User talk:Theroadislong/Archive 37

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Theroadislong. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Dear Theroadislong,

Thank you for your comment. Please, can you expand and help us?

Thanks Albert — Preceding unsigned comment added by AWall1998 (talk • contribs) 16:13, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the company have chosen to publish about them: the article should be limited to a summary of what such independent sources have said about them. Each and every substantive fact requires independent sources. Theroadislong (talk) 16:15, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Hello, we have updated the draft. Please can you check it again?

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by AWall1998 (talk • contribs) 14:54, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Who is "we". Wikipedia accounts are very strictly limited to single person use. Theroadislong (talk) 19:27, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your constructive comment on my submission. I was not paid to submit the article and it references numerous independent sources including the Washington Post and Chicago Tribune. This is my first submission to Wikipedia so your feedback is appreciated. I will edit the article and re-submit it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skv1982 (talk • contribs) 17:55, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi,

So I've added new citations to support the claims made in the biography. I want to be clear that while Jeff is a friend, it was entirely my idea to create a page for him. I wasn't directed by him in any way. I thought that since the issues of his contributions are uncontroversial, that this wouldn't be a problem that I would help kick start this page.

Thanks, Alaks Hovel 03:56, 23 August 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alakshovel (talk • contribs)

Your draft is a single line followed by a gigantic list. It doesn't look appropriate for an article yet.Theroadislong (talk) 06:39, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Hello, I have just read the message in which you have left me and just recently read it after an added discussion site I have created. Your objection is justified. Though I completely condemn that particular policy as it really is quite ridiculous. Its really not as trivial as that in which I don’t like the very sight of it. I, prior to the policies I have read, believed that Wikipedia’s articles should be relevant to the smallest degree to the rightful viewpoint of the subject’s nature. It is almost the opposite after I read it and it is very appalling and almost contradicts it as a misinformed encyclopedia. I acknowledge that it isn’t your fault. Sorry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by The Astute Adamant (talk • contribs) 20:34, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment! I work for a PR company and was tasked with posting a Wikipedia page about our client. Obviously, seems like it's a bit more complicated than it sounds. Do you happen to know if it's possible to get a page approved in that situation? Or am I completely disqualified because of my connection. From what I read, I thought that if I add something like the below, that I am okay to add the page? But I may not be able to.

The Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see WP:COIRESPONSE. Truecommunicationmatthew (talk · contribs) has been paid by TRUE Communications on behalf of 100%.

Not trying to hurt the community, just hoping to learn more. The answer may be, "Nope, can't do it." Appreciate your time.

Thanks, Truecommunicationsmatthew (talk) 20:54, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

You are not disqualified, but very much discouraged, writing any article is one of the most difficult tasks on Wikipedia, writing one as a paid editor is massively more difficult and rarely successful, your sources are extremely poor, blogs are not acceptable and neither is the company's own website. Theroadislong (talk) 21:05, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Regardless i haved a neccessary citation you have declined my page Vushtrria Online.

Thank you very much Buddy.

Its easy to click decline button. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BerattKasumi (talk • contribs) 11:47, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

We require multiple in-depth coverage in reliable sources, you have two primary sources which are not independent and a third reference that does not mention Vushtrria Online. Theroadislong (talk) 12:14, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

Dear you can see here the third source, as you have said that doesnt mention VushtrriaOnline.

You can see it below.

https://imgur.com/a/tbI0XZd — Preceding unsigned comment added by BerattKasumi (talk • contribs) 12:42, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

OK that is a mention yes...but it is NOT in-depth coverage. Theroadislong (talk) 12:52, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

Doug Weller talk 12:46, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

Clearly not, I've removed it, we don't link to draft articles. Theroadislong (talk) 12:54, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. Doug Weller talk 13:49, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your quick review and response to the Jesus Calling article submission.

In order to improve this article and move it closer towards submission, below are some comments:

1) The template for the Jesus Calling article was modeled after The Purpose Driven Life Wikipedia article, as they are similar items (both best-selling Christian devotionals).

2) I have no affinities towards or conflicts of interest with the book, other than owning a copy given to me as a gift. In fact, after doing research for the article, I became aware of the book's controversy and included a section as such in the article.

3) The genesis of the article started when looking up the books author, Sarah Young. Instead of finding an article on the best-selling author or her book, came across a poorly-to-unsourced Wikipedia article about Sarah Young (pornographic actress) containing under age sexually graphic content in the lede.

At your convenience, please review the good faith attempt to remove the appearance of an advertisement and resemble more of an encyclopedic entry. I strongly believe this subject is worthy of inclusion and look forward to other editors adding a range of independent, reliable, published sources.

Cheers Wesley Craig (talk) 17:46, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

P.S. If Sarah Young the topless 15-year old pornographic model is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, so should Sarah Young the best-selling author!

WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a good reason for writing an article. Your draft contains promotional content sourced to her own website, namely the number of books sold, we need independent sources for such claims. Theroadislong (talk) 18:50, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

Promotional content has been removed, and independent sources added. Please review for submission. https://en.wikipedia.orghttps://wikifreehand.com/en/Draft:Jesus_Calling Wesley Craig (talk)

		September is an exciting new month for Women in Red's worldwide online editathons! New: Women currently in academics Women + Law Geofocus: Hispanic countries Continuing: #1day1woman Global Initiative Check it out: Monthly achievement initiative All creators of new biographies can keep track of their progress and earn virtual awards. It can be used in conjunction with the above editathons or for any women's biography created in September. Try it out when you create your first biography of the month.
		Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!): Call for members for the Gender Diversity Visibility Community User Group Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women in Red#The Endless Night of Wikipedia’s Notable Woman Problem (To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 01:55, 26 August 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging

I am myself Ad Nawaraj. I can prove you that I am the same person I wrote a Bio about. How can I maintain a references? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nawarajmusic (talk • contribs) 14:52, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I am writing in regards to the draft I made for Cynthia Hoffmann. I believe is a notable figure. She is a principal teacher at The Juilliard School, contributor to a well-received novel, and instructor to many famous opera singers such as Susanna Phillips, Will Liverman, John Brancy, Guang Yang etc...many of whom have Wikipedia articles in their own right. Her line of teaching can be traced back to Manuel Garcia which is very rare today in classical music. She is also a prominent teacher at The Manhattan School of Music and The Curtis Institute of Music where many of her students are raved about in reviews in The NY Times where she is credited as their instructor. She has also performed extensively with the LA Philharmonic and worked with well known pianist, Martin Katz.

Best, Ryan Green — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.86.34.191 (talk) 03:09, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

You declined this draft in July. 213.200.15.168 created a duplicate at Draft:The Forgotten King (2013 film) on August 16. I came upon that and was intrigued by a line on the poster as given at IMDb, which led me to an English-language source with which I expanded the draft. They've now copied that second draft over the original one, so I think you should know as someone working at AfC. (There's also the film poster, which they added today; it's on Commons so I'm about to nominate it for deletion today.) Yngvadottir (talk) 13:23, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

• Joe ashby porter (talk · contribs)
  • User:Joe ashby porter/sandbox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Over the weekend I worked on a version of my Joe Ashby Porter page, which work shows at the history tab. Yet I'm unsure whether that work got through to THEROADISLONG, or what the next step should be.

Joe ashby porter (talk) 15:39, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Joe ashby porter (talk) 15:42, 28 August 2018 (UTC)Over the weekend I worked on my prospective Joe Ashby Porter page, and I tried to send it to you.

Thanks for your help.

Best,

Joe Ashby Porter

I'm sorry I'm not sure what you have done, but none of your content is viewable I'll take a closer look after supper.Theroadislong (talk) 17:08, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at User:Joe ashby porter/sandbox. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 17:35, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Huggle Jimbobtron2007 (talk) 12:41, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

• Alrota10 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Demand Control Kitchen Ventilation (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Could you please provide some examples on how I could better my page on DCKV in order for it to be approved? It was declined a first time and I made changes that I thought improved the article to read better, but it was declined a second time, this time by you. Any guidance on what I could do to improve it to read more like an encyclopedia like you say would be very much appreciated! Thank you in advance for your assistance!

Alrota10 (talk) 20:04, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

Alrota10 (talk) 20:04, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

It needs a complete re-write, please read Wikipedia:How-to, Wikipedia is not a "how to guide" Theroadislong (talk) 20:23, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

I have resubmitted the article for a re-review. Could you please go through that and let me know if it reads better now? If not can you guide me in writing it better or can you show an example?

Thanks, Tina Tinamariyam1990 (talk) 13:42, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

Yes it reads much better but it's only three lines and I don't know that being a "servant of God" makes him notable? I'll leave it for someone else to review. Theroadislong (talk) 15:31, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

Dear Theroadislong, I'm writing you about the TIPS wiki page to ask for a clarification about the "Blatant advertising" issue mentioned in your review.

The page I've created has the pouropose of divulgating this new Eurosystem payment system (like the Target 2 and T2S. It has not the scope of promote it for commecial purposes or to sell something, bcause there is nothing to sell.... it a new way for European citizen to send money istantly (like other Instant_payment worldwide.

I've published the same page in the italian wikipedia (https://it.wikipedia.orghttps://wikifreehand.com/en/Target_instant_payment_settlement) without receiving such kind of comment.

I've declared a potential confict of iterests because I work in a Central Bank, but please consider that as mentioned before that thi article has divulgating purposes only.

I hope you woud appreciate this clarification and might reconsider the review.

Thank you in advance for any suggestion you woud give me in order to improve the quality of this wiki page. --Nicola Caione (talk) 21:16, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

Sentences like this “The Eurosystem’s market infrastructure is evolving and many initiatives are ongoing to promote efficiency, innovation and integration in financial markets in Europe.” are blatant advertising! The fact that you have published the same page on Italian Wikipedia is irrelevant, it should probably be deleted there as well. Theroadislong (talk) 21:34, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

Dear Theroadislong,

Thank you for the hint, I’ll try to rephrase the sentences that are sounding like the one you mentioned using a more neutral language, but please consider I’m not native English speaker. I’m not a representative of the European Central Bank and I’ve selected as references press releases and other independent and reliable sources.

The ECB itself, the Institution promoting the TIPS initiative, it is a public authority like Federal Reserve System, Bank of Japan, International Monetary Fund etc. All these Institutions are independent, reliable and not aimed at making profit from their activities.

Thank you all and best regards,

Nicola Caione (talk) 14:54, 2 September 2018 (UTC) @Kpgjhpjm: @Theroadislong:

Please note that press releases are NOT independent, reliable or suitable. Theroadislong (talk) 15:09, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Generally speaking I agree with your statement, but Wikipedia is full of press release because they come from reliable source, and I suppose that International Authorities are reliable.....

To keep a positive approach I kindly ask you to provide me the references you presume are not reliable, I'll do my best to find better one Nicola Caione (talk) 15:59, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

@Nicola Caione: I recommend you to see other related articles , see how they are written and then re-write yours in an encyclopaedic way with reliable sources. Kpgjhpjm 15:38, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

@Theroadislong: I'm doing a review of the article trying to be encyclopedic :-). I kindly ask you to provide me the references you presume are not reliable, I'll do my best to find better one Nicola Caione (talk) 15:59, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

I've long encouraged article creators to add projects to their article talk pages to foster collaboration. For consistency I guess I should also encourage you as the reviewer promoting the article to mainspace. Regards, Cabayi (talk) 14:12, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, good call, is there somewhere I can find a list of projects for future reference? Theroadislong (talk) 15:56, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Usually I copy from similar pages. For Aspergillus aculeatinus I went to the parent genus Aspergillus & copied from there. For the occasions where there's nothing to copy, there's a project directory at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory. Cabayi (talk) 16:04, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

I have revised the citations. Thank you for your review. Please let me know further info is necessary. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Windy.w.k.smith (talk • contribs) 22:38, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Looking to make proposed changes to Richard Borer profile. Please see below. I would also appreciate all templates being removed as there are no more issues unless you can tell me how I may correct them. https://en.wikipedia.orghttps://wikifreehand.com/en/Richard_Borer

Thank you kindly,

Kelly

H. Richard Borer is an former American politician and current nonprofit executive. Borer was the former mayor of West Haven, Connecticut, and member of the Democratic Party. He is currently President of Goodwill Industries of Southern New England in New Haven, Connecticut. In 1991, Borer was elected as the eighth mayor of the city of West Haven, a position he held for seven terms. During his tenure as mayor, Borer focused on the redevelopment of commercial areas including a new train station on Metro North line for West Haven, redevelopment of Sawmill Road, Savin Rock Conference Center and public safety with a new state of the art Police Station. Borer serves on the board of directors for Goodwill International and formerly the Leadership Circle of Goodwill of Southern New England. He currently serves on the New Haven Workforce Alliance, Gateway Community College Foundation and as commissioner of the Milford Redevelopment and Housing Partnership. --Thehappyworkaholic (talk) 16:06, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

As repeatedly suggested, you need to discuss this on the article talk page not here. The templates stay until the issues are resolved, his notability is NOT established and you continue to edit the article as a paid editor so the COI notice remains in place. Theroadislong (talk) 16:09, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi There,

I would like to add these articles to references section of Richard Borer page... https://en.wikipedia.orghttps://wikifreehand.com/en/Richard_Borer Can you please let me know if they are compliant are they are notable sources.

Thank you kindly,

Kelly --Thehappyworkaholic (talk) 16:12, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

https://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/06/nyregion/and-the-winner-is-west-haven-for-now.html https://www.nhregister.com/news/article/New-site-in-mind-for-police-station-11695112.php http://scrcog.org/wp-content/uploads/board/2014/1_scrcog_Jan14.pdf https://www.nhregister.com/connecticut/article/Former-West-Haven-mayor-named-to-Milford-housing-11406433.php http://westhaven.hotfix.emanagersite.com/departments-Human-Resources.htm https://www.ci.milford.ct.us/board-of-aldermen/minutes/010416-aldermen-minutes http://www.nawc.org/uploads/documents-and-publications/documents/document_a1638c71-50df-4e74-b093-057048c28714.pdf http://www.workforcealliance.biz/download_file/view_inline/190 https://www.nhregister.com/connecticut/article/Former-West-Haven-mayor-named-to-Milford-housing-11406433.php http://gordongroupholdings.com/200-million-100-store-center-proposed-in-west-haven/ https://books.google.com/books?id=vE2pxBoQINMC&pg=PA321&lpg=PA321&dq=mayor+richard+borer&source=bl&ots=_BcSmnfynl&sig=cILeojn-BYEqws29pIZ7206UetU&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj73pXJtaHdAhVDdt8KHW0sD0g4FBDoATAEegQIBhAB http://www.thistlegroup.net/whcity/srcc/ http://www.whecocamp.com/history https://givegreater.guidestar.org/profile/1055467/gateway-community-college-foundation.aspx http://gordongroupholdings.com/200-million-100-store-center-proposed-in-west-haven/ Thehappyworkaholic (talk) 16:12, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Did you not read my comment above??? "As repeatedly suggested, you need to discuss this on the article talk page not here" Theroadislong (talk) 16:15, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Theroadislong,

Thank you for your message. I wanted to reach out to you to give me some guidance on creating a page for Ambleside Schools International and their affiliate members. I am trying to sort out the world of educators connected to Charlotte Mason. ASI is a fast-growing K-12 organization, but there is surprisingly little out there by way of third-party informational sources. What advice do you have to making an encyclopedic on such an organization with so little additional information outside of the organization's own site? Thanks!Rkwestervelt (talk) 20:39, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

It's very simple, we only summarise what reliable, independent published sources have to say about a subject. If there are no such sources then we cannot have an article. Theroadislong (talk) 20:42, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

I did some more digging and found some news articles that might do the trick. Thanks! Rkwestervelt (talk) 21:23, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello Theroadislong,

Thank you for reviewing the wiki page I put up. I'm new to Wikipedia. Could you share some suggestions on how I can fix the tone of the article so that it's appropriate for Wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trisphi (talk • contribs) 11:43, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

You are being paid to edit so my help will be minimal, I detest paid editing, we are mostly volunteers here, it is NOT a place to promote your non notable business, please read Wikipedia:Your first article as a start and also the links on your talk page. Theroadislong (talk) 11:51, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

I have written an article which is about me as my life as an author. You have rejected it because of the references. Some of the references were about my latest book, 'Psomi' and some were interviews that I gave for lit magazines. I will resubmit without any references to see if the article passes. Thank you, I will be waiting for your response. Christos --Christos tsiailis (talk) 13:23, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

Articles on Wikipedia must be adequately supported by independent reliable sources so that information can be verified. We have no interest in what you want to say about yourself, only what the reliable sources say. Theroadislong (talk) 13:27, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

Could point me those sources please? I would very much like to see them.UltimateHope (talk) 11:07, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

There are 330 sources in the Catholic Church sexual abuse cases article including these…

• https://www.vox.com/2018/8/20/17721292/catholic-sex-abuse-priest-scandals-pennsylvania-report-why-now
• https://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/religion/2004-06-19-church-abuse_x.htm
• https://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/religion/2004-06-19-church-abuse_x.htm
• http://www.abc.net.au/religion/articles/2011/05/27/3229135.htm

I will add some to the article if you like? Theroadislong (talk) 11:23, 10 September 2018 (UTC) That article says nothing about it being widespread, and widespread=/=prevalence, so even with those sources your original edit would still be problematic. I’ll check those sources first.UltimateHope (talk) 11:25, 10 September 2018 (UTC) “Widespread” would be a good word, but it should be in the body first. Don’t put it in the lead.UltimateHope (talk) 11:28, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

		100000 Edits
		Congratulations on reaching 100000 edits. You have achieved a milestone that only 513 editors have been able to accomplish. The Wikipedia Community thanks you for your continuing efforts. Keep up the good work!

-- Dolotta (talk) 04:23, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

• If you would prefer a user box on your user page the template {{User 100,000 edits}} will do the trick for you. -- Dolotta (talk) 16:35, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Theroadislong -

I don't know if you remember me, but I just thought I'd pop around to see if you might be willing to take a look at the latest edits I made to the March Networks draft over at AfC. I've toned down some of the language, but would be interested in getting your take on whether it's enough. The draft has been awaiting review for some time now, and I want to do everything I can to make sure it meets NPOV and notability. I'm definitely open to any feedback and/or recommendations you'd be willing to offer.

Thanks very much!

Mdrozdowski (talk) 20:51, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

No... I have no interest in helping paid editors. Theroadislong (talk) 21:14, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

I can understand that. Thanks anyway for your response and have a good one.

Mdrozdowski (talk) 14:42, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

The reason why the sentence says “Abrahamic religions” even though three prominent Abrahamic faiths are crossed out as “Western” is because monotheism is an essential part of Western civilisation and the Abrahamic religions are monotheistic and Platonist in nature. Eastern Christianity is an exception because it is what created the East-West dichotomy in the first place.UltimateHope (talk) 21:18, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

I already posted the above on the talk page. PLEASE respond.UltimateHope (talk) 21:23, 13 September 2018 (UTC) I already posted sources on the talk page. Please respond.UltimateHope (talk) 21:48, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

In terms of policy, I think you did the right thing here, but it feels wrong for Wikipedia to be stating things as fact that are factually incorrect. So I've posted to Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#How_do_we_deal_with_a_RS_being_factually_incorrect.3F to ask for advice on how to handle this. Please do chime in if you have any suggestions. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 08:36, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

I've been bold and made the change that was suggested there. Cheers. Theroadislong (talk) 11:06, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi Theroadislong,

I have been editing on Wikipedia for sometime but this is my 2nd attempt to create an article. You can find my submission about The/Nudge Foundation here: https://en.wikipedia.orghttps://wikifreehand.com/en/Draft:The/Nudge_Foundation

However, it has been more than 8 weeks and the review has not taken place. I have attempted to put multiple credible sources including Indian and international outlets to verify the notability of the subject. Additionally, I am in no way associated with the subject matter involved, and this is an attempt to increase my submissions and contributions on Wikipedia.

Please let me know in case this article is good enough to be accepted according to Wiki guidelines. In case I need to make any improvements, I would appreciate support from your end.

Thanks a lot, in advance. ParadiseStark (talk) 11:56, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

I don't know much about you (yet) but you seem like a good chap. Is there a particular reason why this is a redlink? Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Theroadislong --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 08:41, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Too busy with routine editing to take on more responsibilities! Theroadislong (talk) 11:07, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

It's a volunteer thing. You need not busy yourself any more or less. If you're an admin and see something you can fix with your tools, you do. If you're not an admin, you have to ask someone else. There's no rule that admins need to stop editing. In fact, lack of content work is a regular reason for RfAs being opposed. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 12:10, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Hey so I'm wondering what else I have to do to have this page https://en.wikipedia.orghttps://wikifreehand.com/en/Draft:Jeff_Hunt_(music_producer) at least turned into a non-Draft, full Wikipedia page. I've cited several reputable sources that link back to Jeff Hunt and prove his affiliation with the label Table of the Elements. I would love to make it live so that more people are aware of it and able to contribute.

Let me know. Thanks. Alaks Hovel 13:23, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Your draft Draft:Jeff Hunt (music producer) has only one sentence and a VERY long list, it would help if you added sourced content which explained why he is notable, awards, reviews in national newspapers, books, etc. It has also not been submitted for review. Theroadislong (talk) 13:34, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi there,

Thank you for your feedback in regards to my article. I will try to gather more content and sources.

Thanks again,

Somersethistoryuk — Preceding unsigned comment added by Somersethistoryuk (talk • contribs) 14:36, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello,

I am curious as to why you considered the links to a Doreen Virtue interview as unreliable but have left other links to an interview standing. Please explain your rational for this.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.253.119.138 (talk) 16:21, 14 September 2018 (UTC) 

This link doesn't mention her and we don't use Youtube as a source for anything, because it is considered unreliable. Theroadislong (talk) 16:34, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Please Do not assume it is my client by you saying politely, it isn't It is a way of me specifying the article not a person relationship or

paying getting paid

if that is what you guys do it's fine 

Not me

what is Wikipedia criteria ? 

Thank you, but not interested in being part of it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ariadnne2018Mgmt (talk • contribs) 17:49, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi there, Wonder if there is a Major criteria regarding Article,

I have to add near 40 references more  of my client but,  I did hoped 5 which i Submitted were not enough relevant then ?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ariadnne2018Mgmt (talk • contribs) 17:14, 14 September 2018 (UTC) 

Thank you ! But You makde a mistake

Contemplating my word 'client' for a relation of work which is not and has not ever been,

I refer client as for English is not my first language and was about to specify the subject of my submission as ' client - subject- Article ' please delete that warning, since you have no wrounds to prove it.

I live in Europe im a citizen and have all rights under commission to request your removal. As a moral person Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ariadnne2018Mgmt (talk • contribs) 18:05, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

You are editing using your real name representing Ariadnne Entertainment Management.Theroadislong (talk) 18:10, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

However no monies involved, no work relation. No wrounds to accuse us me or other publicly.

Please remove warning on page, according to European rights of Information we request you Remove warning on articles page

work our best without Wikipedia at this moment Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ariadnne2018Mgmt (talk • contribs) 18:27, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I am new to wikipedia. I have read some guidelines but apparently not understood them sufficiently. I wanted to fill a gap, because I have noticed that there is an article about Global Telecommunications System (GTS) but not about WIS that can been seen as its enhancement/evolution. I linked my article to documents at WMO (World Meteorological Organization) site - is this the problem? Do you consider it a non-independent source of information? Or do you consider the WIS not important enough to deserve a separate article? Josusky (talk) 09:32, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

We only summarise what reliable, independent published sources have to say about a subject. If there are no such sources then we cannot have an article. Theroadislong (talk) 09:37, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Please perform due diligence when advising someone of something as serious as edit warring. The item in question was brought to the talk page and yet the other editor continued to revert and not abide by the rules of WP.2605:E000:1301:4462:8C64:A6E3:E51C:CFEC (talk) 15:45, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Yes you took it to the talk page where you were told " The issue is that your writing is of poor quality and does not improve the article." and yet you still added it back. that is edit warring. Theroadislong (talk) 15:47, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

How is the writing not appropriate to WP standards?2605:E000:1301:4462:8C64:A6E3:E51C:CFEC (talk) 15:58, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

You would have to ask user:TheOldJacobite about that, but terms like “ washed-up lawyer, Danny Snyder,” and “The boys pull a prank with a hot dog cart “ certainly don’t read as encyclopaedic. Theroadislong (talk) 16:06, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi -

I am not sure what the issue is with the resubmitted Wiki. We followed all of your guidelines. There is one blog post resource but it is an outside, reputable source - The Times Union. You have made this process almost impossible - we have submitted this post 3 times now and every, single time there is an issue. Clearly state what we do to make this an acceptable Wiki post, please. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RenderTribe (talk • contribs) 13:25, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

You say "we" Wikipedia accounts are for single person use only. The subject is not notable, you are being paid to edit and have failed to disclose this. Theroadislong (talk) 13:33, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello thanks for your advice "Please write about the topic from a neutral point of view in an encyclopedic manner."

Could you give me an example from the article to help me on my way?

Thanks

Indipage (talk) 20:31, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

There may be other place called "Topsham" but the title is disambiguated from them, so a hatnote to the DAB is not needed as none are in Devon. Crouch, Swale (talk) 10:23, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

Ah yes, you could well be right, sorry. Theroadislong (talk) 10:33, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

I have used Wikipedia a lot to find out about things. You would think Wikipedia of all places, would be a resource for the things you need to stay safe and progress through life. I had a simple problem with a water faucet in my bathroom. Everywhere I searched on the internet and then even at hardware stores, plumbing supply businesses and even manufacturers, personnel did not give me the answer to what I thought was the most elementary questions, concerning a valve for my bathroom faucet. Once I bought numerous parts and assembled what little information I could gather, I got my answers. I just thought I should share it. I guess Wikipedia is not the place to do that. Do you have any suggestions. I know there are people out there with the same dilemma I had. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sheffield3exp (talk • contribs) 14:59, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

Your article is original research which we cannot host. Articles on Wikipedia must be adequately supported by reliable sources so that information can be verified.

We only summarise what reliable, independent published sources have to say about a subject.If there are no such sources then we cannot have an article. You could upload your research to a blog or forum, but Wikipedia is not the place I'm afraid, good luck. Theroadislong (talk) 15:04, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

There was no COI in Dave Roller's original Wikipedia page. All information can be documented by articles and pictures. So how is that a conflict of Interest? Wikipedia should be glad to have all the information that Dave Roller provided. Also, Mr. Roller has asked that his birth date be removed from Wikipedia and it was removed but now that his information has been deleted and rewritten his birth date has been added back. Please remove his date of birth as that is sensitive information of a living person.

Thank you! Mmm1313 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mmm1313 (talk • contribs) 21:29, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

The conflict of interest arises because you are representing the subject of the article, you are welcome to suggest changes on the articles talk page, but all content has to be sourced, this doesn't have to be on line, it can be from magazines and newspapers. I can remove the date of birth but it is clearly freely available information on many websites that mentions him. Theroadislong (talk) 21:37, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello Theroadislong,

Thank you for giving feedback on my draft articles Draft:Natasha Mudhar and Draft:Sterling Media earlier this year following my post in Teahouse. Since then, I have been working to change both pages to better fit Wiki's standards based on the feedback you gave.

I would greatly appreciate it if you could take a look at the revised articles and let me know if you feel it is acceptable for approval or if you have further feedback?

Kind regards, DAL123 (talk) 08:54, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi Theroadislong

Hope your well,

Thanks for looking into my Wikipedia sandbox draft for approval, I would like to give my deepest gratitude for looking into this page, I currently edited a section on the biography and it seems the area beneath the 2nd picture when it was stated has gone missing, is there a way of getting that section back? As it contains information about past performances at the Mercury Prize Award Winner + OBE Talvin Singh Anokha Tent performance by Sinius & Atmospheric Research?

I look forward to hearing from you,

Kind Regards,

-Daljit

I have no way of knowing which article you are referring to and as you are logged out your edit history doesn't tell me either. Theroadislong (talk) 09:28, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi Editor

please accept my apologies, here is the link as requested: https://en.wikipedia.orghttps://wikifreehand.com/en/User:Daljitkundi/sandbox?wprov=sfti1

i also notice my discography has gone missing, their seems to be a duplication.

deepest gratitude,

-Daljit — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daljitkundi (talk • contribs) 11:56, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

If you look at the edit history you can see that you removed these, your draft is an autobiography which is strongly discouraged it also has no sources and will not be acceptable without them. Theroadislong (talk) 12:21, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

thanks for the information theroadislong, deeply appriciate it, will have another re-edit later on this evening to correct it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daljitkundi (talk • contribs) 13:19, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi Theroadislong, can you help me understand why Jacqui Larsen is not considered notable enough to have her own page? ArtHistorian1977 also reviewed the page, but did not flag her as not notable. She has won multiple awards, exhibited in multiple places across America (including several solo shows), published multiple times, and has works in multiple permanent collections. Her work has been reviewed by multiple secondary sources. Please help me know why you consider her not notable enough. Lizdonakey (talk) 16:10, 20 September 2018 (UTC)lizdonakey

there is no mention of any awards in the article? Theroadislong (talk) 16:16, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

The awards for Jacqui Larsen are listed under "Fellowships and Publications." I can change the header to more explicitly state awards as well if that helps. Fellowships are also awards (including the four-state fellowship that she was awarded). Lizdonakey (talk) 16:22, 20 September 2018 (UTC)lizdonakey

Those are not notable awards, and you should be editing the draft here Draft:Jacqui Larsen not another misspelt version here Jacqui larsen

Dear Thereodislong,

I am not sure that this page qualifies for speedy deletion because the points raised in the original deletion discussion have been addressed. It is not merely a CSD-G4. The article went through a deletion review (https://en.wikipedia.orghttps://wikifreehand.com/en/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2018_September_4) and was treated as a WP:REFUND and restored to draftspace. The main point raised in the original deletion discussion were the lack of citations showing this subject's notability. Numerous additional citations were added to show he has been extensively written about and interviewed by third parties in books, magazines and videos. The article has also been fleshed out. Mooji is well-known in his particular field and the author of 7 books. Is there anything in particular you feel needs to be changed in order for the request for speedy deletion to be removed? I would appreciate any input you may have. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sumantra1 (talk • contribs) 16:41, 20 September 2018 (UTC) Sumantra1 (talk) 16:42, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Yes it was restored to draft space but you have now moved it to main space bypassing the review procedure. There is nothing inherently notable about publishing 7 books unless they have been the subject of in-depth coverage in independent sources, Youtube and his own website are not reliable sources. Theroadislong (talk) 16:52, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

I agree with you entirely that youtube and his own website are not reliable sources, and this is what the issue was with the original page. The new page has many new citations, including 6 magazines, 2 newspapers, and 3 books that have articles about Mooji. The citation of youtube and his own website were use sparingly to illustrate him meeting his own teacher and particular aspects of what he teaches. I was not aware that it is required for all articles to go through a review process, which seems to take up to 2 months. Is this what you are suggesting is needed even with the changes that were made to address the original issues? Sumantra1 (talk) 19:40, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

I'm a little concerned with the comments which you say there were no outside independent sources. There are nothing but outside independent sources listed except one study which was done independently. I reviewed a number of the pages yo created looking for what I should be looking for and I came across a number of pages you made on different potters which are significantly less relevant than this page. Some accurate constructive comments would be appreciated. Joedirosa (talk) 09:53, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

I have commented on the draft again re sources...

• https://www.onox-inc.com/researches this is their own website so not independent.
• https://www.amazon.com/Money-freedom-application-disastrous-consequences/dp/B0007FQAXY this is a book by a family member, not independent.
• Rights Vs. Privileges: An Analysis of Two Powerful Privileged Interests That Have Deprived Us of Fundamental Rights. is another book by a family member, not independent.
• https://localwiki.org/oakland/James_de_Fremery is not a reliable source it’s a local wiki page.
• https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/7571808/james-de_fremery Find a grave is not a reliable source.
• http://www.jones-hamilton.com/about-our-company.html this is a primary source.

Hope this helps. Theroadislong (talk) 10:08, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for taking a look. The books you say are published by family members are not family members of the private equity company that owns the company now. From what I understand they have been out of the picture for 2 decades. I understand the local wiki is generally not acceptable but that article has 9 different references which I imagine I could just use instead. The Our Studies page references independent studies from defunct independent medical journals which stopped being published before the internet was around. Do you have an idea on how to reference them another way? Are patents considered reliable outside sources from USPTO?

How about these references?

Misson, William (1961). "U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, Fluid Dispenser, June 20, 1961".
Mattisson, Grant (1979). "U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, Foot Liquid dispenser, October 9, 1979".
"E Byrd, O. (1966). Athlete's foot.. Western medicine; the medical journal of the west. 7. 142-4".  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joedirosa (talk • contribs) 10:20, 21 September 2018 (UTC) 

I don't think patents are considered reliable sources for notability, but the E Bird book looks much better and yes you could use the references from the local Wiki page if they were relevant, but I don't see Onox mentioned in them? Theroadislong (talk) 10:27, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

You nominated Mooji for speedy deletion under CSD G4 (Recreation of a page that was deleted per a deletion discussion). I have declined your nomination, because of changes to the article, including adding new sources. G4 is rather vague, and is, in my experience, subject to widely varying interpretations. The definition of G4 uses the expressions "sufficiently identical" and "substantially identical", and it hinges on how broadly or narrowly one interprets "sufficiently" and "substantially". My own view is that since the purpose of CSD G4 is to prevent waste of time by having another AfD where exactly the same reasons will apply, it follows that if any changes made don't address the reasons given in the AfD then the article is sufficiently identical for that purpose. Taking it that way I might have deleted the article, but I have seen deletions in this kind of situation torn apart at deletion review on the grounds that the new version is not "identical" to the old one, and since this one has already been taken to deletion review once it might well happen again. Also the AfD outcome was by no means totally clear cut, which further weakens the case for using that AfD as justification for deleting again.

Personally I don't know whether the subject of the article satisfies Wikipedia's notability guidelines or not: a quick look at cited references shows that some of them clearly don't contribute to notability, but some look as though they do. I also note that your CSD nomination had stayed in place for more than 20 hours before I declined it, which suggests that other administrators regarded it as a case which was not clear cut: it is almost inconceivable that in that time there had not been several administrators who had looked at it and decided not to make a decision on it. You may like to take it back to a second AfD discussion. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 11:00, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Two more thoughts since I wrote the message above.

1. I forgot to mention that the definition of G4 says "This criterion also does not cover content undeleted via a deletion review", which in this case rules it out altogether, never mind the considerations I mentioned above.
2. Since the deletion review approved restoration as a draft, not as an article, and since its return to main space is clearly far from uncontoversial, I shall return it to draft space, so that its suitability can be assessed by an independent reviewer. I don't think that it is suitable for the person who has had it restored as a draft to allow improvement should be judge and jury in deciding whether his or her own improvements are sufficient. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 11:13, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Thank you that is an ideal solution. Theroadislong (talk) 11:30, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the many thanks. AFD is amusing sometimes.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 21:58, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Indeed it is! Theroadislong (talk) 22:00, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Why would the DailyMail not be an acceptable resource? why would a youtube video with 9,000,000 views posted by a record lable not be credible? YouTube I might understand but the DailyMail is legitimate publication. Joedirosa (talk) 01:59, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Please read Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources/Perennial sources The Daily Mail and Youtube are most definitely NOT reliable sources. Theroadislong (talk) 06:39, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

I removed all wikipedia sources from my article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Memedoggo (talk • contribs) 13:30, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

2405:205:2303:A8C9:0:0:F14:28AD (talk) 12:13, 23 September 2018 (UTC)Why are you editing Rameshwar sahu profile.I am his grandson.every detail is correct which I am writing.2405:205:2303:A8C9:0:0:F14:28AD (talk) 12:13, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Please read the comments on your talk page you are adding unsourced material to the article whilst removing the sourced content. Theroadislong (talk) 12:20, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for the suggestions. it was really helpful . I made those changes and hope it now meets up the Wikipedia standards. please feel free to let me know if there need to be any more such improvements.

Snakamelian (talk) 15:49, 23 September 2018 (UTC)