Hi I'm new in Wikipedia, One person in our country who was the invited to the united nation's general assembly in 2013 his name Baqibillah Mishkat Chowdhury, I was created a article about his biography and submitted to draft space. after some time I was moved that ‍article in the main space. After that a person move the article from main space to draft space. Then I was deleted that Article from the draft space. After some time I wrote same Article in the draft space and submitted for approve. I attached all reference in article. I want to know my article is correctly submitted or if there is any mistake. I hoe you will help me. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sumon Mahmud786 (talk • contribs) 16:51, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

@Sumon Mahmud786 I have reviewed your draft. I have left some substantial comments for you on it. I hoped to accept the draft, but the faults in to showed me I could not do so. When you'v e corrected the issues please submit it again for review. Anther reviewer will do that review. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 16:56, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

@Faddle^Talk to me how to resubmit for review I don't know please help me — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sumon Mahmud786 (talk • contribs) 17:06, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

I have rearranged the references and changed the picture. Would you please check if it is okay? Then I will Resubmit — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sumon Mahmud786 (talk • contribs) 17:30, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

@Sumon Mahmud786: Checkimg it is ok is the same as reviewing it. YOu need to have confidence in your work. I almost never review a draft twice. The big, blue RESUBMIT button is the way you submit. The picture, however, is still a problem, and wil be a proboem until you find a picture that obeys the rules. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 17:42, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

@Faddle^Talk to me Thank you so much — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sumon Mahmud786 (talk • contribs) 17:59, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Missvain was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

It appears the art gallery *may* meet notability guidelinse but the artist himself does not. His work would need to be held in a major art collection (i.e. major museum, university) or he would have to be covered in major media, to qualify. Sorry.

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 when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Alden Bryan and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Alden Bryan, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the , on the or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Missvain (talk) 19:59, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

@Missvain I suspect I fouled up when I corrected the submitter. Would you mind correcting my error, please, and notifying the real submitter? I failed once, so will fail a second time, or I'd attempt it myself Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 20:35, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Timtrent! Having an article 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! Missvain (talk) 19:59, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

	Орден за заслуги
	Thank you so much for your attention and for your help in editing my articles. Jegi Angelski (talk) 16:59, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

I will create (translate from Polish) several dozen pages dedicated to members of the Ostoja Clan. Names in such a studio as "Surname .... CoA .... Ostoja" already exist in the English wiki segment. For example: Baranovski CoA Ostoja. Therefore, I will create articles consistently. I ask you to approve the creation of the page in such a way that would not violate the uniformity of a whole series of publications. Thank you for your tips and support! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jegi Angelski (talk • contribs) 17:09, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

@Jegi Angelski Pease work with members of the Polish Wikiproject as you do this. I do not need to see them. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 08:51, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Hello, @Timtrent: how are you? hope you are well Can you help me to create an article about this person He is a writer, journalist, Middle East correspondent for a well-known Turkish online newspaper Ensonhaber and translator I think he is notable if you have the time of course

• https://muckrack.com/alialsuleiman

Sources

• The Guardian

  https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2019/sep/13/turkish-tv-magnificent-century-dizi-taking-over-world

  https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2020/aug/12/ertugrul-how-an-epic-tv-series-became-the-muslim-game-of-thrones

• Anadolu Agency - https://www.aa.com.tr/en/culture/young-syrian-promotes-turkish-tv-series-stronger-ties-with-arab-world/1998300
• TRT World - https://www.trtworld.com/life/the-young-syrian-who-translates-turkish-dramas-for-the-arab-world-39251
• Daily Sabah - https://www.dailysabah.com/arts/ali-al-suleiman-the-syrian-translator-behind-turkish-soap-operas-conquering-the-arab-world/news

Turkish Sources

• Gunboyu gazetesi - https://www.gunboyugazetesi.com.tr/ali-al-suleiman-arap-ulkelerinde-merakla-izlenen-turk-dizilerini-arapcaya-ceviriyor-56472h.htm
• Aksam - https://aksam.com.tr/cumartesi/turk-kulturune-yabancilik-cekmiyorum/haber-1129135
• Yeni Safak - https://www.yenisafak.com/hayat/turkiye-ortak-noktamiz-3555934
• Yeni Akit - https://www.yeniakit.com.tr/haber/ali-al-suleiman-kimdir-1281918.html
• dirilispostasi.com - https://www.dirilispostasi.com/haber/6493565/turk-kulturunun-taninmasi-ve-dilin-yayilmasinda-turk-dizileri-kopru-gorevi-goruyor
• T54.com.tr - https://t54.com.tr/haber/8235732/turk-dizileri-turkiyeyi-ve-turk-kulturunu-tanitiyor
• Haberdenizli.com - https://www.haberdenizli.com/teknoloji/ali-al-suleiman-kimdir-h55161.html
• Draft:Medyabar.com

  https://medyabar.com/haber/8077445/arap-dunyasi-icin-teskilat-dizisinin-cevirmeni-ali-al-suleiman-bu-dizinin-etkisi-hakkinda-konustu

  https://www.sakaryadanhaber.com/haber/8235036/turk-dizilerinin-cevirmeni-ve-arap-dunyasina-etkisi

  https://onedio.com/haber/turk-dizilerinin-arap-ulkelerinde-tanitimina-katki-saglayan-cevirmen-ali-al-suleiman-909412

Arabic Sources

• Shehab News Agency - https://shehabnews.com/post/67268
• Orient News

  https://orient-news.net/ar/news_show/182669

  https://www.yenisafak.com/ar/life/3468613

• Syria TV (Turkey) - https://www.syria.tv/علي-السليمان-سوري-ساهم-بنشر-الدراما-التركية-في-البلدان-العربية

--Gazeteci 1980 Tr (talk) 10:21, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Disregard, please; that was from globally banned LTA User:علي_أبو_عمر, continuing his relentless quest to find someone to publish an article about himself. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 14:06, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

@Ohnoitsjamie Thanks for the heads up. There was never a hope that I would accede to the request, but its good to know that folk like you are vigilant Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 18:48, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I am a new author and I appreciate you taking the time to review my draft at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SunshineOdyssey380/sandbox/Michael_N._Huhns

There are two places in my article marked with "***REDACTED COPYRIGHT VIOLATION***." I have (I think!) removed a sentence that might have caused the first copyright violation, but I don't understand the second. I need some guidance about this. Thanks! SunshineOdyssey380 (talk) 22:03, 10 December 2021 (UTC) SunshineOdyssey380 Michael N. Huhns

answered at user's own talk page as it raises other matters than copyright. Nthep (talk) 22:20, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, @Nthep.

@SunshineOdyssey380 I have also answered, against my usual practice, on User talk:SunshineOdyssey380. Normally I keep conversations together Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 23:02, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi there,

I am going to work on this as I think it should be included as an article. I believe that Thai Examiner is noteworthy enough to have a Wipideda page but I can see understand your valid points about reliable and independent references etc.

I will be working on this and will notify you before I resubmit it for approval when I have extended the article, trimmed it of any subjective terms while adding more authoritative and independent references.

Kindest regards,

Joseph O' Connor — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thaiexaminer (talk • contribs) 14:47, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

@Thaiexaminer No need to tell me. Just resubmit when ready Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 14:48, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi, i am sorry, but i don't understand your comment ^[1] What do you mean? shall we correct something?Виктория Шмыговская (talk) 06:54, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

@Виктория Шмыговская I suggest you ask the OTRS team what has happened. These things do not normally take this long Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 08:06, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

@Fiddle^Timtrent Thank you! But may i ask, what shall i correct in the text? The auther of the article is represented by only one link in referenses and others are independed resourses, including massmedia and organizations. Actually, there is no advertisement in the article, it is totally neutral. May i ask you to outline sentenses or words, which seems as an adverticeing for you, or something else what i should correct. Thanks! Виктория Шмыговская (talk) 07:26, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

@Виктория Шмыговская Why did you make such a mess on my talk page. All you had to do, all, was to send me a message. Instead you brought a whole slew of material back here from the archive page, overwrote other material and seem to think that is all right. It is not. You caused me work to reconstruct it. This is a rhetorical question.

You have not linked to the article you speak of. I am not going to look for it. It seems I have reviewed it. I almost never review more than once. Please ask at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 08:44, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, the link is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:A-Navigation. may i ask you to check what is wrong with the article, as i totaly don't understand, why it is readed as advertising. Виктория Шмыговская (talk) 11:08, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

@Виктория Шмыговская I'm not sure that it is viewed as advertising. I think you need to discuss this with the reviewer who declined it, Luxtaythe2nd, probably on their talk page Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 12:30, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Dear fellow editor,

I am Piotr Konieczny, a sociologist of new media at Hanyang University (and User:Piotrus on Wikipedia). I would like to better understand Wikipedia's volunteers who edit medical topics, many associated with the WikiProject Medicine, and known to create some of the highest quality content on Wikipedia. I hope that the lessons I can learn from you that I will present to the academic audience will benefit both the WikiProject Medicine (improving your understanding of yourself and helping to promote it and attract new volunteers) and the wider world of medical volunteering and academia. Open access copy of the resulting research will be made available at WikiProject's Medicine upon the completion of the project.

All questions are optional. The survey is divided into 4 parts: 1 - Brief description of yourself; 2 - Questions about your volunteering; 3 - Questions about WikiProject Medicine and 4 - Questions about Wikipedia's coverage of medical topics.

Please note that by filling out this questionnaire, you consent to participate in this research. The survey is anonymous and all personal details relevant to your experience will be kept private and will not be transferred to any third party.

I appreciate your support of this research and thank you in advance for taking the time to participate and share your experiences! If you have any questions at all, please feel free to contact me at my Wikipedia user page or through my email listed on the survey page (or by Wikipedia email this user function).

The survey is accessible through the LINK HERE.

Piotr Konieczny
Associate Professor
Hanyang University
If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:24, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

• Fggnna (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Tetsuro Shimizu 2 ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Thank you very much for your comments and suggestions. I prepared a new article entitled: Tetsuro Shimizu 2 (there is a homonym which is a curler). Shimizu is a contemporary Japanese artist, living in Milan (Italy). He teaches as professor at the Brera Academy. His paintings occur and are displayed in permanent collections (listed in the article). Because Shimizu is an academic and an artist with notable arts, it was worth preparing a wikipedia article about him. These two characteristics (academic, notable artist) are considered being valid for a wiki-bibliography. I would be very grateful if you or somebody else can help my wiki article to be improved and published. I have not enough experience to do it properly. Thank you very much for any hint and help. Best personal regards, Fggnna (talk) 16:20, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

Fggnna (talk) 16:20, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

@Fggnna I'm afraid this is not a topic thaty is in a genre I normally create articles in, so I am unable to help you beyond the advice on references. Let me remind you:

For a living person we have a high standard of referencing. Every substantive fact you assert, especially one that is susceptible to potential challenge, requires a citation with a reference that is about them, and is independent of them, in multiple secondary sources which are WP:RS, and is significant coverage. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources. Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact cited, that meet these tough criteria is likely to make this draft a clear acceptance (0.9 probability). Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the person is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 17:19, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

		The Barnstar of Integrity
		Thank you for patience, understanding, wisdom and leadership! You're a true inspiration. Hope we cross paths again :) MaskedSinger (talk) 11:49, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

@MaskedSinger Thank you. Wikipedia is a place to make (weird) friendships while indulging in a satisfying hobby. It's oddly like the real world in that real decisions are made by others about what we all do. It's unlike the real world in that we all enforce our own rules, and create those rules the first place.

We do what we can, when we can, and every time we do something we get a little better at it. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 12:31, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

Hope you are well. A brief excursion into Wars of The Three Kingdoms has left me wondering if I need counselling. The combo of admin hostility following my outing as the erstwhile and notorious Sirjohnperrot is really out of order. I fled the scene some time ago but it doesn't seem to have stopped the flow of vitriol. Any advice would be welcome if you have the time. Horatius At The Bridge (talk) 22:18, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

@Horatius At The Bridge I am somewhat lost. Would you mind giving me a potted background? I will do whatever I am able, of course. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 22:33, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

@Horatius At The Bridge What I think has happened is that you changed your user name and have been linked to the old one. I imagine this was under WP:FRESHSTART? Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 22:37, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

@Horatius At The Bridge If my surmise is correct, and without looking at the facts, I suspect one or more folk have considered that you have not played by the rules (I make no comment on that. I choose not to take sides). That has possibly triggered the outing as SJP. And the crowd is now baying for blood. Or some of the crowd are.

If I am interpreting this correctly my advice is to make a substantial apology even of you feel you have genuine reasons to be the victim in this. And to mean the apology, again even if you feel in the right.

A period of intense calm, making 100% useful edits (I am not suggesting your prior edits were not useful) in uncontroversial places tends to rebuild trust.

Am I making any sense at all? Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 22:51, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

@Horatius At The Bridge A firm suggestion is to avoid the article that appears to have enabled this brouhaha, even if you are an undoubted expert in the field. Not that I have any idea whether you are or not.

Somehow, I have kept my own nose clean here since I started editing. I achieve this by being invariably polite and handling any controversial area with very long and policy based tongs. I've seen very long established and productive editors blocked for reasons of their over confidence in their reputation overriding other considerations. So I try to treat every day here as a learning experience, learning how to get along with unique and sometimes difficult people.

I am assertive, yet know when to stand firm and when to yield with grace. When I base my assertiveness on policy it is rare that I need to yield. But when I do I try to thank those whose expertise has proven greater than mine.

I think this means I am counselling you to act in a similar manner. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 22:57, 16 December 2021 (UTC)#

that really is my problem, its all quite Kafkaesque - I have not done anything I can apologise about. Having finally accepted no consensus was going to be formed around my proposal I suggested a compromise, also posting an admin request asking if it was possible to change the banner on the talk page to the revised proposal. Around this point MichaelMaggs decided the personal attack was in order as above and this quickly changed the tone of the discussion with all the participants, culminating a quite extraordinary accusation by another admin. I'm really a bit shell-shocked tbh.Horatius At The Bridge (talk) 23:04, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

@Horatius At The Bridge Disengaging is the correct thing to do. If you are certain that there is nothing to apologise for then do not make a false apology. Are you absolutely certain that someone else does not feel you should apologise or withdraw something , or similar action? If so, do that thing, and with genuine good grace.

The outing is unfortunate. The process does not intend this to happen. Perhaps the redirects shoudl not be present at SJP, but they are, and deleting them now will compound the problem.

I would say that under no circumstances should you attempt to visit a drama board over this. It will backfire. These things often do. WP:BOOMERANG is real.

If you are dragged there, be humble, factual and brief. Do not feel the need to comment on every contributor's actions.

Again, am I making sense? Feel free to tell me where I am not. I refuse to become offended. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 23:12, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

Yes it makes great sense and helps me, thank you. I have stayed away from the article and its talk page but have assured JBA my request to admin as to the possibility of changing the article title proposal to match my revised proposal on its Talk Page was certainly not intended as an invitation to abuse admin powers. Also that I am frankly baffled as to why he chose to describe it in the terms he did and would value an explanation. Horatius At The Bridge (talk) 23:29, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

@Horatius At The Bridge A little too late, I see you have asked about the interpretation of your action. I would have phrased it a little easier to receive.

"I apologise that I suggested something that was capable of being interpreted as requesting an abuse of admin powers. That was not my intention and I apologise for it."

I also would have waited and slept on it one more night Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 23:30, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

@Horatius At The Bridge The difference is subtle. In my version you take responsibility for your action. In your version you have a slight sting in the tail regarding your bafflement, despite stating that your intent was not what was suggested. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 23:34, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

You're absolutely right of course, I'm off to bed now before I make any more mistakes, thanks Tim.Horatius At The Bridge (talk) 23:38, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

@Horatius At The Bridge If any rescuing is required rescue it in the morning. You are welcome to mention that I have advised you again if you feel it will be useful to do so. We all make mistakes. It is how we handle ourselves once we have made them that shows who we are inside. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 23:43, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

Sorry to insert myself into a discussion where I may not be welcome. Horatius, I just wanted to set your mind at ease that there is very little chance of anyone taking anything to a drama board over the discussion that took place at that talk page - some of us were getting exasperated, but it's nowhere near the level of requiring any kind of administrative intervention, and if anyone were to take it to such a board I expect I'd argue in your defense.

However, I'll also say that you have above made two accusations that another named editor has acted improperly (personal attacks and outing). If anything is going to spark an ANI thread, it's making baseless accusations of that sort on people's talk pages. I don't know what comment you perceive to have been a personal attack; I don't see any that could be interpreted in that way, but you should either address your concerns to the user who made the comment, start a thread at an appropriate location, or just keep quiet about it. It is also not reasonable to accuse anyone of outing - the term would only be applicable if they had released personal information about you (for example your real name) that you had not disclosed on-wiki. If that had happened I would have blocked the person who did it, revision-deleted the edit, and requested oversight. What actually happened to you was that someone mentioned a previous name of your current Wikipedia account. That old name is on publicly accessible records: anyone who knows how to read your contribution history would be able to find it within two or three clicks of the mouse. As such, it's not private information, and the outing policy does not prohibit people from mentioning it. I don't know what happened in the past that makes you want to disassociate yourself from that username, but if you truly want to keep your earlier wiki identity a secret, you should consider taking the steps outlined at WP:CLEANSTART. I'm not advising you to do that (I don't have any reason to think it's necessary), I just want to make sure that you are aware that policy allows for it.

That's all I had to say - I'll step back, provided the accusations of wrongdoing either stop, or are taken to an appropriate location. Girth Summit _(blether) 15:47, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

@Girth Summit I'm grateful for you contribution. Thank you. As you will see I have helped Horatius overcome difficulties in the past. I believe that this will also happen this time. Thank you for a very clear and straightforward explanation of the errors made. Horatius is a useful editor and you have clearly taken substantial time to creat this message for them.

@Horatius At The Bridge Please take the message by GS exactly as it has been given to you. It is an observation of facts, neutrally phrased, and showing errors.

If I may advise you further, may I suggest that you retract the accusations that you have made and that GS has observed, retract them unreservedly, make a humble apology, and mean it. Then, prove by your subsequent actions that you truly have meant it.

If, as GS suspects, those accusations lead you to a drama board, contrition and retraction are the sole useful routes open to you, but this card cannot be played often, so play it well, and after thought. Do not play it as a knee jerk reaction. As I said before, it is the manner in which we handle our errors that show us as who we are. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 16:02, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

I'm obliged to you for your advice which I take on board. WP is an open community but it is a little surprising that this talkpage discussion has taken the turn it has. Please be assured I have no wish to hide or disassociate myself from my previous username. I'm proud of the many edits as Sirjohnperrot and until very recently it was still referenced directly on my talkpage, (I think I'll put it back). I only changed it because it was also used on other unrelated family history sites and caused mix ups on them. For the sake of clarity the comment I regarded as a personal attack was this one:

Constantly arguing when you know you are irritating people will affect your good standing, as it repeats one of the behaviours that got you into some trouble last year at ANI when you were editing as User:Sirjohnperrot. MichaelMaggs (talk) 15:31, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

That episode was most regrettable and "excessive verbiage and snark" were identified as something I should try to avoid in future. There was no snark in my dialogue with Girth Summit but I do apologise for my verbosity which was unnecessary, probably very irritating and also obscured the main point of my proposal for change that the title lacked the required explanatory power (what wars? what kingdoms?) and was likely to be unrecognisable to most users anyway. So let's hope all this is now water under Horatius' bridge. May I wish you both a Happy Christmas and New Year - during which btw I'm due to be involved in a wikitree event tracing the ancestors of their special guest Jimmy Wales! Delighted today after possibly discovering his 10x Great Grandparents in 16th century Gloucestershire ;-) Horatius At The Bridge (talk) 21:46, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

I agree that you were not overly aggressive or snarky in the recent discussion; you were perhaps verbose, but you weren't the only one, I am frequently guilty of that myself. However, I don't think that you would be able to convince many people that the comment you've copied above constitutes a personal attack, as the term is defined here - it's not about you yourself, it's a comment on something that you were doing. Was it unnecessary? Perhaps, but not a personal attack. For what it's worth, I actually think that your comment about me, The missionary zeal of this editor and others to rebrand 17th century British history as Scottish or Irish or Welsh... was a personal attack, since it is commenting on my motivations. I don't mention that as any sort of threat, I am certainly not going to ask that anyone take any action over it, but it's worth bearing in mind that comments like that raise tensions in a discussion and are likely to irritate your interlocutors. I concede that telling you that your argument is arrant nonsense, or that you should put something in your pipe and smoke it, may also have the same effect: we're none of us perfect. I'm happy to let this flow under the bridge, and to wish you a merry Christmas - I hope the wikitree event is a success. Best Girth Summit _(blether) 11:58, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

@Horatius At The Bridge I think we are at the state, now, of least said soonest mended. I'm very happy to have had my talk page play a good part in this. Coming somewhere neutral is always a good idea when one is unsure of what has transpired, or whether one is at fault.

All of us editing Wikipedia are respected editors until out latest gaffe! May all our future gaffes be well into the future. And yes, I make them too! Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 12:15, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Failed to ping Girth Summit. That note was for both of you Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 12:16, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Excellent, I would just point out to Girth Summit my reference in the passage below was to the author of article title and other similar-minded editors but certainly not to him! If he had resorted to that particular trope in his extensive defence of the existing title I should surely have noticed ;) "Finally, I return to the important point about the subtext of retitling. It is fashionable to try to challenge the established record of historical events to promote a particular narrative and this is a case in point. The missionary zeal of this editor and others to rebrand 17th century British history as Scottish or Irish or Welsh, using an empty 'Three Kingdom' code as the default, is no doubt seen as admirable by some. I am not one of those and it pains me to see such deliberate distortion. The "Three" Kingdoms in this context is a complete fiction - the last sovereign king of Ireland was Ruaidhrí in 1198 and the last sovereign king of Scotland (Idi Amin aside ) was James VI in 1601 - the last sovereign king of Wales was Owain ap Gruffudd in 1170 who has inexplicably been excluded so far - I await a proposal for "The Wars of The Four Kingdoms" with keen anticipation ;) "Horatius At The Bridge (talk) 13:40, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

In response to this I have done this could you assist in cleaning up the mess? Celestina007 (talk) 16:00, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

@Celestina007 I have looked at each article and placed an unbiased opinion at the AfD. You have alerted me but not canvassed me. I appreciate that.

On Commons I have sent four files for deletion, two as copyvios two as deletion discussions. That is independent of any AfD.

The AN discussion is correct. This is being not guilty if reasonable doubt exists. With evidence the editor(s) can be blocked. Without it, much harder. Do you see evidence for an SPI? Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 16:15, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

I’m sorry for the delayed response, I was trying to enjoy my Sunday by just doing new page reviewing or work at the Teahouse and I suddenly get hit with this which has left me inundated and annoyed as I continue to ponder about how this has gone on so long unnoticed. Are you referring to this editor? @Luciapop, on if or not they maybe optimizing more than one account? (please correct me if I’m not interpreting your question correctly) if yes, then it is possible that they are, I can can carry out an investigation to that effect. Celestina007 (talk) 17:17, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

I am referring to Luciapop, but I have no idea if they have more than one account. I anticipate that they have.

These things go on because we trust people Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 17:40, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

@Celestina007 I have been led to Special:Contributions/Awwakko, who created on item at the AfD. These are the pictures I have sent for deletion Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 17:44, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

Aha! Thanks for sharing this with me, how yourself and Dan ardnt are able to spot things I overlook or fail to see always wows me, I shall be looking at this with my microscope tonight! Celestina007 (talk) 18:28, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

@Celestina007 I find following pictures to Commons almost always bears fruit. Some is harder to pick than others Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 19:12, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

@Celestina007 the articles created record is interesting. As you expect there are half decent articles, pure rubbish and a few decent ones Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 19:37, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

I have done this. You are correct when you say working with files can lead to exposing unethical practices, you are very correct, sometime last year or early this year i was working with files a lot as I enjoyed how mentally challenging it was, almost as mentally challenging as new page reviewing, but I stopped working there when I realized it was prone to territorial editing, I noted some editors considered working with files “theirs” Having said, Godsy definitely did a lot to encourage me to continue but I figured i didn’t want to cross boundaries nor step on toes so I quit altogether, forgive the digression, but yes like i stared working with files did expose a lot of promotional editing/unethical practices. Celestina007 (talk) 20:58, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

@Celestina007 I work with files because so many people break copyright. They reveal very interesting things, often the depth and breadth of sockery. Continue with files. People pretend to own them, but they are often mistaken. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 21:00, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

I've added my small thoughts to the SPI Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 21:09, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

@Celestina007 I am unable to wade through this pile of ordure. It stinks badly. I have sent a few more to AfD, individually rather than en masse. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 20:58, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

Great I shall cast my !vote accordingly, I’m annoyed we are having to use up time we could have spent in other product areas instead of this arduous tasks we are being subjected to. Celestina007 (talk) 21:04, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

Just came across Team8 and wondering if it's Wiki worthy. What are your thoughts? AFD? MaskedSinger (talk) 19:25, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

@MaskedSinger I tend to teach folk to fish. What is your analysis of it? Not just the article but any additional potential sourcing. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 19:45, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

I think it's poor and suspicious. Putting the COI editing to the side, the sources are all basically press releases. No secondary sources. Should be deleted. MaskedSinger (talk) 06:20, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

@MaskedSinger At present, yes, it is. Before we offer an article for deletion it is incumbent on us to perform WP:BEFORE to determine whether it might be sourceable. Once we are certain to the best of our belief that it is not, then we can nominate at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion.

Now, this process looks daunting, but the gadget Wikipedia:Twinkle lets us do this with ease.

While nominations "for the sake if it" or prior to WP:BEFORE are frowned on, it is a safe mechanism because others weigh in and decide. So it now depends on how confident you are in your research.

Verbose nominations tend to be poor. Succinct are useful. Policy based reasons are important, otherwise Wikipedia:IDONTLIKEIT applies.

There is more reading for you to do, after which you will have learned more about the arcane processes of Wikipedia, and may or may not choose tom nominated the article for deletion. There is no rush, so take your time. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 08:44, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

You lost me at incumbent :P MaskedSinger (talk) 08:56, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

@MaskedSinger what got you lost? Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 09:09, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Twinkle and all the other hoops required to jump through in order to delete. I did a search and there isn't much out there that is a valid source. I go by gut feel and instinct. There is not a lot of content on the page - most of it comes from press releases, it has a dubious editing history. I'm happy to nominate it and let the community decide. MaskedSinger (talk) 09:23, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

ok, of you enable Twinkle in your gadgets (via the preferences tab) the nomination will go easily Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 09:48, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

I did that but I have no idea what to do next. It's double dutch for me. As a kid, I would never read the instructions of games. Others would do that and explain it to me. MaskedSinger (talk) 10:46, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

@MaskedSinger in your TAB row at the head of any page a TW tab ought to have appeared. It is context sensitive based omn the type of page you are on

• Go to Team8
• use the TW tab
• Select XFD
• A box appears for you to fill in. Simply do your best. Say in words what you think is wrong. I suggest you put in "Fails WP:NCORP" since you are sure it is a non notable organisation

Because I have guided you I may or may not add my opinion to the nomination, but likely not. Note that it is not a ballot. Reasoned arguments for and against deletion are expected, based upon policy by the participants. Nothing will happen for a good while. After at least seven days an admin will take relevant administrative action Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 10:53, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Ok. That was remarkably simple. Thank you!MaskedSinger (talk) 11:05, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

@MaskedSinger Now you are far better equipped. Do not let this go to your head, though. Find your way quietly and gently. Twinkle is a powerful tool and there is scope for making a huge mess Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 11:06, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi,

Thanks for your help! 2601:703:200:4AF:59E6:3331:BECA:329A (talk) 16:42, 23 December 2021 (UTC) Nietzsche Jones

Please don’t bother with them, if they continue the incivility and personal attacks I’m reporting them. I presumed they had NPR rights and was very worried as to how they had the rights if they didn’t understand, or, have a proper grasp as to the optimization of CSD's but on second look I observed they didn’t and I said “oh well that explains” that Celestina007 (talk) 23:09, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

I am not bothering with them. I will respond to ANI if you take it there, but broadly as I have responded to you on their talk page. I am hoping it is an aberration, not a normal behaviour, and I am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt.

In case it was possible to interpret my thanks to you there as patronising or condescending, they were meant at face value. You care. I thank you for it. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 23:15, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

@Celestina007 forgot to ping Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 23:16, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

@Celestina007 I am hoping that their remarks will become much more collegial. Everyone is allowed a mistake. Heaven knows I've made loads. I truly never mind disagreeing with anyone. It is the manner of the disagreeing that I mind when it embraces hostility. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 23:19, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

You are too modest is why I like you a lot, that has been my point with them all along, I know we editors here can’t or won’t ever agree on something but as intellects which we all are, i expect all editors to argue intellectually with dignity, decorum and above all, with respect. Oh well, aha! Lest I forget, happy Christmas to you and yours, do enjoy the holidays mate. 💗 Celestina007 (talk) 23:52, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

@Celestina007 May you, too, have an amazingly happy Christmas. I've no idea if it is part of any faith you may have, but it is a decent time of year with genuine good wishes. I am an atheist, raised vaguely Christian, so I appreciate the time of year, though have no interest in a deity.

Modest? Not really. Pragmatic, I think. We will never change everyone, but we can change a few folk, one at a time.

Happy Christmas my friend Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 23:58, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Celestina007 (talk) 03:13, 25 December 2021 (UTC)"}}

Just sending here in case my reply didn’t get through on my own page:

Hi there, thank you for your message. I am the owner of the business and I thought the COI on my user page was sufficient. Please let me know what would be the best declaration for this.

I previously mentioned 331dot that I declared a COI as I am the business owner, I went through the AFC process as I thought that is what I should do but that I didn’t think this counted as being an employee as I am not being paid to create the draft, but I wasn’t sure whether I still needed to add the paid/employer/client declaration. I do want to do what is best practice.

I was then advised by 331dot that “An owner of a business editing is a gray area of the paid editing policy, as no one is paying the owner to edit, but the owner has an indirect financial benefit with their editing about their business. You may not need to comply with the letter of the paid editing policy, but I would advise you to at least post on your user talk page that you are the owner of the business“.

Should I just add that I am the owner of the business on my user page or would there be a more specific declaration I can add?

Please do advise, many thanks for your help. Ayo wpgm (talk) 21:51, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

@Ayo wpgm I believe that you should be safe, thus use the declarations in then Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure im full. Then no-one can accuse you of lack of transparency Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 22:20, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

What is the possibility of this page getting published? How to check its eventuality? AashitS (talk) 05:46, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

If you can't be bothered to link to the page I am not even going to look. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 08:10, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

• Alwayslp (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Paulie Gee ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello - Thank you very much for your review of the draft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Paulie_Gee#cite_note-40

I will create a new draft with the name Paulie Gee 2, as you had suggested.

I was wondering if I first need to delete the original draft before creating the new Paulie Gee 2 draft?

Or else can the original draft be "cut and pasted" into the new draft so that I can keep some of the references that I found and had already entered as footnotes? Just in order to maintain some of them (I won't use all of the references as I had previously done, however).

Or must everything be deleted from the original draft, and I have to enter the references again from scratch?

Thank you again for your guidance and help.

Alwayslp (talk) 15:23, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Alwayslp (talk) 15:23, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

@Alwayslp Abandon this one, and work om the new one

NEVER, not ever, cut and paste. It causes work for others. The attribution trail must be intact

Read this essay, which is one of many and gives you a roadmap for potential success. Use that roadmap, and start from scratch. Aim for concise words with just the right number of references. Keep it very simple. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 20:36, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply and advice, and I'll read the essay that you referenced.

I have another quick question, please.

Do I simply abandon the previous draft (and let it stay as is) while I make the new draft?

Or must I first request deletion of the original draft, using Db-g7, and then begin the new draft once the original is deleted?

Thanks again, Alwayslp (talk) 22:27, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

@Alwayslp you may ask for it to be deleted, or you can just abandon it. Deletion simply removes it from the public gaze. Tidiness suggests deletion, but it truly does not matter either way Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 22:36, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

I appreciate the advice and understand the rationale. Alwayslp (talk) 22:43, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

@Alwayslp Just remember that all you need to do is the minimum to prove that the subject is notable. Perfection is not required. Notability is proved by excellence of referencing. That is quality, not quantity.

Regrettably, if you cannot prove them to be notable then. they cannot be accepted as an article. SO work smart and know when to cut your losses if you have to. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 22:47, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

Benpring112 (talk) 11:49, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi Timtrent,

Thank you for reviewing my work so soon. I will add the references into the appropriate areas, however some of the information is from Danny himself - do I need to delete this from the article if it doesn't have a relevant reference or am I okay to leave it in as long as you're aware?

Speak soon,

Ben.

Benpring112 (talk) 11:49, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

@Benpring112 Lupano himself is not a reliable source. We really are not interested in what he wishes to say about himself. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 12:17, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. I appreciate that. I'll get editing.

Benpring112 (talk) 12:20, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Benpring112 (talk) 17:10, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi Timtrent,

Sorry for my slight ineptness, I was just wondering if you could see my recent edits to the post and could have a look over it please? If not, I apologise but I'm new to Wikipedia - I would appreciate if you could guide me on how to allow you access if this is the case.

Regards,

Ben.

Benpring112 (talk) 17:10, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

@Benpring112 I never review more than once. We all are new when we start here. Be unafraid. I am able to access, even edit, all that you can Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 17:29, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Ok thank you. I will resubmit now.

Ben. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Benpring112 (talk • contribs) 17:32, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

• Sarfaraz Hamid (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Ahmed Al-Harrasi ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Dear Timtrent, How the template "This article is an autobiography or has been extensively edited by the subject or by someone connected to the subject. It may need editing to conform to Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy. There may be relevant discussion on the talk page. (October 2021) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)" will be removed from my article ?

my article is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmed_Al-Harrasi , If I am not then someone else can remove the template from my article, moreover in my view the article is changed a lot to meet Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy . can you please help me ? Thanks in advance.

Sarfaraz Hamid (talk) 09:33, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

@Sarfaraz Hamid I reco9gnise that you have changed your name. Please state clearly if you are or are not Ahmed Al-Harrasi Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 09:39, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

I am Sarfaraz Hamid, and i already changed my user name from Ahmed al harrasi to Sarfaraz Hamid, and this Article is written by me.

My declaration https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=1065359090 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarfaraz Hamid (talk • contribs) 09:49, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

@Sarfaraz Hamid I now understand from what you have said that you are not Ahmed Al-Harrasi. This means you may remove the autobiography banner. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 09:57, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply, i checked but i didnt find from where to remove it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarfaraz Hamid (talk • contribs) 09:58, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

@Sarfaraz Hamid I have removed it on your behalf. You may see how by checking the article history Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 10:00, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, Much appreciated ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarfaraz Hamid (talk • contribs) 10:12, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

Benpring112 (talk) 00:57, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Vincent Harper

Messemo Junior Bakayoko

Hi @timtrent, I would massively appreciate if you could inform me what I need to change in these articles in order to be able to remove the message at the top of each page.

I look forward to hearing back from you,

Ben.

Benpring112 (talk) 00:57, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

@Benpring112 You need to ask the editor who placed the tags there. Any editor in good standing may remove them once they have been satisfied. This included you.

With regard to Messemo Junior Bakayoko I have tidied it up. While the references existed they were misplaced. Where non English titles are used please add the parameter trans-title after translating the title.

Please use my example to tidy the other article.

On Commons you will see that I have doubts about the copyright of the picture you have uploaded. That is handled there.

It's kind of you to select me for your question. I have no expertise in articles on football players, though Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 09:09, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

All of this has been excellent, thank you so much @timtrent. I asked you purely because you've been so great in the past and you delivered again, haha! Thanks again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Benpring112 (talk • contribs) 09:43, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

My draft was rejected in October but greatly appreciate your note about how the article should be focused on the individual or the business. This provided the guidance I needed to edit the piece for resubmission.

Charles Kouri — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ckouri (talk • contribs) 00:08, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

I am not understanding the reason for decline. The message left was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

However I do show published sources that are independent of myself. Multiple in fact. This is why originally the draft included all the reasons I meet Wiki's guidelines. I'll place such below. I have looked over such criteria multiple times to check that I meet such. This originally did not start out as an autobiography but something brought up by others to me.

NOTES:

Therealc2theg003 It is not "impossible". It may be difficult, but I have not looked for what independent reliable sources say about you yet to know if you are notable or not. To pass the AFC process, most reviewers look for at least three independent reliable sources with significant coverage of the subject. If you have at least three news reports about you that cover you significantly(not just mentioning you), your draft would likely be accepted. Focus on summarizing the three best independent sources about you; anything else that you can cite may come later(though would need to be submitted as a formal edit request). 331dot (talk) 09:55, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

I was told on the Pendleton, Indiana talk page that if I could provide three news reports that cover me significantly, my draft would most likely be accepted. In regards to this I have included three times I was significantly included in local newspapers with citations, archives, and photos of those papers (linked references), not just other briefer mentions of myself in the news. To not cause what would be deemed a conflict of interest or biased editing, in this draft for consideration I am leaving out the lengthy notes and sections included in my prior draft, and other work I've taken on. That being my work with published illustrator Mio Silvey, my independent film which starred the likes of Matt Hill from Ed, Edd, and Eddy, and a lot of other decently significant actions. This creative work resulted in me being awarded, which is in the specifications for notable creative professional, that such person be awarded for their work would make them notable stated on additional criteria "the person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for such an award several times" and listed later in the section "the person has won significant critical attention" which would be that of an award or multiple awards due to their work (away from my other academic awards not received for creative purposes).

But basically as asked, I have removed my works on my independent film featuring Matt Hill, my work with published illustrator Mio Silvey, my received awards for creative work ($50,000 distinction scholarship, Father Chaminade Award, etc), my book series and novella under review by literary agents and big name publishers, my yearbook designs which where then published with images of me in such work, and other things like my journal series, my band and our performances, comics I've worked on, my work with given institutions and groups and so on. Now I have only included published articles of myself away from me in The Herald Bulletin and Pendleton Times.

In a technical sense I also meet the Entertainer criteria "has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions" as I have starred as lead roles in stage performances sold on DVD. The creation of this page is not for personal self promotion of my concepts or ideas, but because I do meet what seems to be the given criteria to be on Wiki. Others can feel free to edit anything about me as this is not MY wiki page, but a wiki page ABOUT ME. That is also why I've included the articles written about me independent of me.

"Materials that have been recorded then broadcast, distributed, or archived by a reputable party may also meet the necessary criteria to be considered reliable sources" here I have included archived newspaper sources and direct links on their website. I feel I am doing more than enough to provide and showcase my local notability (that compared to people of my town page which I am doing this for, some of those people's pages that are getting a mere 55 views and some on my town's notable wiki not even having a separate page at all).

"Primary sources are original materials that are close to an event, and are often accounts written by people who are directly involved. They offer an insider's view of an event, a period of history, a work of art, a political decision, and so on. Primary sources may or may not be independent sources. An account of a traffic incident written by a witness is a primary source of information about the event; similarly, a scientific paper documenting a new experiment conducted by the author is a primary source for the outcome of that experiment. Historical documents such as diaries are primary sources". - I have provided multiple accounts of archived sources with the photographers and writers who were directly involved in the events.

"A secondary source provides an author's own thinking based on primary sources, generally at least one step removed from an event. It contains an author's analysis, evaluation, interpretation, or synthesis of the facts, evidence, concepts, and ideas taken from primary sources". - I have included direct analysis of the primary sources written about me.

All referencing is correct, including WP:RS, WP:PSTS and that I am posted in multiple reliable sources that are not only referred to, but directly linked on this page in footnotes.

Entertainer criteria, creative awards, independent reliable referenced sources are all met with what I've drafted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Therealc2theg003 (talk • contribs) 18:12, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

@Therealc2theg003 You are standing too close to the subject, which is yourself. Put plain, you fail WP:BIO.

Perhaps you should ask at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk for further opinions.

Wikipedia does not publish what you wish to say about yourself. For that you need your own web site. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 18:46, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Unless you start properly citing all the claims in that draft - which means citing the print edition of the newspaper with {{cite news}} and not just the scans of the newspaper - it isn't going anywhere anytime soon, per WP:BLP. Arguing about the requirements isn't going to help your case a whit. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 20:06, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi Timtrent how are you?

Sorry to disturb but I was just wondering if you wouldn't getting back to me on the comments I left on my sandbox please? You recently reviewed my article on Neilson Financial Services and I was just looking for some feedback if that's ok.

Please find the link here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Aoife30/sandbox

Thanks a million,

Aoife.

--Aoife30 (talk) 10:29, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

@Aoife30 The answer to the first part is that Wikipedia has many articles that should not be present. Gradually we weed them out, but it takes time. No precedent is ever set by any article for any other. If it were we would have a brutally fast descent into idiocracy

The answer in references is almost never "more" and almost always "better". Quantity of references is always an error, Quality is always what is required. Three excellent references are worth 100 poor ones. Crunchbase is virtually useless, I'm afraid. SMH and TMM are excellent (7 & 10 today), the rest are questionable, though not necessarily poor. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 11:47, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the speedy review of my campaignbox template. Wareno (talk) 21:46, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

@Wareno easy to do. Thank you for creating it Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 21:53, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Let's see how this pans out. Catfish Jim and the soapdish 19:15, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

I had nowiki'd your comment on my talk page to limit its visibility for the time being. But whatever... Catfish Jim and the soapdish 02:39, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

@Catfish Jim and the soapdish Ah! That explains it. I didn't check the history so thought I'd cocked up. It won't matter. Either they are genuine, which now appears less than likely, or they are not. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 07:55, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

Their use of grammar and wiki markup is also a dead giveaway. Catfish Jim and the soapdish 12:13, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

@Catfish Jim and the soapdish it is. I was just wondering how large a hole they could dig. They are very polite for a sock; this makes me appear extremely helpful, I suppose because it's good manners. I'd forgotten the blocking admin was a CU practitioner!

This one knows far too much

Reviewing at AFC means I spot a large number of sock farms. I'm sure I miss a few, too Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 12:24, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

The page is currently being vandalized by an IP from Gujarat. The state with most Neo Nazi activities in India. You might want to look at the pre-vandalized version before drawing your conclusions. Appropriate refs are there. Venkat TL (talk) 17:42, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

@Venkat TL I may review my opinion during the course of the discussion. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 17:54, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello! I wanted to drop a quick note for all of our AFC participants; nothing huge and fancy like a newsletter, but a few points of interest.

• AFCH will now show live previews of the comment to be left on a decline.
• The template {{db-afc-move}} has been created - this template is similar to {{db-move}} when there is a redirect in the way of an acceptance, but specifically tells the patrolling admin to let you (the draft reviewer) take care of the actual move.

Short and sweet, but there's always more to discuss at WT:AFC. Stop on by, maybe review a draft on the way? Whether you're one of our top reviewers, or haven't reviewed in a while, I want to thank you for helping out in the past and in the future. Cheers, Primefac, via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:00, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

• Polip team (talk · contribs)
  • User:Polip team/sandbox ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Polip team (talk) 20:58, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your words, but actually I did not copy any previous issues, simply as I was misunderstood about lack of references, that's the reason why I have included all that, now I am losing myself as who reads the draft changes all the times so it is almost impossible to find a correct way and to keep alive a useful dialogue. With my best Polip team

Polip team Please see Draft:Enzo Minarelli and improve that one. Abandon User:Polip team/sandbox

Drafts are reviewed by multiple reviewers. Reviewers are very experienced Wilipedia editors. Their comments are usually very clear. MIne are that you need to edit the correct draft. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 21:14, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	...And here's the Not Taking Me To ANI, XRV or Any of Those Types of Dramaboards barnstar. – AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 10:35, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Good heavens, @AssumeGoodWraith! First, thank you, and second why on earth would I have done that? No-one comes out of that well, not the reported and not the reporter, often!

Good editors make mistakes all the time. What matters is what we do after the error, not the error itself. I believe in nurture, not censure. No-one, with the except on a vandal, is here to do harm. All of us are here for an intriguing hobby. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 10:46, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Maybe it's just my view of the community. I hesitated for a few minutes before clicking one of those notifications. – AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 10:46, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

@AssumeGoodWraith We have all sorts here. Even on the good side we have those who are unpleasant, bombastic, self important, self righteous. Most of us are just decent folk plodding through life as best we can.

If it helps, I had to consider the question I asked you on your talk page very carefully before I asked it. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 10:49, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Hmm... since we're here, can you review this section? I feel like I interpreted something wrong here. (first article, 9 months later, etc, etc.) – AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 11:19, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

@AssumeGoodWraith I'm not entirely sure what you are asking me to look at. On the face of it I see a well enough referenced section, though three references are two too many in my view, and the references are pretty much repetitive. One does not need three references to what Narang has said. The articles are obviously written after a PR release of some description, but they are not articles that bolster the notability of the article subject. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 11:28, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi thanks for looking at the page Im obviously finding my feet with the two pages ive tried to write and had both declined. I take the comments. Is there a better format for this as it should be about the art works not the person necessarily? Asgar the crippled (talk) 09:39, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

@Asgar the crippled if it is about the art works then the art itself has to be notable. You have to make a decision. Do you write about the person or their work.

Format? I think some section headings would be useful Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 09:42, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Ok, I deleted the headings and turned it into a bio thinking that would be better. Will look into it more before resubmitting many thanks Asgar the crippled (talk) 10:15, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

@Asgar the crippled read this essay, which will help with the process you need to follow to be successful, assumimg notability exists Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 10:26, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Thankyou Asgar the crippled (talk) 10:38, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Sorry for the delayed response have been busy in r/l. There is a couple of ways that this could be addressed:

1. That Draft:Nikolaus Gerszewski be deleted and Draft:Nikolaus Gerszewski 2 page be moved to that location (following the deletion), or
2. That the relevant information & sources from Draft:Nikolaus Gerszewski 2 be cut & paste onto Draft:Nikolaus Gerszewski (with Draft:Nikolaus Gerszewski 2 then being deleted), and then once the draft is knocked into shape it be lodged as an AfC.

I hope that helps. Dan arndt (talk) 05:45, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

@Dan arndt Way 3 is to ignore the pathetically incomplete one and review the more complete one. I find that the best of the three. I was hoping you would revert your decline and review in that way Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 08:41, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi, I saw that the page I created (Iveco Group) was moved to draft since it was misconceived as a "copy" of another Iveco page. The page I created > ^[1] The Iveco page > ^[2] I created the page because I noticed that the current Iveco page has several inaccuracies since it refers to the IVECO brand. Iveco Group is a new holding company established in January 2022 and IVECO is one of the group brands. So I think it would be clearer to have a group page (Iveco Group) and a edited IVECO brand page. Let me know ok? Gianmaria V (talk) 08:52, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

@Gianmaria V Your opinion is reasonable, but unlikely to prevail in my opinion. I suggest you reach a consensus on its talk page for splitting the Brand article you envisage into a separate article. The problem you have is the huge scope for misunderstanding what you are doing. That is just my view. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 09:00, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Gianmaria V (talk) 14:28, 24 February 2022 (UTC) Thanks, I will do it right now.

Hello! I see that you submitted my sandbox entry as a draft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Lillian_Louise_DeBaptiste. I already have submitted it here→https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Lillian_DeBaptiste. It was on my sandbox as a backup just incase something happened to the live version. I don't know if you can remove the second submission, but if you can, please do. Thanks, Tim--Physeters (talk) 19:11, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

The only reason I moved it to Draft space was that you had submitted it for review. Others have handled the issue for you I the interim Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 20:17, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

@Physeters forgot to ping Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 20:17, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

@Timtrent That's great. Thanks!--Physeters (talk) 20:22, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Greetings friend, I'd like to thank you for reviewing and approving my template "Portuguese Governors and Viceroys of India". I do, however, disagree with your reasoning for rejecting my other one, "Governors-general and Viceroys of Portuguese America", for a simple reason: if people become aware of the work that needs to be done, they're that more likely to go ahead and actually create the articles that are missing. I ask if you would not reconsider, or at least allow someone else to approve it when I resubmit it in the future. Best regards Wareno (talk) 18:39, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

@Wareno please feel free to ask for other opinions. I am not the only reviewer. While I think I am correct I may not be. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 18:56, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Timtrent. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Celestina007 (talk) 20:01, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

@Celestina007 NOT urgent. Just a load of similar edits/editors creating State of Lagos drafts and articles Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 22:29, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi Tim, Thanks for your initial review of the draft article for Duane McRuer (late aircraft controls engineer; National Academy of Engineering). I revised and added a bunch of references. Can you please take a look and provide any advice on how to make it better? Thanks so much for your help. Jbgeddes3 (talk) 17:44, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

@Jbgeddes3 I see you have resubmitted it. Good. Please use the time between now and the next review to continue to enhance it.

It is very rare that I re-review a draft. This iterative process is better conducted with more eyes than just one reviewer. Thank you for asking me, though. Like waiting for a bus there will be another reviewer along in a while. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 17:48, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

I think Draft:Segal Al Rikabi is very difficult and nearly impossible for any individual to review at AfD. It is obviously not a complete hoax or anything and I believe community at AfD is probably a better place then the pressure on any indiviidual at AfC. Would you violently object i(you don't have to like it) f I moved it to mainspace with a notability tag and it can be AfD tested there if necessary. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 17:30, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

@Djm-leighpark I've asked at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation for others to have a look. May I suggest you wait a period of your choosing before migrating it to mainspace?

I have no objection if you choose not to wait, but, equally there is no rush, no deadline.

All I really want to know is if the poet has verifiable notability Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 17:40, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

I'll give a little time and at least a further work over before I do that. Maybe translate the the title's as well. I've added WikiProjects so that might help. Djm-leighpark (talk) 17:48, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

@Djm-leighpark For AFC acceptance all we need to know is that it has a better than 50% chance of surviving an immediate deletion process. I suggest you work on it 'that far', and only go further if you feel like it Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 18:11, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

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.

You have been trouted for: YOUR REASON HERE Aureliae42 (talk) 23:01, 6 March 2022 (UTC) Rejecting a page for not meeting WP:PROF when they weren't submitted as an academic, and were not a student (PhD awarded and linked in refs.)

@Aureliae42 Troutshit happens. What was the draft? Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 23:07, 6 March 2022 (UTC)