I have worked on improving the citations, and published an update to the article. In case the citations still have to be worked upon, please specify how, in case it is not absolutely obvious. Your comment was helpful, though, and I do also personally agree in retrospect regarding the need for improvement of citations. I am fairly new to editing and building upon Wikipedia, so any advice and help is appreciated, especially if it is conducive to making my contributions valuable to Wikipedia, and in this case to the article being suitable for approval. Vasaras kruīzi Tallink (talk) 23:00, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your careful crafting of this well-written article. You've spend some time working on it in draft, then moved it the main space at the right time. The only things that other editors and I have done since then is to add categories (helpful for finding articles), and moving the title to be consistent with MOS:AT. It's good to see that this alternative model has also had specific discussion in peer-reviewed sources, demonstrating its independent notability.
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Klbrain}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
Thanks for the long overdue edits on Sam Vaknin. You have made a great, thoughtful, and thorough job.
Vaknin came up with additional concepts such as "sadistic supply" and "projective splitting", among many others. He also originated the new proposed diagnoses of "covert borderline" and "covert psychopath". Zorandimitrovskiskopje (talk) 07:40, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Zorandimitrovskiskopje Sure, it's good if you can find stuff there, but I sounds like it's still his own claims reported by several people and organizations. It would be good if we could get our hands on independent coverage of him. BlockArranger (talk) 14:59, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. Found an English language article in a Geneva newspaper about his presence and activities there, so this is beyond doubt. Also, clips from many Israeli newspapers who interviewed him in all these locations (I am told by my translator friend). Actually, Vaknin made all these available on his CV in a zip file. Also found a video interview where he confirmed that he rejected his diagnosis.Zorandimitrovskiskopje (talk) 08:02, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Would just like to clarify a few things here. I did not have a lot of reliable sources to go by, but I had just enough to weasel out an somewhat good AFC. If you see claims or sentences and don't see a citation, don't assume its because I didn't place on there. Its likely because the entire paragraph, and potentially even section uses 1 single citation from a reliable source that you can find somewhere down the line. This is essentially my explanation for every "citation needed", "by whom", "who", "which" template that you placed on the article. I do not write unless I have a citation to back it up. Nonetheless I will still explain a few sections that you tagged with templates, as for the "Which" template, its any south east Asian border which is clarified later in the sentence. Friendly country (clarification needed template which you placed there) is already explained earlier in the article to be either Mongolia or the South East Asian countries. The By Whom template you placed in the brokers section is explained in the citation "https://www.bushcenter.org/freedom-collection/kim-seong-min-how-defectors-escape" or in the draft, Citation 8. Thank you. DotesConks (talk) 20:35, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
For your information, I am trying to point out things you could clarify in your article. Sorry if you see it as rude, but you should cite more and write some things more clearly if you want the article to surely pass inspection. Also, I did not manage to find any claim of homosexuality being rare in Asia in the source provided immediately after that statement. I am not disputing factuality of most things, though. But please check if the math prodigy actually was selected for the "Olympics" several times, as the math olympiad is in fact not at all the same thing as the Olympic Games. BlockArranger (talk) 20:51, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@BlockArranger I don't think its rude, I think its helpful to my draft. I'm just clarifying how I write drafts and how that may be different from most people which leads to people thinking I do not have a lot of citations when I infact do. DotesConks (talk) 01:32, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Sophisticatedevening was:
This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:
in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
Hello, BlockArranger!
Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Sophisticatedevening🍷(talk)18:30, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! I see that you are quite active in the personality disorders scene, with an emphasis on the borderline variant. I have been wanting to bring the article on BPD to good article status for quite some time, but it's quite a long article, so, naturally, I was wondering if you wanted to collaborate with me on this project! Let me know what you think. Many thanks, The Blue Rider02:30, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@The Blue Rider In general, I would absolutely be inclined to further improve the article. I would perhaps disagree with the notion that BPD has been my main thing; I have most notably worked on covering dimensional models and incorporated them in to categorical PD articles. Nevertheless, BPD is the best PD article as of now, and thus I also think we have good opportunities to further improve it. In case you have any specific suggestions, let me know. Perhaps discussing on the BPD talk page could be extra beneficial as then we might get others to join. BlockArranger (talk) 10:32, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I just saw your username there quick often, but I'm glad someone is so keen on working in PD articles! I will leave some comments on BPD's talk page as suggested! Thanks, The Blue Rider15:20, 5 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
