User talk:Domdeparis/Archive 6

Aliyar Aliyev
I just would like to know in which cases i violated the principles of neutrality in this article so that I can correct my mistakes. --Daydreamer2011 (talk) 17:16, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi the use of the word "martyr" is inappropriate in an article about a recent armed conflict between two nations. The source about the commemorative plaque is not in the least bit neutral and is more state propaganda than anything else. Dom from Paris (talk) 18:18, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your help. I am still working on my article and I will solve all the mentioned problems.--Daydreamer2011 (talk) 18:43, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Don't Quote Me
Thanks for tagging this article, which I put together recently. Not sure exactly what you would like more information about (it is not unusual for television programmes to, as it were, provide their own references on Wikipedia) but I hope the current references give sufficient additional information. In due course I intend to add various references from the many newspaper and magazine articles published at the time which reviewed or profiled the series, but this will need to wait for the relevant file of cuttings to emerge from our out of town storage archives. AnOpenMedium (talk) 09:45, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
 * as per WP:NTV even if a national television program is likely to be notable all articles must be accompanied by reliable sources. You have provided no sources for the list of editions so this is missing too. Dom from Paris (talk) 12:29, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Also the quote about it being "the forerunner of... every other comedy panel show thereafter" comes from a discussion forum by an anonymous user and this kind of thing does not have its place in an encyclopedia. Dom from Paris (talk) 12:33, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Good work
Good on you for looking at PR articles on Wikipedia and investigating whether they should be deleted. There is way too much ego-fluff on the encyclopedia that anyone, including paid editors, can edit. Thanks. Chisme (talk) 16:36, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks it's not always an easy thing to do because you don't always get it right and sometimes there are some very odd comments on deletion discussions often quoting WP:ATD as a reason for keeping clearly non notable articles or redirecting. Dom from Paris (talk) 10:12, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Enough Sources for Mukesh Patel
Dear Domdeparis,

The Reliable sources are already there in the article Mukesh Patel. so you are requested to review the page again and remove that Notability Tag from the Top.

Thanks

Radadiyageet (talk) 11:22, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't think that any more sources have been added since I reviewed the article. Dom from Paris (talk) 15:54, 26 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Dear Domdeparis,

Thank you for the revert, But I am telling you that everything that you need as sources are already there in Gujarati, Hindi and English Languages with the. Each content based on the Sources which is already added in Article.

Radadiyageet (talk) 05:54, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
 * And I disagree. There is not enough in-depth coverage in independent sources to show notability. You can forget all the sources about the suit auction as this only shows that he made a bid for a silly amount of money for a suit but this doesn't make him notable. Please read WP:GNG. Dom from Paris (talk) 08:03, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

Can You See
I was in the middle of editing the template that's why I addded the temple to the page. Another recommended me using that. Did you not see the temple on the page in use for more editing. Re read Wikipedia Guidelines. Welcometothenewmillenium (talk) 01:09, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
 * The in use template is to be used only if you are actually in the middle of editing. It was removed by another editor not me 8 hours after you placed it there. This is not a means of protection for a page that does not meet notability guidelines. If you think that you have the necessary sources open a discussion on the talk page to gain consensus instead of edit warring. Dom from Paris (talk) 04:58, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.12 30 July 2018
Hello, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

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


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


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

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. —  Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)  00:00, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
 * The Signpost
 * The next issue of the monthly magazine will be out soon. The newspaper is an excellent way to stay up to date with news and new developments between our newsletters. If you have special messages to be published, or if you would like to submit an article (one about NPR perhaps?), don't hesitate to contact the editorial team here.

Draft:Jesse Bogner
Dear Domdeparis,

Many thanks for your inputs on my first submission 'Jesse Bogner'. I have mentioned 5 references of newspapers and web-based sources to prove the notability of the author. Do I have to provide more?

As per your feedback, I have also corrected the particular sentence that you pointed out as being unsuitable for academic writing. Since I am new on this platform, I would be truly grateful for any further inputs which you have for me that would enable me to get this page fit for being published.

Thanks again, regards, Vinvibes (talk) 17:38, 2 August 2018 (UTC)VinvibesVinvibes (talk) 17:38, 2 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi,


 * I have added 2 more sources to my article both of which reinforce his status as a renowned author. Please let me know what else needs to be done to improve upon it. Many Thanks,


 * regards, Vinvibes (talk) 18:05, 2 August 2018 (UTC)VinvibesVinvibes (talk) 18:05, 2 August 2018 (UTC)


 * What I would also like to ask is where should I place the 'paid editor' information. These people approached me and requested me to have their page published on Wikipedia, and I agreed to give it a shot for the sake of gaining more exposure in the field. So if I am to disclose the employee, client and affiliation, where should I put it and how - preferably an existing example of an article that has this info will help. If you can provide an example of an article that bears this info, I could go through and incorporate the same in my article. Thanks, in advance, Vinvibes (talk) 20:16, 2 August 2018 (UTC)VinvibesVinvibes (talk) 20:16, 2 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi, I have disclosed info as paid editor here - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft_talk:Jesse_Bogner. Can you please check and verify that it is correct, and what else needs to be done? Thanks in advance, regards, Vinita.

Removing PROD from
You just deleted my message on your talk page without replying so I have copied it below as I thought I'd give you the chance to discuss it here if you wish as there seems to have been some misunderstanding between us.

"Hi just to let you know that once someone has contested a WP:PROD as per WP:DEPROD you must not replace it. as per WP:REDIRECT "Redirects aid navigation and searching by allowing a page to be reached under alternative titles." I specifically added a template to explain why this redirect could be useful. It is totally normal that very little or nothing points to a redirect because there is a bot that cleans up Wikipedia:Double redirects. If you do not understand what redirects are for please do not be surprised if someone undoes your edits."

The redirect has been around for 4 years now but came up on the new pages feed of which I am a patroller because you modified it. As your PROD was in my opinion an error I undid your edit because the redirect clearly fulfills the purpose of redirects. I most certainly am not stalking you and I don't recall ever having come across you as this analyser log will attest. I undid your edits twice indicating that I believed they were in good faith and I still do. If that is what provoked your reaction I apologise if you were upset by the revert. Dom from Paris (talk) 13:54, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

Nepal's Mega Cinestar
Hello there, the page that you reviewed looks like blatant copyright violation. I have tagged it for CSD now, if you disagree with my nomination then let me know. Hitro talk 14:35, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi User:HitroMilanese thanks for that looks like I missed it! cheers. Dom from Paris (talk) 14:41, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

AFD:Lydia Janssen
I have nominated Lydia Janssen for AFD, not sure if I have done that correctly. Can you please look into this? 157.37.219.5 (talk) 07:42, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Austroads
Your addition of refimprove to my Austroads page is fair enough - two refs is not many. But it's easy for someone else to do - this is a major organisation in an ecosystem already embedded in WP. Others may add dimensionality that I missed. Pedalissimo (talk) 17:43, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm pretty sure it's got to be notable but it does need more refs to pass WP:NORG hence the tag. As a reviewer I add refs if I've got time otherwise I just tag so it can get referenced. Cheers. Dom from Paris (talk) 20:27, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

No
This was another terrible, over-policing edit. The relevant phrase at WP:UP is "What may I have on my user page? ... A small and proportionate amount of suitable unrelated material ... For example: ... a brief three sentence summary that you work in field X and have a band named Y will be fine." There is no question that the link you removed was within usual norms. --JBL (talk) 11:28, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Did you take the time to check out the blog? The user page violated WP:UP and is a link to a blog which has nothing to do with his WP activity and as per the blog's disclaimer "Disclosure: I may get a small commission if you buy certain products linked in this article. However, my opinions are my own and I only promote the products and services that I trust." this is a clear violation of WP:NOTWEBHOST. --Dom from Paris (talk) 11:33, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Listed in the content that one may not have on a user page at WP:UP "A weblog recording your non-Wikipedia activities". Dom from Paris (talk) 11:38, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Apparently you don't understand the difference between "having X" and "having a link to X"? They do not mean the same thing. --JBL (talk) 11:40, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
 * You may be right I may have misunderstood. But that said in UPGOOD it also says "However, if a link to your home page is the only thing on your userpage, this may be seen as an attempt at self-promotion." You might also like to check out the previous version of the user page . Dom from Paris (talk) 11:52, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I accept that there are compelling reasons to believe this is a problematic user. --JBL (talk) 00:26, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
 * when doing new pages patrolling we come across an inordinate amount of problem pages and problem users. We are snowed under the weight of undisclosed paid editing and COI editing. I would say something like 40% of the bio and company pages I patrol are undisclosed paid editing so as patrollers we can be a little heavy handed at times but there is a good reason behind that. Thanks for your message. Cheers. Dom from Paris (talk) 07:20, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Chris Bradford (social entrepreneur) (2nd nomination)
Hi, I'm curious if you meant to vote "delete" there, or just leave a comment. --K.e.coffman (talk) 06:35, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi User:K.e.coffman I was actually the nom it looks like a keep !voter added his !vote above the nomination. I'll move it down. Dom from Paris (talk) 06:43, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Chill Bruh.
Woah woah woah, dude, you seem pissed about the page I made about Pasir Panjang Power Station. Look here, I didn't have time to create references and sources and so on for the information I put up there, so I'd need some damn time to work on that page. Plus, Wikipedia's a free page, so if you have any good plans to help the page, go ahead. Deleting it won't do anybody any good. Cavalry.charger (talk) 13:34, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi you have been requested several times now to only add information to Wikipedia once it is sourced. I moved you creation to draft space to allow you to bring it up to standard. If you do not have time to add the sources then you should leave the article in a sandbox or draft space until you have the sources. This is in line with WP:VERIFIABLE. If you do not know how to use a sand box then please read WP:SANDBOX. --Dom from Paris (talk) 13:39, 3 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Forreels man people are free to edit and improve the page so let it be bruh.
 * I am afraid you are wrong this is a community with guidelines and policy and if you do not want to abide by these then you are better off doing something else with your spare time. --Dom from Paris (talk) 13:47, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
 * also please note that you have received a final warning for adding unsourced material to wikipedia and the next addition will be followed by an admin report that may lead you to being blocked. --Dom from Paris (talk) 13:53, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Tellows
Hi Domdeparis. Thanks for the notice about COI. I'm writing the article from a general point of view without advertising purposes within. I think it's not a bad idea to make an article about tellows since it's a big platform that many people use. Besides, I've put enough trusted references that I found for all the information I cited. Anyway, would you suggest to post a cleanup request so I can improve the article? --JamesBaldwinWiki (talk) 16:35, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi . I am curious to know if you have had another account on Wikipedia before this one? --Dom from Paris (talk) 16:01, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately not. I've been using wikipedia for a while and made some changes here and there, but not as a registered user. I'm just interested in telemarketing and phone fraud topics so I thought it would be good to make an article about that anti spam platform. As for COI, I already mentioned it before, but I'm writing the article as a user who uses the online platform "tellows" on daily basis. I personally just wanted to start making more contributions on wiki so it's quite sad if the article has to be deleted, cause I thought it's pretty informative for wiki readers. --JamesBaldwinWiki (talk) 08:38, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Spirit of Boise Balloon Classic
Thank you for reading Spirit of Boise Balloon Classic and raising notability guideline concerns. The event would seem to meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines, and if it falls short of meeting the guidelines, then other balloon festivals listed at Hot air balloon festival may fall short as well. If the page I wrote is itself the cause of your concern, I added references.Tamanoeconomico (talk) 02:20, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Third Captain(association football)
After I had nominated this article for deletion earlier today, it was deleted but not salted, and only a few hours later had reappeared. Another reviewer has since corrected its name by adding a space, and redirected it to Captain (association football), from which it had been copied anyway. I'm not familiar with the use of the term "third captain" and doubt it is sensible to redirect it. I don't know what you think? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 20:05, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi I'm not a big fan of football but I dug around and from what I can gather there is a sort of vice-vice-captain who is known as the third captain and apparently there's even a fourth captain. . Dom from Paris (talk) 20:22, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Regarding Hello Haldwani community radio page
Sir I organised reflist of Hello Haldwani page, Please observe it and give me further guidance. Thanks Krishna Kumar Mishra (talk) 08:23, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

Filled
I filled in the background section of the article. Thylacoop5 (talk) 09:31, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

g10 decline
I declined your speedy-attack nomination of Mast Newspaper. You are welcome to pursue other deletion paths, of course. --joe deckertalk 16:48, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
 * No problem I sort of thought that might happen. The sources were purely negative but the article wasn't. --Dom from Paris (talk) 12:27, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Scratch Saga Speedy deletion
How do I make it seem important enough for the encyclopedia? TANAZ2007 (talk) 11:11, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I think your question shows that you are probably going about things the wrong way here on wikipedia. the idea is not to make subjects "seem" important enough but to create articles about subjects that are already notable enough and add the sources to show they meet the notability criteria. For this animated series meets the notabilty guidelines there must be indepth coverage in mutlips reliable sources that are independent of the subject. You have added nothing to the article that suggests this is a notable subject. Dom from Paris (talk) 11:39, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I understand now. The subject IS notable, but I haven't added notable information
 * I'm going to leave you a welcome message with some helpful links. --Dom from Paris (talk) 11:48, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you. But I read the Criteria for deletion page, and A7 didn't mention anything about an animated series. TANAZ2007 (talk) 11:54, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * It covers web content as well. Dom from Paris (talk) 12:18, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

If you can't read thai language reference for Thailand Amateur League. You may not chaotic
Phitsanulok City has thai language reference and this reference situation say Phitsanulok City history. This article is full evidence for this one reference linking. This football club is Thailand Amateur League. Do you know ?. You would like to foreign language reference from Amateur football club, don't you ? You don't reason. Aquaelfin (talk) 13:13, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid I don't really understand what you are saying. But I think what you are trying to say is that because I don't read Thai then I can't judge the sources. Luckily there is Google translate which helps and allows me to have a good idea if the source meets the requirements. Whatever it is they are too weak to pass GNG. The club clearly doesn't meet WP:FOOTYN as it hasn't played a single match yet. Anyway the afd will hopefully atttract some Thai speakers who will be able to check ut the sources in more detail. Whatever happens please do not remove the discussion template again. Thanks. Dom from Paris (talk) 13:23, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Some thai word is Thai technicial word of football. Google translate translate worng thai word. If you can't read thai language same native. You may not chaotic same me. I may not chaotic France Amateur league. Aquaelfin (talk) 14:17, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry but what do you mean by "chaotic"? Dom from Paris (talk) 14:19, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.13 18 September 2018
Hello, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

The New Page Feed currently has 2700 unreviewed articles, up from just 500 at the start of July. For a while we were falling behind by an average of about 40 articles per day, but we have stabilised more recently. Please review some articles from the back of the queue if you can (Sort by: 'Oldest' at Special:NewPagesFeed), as we are very close to having articles older than one month.


 * Project news
 * The New Page Feed now has a new "Articles for Creation" option which will show drafts instead of articles in the feed, this shouldn't impact NPP activities and is part of the WMF's AfC Improvement Project.
 * As part of this project, the feed will have some larger updates to functionality next month. Specifically, ORES predictions will be built in, which will automatically flag articles for potential issues such as vandalism or spam. Copyright violation detection will also be added to the new page feed. See the projects's talk page for more info.


 * There are a number of coordination tasks for New Page Patrol that could use some help from experienced reviewers. See New pages patrol/Coordination for more info to see if you can help out.


 * Other
 * A new summary page of reliable sources has been created; Identifying reliable sources/Perennial sources, which summarizes existing RfCs or RSN discussions about regularly used sources.


 * Moving to Draft and Page Mover
 * Some unsuitable new articles can be best reviewed by moving them to the draft space, but reviewers need to do this carefully and sparingly. It is most useful for topics that look like they might have promise, but where the article as written would be unlikely to survive AfD. If the article can be easily fixed, or if the only issue is a lack of sourcing that is easily accessible, tagging or adding sources yourself is preferable. If sources do not appear to be available and the topic does not appear to be notable, tagging for deletion is preferable (PROD/AfD/CSD as appropriate). See additional guidance at WP:DRAFTIFY.
 * If the user moves the draft back to mainspace, or recreates it in mainspace, please do not re-draftify the article (although swapping it to maintain the page history may be advisable in the case of copy-paste moves). AfC is optional except for editors with a clear conflict of interest.
 * Articles that have been created in contravention of our paid-editing-requirements or written from a blatant NPOV perspective, or by authors with a clear COI might also be draftified at discretion.
 * The best tool for draftification is User:Evad37/MoveToDraft.js(info). Kindly adapt the text in the dialogue-pop-up as necessary (the default can also be changed like this). Note that if you do not have the Page Mover userright, the redirect from main will be automatically tagged as CSD R2, but in some cases it might be better to make this a redirect to a different page instead.
 * The Page Mover userright can be useful for New Page Reviewers; occasionally page swapping is needed during NPR activities, and it helps avoid excessive R2 nominations which must be processed by admins. Note that the Page Mover userright has higher requirements than the NPR userright, and is generally given to users active at Requested Moves. Only reviewers who are very experienced and are also very active reviewers are likely to be granted it solely for NPP activities.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:11, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Thailand Amateur League is National cup and This tournament is upper level than Thai FA cup and Thai League Cup
Thailand Amateur League is one level of Thailand league system. http://news.ch3thailand.com/%E0%B8%82%E0%B9%88%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%A7%E0%B8%94%E0%B9%88%E0%B8%A7%E0%B8%99/36292/%E0%B9%82%E0%B8%84%E0%B8%A3%E0%B8%87%E0%B8%AA%E0%B8%A3%E0%B9%89%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%87%E0%B8%9F%E0%B8%B8%E0%B8%95%E0%B8%9A%E0%B8%AD%E0%B8%A5%E0%B8%A5%E0%B8%B5%E0%B8%81%E0%B9%84%E0%B8%97%E0%B8%A2%E0%B8%A4%E0%B8%94%E0%B8%B9%E0%B8%81%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%A5-2017.html. Champion for each region of this league can promote to Thai League 4. Honour of this leguage upper than Thai FA cup and Thai League Cup which are isn't Thailand league system. You try to true understand. Aquaelfin (talk) 2:57, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Ok I'm going to try and be clear. WP:FOOTYN says a team is presumed notable of it has participated in a national cup. In Thailand it is Thai FA Cup. Amateur teams do not automatically participate. If you do not understand the criteria then stop creating articles. Dom from Paris (talk) 03:04, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Amateur team can participate Thai FA Cup such as 2018 Thai FA Cup. https://sport.mthai.com/football-thai/343352.html. Thailand Amateur League is one cup and league cup of Thailand. Honour of this leguage upper than Thai FA cup and because Out of league team can join Thai FA cup. You try to hold on league. Cup is the league Aquaelfin (talk) 3:15, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Thé criteria WP:FOOTYN refers to the cup in which all teams can participate pro and amateur. A team that has never played a single match cannot have participated in this cup. This is not rocket science. Leagues and cups are not the same thing. Dom from Paris (talk) 03:26, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
 * No, A team that has never played a single match can have participated in this cup. such as Muangchang United don't join 2018 Thailand Amateur League but this team can play 2018 Thai FA Cup. Aquaelfin (talk) 3:34, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I doubt very much that we have the same definition of what is a/participating and b/national cup. This discussion is going nowhere. Let's see what happens with the Deletion discussions. Dom from Paris (talk) 03:56, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

About: "Primary sources" tag in Chantilly Jumping - I've removed it
only reference 3 and reference 13. I must admit I spent more time looking for secondary sources to write an English language article for the French magazine L'Éperon, described in its French language Wikipedia article as "Créé en 1937, il est le plus ancien magazine équestre français" but also tagged as "une ébauche concernant la presse écrite et les chevaux." (I have, as they in Italian, soleamente un pochettino of French. Nevertheless and somewhat bizarrely I recognized the singular "éperon" from the plural in Jacques Derrière's  1978 work Éperons: les styles de Nietzsche). Showjumping is not my area of expertise, but I'll have a look at the article and see how I can help out. Pete AU aka --Shirt58 (talk) 10:09, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
 * thanks for that. As I mentioned I have a COI with the subject as I am an unpaid volunteer for the organisation of the show. It is one of the 15 or so legs of the global champions tour which is one of the most prestigous series of show jumping competitions in the world so when I created it I was pretty sure there were no notability problems and there are some solid secondary sources that talk about it. I haven't had a chance to see if there are any more sources to update the page but I'll have a look and maybe ping you on the talk page with a requested edit as I don't want to fall foul of COI. By the way I also played hockey and used to get royally miffed when it was suggested it was a girl's game. I was a goalie and when balls came at you at around 100 km/h you had to be either very well padded, nuts or suicidal or a mix of the 3. Cheers --Dom from Paris (talk) 10:30, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

review
about I took into account this Stem Cell and Regenerative Medicine Conferance as well as a patent made(per Notability_(people) it seems the conference series is independent secondary, also goes for the patent)….--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 10:54, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi these sources are not enough to show he meets WP:NPEOPLE criteria and is not in-depth coverage in a secondary RS so does not show he meets GNG.--Dom from Paris (talk) 11:04, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Patents are not enough anyone can file a patent and the conference series is affiliated as he was a speaker so not independent or secondary. Dom from Paris (talk) 11:06, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
 * ok--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 11:07, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Fidlar EP pages
Good afternoon,

I’m wondering why you removed the pages I created for the Fidlar EPs. I provided sources and references for the information, and they are a professional band in the industry. I had thought the bands page was lacking information along with links to such pages for the eps. Please let me know. Takensorryuser (talk) 11:46, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi seperate pages for albums and EPs have to show that the subject passes WP:NALBUM which states that


 * Specific to recordings, a recording may be notable if it meets at least one of these criteria:
 * Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent from the musician or ensemble who created it.
 * This criterion includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, books, magazine articles, online versions of print media, and television documentaries except for the following:
 * Any reprints of press releases, other publications where the musician or ensemble talks about the recording, and all advertising that mentions the recording, including manufacturers' advertising.
 * Articles in a school or university newspaper (or similar), in most cases.
 * The single or album has appeared on any country's national music chart.
 * The recording has been certified gold or higher in at least one country.
 * The recording has won or been nominated for a major music award, such as a Grammy, Juno, Mercury, Choice or Grammis award.
 * The recording was performed in a medium that is notable, e.g., a theme for a network television show, performance in a television show or notable film, inclusion on a notable compilation album, etc. (But if this is the only claim, it is probably more appropriate to have a mention in the main article and redirect to that article. Read the policy and notability guideline on subjects notable only for one event, for further clarifications).
 * The recording was in rotation nationally by a major radio or music television network.
 * The recording has been a featured subject of a substantial broadcast segment across a national radio or TV network.


 * Notability aside, a standalone article is only appropriate when there is enough material to warrant a reasonably detailed article; articles unlikely ever to grow beyond stubs should be merged into the artist's article or discography.


 * As you made no claims that the different EPs meet the criteria 2 through to 7 then it has to meet criteria 1. The sources that you provided show that the EPs exist but are not enough. Soundcloud and discogs are simple track listings or the band's account page. What you need to supply is album reviews or any other in-depth coverage of the recording and not just 1 song from the EP.


 * I hope this helps. --Dom from Paris (talk) 12:14, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Subzzee
Yes, good spot, and thanks for the heads up - I've blocked, tagged, and reverted. GiantSnowman 14:01, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
 * you're welcome. --Dom from Paris (talk) 14:09, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Prashant Kishor Wiki
Regarding your reverts today which you say should be concentrated on the subject of the article, my previous edits were meant to give a background to the work done by Prashant Kishor. They highlight why the campaign was designed the way it was, given the political situation. It would be great if you actually read these before reverting them. I can share these with you separately if needed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FactFreak10 (talk • contribs) 13:42, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
 * you may have confused my edits with those of another editor. I only reverted your adding of the full name of an abbreviation that was already given earlier in the article .Dom from Paris (talk) 13:51, 29 September 2018 (UTC)


 * I'm referring to the edits made on 20 Spetember at 8:45 am. (Reverted good faith edits by FactFreak10 (talk): Undo WP:COATRACK please keep this article concentrated on the subject. (TW)) (undo | thank) (Tag: Undo).

FactFreak10 (talk) 05:40, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
 * No need to ping me on my own talk page. The edits you made were what is known as WP:COATRACKING as they mostly dealt with the politician known as the The Captain and not with the subject. Seeing your editing pattern and the fact that you are a single purpose editor I am afraid that despite the fact that you claim not to have a conflict of interest your edits and those of the other WP:SPA accounts look like a concerted effort to promote this person and their interests. If this continues I shall be asking for a permanent protection on this page that will only allow experienced editors to edit it. Dom from Paris (talk) 06:42, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Tag on Nicholas Griffin (philosopher)
Hi Domdeparis, Is it OK to remove the BLP sources tag on this article now? As far as I can tell, all statements are now properly sourced. Best wishes, Anotherultimatename (talk) 09:07, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

With regards to your remarks on the Prashant Kishor page edit, all suggestions are duly noted. I tried to formulate the content as close to the text on the references provided. However, will concentrate on neutralising the write-ups further. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiki007edit (talk • contribs) 12:50, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

You've got mail

 * Hi I only use email for confidential or off-wiki subjects, please do not hesitate to use talk pages rather than e-mail. Please read WP:NORG which should give you some good pointers as to what is needed to show notability. --Dom from Paris (talk) 16:03, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Sociedad Deportiva Compostela (1962-2006)
Regarding the article Sociedad Deportiva Compostela (1962-2006) you just reviewed, all I did was creating a new page with the previous text from Sociedad Deportiva Compostela that belonged to the former team, as they are different clubs. Something similar to New York Cosmos (2010) and New York Cosmos (1970–85). Did not remove neither add any reference.--Banderas (talk) 12:21, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I am not at all in agreement with what you have done. The 2 clubs have the same strip the same name the same logo the same stadium and had the same players. There was simply a haitus for a very short period that you have not defined where they had another name. There is no reason to create a page for the dissolved club because to all intents and purposes the club has never ceased to exist. This information should have been added in a seperate section about the history of the club. vesaD --Dom from Paris (talk) 12:31, 4 October 2018 (UTC)


 * They never had the same players. Former SD Compostela didn't pay and they all left unpaid. It ceased to exist and a judge took over the properties to make an auction and pay part (very small part) of the debt. The name, brand and logo were bought at that auction and used to change "Campus Stellae" club into the new SD Compostela. The stadium is city owned (municipal) and leased.--Banderas (talk) 18:15, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm in the middle of opening a discussion to see if other editors agree with me that this is unnecessary content WP:CONTENTFORKING. Dom from Paris (talk) 13:54, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Prem Kumar (film)
Hi. I removed the speedy nomination from Draft:Prem Kumar (film), for now. The article is at AfD now. As the article in the mainspace was result of copy-paste move (with no history), the draft with history should be kept. Regards, — usernamekiran (talk)  10:12, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
 * oh it was you who nominated it for deletion. lol my mistake. — usernamekiran (talk)  10:15, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
 * no problem. it was originally draftified and immediately moved back. If it gets deleted (as I think it will) I'll nominate again as a speedy. --Dom from Paris (talk) 10:33, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, it can be done too. But I dont think deleting the draft too is necessary. I mean, it is a standard procedure too, keeping articles in draftspace. I think it will go stale, and get deleted automatically; as it doesnt seem to be a case of paid editing. Anyways, you should make the call after AfD ends. See you around :) — usernamekiran (talk)  10:56, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
 * You're probably right. We'll wait and see. cheers Dom from Paris (talk) 11:02, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Talk page
Could you please stay on one and only talk page and not diffuse the discussion? Next to your canvas and for not directly answering my question why to attack this list where you respect all the 99% of other lists that are of less quality, it's annoying me very much. Whole the time I am exchanging subjects and not seeking coalitions or playing games. Using words like battleground, when I am the constructive one asking for talk and content, is not really a nice thing to say, Dom... I hope I don't have to ask this again, because I don't feel your behaviour to be very constructive. Ymnes (talk) 18:34, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Hey look I tried to take our discussion to your talk page because I think it was a problem of comprehension between us, I gave you my view that I have already stated maybe three times in different ways and you want me to say something else but I can't because it's not my opinion. If you don't like or understand my answer I really can't do any more. You deleted the discussion on your talk page which is fine and if you want to carry on here my page is open to you but I won't repeat myself endlessly on the article's talk page as it's starting to get a bit heavy. I understand that English is not your first language despite your excellent level so maybe that is the problem, a slight lost in translation thing. I speak French all the time so that could be it too, who knows. Anyway don't hesitate to come back here if you need to. Cheers. --Dom from Paris (talk) 18:42, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
 * It is pointless trying to get me to reply on the article talk page. I have pinged you here so please do not hesitate to reply here if you wish. Cheers. Dom from Paris (talk) 18:55, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I can't work out what you want us to say. You don't like the answer but it is an answer. I am not teasing you I am honestly trying to answer your question which I think is "why are we saying that this article is different to other similar articles". If this is not the question I do not where to go from here. I understand that you want to defend the article you created and have all the entries that you wish in it but wikipedia doesn't work like that it's a collaborative thing. Dom from Paris (talk) 16:29, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
 * It's really a disgrace. The way you do your things here on Wikipedia, won't make the main space better. Why are you here than after all? I have posed you many times the question, why you are attacking particularly this list that can be ranked among 5% of the best on Wikipedia. There is simply no reason for your behavior and it complies to WP:LISTN. You simply avoid to directly answer to a question time and again, and now you wave with a rule on Wikipedia as if it were your human right. Having some imagined right, is not an answer to why you do it. And having a right is no reason to go on and never stop, even when it's time to. I yet spent a lot of time in the list, to please you in fact, because the rules don't even ask that much of me. But it's never enough for you. Please spend your energy in good things. This list shows notable museums and that can very easily be verified. This is just the way how lists are on Wikipedia, accept that, or try to change general policy, not just one good list. In this way you make me accountable for what I am not responsible for. And, when you keep on neglecting good arguments, than of course you are teasing. I don't deserve this treatment. Please know when to stop. Ymnes (talk) 17:10, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
 * ok look you're wasting mine and your time time now. I'm going to ask you one more time ask your question in one simple phrase and I will answer it and that will be the end of it. If you don't like or don't understand my answer that will then be your problem to deal with as you wish. Dom from Paris (talk) 19:05, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
 * No, that is and will always be your problem. An attack is usually made on the most weak articles, not on the best. Do you have such talks without understanding each other a lot? Ymnes (talk) 19:14, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Ok last chance. If you don't ask your question don't bother replying. Dom from Paris (talk) 20:00, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
 * If you don't have arguments, don't listen to arguments of others, are not prepared to answer my question, and are just teasing around and help vandalizing the article, TW. Ymnes (talk) 07:13, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

No more futile discussion now. If you restore any entries that do not meet WP:GNG I will remove them and then ask for sanctions against you. Do not reply on this talk page any more. 08:26, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Notable question
Hi you said few things regarding the article isn't notable so let me explain here you go https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/MTV_Music_(Italy) MTV is notable ? Right or wrong ? I have added two links from MTV Italy which shows notability of the article i wrote. SiddiqFarooq (talk) 14:41, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

COI
"Just very quickly I would agree with you that some of the photos have clearly been published professionally and I have found off and on-wiki proof that she had photos published for newspapers such as this File:SFCHRONICLE TEARSHEET.jpg. I would be very curious to know why she would lie about being a professional photographer especially as she doesn't seem to be advertising her work and seeing the dates of some of these photos (1970s) she may well be retired already. Dom from Paris (talk) 16:20, 17 October 2018 (UTC)"

Hi Dom, Thank you for your comments. I am not lying about being a "professional photographer" because I never was one and still am not. I GAVE my photos to the SF Chronicle when they needed them. Wikimedia Commons didn't exist until 2004. My 1977 photo of Reverend Jim Jones was used for the 1998 (20th anniversary of the Jonestown Tragedy). I had no idea who that guy was on the street in front of the International Hotel back then. I never read the newspapers when the massacre occurred because I had no interest in Peoples Temple. I don't do PR: what I do is called Public Service. I don't accept photo assignments because I don't need the aggravation. As for my 1980 photos of film director Wayne Wang, I was asked to take pictures as a personal favor. I was not paid and it was not a job. I spent my own money for film, supplies and darkroom time at Columbus Camera in North Beach, San Francisco. Wayne gave or sold my Chan is Missing photos to New Yorker Films when "Chan" was distributed in 1982. I was never asked or told, but really didn't care. I am just reclaiming what's rightfully mine: my photos and my name credit. My photos aren't for sale because I'm giving them away. There shouldn't be any monetary value in them because anyone can download and use them and I am happy that people do. That means people turn to wikimedia as a source, and it's only 14 years old. The only people who ever credited me correctly for the "Chan" photos is BAMPFA: it makes sense that an art museum realizes that someone took the photo and it wasn't New Yorker Films or Koch Lorber. A real person once had to go to a store and buy a roll of Tri-X for $3.50 and process it--then you had to enlarge the negative, develop the print, fix and wash and dry it. I recently found some of my old photos from 15, 20, 30 and 40 years ago that I thought would be useful to give to wikimedia. Some of them could be considered historical documents. Many people know Joe Rosenthal's image of the flag raising on Iwo Jima, but how many people know what he looked like? Maybe some people thought he got blown up on Mt. Suribachi, like three of the six flag raisers in his photo. As for Reverend Jim Jones, with the 40th anniversary of the Jonestown Tragedy coming up next month on November 18th, there is still interest in Peoples Temple. People have misused my photo of Jones for many reasons--for their personal websites on conspiracy to using my image without permission for a t-shirt and clothing line that includes dresses, skirts, scarfs and leggings. Please let Mr. Ronz know that I give him permission to go after Red Bubble to protest their use of selling T-shirts with my Jim Jones image. Thank you again for your insightful comments. I guess Mr. Ronz is still combing the world wide web for my non-existing website promoting my "photographic services," which I will add, I don't service anyone, photographically or otherwise. Sincerely, Edmunddantes October 17, 2018 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.102.74.3 (talk) 19:18, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Ok no problem I apologise for the "lying" comment but you have to admit that it seems very odd to "give" photos to a newspaper. I don't really see a COI problem but the fact that your photos have been published in other media such as Berkeley Barb or that you took promo photos for a film makes your comment about only taking snapshots and 1 roll every 5 years and not accepting photo assignments or work for hire seem a little bit like stretching the truth. I also would suggest that there may be a copyright problem with the photos that you gave to the SF chronicle. Are you allowed to reproduce them especially by scanning the paper itself? Dom from Paris (talk) 19:56, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Świdnicka Street, Wrocław
Why is the Vine Street (Philadelphia) acceptable with one historical reference, nothing about the current street, no comment that refrences are needed and this page is inacceptable? The street is linked in at least seven pages. Xx236 (talk) 07:42, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
 * This a the main street of a 600 000 people city, so please don't discuss any notability. A review? By whom? Xx236 (talk) 07:49, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I find your decision destructive. I to review new pages and I perfectly know their level. This page is much better than average. Xx236 (talk) 07:54, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Rue André Barsacq, Rue de Belleville, Rue Adolphe Mille, Paris - please move to the Draft space.Xx236 (talk) 08:07, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
 * please read WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS and WP:GEOFEAT. --Dom from Paris (talk) 08:45, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Verifiability is a core policy in wikipedia and as it says in a nutshell "Readers must be able to check that any of the information within Wikipedia articles is not just made up. This means all material must be attributable to reliable, published sources. Additionally, quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be supported by inline citations.". We should not be creating any pages that are unsourced as this page was. It is the kind of mistake that a newbie would make but I am amazed that an experienced user with 40k edits on EN:WP and nearly 100k edits in total and with reviewer and patroller rights would do this. When I saw your profil after moving the page I imagined that it was simply that you had forgotten to add the sources and I was about to apologise for drafting it but now I don't think that it was such a bad thing after all. Notability for all pages has to be shown with reliable sources, some pages pass easily with a single source because of topic specific notability guidelines but you must add at least one source to show this. Dom from Paris (talk) 08:58, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Rue de Tilsitt
 * Some people must and some don't. And you decide who must and who don't. On the basis of ?Xx236 (talk) 09:03, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Please compare Renoma (Wrocław). Is the bibliography acceptable? It may be copied to any Wrocław architecture page.Xx236 (talk) 09:08, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
 * That's an easy question to answer. I am, like you, a new pages patroller so if I come across a page when patrolling new pages that doesn't meet the required standards I deal with it, as I did with yours. I don't go randomly searching for pages that are not up to scratch I patrol new pages. If I do come across a page when using Wikipedia that needs attention I also deal with it. I just had a look at your curation log and came across these edits on Jayden James Federline . If the editor that worked on this showed you other exemples of similar pages and said on what basis did you do this to this page and didn't on the others what would you reply? --Dom from Paris (talk) 09:13, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Corpus Christi Church, Wrocław
One look on the picture proves notability. Xx236 (talk) 07:56, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Ah if only things were so simple...WP:GEOFEAT doesn't say anything about photos though. Dom from Paris (talk) 08:44, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Things are apparently simple. Paris doesn't need any sources, Poland does. Xx236 (talk) 09:04, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Are you suggesting that I am biased? I couldn't care less where the street is so you are barking up the wrong tree there matey! The draftify script is available to you too as a new pages reviewer so if you come across pages that need to be draftified fill your boots! The Paris streets that you linked above are most certainly not up to scratch but they differ from your creation in the fact that they are not new pages so not in the feed and not candidates for draftify. They do not show that they meet WP:GEOROAD just like your unsourced article.
 * Just as a reminder Georoad is a notabilty guideline that says International road networks (such as the International E-road network), Interstate, national, state and provincial highways are typically notable. Topic notability for county roads, regional roads (such as Ireland's regional roads), local roads, streets and motorway service areas may vary, and are presumed to be notable if they have been the subject of multiple published secondary sources which are reliable and independent of the subject.. Your creation does not claim to be any of the roads that are typically notable so has to have been the subject of multiple secondary sources. It wasn't so I draftified it. All you have to do is add the sources and either recreate the page or submit the page for review. I do not understand why you are getting all sniffy about this. Articles have to be sourced and show they meet notability criteria and that is not open to debate, your creation didn't. --Dom from Paris (talk) 16:23, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the change and notify
hello Domdeparis Thanks for the change and notify me Actually i am new in Wikipedia and learning about the policy. I just made some changes on the page Ajay Bijili I think Ajay Bijili is well known personality or a business person in India which i thing the page should be exist on Wikipedia. I just Like to know what is the process to remove the warning notice from the page or any pages.(for future Knowledge)

--Plotterof (talk) 15:51, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

I dont get any reply please help me to correct the said article --Plotterof (talk) 05:07, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.14 21 October 2018
Hello, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

, there are 3650 unreviewed articles and the backlog now stretches back 51 days.
 * Backlog


 * Community Wishlist Proposal
 * There is currently an ongoing discussion regarding the drafting of a Community Wishlist Proposal for the purpose of requesting bug fixes and missing/useful features to be added to the New Page Feed and Curation Toolbar.
 * Please join the conversation as we only have until 29 October to draft this proposal!


 * Project updates
 * ORES predictions are now built-in to the feed. These automatically predict the class of an article as well as whether it may be spam, vandalism, or an attack page, and can be filtered by these criteria now allowing reviewers to better target articles that they prefer to review.
 * There are now tools being tested to automatically detect copyright violations in the feed. This detector may not be accurate all the time, though, so it shouldn't be relied on 100% and will only start working on new revisions to pages, not older pages in the backlog.


 * New scripts
 * User:Enterprisey/cv-revdel.js(info) — A new script created for quickly placing copyvio-revdel on a page.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. —  Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)  20:49, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Invictus Games
As you probably know, the games are still ongoing. Regarding your concerns that 'There has to be coverage of the subject to show it meets the notability requirements' (I apologise for not being able to magically predict the results of each event) I Have been consistently improving these articles daily to keep in line with the progression of the games, however my contributions obviously aren't appreciated and valued.However, I will still continue to update the pages daily.
 * Don't take it personally your contributions are valued but articles have to meet notability standards. I have moved the articles to draft space to allow you to continue to improve them and update them but we cannot presume that the particpation of each and every nation in the games will generate sufficent coverage to merit a seperate page. All pages have to meet WP:GNG. If pages are empty of content and sources because the games are ongoing then this means it is probably WP:TOOSOON to have a page on the subject. As is they would almost certainly be deleted if brought to a discussion so as an alternative I draftified them to preserve the work you put in and allow you to incubate them. What I suggest you do is maintain the medals table on the main page for now and when there is coverage of a particular nation's participation then add that to the pages in draft space. --Dom from Paris (talk) 10:26, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I apologise, I didn't completely understand what you meant . :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by SmartyPants22 (talk • contribs) 10:32, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
 * no problem whatsoever I may not have been very clear in my message on your talk page. As ex-services myself I believe that these games should have coverage here but as a new pages reviewer I also want to be sure that the pages that are created are up to scratch and safe from deletion if notability is met. Wikipedia is not a place just to keep statistics as per WP:NOTSTATS. --Dom from Paris (talk) 10:43, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
 * My bad for not tagging it for not having any sources. However I think that like Swimming at the 2018 Asian Para Games articles like this have a place here Gbawden (talk) 11:01, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
 * No problem, it may well have its place here but there has to be sources to show that a WP:SPINOFF is merited. It is only necessary to create this kind of article when the size of the main article becomes too large until then it is better to have the information in one place. The coverage may not be enough to warrant these other articles. Dom from Paris (talk) 11:07, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Gurrandi
Hello Domdeparis, Thank you for reviewing the article Gurrandi, I went through the welcome page and understood that we can have any kind of promotion or advertising. I have removed this part from the article please have a look at it and let me know how can i improve it. Khorshedo (talk) 11:40, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Re:Ways to Improve Flora Cash
I literally just created the article this morning. I had to step away from the computer so I was unable to cite my sources. I am currently working on that now. I have been editing Wikipedia for 10+ yrs I know what I'm doing. Thank you. WereWolf (talk) 13:18, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Hey don't worry about it, it was on the new pages feed and as a patroller I patrol. You would be surprised by the number of very experienced editors including admins who make basic mistakes. Don't take it personally we are just trying to work through an evergrowing backlog of unreviewed articles. If, in the future, you want to let a reviewer know that you are in the middle of editing an article don't hesitate to tag it with an WP:INUSE tag or alternatively use your sandbox until it is up to scratch which is the preferred option. Dom from Paris (talk) 13:29, 22 October 2018 (UTC)