User talk:Waggie/Archives/2018/September

Mamuka Khazaradze article
Hi Waggie, I updated the article NOT to read like an advertisement. At this point, everything that is in the artcile are statements of facts, in my opinion. Can you please give me a) one exact sentence that you think reads like an ad, just to that I have an example of what you mean and b) one example of an unreliable source, so that I know which ones to remove. thank you for your help! Regards, Keti — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ketikh (talk • contribs) 08:01, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Regarding deletion of a draft article by the name of Sowmya Iyer
Hi there,

My most recent draft by the name of Sowmya Iyer was deleted mentioning copyright violation as the reason behind it. Is it possible to get the article back so I can save the content and make changes to it?

I will create a new draft with the suggested changes and resubmit it for review. But for this, I will need the text in the previous draft.--Ratanrawat (talk) 10:19, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Coex revisions
Would the official Seoul Convention Bureau's homepage suffice? http://miceseoul.com/venue-finder/center/COEX-1.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by StewCS100 (talk • contribs) 06:52, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks for discussing with me. We're looking for sources that are independent of the subject and are subject to editorial control and fact-checking. I believe that we can accept the sources you're offering for basic information like the information included in the "Facts" section, but it's clear that the source is looking to promote Seoul and it's various convention venues (including COEX), so it's definitely not independent or reliable for much else. I realize that Wikipedia guidelines and policies can be confusing and complex for beginners, so don't be afraid to ask questions.
 * I notice you updated your username to comply with our username policy, thank you for doing that. Also, please note that you will need to declare your connection with COEX Seoul on your userpage in order to comply with the Terms of Use. Your userpage can be found here and an example of a declaration would be something like "I'm Stew and I work for COEX Seoul, I've been asked to update the information on the COEX Seoul article as part of my job responsibilities." Best wishes to you. Waggie (talk) 08:55, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

chef fiso submission
Hi Waggie Wanting more clarity as to why you've declined the submission based on non reliable sources when there are more 20 sources listed and some of these articles have been cited from the New York Times, La Times and several NZ Government agency websites - surely these are reliable sources? We've also added 6 more sources to the article to address your issue of there not being enough. Let us know if we need to add more as there is a lot more on the subject out there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hiakaipr (talk • contribs) 02:28, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
 * , there's a couple things you should understand. Firstly, I declined because too much content was not sourced. Wikipedia requires that content (especially biographical content) be summaries of what independent, journalistic sources say about an article subject. Secondly, it's not about the quantity of sources, but the quality of the sources and how well the content summarizes those sources. A great many of the sources you have cited are interviews, press releases, and other poor quality sources that are not what Wikipedia considers "reliable". As noted in the decline notice, please review our page on reliable sources. Also, I notice that your username is a violation of our username policy, which does not allow for usernames that imply shared use. In your case, it implies shared use by being your company name, and "pr" which is a common abbreviation for "press release". You will need to either 1) change your username, or 2) create a new username and either way, you'll need to declare your conflict of interest officially on your userpage. These are all part of our Terms of Use and must be dealt with before you continue any further with the draft. Thank you and best wishes. Waggie (talk) 02:40, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi Waggie
 * A change of user name is not an issue. Declaring a conflict of interest no problem either, especially as the article hasn't been written in a promotional tone merely a stating of facts. I must say that the tone of your response is rather rude and looking at other users interactions with you this seems to be a them. I don't believe that you're actually looking through the sources. These are not "poor quality" sources, as said before, these are sources from reputable publications such as the New York Times, Los Angeles Times, Tourism New Zealand (NZ tourism agency), The New Zealand Hearld (national NZ newspaper), Television New Zealand (NZ govt owned). Please list the sources that you consider to be poor quality so that we can remove them or clarify them for you.
 * Regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hiakaipr (talk • contribs) 03:23, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Hello, I'm sorry you found my response to be rude, it was not intentional. I wanted to be prompt in my response to your query and I also wanted to be direct and honest with you. Bear in mind that I'm a volunteer for Wikipedia (as most experienced editors and reviewers are) and I lead a very busy life outside of Wikipedia, but I wanted to give you a prompt and genuine response to your question, which I feel I did. I'm really not sure what you are getting at by it saying it seems to be a theme based on other interactions with me. Could you point to an example of such? If you're referring to the Swift Xi discussion above; myself and several other editors had already spent several hours trying to help this person on the live help channel and I was rather tired of repeating myself and not being listened to, I had even brushed off my very rusty and very poor Japanese and was trying to work with them in that language, when English didn't seem to be cutting it. When it finally came around to my talk page here the following day and they were asking the same questions again, I was quite out of patience. If you're referring to the "Functional Clothing" discussion above, it was a discussion with someone who had already been blocked from Wikipedia for violating a variety of Wikipedia policies and was attempting to circumvent that block, so not a lot of patience there, either.
 * To answer your request for more detail regarding the references and my decline. I'm only going to address, as it's for another reviewer to decide on how to handle your draft as it stands now, but hopefully you can take something from this and use it to improve your draft once you address the other issues I raised. There were several paragraphs of content that were unsourced, which fails our verifiability policy for biographies of living people and was a major factor in my decline. For sourcing, the fact that so many were primary sources (considered poor quality sources) was also a factor in my decline. I mis-remembered my review when I mentioned "press releases" above, as I review a great many drafts. You had 8 references and 7 sources (one reference was duplicated) in your draft when I reviewed it:


 * 1) Stuff.no.nz no.1 - Primarily an interview, which is a primary source, primary sources are not useful to establish that a subject meets our general inclusion guidelines.
 * 2) LA Times - Also an interview.
 * 3) NYT Style Magazine - Promising, with some genuine and compelling journalistic discussion of Fiso herself, but quite a bit about the style of food and other chefs, as well.
 * 4) 2017 New Zealand Innovation Awards - There is no discussion of Fiso at all, only Hiakai is mentioned, thus not really helpful for an article about her, except as a brief factoid when discussing Hiakai.
 * 5) Stuff.co.nz no.2 - Listed amongst 10 others, with the content clearly being responses to interview questions, rather than editorially reviewed and fact-checked journalism.
 * 6) Radionz.co.nz - Another interview.
 * 7) TV-NZ - While I cannot watch this given that I'm not in NZ, it appears that this is also likely to be an interview.
 * You can change your username by going to this link and specifying a username that only you will use and does not only identify a role (Examples of acceptable usernames are:"Suzie at Hiakai" or "James with Hiakai PR" or even just "Wendolin Writes Wiki") and a reason (eg: "my current username implies shared use and it was requested I change it"). You do not need not identify your company in the username as you may wish to edit other areas of Wikipedia, and we do encourage you to explore other areas of Wikipedia. The request will take some time to process, and you should receive an email notification when complete, you will then login with the new username and the same password. To declare your conflict of interest, you should go to your userpage and write something along the lines of "Hi, I'm Xavier, and I work for the marketing department of Hiakai and am creating Wikipedia articles for Chef Fiso and/or Hiakai as part of my duties there." Something even vaguely similar will satisfy our username and disclosure requirements.
 * Remember that the quality of the sources is far more important than the quantity, so my final advice is to focus on summarizing what the best quality sources say, and leave the content that is sourced to lesser quality sources out, this will result in the best draft, and give the highest chance for acceptance. I hope that answers your questions and best wishes to you. Waggie (talk) 05:23, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Awesome, thank you for your help!! We'll get on to it as soon as possible. Thanks again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hiakaipr (talk • contribs) 09:03, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Request on 06:45:40, 7 September 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by TVeditor7
Hi there. You recently declined an article submission I made for 'Mikaela Phillips' stating that ALL the supplied information are either links ONLY to personal websites or IMDb and user-updated sites which is incorrect! She is a well known and emerging Producer and Actress that has a TV show airing on commercial TV in Australia and worldwide on Amazon Prime. Links submitted to support this request included; multiple worldwide magazine and press articles (that are written by leading press sites. not one's self contributing), the official wikipedia page of the TV show (which she is the producer and lead actress of), a direct link to the show's listing (and her name visible in high-ranked credits) on Amazon Prime that shows evidence of her being of a high calibre of fellow artists that are on a streaming service like Amazon Prime. Other celebrities on Amazon include: Julia Roberts, Kelsey Grammar, Lily Collins, Matt Bomer, John Krasinki, Richard Hammond etc.

What else can be more specific? Please let me know. I will continue to add more press interviews/evidence as it comes up to solidify and prove this talent is notable, as she is. Any help is appreciated. Thank you

TVeditor7 (talk) 06:45, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Hello, I'm sorry, but I don't have time to go through all these sources again, but I'll go through a few to give you some examples:
 * IdentifyLA is an interview, which is primary sources
 * Mikaela Phillips Wiki is not journalistic and is user-submitted content, which is not journalistic (meaning that it is fact-checked and editorially controlled)
 * Fusionmovies.to looks like it's simply material submitted by her agent
 * AfterBuzzTV does not mention Phillips at all and it's her own website, so it's not independent coverage of her
 * Variety doesn't discuss her at all, either
 * IMDB is content that is either submitted by the agents, or by users, which is not editorially controlled or fact-checked
 * Supernatural Greece is talking about the show, not Phillips
 * Stell Magazine interviews her, which is her talking about herself, again a primary source
 * Her LinkedIn page is her talking about herself again
 * FilmInk is an interview of her father, not an independent or unbiased source, either
 * Getty Images is just a page with a lot of pictures of her, there's no discussion of her at all
 * Amazon listings don't discuss her either, just demonstrate that she has a production available on Amazon
 * To be clear, and please read this very carefully: We're looking for independent and journalistic discussion of Phillips. Your content should be summarized only from that independent and journalistic discussion. Very minor and unimportant facts like her birth date, location of residence, and similar are OK to source to lesser-quality and primary sources, but discussions about her accomplishments need to be summarized from what secondary sources say. Again, please review our guidelines regarding reliable sources. Best wishes to you. Waggie (talk) 07:40, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

Helix (stationery company)
Hello!

The page currently at Helix (stationery company) was formerly at Helix (company) until it was overwritten by a copy-and-paste move from Helix llc (which now redirects to the latter page). I'm attempting to restore the article about the stationery company (founded 1887).

Thanks,

&mdash;Dah31 (talk) 02:44, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks for the talk page message. I see what you're talking about now. Best to clean up the copy/paste move that broke things to begin with before changing the DAB page. Do you need my help with the clean-up? Also, I apologize for my slightly snarky edit summary of "I'm trying to AGF here", it was unprofessional of me. Waggie (talk) 03:16, 12 September 2018 (UTC)


 * You're right about cleaning things up; I'll take care of that tomorrow. And no worries.  👍  :-)mdash;Dah31 (talk) 05:12, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Ji Golpor Ses Nai (Movie)
I am disappointed to see that the draft page has been declined even though I have cited proper sources for it and it doesn't appear like advertisement. The movie is first of its kind in the small state of Assam and information on it would have helped to know more about the film industry in Assam. Prodyut (164.100.149.245 (talk) 07:01, 16 August 2018 (UTC))


 * Given that most of the source links are broken, and that the few sources that do work and actually discuss the subject are only talking about it's future release, I can't support the inclusion of the article. Aside from the dead links, it's really just a simple matter of it being too soon for inclusion. Please review WP:TOOSOON. Thank you. Waggie (talk) 07:45, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. But there are many pages of upcoming films in Wikipedia. I am sure this film also deserves a page. Prodyut ( 164.100.149.245 (talk) 11:33, 12 September 2018 (UTC) ).

Managing a conflict of interest (SEI) and speedy deletion
Hello Waggie, thank you for your message. I am not affiliated with SEI and have no conflict of interest. Regarding the photos, yes this is a photo I took. Regarding the article, you may consider it as "appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopediareads" but in reality these are facts about the history of storm eye. unfortunatley, there aren't many articles one could cite without referring to the Medical University of South Carolina (state university). Below is an example of a wiki page with no references https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kresge_Eye_Institute

15:38. 09/13/18 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Surgepurge (talk • contribs) 19:40, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

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

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


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


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


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


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

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