User talk:Chetsford/Archive 14

DYK for Marye (horse)
Gatoclass (talk) 00:02, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Ideological bias on Wikipedia
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Ideological bias on Wikipedia. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

DYK nomination of We Say Mabuhay
Hello! Your submission of We Say Mabuhay at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 20:49, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Eater draft
Hello again, Chetsford. You've helped me with several articles, so I figured I'd ask for some feedback on another one, if you're interested and willing to take a look. I recently submitted a draft article about Eater.com at Articles for Creation on behalf of Vox Media. The reviewing editor simply said, "Better covered under Vox Media". After sharing plans to propose a trimmed summary for the parent article, I've struggled to get an editor to review my edit request. I am curious if you have any feedback on Draft:Eater.com or the proposed addition to the Vox Media article. I should note, I will be submitting expanded sections for Vox Media's other brands, among other updates for the parent article, so the "Properties" section might become much longer sooner than later.

I'm not asking for you to intervene (unless you feel inclined) as much as I'm just asking for feedback on the standalone draft/article vs. the trimmed section for the parent article. Do you have any thoughts or suggestions? If not, that's perfectly fine, I just felt inclined to ask a helpful editor who has assisted with similar edit requests. Thanks! Inkian Jason (talk) 16:12, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi Inkian Jason - while I agree with the reviewing editor regarding the article in its present state, I believe a few minor changes here and there would make it suitable for a standalone article in mainspace. Specifically, perhaps some additional fields in the infobox could be filled? Separate from that general comment, I believe there should be an "of" between "the" and "president" in this sentence: Steele, who also served as president the Curbed Network ... Perhaps you could make these changes, and any others you feel appropriate, and ping me when done? Chetsford (talk) 05:46, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you for taking a look at the proposed draft. Good catch! I've added "of", updated the tense of a sentence in the "Programming" section, and added mention of two additional original series. I hope these changes look good to you, but please let me know if you have others in mind. Thanks again. Inkian Jason (talk) 18:53, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Inkian Jason - those changes look good to me but let me just consult with the editor who initially reviewed it and get right back to you. Chetsford (talk) 20:18, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Inkian Jason (talk) 20:19, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Inkian Jason - I've moved this from draft to mainspace. Chetsford (talk) 13:53, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Should I submit a history merge request to keep things clear in the edit history? Or, is there a reason I should not? Inkian Jason (talk) 15:07, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Sure that seems like a good idea. Sorry, I kind-of did a hatchet job on moving it over to mainspace! Chetsford (talk) 15:31, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
 * No problem, just wanted to make sure this action was appropriate. Inkian Jason (talk) 15:33, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
 * The edit history has been merged, and I've proposed an updated summary for the Vox Media article here. Thanks again! Inkian Jason (talk) 20:07, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

 * Thank you! What'd I do to deserve that? Chetsford (talk) 22:53, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Herman Vandenburg Ames FAR
Best of luck with getting this article through FAR! Let me know if you need help with anything. Blackmane (talk) 04:30, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Caribbean Journal of International Relations & Diplomacy for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Caribbean Journal of International Relations & Diplomacy is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Caribbean Journal of International Relations & Diplomacy& 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. Randykitty (talk) 06:42, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Josh Heaton
Hi - why did you approve this article? It is non-notable and now tagged for deletion... GiantSnowman 07:54, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
 * GiantSnowman - thanks for catching this, I misread WP:NFOOTBALL to mean players in a professional league, not players who have played in a professional league. My fault. Chetsford (talk) 08:19, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Not a problem, easy to miss! GiantSnowman 08:27, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

European Capital of Smart Tourism
Hi Chetsford, you just declined a positive review of the article due to a lack of relevance. Could you please remove the article stub? I am sure that you have some special rights or competences which I have not. Thank you. --Dirkjot (talk) 09:02, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Żegota
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Żegota. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

DYK for In Memoriam: President Garfield's Funeral March
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:51, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Clarification and coaching
I'm new to Wikipedia. Thank you for reviewing my first article. You rejected my first article of a company description: Draft:Slate_Rocks

To me, my article seems substantially similar to company articles in content, form and references, like Omniscien Technologies, SYSTRAN and PROMT

What am I doing wrong?

Tom.Hoar (talk) 14:21, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi Tom.Hoar, no worries. Basically, the article is almost entirely sourced to something called Multilingual Magazine which doesn't appear to meet our standards for WP:RS in that it is not, itself, referenced by RS. Indiegogo is also not RS. The other references are purely routine such as company registrations. You'll just need to source the article to RS and you should be set. Omniscien Technologies also doesn't meet sourcing standards and I've now nominated for deletion. Chetsford (talk) 14:26, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, Chetsford, for you quick reply. I find it odd that Wikipedia does not consider a government maintained company registration site as a "reliable source." Likewise, Multilingual Magazine is the world's largest independent trade magazine for the language market. They print and circulate 10 magazine issues annually worldwide to over 15,000 subscribers. Before I edit the article, can you tell me if either of these two links meet the standards? http://statmt.org/moses/ and http://www.statmt.org/moses/?n=Moses.Packages. This website is property of the University of Edinburgh and a recognized world authority in this field. The Common Sense Advisory, an independent market research company, has published several articles that reference this company, but they are only available through their paid subscription service. Any/all guidance is appreciated. Tom.Hoar (talk) 15:02, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Tom.Hoar - those are certainly reliable sources, however, they wouldn't help the company pass the standards for significant coverage. Keep in mind, proof that a thing exists is not sufficient for inclusion in WP. The thing must not only exist but it must also be notable as evidenced by widespread, in-depth coverage in reliable sources. In the case of the corporate registries, those are certainly reliable, however, they are WP:ROUTINE, meaning that every company is included in a corporate registry and that only demonstrates they exist, not that they're notable. Vis a vis Multilingual Magazine, no reliable sources reference it. Except in cases like books, university websites, and peer-reviewed journals, reliable sources are almost always referenced by other reliable sources. When I search for Multilingual Magazine in Google News (for example), I find that, over the last five years, none of the thousands of sites indexed by Google News have ever referenced it by name. The circulation the magazine claims is mostly irrelevant as it doesn't appear to be audited and, even if it were, circulation is not evidence of reliability. Reliability is evidenced by the provable existence of a gatekeeping process, by referencing in other reliable sources, by the existence of a legal personality by which it could be held liable for things it publishes, and by indication of editorial competence. Chetsford (talk) 15:29, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Sara Sheffield
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

Request on 15:51:30, 16 July 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Makim0103
Good morning, Chetsford,

Thank you for reviewing our wiki article on learning diversity. I read that you rejected because there is not much information of the subject of learning diversity. I went back through many wiki articles in my discipline of study. Many of the articles I have read have not much written on a particular subject and fewer sources than I presented in my own article (please see the article on rhetorical velocity). Based on those criteria, I am not sure why my article was rejected. Could we discuss what I can do moving forward?

Makim0103 (talk) 15:51, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi Makim0103 - there are many WP articles that exist which do not meet WP's criteria (see: WP:OTHERTHINGS). This is largely a function of the anarchic and decentralized nature of WP. In general, the issue I had was that, while specific statements in your article are accurately sourced, some of the sources seem not to discuss "learning diversity" as a concept but merely affirm the veracity of specific information in a sentence they're supporting. Unfortunately, I'm not able to provide personalized assistance, but you may want to post an inquiry for advice to WP:TEAHOUSE. Alternatively, as there is always a level of subjectivity in evaluating articles and yours is much better put together than most, you could resubmit it to see if another edit disagrees with my assessment and moves it to mainspace. Chetsford (talk) 16:36, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Hi, Bob
— Maile (talk) 01:11, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Winged Victory (statue)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Winged Victory (statue) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Okeeffemarc -- Okeeffemarc (talk) 01:41, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Winged Victory (statue)
The article Winged Victory (statue) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Winged Victory (statue) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Okeeffemarc -- Okeeffemarc (talk) 14:41, 17 July 2018 (UTC)