User talk:ColinFine/Archive 11

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - January 2021
Delivered January 2021 by MediaWiki message delivery.

If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.

20:05, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Invitations to the Tea house
Dear Colin, I am contacting you due to your relations to the "tea house". Please may you explain the reasons why some people are invited to the tea house? To be honest, I am a bit shocked to read such invitations to people who do not even try to meliorate Wikipedia and its attempts to assist democracy but do perform the opposite. For good instances, please have a look on the Wikipedia entry of Gunnar Kaiser. I do appreciate this modern author a lot. He really tries to stay fair and to keep an independent view on political and personal issues in difficult political times when anything uncommon is accused (not by argues but by medivial accusation and insults ad hominem) to be heretic. Now, there are people who throw dirt on him again and again in such a unsubtle way that it is really a bit embarrassing. And this people are invited now for a good English cupper? I do hope, at least the biscuits will consist of some subtle lectures in democratic education ? (please see article Gunnar Kaiser, history and also the talk page).

I am sorry, if these complaints are published now in such an official manner. Maybe, there is a more discreet option in Wikipedia? I, please tell me. Cheers a lot! Prinzvonzavelstein (talk) 04:05, 2 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Hello, . I have no idea why you are asking me any of this. I am a Teahouse host. As far as I can remember, I have never invited anybody to the Teahouse. I have never heard of Gunner Kaiser, and never before looked at the article about him. I see you have edited that article, but I have not looked at your edits or anybody else's. I'm guessing you are having an argument with somebody about the article - fine, that's how Wikipedia works: have you read BRD and DR? --ColinFine (talk) 10:19, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Mistake while reverting
Hello, I just wanted to tell you that you made a mistake in the process that you reverted an edit in Teahouse. While you made constructive edits as you assume good faith, I have seen that you inadvertently put a comment (specifically "Revert my own reevert: this was the reply i ") that obviously doesn't belong to an unrelated section (in this case, the "Sources in drafts: Part II" section) as you restored a reply (from "New Page" section) you removed it.

I admit that many users can make mistakes and so do extended confirmed users and administrators. In brief, I just wanted to tell you the next time you revert an edit, be more cautious and press "Show preview" before you publish changes.-- André the Android (talk) 19:08, 3 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Nevermind, I had to removed the "Revert my own reevert myself: this was the reply i" sentence myself from "Sources in drafts: Part II" before a bot will going to archive the mentioned section.-- André the Android (talk) 21:21, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks
Dear ColinFine, I just wanted to say thank you for you have answered me everytime I came to Teahouse. May you have a good and happy life. I wish you very merry life.

Kamilalibhat (talk) 18:09, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Please review my article
The link is as follows: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Mother_Bird_(sculpture) Sarika9140 (talk) 20:10, 17 January 2021 (UTC)


 * The same request is posted also (and answered) at Help desk. --CiaPan (talk) 21:00, 17 January 2021 (UTC)


 * . I see that your draft has already been rejected: this is not surprising, as its sourcing is so poor that it was easy for someone to review. But I can tell you that I have a strong dislike of people gaming the system. Why are you so special that your draft should be reviewed ahead of others? Please don't ever ask me this again. --ColinFine (talk) 22:37, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Ok sir, sorry for this. I want to ask u something. You have said that my article was rejected because if Poor Sourcing. I think that I have sourced thejapantimes which is a news website. When Wikipedia accepts The New York Times, why then lol it is rejecting thejapantimes. Plz tell. Sarika9140 (talk) 03:33, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
 * , Japan Times is probably a reliable source. But that is only one of the criteria. We also require that most sources are independent sources, which that is not: it's based on an interview with the artist. If we allowed non-independent sources, then every band, every artist, every business, and every schoolchild with an ego, would all be "notable". --ColinFine (talk) 12:15, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Ok understood!!!! Sarika9140 (talk) 12:24, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Question about an image
Hi ColinFine, i really apriciate if you can help me white the upload of an image. I tried to use the licence Fair use. Could you look at the image that i add on top, in the page Woodstock?. Waiting your answer i wish you a good evening. --TommasoRmndn (talk) 18:24, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Hello, . I'm afraid not. The only kind of Fair use that Wikipedia allows is when the image and the way it is used meet all the criteria in the non-free content criteria: such images must be uploaded to Wikipedia, not to Commons, and the uploader must justify how it meets those criteria. I doubt if that image will meet criterion no. 8: "Contextual significance. Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding". I note also that your edit has been reverted by another editor who thinks the poster is a better choice. This means that as well as justifying using your image legally, you would also need to reach consensus with that editor and any other editors who were interested that yours would be a better picture there: see WP:BRD. (If you decided to add it elsewhere in the article, that particular problem might be avoided; but you still have to justify the use of a non-free image). --ColinFine (talk) 22:54, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
 * By the way, please ask questions like this on the Teahouse or the Help Desk, not directly on a particular editor's talk page. First, only that editor will see it, and answer it, so you may end up waiting longer. Second, it puts pressure on that particular editor to answer, for no good reason Thirdly, the question and answer may help others who come looking for an answer. --ColinFine (talk) 22:54, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Ok, ColinFine thank you by the way. --TommasoRmndn (talk) 13:29, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks
Thank you for following up with a friendlier answer than mine. I was overly blunt to the poor scout. Kind regards, Zindor (talk) 01:56, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

More Advice Needed
Hi ColinFine, Thank you for giving your comments on my article Draft:Direction Finding by Amplitude Comparison on Teahouse. However, I'm not sure how to proceed.

Regarding your first concern, I don’t think the article can be considered as original research. The material in the article is based on techniques established some time ago and I believe that I have referenced them adequately. Your comment on Synthesis, however, is trickier to answer. Here are some possible problem areas.

The section “Comparison of signal levels from Adjacent Antennas” This section discuses adjacent Gausian patterns in some detail, as an introduction to three antenna processing, which occurs later. The material is not original or contentious, but is simply a description of pattern properties. However, it does not appear in this form in any of the references. The section “Choosing a value of K” In his original article (my reference 35) O’Keefe suggests, as a guide, a typical value of K = 3 when signal levels are low or, alternatively, carry out system modelling. In my article the value of K = 3 is arrived at slightly more logically.

What do you think?

My original aim was to show, explicitly, how bearing was derived for two and three antenna combinations from an antenna array. I did not want to simply say that it could be done and give references. This information is not on Wikipedia at present, even though the techniques have been in use for many years. However if this is the material that editors have been objecting to then, perhaps I should give up. I added an introductory section that one editor thought would help, but that does not seem to be the basic problem.

Help! D1ofBerks (talk) 17:44, 23 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Hello again, . I'm no expert, and I haven't looked at the draft, but from your description it does look like Synthesis. --ColinFine (talk) 19:22, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi ColinFine, Thank you for your comments. Do this mean that, provided I resolve the issues with Synthesis, my article will be accepted? D1ofBerks (talk) 17:58, 25 January 2021 (UTC)


 * . I have no idea. I haven't looked closely at the article or its sources. You'd do better asking the reviewer who declined it. --ColinFine (talk) 18:27, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks
Thank you so much for your advice in the teahouse Whamrockers (talk) 06:13, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - February 2021
Delivered February 2021 by MediaWiki message delivery.

If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.

15:35, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you
Hello ColinFine, I just wanted to say thank you very much for your time and support in the teahouse and in helping to improve the page for Hugh Mesibov. 2A02:C7D:8A84:3100:7917:C3A2:F37:3A0F (talk) 21:07, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Loomain Legacy
So since you removed the Loomain Legacy section, we still need to put Loomain Legacy some where, since Loomain Legacy is still a remake of Pokemon Brick Bronze. JennilyW (talk) 21:51, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Then find some reliable independent sources for it, . If the only sources you can find are from the company, or user-generated, then I don't believe it belongs in the article. --ColinFine (talk) 22:34, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Note
Hello I am new at this and not writing about myself. I saw you mention that If you could help that would be great Thanks Goalmaker70 (talk) 20:50, 4 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Hello, . My advice would be to leave your draft alone for a few months as you learn how Wikipedia works by editing to improve existing articles. Would you expect to play in a regional competition after playing your first few games in a sport? That's what creating a new article is like for a new editor. You are likely to have an unhappy and frustrating time if you stick with this exceptionally hard challenge without having learnt the trade first.
 * As for your draft, I'll take a different analogy: it's like building a house without surveying the land to check that it is safe to build on. You've built something that looks like a house (your draft) - you're even asking people how to hang pictures on the walls. But if Oliver doesn't meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, then your house is going to fall down. One of the reasons that creating a new article is so hard is that it needs to start by finding the independent reliable sources that are an absolute, non-negotiable, essential for a new Wikipedia article. If you can't find enough, then you know that the draft will never be accepted and not to waste your effort building it. If you can find the sources, then (for the first time) it is possible for you to write an article, because you will (for the first time) have information which can go into the article. Please see WP:YFA if you haven't read it already, and WP:V. --ColinFine (talk) 22:56, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

There’s a lot of articles out there. So do i as then to the draft in the sandbox Goalmaker70 (talk) 23:08, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Meant to say so do i add the articles to the sandbox Goalmaker70 (talk) 23:12, 4 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Not sure what you're asking, . If you mean that there are a lot of articles which are suitable as references, great. For each one
 * Make sure it is in a reliable source.
 * Make sure it is independent (not based on an interview with Oliver or a press release).
 * Add a citation to the source after any information in the draft that is verified by the source, and you haven't already provided a source for. (See REFB for how to reference the same source more then once, if needed).
 * If you decide not to work on that draft at the moment, you can of course park your sources on the draft for later.
 * Does that answer your question?

Recent teahouse reply
Hi, Colin. I notice you've just replied to a querant at the Teahouse about his draft article on a horror writer, but that (uncharacteristically for you), your signature doesn't appear. This might be my fault.

I was composing a reply myself (I started when yours wasn't visible) but gave up halfway through and cancelled it. This might have somehow interfered with your post. If so (though I don't understand why), my apologies.

(I haven't heard of the writer before (I notice his 3 books are all from small presses), but he sounds as if I might enjoy his work! Regards {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.200.40.9 (talk) 13:52, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Rievaulx Abbey edit problem
Hello Colin, can you have a revisit to your edit to Rievaulx Abbey. The book reference you added causes a duplicate argument problem as it has two page parameters. Unsure which one is the required one. Thanks. Keith D (talk) 23:17, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you . I've removed the extraneous one - I copied the citation from elsewhere, and changed the page, as I thought. --ColinFine (talk) 00:04, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Rose Bulma
I would like to learn more 🤗🤗🤗🤗 Rose Bulma (talk) 13:46, 28 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Hello, . I moved your post to a separate section at the end of my User Talk page - that is where new material should go.
 * What is it you would like to learn about? --ColinFine (talk) 13:56, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Teahouse exchange
The summary of what led to that Teahouse exchange on 23:37, 22 February can be found in the second paragraph here. Attempted to reach out to User:David notMD, but views it as as a horsemeat. They do not seem understand I am trying to reach compromise with a user. User:Hostagecat had broken off from discussion after raising many concerns erroneous in nature that I think need to be examined (i.e. should AllMusic no longer be designated a reliable source under WP:RSMUSIC?) and then filed a report, which User:EdJohnston accepted without vetting if its claims were actually accurate and gave me a warning. Or perhaps they simply do not want to weight in. According to David notMD, "Content is totally outside my realm of knowledge (I'm an old white guy)". Either way, I am simply looking for a someone to serve as mediator between Hostagecat and I to enhance our communication. If you can assist in initiating a resolution or point towards the direction of an editor whose purview this falls under or is in some way interested, I would greatly appreciate it. -- Ascribe4 (talk) 16:41, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - March 2021
Delivered March 2021 by MediaWiki message delivery.

If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.

13:00, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

# of reliable sources reply
Thank you for your feedback! This was very helpful I will go back through my citations and pull sources that are independent. For the second article though, the festival is mentioned. Culturepedia (talk) 21:53, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
 * You're right,, it does: I searched for "Festival" not for "Fest". However, it is only a passing mention, not significant coverage, so it does not contribute to notability for the Festival. It's possible that the Fest does not merit an article, but could be mentioned in Do-rag. --ColinFine (talk) 23:09, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your swift reply. I appreciate it .I will go back through the sources to see if they are reliable for Wikipedia as you said and try to rewrite it if there are enough notable sources. I’m sure you are busy I would like to send you my draft if you are free once I have completed. Thank you again. Culturepedia (talk) 00:39, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Surname
Surname do not require a reference. This is not about some big public figure. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:6580:C500:5A00:B85C:AC10:3166:E2D5 (talk) 23:14, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

My page, again.
Hello.

I have read your advice and understand now. I know how to use wikipedia and I have used it for years. But I just forgot how to create one since I had no reason to in years, as I lost passwords to all my old accounts. Again, please consider taking off the deletion notice, as I have worked hard on that, and know how to use the editing feature,

Thanks again, Kaleb.catiko — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kaleb.catiko (talk • contribs) 19:57, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry,, but I don't think you can have read any of the links. It doesn't matter how hard you have worked on it, it is not, and almost certainly will never be, a suitable subject for a Wikipedia article. Even if you bought the land, built a house, issued coins and stamps, and created a website with ten thousand pages of laws and made up history for Domov, it would never be suitable for a Wikipedia article unless several people with no connection to you decided to write about it in major newspapers, or in books from reputable publishers. Without that, it is not notable, and does not belong anywhere in Wikipedia. It's great that you are dreaming and using your imagination, but Wikipedia is not a suitable place to do that. Perhaps you want to create you own personal wiki in somewhere like Fandom (website)? If you do that, you can create as many pages for Domov there as you wish. --ColinFine (talk) 21:15, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Ron Weighell draft article
Good day to you, On 5 February in a Teahouse comment you kindly explained the need for references in the subject draft article. I have now removed pretty much everything that cannot be substantiated, and have provided a number of citations and references. If you have a chance to cast an eye over it, I'd very much appreciate your view as to whether I have done enough (or equally in some areas, too much). Regards, Nick Goodall Nick Goodall (talk) 22:58, 15 March 2021 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry,, I'm not interested in ploughing though twenty eight references to see if somewhere among them there is even one that provides significant coverage of Weighell - without which he does not meet Wikipiedia's criteria for notability. Most of them seem to be references to where works in the far-too-long-for-the-article bibliography were published - which makes them primary sources, which do not comtribute to notability, and should amount to only a small proportion of the total references for an article. --ColinFine (talk) 22:33, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

help me in approving my article
hi good evening Mr ColinFine. i found your profile on wikipedia as a mentor and volunteer in helping new editors on wikipedia. i need help in this procedure. can you please help me finish my article. my article's title is = masoud shafaghi ( best regards neda sajedi — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neda.sajedi (talk • contribs) 15:19, 17 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Hello, . I have no particular interest in working on Draft:Masoud Shafaghi. What I will say, on a quick look, is that it looks as if it is what Shafaghi or his associates want to say about him. Wikipedia does not care - not even a little bit - what he or his associates want to say about him. The article should be nearly 100% based on what people who have no connection with him whatever have chosen to publish about him. --ColinFine (talk) 16:20, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia draft tracking system
Any way to check the progress of any draft submitted for review. What Im interested in is knowing the queue number or expected time if i have a curiosity to check what's happeningWisdomwiki 40 (talk) 07:35, 26 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Hello, . There is no progress. There is no queue number. There is no tracking system. There is a pile of drafts waiting until a volunteer reviewer decides to pick up one of them and look at it. Looking at Draft:Ashutosh Sharma, I don't immediately see a single one of the nineteen references that appears to be both independent of Sharma and contain significant coverage of him (I'm assuming at least that they are all reliably published). Without both of those criteria being met, a reference does not contribute in any way to establishing notability. --ColinFine (talk) 12:33, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

ColinFine thanks for the quick response and time you took to review Draft:Ashutosh Sharma. banking on the published academic works that are earning citations, though slowly.Wisdomwiki 40 (talk) 13:44, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Siege of Bunratty
Hello ColinFine not sure if this is the right place but thanks for taking an interest earlier in my problem I have gone onto politics.ie just now and added a permission to copy the content under the last post by galteeman proving that I am the same person who wrote the article there. a few weeks ago I was able to edit my article here and added a bunch of references and sources as others had suggested but now I can't find that either as it has disappeared. Do you know where my updated article has gone and how do I get it up on wiki thanks Stephen Blackpool (talk) 07:03, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I think JimfBleak has answered you on your user talk page, . --ColinFine (talk) 12:22, 27 March 2021 (UTC)