I am trying to write an article and I keep hitting a road block with my references. I understand that you reviewed my article at some point. I have used references that are to me verifiable and of notable standing themselves, I just don't understand how they are not helping me out.

Can you please elaborate for me?

This is the article in question. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focus_the_Producer Rico2014 (talk) 19:50, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Check out WP:NMUSIC for the notability requirements. I'm not seeing anything that would indicate that any of these requirements are met. All the references in the world won't help if the notability requirement is not met and verified by the references.The Ukulele Dude - Aggie80 (talk) 20:03, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

I'm trying to mount the actor Andrew Jarvis onto Wikipedia.

The problems so far have included:

3rd person evidence that Mr Jarvis is "notable". Could you let me know what you mean by third person. Andrew Jarvis is one of the most notable Shakespeareans around -- you only have to see his CV to be convinced of that. Although a lot of his achievements (his Best Actor Award, his rep career) happend before Wiki and the internet got underway, so I don't know if there's online evidence for every fact. But these are the facts of his CV, he was in these productions and he did play these roles. There are, luckily, a number of roles that he's played since the internet's prominence, so you can check those sites.

Also, I can't get the programme to stop producing two versions!

Best,

Gillian Piggott — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gillianpiggott (talk • contribs) 15:52, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Simply delete the entry you don't want. You can't use the subject's own CV to establish notability. There have to be reviews, discussions, articles on the actor. They don't have to be online, though most newspaper archives are becoming available. While imdb is not considered a good reference source, the number of productions listed could be used. Good luck! The Ukulele Dude - Aggie80 (talk)

I have cited IMdB, where there is material about the film role of Merlin that Jarvis played for the American director, Mark Lester this year. Jarvis is also due to guest star in a new series of BBC 1's New Tricks in August, 2014. I also do have five or six reviews that I've cited, and they're online - but there are countless other reviews that are not online. Also, there are several academic texts (The Arden Shakespeare (2009) and the Penguin edition (2005) of Richard III), which discuss Andrew Jarvis's performance of Richard III. Also, an academic text edited by W.R.Owens and Lizbeth Goodwin on Aphra Behn, Shakespeare and the Canon (1996) discusses Jarvis's performance of Duke Frederick. His image is also promoting the British Shakespeare Assocation website - and the image of him as Richard III is among the exhibition of Shakespearean actors at Shakespeare's Globe in London.

Have you taken all these references into account? Or do you need more? If so, how many more? Because I can provide more sources of discussion than that, if needed. He really is one of our most distinguished Shakespearean actors and has also been on film and on TV and he should be on Wikipedia. He's played all over the world.

Best

Gillian Piggott

		The Silver Wiki Award
		Congratulations, you have earned The Silver Wiki Award for having performed the second highest number of reviews during the WikiProject Articles for creation December 2013 - January 2014 Backlog Elimination Drive. Thanks for contributing to the backlog elimination drive! Posted by Northamerica1000 (talk) on 11:18, 26 February 2014 (UTC), on behalf of WikiProject Articles for creation

Hi Aggie80!

Thank you for the comments on the abovementioned page I submitted. I'm still very new to writing on Wikipedia, so I really appreciate the comments and help. I'll group the sections with single sentences into an 'Other' section to make it more readable.

I am unsure, however, about the difference between 'essay'-type and 'encyclopedia'-type writing. Can you please give some examples and some guidance?

Phildt (talk) 14:11, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

I've just made a few changes. Am I going in the right direction?

Phildt (talk) 14:46, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

immediately rollback article Top world news — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adriatik neziri (talk • contribs) 14:59, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

the last time, is that delete the article. Delete only those sentences that you think is marketing. And then immediately edit my article and not delete, but the Sharpen. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adriatik neziri (talk • contribs) 15:33, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi I wish to create article for my company virtualinfocom.

You may visit our link www.virtualinfocom.com www.virtualinfocom.in www.virtualinfocom.net www.virtualinfocom.co.in

Please suggest me the way to do it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amit.wikki (talk • contribs) 12:14, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

There are a number of challenges. As it is 'my company' you have an issue with WP:COI. Make sure that WP:CORP notability requirements are met and shown. If you type in the name of your company in the search bar, you will be given the opportunity to create the page and it will take you through the process.The Ukulele Dude - Aggie80 (talk) 12:30, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

hi i am demi lion my article is rejected plz can u specify detail for rejection. i think the psipred article would get better after it is published but still i will try to make edits but it would be help full if i could know what is missing in my edit. thnx for assistance. Demi lion (talk) 18:12, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

There are only three references. The title is not clear, terms are used that are not defined. The grammar is not correct, capitalization at start of sentences as an example. The Ukulele Dude - Aggie80 (talk)

Hello Aggie80,

I have made the following correction in the article and resubmitted it thank you for help.Demi lion (talk) 13:22, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi Aggie80! Thanks for your information about Grimlord's band article. I deleted this materials, and I will prepare corrected tomorrow.Grimwiki (talk) 19:02, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello Aggie80:

WikiProject AFC is holding a month long Backlog Elimination Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running from March 1, 2014 to March 31, 2014.

Awards will be given out for all reviewers participating in the drive in the form of barnstars at the end of the drive.
There is a backlog of over 1800 articles, so start reviewing articles! Visit the drive's page and help out!

A new version of our AfC helper script has been released! It includes many bug fixes, new improvements and features, code enhancements, and more. If you want to see a full list of changes, visit the changelog. Please report bugs and feature requests there, too! Thanks.
Posted by Northamerica1000 (talk) on 02:12, 28 February 2014 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk), on behalf of WikiProject Articles for creation

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Ira_Ward

Hi, Now I am back and logged in! Please contact me... -Thanks! 4gottenhistory (talk) 12:44, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi again!

I would like to add that I read the rules for notability and my article contains several of the requirements for notability. You must have misunderstood who the person is. As a composer, musician and producer Ira meets all of the notability requirements. My article needs work as this is my first and I would like for you to help me re-write it. :) Thanks! 83.180.198.250 (talk) 10:00, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

My purpose is to help unsung heroes, musicians who made major contributions to the music industry but never got their due credit. I met Ira Ward when he worked with "The Gap Band". He worked with Rudy Taylor as a ghostwriter, Rudy never paid him or gave him any credits for his work! What about the direct credits of the albums that Ira appears on, isn't that enough...? For example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gap_Band_VI See credits. Ira Ward is a notable writer, producer and musician. He wrote and produced songs for dr. alban which sold 11,000,000 units. Here is a artist below that has his own article but doesn't match the notability of Ira. He is also using a myspace... http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swingfly For instance, Ricky Lawson, a musicians who worked with Michael Jackson has his own article. Thanks for helping man, I really want to see this guy get his due credit. Please help...! P.S. Sorry for not logging in, I am overseas traveling at the moment but will login next time. 83.180.177.45 (talk) 21:41, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi Aggie80! Thanks for taking the time to review my article. I saw that it was declined on grounds of lack of notability. The article is still underconstruction but does not lack notabilty. This musician/songwriter/producer has worked with artist(s) that have sold millions. The citations show this clearly, I am new to this and may be misunderstanding you. Can you help me or re-write the article? I would be greatful. :) Thanks! 83.180.198.211 (talk) 08:48, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Working with others does not confer notability on someone or something, it is not inherited. Review WP:MUSIC and show how this individual meets those requirements. Myspace, discog and Wikipedia articles are not substantial references, so there are no acceptable references provided, see WP:REFB for starting point. And because you are not logged in and have a different IP for each session, I have no way of contacting you and don't know if you will see this.The Ukulele Dude - Aggie80 (talk) 12:08, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for you comments. I have added three more references to this article, and resubmitted it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/Agatha_Chapman Lancastle (talk) 17:27, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Dear Aggie80, my article for cretation/Sardar Kahn Singh Nakai was rightly declined by you. I improved it and resubmitted...but now feel that the article is unnecessary as most of the information has been covered adequately in other related pages. Now I wish to withdraw it but do not know the procedure to do the same.

Can you help me in doing this? Thanks...StratMan001 (talk) 04:24, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

I marked the article for deletion with your text above for the explanation why. It should go away in a day or so.The Ukulele Dude - Aggie80 (talk) 11:46, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi Aggie80. Thank you for reviewing my submission. I have already included several references to our company as a notable topic of interest and to our proprietary technology - Rich Media Messaging. "Mogreet" is a very similar submission which was approved and I cannot decipher where that submission differs from ours in terms of notability. Since my last submission for this topic we have been quoted in a few additional online publications but they are similar to the ones I have already included. For a startup company with a patented technology that has been featured / quoted / referenced in online media what references are you seeking? I want to make my next submission for this topic a success. If you could be more specific on the types of references you are seeking, I will work to provide them. Thank you so much, 15:30, 3 March 2014 (UTC)Katty8888 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Katty8888 (talk • contribs)

Dear Aggie80, Can you be specific about the copyright violations I need to remove in order to have Wikipedia accept the article? And I'm having trouble accessing the article. I can't locate it any more. Can you tell me what happened to the link after you read and rejected the article? Thank you, LeninMartovLeninmartov (talk) 16:49, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Dear Aggie80, jI am still trying to find my submission to continue working on it: "If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ronald Aronson." The URL is: but all I find there is your comment about containing copyrighted material. Please help me locate my March 1 resubmission so that I can continue working on it. Thank you, LeninMartovLeninmartov (talk) 17:13, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Ronald Aronson shows that it was deleted for copyright violation.18:47, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Dear Aggie80, Now that I know that the article Ronald Aronson was deleted, can you help me in two ways: 1) send me a copy of the article so that I may remove the copyright violations in my own space and resubmit it; 2) tell me what the specific violations were so that I can edit the article? ThanksLeninmartov (talk) 18:54, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, I can't pull up a copy of the deleted article. The text was closely, if not directly, copied from Aronson Biography18:57, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Yes, that web page was used for information for the article. But isn't that in the public domain and thus not subject to copyright restrictions?Leninmartov (talk) 19:39, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

What would indicate that is in public domain? It is a web site and the creator holds the copyright, whether marked as such or not. Without a specific disclaimer, Wikipedia will consider it a copyright violation. See WP:CV for more specifics and links to additional information. The Ukulele Dude - Aggie80 (talk) 19:45, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi Aggie80, You are incredibly fast. Question about the article on the EPTIS database: Actually, I am the secretary of the so-called EPTIS Consortium, which publishes the database, and I write the text with the approval of this consortium. I wrote the text myself, and have written the website of EPTIS where it refers to. There is no copyright conflict in my eyes. Could you please explain? Thanks! Best wishes from Berlin, Germany Johannes van de Kreeke — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kreeke (talk • contribs) 11:58, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

There are sentences that are directly off the web site. That is a copyright violation unless the process is done to release the rights to Wikipedia in a documented form. Also, knowing that you are the secretary means there is an issue with WP:COI which makes it difficult to obtain a neutral, unbiased report. Really need more in the way of independent, third-party references to confirm or establish it. See WP:REFB for introduction to the basics. Good luck! The Ukulele Dude - Aggie80 (talk) 12:02, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi Aggie80 again, thanks for your explanation. If these are the two issues: (a) releasing the rights to Wikipedia and (2) add a lot more external references to demonstrate objectivity: definitely no problem. With (b) I'll go ahead in the next hours, but how to accomplish (a)? Absolutely no problem for me / the EPTIS consortium / my employer (all not for profit, governmental organizations) to release copyright. I appreciate your help! Take care / Johannes — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kreeke (talk • contribs) 12:20, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

See WP:CV for the basics on what is needed. The Ukulele Dude - Aggie80 (talk) 12:30, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi Aggie80, I added a text release note at the "disclaimer" part of the EPTIS website and hope this helps to clarify things.

Best wishes / Johannes Kreeke (talk) 14:56, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Any news? / Johannes 88.74.28.254 (talk) 20:27, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Can you please provide all of the specific changes needed in order to gain approval. Thank you. -Leedbiz4 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leedbiz4 (talk • contribs) 04:19, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

The article needs to show notability with the appropriate references to support the claims. See WP:BIO for the requirements and WP:REFB for the basics of referencing. References from companies the subject is a part of, or simply on a listing, are not adequate to show notability.The Ukulele Dude - Aggie80 (talk) 12:11, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi Aggie80. Firstly, thanks for taking the time to review my first page :-)

I know that, as you said, I need to provide reliable sources to be approved. I have added a couple of more references. Can you give me an idea of what I could add in terms of reliable sources please? I would have thought that a newspaper article such as The Sheffield Star article would have counted as a reliable 3rd party source. For example another actress page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samira_Mohamed_Ali has links to an online version of a local newspaper article and this page has been approved and published. All the other links on that page are IMDb, YouTube or personal website links. So I'm struggling to think what else I can add to get the page approved.

Many thanks. FlashLight Creative — Preceding unsigned comment added by FlashLight Creative (talk • contribs) 16:30, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Pretty much that newspaper article is the only acceptable reference there. The others should be external links. And is there a reason you are creating this article? You might want to review WP:COI and make sure any issue is documented on your WP home page. (And comparing to other articles is not a good idea unless they are highly rated. The one you cited has been flagged.)The Ukulele Dude - Aggie80 (talk) 16:51, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi Aggie80, I've offered to help another user to create a page for artist Nancy Buchanan. I see some formatting issues here that I can help her to work out, but also count at least 11 reliable sources cited inline, so trying to get a better handle on why it would be declined for that reason. Could you please help me by way of a little more explanation on your comment? Thank you. 16:32, 5 March 2014 (UTC)StaceyEOB (talk)

It was the formatting issues, that didn't line up the footnotes being inline. If you help her out with that issue, I think the article should be accepted.The Ukulele Dude - Aggie80 (talk) 16:46, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! We're having a meetup on Sunday and I'm pretty sure we can start fresh with the formatting and get it worked out then. Appreciate the quick response. 16:50, 5 March 2014 (UTC)StaceyEOB (talk)

Thanks all, we'll fix this up Sunday, then I'll be a better editor. Best Marilyn Nix (talk) 21:18, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Which specific copyright information needs to be taken out? I will take it out immediately. Nelsenkinkaide (talk) 18:20, 6 March 2014 (UTC)nelsenkinkaide

It was a direct copy from Who's Who complete with the formatting at Greg Speirs.The Ukulele Dude - Aggie80 (talk) 18:35, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi Aggie80,

Thanks for adding the AfC tag. But I believe I wanted to add more Information to the article. Can we possibly remove the request since i believe the article is not complete. Also, will take a lot of time since there is always a lot of request to the moderators for creation. Please kept me know if this is possibility?

Also, relatively a newbie here - Would you mind helping me to understand how Wikipedia works whenever required? Seriously appreciate your help. Thanks in Advance

-Chris — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChristopherYeun (talk • contribs) 06:06, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I can remove the tag.The Ukulele Dude - Aggie80 (talk) 12:37, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks You, Aggie80, BUt the article is still in the AfC talk section can we possibly move it mine. I don't know how do it. Please Teach me the same too and also move the same. ChristopherYeun (talk) 18:35, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

It is where it is supposed to be and will be there until you ask for it to be reviewed, deleted or has been abandoned for three months. No one is going to look at it until you ask for a review.The Ukulele Dude - Aggie80 (talk) 18:38, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

==I will take out the Who's Who reference immediately.== Will I then be able to redo the page again with this taken out? Nelsenkinkaide (talk) 18:48, 6 March 2014 (UTC)nelsenkinkaide

Hey so I think this is the right place to message. This was my first article created to Wikipedia and it was a bit overwhelming (noob syndrome ha) so I am wondering what exactly I can do to meet the standards. The notice I see said "What you can do: Add citations (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners) to secondary reliable sources that are entirely independent of the subject." and I think you are the guy that reviewed it. So, I might not have added the citations right? Because I had a lot of them cited and had a lot of different sources. If you can just tell me in layman's terms how to get this article approved, that would be super helpful. If it is just simply citing the sources properly then would you mind helping me out with how to do that? Thank you! Also, feel free to just email me at officialrecurrence@gmail.com. It would make it easier for me to communicate because it even took me a while just to figure out how to message you here haha. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by OfficialRecurrence (talk • contribs) 01:12, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

The references are done correctly, the biggest issue is what is referenced. YouTube, VH1, airplayaddboard, livemixtapes, and the subject's own website are not appropriate references, they are the equivalent of wikipedia. The biggest thing to review would be WP:MUSIC and see what the requirements for notability are and see if your subject can meet them.The Ukulele Dude - Aggie80 (talk) 01:24, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Ah Ok thank you for the info, i was not aware for this. I will take a look and see what I can figure out. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.57.230.34 (talk) 19:27, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Also as an example, I was basing it off of another rapper's wiki page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fredo_Santana) and this one was published but still has youtube and BET and such as resources. My article has a lot more points of notability so I was wondering what the difference between the reasons they were published was? And yes I am still looking to find more reliable sources at the moment. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.57.230.34 (talk) 19:44, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

And he has chart time on the R&B charts, one of the key indicators of notability. I see nothing to indicate that Frenchie meets any of the WP:MUSIC criteria.The Ukulele Dude - Aggie80 (talk) 19:51, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Aggie80. Thank you for reviewing my article on Mandy Boursicot. I am a new wiki user and did not intend to have my article published in Wiki already. I thought I was still working in my sandbox when I saw my draft was up on Google….then it kind of snowballed from there. Anyway, I intend to add many more references, but would like your guidance on appropriate inclusion. In the article I list solo and group exhibits. I believe these are indicators of notability, but I am not sure how I would demonstrate that. There are a number of gallery and academy Websites that Boursicot is included in - do these count as references and would links to those sites be appropriate citations? If you could give me any other advice on demonstrating notability for this contemporary artist, I would very much appreciate that. Thank you.

(EditPiaf (talk) 23:52, 6 March 2014 (UTC))

how do it write this page on Yasmian quite frustrating — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sonathomas62 (talk • contribs) 08:26, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

From Chastized

Thank you for your assistance in creating and editing my article on The Hype Magazine. Do you have any other suggestions on how I can link the page to other wiki pages that mention the outlet? I would love to dress it up.Chastized (talk) 19:57, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Follow Up: Since "The Hype Magazine" is trademarked as listed in the quotation marks, would it be more appropriate for the title of the page to reflect the trademarked title rather than "The Hype (magazine)?"Chastized (talk) 20:12, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Aggie80. 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.

Chastized (talk) 23:05, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi "Aggie": the intention to creat an article on IDP is the following: there is no Wiki with the (correct) definition of the term out there yet. Your comment is very valid that it MUST be enriched by proper references. I am absolutely sure that these will be quickly filled in once the article is accepted for creation. Many IDP researchers can quickly fill in their part of the story. Therefore, I would like to ask you to reconsider your verdict. Many thanks in advance!

CheersDavid P Minde (talk) 14:38, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, the article needs to have references before acceptance, otherwise it gets flagged for rapid deletion as having no references. We're trying to prevent that from happening by having an article that meets minimum standards from the start.The Ukulele Dude - Aggie80 (talk) 14:42, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Ic, Thanks! David P Minde (talk) 14:45, 9 March 2014 (UTC) PS hope new version adresses your kind suggestions for critical improvements, Cheers David P Minde (talk) 16:28, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

... I am by now pretty confident that I have addressed all your comments and therefore very much looking forward to your re-evaluation of the AfC on IDP. Cheers, David P Minde (talk) 11:14, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi Aggie80-

I recently had a comment from you regarding the new page created for the band American Standards. In the comment you reference that there are no third party citations, notable awards or label backing. I have included each, but being our first submission, am unsure if maybe they were cited in an incorrect format or otherwise wrong? The band has been featured in several notable global publications from Absolute Punk and Alternative Press here in the states to For The Love Of Punk and Thrash Magazine over seas. The band was also a distributed band of the label Victory Records with several album reviews cited. All additional factual information regarding the band and their bio was taken from the bands websites (reverbnation, facebook etc.) as cited in the wiki. I would love to make corrections as needed. Just would like to better understand the process and where to focus my efforts. Thank you!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:FoundationAgency/American_Standards — Preceding unsigned comment added by FoundationAgency (talk • contribs) 14:47, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

First, thank you for including the link to the page in question! The next thing is references. The formatting is off and that makes it look like there are none! The 'little numbers' need to be moved up to the sentences or facts that they support. I've moved reflist to the end to pull them from the top portion, where ever the belong and list them properly in the References section. I'll concur that Victory could be considered a major label. However, there is an issue with WP:COI in that I believe you represent the band. This needs to be clearly disclosed on your user page, per the link. I've also moved the location now. [American Standards. I believe that if you move the references to the appropriate place that you have shown notability and can re-submit.The Ukulele Dude - Aggie80 (talk) 15:01, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

how i can improve my topic to make a wiki pedia page???its an acadmy....its really famous.page name is ISA BHAKKAR,it is Inayat Science Acadmy Bhakkar Pakistan (KIFAYAT ULLAH KHAN(KAIF KHAN) (talk) 07:39, 11 March 2014 (UTC)).

Aggie80-

Appreciate your quick response in regards to the citations on the American Standards wiki I am working on. Your direction helped a lot. I've done my best to update accordingly. I tried to cite everywhere that seemed appropriate in order to make your life easier when reviewing it. If any additional edits are needed, please let me know and I'd be happy to do so.

One thing outside the edits that I'm unsure if you can help with- I'm having trouble getting the image to display the the artist box. I've looked at other artist wikis and done a fair amount of research on google with no luck. Any chance you can give me a little direction on that? The image is currently in the wiki coding as; http://i.picresize.com/images/2014/02/26/NfOrK.jpg It's just not displaying when I view page.

Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by FoundationAgency (talk • contribs) 14:54, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/American_Standards — Preceding unsigned comment added by FoundationAgency (talk • contribs) 01:50, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Dear Aggie80,

You have reviewed the article I've send for creation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mikicook/sandbox and denied it. The reason was "it is not adequately supported by reliable sources" - could you please further explain? The sources I've referred to are articles of The Jerusalem Post - an accredited newspaper in Israel - why is that not adequate enough?

I'd just like to mention COI of the article's topic - NPG - an organization I'm working in. My aim in this article is informational and not promotional [NPG is a non-for-profit organization, a sub-unit in the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, which aims for sharing the university's exhibitions and knowledge with the public]. I've red the COI guidelines and have been trying to follow them strictly while writing - as this COI declaration shows (hopefully).

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikicook (talk • contribs) 14:03, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

I took a look and the first thing I realized is that the references didn't show up, the formatting for having them listed was not in the article. I added that in so they show up now. I probably missed the small numbers in my review. There is the WP:COI issue, so that needs to be disclosed on your user page per Wikipedia requirements. ( Note-> I see you have clearly done so! ) It would be better to see additional sources, not all from the same two authors in the same paper to establish "substantial coverage" for nnotability.The Ukulele Dude - Aggie80 (talk) 14:16, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for your comment and quick reply. I'll get more sources as you suggest. Best Mikicook 14:49, 6 March 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikicook (talk • contribs)

Hi,

I was unsuccessful so far in finding extra sources for my article, like you've suggested, how crucial is that? There's one release note from the University's Spokes-man (the article is about a sub-unit in the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. here is the link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mikicook/sandbox), but that would probably be considered as a self publication, right?

Besides, I'm having some trouble uploading images, could you please give some guidance about that? I've red the articles considering tagging and so on, but got totally lost on the way..There are 2-3 free-to-use images - taken in Israel, given to my by their author - I wish to upload, but I couldn't understand how should I tag them. What to do?

Thanks again, Mikicook 14:35, 9 March 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikicook (talk • contribs)

Try the "upload file" in the left side menu for adding pictures. It will walk you through the process and will explain the rights that have to be released in order for it to be allowed on the site. This can be tricky without the actual photographer's permission. As far as additional sources go, that will probably depend on who looks at it and whether they feel it is substantial coverage. Yes, the other article you found would probably be considered a primary source. Good luck!14:49, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, that was indeed very helpful. The author of the pictures has emailed them to me personally, approving their free usage. As far as I understand, now this approval should be forwarded somehow to Wikipedia? How? To whom? Besides, I found an extra third-party source, so hopefully that should do. Thanks again. Mikicook 15:57, 11 March 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikicook (talk • contribs)

Thank you for your edits and comments. Obviously I'm a newbie. If you have specific suggestions for edits I'd welcome them. Saglos (talk) 18:58, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

I think you did very well, I tweaked the formatting a little bit to line things up a bit better. In most cases I would have blanked the entire page, but felt that the rest of the article was good enough not to. The bio work has to be independent enough that it doesn't copy existing language in other web sites. Switching the order of sentences is not sufficient, as it can be seen as coming from that location. If you can work up the bio bit in a more independent fashion, this should go through.The Ukulele Dude - Aggie80 (talk) 19:12, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Much appreciated. For now, I just resubmitted a much-shortened version of the bio, thinking I should carefully rewrite the 'early years' section after re-reading my sources. I hope this will prevent the draft from being deleted in the next 24 hours? If not, I'll try again. Saglos (talk) 19:23, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

You also need to use the referencing format on the Sources. They should create a footnote the way the other references do, with the quote or appropriate sentences.The Ukulele Dude - Aggie80 (talk) 19:26, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

okay, I will fix this issue, too - I'll do more edits tomorrow and resubmit. Many thanks! Saglos (talk) 19:33, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Please help. I wanted to do something unique for my father's 80th birthday. My opinions aside, I know that he is notable enough for Wikipedia, given his contributions in the fields of pschiatry and psychopharm alone. I don't know how to prove this other than to cite the hundreds upon hundreds of studies he's published. I won't even go into how many times he's been an expert witness but how many other people do you know who testified against Jack Kevorkian or John Wayne Gacy??

So, if I am not the right person to submit the FACTS (which is what I thought Wikipedia is for) would you be willing to help me?? My only goal here is to provide a living testatment to someone who's life's work has been about helping those who are too sick to help themselves, who has contributed enormously to the understanding of psychiatric disorders and who has inspired or created treatments for those problems.

I wanted to share that with a larger audience BEFORE he dies. I won't ramble on. Help me Aggie80. You're my only hope. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheRealMarcFawcett (talk • contribs) 22:57, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Yes, Wikipedia is for facts. Facts which can be backed up with references from sources unrelated to the subject. Studies he did and his published writings are fine for a listing of his works, but need others to cite his research. Review WP:REFB for how to put inline citations into the article, a requirement for living people. Example, there are a number of awards listed that he has won, but no reference to back them up. A link to the organization's web site listing the award winners, or a newspaper article about the award would be required. His resume or the school newsletter would not be appropriate. Saying he testified against Kevorkian is all well and good, but provide the reference. The Ukulele Dude - Aggie80 (talk) 02:36, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Hello Aggie80,

Thank you for your suggetsions and additional links. I have followed your advice and added them which definitely has enriched teh article. Re scientific publications, I prefer to follow teh model of Steven T. Bramwell Wiki page and use the format * cite for selected publications and not teh footnotes. Otherwise the list becomes too long and confusing. HOpe that you will find my modifictaions accaeptable. Again, Thank you sincerely fo ryour help on improving the article ( the goal is to make a present for A. Bouzdine fo rhis 60th anniversary the coming Sunday).

Tatiana Chameeva

Hello. Thank you kindly for your assistance. Would you be able to inform me as to which parts are violating copywrights? Or is it just the bio part?

Thanks muchly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Martinrossgibbs (talk • contribs) 08:51, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Dear Aggie80,

I have written another article for Wikipedia, which like this one, has been rejected, for similar reasons to those you have for my article BTOSS.

I have attached my reasons for inclusion within my other article, "Push button telephone" to the other editor and would like to submit the same to you for your reconsideration.

Dear Kbrose, I noted your deletion to my recent insert, but wish to point out the following:- The article on the push-button telephone is mainly written regarding developments in the USA and there are several references to originators which could be arguably contested. I have presented the full picture as seen within the UK and was instrumental for the design and adoption. I believe this information is worthy for inclusion in Wikipedia, as its omission would not give any future reader the full details of all the developments behind the scenes in both countries. Unfortunately, within BT, we had to work with confidential information which could not be made public, nor was I able to file or patent any of my inventions or designs for external release, of which there were many, under the the then current rules and regulations in force. Although all my colleagues were aware of my push- button design which was adopted throughout the UK, it was introduced without any fanfare or press release, which would otherwise have corroborated my inclusion within this article. Some of those people who would have been able to confirm my facts are now dead or untraceable and again, would have been associated with BT. However, records exist within BT, which I have quoted. Therefore, I hope you can appreciate my dilemma as to providing external sources of references to support my facts. In my defence, I can only offer the truth. If Alexander Bell were to be omitted from the discovery of the telephone within any encyclopaedia source, no doubt other worthy inventors, plus the telephone and all its constituent parts would still be explained, but an important part of the history would be lost and the reader would be less informed. May I direct you to another source within Wikipedia regarding Higgs boson to support my inclusion (not that I wish to take any credit for that article or place myself in that esteemed body of luminaries). I would therefore kindly ask you to reconsider my inclusion under this topic and make an exception in this case and thank you for your time and input. Yours Sincerely RTS Parr, IEng, EngTech, AMIEE, AIPOEE, ACMI — Preceding unsigned comment added by Astede (talk • contribs) 11:17, 13 March 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Astede (talk • contribs)

hello thanks for your views on my submission of article traitvad but i think you understood it completely wrong its not neologism its a philosophy based on vedas and upanishad and this type of material is never published in press its a philosophy like dvaita and advaita i wish you to rethinking on ur views, i agree article need source but the source which i will give is directly from vedas and Upanishads i think which you can't understand. --Sandeep (talk) 14:11, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

I have been trying to create a web page for Radhika Nagpal; my first submission was rejected because it contained "insufficient information to attest to her being a notable person."

However, Wikipedia's own rules state that an academic in a named chair is a notable person; one of the original references documented that she holds the Kavli chair at Harvard's School of Engineering and Applied Sciences. Second, I modeled her page after her colleague Rob Wood's page (who was accepted into Wikipedia), which had precisely 3 references, which included his Harvard and Wyss affiliations and his showing up in the TR 35; her included similar references to the first two and a link to her work that made the cover of Science magazine (only 24 projects per year have that distinction, so it would seem as "notable" as the TR 35).

I then added more material that I wrote myself and was informed on March 8 that the page contained copyrighted information, but there is no indication of what that material might be. Now the page is deleted, and I have no idea what text was considered objectionable.

Margoseltzer (talk) 13:37, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

I have no way of finding the page or the history to review it, as it was deleted for the copyright violation. I don't know who deleted the actual page, but it means that another editor reviewed my review and removed it. Basing an article on an existing one only works if the article has a good rating. Robert Wood's article has been flagged for notability, has two of the three references are from his employer, who has a vested interest in promotion of the subject.The Ukulele Dude - Aggie80 (talk) 13:54, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

I have restored the Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Radhika Nagpal AfC draft. On second look, it was not obvious enough for G12 speedy deletion. Should go for copyright violations page or checked more carefully by AfC participants (don't know what their process is). I also removed some of the most susceptible copied material. Article likely fails the Professor Test, but lets at least give it a chance to be improved, as most of the article seems to be own work. jni ^(delete)_{...just not interested} 19:24, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Could you please provide me with some instructions as to how to correctly cite sources to get my page up. It says the sources aren't independent, but I'm not sure what qualifies as independent if mine do not. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ajp148 (talk • contribs) 14:27, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

I'd start with reading WP:REFB so that what you think are references get formatted so that they actually show up as references. Right now there is a single reference in the list, a blog which is not adequate for Wikipedia, and which is not formatted correctly. Any bio of a living person must have inline citations of the appropriate references. And those references need to show that the judge meets the notability requirements found at WP:JUDGE.The Ukulele Dude - Aggie80 (talk) 14:38, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Why didnt you post that?!?!?!? It was real information and EVERYONE needs to know. Gosh Aggie you're so STUPID!!! I dont want you're opinion!!!! Look, this is important to me and most people so just shut up and do your job!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Higuiseiloveyou (talk • contribs) 14:40, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

	The Original Barnstar
	Guess what?!?!? I'm back!!! Hey you suck!!!!! I dont like you aggie. Brooklyn and i r super happy together and we dont need you to involve yo-self in r luv life. Got it? SO please just screw off! K? Higuiseiloveyou (talk) 18:01, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

I followed your suggestion and added a lot more sources to make it more reliable. Please check it out. I really need this article to be published, and I would like to thank you for the advice. Please take another look and help me have this article published. I appreciate your help.

This is the link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Riana-santos/sandbox

Riana-santos — Preceding unsigned comment added by Riana-santos (talk • contribs) 08:20, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Hello Aggie80, you declined Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Life supportiveness on 12 February 2014. I just wanted to let you know the submitter deleted the history of you declining their article, as well as that of another Wikipedia reviewer. I have reinstated the notice of your decline on the page. I am declining the article a third time because it still reads like an essay. If you happen to come across it in your future reviews, I just wanted to let you know. Regards. Belshay (talk) 02:23, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Concur and thanks! I've even added a new comment to the existing article.The Ukulele Dude - Aggie80 (talk) 12:28, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Greetings.

Thank you for your review. Could you please guide me as to what references can I exactly add to my article? I'm not sure what role the references play in the article, and of what nature the references should be, etc.

Profound Anarch (talk) 16:39, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

The role of references is to substantiate the existence and acceptance of this notation format. I have no idea what references you can add. Where did the idea come from? Who created it? What publications have referenced the sources and existence of this notation format? What is its history and where is it documented? Who uses this format on a regular basis? Has it been accepted by any industry or organization? If this is an original idea, Wikipedia is not the place for it, see WP:NOT.The Ukulele Dude - Aggie80 (talk) 16:48, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

All right. I'll see what I can do. I'll have to add my references and re-submit, yes? Profound Anarch (talk) 01:42, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

I received notification that you had reviewed Churchill Weavers, a page created by Isaac Murphy Boone. When I clicked the link to review your comments, there was no page and no article. Any suggestions, or can you tell me what about the article made you turn it down for posting? Thanks. Isaac Murphy Boone (talk) 12:46, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

What made me turn it down? It was completely and totally blank. User:Isaac Murphy Boone/Churchill WeaversThe Ukulele Dude - Aggie80 (talk) 13:07, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Hello Angie 80,

thank you for reviewing the Article on Tom Amarque! (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Tom_Amarque) I have a question: You rejected the article on grounds of insufficient notability of the book(s). But the article is about the author, and the notability rules for creative professionals (wp:authors) do apply. He has a collective body of work, is known for originating a significant new concept, theory or technique and is cited by peers or successors. Is there a chance you can, well, review your review? ;-) The corresponding article in Germany got accepted on these grounds ... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nils Weber 418 (talk • contribs) 10:53, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

The biggest issue is that there is essentially one third party reference that supports the claims you are making above. Katalog der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek is simply a book listing and provides no support other than they exist. The third reference is an interview, which is a first level source. The fourth is a review of one book. Need to find more than a single source to establish notability.The Ukulele Dude - Aggie80 (talk) 11:19, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi Angie80. Ok, I understand. ... would it help to restrukture/rewirte the article a lá https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_E._Zimmerman_%28philosopher%29#cite_note-1 or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel_Braudeau? Thanks for the help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nils Weber 418 (talk • contribs) 13:32, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi Angie80! I rewrote the article and added external references. Problem solved? Best wishes!

Hi Aggie80-

In regards to; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/American_Standards

I've updated/corrected the citations for the American Standards page to the best of my ability. I'm unsure how to bring them down into the citations box or if this is even needed but each now appears with the number that you referenced. Please let me know if anything additional is needed and I appreciate all your help! Have a great day!

FoundationAgency (talk) 14:57, 19 March 2014 (UTC)FoundationAgency

I need that page because when I added to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_who_disappeared_mysteriously it was deleted because there was no article I created the article and it was deleted before I could link to the page. All of the others on that page have articles, so why can't mine have an article or be allowed to remain without an article? Apriv40dj (talk) 03:15, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments, Aggie80 - and reading the remainder of this talk page provided quite a learning experience.

The core purpose of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Sami_H._Elmansoury is to highlight a prominent Huffington Post contributor who also happens to be a public trailblazer for counter-radicalization initiatives.

In writing this article about the subject, the notability guidelines were evaluated and followed closely. The subject is not "famous" in the way that a sitting federal politician or well-known actor would be. But this is not a requirement for Wikipedia inclusion, as is written in the guidelines and as is evidenced by many approved articles. Nor should this be our standard at Wikipedia - we should highlight influential trailblazers, even if they are not over-saturated in our media. Much of the work that these individuals do is not covered by the media, but their impact is no less significant.

One of the core principles of notability for Wikipedia is that the subject in question be "significant, interesting, or unusual enough to deserve attention or to be recorded." Aside from other information in the article, the work produced by the subject is unmistakably "significant" - the subject's ideas and work on counter-radicalization and advancing peace are directly sought after by the State Department and other prominent institutions, working to achieve the goal of peace. The subject has done this work both domestically and internationally, as is evidenced by a quick Google search. The subject is also "interesting" and "unusual" in that there are very few within the Muslim community publicly developing critical post-9/11 counter-narratives to radicalization, and "fighting" extremists from within that community. Finding a well-received Huffington Post piece written by the subject last year on the Boston Marathon bombings was the initial catalyst for this article, as this led to further searches, and to learning much more about the subject's impact and admittedly unusual work and public influence - both as a HuffPost writer and elsewhere.

The subject, through DOS, BMW Foundation, and other initiatives, seems to have had a tremendous impact on youth, and is well-reputed in government circles based on visits to the subject's publicly viewable social media pages. Listings and prominent coverage, such as the professional organization interview independent of the subject, explain how the subject's impact is viewed at an international level, and again, why it is "interesting" and perhaps more importantly, "unusual." Search after search has turned up little by way of public figures expressing the same views on high-level platforms. Beyond the subject's work at Huffington Post, the remainder of this Wikipedia article, including merits achieved, bolster on-paper notability but are not the foundational premise, nor are they what alone make the figure "significant, interesting, or unusual." His work for The Huffington Post and his government initiatives stand on their own, the rest is supplementary, but ultimately unnecessary if you wish to see it removed.

It would be a clear violation of notability standards to include references that simply list a subject's personal blog, etc. That is understood. But neither is that the case here. If there are references that are "related to the subject" or "supporting things other than the subject" - please indicate an example, so that they can be cleaned up. Thanks so much, and thanks for reading through this whole elaboration - when your plate is notably full. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.17.33.100 (talk) 05:44, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

I listed my reasons and had another reviewer give me feedback as well. Here are the issues with this article and the references:

   Ref 1 - Interview - Primary source
       If the source is reliable, the fact that someone to took the time to do the interview is evidence of notability, but this is marginal and not a particularly quality source.
   Ref 2 - List - One name on a 15 page list of participants.
       Not significant coverage
   Ref 3 - Profile of speaker - Marginal as related to subject
       Not an independent source
   Ref 4 - One sentence speaking at a middle school
       Middle school is not a reliable source
   Ref 5 - Speaker at a dinner
       Not reliable or independent
   Ref 6 - List - Panel discussion member
       Not reliable or independent
   Ref 7 - List - One of a number of speakers on a list
       Not reliable or independent
   Ref 8 - Huffington Post profile - Regular contributor - Primary Source
       Coverage by employer is not independent
   Ref 9 - Article by subject - Primary Source
       We need sources about the subject not by the subject
   Ref 10 - One sentence quote from subject
       A paragraph about the subject in a 4 paragraph piece is potentially useful, but not a particularly quality source.
   Ref 11 - One sentence quote from subject
       I find two quotes. The subject is being used a source for this story but the story is not at all about him.
   Ref 12 - Subject asking a question of Paul Rand - No support
       Being a member of the media doesn't automatically qualify you as notable. You must be covered by the media.
   Ref 13 - Subject moderated discussion
       Being a member of the media doesn't automatically qualify you as notable. You must be covered by the media.
   Ref 14 - One of 45 contributors to the book
   Ref 15 - One of 45 contributors to the book - One paragraph bio
   Ref 16 - One of 45 contributors to the book - not mentioned on page
   Ref 17 - One of 45 contributors to the book
       We need sources about the subject not by the subject
   Ref 18 - One of many participants in a conference - Large paragraph written by subject - Primary Source.
       Not independent
   Ref 19 - List - One of many participants - No content - List
       Not independent
   Ref 20 - List - People on this list must have gone to Rutgers University and be of some renown.
       Not reliable

The Ukulele Dude - Aggie80 (talk) 12:02, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

If you'll notice, my article on "Big Band Bossa Nova" has more detail and documentation than the article on "Jazz Samba Encore!," the album that followed it. I firmly believe that the standing of Stan Getz as a giant of jazz is enough to include this new article in Wikipedia. While chart position may be important for commercial popular music, creative music by a major artist like Stan Getz is not judged by its popularity among the masses. The information that you ask for can always be added later. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JaneOlds (talk • contribs) 11:57, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

"I firmly believe that the standing of Stan Getz as a giant of jazz is enough to include this new article in Wikipedia." The album certainly belongs on his listing of works. But is there evidence of others considering this a notable album? Quality independent references need to be shown to back it up. If it was truly notable, there are going to be other references to the album. The Verve liner notes are not adequate. As stated in WP:MUSIC "That an album is an officially released recording by a notable musician or ensemble is not by itself reason for a standalone article." The article is better than the one on "Jazz Samba Encore" which has no sources at all (and has been flagged for such). Need to have substantial and independent sources to establish the notability.The Ukulele Dude - Aggie80 (talk) 12:18, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I'm getting many, many hits on this album at Google Books. I believe it was #1 on the Billboard's Jazz charts in 1962. If someone will provide a link to the declined article, I'll see what I can do to add some sources and promote it. 78.26 (I'm no IP, talk to me!) 20:28, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

User:JaneOlds/sandboxThe Ukulele Dude - Aggie80 (talk)

Hi, The link you gave me does not exist. Please advise where I go from here. Thanks, Iantomferry

Please sign your posts with the 3~'s so that you can be found. Your link is at User:Iantomferry/Peter LavertyThe Ukulele Dude - Aggie80 (talk) 14:02, 22 March 2014 (UTC)