB House rejection
Hey CNMall41,

I wanted to thank you for your comments on the article, I can see where the problems are.

I will review the piece again, improve the sources, fix the writing style and resubmit when/if I believe it meets criteria.

Cheers

Fly4pix (talk) 13:17, 1 June 2021 (UTC).

Draft:Manmadha Bullets
Hi, I can't make disclosure for the previous Wikipedia page. And, is it possible to verify it and moved to article section because it had the source that the Series is exist. Thank You
 * You can't make disclosure based on.....? I'm not really understanding what you mean. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:01, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Jodi Kantor
Hello! I've struggled to get feedback on a request to remove potentially misrepresentative text from a biography. Previously, you've assisted me with a company article, but I also see you're a member of WikiProject Biographies so I'm hoping you might be interested and have a quick moment to assist.

I've submitted a request here on behalf of The New York Times Company to remove content which is seemingly misrepresentative of sourcing. User:Bri helped with 2 of the 3 pieces of problematic text. Might you be able to review the third? The remaining concern is outdented at the bottom of the section.

Thanks for your consideration, Inkian Jason (talk) 19:47, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Economy, trade, and companies request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:Tether (cryptocurrency)&#32; on a "Economy, trade, and companies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 08:30, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

"Meira Oy" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Meira Oy. The discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 June 19 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 84.250.167.86 (talk) 08:08, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

Jodi Kantor
Hi again! No rush responding, but I don't want this request to fall off your radar. Please let me know if you have any other questions or concerns.

Thanks! Inkian Jason (talk) 21:17, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Sorry. I have been away for a while. Will take a look now. --CNMall41 (talk) 06:23, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

RTB House Article - Review Request
Dear CNMall41,

I've spent some time redoing the RTB House article, based on your feedback and a review of wikipedia's policies, you can find the draft page here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:RTB_House

I additionally used the following page of a comparable company as a guideline: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criteo

I believe that RTB House, particularly based on their Google FLOC contributions, are worthy of inclusion in the same way that Criteo is. I have also taken particular care to make the article more neutral, my apologies for the more salesy tones in the previous version.

Would it be possible for you to give it a once-over and let me know if its okay? If not can I ask another editor to give it a review before resubmitting?

I would appreciate whatever assistance you can give me.

Cheers,

Fly4pix (talk) 14:14, 24 June 2021 (UTC)


 * , you are welcome to resubmit if you feel it meets guidelines. However, I can say that there is not quite an understanding of WP:ORGCRIT from your end. The references you added are written by contributors or the company website itself. These are not acceptable references to establish notability so I would assume it would be declined a second time. --CNMall41 (talk) 00:05, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:The Action House


Hello, CNMall41. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "The Action House".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 05:58, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
 * , I believe this is one I worked on reviewing through AfC. I cannot see the draft any longer so you may want to ping the original creator. Thanks for the notification. --CNMall41 (talk) 16:21, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

Adapted Physical Activity
It seems that you reviewed the following wiki page; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Adapted_Physical_Activity It has since been updated, but there were also some suggestions that I would disagree with. Comment: All sources are from IFAPA. You will need to provide independent reliable sources. Also consider if this deserves it a separate Wikipedia article or if the information can be included in an already existing article. CNMall41 (talk) 17:55, 28 January 2021 (UTC) - there is no other already existing article. Please provide a link for what you suspect is the same. The page adapted physical education is one specific domain of adapted physical activity. Comment: A quick search finds that this is more likely suitable to be covered under Kinesiology. CNMall41 (talk) 20:22, 27 January 2021 (UTC) - This is one potential area of kinesiology, but also fits under rehabilitation and sport management, so it deserves a separate page to Kinesiology alone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kwokng (talk • contribs)
 * , link was provided in the decline reason. Being that there are still plenty of references in the draft that are from the IFAPA despite the comment that you need more independent sources, I don't think the draft is ready for me to take another look. Feel free to resubmit and maybe another editor can review. --CNMall41 (talk) 02:54, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

2050cards Draft
Hey thanks so much for your feedback on the 2050cards article (my first article). I've just added a new reference to the article as well as some information that highlights the notability of the organisation. Please let me know if it needs more work of if its ready for me to 'resubmit'?

A few friends of mine would also like to contribute - would that help me to get the article approved (as one of the founders of the business I have registered a conflict of interest whereas they do not)?

Best wishes,

Benjy
 * There is a chart at WP:ORGCRIT that will assist you with the sourcing required. The additional ones you added to not meet the criteria. As far as other people contributing, that in itself does not add to notability. It comes down to the sourcing, not the contributors here. --CNMall41 (talk) 22:16, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi! May I ask how to improve the sources?
Hi! I appreciate your time reviewing the draft that I've been writing. I've taken the suggestions from Teahouse, and the previous auditor(?), and applied them as best as I can.

The article is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Fantech

To draft this, I used https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Razer_Inc. as a reference on how it has been written, as it's a company from the same industry and area of the world.

I have a few questions:

1) If I find more credible sources, should I remove the less credible ones? Or simply add the more credible source(s)?

2) Is there any sources in particular that are bad on the source list? I've used an awards organization (Top Brand - https://id.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_Brand_Award) that uses statistical sales data to source some content, as well as e-sports news sites that provided picture proof and their own research into statements from notable companies like Riot Games in reference to the brand (and a contreversy that happened surrounding the brand, from a streamer that was sponsored by Logitech). One source was from Bisnis Indonesia which has its own Wikipedia page, and is well known credible source. Even one of the sources is from Detik.com, as well. One of the sources is from SWA (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SWA_(magazine)) as well, which covers a full article on the company, not a passing mention. Even a source is from Enthusiast Gaming (Upcomer), and from Ginx TV as well as Philippine Entertainment Portal. One of the sources is used in "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_games_in_India" as well (AFKGaming) for multiple references. If all these sources are notable enough to have their own Wikipedia pages and are used to source other wikipedia, then why is the content they write about not considered notable enough to use as sources on this one?

As it is a large gaming company, with rich history, I think it could be relevant here on Wikipedia, as there are other brands (such as Razer), that have articles about them. But since this is an Indonesian/South East Asia company, it's unlikely that they've had coverage from US news sites like CNN, New York Times, etc. They gained a lot of awareness being involved in a large game streamer's controversy, being the first Indonesian gaming company to go international, etc, which I all think is quite notable, especially the last point. I've sourced each of those as well.

Thanks! Sorry to trouble you, just trying my best to improve this and contribute! And thank you for putting up with me editing this message so much.

LythPython (talk)
 * , thanks for the questions. First, never use another page as an example. There are many pages in Wikipedia that do not meet guidelines and have not been addressed as of yet. Using a page that doesn't meet guidelines will lead to you creating a draft that doesn't meet guidelines. As far as references, please see WP:ORGCRIT for what is required for companies. There is a chart there that you can use to determine if a source you are using is sufficient. I would suggest replacing bad sources with ones that meet ORGCRIT so as to avoid WP:OVERLINKING. --CNMall41 (talk) 17:54, 1 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Can do! I'll do my best to replace those lower end sources, and see if it suffices. Thanks! LythPython (talk) 01:48, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

July 2020
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.— Mikehawk10 (talk) 04:01, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

COI
Thanks for your remarks at Articles for deletion/Moglix (3rd nomination) and sorry for the late response. I have mentioned about my coi on my talk page. Better late than never. Would you mull over your decision at the deletion discussion? Thanks. Hayema K (talk) 17:24, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , mentioning and disclosing are two different things unfortunately. Please read WP:COI and WP:PAID and make the appropriate disclosure. --CNMall41 (talk) 23:35, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out, CNMall41. I have made the disclosure on my page as per instructions.Hayema K (talk) 13:39, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Articles for Creation July 2021 Backlog Elimination Drive
 Hello :

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a  month long Backlog Drive!

The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running until 31 July 2021.

Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.

There is currently a backlog of over articles, so start reviewing articles. We're looking forward to your help!

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject Articles for Creation at 21:53, 7 July 2021 (UTC). If you do not wish to recieve future notification, please remove your name from the mailing list.

Feedback request: Economy, trade, and companies request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:Redhill railway station&#32; on a "Economy, trade, and companies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 12:30, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biography&#32; on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 19:31, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Lord Abbett Logo 2019.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Lord Abbett Logo 2019.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:45, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Matusalem Rum logo.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Matusalem Rum logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:26, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:Ricky Schroder&#32; on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 18:31, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:Justin Bieber&#32; on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 03:31, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)&#32; on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 20:31, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

Rejection appeal - Lawn Chair
Recently, you rejected my article on the lawn chair. You claimed that it instead, belongs under the article for garden furniture but I disagree. If you read the article on garden furniture, you will see that it is talking about permanent furniture for outdoor use. I feel as if lawn chairs are different enough and deserve their own article. They have a very different use and have so many different designs and so much history and I think that a section in the garden furniture article does not do it justice. I don't believe they count as garden furniture because I think most people would describe a lawn chair as more of a portable seating device that has many uses, whereas garden furniture is more of something to furnish a house or establishment which lawn chairs would never be used for. Thank you for doing all you do as a Wikipedian, and I await your response.--LukeSinclair1 (talk) 13:14, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Talk page stalker comment: in addition to garden furniture we have an article at folding chair, which also covers aspects of this. I would suggest opening a WP:RM proposal to move that article to the slightly broader topic of portable seating, and then merge your content there. BD2412  T 05:26, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I think this would create a WP:CFORK. Also, "permanent furniture for outdoor use" is stated in your argument but the draft has a picture of folding chair. --CNMall41 (talk) 20:42, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
 * To be clear, I meant to move folding chair, to which I would say the draft presents something analogous. BD2412  T 21:25, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Okay. That makes sense. Sorry for the late reply. I was down with COVID for a while but I'm back. --CNMall41 (talk) 21:18, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm glad that you are. I was starting to worry. BD2412  T 21:43, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks, but no worries. I tried accessing the site a few times but just couldn't get enough energy. --CNMall41 (talk) 21:44, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:BeFrugal Logo.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:BeFrugal Logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:13, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Queen Oluwa
Hello, CNMall41. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Queen Oluwa, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 09:03, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I actually think this was an AfC script error as the draft wasn't something created by myself. --CNMall41 (talk) 17:29, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

SHVO
You left a message on my talk page about content updates for this article. I have been extremely busy with my architecture internship and have had little time to get on Wikipedia. I do have a bunch of photos I am going to upload but please do whatever you feel appropriate to update this article and any articles associated with it. --RTotzke (talk) 21:38, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
 * , All I did was add a small section to the Michael Shvo page which incorporates a summary of the company SHVO. I would suggest looking closer at the SHVO page and update accordingly as there are some recent purchases I found that are not in the page. --CNMall41 (talk) 04:50, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I also see that you were involved with some recent edits to Drew Binsky. This is a topic that I follow very close so thank you for that. --RTotzke (talk) 00:48, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Big Red Group logo.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Big Red Group logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:08, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Economy, trade, and companies request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:Stakeholder theory&#32; on a "Economy, trade, and companies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 05:31, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter September 2021
Hello ,

Please join this discussion - there is increase in the abuse of Wikipedia and its processes by POV pushers, Paid Editors, and by holders of various user rights including Autopatrolled. Even our review systems themselves at AfC and NPR have been infiltrated. The good news is that detection is improving, but the downside is that it creates the need for a huge clean up - which of course adds to backlogs.

Copyright violations are also a serious issue. Most non-regular contributors do not understand why, and most of our  Reviewers are not experts on copyright law - and can't be expected to be, but  there is excellent, easy-to-follow advice on COPYVIO detection here.

At the time of the last newsletter (#25, December 2020) the backlog was only just over 2,000 articles. New Page Review is an official system. It's the only firewall against the inclusion of new, improper pages.

There are currently 706 New Page Reviewers plus a further 1,080 admins, but as much as nearly 90% of the patrolling is still being done by around only the 20 or so most regular patrollers.

If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process or its software. Various awards are due to be allocated by the end of the year and barnstars are overdue. If you would like to manage this, please let us know. Indeed, if you are interested in coordinating NPR, it does not involve much time and the tasks are described here. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. Sent to 827 users. 04:30, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Peeple mobile app logo.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Peeple mobile app logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:36, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:Éric Zemmour&#32; on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 05:31, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Economy, trade, and companies request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:Social democracy&#32; on a "Economy, trade, and companies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 03:31, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

ScaleUp Capital
Hello CNMall41,

Thank you for coming back so quickly on my submission regarding ScaleUp Capital, I’m new to the Wikipedia community so all advice is much appreciated! I wanted to ask if there was any additional feedback you could share on reasons why you didn’t approve the article beyond the two tags, and seek your advice on how best to proceed with my draft.

Following your review, I have begun redrafting an updated version which I will soon submit for review. I have been able to source and reference multiple additional sources, including further top-tier media coverage in the UK.

Finally, on tone of voice. Are there were any specific sections of the draft you feel require re-working?

I look forward to working with you on this and thank you in advance for your time! — Preceding unsigned comment added by JamieArnold1 (talk • contribs) 11:05, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
 * , the first thing I would suggest is reading through the guideline I provided about types of references needed (WP:ORGCRIT). --CNMall41 (talk) 18:27, 27 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Hi, thanks for responding and your help thus far. Having read the guideline provided and made amendments to my draft, I have just submitted a second attempt that I hope you would be able to look at. In this new draft I have updated the language in-line with neutrality requirements. In addition, I have sourced additional coverage from UK Tier One publication The Times, which should match the criteria outlined in the guidelines for being significant, independent, reliable and secondary. Furthermore, I have also added an article from RealDeals, an independent and authoritative publication in European Private Equity featuring independent analysis which I believe also matches the criteria outlined as well as content from Sifted, who supported by the financial times, report on start-ups. Thanks again for your help so far and I will be grateful for any further advice you can share on this new draft.
 * , can you point specifically to the references that meet WP:ORGCRIT? What you added appears to be industry trade publications. --CNMall41 (talk) 00:33, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:Amedeo Modigliani&#32; on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 17:31, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Rejection Appeal: Kinetic Spray Solutions
Dear CNMall41,

thank you for your review of my article. This was your comment on the article: "Brief mentions do not show how the subject is notable for Wikipedia. Please see WP:ORGCRIT for references required to establish notability." I have checked with the WP:ORGCRIT policy on notability and understand where your concerns comes form. Nevertheless I would like to ask you to reconsider your initial assessment due to the following facts: ·The first article cited by Tan et al. 2018 is only mentioning the software 9 times in the paper. The simulation performed in the article are based on the KSS software. So the results in Figure 3 and Figure 4 as well as velocities in Figure 7 are based on the simulation. ·The second article by Che et al. mentions the KSS software only 4 times, so even less. �However, Figure 2 and all the simulation results in the text have been deriven by the KSS software. · I could continue with some ±30 papers that I found that use this software for cold spray simulations. The authors come from different institutions in Europe, Americas and Asia. I carefully chose article that were not written by some of the managing directors/afiliates on the company website (these are often cited by the papers).

I have myself stumbled upon the software in 2015 and found it useful during my PhD. Back then it may have been too early and the software may use may have been insignificant, but by now, it is widely used in the scientific community in various publication and so I think, it should be found on wikipedia if readers stumble upon it as I did.

Coldsprayuser (talk) 15:50, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

Coldsprayuser


 * - "only mentioning the software 9 times," "based on the KSS software," "mentions the KSS software only 4 times" - All of these mention the software. It sounds like you are saying the company is notable becuase of the software. Please see WP:ORGSIG. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:31, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:Éric Zemmour&#32; on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 07:30, 11 November 2021 (UTC)