User talk:MadeYourReadThis/Archives/2016/April

This is an archive of past discussions with User:MadeYourReadThis. 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.

• WeAreAllStars (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:The Band Famous (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Cleanup of Draft:The Band Famous

• Comment: I've done a lot of cleanup and formatting. I would love some more input on my progress. Thanks again! WeAreAllStars (talk) 20:05, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

• Mim.cis (talk · contribs)
  • Beg's Dense Image Matching via LDDMM (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
  • Draft:Beg's Dense Image Matching via LDDMM (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I have added many connections and responded directly to the question. I dont think there is a problem with the reference anymore even though that note is still there. I think now the section links and stands alone and since the algorithm is so widely adopted it will grow with inputs.

Thank-you Michael I. Miller Mim.cis (talk) 03:45, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

• Thirty3degreez (talk · contribs)
  • Kumar (actor) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
  • Draft:Kumar (actor) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello, I have provided in line citations in the form of the no of the reference in the references list, could you please give me an example of how else to cite? Many thanks

Please take a look at WP:CITEFOOT--RadioFan (talk) 14:34, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi RadioFan: Please read point #2 at WP:AFCSTANDARDS. Your declination of Draft:Kumar (actor) with the rationale "Please use inline citations to make it easy for readers to see where you got your information from. See WP:CITE for help" is not particularly accurate as a valid reason to decline per AfC's Reviewing instructions. Note that "Editors may choose any form of inline citation, not just the most popular one. Many new editors choose a different style, and their choice is officially protected by Wikipedia's citation guidelines." See also WP:CITEVAR. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 14:46, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Yes you are correct in the latter of the law that this form of referencing is allowed but the AFC process is about helping editors create articles that are ready for the project. Declining an article because of a disagreement in citation style would be problematic but guiding them toward a better article is very much a part of AFC.--RadioFan (talk) 14:50, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Making relatively inexperienced editors jump through multiple hoops when it is not warranted is not a part of the AfC process, and discourages continued contributions. Why not chip in to improve the draft as I have in a slight manner? This is much more congruent with guiding editors in a positive manner. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:01, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

While your edits are appreciated of course, did the original contributor learn anything from them? AFC is a learning process as much as it is a filter. Sometimes I just make the edits (as I just did with a bio on a photographer I was reviewing) sometimes I challenge the original contributor to do it when it's clear they can handle it and learn from it.--RadioFan (talk) 15:06, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

I've declined this draft again for different citation reasons. Claims of notability are not sufficiently backed up with reliable sources, in any citation format. --RadioFan (talk) 15:10, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

All right, but then please consider doing this from the start, providing the most valid rationale. For example, let's say the editor went back and added inline citations that neatly link to the references section in the prose. After this, then would you then decline for lacking notability? Seems like putting a person through a bunch of busy work, just to decline again for lacking notability. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:21, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

In re the notion of AfC being a learning process, this is not a part of the project's scope, nor is this notion backed at the project's Reviewing instructions. You should please seriously consider not rejecting submissions based upon your own (subjective) criteria. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:26, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

• Doramensah1971 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Bibi Owusu shadbolt (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello RadioFan,

You declined my draft because you don't believe the subject meets notability guidelines for creative professionals. I have looked at the notability guideline and I'm a bit confused as to where you are coming from. 1. Bibi Shadbolt is a very famous film maker who came from obscurity to create a film that has a cult following. Bibi has been nominated for three big awards and won one.

2. Bibi has been interviewed by major UK and African press.

3. I have provided independent articles to support all this. I do agree that some of the articles were primary sources but The Daily Graphic and Bedfordshire Times and citizens aren't. Can you clarify this please? Thanks

There are a lot of references there and most are about the movie, not this person. Biographical articles must have significant coverage in reliable 3rd party sources. I do see two sources which interview the subject of the article but their reliability is unclear. Pantoufle and mbwpr.com appear to be well written blogs, not "major press". Coverage in major press would help establish notabilitiy here.--RadioFan (talk) 19:04, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Doramensah1971 (talk) 15:13, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

• Sigur~ruwiki (talk · contribs)
  • Elena Makarova (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
  • Draft:Elena Makarova (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hey @RadioFan,

You declined my draft of an article about Elena Makarova https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Elena_Makarova and the reason for that was "Any claim of notability is not clear here." I was under the impression I managed to prove that Elena is a world famous specialist in Dicker-Brandeis's work as well as a prominent art therapist. She authored hundreds of articles on the matter and tens of books translated into multiple languages. I backed this with links to numerous sources including scientific articles, The New York Times and Wikipedia itself. Can you please take another closer look at this draft? Or at least be more specific on what else can be done there in order for you to accept it.

Regards, Sigur

Sigur~ruwiki (talk) 15:26, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Notability is not clear here. You've established her occupation, who she studied under and that she has acted as a consultant on a film. If any of your references refer to her as a "world famous specialist", please add that to the article so that this is more clear. As it stands the article reads like a well published author, which is not enough to meet notability guidelines.--RadioFan (talk) 19:07, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

• Thirty3degreez (talk · contribs)
  • Kumar (actor) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
  • Draft:Kumar (actor) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello, I appreciate your feedback, however, the references I have supplied do verify the claims made in the article, in fact other people such as Mehboob Khan and K. Asif and Sitara Devi all feature on Wikipedia, their wiki pages also have references of Kumar in them with a stub to contribute for the same. If you go through the references you will see they are established magazines from over 80 years in existence. Would photographic evidence or scanned pages from the magazines help? Many thanks and I would be grateful for you to allow me to prove authenticity. In fact my other article Esther Victoria Abraham was rejected and then someone else article on the same has been accepted. Please guide me on getting Kumar article accepted. Best wishes

Thirty3degreez (talk) 15:39, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

The closest reference I can find to the claim "successful film actor" is http://mazhar.dk/film/db/details.php?pid=374. This is a film database listing details about a movie he was involved in. It does show he acted in the movie but does not support this claim. The article needs to remain neutral in tone and all claims backed up by 3rd party reliable sources. Flowery and boastful language needs to come from the references, not the creator of the article. --RadioFan (talk) 19:11, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

HI there. You rejected the article with the comment "Not seeing now this meets WP:POLITICIAN". While I wholeheartedly agree that the subject is not a politician, I felt te article was worthy of creation on the basis that there is an article regarding the group he is leader of. Surely if the leader of the group is not worthy of an entry then the group surely is not relevant enough for inclusion either? THanks for your help, I'd appreciate any assistance I can get in making this article suitable for inclusion. ALso, apologies as always for my crude efforts, I might be a butcher at this pont, but I'm learning. Or trying to anyway. Cheers Panglossx (talk) 15:55, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi RadioFan: Perhaps this declination rationale in the comment you left there was a copy/paste error on your part? The subject at Draft:Blair Cottrell does not appear to be a politician. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:01, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

The context is unclear. Upon rereading it looks like this person was involved in attempting to register a political party rather that run for office himself.--RadioFan (talk) 19:18, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Please keep in mind that subjects do not have to meet WP:POLITICIAN when they meet WP:BASIC. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:18, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

• Oakland.dan.williams (talk · contribs)
  • Howard Christie (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
  • Draft:Howard Christie (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

A bit more detail about what exactly is needed to have this page approved would be appreciated. If there is a minimum number of references that should be included (i.e., more than 8), that information would be helpful, as would a description of different or better types of references.

This person produced more than 44 films or TV shows, and there are more than 40 mentions of Howard Christie on Wikipedia alone, and while I realize that those aren't valid references, it's clear to me that this was a notable person based on the 'guidelines on the notability of people'. What's not clear, even after reading all of the Wikipedia instructions and other resources you provided, is how much evidence needs to be provided in order to qualify as notable for Wikipedia. Many existing/approved pages of notable people include far fewer references than I've provided here.

Thanks. Oakland.dan.williams (talk) 18:52, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Notability is not judged by the number of references , but their quality. For a person who has produced so many shows, there should be more than brief wire reports in local newspapers. Also biographical articles should be based on references where the person is the primary subject of the reference. The references you have listed do mention Christie, but it's in quotes about Wagon Train. These are great for establishing the notability of that show but that's not what you are after here. Awards would help too, has this person won an Emmy or similar high honor?--RadioFan (talk) 19:15, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

• Doramensah1971 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Bibi Owusu shadbolt (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello RadioFan,

Because you said the references I used were not reliable, I added two articles from major press. The Daily Graphic(the national newspaper of Ghana) article Titled 'Afua's Diary reveals more film Talents' and Bedfordshire Times and Citizen's article titled 'Bibi's film hits the big screen' both focus on the subject and not the film. The two are major press articles which cannot be found online. I asked in the chats room if I could add these articles and I was told I could so I added the date, title and authors as reference. I can send you screen shots of these articles if that will help.

Doramensah1971 (talk) 19:36, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

• Marylandstater (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Ambre Michele Anderson (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

RadioFan, thank you for your recent review of the Draft:Ambre Michele Anderson page I created. I am not requesting a re-review at this time but had questions about the initial review rejection. Specifically: was it rejected because of lack of notability, lack of reliable references or were there some copyright problems. I have reviewer status as well so I should be able to understand what's needed, once explained. Thank you.«Marylandstater» ^«reply» 18:15, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

It seems like you are looking to establish that this person is well known as a model but there are insufficient references in reliable 3rd party sources where she is the subject of the article. She's mentioned but in passing. Her television appearances are insufficient to establish notability. per WP:ACTOR

You should also consider taking another look at tone of the article to ensure it is nuetral. Phrases like "lucrative modeling job" are fine if they are coming from the sources, and not from the article creator. Overall this article feels like it is trying to sell me on this actress/model, that's not the purpose of the encyclopedia.

Looking at individual referencs

1. This establishes she was in this off-broadway musical, but so were many others. It's not clear what if this was even a staring role or not
2. the reliability of this source is unclear. It appears to be published by a PR firm which do not make very good sources, especially for establishing notability.
3. I'm unable to verify this source. What is it? A magazine article? Is it about her or something she's involved in?
4. This is a primary source
5. This shows she appeared briefly in the commercial in a non-speaking role, not sure how this establishes notability.
6. The TV guide link provides zero information beyond her name. You used this reference twice but it doesn't contain any information.
7. The rotten tomatoes link also provides very little information, a single credit as an extra. All other information is blank. A notable actress would have more information here
8. Anderson isn't mentioned in this article at all
9. IMDB entries do not establish notability, they are not difficult to get. I have one and I'm nobody.

--RadioFan (talk) 21:47, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:WKHC logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:22, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

• Sigur~ruwiki (talk · contribs)
  • Elena Makarova (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
  • Draft:Elena Makarova (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hey @RadioFan,

Not sure how to continue the talk we started here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:RadioFan on the matter. You mentioned there that current article "is not enough to meet notability guidelines" and gave these notability guidelines as a reference. I read them and it seems like Elena Makarova falls under a category of notable and links I provided in the article proove this. 1. The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors. Elena is widely cited by peers in this field, you can double check it by viewing suppoting links in the bottom of the article

2. The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory, or technique. Based on her research Elena developed her own art therapy method and now applies and gives lectures and seminars on the matter all over the world. Cited links proove it as well.

3. The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work Elena's book 'Freidl' is not only translated into multiple languages, it's also a foundation for a future documentary starring Jolie. This is backed with link too.

4. The person's work (or works) (b) has been a substantial part of a significant exhibition Even though this criteria can't really be applied to an autor, Elena held numerous exhibitions all over the world. And again this is backed with links.

I do realize that Elena's field is quite narrow compared to say SciFi literature, but this should not be a reason to question her notability in this field. Therefore could you please approve this draft or tell me which criteria out of those 4 she doesn't fall under and why do you think so.

• Aprilkap (talk · contribs)
  • WNYC Studios (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
  • Draft:WNYC Studios (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Thank you for editing the WNYC Studios Draft page. I appreciate your recommendation to add more to the article, and would like suggestions on the type of content to add.

I based the page off of the Gimlet Media page. The only thing that I found that Gimlet included that WNYC did not is a people section. Would this be helpful? What else would I need to add to make the WNYC Studios page complete?

Thanks for uploading File:WXXE logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:57, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:KWKY logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:39, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Wxmd logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:41, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi RadioFan,

I have removed some of the portions without citations and sentences with an editorial tone. Please advise if there are particular sections of concern. I also added some more recent news articles to strengthen citations.

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

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Artworldmaven (talk • contribs) 20:15, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:WBGB.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:39, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:KSNE-FM logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Levdr1lp / talk 18:18, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:WLTQ-FM-logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Levdr1lp / talk 18:39, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Prints and Photographs Division. Since you had some involvement with the Prints and Photographs Division redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. --BDD (talk) 17:10, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:KTKZ logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 12:19, 28 April 2016 (UTC)