User talk:Sulfurboy/Archive 17

Allan Flanders Question
Hi there! I am looking to work on getting the Allan Flanders draft (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Allan_Flanders) published as a source. I was wondering if you see any big specifics to be addressed or if the comments refer to the entire article. There were some words to be changed in the intro although I can't seem to find any other blatant puffery in the rest of the article. The article includes quite a lot of varied, academic research and overall is neutral in its coverage of the topic. Would love to hear some more points to get working on them! Thanks!

Aceithistorian (talk) 07:46, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Request on 08:54:38, 13 March 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Nyamwij
I want to request for fresh review on my aricle on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Tayo_Oladiran_Arulogun, I have made the necessary changes in the citations as requested. Nyamwij (talk) 08:54, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Article warification
Dear Sulfurbay, can you check please my edits what I did, for this article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Anastasia_Kochetkova and tell me please if everything is correct.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bokhan.evgeniy (talk • contribs) 12:06, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

added additional works or notoriety and external links of works
Thank you sulfurboy for your suggestions. I have added more resources per your suggestion for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Dan_Shafer. Please have a look when you have a moment, I appreciate you!Jingleman2 (talk) 16:28, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Victoria Romanoff
HI Sulfurboy, Today is 3/13/20. Thank you for your message. I am new at this and did not realize I had already submitted my article yesterday. I did make a few edits this morning - will you see the latest version? Thank you, MarinaDelaney (talk) 18:00, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you
Hi Sulfurboy, I read you were busy as a result of COVID19. Wishing you all the best! On a different note: I have update the page Startup Fest Europe, giving it more relevance as you pointed out. After all the event was the biggest thing to happen to the Dutch startup eco-system.

Thanks. W

Willamine (talk) 11:17, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Studio N (Naver)
I gave this one a major makeover, so it could pass as a stub. Should it be left like that or be merged into the Naver (corporation) article? It could potentially grow with more adaptations. 3 of the drama shows are already their own articles. The editor has copied it over to Naver article in the meantime, so it could survive as a section too. AngusWOOF ( bark  •  sniff ) 22:55, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

The declination of my article.
I was shocked to see my article was declined again. I've been declined twice now after fixing the previous problem which was to add multiple sources due to the fact I only had one at the time. All the sources I included posses accurate information about my topic and stay on point with the subject though I understand currently there is not much information around regarding my topic. Yet I feel that my draft meets the criteria for it to become an article.

Link: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Wicks_(hairstyle)#

Igiveupicantchooseadecentusernamewithoutitbeingtaken (talk) 16:28, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
 * , I would recommend reading the links provided in the decline message, your "shock" that they were rejected demonstrates that you haven't as the issues with the article are quite glaring. Sulfurboy (talk) 18:31, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Rachel Bitecofer
Damn, yall don't make this easy, do you. All i wanted to do was start a page on a very important person, who is quite relevent in this time of election. I've been denied a couple times, and have spent way too much time on this.

I'm not a programmer. Just trying to be a good samaritan. but, i'm done trying. last excuse was something about against the purpose of wiki. Really?

since you're the expert, why not just create the page yourself????????????????? — Preceding unsigned comment added by WilliamR164 (talk • contribs) 16:11, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
 * , I have zero interest in writing a page for you. WP:BUILDER Sulfurboy (talk) 18:32, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Request on 08:45:16, 15 March 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Stefanvihar
1. I have submitted 2 articles in Wikipedia ? both of them are up for review. So which article should I start to edit in order to get it accepted in Wikipedia.... 2. How much time would it take to actually publish my edit? 3. is there a problem in how my content is specifically placed?

Stefanvihar (talk) 08:45, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
 * , Only one submission of an article will be considered at a time. That process can take up to three months Sulfurboy (talk) 18:32, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Request on 03:14:07, 13 March 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Cse404
How many links are needed for this page to be published? I have TV links and articles.

Thanks!

Cse404 (talk) 03:14, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
 * , The issue is the reliability of your sources, not the quantity of them. Please see WP:RS Sulfurboy (talk) 18:33, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Request on 20:04:12, 15 March 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by GauchainAltea
GauchainAltea (talk) 20:04, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Help how to improve my declined article / reliable sources
Hello Sulfurboy,

thank you for your feedback on my article!

Looking at it now, I totally understand that it has too many sources. I also see that some points are not so relevant for the subject and can be left out entirely, which should make the article (and the sources) much leaner.

Also, could you give me a hint which sources would be considered not reliable? Just so I can throw these out.

Thank you so much for taking the time to help me here!

Link to article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Thomas_Wagner_(Designer)

Best, Dennis — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daredevil1969 (talk • contribs) 09:43, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
 * , You can review WP:RS for help on what sources are not considered reliable. Sulfurboy (talk) 21:05, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

FYI
Looks like you are occasionally being logged out and revealing your IP... check the history of recent pages you've reviewed or I can link to the edits if you don't care. Home Lander (talk) 21:46, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
 * , Hmm weird. Thanks for pointing it out, seems to be an issue with the network I'm on knocking me off on occasion. Sulfurboy (talk) 21:49, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Request on 21:53:03, 17 March 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Alfredsph
Hi there! Thanks for taking the time to review the article I wrote for the 'The Elephant in the Brain'. I wanted to ask for clarification as to why the article was rejected. You wrote 'Reviews on the book are from non-notable or unreliable sources. Not seeing any significant coverage of the subject.' The Wikipedia notability guidelines WP:NB states that to qualify as notable the book must be the 'subject of two or more non-trivial published works appearing in sources that are independent of the book itself'. I have cited substantial reviews from the Wall Street Journal, New Yorker and the New York Intelligencer, all of which are considered 'generally reliable' according to [these guidelines]. These three reviews, on their own satisfy the notability requirements. On top of this I have cited reviews in Publishers Weekly and Quillette, as well as a minor review in the National Review and a blog review from a well respected computer scientist. I understand if you believe that the latter four reviews are from 'non-notable or unreliable sources' but I don't think that it is accurate to call the Wall Street Journal, New Yorker and New York Intelligencer 'non-notable and unreliable'. Please could you clarify the reasons for rejection, because as it stands, I believe that the article satisfies the notability requirements. Thanks, all the best, Alfredsph (talk) 21:53, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
 * , You're right. The WSJ article in particular was overlooked as a skimmed reading of the title was a bit deceptive. The article has been approved. Cheers Sulfurboy (talk) 21:57, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for sorting that out so speedily! Cheers, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alfredsph (talk • contribs) 22:03, 17 March 2020 (UTC) Alfredsph (talk) 21:53, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Request for assistance on article submitted through AfC that was rejected
Hi there!

This is regarding the article submitted through Article for Creation that was rejected and your response on 11th March that I need to clarify if I am being directly or indirectly compensated for the edits being made. Would like to clarify that I am being indirectly compensated for my edits. Looking forward to knowing how I can proceed. Thank you!

Link to article- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:MeeraShankar123/sandbox

Regards, Meera (Talk page)
 * You need to make the proper disclosures as outlined on your talk page. Sulfurboy (talk) 22:07, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Niamh Algar
What do you mean by saying the sources are not independent? rte is Irelands foremost broadcaster, BAFTA is 'independent' of Niamh Algar etc. Filmmoonshot (talk) 22:46, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Request on 19:20:58, 18 March 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Gaussianfilter
Thank you for reviewing!

I am not being paid directly or indirectly, therefore I do not require the paid tag (where do I state this officially to proceed with edits). If the article does not read neutrally, certainly, I would appreciate editorial guidance as a first time contributor.

I am quite interested in writing about African-Americans in Tech/Venture Capital - it is important to note that over 200 Tech VC African-Americas are members of BLCK VC (this is why I am starting with Frederik Groce, the Co-Founder of BLCK VC). Also, I am not paid nor am I affiliated with BLCK VC. I have added more neutral references as requested in the edit feedback from DGG, I have received no specific guidelines on refactoring the draft, how do I proceed?

Key Question: As a starting point, does it make sense to write a WP draft for BLCK VC first and then list all its members - then create stubs for all its members and all the Venture Capital Companies they work for (I think this is around 300 VCs/Companies now)? If so, what info should I list for each member and what is a reliable source other than venture company sites?

Gaussianfilter (talk) 19:20, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
 * , I would recommend reviewing the guidelines of WP:BIO and WP:GNG as I doubt the vast majority of the subjects you mentioned would meet our strict notability guidelines. Sulfurboy (talk) 04:02, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Submission declined?
Hey, just wondering why you declined https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:The_Race_All-Star_eSports_Battle? You said that it was declined because the citations "do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject", but User:Sdkb checked it out and found nothing wrong. Miasma Eternal TALK 04:58, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
 * To confirm, I was helping out MiasmaEternal on the IRC and took a quick look at the article. The Independent and Yahoo Sports sources looked sufficient to me to pass GNG, but as I'm not knowledgeable about e-sports, there may be things I missed. Regards, Sdkb (talk) 05:04, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
 * , Sure, you provided four sources. One of the sources is from a blog website and the other is a press release. The other two focus more on notable driver's participation instead of the actual event itself, meaning any notability this event might have would hinge almost entirely on the notability of these already established drivers which means the event wouldn't be considered independently notable. We need to see at least one reliable source whose primary focus is on the event itself and not these professional drivers. Sulfurboy (talk) 05:09, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
 * For example, would https://arstechnica.com/cars/2020/03/esports-fills-the-gap-as-coronavirus-cancels-in-person-sporting-events/ be acceptable? Miasma Eternal TALK 06:56, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Rajvir Sharma
Hi,

I submitted an article about Dr. Rajvir Sharma. It was declined due to some issues with the reference links provided. Could you please elaborate a little further, or share some directions / guidelines so I can rectify accordingly.

Much appreciated. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by JojaxNation (talk • contribs) 06:09, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Biography of Liberia's First Lady Clar Weah
Hi, thank you for your feedback concerning my draft on Clar Weah https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Clar_Weah I would like to know if I could get some pointers as to the peacock terms that were used in this article, as for the references they are verified and reliable but most of them are from Africa and in particular, Liberia is it the fact that they are from Africa that they are considered unreliable? Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by BramsKK (talk • contribs) 12:00, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
 * , The whole thing likely needs to be rewritten from the ground up. Wikipedia is not a place to advertise or promote every organization this person has been part of. The article also needs to be written a formal, neutral tone. Do not use Wikipedia as a voice, we care what others have to say about her in secondary sources, not what the user thinks or what the organizations she's involved with think Sulfurboy (talk) 15:24, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

What should I remove to have the article I wrote posted?
I wrote 2 versions of an article, each getting shorter and more to the point. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:YEW!,_Inc. Perhaps I should remove the "Environmental effects"? Thanks for all your help. Micheltvalenzuela (talk) 16:24, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
 * The subject isn't notable and it reads like ad copy. You cannot cite Wikipedia. Your citation about hockey says nothing about your product, wax, or using adhesive. The other citations saying that petrochemicals are bad for humans says nothing about your product, either. Finally, WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS isn't a reasonable argument. Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 16:34, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Biography of Liberia's First Lady Clar Weah
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Clar_Weah Thank you once again for your feedback, indeed Wikipedia is not a ground to express or promote any views, the overall tone of the article will be revised. But the comment on promotion or advertisement on every organisation she has been in is not true its a biography and part of her humanitarian activities, the template was based off other first ladies wiki pages which bear similar "advertisement", and I have yet to understand why the sources that were sited were not reliable they all stem from legitimate newspapers of Liberia, hence my previous question why are they not considered credible? Thank you --BramsKK (talk) 17:07, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Draft:Clar_Weah is laughably promotional. One does not "launch her career" by coincidentally being a bank teller where she meets her future husband. Many of the claims you make are unsourced, and promotional. Bullet-listing her goals is clear ad copy. You have gone out of your way to list her social media profiles in violation of WP:ELNO. You undoubtedly have a conflict of interest and can't see this objectively. Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 18:39, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Rafael Almanza Alonso
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Rafael_Almanza_Alonso Hello,thanks you for your comments. Could you please advise if the below references are in compliance with Wikipedia guidelines? Are Spanish language references acceptable? If no, could you kindly point what needs to be done to complain? Do you prefer I to translate the references to English-language? I really appreciate very much your help. 1-	One Doctoral Thesis of the University of Montreal: Manresa González, Carlos (2018). "El agon en Rafael Almanza; Iconos de Almanza: revisión del endecasílabo dactílico". La obedencia rebelde: Roberto Manzano, Rafael Almanza y Jesús David Curbelo, tres poetas contemporáneos ante el canon cubano (PhD). University of Montreal.

2-	Two Books of a Distinguished Professor at Youngstown State University and an Associated Professor at Princeton University: Del Pozo, Ivania (2002). "El icono literario: Rafael Almanza". Espejo de vehemencia. Un viaje al Camagüey poético. Camagüey: Editorial Ácana. pp. 55, 56, 57, 61. ISBN 959-267-007-2. Price, Rachel (2015). "Free Time". Planet/Cuba: Art, Culture and the Future of the Island. New York: Verso. pp. 128–140. ISBN 978-1-78478-122-4.

3-	Two Peer reviewed journal articles from the University of Sevilla in Spain: Manresa González, Carlos (2015). "Iconos, de Rafael Almanza Alonso: un nuevo caso de uso intencional del endecasílabo dactílico". Rhythmica. XIII (13): 97–127. doi:10.5944/rhythmica.16159 Manresa González, Carlos (2018). "Rimas en libertad: apuntes para un estudio de la rima libre o mezclada en la poesía cubana contemporánea". Rhythmica. XVI: 113–147.

4-	One Research of a University of Waikato (NZ) researcher about Cuban Visual Poetry: López-Fernández, Laura; Garceran, Carlos M. (2019). "Experimental Cuban Poetry. A Digital Humanities Project. Story Map Journal".

5-	Four Different magazine articles: Cino, Luis (October 16, 2018). "Rafael Almanza y el amor universal". Puente a la vista. Gina Picart (2009). "Eliseo Diego: el juego de dies o el ajedrez de la trascendencia". Constantín Ferreiro, Henry (2013). "La Peña de un Júcaro cada vez más recio". Convivencia. Pinar del Río. Escobar, Reinaldo (2018). "The Blasts of Rafael Almanza". Retrieved March 18, 2020


 * References in other languages is fine. You can find more information about reliable sources at WP:RSSulfurboy (talk) 22:44, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Chris_Bouchard
Hi thanks for your comments on this. In your view is the underlying content significant and this is just a technical hurdle regarding sources? Or is it more fundamental that I need to justify him being significant?

I had included the bio and his imdb page but a previous reviewer said they didn't count as reliable sources. So I stripped it all down to things that I was confident were as reliable as you can get. The seven sources are all international news organisations which I thought was good. In my eyes he counts as significant as he's directed three films which have their own (extensive) wikipedia pages but I guess it still needs a bit more work. Would it help if the post was longer? I tried to keep it concise so that every word was backed up by as many sources as possible but maybe that's unhelpful.

Very grateful for help! Thought this would be an easy one to start me off but it's been anything but! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.240.194.255 (talk) 00:15, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
 * We need to see significant coverage of the subject by secondary and reliable sources. The sources provided do not show WP:SIGCOV Sulfurboy (talk) 06:53, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

So much decline
So much decline over drafts. Turkfromturkey (talk) 11:26, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

Submission declined
Hi, I noticed that, you have rejected my draft on Draft:Basab Chaudhuri. He is the current Vice Chancellor of West Bengal State University, located in West Bengal, India. 90% of the content on this page is directly based on the press coverage in the Millenium Post and the most circulated Bengali daily Anandabazar. Even his researchgate profile has been given as an external source. The information contained herein is partly extracted from the University website (Office of Vice Chancellor (VC). It's almost impossible for a man to get vast coverage and I don't think it should be the only criteria for a draft to get published. He is an well known academic in West Bengal and holds the designation of VC in a State University. I do belive that I have adequate notability and reliable sources to support the article. Now it's arduous for me to gather more sources to validate what I have written there. Please consider that. You can check the university website also. Thanks. DeoxysX (talk) 15:57, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
 * , The reliability and notability of the sources is not the problem. The problem is that the sources don't show significant coverage of the subject. Sulfurboy (talk) 23:29, 21 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Then what should I do know? DeoxysX (talk) 02:13, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
 * , Resources for help have been provided on your talk page and the message in the decline. Repeating them here again would be redundant. Cheers. Sulfurboy (talk) 07:36, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Please join this discussion
Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 22:50, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Sulfur, I don't want this to get lost in the discussion about FA but you have two respected editors (John and DGG) who both express some unease with your review process. I would take heed and if you don't understand the concerns ask for more detail. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 02:15, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
 * , Apologies for this being long, but there's some context that might be missing here. I'm not sure what warranted unease John has with my review process. I'm not even sure he fully understands the difference between AfC and NPP considering a couple of his comments and your pinging. His disagreement with my decline of FloridaArmy's article was done without assuming good faith and without proper due diligence. The article was in fact submitted and declined appropriately. FloridaArmy has been repeatedly warned and restricted and still has gone on and continuously disregarded reviewers very basic suggestions. Considering the volume of FloridaArmy's page creations, declines such as this are the only defense against a flood of improperly sourced articles, many of which have borderline/questionable notability. Why John even jumped in on this, with little to no background surrounding the issue, and why they tried to have a broader discussion about my ability as a reviewer on a submitter's talk page is beyond me.
 * Beyond that, I really have no interest in hearing out John or taking his critiques seriously. He has talked down to me on more than one occasion and I've seen them be very abrasive and have a general lack of AGF, particularly towards newer editors. I've even had to outright ask him not to talk down to me and their response was "I talk how I talk". At that point, I made the choice to no longer interact with them. The only reason I even responded today was because you asked for me to join the discussion. This is why I'm choosing not to even tag them in this, as I have zero interest in dealing with their negativity unless it's absolutely necessary.
 * is a completely different story. They are in fact one of my favorite editors here and I always welcome and, when needed, respond to their critique of my reviews. As far as I know, I've always been open to what they have to say and I don't think it's an ongoing unease they have with my review process, but instead issue with certain individual articles. Mistakes will always be made, but I would like to think I'm always willing to admit to them and improve from them. I do welcome of course DGG to correct any of those assumptions I've just made though. Sulfurboy (talk) 03:07, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
 * , I understand the hesitance to engage with people who you've had bad experiences with in the past. I'm glad to hear you remain open to feedback and growth - that is all any of us can do. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 04:10, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
 * is a completely different story. They are in fact one of my favorite editors here and I always welcome and, when needed, respond to their critique of my reviews. As far as I know, I've always been open to what they have to say and I don't think it's an ongoing unease they have with my review process, but instead issue with certain individual articles. Mistakes will always be made, but I would like to think I'm always willing to admit to them and improve from them. I do welcome of course DGG to correct any of those assumptions I've just made though. Sulfurboy (talk) 03:07, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
 * , I understand the hesitance to engage with people who you've had bad experiences with in the past. I'm glad to hear you remain open to feedback and growth - that is all any of us can do. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 04:10, 22 March 2020 (UTC)


 * , all reviewers make errors, and though each reviewer does tend to have a characteristic style and a characteristic pattern, there are some errors that most of us make, and Sulfurboy is not alone in a tendency to decline articles for fixable problems, or to not notice the relevance of special notability guidelines, or misjudgments in dealing with areas where one is less competent than one would like to imagine--all of these are errors I recognize because I make them also. .Nor is he alone in declining instead of rejecting hopeless drafts, or in not always seeing the advantages of speedy or MfD, or in not dealing more actively with the probably undeclared paid editors --all areas where I have become more likely to take strong action than most reviewers.  All of us are so aware of the need to clear backlogs that we often do not give sufficiently directed help, or become apt to treat a good faith beginner as if they were a SPA.
 * I deal with such errors when I see them by mentioning a clear example from time to time, and hope that will help to correct imbalance; just as I hope others will correct my own. There are some reviewers I am reluctant to correct because I know they will get  angry, but Sulfurboy is by no means one of them,  The only real difficulty I have with Sulfurboy  is that they do not necessarily  realize that a correction about a specific draft is likely to be representative of other errors of the same nature--I don't think it friendly or productive to  criticize at every possible  opportunity.
 * I'm responding here at some length both to reassure Sulfurboy, but also, Barkeep, in the hope that I can help you can work out more effective processes to improve the quality of reviewing.  I was delighted to see you participation in this. because if always helps if things don't become just a back and forth between two individuals,. DGG ( talk ) 08:37, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Langston_Uibel
Hey Sulfurboy. I have answered again.

LINK: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Langston_Uibel

I can take out Wikipedia and IMDB. There are still other credible sources and i can find many more. Thank you for your time! Loisopokupr (talk) 19:50, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Declined page on bereskin & parr LLP
Hi,

I was just curious why the new proposed page on Bereskin & Parr LLP was declined? In viewing the landscape of IP firms in Canada (i.e., intellectual property), I had noted many IP firms had informative Wikipedia pages (e.g., Smart & Biggar, Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP, etc.). Accordingly, I sought to add a brief page discussing Bereskin & Parr. In particular, in viewing and passing by the Wikipedia page for "Boutique law firm", I noted that Bereskin & Parr did not have a Wikipedia page.

Alternatively, how could I change my submission to be acceptable, without it seeming like an "advertisment"? The original page noted a brief history of the firm (i.e., founded in 1965), it's founders, the number of lawyers, it's general ranking in IP landscape as well notable clients that have been represented. I seem to have found similar information disclosed in other articles discussing law firms.

As well, apologies, this is one of my first draft submissions - I am unsure how to link to the deleted draft in this comment, as per the rules. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IPLaw365 (talk • contribs) 20:46, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you very much

Kind Regards, IPLaw365 (talk) 16:22, 22 March 2020 (UTC)IPlaw365 — Preceding unsigned comment added by IPLaw365 (talk • contribs) 16:18, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
 * , The entire article was an unambiguous advertisement which is why it was speedy deleted. If you are not able to see that it was nothing but an advert, then it is likely you have a conflict of interest in play that is affecting your ability to view the subject neutrally. Sulfurboy (talk) 23:41, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Request on 23:43:01, 22 March 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Musiciranfans
Musiciranfans (talk) 23:43, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

asking for details
Musiciranfans (talk) 23:48, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Draft:BetKing
Hi, I just like to let you know that you declined the page that i submit for review, with some purpose like unreliable independent sources, and very sure that those source are very reliable, many Nigerians article uses those sources for reference. Pls I will like you to considered this. Much regards (F5pillar 17:16, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
 * , As already stated, too many of those sources are paid for promotion or press releases. Sulfurboy (talk) 23:39, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
 * that's not true bcuz you're not even really sure of that, those sources and independent newspaper and some owns by government and not a pay publish newspaper. Respect (F5pillar 07:29, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

Request on 07:49:06, 23 March 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Bullaiytro
Bullaiytro (talk) 07:49, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

Hyva
Hi! I've seen that you declined the Hyva page that I've setted up. Can you tell me why?

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by LucaColombo1990 (talk • contribs) 09:50, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

Request on 09:01:02, 22 March 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Maentik
"...they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject..."

IGN, Eurogamer, and Digital Foundry are all "published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject".

The entire IGN interview alone presents significant coverage of the subject (person) and was conducted independently by IGN.

Kind regards,

Maentik (talk) 09:01, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
 * , You provided three youtube links (unreliable), one page is just listing credits and the other is a primary interview. None of those come close to proving notability. Sulfurboy (talk) 23:42, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
 * , Obviously these are not random anonymous youtube videos. Why are videos of interviews posted by independent, secondary source media companies (IGN, Digital Foundry) to their own channels (which they control), considered unreliable? Also, what do you mean by primary interview? They were interviewed by the gaming press and the public in the audience, at a scheduled open event. Maentik (talk) 08:12, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
 * , Update - Original sources of youtube interview videos provided. Sources further widely expanded. Notability further explained. Resubmitted. Maentik (talk) 10:41, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
 * , I drew a pretty clear and concise map as to the significance of the subject of the article. You do not appear to understand the game industry nor its technology. Maybe you disapprove of the particular contributions written about in the article. Other than a dislike for YouTube interviews (again, controlled and posted by the cited established media companies themselves), you did not state exactly which of the other sources are not reliable. I clearly provided multiple media articles from "published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject". Maybe I need a second opinion. I've already invested too much time just trying to start this article and making changes you've suggested. Then it becomes something else that is wrong. As a (personally) disinterested party, it's almost not worth continuing to argue semantics with a single authority. It makes one wonder how single-source articles like this were ever approved and still exist: Robert Duffy (programmer) Maentik (talk) 6:26, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
 * , It is Wikipedia, not me, that has decided that Youtube is typically considered unreliable. None of the sources your provided show significant coverage of the subject. The only sources that do directly cover the subject are primary interviews that do not denote notability. Again, these are not rules set by me, they're set across the whole wikipedia. And I'm not sure what your point is about the other article, I didn't create or approve it. Also, inclusion of another article is not an indicator of notability WP:INN . If you have issue with that article you are welcome to improve it or nominate it for deletion.
 * , "The only sources that do directly cover the subject are primary interviews..." No, only 2-4 are a "primary" interview (which I tried to explain they in fact, are not). But moving on... 1 & 5-8 are not primary interviews and cover the subject, so I don't understand the issue with those. And where it may be unclear, if you read or listen closely, the authors establish that the source of their detailed information is in fact, Khan. Maentik (talk) 6:45, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
 * , Not sure how else to get this across, but if the subject is being interviewed, that is considered primary and does denote notability and can also be considered unreliable. 8 literally has one quick sentence about the subject. Please review WP:SIGCOV
 * , Again, the interviews were conducted by "reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject". I do not know how else to illustrate the subject's proprietary contributions. It's not as if raw source code can be released. Many articles published by the most well-respected journals involve interviews, not second and third-hand information. This new learning experience has not been a pleasant one. I'm done. Maentik (talk) 7:19, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Karl_Ferris#Karl_Ferris
Could you please explain why this article "Karl Ferris",(about me) which has been on Wikipedia for over 10 years, is now marked for Deletion or Draft? I, and much of the public, do believe this subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article, and has over the past 10 years. And, half the pictures on it were there from the very beginning and are in public domain...and I have just added 4 additional images that half were uploaded from Wiki Image sources and half from me Karl Ferris, their Author and copyright holder, (and I give Wiki permission to use them). I also corrected a few incorrect names and dates in the original article written by Michael Goldstein-Curator, of the Album Cover Hall of Fame.com And there are plenty of Periodical citations there also, and many related Wikipedia interlinks on the page to many other related pages.

So the article is definitely legitimate, therefore could you please review and reinstate the article as it was for many years? And please let me know: karlferris@hotmail.com

Thank you, Karl Ferris Ferris1182 (talk) 23:10, 22 March 2020 (UTC)


 * ,, I moved this back to mainspace. I agree this shouldn't have been moved to draft, and if it is not notable, should be subject to AFD. AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 23:28, 22 March 2020 (UTC)


 * , please do not move 10 year old articles back to draft. They should be put through AFD instead if the subject is not notable. AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 23:34, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
 * , Yeah you made the right move Angus, I had no idea when I reviewed it that it had been an article that was moved back to draftspace that had been in main for a decade. That being said, it is possibly an AfD candidate, and at the very least, all non-sourced BLP claims in the article should probably be removed. Sulfurboy (talk) 23:38, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
 * , no worries, I find myself jumping on those drafts like that too. AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 23:40, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Hello Sulfurboy, I did WP:BEFORE. There is enough coverage to justify inclusion so AfD does not make sense. After so many years most of the article is not backed by independent reliable sources, I thought of just trimming all unsourced claims, but that would leave mostly a gallery of images. In its current state it does not follow WP:BLP. I moved it to draft in the hope that involved editors would source the content and remove that which can't be sourced. I will add the citation needed templates to the article In the hope that references are added, but if there are no changes I will probably source some and remove the rest of the content. Any better ideas to go forward? --Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 08:29, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
 * , I would just be bold and slash and burn anything that isn't backed with a source. This will encourage the page creator and anyone else to add in sources if they want to rebuild the article. Sulfurboy (talk) 13:16, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I will give it just a few more days before I take out the flamethrower. It has been like that for years so a few more days won't matter much. The best scenario would be that at least some of the content is sourced before the much needed slashing. --Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 13:26, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

Chironex fleckeri venom
The draft properly links to the article on the species, so the draft almost certainly is about the venom. We edit-conflicted in a non-harmful way, because I renamed the draft while you declined it. I think that an article on the venom should be accepted when the title is clarified, but we need to let the author work on the draft. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:10, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
 * , Agree to all this, I just wanted the page creator to clarify in an abundance of caution, particularly since I don't have much of a biology background. Sulfurboy (talk) 16:42, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

Request on 07:04:09, 24 March 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Devkumar20201
}}

Devkumar20201 (talk) 07:04, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

about my article for Document Management in E-government
Good morning Sulfurboy,

Beside the references from official government website, what else I need for the secondary references? I have removed some "peacock" words in it, please let me know if there more "peacock words" I have to remove ...

It is appreciated if you can be more specific.

Regards,

Ren — Preceding unsigned comment added by Renwang101 (talk • contribs) 09:32, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Please check my new correction
Hello Sulfurboy, can you check please my corrections? Thank you

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Anastasia_Kochetkova — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bokhan.evgeniy (talk • contribs) 10:21, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Hitachi Zosen Inova
I've removed the notability tag you placed there. The article has three solid secondary sources, so I do not think the tag is appropriate. --The Huhsz (talk) 10:01, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
 * , You need to review WP:CORPDEPTH. The article as it stands completely fails that.
 * Source review:
 * 1) Standard corporate directory entry. No coverage.
 * 2, 3, 5, 7) All are considered trivial mentions under WP:CORPDEPTH, in particular "expansions, acquisitions, mergers, sale, or closure of the business"
 * 4) Unreliable blog, news site.
 * 6) Just an advertisement for the product that is likely self published.
 * Thus, the article wholly fails the requirements of WP:NCORP. Even if 4 was considered fully reliable or a notable publication, that still puts this article short one article to meet the aforementioned standard. I'm restoring the tag and posting this to the talk page. It should be noted that when I reviewed the page, I very much considered draftifying or sending to AfD, but I'm giving a benefit of a doubt. If it's not corrected, or the tag is removed without improvement, then one of those routes will have to be considered. Sulfurboy (talk) 13:31, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Thus, the article wholly fails the requirements of WP:NCORP. Even if 4 was considered fully reliable or a notable publication, that still puts this article short one article to meet the aforementioned standard. I'm restoring the tag and posting this to the talk page. It should be noted that when I reviewed the page, I very much considered draftifying or sending to AfD, but I'm giving a benefit of a doubt. If it's not corrected, or the tag is removed without improvement, then one of those routes will have to be considered. Sulfurboy (talk) 13:31, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Thus, the article wholly fails the requirements of WP:NCORP. Even if 4 was considered fully reliable or a notable publication, that still puts this article short one article to meet the aforementioned standard. I'm restoring the tag and posting this to the talk page. It should be noted that when I reviewed the page, I very much considered draftifying or sending to AfD, but I'm giving a benefit of a doubt. If it's not corrected, or the tag is removed without improvement, then one of those routes will have to be considered. Sulfurboy (talk) 13:31, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Request on 16:08:23, 24 March 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by 47.232.188.74
47.232.188.74 (talk) 16:08, 24 March 2020 (UTC) Hi there, i'm extremely confused, Fuse is actually mentioned in various current wikipedia articles: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agents_of_S.H.I.E.L.D. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mr._Robot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Rygiel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Punisher_(season_1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luke_Cage_(season_1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deadly_Class_(TV_series)

And when you compare it to other houses: I cited all my sources, seems very streamlined and compared to other wikis on vfx companies like: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoic_Studios https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rodeo_FX https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Domain. It seems on par, let me know if I'm missing anything here. Thank you.
 * There is not a single source that shows WP:SIGCOV of the company. Companies have much stricter notability guidelines. Please see WP:NCORP

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Ojay
Thank you Sulfurboy for helping out a new contributor move the article to the appropriate space, i look forward to more talks and edits on this space Bethel Sandius (talk) 18:21, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Article
I don't know why they rejected it. I do this for my mental health and when you do that it makes it worse. I need you to be there to support me not bring me down harder. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Solangelo19 (talk • contribs) 18:09, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
 * , Wikipedia might not be the best place for you if you feel that rejections are making your condition worse. Wikipedia is full of rejections and mistake correction and eclines, etc. Wikipedia policy is very strict and does not make exceptions for people's mental health. If you are currently having a mental health crisis, I would recommend texting NAMI to 741741. If you are in another country, please let me know and I can try to find your more applicable resources. I hope you are able to get help or feel better. Sulfurboy (talk) 18:26, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

I know, I got I am fine. sorry for the Drama. Solangelo19 (talk) 18:31, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Talk:Lucky Lou's
Hi there Sulfurboy. I am sorry you didn't like my fixing up Lucky Lou's; mea culpa, when you did not answer my question about content creation over at Talk:Hitachi Zosen Inova, I took the liberty of checking your contributions. I see you are mainly a tagger and reviewer of other editors' work, and there is nothing wrong with that. I then looked at the five articles you have started. Most of them look fine, but this one stands out as a terrible article in terrible shape. Now, I apologise if this comes over as a tu quoque, and it sure sounds like a nice bar to drink in, but I think there are some problems there. I've raised some of them in talk as you requested in your edit summary when you reverted back in all the promotional material sourced to long-dead blogs; you really shouldn't have done that but never mind. I'll see you at the talk page and we can see what needs to be done. --The Huhsz (talk) 18:24, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
 * , What you've done is a pretty blatant violation of WP:HUNT. Going back and digging up some article I worked on seven years ago because you are upset that I put a maintenance tag on one of your pages is about the most childish thing I've ever seen on here. Sulfurboy (talk) 18:29, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
 * All right, and for your hurt feelings you have my apologies, again. The article we are talking about was created by you seven years ago, as you say, and has had an "Advert" improvement tag on it for six of them. I am not in the least upset, and I hope you are not either. See you at article talk. --The Huhsz (talk) 18:59, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Removed IMDB from the page on Tommy Vicari
Hey there. I removed the IMDB citations as suggested. Thanks for your review. TanookiKoopa (talk) 21:14, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
 * , Approved. Thanks for the quick improvement. Sulfurboy (talk) 21:20, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Nabeel Ahmad (entrepreneur)‎
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Nabeel_Ahmad_(entrepreneur) I assumed that the sources were genuine. However, you and another reviewer have the opinion that they are press releases. As I am new, I am not fully aware of all the vetting processes of sources. I included all the sources I could find, and there are no other sources for the article. So if these are not enough, you can delete the article, as I cannot do any more work on it. Thank you, and sorry for being a bother. MistyGraceWhite (talk) 21:34, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Modular forms modulo p
Link: Modular_forms_modulo_p

Thank you very much for your review. You changed the title from modular forms modulo $$2$$ to modular forms modulo $$p$$. However, the article only talks about modular forms modulo $$2$$ (which is a special case when $$p=2$$). What has been written in the article do not generalize to $$p$$ (it is a very special case), so I wonder if the change of title is needed.


 * So the discussion to change the title to that was held here. To be honest, this subject is completely over my head, so my input is useless which is why I turned to the Mathematics talk page for help. You're welcome to discuss it there, on the page's talk page or be bold and just rename it if you like. Sulfurboy (talk) 00:08, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Galerie Chalette
All right, I need some help here. I'm not sure why that happened, and I think I fixed it. This is article #1 for me, so if I typed the wrong button by accident... I have to feel philosophical about that.

So my question has to be, having purged the junk at the bottom of the article, do I simply resubmit?

How much of the process here is machine-driven?Sicklemoon (talk) 23:18, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
 * , I've resubmitted for you. I'm going to allow for another reviewer to see it now, I've commented to this effect on your submission. Sulfurboy (talk) 23:23, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. Am interested just to be walking through the process.Sicklemoon (talk) 23:26, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
 * , AfC sometimes moves fast, and sometimes it moves slow. Just depends on when a reviewer with subject matter experience can review it. Let me know if you have any questions. Sulfurboy (talk) 23:29, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

No worries. I was, in fact, surprised to hear back from anyone so quickly. Mid 20th C. art is... a challenging subject, with all the copyright issues it infringes on. And... the perceptible fade into self-promotion is going to be an ongoing issue. Definitely multiple eye passing over the content is the way to go. Again, thanks for the quick response. Sicklemoon (talk) 23:37, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Another P.S. I saw your note, and I'm working up the two sections that need it. Really, it was the partnership of Madeleine, with her French (and Swiss) connections, and Arthur, with his Polish Connections, that made the gallery so influentual. So--the gallery is the important thing, I think, not so much the individuals who ran it. I'll add the bits about Madeleine and the politics with the Guggenheim, the Met, &c. so the Gallery's importance is clearer. As I wrote above--wasn't clear when my end of the job could be considered done. I've only experienced Wikipedia from the users end, to date. So am learning today's standards as I go. I figured it was better to get that in process than sit back fussing with one piece. BestSicklemoon (talk) 00:49, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Latin_American_Cargo
Please can you explain to me what should I change to be able to have the pages of the company Latin American Cargo published? This is my 1# article, I am new to this. You declined it a few minutes ago but I am not sure to understand why it is not approved as it does not counterfeit with the wikimedia policies.
 * A reason for the decline was clearly outlined in the review message on the page. Let me know if you have any specific questions about that. Sulfurboy (talk) 01:10, 25 March 2020 (UTC)