User talk:Devonian Wombat

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4

I have no idea what of the above material has been fixed and which hasn't. Serendi^podous 10:36, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A few days ago, new page patrollers got the backlog to zero. Due to the unprecedented success of the backlog drive, it will be ending early—at the end of 24 October, or in approximately two hours.

Barnstars will be awarded as soon as the coords can tally the results. Streak awards will be allocated based on the first three weeks of the drive, with the last three days being counted as part of week three.

Great work everyone! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:50, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

For accidentally editing New People's Ecologic and Social Union, thinking it was my user sandbox. Devonian Wombat (talk) 01:54, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

		The Reviewer Barnstar
		This award is given to Devonian Wombat for collecting more than 50 points doing reviews and re-reviews, in the October NPP backlog reduction drive. Thank you for your contributions. Zippybonzo | Talk (he|him) 09:16, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

		The New Page Patroller's Barnstar
		For over 100 article reviews during 2022. Thank you for patrolling new pages and helping us out with the backlog! -MPGuy2824 (talk) 03:27, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I noticed you rejected my latest draft proposal for Draft:Ma’ I Got A Family as the page didn't have enough secondary, reliable, or independent sources. I have made edits since then and added the sources, however, it doesn't allow me to submit a proposal again. Could you take a look at it, Please?

Sincerely, Zwap2019 (talk)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Results of the 2022 Victorian state election (Legislative Council), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David Davis.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for participating in Articles for Creation's January 2023 Backlog Drive! — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 00:30, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Devonian Wombat. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Duy Long Nguyen, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 17:01, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Devonian Wombat, I hope that you've been well. Some time back, you reviewed the draft I'd submitted for Mother Cabrini Health Foundation and also helped with a couple of updates. I'm wondering if you'd be able to spare a few minutes to look over a request to add information following the foundation's latest round of grants? The request is on the Talk page, here.

For disclosure, I am the Director of Communications for Mother Cabrini Health Foundation and have a conflict of interest. Thanks for any help you can give, Bvar on Wiki (talk) 21:02, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Bvar on Wiki:, sure, just made the edits. Devonian Wombat (talk) 21:32, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Bvar on Wiki (talk) 04:05, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Devonian Wombat. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Duy Long Nguyen".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! Hey man im josh (talk) 16:14, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Devonian Wombat, I am very interested in agile methodology and I decided to write this article because it is one of the few founders that doens't have. According to your suggestions, I have improved the structure and I have completed it with new references that make it admissible for Wikipedia, I ask you please if you can take it into account when revising the article. Please let me know if you have new suggestions. All best! Libros abiertos (talk) 08:52, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol | May 2023 Backlog Drive
On 1 May, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of redirects patrolled and for maintaining a streak throughout the drive. Article patrolling is not part of the drive. Sign up here! There is a possibility that the drive may not run if there are <20 registered participants. Participants will be notified if this is the case.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:11, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jacob Hornberger, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jacob Hornberger (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Devonian, I see that you declined my submission for the article for White Reaper’s 2023 album, Asking for a Ride, because they’re “either not about the album itself, are highly promotional or are interviews.” If I keep my original sources but add more reliable sources to the citations list, would the article still be acceptable? In other words, can you please help me with the resources (and maybe add more content to the draft)? KevinML (talk) 14:46, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Devonian Wombat, I created this page Draft:Owner.com which was moved into draft and is now in AFC review. I came to your talk page from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_new_page_reviewers

The draft has significant and in-depth coverage in multiple independent reliable sources to show notability. Also WP:THREESOURCES are on the talk page of the draft.

This is just my second attempt in creating a new page as a Wikipedian. Can you please give your feedback if the draft page looks fine. Thank you Herobuddies (talk) 21:54, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Herobuddies:, it looks good, though it must be noted that articles on companies are extremely hard to get through AFC to the strict WP:CORPDEPTH guidelines surrounding acceptable sourcing, which state among other things that articles on fundraising announcements cannot be used to establish notability. The Vice article is good, and the two Business Insider articles plus the Mercury News article also look decent, but those are behind paywalls and are thus difficult to parse. If you can find any more articles like those four and use them to add more information to the article, I'm sure it'd help get it accepted. Devonian Wombat (talk) 23:11, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Devonian Wombat, very insightful, thank you for taking time to give such helpful feedback. I have found and added non paywall protected new references and also some content from it. Will this help?

1 https://www.foxbusiness.com/technology/high-school-dropout-company-free-delivery-restaurants

2 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2020-12-22/how-profitboss-helps-restaurants-survive-during-the-pandemic-video

or

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=456eHDT4yU0 for Bloomberg tv news

3 https://techcrunch.com/2022/03/03/owner-com-independent-restaurants/

More non paywall protected references

4 https://www.vice.com/en/article/k7awpm/this-startup-is-saving-restaurants-from-heavy-delivery-apps-fees

5 https://www.mercurynews.com/2021/03/05/meal-delivery-high-school-dropouts-bay-area-startup-aims-to-save-restaurants-from-fees-karens/ Herobuddies (talk) 18:14, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sent by Zippybonzo using MediaWiki message delivery at 06:58, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am interested to know why the Victor Sarkis draft article is continually rejected.

There have not been many players from Brazil on the tour, and Sarkis is currently the only one.

He played recently in the 2023 Championship League and made a century break in the single frame he won against Thepchaiya Un-Nooh.

There are players, who have articles, whose "notability" is, in my opinion, less than or equal to Sarkis. Here are a few:

• Xing Zihao
• Long Zehuang
• Mostafa Dorgham
• Manasawin Phetmalaikul
• Liam Pullen
• Liam Graham
• Jiang Jun
• Ishpreet Singh Chadha
• Liu Hongyu
• He Guoqiang
• Baipat Siripaporn
• Ahmed Aly Elsayed

There are, I am sure, many more that could be added to this list.  Alan  (talk) 10:57, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@AlH42:, I am not overly familiar with Snooker, so forgive me if I make some assumptions here, but the rather permissive guidelines listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Cue sports/Notability don't mention participation in any specific Snooker tournament as proof of notability. I looked through several pages on the Championship League and it seemed to me that though most players who participated in it were notable, quite a few (mainly those who performed badly in the tournament, such as Sarkis) did not have articles. Since Sarkis didn't seem to be prominent enough to be assumed notable, I fell back on WP:GNG for determining if he was notable.

Your draft unfortunately fails the GNG requirements of having two reliable secondary sources devote significant coverage to the subject. The first reference is to Victor Sarkis' Twitter account, a primary source. The second reference is his statistical listing on WST, and statistical listings are considered not to provide significant coverage. The third reference is better, but as it was published by the WPBSA themselves I was reluctant to consider it towards a GNG pass, and by itself it would not have been enough anyway. Since Sarkis seemed like he could be notable, I did an extensive search looking for more sources but unfortunately come up with nothing. The closest thing to significant coverage I could find was a single-sentence mention in an article detailing an Armenian Snooker prodigy who had recently beaten Sarkis.

With regard to the articles you've listed, I agree from a glance that quite a few of them don't look notable, and if you feel that any of them should be deleted you can nominate them at Articles for Deletion. However, I do think Sarkis could still be notable, and I'd definitely recommend you ask for assistance in finding sources at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Snooker, they're very active over there and I'm sure they would be happy to help you out. They definitely know a lot more than I do, that's for sure! As a start, I'd recommend using Google Translate to search for articles on Sarkis in Portuguese, since if there's coverage out there that's the language it would likely be in.

Cheers for bringing up your concerns, and good luck with your draft! Devonian Wombat (talk) 12:26, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

For clarity - not "my" draft - someone else's. I was just interested.  Alan  (talk) 12:41, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Just for your information. As I said, this is not my article. The only reason I'm interested in Sarkis has to do with the recent work carried out by users in the WT:SNOOKER group. We were trying to stop IP users from vandalising snooker players' nicknames. This has been a problem for a long time, especially during the World Championships. The ultimate decision reached by the group was to create a protected sub-template just for player's nicknames. This was very successful and it all works well. Now every player who has a valid and properly referenced nickname has an entry in the protected template. The vast majority of the references come from https://wst.tv/players/ which is the official players' list from the World Snooker Tour. There is only one player with a properly referenced WST nickname who does not have a Wikipedia article, and that is Victor Sarkis. I am pedantic by nature and this is a loose end I would like to tie up.

Regarding the players I listed above, I would not like to see any of their articles deleted. They are all young people at the start of their careers. Who knows - the next "Rocket" could be among them.  Alan  (talk) 20:51, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Wombat! Can you look at the article Draft:Ahmed Ali Banskandi and tell if it is eligible to be resubmitted for review or not? Please! Regards, Khaatir (talk) 09:43, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Khaatir:, If the article was submitted to AfC as it stands, it would almost certainly be rejected. The issues with promotional language still exist, among other examples Banskandi is described as a "great Jamiat leader", "he proved his excellent leadership", "He sacrificed his life for the welfare activities of the people and Islam." These are examples of peacock terms, and should be replaced with more neutral and dry language. Devonian Wombat (talk) 13:31, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Devonian Wombat Thanks for pointing out the bugs! Actually this content was created by someone who doesn't know how to use Wikipedia, I have made many corrections. I will now clean up the article from the errors pointed out by you and try my best to be unbiased. Khaatir (talk) 13:40, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Devonian Wombat I have corrected the errors you pointed out. If there is anything else, please guide me. Khaatir (talk) 19:42, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Devonian Wombat I have made many corrections to the article. Do such things still exist, as you pointed out? Please inform me so that I can re-submit the article without worry. Khaatir (talk) 15:56, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Devonian Wombat As per your guidance, I tried to revise and correct the article as much as possible with a critical eye. A portion of the article was also corrected by another user. I have since resubmitted it. Can you re-check and review, please? Khaatir (talk) 18:47, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comparison between the article at the time submissions were declined and the article in its current form Khaatir (talk) 18:59, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Khaatir:, there are still several problems with how the article is worded, especially with how flowery some of the language is, but it is better. I've taken liberty to remove a sentence and clean up some wording, but I think the article can be accepted now. Devonian Wombat (talk) 02:34, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Devonian Wombat Thanks for encouraging me. Khaatir (talk) 02:44, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is a new requested move discussion in progress for the Charles III article. Since you participated in the previous discussion, I thought you might like to know about this one. Cheers. Rreagan007 (talk) 06:09, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Devonian Wombat , hope you are doing good! Recently, you rejected my AFC submission Draft:Nikhil Kamath saying it reads like an advertisement. However, I have also added a chess controversy related to the subject with multiple sources. Also, the tonality of the draft is neutral. Hence, I was wondering, how can this draft still sounds like an advertisement? Can you please guide me in your free time? Thanks a lot. Himalayan7914 (talk) 11:56, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Himalayan7914:, my concern was mainly with the awards and recognition section, since it only lists items such as Kamath being recognised as a billionaire by Forbes as well as numerous 'awards' from what look to me like unreliable publications that mostly advertise rather than cover the people within them. If you removed that section I would be willing to accept the article. Devonian Wombat (talk) 00:30, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Devonian Wombat , thanks for your valuable input. As suggested, I have removed the Awards and recognition section from Draft:Nikhil Kamath and resubmitted it for article creation. I have realised my error. While the sources I previously added are considered reputable media outlets in India, but not all of them are considered reliable according to Wikipedia. Hence, as suggested I have removed it totally. Kindly accept the draft submission. And once again, thank you for guiding me. Himalayan7914 (talk) 10:31, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Devonian Wombat , hope you are doing well! Can you also review my another article Draft:Harsh Jain in your free time and let me know if you have any feedback on it? Thanks a lot! Himalayan7914 (talk) 09:36, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Devonian Wombat, hope I'm doing this the right way. You declined my article for Gary K. Burger because the "references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article," and the sources don't show "significant coverage." I just wanted to ask if you could offer an example of the types of sources that need to be improved? I linked to several news sources about two cases that were very newsworthy in the St. Louis area. Is part of the issue that some of the articles are behind a paywall? I appreciate any guidance you can provide. Thank you! Ericvjensen (talk) 12:43, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ericvjensen: The main problem with the sources is that they simply do not give enough coverage to Gary Burger. I checked the news reports you cited, and they only gave a brief mention of his name along with a short quote, which is not enough. Generally, two full-length paragraphs is considered the minimum for significant coverage. Devonian Wombat (talk) 23:18, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Devonian Wombat. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Terran 1, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 19:04, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Contrary to many of the messages that are left to you, I thank you for making me aware of the GNG content, which may be sometimes very heavily and well-referenced but still not pass the threshold.

Thank you and I will continue to look for material to submit for drafts on other topics.

Thank you once again, and have a good weekend ahead! CoryGlee (talk) 14:36, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You recently approved my article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Girl_With_a_Pimply_Face

A question: What is your appraisal of the recently instituted protocols for new articles? The process appears to be more protracted than that for Good Article requests. "Four months or more" appears to indicate that the number of reviewers are not enough to expedite the process. Any insights into why the protocols were changed? Concerned. 36hourblock (talk) 17:27, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@36hourblock:, if what you were referring to is the process of Articles for Creation itself, then the reason it was implemented was because a massive glut of newly created articles had completely overwhelmed New Pages Patrol and led to a lot of blatant vandalism and spam entering Wikipedia. In my mind the process is working quite well, while there may be a long backlog the vast majority of submissions get reviewed within a few days. Personally, I think the main problem causing such a large backlog is that there is a large contingent of editors who react with scurrilous personal attacks if someone makes a call around notability that later turns out to have been mistaken, so reviewers are reluctant to deal with anything borderline and just take the easy option of leaving maybe-notable drafts in the backlog. Devonian Wombat (talk) 01:51, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your thoughtful response. You quickly approved the article cites above. My concern is that several other article submissions, formatted and sources almost identically, have not been confirmed for posting for weeks or months.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Jean_Beicke
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:The_Sailor%_Son
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:The_Colored_Girls_of_Passenack%E2%80%_and_New
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:An_Old_Time_Raid
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:A_Night_in_June
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:The_Knife_of_the_Times_(short_story)

Not sure why. Can you provide some insights? --36hourblock (talk) 17:54, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@36hourblock: I can’t really speak for the minds of other reviewers, but I think the main ‘problem’ (not actually a problem, but it might be what’s holding you up) is that literature isn’t a topic that gets submitted to AFC all that often, and so a lot of reviewers might be unfamiliar with the notability guidelines in that area. They look good to me, so I’ll review them when I get the chance. Devonian Wombat (talk) 08:29, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That would be much appreciated. P.S. - not sure what the "Yeat" article posting is doing here.--36hourblock (talk) 16:14, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol | October 2023 Backlog Drive
On 1 October, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Articles will earn 3x as many points compared to redirects. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:13, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Devonian Wombat. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Terran 1".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:52, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Devonian Wombat, thanks for your comment and interest! I left you a reply on the Multiple Code Theory page. PetersonHC (talk) 13:23, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:45, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• LQMonkey (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Paul Richardson (businessman) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Thanks for reviewing the recent updates to the article for Paul Richardson (businessman).

I understand the latest rejection is because the 'Subject looks to potentially be notable, but the draft currently contains far too much promotional content to accept.'

I appreciate it's possibly asking for too much help but which promotional content are you referring to please?

I'd rather get a steer on this from you than spend more time on editing the article and it being referred to again.

Thanks.

LQMonkey (talk) 12:28, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@LQMonkey:, the problem is that promotional content is found throughout the article as a result of press releases in trade publications being repeated uncritically. There's a lot of language about Richardson 'revolutionising' a company and such, as well as a lot of information promoting the non-notable companies that Richardson was associated with that are not directly relevant to Richardson himself. I would recommend removing the "Other ventures", the second sentence and the last sentence in the Gymshark section and the second sentence in the "AllSaints" section. I would consider the article fine to move to mainspace if these changes were made. Devonian Wombat (talk) 11:37, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, very much appreciated. I'll have another swing at that now. LQMonkey (talk) 14:11, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I asked you if you can approve my Redlands FC Draft, which you did, and thanks for that! but now I have created another Draft, River Light FC, and I was wondering if you can review that, and see if it can be approved. Thanks! RealCrazyboy (talk) 00:00, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@RealCrazyboy:, I’ll take a look through the draft when I get the chance, though I will note that generally you’re not supposed to do reviews through a talk page request, since it’s not fair for those who haven’t had a review accepted yet :) Devonian Wombat (talk) 11:53, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Devonian Wombat ah ok! I didn't know that, still kinda new to wikipedia :) RealCrazyboy (talk) 18:46, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I have a request if it's OK about reviewing a page. I submitted Draft:BubbleUPnP twice, and on both times a specific reviewer declined it. Now normally I would understand the reasons why (and I have come across it before and made changes to improve drafts), but in this special case I feel like that reviewer has been a bit too harsh. The article is certainly not poor, and while that reviewer complained about refs I have definitely added a good number of secondary sources.

So that's why I would like to hear another reviewer's opinion on the matter, in case the other reviewer really is taking it a bit harshly by average standards. I would appreciate if you can take a look at the draft and determine if it is enough to pass or if you agree that it's not in a good state. Thanks! Chifonr (talk) 16:13, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Chifonr: unfortunately I would have to agree with the previous reviewers that the article is not good enough to move to mainspace, for two main reasons:

1. While it does have numerous secondary sources, only the Frankfurter Rundschau source seems to be reliable. TechFollows and TechOwns both seem like unreliable tech blogs to me, and I can find no evidence either has an editorial team. The XDA Developers source is very promotional and seems to be a blog post and the Top New Review and Eric Boisseau sources are once again blogs. As such, there's only one source here that I would count as contributing towards the General Notability Guideline

2. The way the article is formatted right now, with a lot of very short paragraphs and big list of features, makes it read rather promotionally. I would suggest removing the "As a client" and "Interface" sections, cutting out the list of external devices in "Features" as this is better suited for a company website, and removing all but the first paragraph in "BubbleUPnP server". If you did that and added another reliable secondary source in addition to Frankfurter Rundschau, I would consider the article ready to be moved to mainspace.

I hope that my comment hasn't been discouraging, there are good bones for an article here there's just some pruning you have to do to get it fixed up. Good luck with your editing! Devonian Wombat (talk) 23:18, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help! Your comments have made me understand further that perhaps it indeed isn't exactly in the right state. Having taken your advice I've made changes including cutting parts that you recommended.

More crucially, I have managed to dig out from the depths some more reliable sources about the product from PC World, Android Police, Tom's Guide, GQ (German), Chip (German), and Wired. Does it look in a passable state now? Chifonr (talk) 11:22, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for accepting! I do have another article as well called Draft:Musicolet, denied for the same reason. I understood that this article was weaker than the other so I didn't mention it before but your comment about secondary sources made me push into finding reliable sources and I did manage to. I'm not sure if it's in a passable state but your advice I would take if you can take a look! Chifonr (talk) 23:10, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Draft:The dinosaur has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 November 12 § Draft:The dinosaur until a consensus is reached. TNstingray (talk) 18:14, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have noticed that in the afternoon before an election, even though this information had already been up for 12 days prior and you are quite an active and experienced contributor to Australian electoral articles, you saw fit to delete a significant amount of information about the Candidates' background.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2023_Mulgrave_state_by-election&diff=prev&oldid=1185481652

Your explanation was "Removed original research and simplified bios".

For example, one candidate had their background reduced to just "Student", which is quite inadequate compared to the others and what their actual credentials are.

Candidate background info is something that I had put in a significant amount of effort into updating to ensure that all candidates had a fair amount of sourced background information as is tradition for by-elections on Wikipedia. As all the information was sourced, it was not "original research", and "Simplified" is quite the understatement.

Given the popularity of Wikipedia as a source of information before a by-election, I consider what you have done to make such edits so close to the day of the by-election as being deliberately timed and a form of election fraud.

Could you please explain your actions and why I should not be reporting what you have done to the Wikipedia Administrators? Kleinerziegler (talk) 21:33, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Kleinerziegler:, Wikipedia is not a place for resumes. Ackerley's ABC bio described her as an graduate student, which I reflected in her description here. If there is some other job she holds that you believe is worth a mention you should have focused your efforts on getting secondary sources to reflect that. As to your claims of bias, the Sustainable Australia Party for which Ackerley stood is a a micro-party of zero political relevance. I very much doubt anyone would bother even doing opposition research on them, much less engage in some sort of b-movie conspiracy against their candidates. Devonian Wombat (talk) 22:02, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A Graduate student is very different to "Student", do you even know what a Graduate student is? Regardless Wikipedia is supposed to be neutral and your bias against Sustainable Party has come through in your edits. She was not the only one with information removed, it's just the most severe case.

I will be progressing this case to the Administrators.

On a personal note, I find it abhorrent how you have belittled someone who has dedicated their life to academia, to simply be just a 'student' as if they are still in high school.

Your bias against micro-parties is also disgusting, as you are actively doing your part to keep them down. Kleinerziegler (talk) 22:11, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.Kleinerziegler (talk) 22:31, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Rk9000 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Ding Rong (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Rk9000 (talk) 20:07, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello..

Please tell me how to improve this Draft:Naomi Mac - Wikipedia. She is notable in Nigeria. She has featured in various reality Tv shows and has lot of sources on the internet. A response to this will be much appreciated. Thank you so much Princeisrael2728 (talk) 12:09, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Princeisrael2728:, the problem is with a couple of the couple of the sources you've used. BellaNaija is considered to be a unreliable source and as such shouldn't be used in articles. Naomi Mac is notable for her Nigerian Idol appearance, but the presence of several unreliable sources in an article on a living person was a problem. Remove the BellaNaija articles and I see no reason why the article wouldn't be accepted. Devonian Wombat (talk) 01:32, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much sir ... This is really helpful.. I would like you to be my mentor if that's ok by you sir Princeisrael2728 (talk) 06:32, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Princeisrael2728: I'm afraid I do not offer mentorship services. In any case, your draft was competent enough for me to think that you don't need any mentorship in any case :). Devonian Wombat (talk) 08:39, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oh . Thanks you so much sir Princeisrael2728 (talk) 08:47, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol | January 2024 Articles Backlog Drive
On 1 January 2024, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each review will earn 1 point. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:10, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

		The Invisible Barnstar
		Thank you for your participation in the Articles for Creation's November 2023 Backlog Drive! You made a total of 27 reviews, for a total of 33 points. – robertsky (talk) 06:51, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

– robertsky (talk) 06:51, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I saw that you declined to accept the article Draft: Katy Krassner a few months back. In your comment you noted that "most of the references were either about Simon LeBon or Duran Duran more broadly." Indeed, a number of the sources do reference Duran Duran, I would respectfully like to point out that the subject of this article has worked with that band for a long time. It would only seem natural that citations make mention of this person in relation to their association with the band. Many other entertainment executives with articles on Wikipedia are mentioned in reference to their high-profile clients. Further, there are multiple references about this individual, including reference 5 from Billboard I just made a number of small edits and hope you will take another look at the article and reconsider your decision to decline. Thank you. Variety312 (talk) 19:40, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I just re-submitted this. Given the vast number of articles with NO citations, I respectfully hope you will approve this article given the number of sources which all indicate wp:n. Thank you so much. Variety312 (talk) 17:07, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. There's a dispute in the War in Sudan (2023-present)'s talkpage regarding an edit you've removed. I would like to ask for an opinion regarding this. Thanks. Borgenland (talk) 07:47, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Devonian Wombat, I'm Jamila and I work at the Mother Cabrini Health Foundation. You've helped my former colleague, Bob, with some updates to the Wikipedia article for the foundation in the past, is there any chance you'd be able to help with my current request? The other editor I tried to ping appears to not be an active editor any more. Thanks! MCHFJamila (talk) 18:15, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Devonian Wombat,

The draft composed for On2Cook has citations such as The Times of India and The Tribune, all of which are independent sources. The primary topic these articles is On2Cook as well. The promotional content is removed and the article has been updated accordingly. I believe the page meets wikipedia's criteria for inclusion as an encyclopedic entry.Thank you.

Regards,

Jyoti Sudhir Jyotisudhir25 (talk) 12:29, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Response to Comment: "This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed." This draft is for wiki-linking to List of computer simulation software. The description of Sim4Life does not sound more "promotional" than other entries in that list. I have been editing to remove descriptive words that might be perceived as promotional, but sometimes such words are needed to give an adequate description. The first 2 citations are links to the project pages of the Swiss government agency that funded the original research to develop the platform. Reference 13 is to the NIH SPARC online platform that has been developing in tandem with Sim4Life for about the last 8 years. These 3 references, listed above as the WP:THREE best sources, are truly independent. Most of the other citations in this draft are to independent research papers where the lead writers/researchers are not employed by ZMT Zurich MedTech. In only one case, Reference 12, a few of the co-authors are employees of ZMT Zurich MedTech, included as is common practice in scientific collaborations. Please check some of the other entries in the List of computer simulation software and reconsider acceptance. PLBounds (talk) 13:54, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PLBounds:, at the moment there is no issue with the draft's sourcing, merely with its tone. I would recommend removing the sentence long-paragraphs "Sim4Life V8.0, released in March 2024...." and "S4Lite, an online version of Sim4Lite...." as that content does not seem to be reflected in the secondary sources, as well as the phrase "to enable collaborative, reproducible, and sustainable computational neurosciences" since that seems to be a line more suited to a press release. I would also recommend removing the promotional image due to copyright concerns, if as stated in the image description it was provided by a company graphical artist it is likely still under copyright and has not been released to a Creative Commons license. Perform these actions and I would consider the draft ready for acceptance as a stub. Devonian Wombat (talk) 22:00, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for the helpful feedback! I will work to tone down the language as you recommend and remove the image for now (but will ask about the copyright status)... PLBounds (talk) 15:18, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again, I am working on getting a different image (one less promotional, hopefully more informational) as well as a source for S4Llite (from a university syllabus, perhaps a link to a video). Thanks again for your feedback! PLBounds (talk) 08:48, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reviewing Draft:Rachel Cowan so quickly. If I remove the offending sentence "People who worked with her described her as a prophet, teacher, healer, and visionary who empowered individuals to effect change." would that satisfy your objection? Note that sentence was sourced and summarizes what others said. But I'm fine to remove it. What about the final sentence under section "Personal life and passing": "She passed away on August 31, 2018 leaving behind a legacy of compassionate leadership and spiritual innovation, inspiring others to carry on her work." Does that run afoul of NPOV? Nnev66 (talk) 14:55, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Nnev66:, yes I would say that also falls afoul of NPOV guidelines. A general rule when writing Wikipedia biographies is to keep positive or negative adjectives to a minimum, even when paraphrasing a source. Devonian Wombat (talk) 23:03, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the feedback. I removed the original sentence you mentioned (with word "prophet") and the one I noted in italics above. I added two more sentences at the "Personal life and passing" section. I don't see any other NPOV issues. Please take another look in case you see something else of concern. I'll then submit for review again. Nnev66 (talk) 01:09, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Checking back in to see if you have any other concerns about Draft:Rachel Cowan. I believe I've addressed NPOV issues. The article reads to me in formal tone so I'm not sure if the box on the page is standard verbiage or you felt there was an issue there. Would be good to have your concerns addressed before I re-submit. If I should be doing something different than I am in responding to your comments also please let me know as this is my first time going through this process. Nnev66 (talk) 21:13, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Hi and Hello Devonian Wombat. I have written a BLP. It's quite detailed. Anyways my request is that can you submit my draft for publication on wikipedia? If you can do that I would be extremely thankful to you.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Islam_Mamedov

Harris Zaindi (talk) 18:58, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol | May 2024 Articles Backlog Drive
On 1 May 2024, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each review will earn 1 point. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:14, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to other languages.

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process.

This is a reminder that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) ends on May 9, 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.

Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.

On behalf of the UCoC project team,

RamzyM (WMF) 23:18, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated 1880 Republican National Convention for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Hog Farm _Talk 18:02, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New pages patrol | September 2024 Backlog Drive
On 1 September 2024, a one-month backlog drive for new pages patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each article review will earn 1 point, and each redirect review will earn 0.2 points. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:09, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reviewing my draft which you recently declined. I cannot fathom why Quadrio is not considered notable when she has recieved several prominent awards, most recently a Kings honour. She is an expert in sexual abuse in Australia, poviding expert testimonies and called upon by the media for her expert opinions. Plus other reasons cited in the article. I have looked carefully at WP:PROF and the criteria there. I have not been able to find citations for all of her posts, some I have had to remove, records from the 70's are hard to obtain. Would you be so kind as to tag the places I need to cite? I have gone through the article more carefully and removed any language that might be considered peacock, but seriously I don't think this is accurate. I also think I have remained neutral, I have used quotes to represent the person, who is an outspoken advocate on womens rights and sexual abuse. I feel these quotes are suited to describing Quadrios work rather than anything I feel or think about her. Yes, as the author I have made a decision to include these quotes but that is based on the fact that this is who the person is, this is their career. I am just bewildered, and a tad frustrated, as to why I cannot get this article out of draft stage or what to do about it. Thanks Bcritical (talk) 02:35, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

January 2025 Backlog Drive | New pages patrol
On 1 January 2025, a one-month backlog drive for new pages patrol will begin in hopes of addressing the growing backlog. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Each article review will earn 1 point, while each redirect review will earn 0.2 points. Streak awards will be given out based on consistently hitting point thresholds for each week of the drive. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:52, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]