User talk:Flat Out/Archives/2015/August

17:23:57, 27 July 2015 review of submission by Galileo IV
Dear Flat Out

I've followed your advice and added an independent source that describes the APSR. Could you re-review please?

Thanks

Galileo IV Galileo IV (talk) 17:23, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Galileo IV does the article meet the criteria at WP:ORG ? Flat Out (talk) 05:25, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I believe it does meet the criteria.

The Forum of International Respiratory Societies (FIRS) is an independent organization (in practice administered by staff of the European Respiratory Society) but is a separate organization and distinct from its member societies. So the FIRS is an independent source.

They have described the APSR on their website. It looks like they've copied some of the wording from the APSR in that description, which is understandable, but the entry is that of the FIRS. The APSR has no access to entering material on the FIRS website, nor does it have any authority of enter material on the FIRS website. Such entries are at the whim and decision of the FIRS (effectively, the ERS).

Best regards

Galileo — Preceding unsigned comment added by Galileo IV (talk • contribs) 01:15, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Esperança (non-profit) suggestions
Flat Out, thank you for the feedback on the article Draft:Esperança (non-profit). Could you let me know what specifically you thought read like an advertisement? I changed the wording of one section but outside of that it mirrors, in my mind, the numerous independent articles cited (from newspapers, books, etc). In addition, are the sources cited up to par? If not, what are there the issues there? I spent time reading through the golden rule and the reliable, published sources, verifiability policy and the notability sections. It seems since the article is based on wide variety of independent sources (ie multiple newspapers, peer reviewed journals, foundation websites, and other independent websites) it fits the sections mentioned. I also based the article on this entry Project C.U.R.E which seems to have less citations but more text in a similar vein to the one that I am working on. Again any suggestions would be appreciated. Rtapscott (talk) 14:33, 29 July 2015 (UTC)Rtapscott
 * Please indicate the sources that you have that are independent of Esperança, and that are written about Esperança. Flat Out (talk) 01:07, 30 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Flat Out thank you for getting back to me. The overwhelming majority of the references cited are independent. Some are informational such as the Better Business Bureau, Charity Navigator, the Internal Revenue Service, and GuideStar. All of the sources below are truly independent of the organization.

1. Drain, Paul; Huffman, Stephen A. (2008). Caring for the World: A Guidebook to Global Health Opportunities. University of Toronto Press, Scholarly Publishing Division. p. 127. ISBN 0802095488. 2. Health and development non-profit expands work to Peru". Catholic News Agency. Retrieved 28 July 2015. 3. Fortney, David L. (November 1984). "The Legacy of Doctor Luke". Readers Digest. 4. 1985 Congressional Record, Vol. 131, Page S6907 (May 23. 1985) 5. "About Flagship Cruises & Events". http://www.flagshipsd.com. Retrieved 28 July 2015. 6. Murphy, William S. (May 15, 1972). "Old San Diego Ferry to Be Hospital Ship". Los Angeles Times. 7. Harrison, Cathleen (Dec 1991). "Perioperative Nursing on the Amazon River: an experience that made a difference". AORN Journal 54 (6): 1245–1250. ISSN 0001-2092. Retrieved 27 July 2015. 8. Dolan, William V. (Jan 1984). "Elective Surgery in a Rural Primary Medical Care Program in the Central Amazon Valley". JAMA 251 (4): 498–501. doi:10.1001/jama.1984.03340280048027. Retrieved 27 July 2015. 9. "Parts of Aged Carrier Given to Hospital Ship". Los Angeles Times. October 19, 1972. 10. Ferryboat to Become Amazon Hospital". The Milwaukee Journal. May 14, 1974. 11. Esperança Foundation: Jinotega, Nicaragua". Northern California Residency Programs-Global Health Blog. 12. "Valley doctor helps the poor in Nicaragua". azcentral.com. Retrieved 23 July 2015. 13. "HIPMC: Community Initiatives and Resources". Retrieved 28 July 2015. 14. "Maricopa County Department of Public Health Named a Scale Awardee by Institute for Healthcare Improvement" (Press release). 15. Maricopa County. Public     Health Department of Maricopa County. 21 April 2015. Retrieved 2015-07-27. 16. Araiza, Christina; Valenzuela, Maria; Gance-Cleveland, Bonnie (19 Apr 2012). "Salud con Sabor Latino: a culturally sensitive obesity prevention curriculum in an underserved Latino community" 50 (2). Routledge. pp. 51–60. doi:10.1080/14635240.2012.661963. Retrieved 27 July 2015. 17. Stevens, Carol (2011). Salud con Sabor para los Niños: A Feasibility Study (Ph.D.). Arizona State University. 18. "Completed Project List". Retrieved 28 July 2015. 19. "Izumi Awards Esperança Grant to Reduce Vectoral Transmission of Chagas in the Tarijean Chaco, Bolivia". Retrieved 27 July 2015.

Sorry for the bad formatting. Rtapscott (talk) 01:19, 30 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Can you please provide links to, say 3, of the sources that you believe are independent and are written about the subject. I can't do anything with those above. Flat Out (talk) 01:21, 30 July 2015 (UTC)


 * I can scan a copy of the article in Reader's Digest. Is that what you are asking for? I do not have a link as I do not have access to the digital archive. Outside of that the rest can be found online. I followed the citing format as I read it on the Wiki page. Were there other sources that you were looking for? All of the rest can be found online. However, it would require access to online archives through a library or the like. Rtapscott (talk) 01:28, 30 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Also a quick note, the article is about Luke Tupper and his starting of the organization. The two are interconnected. The article speaks to the why and how he started the organization and I believe integral to the article. Rtapscott (talk) 01:39, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

The organisation needs to be notable in its own right, notabiltiy isn't inherited WP:NOTINHERITED. Flat Out (talk) 02:03, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Sure thing these three would fit that qualification I believe:
 * http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=391175
 * https://dx.doi.org/10.1080%2F14635240.2012.661963
 * http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/health-and-development-non-profit-expands-work-to-peru/

Rtapscott (talk) 01:44, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
 * 1 and 2 I can only read the abstract at this point and Esperança isn't mentioned in either. 3 appears to be a media release. Flat Out (talk) 02:06, 30 July 2015 (UTC)


 * That really seems like a curious issue that two journals, that are held to a much higher standard than a newspaper, cannot be considered since they cannot be accessed. Likewise the articles such as the ones published in the Los Angles Times and Milwaukee Journal, specifically speak to the early years of the organization and its founding. Also the website cited from ASU mentions the international work done in partnership and the Izumi website, also speak to the notability of the organization. I am open to suggestions but it just seems to me that the article fits the notability for non-commercial organizations.

I do have an question. How is one to cite things that cannot be accessed online? There countless books and journal articles that have either not been scanned, or simply cannot be accessed without a paid account, access to a library, or the like? Also the organization was feature in an extended documentary in both 1979 and 1985 on an Arizona television station. Additionally, there were two segments where individuals who worked for the organization where participants on the national television show To Tell the Truth. How would one go about citing that? Would the clips have to be upload to youtube in order to be cited? It seems to me that due to the international nature of the organization (noted in the newspaper articles, Izumi Foundation's website, and mention in the peer reviewed articles mentioned above) it would again fit into all of the necessary categories required. Rtapscott (talk) 04:45, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Also I would not consider the article from the Catholic Sun to be a media release. There is no relationship between the publication and the organization.
 * I didn't say that, I said that all I can see is the abstract and that the abstract doesn't mention the subject at all. Sources do not have to be online. If they are your best sources then other editors can verify them, I can't. The Catholic Sun article reads like a media release or a paid piece and I don't consider it to be a reliable source. I'm happy to let another editor do the next review. Flat Out (talk) 05:31, 30 July


 * Fair enough. Would you consider it enough if the citations where from the newspaper articles alone? I mean the four or five, outside of the Catholic Sun, that are cited? I am honestly trying to get a handle on what establishes notability. I would think it being covered by several newspapers from different states would be enough, rifht. Also do you believe the Izumi Foundation's webpage is a valid source?Rtapscott (talk)
 * Notability is explained at WP:ORG and summarised at WP:42. Flat Out (talk) 07:03, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Not sure if you will be reviewing it again. However, I included more links to articles that can be accessed without an account as that seems like an issue. Let me know what you think regardless. Thanks again for your help. Rtapscott (talk) 21:43, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Take for example reference 31, do you feel like that is a passing mention?Rtapscott (talk) 05:45, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I meant to say 32, but I believe both of them would apply. Rtapscott (talk) 05:52, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Rtapscott, I don't have access to the articles except the abstracts so I can't give an opinion. Flat Out (talk) 02:58, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

The Cash Box Kings
Hi Flat Out, I made the appropriate changes to an article that I created that you had rejected, but now I can't find where to resubmit the article! Please help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tcobrin (talk • contribs) 18:15, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Tcobrin, the article was not ready for mainspace and I have nominated it for deletion. Flat Out (talk) 23:31, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Flat Out, if you could give me specific reasons the Cash Box Kings article was nominated for deletion, as well as what I can do to fix it, please let me know. I have reviewed the article and have not only established notability but also used several independent sources unrelated to the subject. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tcobrin (talk • contribs) 14:25, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

07:35:02, 4 August 2015 review of submission by Coexdivers2015
I need help. This organization is a very notable organization in Israel and I have found several websites and journals that talk about their work. They are cited at the bottom but still the article is being rejected.. why? Thanks so much! Coexdivers2015 (talk) 07:35, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Coexdivers2015, If you have reliable sources that have written about the organisation, summarise the key points they make in your own words and then provide the source as a reference.
 * Currently you have large sections (to be honest they look like they are copied and pasted from another document) supported by 2 sources;
 * 2.1 Model for Promoting Palestinian-Jewish Partnership
 * 3 Programs
 * 3.1 Building a Culture of Peace
 * 3.2 Community in Action
 * 3.3 Partners in Shaping Reality (Gemini)
 * 4 Impact
 * 4.1 Campaigns
 * and when I look at the sources the information isn't in them. I see only one source "Promoting Change within the Constraints of Conflict: Case Study of Sadaka Reut in Israel" that support's the notability of the organisation. Flat Out (talk) 23:40, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Eliot Higgins
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Eliot Higgins. Legobot (talk) 00:00, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Request on 21:37:35, 5 August 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by MikeJ 45
It states the article is not supported by verified sources. Which sources are not verified? The majority of the sources are established newspapers and/or their websites. The others are independent publications and websites managed by universities and/or their affiliated conferences.

Thanks- MikeJ 45 (talk) 21:37, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi MikeJ 45, the issue is the way you've cited so that the references aren't compiling under . Please have a look at REFB. The other problem is that you have sentences/paragraphs that have no source. In a bio of a living person, every statement needs a source. I'm happy to help if you need a hand. Flat Out (talk) 01:12, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

TAFI List of articles purge, part II



 * Hello Flat Out:


 * A discussion is occurring at the TAFI talk page regarding the removal of entries from the project's List of articles page. Your input is welcome at the discussion.

Sent by Northamerica1000 using mass messaging on 17:23, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Inline Citations for Draft:ACTS Retreat
I'm not really sure what you mean when you say add an inline citation. Can you give me some guidance with this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rjccourt (talk • contribs) 20:16, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi Rjccourt, looks like you figured it out! Let me know if I can be of help, Flat Out (talk) 01:49, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Rod Steiger
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Rod Steiger. Legobot (talk) 00:01, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
 * RfC is closed Flat Out (talk) 02:01, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

Request on 15:21:44, 10 August 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Ksmith2003
Could you help me be a little more clear about what the issues are with my page (SmartDeploy Enterprise)? I'm getting rather frustrated as I have sited numerous articles and keeping getting declined. Looking at competitive products like Ghost software, 90% of the references go back to the manufacturers website. I had 2 referencing the manufacturer. I've read all the links about reliable sources, referencing, etc. I don't think I'm violating anything or doing anything wrong. So more information would be greatly appreciated! Thank you Ksmith2003 (talk) 15:21, 10 August 2015 (UTC) Ksmith2003 (talk) 15:21, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi Ksmith2003, the sources you are using are product announcements and non-notable reviews on blogs with no editorial oversight. Please read our resource on reliable sources Flat Out (talk) 01:19, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Review of submission by smon881
Hello - I saw that you declined my draft for Perr&Knight. I have verifiable sources and removed information that I couldn’t cite. I am uncertain what other edits to make, is there any way you could provide more details about which area of the article does not reach the notability requirement? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smon881 (talk • contribs) 16:36, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Smon881, the criteria for notable companies are here but to make things simple the subject requires significant coverage in sources that are independent of it. Of the 6 sources you have cited, at least 4 are press releases/company announcements. For example, see this one where it clearly states Source: Perr&Knight at the bottom of the piece. Press releases are not reliable sources. Flat Out (talk) 01:26, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Kaiho Sangyo Submission declined on 8 August 2015
Dear Flat Out, Thank you very much for your prompt review, I really appreciate it! (first submission took around 6 weeks and this time just 2 days). Unfortunately (for me) you declined my page since "the submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia". I am a little bit dispirited after my article has been rejected by second time. I am doing my best to use a neutral point of view but it seems I am not doing it properly. English is not my mother tongue and probably I cannot catch this point. Referring to the article s sources, I included from Oxford University Press,　Nikkei Business Press or from the BSI Group. Despite I am using large sources from the own company (or related with), I am also using neutral sources. Please, could you kindly give me some hints to improve the article? I would really appreciate it. Thank you in advance! Kind regards Alejandro R Moreno (talk) 03:06, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi Alejandro R Moreno, I have made a comment on the Draft. Best wishes Flat Out (talk) 01:14, 11 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Flat Out, Thank you very much for your prompt answer. I understand the reason for declining the article. I will try to correct it and I will try again to resubmit it again. It is difficult to write from a neutral point of view if you are really enthusiastic about what you are writing. Thank you again for your help. Best regards, Alejandro R Moreno (talk) 02:25, 11 August 2015 (UTC)


 * DearFlat Out,I resubmitted again the article. I included large sources and eliminate/change those Claims that may be challenged. Hopefully this time I wrote it correctly! Thank you very much for your advice and time! Best regards,Alejandro R Moreno (talk) 07:03, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Inanna Publications and Education Inc.
Dear Flat Out, Thanks for your rejection and suggestion. I tried to reply to you on my talk page, but reached your talk page. Following your suggestion, I did some research on the Internet and added two more citations. I'm wondering if you could take a look and offer me further suggestion. Thanks so much for your time! 1001Bookworm (talk) 00:37, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
 * 1001Bookworm I'm going to leave this for another reviewer who has experience with publishing companies. As it stands there isn't much written about the company itself and notability can't be inherited. I'll watch on with interest. Flat Out (talk) 01:59, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

13:26:00, 12 August 2015 review of submission by 1001Bookworm
Dear Flat Out,

I've added more reliable citations and also updated a log for Inanna Publications to replace the former one. Could you please take a look if you have any suggestion to help me to improve before I re-submit?

Thanks so much for you time!

1001Bookworm (talk) 13:26, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

About Rosalba De Carlo page
Dear Flat Out, I'm writing in regards to the speedy deletion of the Rosalba De Carlo page on August 5, 2015. Excuse my error during the publication, but please let me explain, because in your box I red: "If you created the article, please don't be offended" and so on. Believe me, it was not my intention to be offensive. At the beginning, I created the page with just only three lines, without references, but the article was not finished! I was sure that the prod blp tag referred to this incomplete version of my page and that publication of the remaining part could have solved any problem because it is full of demonstrated references that are available online. (In fact, in the box it was written: "Once the article has at least one reliable source, you may remove this tag"). So I did just that. Indeed, please consider that I didn't use any names of restaurants or any other commercial activities, only cultural events and their references, with their scientific contexts, such as a university website, a philosophy festival with its online space, a virtual museum, and other notes about Mrs. De Carlo's activities. So, is there a way that you can reconsider the republication of my page? I assure you that the contents are true and that I will work on it to improve it according to your guidelines. I ask that you restore my page.

Kind regards Kabooto40 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kabooto40 (talk • contribs) 07:43, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Kabooto40 i marked the article with blp prod because it was unsourced, I didn't have anything to do with it being deleted. Flat Out (talk) 05:47, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Cyrano de Bergerac
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Cyrano de Bergerac. Legobot (talk) 00:01, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Rubin Carter
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Rubin Carter. Legobot (talk) 00:00, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

06:45:01, 19 August 2015 review of submission by 118.208.35.229
Hi there, sorry to bother you and thanks for your review to date, can I please ask, if I add all of the articles found here: www.ddpproperty.com.au/media.html would that help this article get approved? The subject has many stories written about him so I thought he would be noteworthy... I am trying to learn how to become a Wikipedia contributor and thought that this person would make a good first edition but obviously I need a little help working it all out. sorry to be a pain, thanks for your response. 118.208.35.229 (talk) 06:45, 19 August 2015 (UTC)118.208.35.229 (talk) 06:45, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid that there isn't enough written about the subject in sources that are independent of him. Flat Out (talk) 06:57, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Paul Signac
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Paul Signac. Legobot (talk) 00:00, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Shooting of Samuel DuBose
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Shooting of Samuel DuBose. Legobot (talk) 00:00, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Request on 13:15:21, 22 August 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by JRCALHOUN
Hi Flat Out, I just got a message about my article on Jim McWilliams. Your comment said I need to improve verifiability of my sources, but I don't know how I can do that. All of them are reliable sources according to Wikipedia guidelines -- newspapers, books, journals -- but not too many of them can be checked online because they are out of print, not digitized, not searchable, etc. I can provide scans of all the articles and book pages I cite. Would that help? How can authors get around the problem of having good sources that can't be checked by reviewers? It is unfortunate that some articles might be rejected for this reason. If reviewers could see my sources, the other issue I have had -- my subject's notability -- would probably be resolved. Thanks. JRCALHOUN (talk) 13:15, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

JRCALHOUN (talk) 13:15, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
 * JRCALHOUN, the issue is that the sources you have provided do not support the notability of the subject - not that they can't be verified. Flat Out (talk) 02:23, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Carly Fiorina
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Carly Fiorina. Legobot (talk) 00:00, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

05:42:13, 25 August 2015 review of submission by TedF13
Hello and thank you for taking the time to review my submission. I am at a loss as to its decline. The radio show has been recognized by a notable source: Oxygen.com. Additionally, it is broadcast on a radio station, WFMU which has met the notability requirements for its own Wikipedia article. The radio station (WFMU), considers the show important enough to have aired it continuously for the last 7 years. Previously, I was told, by another reviewer, that the show was local in scope, but as I pointed out, the radio station also broadcasts live over the internet and Shut Up Weirdo is enjoyed throughout the world. Can you please give me some more information as to how it does not meet the notability requirements or your thoughts on why you declined it. Thanks again. TedF13 (talk) 05:42, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
 * TedF13, it's a local show that has received the absolute minimum of attention in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. See WP:RPRGM. Flat Out (talk) 04:49, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
 * But isn't Radio, as a broadcast medium local in scope by nature? Sure some programs become syndicated, and are rebroadcast on multiple stations, but that does not apply to the vast majority of programming.  How is it different from Seven Second Delay a similar show on the same station, which has a wikipedia article?TedF13 (talk) 15:04, 26 August 2015 (UTC)