User talk:Joseph2302/Archives/2016/April

DYK for Gehan Mendis
The DYK project (nominate) 12:02, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

19:32:00, 27 March 2016 review of submission by Toreeva
Hello, thanks for the Easter "gift" I got from you today. I don't understand why you rejected my input and use the same words as the prev. review person - exact words. From the prev. notes I did added many References, which in my opinion should satisfy you. But now, what is wrong now? I checked for the example another Russian artist, A. Belkin, who has only the couple of sentences, and his References section has 3 or 4 References which I could not even open, but still his input "pass" your acceptance. I don't even try to compare the artists, just checking the correct built structure of the input you could accept. My main point of making my input is our artists asked me to make my input into our Unofficial Russian art, which is unknown from outside of Russia. And because of my input into the sections of the Petersburg groups, included "School of Sidlin", "Sterligov group", "Arefief", and "Others", people asked me to make my input into "Natalia Toreeva", so people know that it is the reliable person, who has the good knowledge, and not just knowledge, but because she was a part of the art movement of 1970s. So I added there the "School of Sidlin". "Sterligov, "Arefief", and other sections there. My main point is about the "School of Sidlin", where Natalia Toreeva was the member of the group. Now only 4 students left alive, and only one person is alive in the "Ariefiev" group. I knew them all, but the time is ticking.. And because the "School of Sidlin" is very important from the art history point of view, since the teacher (O. Sidlin) was the student himself of the K. Malevich, etc. And this is the part of history now. And since I knew another artists and their importance, I wrote about them too. Those info is very important, since for example, our "School of Sidlin" included in the St. Petersburg Encyclopedia, where all students of this group are included there. Is it not notable to be included in the St. Petersburg encyclopedia? (A.Belkin, or Alek Rapoport were not part of any group movement, but still they are included in your wiki encycl.). Also, I included in my input that many of Natalia Toreeva's works were accepted by the different museums to their permanent collection. Is it not notable from your point of view? What is more important for the artist than to be accepted in the museums? And for the Spertus museum, for example, the famous American art collector (Norton Dodge), who had the best knowledge of the Russian art, was invited by the museum, to help them in the selection process. He gave me his published book with his note, that it is too late to include Natalia into his book. I also divided the input into 2 parts, since Natalia Toreeva was living in Russia, and than moved to USA, so, it is 2 parts of the life of real person. Also, Natalia Toreeva was accepted being in USA, as the member of the Artist Union of Russia (very important) and the member of the Writers Group in Illinois, USA. And for the artist it's important, as Natalia Toreeva was included in the Best 10,000 artists in the world by the Russian Art Union. Is it not notable again? Yes, I'm not compare Natalia Toreeva with Picasso, but she has her own role in the history, and as well as the part of the "School of Sidlin" art movement. If you can make the editing, and delete whatever you feel is extra written for this effort, them please help to do it. Why my input is accepted in the Unofficial art in Russia, but rejected here? I disagree with your opinion about the rejection of my input, because it would be loss not only for Natalia Toreeva name, but for the history of Russian art as well. Toreeva (talk) 19:41, 27 March 2016 (UTC)


 * First of all, writing autobiographies or writing with a conflict of interest is strongly discouraged.
 * Also, although I did use the same template to reject, I also gave comments. There is no evidence they meet any of the criteria for notability of creative professionals:


 * 1) The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors.
 * 2) The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory, or technique.
 * 3) The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must #have been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews.
 * 4) The person's work (or works) either (a) has become a significant monument, (b) has been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) has won significant critical attention, or (d) is represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums.


 * And lots of the sources presented aren't reliable. Joseph2302 (talk) 21:18, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Hello Joseph, I don't know how to convince you, since I don't think you see in my input what you mentioned in your response. You mentioned museums, exhibitions, books, etc. I have included the exhibitions Natalia Toreeva participated. I have the museums section, where her art works were accepted into their permanent collections, and I named those museums. And in the Publication section, I included the books where her work was published. For example, she created 3 children's books (wrote the manuscripts and illustrated), that were taking in the International Books Fair, and also accepted by the museum into their perm. collection. In other published books she participated with her design and illustrations. You also mentioned works on the films. She worked on the "Lenfilm" film studio (her filmography also included), and the film where she worked as an artist, was on the International film festival in USA. Don't you think your request for needed input is there? And 23 References I think are the good input for the verification of the info. Again, when I compare the pages of other artists, I don't understand why you declined my submission? I am not trying to crit. their work, I am happy for them, I just trying to logically look why their inputs were accepted. For example, A. Belkin, has only 6 lines of the text, and 9 references, where 4 does not open at all. Artist, Afrika, has only 15 lines of text, and 5 references. Igor Polyakov page has only 4 lines of text and not Ref. at all. So, is it possible, if my text is too long? Then please, if possible, can you edit/suggest where to clean up the text. I would appreciate for your help. Thanks!Toreeva (talk) 12:46, 28 March 2016 (UTC)


 * WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, just because some other crap exists on Wikipedia doesn't mean we should be accepting more. It's not about other articles, rather showing that yours passes Wikipedia's notability guidelines, which I don't believe it does.
 * Also, are you the subject of the article?if you are, you're strongly discouraged from creating an autobiography, and if you're not, then your username misleading, and should be changed at WP:CHU. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:15, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Hello Joseph, Thanks for your reply. I don't want to write the Bio since my main goal is to write about the art groups of 1970s, I was part of, and I knew almost all artist of that time, and specifically about the "School of Sidlin", which is the part of the art history now. I started to write about the St. Petersburg art groups in another article, very objectively, and without the problem, but I have the problem with this article. I am planning to write the separate articles about other artists, but don't understand and did not expect to receive these kind of rejections on this article. I will try to improve this article though hoping on your help on suggestions/editing or other reviewers as well. My addition question, besides how I can improve this article, should I include that Natalia Toreeva had her 5 patents when she worked as the computer scientist, or is it outside of the description part her as an artist? Thank you.Toreeva (talk) 17:19, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
 * If the fact she had 5 patents is reliably sourced, then it can be added.
 * Also, I've asked at the Teahouse if other experienced editors can look at the article, and give additional guidance. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:37, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply, Joseph! The patents are real, and I will add it to the text, but I can't discuss about it in deep since they are the patents. Also, I have the newspapers where the articles about Natalia Toreeva's art discussed, and also another newspapers and journal, where her drawings are included by the poet in his poems, and they are printed in the newspapers, New Your. They are also real newspapers, but they are from 1990s, so how I can include them to the article? I can include the printed books, but the newspapers? Should I make a copy and send you, or how I can prove that the sources are real, but I can't show it? I can include the name of newspapers/journal and the date of publishing and the issues number, but is it enough? Also, in the filmography, I mentioned about the film, where Natalia Toreeva was working. The director, Alexei German, was the number 1 in filmography of that time, and the scenarist was the number one writer in USSR (K. Simonov). The film was in USA for the show. Is it the things you want to be included in the article to prove notability, then I can include K. Simonov's name? The films are easy to verify, because the name in the titles, but the newspapers? I remember I was invited to the Teahouse when I started make my inputs, but I was so busy. So, if someone from your Teahouse can help with the editing, or deleting the extra text/info, or help with the structure itself, it will be appreciated. Any suggestions? Thank you!Toreeva (talk) 21:23, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

19:31:25, 5 April 2016 review of submission by Andy at InfraUSA
Hi, thanks for the review! Disappointed to hear my article was rejected again, but I will soldier on! I am confused about a few things with my rejection, maybe you can help?

First, notability. I see there are many articles on Wikipedia with questionable notability and few references (retired mobile apps, 80s garage bands, my own father has a page for his appearance on a cancelled TV show!). This makes it difficult for me to gauge what is considered notable and what is not. I just find it hard to believe that Steven C.F. Anderson who has won awards for his work with UNICEF and Globalvision should be considered less notable than these other articles. It feels unfair.

Second, bias. I have been very open about my involvement with InfrastructureUSA. Does my involvement with the organization make this article unpublishable regardless of content?

I apologize if this came across as terse or frustrated, I just have great respect for this man and the work he has done around the world for human rights. Any guidance would be much appreciated. -Andy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andy at InfraUSA (talk • contribs)


 * Hi The main thing we're looking for is independent reliable sources that cover them in depth.
 * Looking at your submission:


 * 1) No mention of him at all: ,,, , , , , ,
 * 2) Written by a company/organisation that he works/volunteers for (and so not independent): ,
 * 3) Couldn't access:  (blocked as "dangerous" by my firewall)
 * 4) Not a reliable source:, , , ,  (videos aren't reliable sources, and neither is IMDb)
 * 5) Passing mention:, ,
 * 6) Decent, independent sources:, , ,


 * So that leaves just 4 decent sources about him, which I don't believe shows significant coverage, as required by WP:GNG. If his work is covered in other sources e.g. books/newspapers/independent websites, then they should be added.
 * To address your other questions:


 * 1) Just because other stuff exists on Wikipedia, that doesn't mean anything should. Things that no longer exist may still be notable if they generated coverage when they did exist.
 * 2) Wikipedia shouldn't be biased against you as a conflict of interest editor, as Wikipedia policy states that editors with COI are allowed to edit. In fact, making your affiliation obvious and also using the articles for creation process is exactly the recommended steps for COI editors on Wikipedia. Joseph2302 (talk) 20:59, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for the quick and detailed reply! I will do my best to fix these issues. -Andy

Thank you so much!!!
Thank you for your help!

I will do what you suggested and look into removing some of the links (was sent a note that I needed to do that) once I disclose, will this remove the flag on the page that says there is a close connection to the subject? I have actually never met the subject in person, but is friend of a friend who needed help with this. They have PLENTY of incredible writer friends, but wanted an unbiased point of view, as ironic as that sounds, at this point! Anyway, I absolutely want to be as honest, neutral and integral as possible and not cause any problems for the subject. This was my first article, and I'm afraid I'm a bit confused.

Thank you, thank you!

MelissBelle (talk) 20:39, 5 April 2016 (UTC)


 * No problem. Right now however you need to find more reliable sources to show why she's notable enough for a Wikipedia article. Joseph2302 (talk) 18:56, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Your Edit to Draft:National Register of Public Service Interpreters
Dear Joseph,

(1) Did you review the previous comments of 15th March before making your very dramatic edit?

(2) If the above editing is accepted, is the article now suitable for publication, having responded at length to all the previous comments?

Stephen

SHBishop (talk) 06:48, 7 April 2016 (UTC)SHBishop


 * I don't see where you've "responded at length to all the previous comments"- the only comments I can see on Draft talk:National Register of Public Service Interpreters are about removing copyvios from.
 * Also my "dramatic edit" was actually removing a long quote, which I believe violated WP:COPYQUOTE. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:03, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Sierra Academy of Aeronautics
You tagged Sierra Academy of Aeronautics for proposed deletion. I have found a number of sources and added them to the article. I think this is now out of the PROD zone, although an AfD might still choose to delete it. I strongly suspect that there are more sources out there -- all of mine were taken from the first few pages of a single basic Google search. This is just FYI. DES (talk) 13:20, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
 * That's fine, thank you for notifying me. I'm not going to nominate it for AfD. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:03, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

About my editing as a paid editor for Free port of Ventspils
Hello Joseph, I received the concern about me being a paid editor. I am not, I am doing an internship which I am not being paid for, it's for the learning purposes to raise my skills in business management. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ventspils brīvostas pārvalde (talk • contribs) 06:10, 6 April 2016‎
 * Ah! So you're a self-confessed "unpaid editor for Free port of Ventspils"??? I think you should probably read our conflict of interest policy first. It's very informative. Indeed, doesn't Joseph2302 mention it in big letters at the top of this page...? Cheers, Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi  10:16, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Agreed, even if you're not paid, you still have a conflict of interest. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:50, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
 * According to Paid-contribution disclosure,, interns are considered the same as employees and so count as "paid" editors. The reason is that interns usually receive an ultimate benefit from there services, even if they do not get a salary, and interns are subject to much the same sorts of pressures as employees. DES (talk) 13:29, 7 April 2016 (UTC) DES (talk) 13:29, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Ahh I get it. They asked me to do this considering I'd be the neutral person, because no one else is likely to update the article otherwise. Well what do you recommend? I realize the article should be only informative and I'm doing my best not to inflict a conflict of interest. Ventspils brīvostas pārvalde (talk) 07:32, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Well first of all, you are required to disclose who is paying you to edit the article- this is a requirement of Wikimedia's Terms of Use & paid editing disclosures.
 * After that, it's better if you don't directly edit the article, but suggest changes at Talk:Free port of Ventspils instead]]. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:52, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Hello regarding Strainz page
What other sources are you looking for. Press releases?

There are many cannabis companies you have already listed that have not even raised funding.

I would like to work with you to provide the content needed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by R500Mom (talk • contribs) 21:48, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

April 2016
Greetings. At least one of your recent edits, such as the edit you made to Wikipedia:Help desk, did not appear to be constructive and has been or will be reverted or removed. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make some test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Stop trying to correct things that aren't wrong, the L1 header was in the correct place. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:19, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

Omega Crosby (rapper)
Can you please be more specific on what is needed on the Wikipedia page for "Omega Crosby. He is in the google knowledge graph and my team has been trying to get this article approved for this artist and the label going on a year now. It's pushing back our schedule. I've seen multiple articles on artist and youtubers who are involved in music and have not charted (Big Fase 100, Pryde, J. Stalin, etc.). He has been nominated for awards in his community as well as receiving over a million views on his YouTube videos and plays through soundcloud and music streaming services. Please be more specific on what is needed, becauseat this point it is getting difficult, tedious and frustrating for our consultants to complete this task and have it marked as approved for the label. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikaveli777 (talk • contribs)


 * Just because Google has created a knowledge graph for him doesn't mean that he needs to have a Wikipedia article. There's no evidence that he passes WP:NMUSICIAN or WP:GNG.
 * Also, the above comment suggests you are engaging in paid editing, which must be disclosed per Wikipedia's Terms of Use. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:52, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

We do not get paid for doing this. We are informed about trending subjects and public figures and we try to help make it easier for fans to know information by doing our research and connecting with google support team.

Sorry for any comments that may have offended you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikaveli777 (talk • contribs)


 * None of your comments have offended me. However, if you work for him and are editing this Wikipedia page as part of your work, then under Wikipedia's definition, you are a paid editor, meaning you must disclose your employers/client. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:21, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

Kundu equation
I have moved it, but I leave you to do the cleaning up. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 20:59, 8 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Cleaned up by me and some other people. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:21, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

Improvements to article of Michel Daigle
Hi Joseph2302,

Thank you for approving the article about Michel Daigle

I'd like to know what I can do to get the article to a class B or A. Specifically, which sections require additional citations for verification?

Thank you,

Gaelmeagher (talk) 02:52, 10 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Hi The sections "Freestyle skiing career", "Selected freestyle skiing results", and "Post-skiing career" and the last 2.5 paragraphs of "The Michel Daigle Ski Camp" section all have 0 citations, so I would focus on finding sources to support everything in those sections. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:37, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 10
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Light gap, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Environment. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:59, 10 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Although technically not my fault, as I was merging an article and a draft at the time. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:01, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

April 2016
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. In the future, please use the preview button before you save your edit; this helps you find any errors you have made, reduces edit conflicts, and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. Below the edit box is a Show preview button. Pressing this will show you what the article will look like without actually saving it.

It is strongly recommended that you use this before saving. If you have any questions, contact the help desk for assistance. Use the preview button to stop your constant formatting issues on pages. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:12, 10 April 2016 (UTC)


 * And again- twice in the last half an hour! Use the preview button! Joseph2302 (talk) 11:00, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

Geological Society of Sri Lanka: Submission of revision
Hi Joseph,

Thank you for lettting me know the review comment on my submitted article on the Geological Society of Sri Lanka. The concern was reference. I am the current co-editor of the Society. My details are:

The Executive Committee of the society decided to submit a page about the society on the Wikipedia (exactly like the GSA- Geological Society of America, they are having a page). So I was given the authority and I did the task. You can see the EC members by visiting our web page http://www.gsslweb.org/32nd-executive-commitee/ and you may verify any details by contacting them.

I have edited the page and revised improving the references for your kind consideration.

Thank you,

Sanjeewa Malaviarachchi - Co editor of the Geological Society of Sri Lanka.

(Geosrilanka) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Geosrilanka (talk • contribs) 08:02, 10 April 2016 (UTC)


 * I suggest you read Wikipedia's conflict of interest and paid editing policies, due to your affiliation with the organisation.
 * Also, the draft needs to be neutral tone, rather than promotional, and supported by independent, reliable sources to show that the organisation is notable enough for Wikipedia.
 * Also, just because other stuff exists, that doesn't mean this should. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:03, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

Ask for a favor
Hi Joseph2302,

Thanks for solving my puzzle. There is another tag on another page I've written, Amanda K. Hale. With the suggestions and help from GoingBatty, I changed and added some references. Could you take a look and remove the tag if the problems have been solved based on the comments below?

Your time and attention are greatly appreciated!

"This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. This biographical article needs additional citations for verification. (March 2016) This biographical article relies too much on references to primary sources. (March 2016)"

00:45, 10 April 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1001Bookworm (talk • contribs)


 * Unless I'm missing something, I only noticed 2 primary sources, and everything now seems to be sourced. So I believe those tags can be removed, and have removed them accordingly. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:33, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi Joseph2302,

Thanks for your prompt response. If I understand correctly. I can get rid of the 2 primary sounces.

1001Bookworm (talk) 11:29, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Graham Charlesworth
Hello! Your submission of Graham Charlesworth at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 14:58, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

User:Longfamily417 Comment
I have removed your G11 because the user page doesn't actually advertise, and because it is inappropriate for user pages. You should report him to administrator board to have him blocked instead. WannaBeEditor (talk) 23:37, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I have reported the editor at WP:ANI. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:28, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Justin Matthew
Please see WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Matthew7878 as you were previously involved in dealing with the COI. Thanks. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 05:02, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Graham Charlesworth
Gatoclass (talk) 00:02, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

J.Schaul
Dear Joseph2302, My apologies. I just clicked on the link above and it does say that the result was delete. I misunderstood and I apologize. I completely misread the top part. Sorry for the oversightJpop73 (talk) 07:15, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
 * No problem, I only noted it since it affects the discussion somewhat. Joseph2302 (talk) 07:55, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

OK, thanks! I hope my comments in the discussion are not too lengthy. I'm just hoping to provide as much background information as I can, which may not otherwise be accessible or considered. regardsJpop73 (talk) 09:36, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Revision to Marketplace (Radio Program) entry
Hello, Back in December you rejected proposed edits to the Marketplace (Radio Program) Wikipedia page. Marketplace_(radio_program)

I made my status as an employee known, and provided updated information for various sections, factual in nature. Based on your stated concern, I re-submitted my proposed edits along with source links very shortly thereafter (still in December 2015). The revised edits are viewable as the final set of revisions on the Talk page for Marketplace Radio Program. Can our page be updated soon with this new, correct information? The changes I made seek to clean up outdated content--such as former program names, former hosts etc.

Also, unrelated to this particular set of submissions, our host (Kai Ryssdal) has his own Wikipedia page. We are wondering what the best approved method is for requesting to change his photo on his Wikipedia page. If you have any suggestions for how we might do that, it would be much appreciated.

Thank you in advance for your help. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:58, 13 April 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmhatfield (talk • contribs) 23:27, 12 April 2016 (UTC)


 * First of all, it isn't your page, you don't own it- it's an article about your company on Wikipedia, the encyclopedia that anyone can edit.
 * I'll have a look when I have time- not that Wikipedia has no deadlines, even if your company does.
 * As for Kai Ryssdal's photo, you would need to freely licence an image of him- see WP:Donating copyrighted material, bearing in mind that the copyright of any photo belongs to the photographer, and so they would have to be the one licencing it. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:58, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
 * All the sources suggested are primary sources not independent reliable sources. Joseph2302 (talk) 19:34, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

04:36:18, 16 April 2016 review of submission by 2001:569:78B8:B500:8D31:20E0:D503:DBCD
I am not sure what you mean by "The mention of any notable people with Wikipedia articles and the surname Sangar should be added to that page instead." As the other Wikipedia articles about 'Sangar' are to do with places and the military term -- which has nothing at all to do with the surname. When you say to add the surname to that page, I would be adding a completely different topic to a page that is about something else. There is a large variety of articles on Wikipedia about surnames and I am still unsure as to why this popular surname cannot have its own article. 2001:569:78B8:B500:8D31:20E0:D503:DBCD (talk) 04:36, 16 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Find all the people with Wikipedia articles that have that name. If there aren't any, then we don't need a page about the surname, and if there are lots, then maybe a separate page is warranted.
 * Also, the current Sangar page is a disambiguation page, which means any relevant links to other Wikipedia pages can be added, even about different topics. Joseph2302 (talk) 06:34, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

19:38:22, 18 April 2016 review of submission by Chris.Bristol
McClenon said (to paraphrase) "expand the page to include an introduction and some references", so I did so. the Joseph2302 said "this should not be a separate page, add it to the main one", which means the introduction and references I have added at the suggestion of the McClenon would be redundant, since the main page already has them.

I'm quite confused, and feel like I have wasted my time, so I am becoming reluctant to commit any more effort to this. I can't see how I can take both of your comments into account, so should I just assume that the latest comment is the correct one?

DYK nomination of Philip Salt
Hello! Your submission of Philip Salt at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 23:00, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Central Recreation Ground
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Central Recreation Ground you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 22:41, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Philip Salt
WormTT(talk) 09:02, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Central Recreation Ground
The article Central Recreation Ground you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Central Recreation Ground for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 14:41, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Help needed
Hello Joseph2302! Why you deleted me from your Talk? You told me that you moved my Draft:Natalia Toreeva to Teehouse for their review and opinion, but I got again declined from another person with no knowledge in the Art in Russia, with the same words by words comments. If you moved me to Teehouse should they do the revision of my article? One of your Teehouse person told that the artist is automatically has notability since her arts in museum and published, and even after that I added some drawings and more info into the article, but since the person has no knowledge in Russian art, the article is declined again. I don't know what else I can do, so please help. Thanks.Toreeva (talk) 17:37, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I didn't delete it from my talk, it got archived, because there was no conversation in 7 days- if I left every conversation I had, then my talkpage would become unbearably long. The response from the Teahouse can be found here- they think that you might be notable, but the article's referencing isn't good enough at the moment.
 * Also, please assume good faith, just because someone didn't accept your draft doesn't mean they don't know what they're doing. Joseph2302 (talk) 21:53, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

I did not write into your talk, since you said you moved the Draft to Teehouse people for evaluation, so I was waiting the answer from them. And suddenly I got the decline today, and speedy deletion from you just now. If those from the Teehouse suggested that it could be notable article, that just need the improvement, so how come you put it into speedy deletion? I don't understand it. What I should do now? I disagree with your action.Toreeva (talk) 01:19, 17 April 2016 (UTC) Hello Joseph2302, I don't understand why you deleted the article? It said ask the person who deleted (you) about why you deleted and please restore it. Hope you understand that you are doing wrong things instead of helping to improve the article.Toreeva (talk) 04:19, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I didn't delete it, did, and he's posted a message with the reasons why on your talkpage. Joseph2302 (talk) 06:39, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi Joseph2302
Subject: Kundu equation  (Contribution submitted

I have left a message-response for you  on April 12 in my talk-page regarding the above contribution on which you have made recently an important comment.Hope to get your valuable advice on this important academic/scientific issue. Please respond in my talk page.

Thanking you, Anjan.kundu (talk) 06:44, 18 April 2016 (UTC) Anjan.kundu, April 18, 2016

New Page for Elizabeth Littlefield
Hi Joseph2302,

Thank you for reviewing the new bio page for Elizabeth Littlefield, President and CEO of the Overseas Private Investment Corporation.

Could I obtain your guidance in addressing the remaining shortfalls? I currently have included 15 footnote citations -- including the New York Times as well as independent and well-respected think tanks -- but the message says that additional citations are needed. Are more footnotes needed? Or a different type? Or both more and different?

Also, the page is cited as an orphan. Need the links from related articles all reference Ms. Littlefield's name herself? Or may they reference her organization?

Thank you in advance for your help, and retrospectively for your contributions to Wikipedia. Very much appreciated.

Best regards,

JSOKeefe (talk) 16:50, 20 April 2016 (UTC)JSOKeefe


 * The "Career" section is mostly unreferenced, and the Other Activities section is unreferenced. Everything should be supported by a reliable source. Joseph2302 (talk) 20:46, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Derick Adamson
WormTT(talk) 09:31, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Central Recreation Ground
The article Central Recreation Ground you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Central Recreation Ground for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 19:41, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you . Joseph2302 (talk) 17:08, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Harmony Gold Mine Cricket Club A Ground
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:47, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Help
I wish I offer my first article, but unfortunately I do not just post it. I have wanted someone to help me post it. They said my account to create a little but I do not, my account before I was little I not recovered. Currently BhuBhu call me.

I also made the French version of this article is the competitions that go with it.

Bhutan girl's national football team U-14 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:E34:EE0E:ABD0:B854:9C74:3C1F:E26D (talk • contribs)


 * Hi As mentioned to you previously on your talkpage, do not copy whole articles/article drafts onto talkpages, it presents many issues including copyright issues. If you want to create an article, then use Wikipedia's articles for creation process, as this is the only way for unregistered users to create articles.
 * Not convinced that a U-14 football team are notable enough to pass WP:NFOOTY or WP:GNG though. Joseph2302 (talk) 21:33, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Polin Belisle
WormTT(talk) 22:57, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Talkback
ww2censor (talk) 09:48, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Elspeth Beard
WormTT(<b style="color:#060;">talk</b>) 21:22, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

14:28:19, 26 April 2016 review of submission by Lauramcintosh2905
Hi, I am writing in response to your review of the Bannatyne's article I submitted. I was wondering if you could give me any tips on how to improve to get this article accepted? An issue I have had is that most news articles about Bannatyne fitness are very focussed in on Duncan Bannatyne as he is a celebrity that gives them more readers, this means that I am struggling to get news articles that are purely about the health clubs. Any tips on improving would be greatly appreciated. Thank you, Lauramcintosh2905 (talk) 14:28, 26 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Notability is not inherited, so just because Bannatyne owns it, it doesn't make it notable enough for Wikipedia.
 * All the sources seem to be about him, with only passing mentions of the fitness club- we require evidence of significant, independent coverage of the club itself in reliable sources. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:53, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Bannatyne's question
<div class="boilerplate" style="background-color: #EDEAFF; padding: 0px 10px 0px 10px; border: 1px solid #8779DD;">
 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hi,

I am writing in response to your review of the Bannatyne's article I submitted. I was wondering if you could give me any tips on how to improve to get this article accepted? An issue I have had is that most news articles about Bannatyne fitness are very focussed in on Duncan Bannatyne as he is a celebrity that gives them more readers, this means that I am struggling to get news articles that are purely about the health clubs. Any tips on improving would be greatly appreciated. Thank you, Laura Lauramcintosh2905 (talk) 15:42, 22 April 2016 (UTC)


 * The discussion above is closed. <b style="color: #FF0000;">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Henley & Partners Visa Restrictions Index
Hi Joseph

Thanks for informing me about disclosing that I work for Henley & Partners - I have now done so on my user page. Please let me know if I now need to resubmit my draft page again, or next steps?

Best, Mara

Mara.ispas (talk) 07:38, 26 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Hi Thank you for adding a paid editing disclosure to your userpage- I've also added a note on the article's talkpage.
 * As for the article itself, there's 5 definitely good sources, 2 books that if I could access would probably be classed as reliable, and looks like there's more sources online about it. So I'm personally convinced it passes Wikipedia's notability guidelines, and I'm happy to move it to article space. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:08, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi Thank you!

41.193.64.243 (talk) 08:31, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Neisha Pratt
Hello! Your submission of Neisha Pratt at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 21:36, 30 April 2016 (UTC)