Archives

Archive 1 (Dec 2006 - Jun 2007) Archive 2 (Jun-Jul 2007 - Dec 2007) Archive 3 (Jan 2008 - Jul 2008) Archive 4 (Jul 2008 - Nov 2008) Archive 5 (Nov 2008 - Feb 2009) Archive 6 (Mar 2009 - Nov 2009) Archive 7 (Dec 2009 - Jul 2010) Archive 8 (Jul 2010 - Sep 2010) Archive 9 (Oct 2010 - April 2011) Archive 10 (May 2011 - Nov 2011) Archive 11 (Dec 2011 - May 2012) Archive 12 (Jun 2012 - Dec 2012) Archive 13 (Jan 2013 - Jun 2013) Archive 14 (Jul 2013 - April 2014) Archive 15 (May 2014 - Oct 2014) Archive 16 (Nov 2014 - 15 Nov 2015) Archive 17 (21 Nov 2015 - Mar 2016) Archive 18 (18 Mar 2016 - Dec 2016) Archive 19 (Jan 2017 - Jun 2017) Archive 20 (Jul 2017 - Nov 2017) Archive 21 (Dec 2017 - April 2018) Archive 22 (May 2018 - Oct 2018) Archive 23 (Nov 2018 - May 2019) Archive 24 (June 2019 - Aug 2019) Archive 25 (Aug 2019 - Jan 2020) Archive 26 (31 Jan 2020 – June 2020) Archive 27 (July 2020 – February 2021) Archive 28 (March 2021 – October 2021) Archive 29 (November 2021 – January 2022) Archive 30 (February 2022 – April 2022)

Bonadea, Han Terra page seems to be vandalized so that it should be restored to previous version. Please give your opinion. You reverted many of editing which I have contributed to other pages that I needed to learn about editing way of yours moreover it hurt my feelings that you hided what I wrote to share my opinion this page also. Also you brought other mobilized user to threaten me to ban my account. I have no idea how this manners have to be considered. Respectfuly yours. Thanks.

• NeverTry4Me (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Pallab Bhattacharyya ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

_{- Signed by} NeverTry4Me ^Talk 06:26, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! Just to let you know I reviewed Template:Did you know nominations/Anne Gunn. It pretty much passes, but it does rather understate her achievement as written: She wasn't just the first to get a British patent on a musical board game, she was the first to get a patent on any board game whatsoever according to the source. While I get why you'd want to specify a little more detail about the board game, it's probably beyond DYK to cover everything. Unless you have a way to do so in the character limit. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.8% of all FPs} 20:58, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Bonadea,

I have found the talk page message you left for me when I opened Wikipedia today morning. I do not understand the logic behind your aggression. I have repeatedly told you that I'm a photojournalist based out of West Bengal and I primarily create and edit pages with Bengali links. Yet, you threaten to block me from editing on Wikipedia (okay let's leave that as it is). Now, when it comes to the content on the page above, here are certain 'independent' and I believe, very much 'reliable' sources:

1. That the subject is an FRAS: https://www.ndtv.com/education/republic-day-2021-meet-rashtriya-bal-puraskar-winners (NDTV - source date 2021). This is neither an interview with the subject, nor does NDTV do independent press releases, explaining why it deserves to be classified as an independent, reliable news source.

2. Coming to the second point, which is the subject's association with the Ministry of Education on a project for some Azadi ka Amrit Mahotsav programme, please find the links here: a. https://www.nbtindia.gov.in/writereaddata/attachmentNews/saturday-december-25-20212-09-34-pmresults-of-all-india-contest-of-pm-yuva-mentorship-shceme.pdf b. https://pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=1811451 This is a project of national importance, and was launched in late August, 2021. Results were declared in December, 2021 but I only came across that in March or April 2022. I do not understand why it doesn't form an important source. The links given are both those of the Government of India's and I do not know what could be more reliable. This is not a primary reference to anything, for your information.

I will not edit these unless you give me your opinion and on what you think the sources above (NDTV, NBT and PBI) are promotional and/or have published a press release whatsoever. It'd be really really great if you could enlighten me on these aspects for I am very much willing to learn editing on Wikipedia!

Thanks, Rohan9082 (talk) 04:32, 18 May 2022 (UTC)Rohan9082[reply]

Hi,

I recently came across an update detailing on the death of Jyoti Kumari's father Mohan Paswan on India Today (https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/father-of-bihar-s-cycle-girl-jyoti-kumari-dies-of-cardiac-arrest-1809105-2021-05-31). Could you please let me know if I could add this to the article or not? Does a father's death impact much about the article? If yes, I will. But I don't feel a father;s death has anything major to do with the subject, except for the fact that she's famed for having saved her father's life in 2021.

thanks, Rohan9082 (talk) 05:17, 18 May 2022 (UTC)Rohan9082[reply]

sir please look at Alha, some people added info without sources Tryant Saurashtrian (talk) 08:34, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bonadea, may I know which part of the article I need to improve on? It was previously declined for the same reason but I have removed sentences that were previously highlighted as an advertisement. Do advise and I'll make the necessary changes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jasvind Singh (talk • contribs) 18:38, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Jasvind Singh: thank you for your message. It is not an issue that affects any specific part of the article – it's the entire text. When you asked about the previous decline here, you were given a few examples of inappropriate expressions and sentences, and it looks like you removed those specific instances but left everything else as it was. Note, however, that it doesn't matter how neutral the writing is as long as there is no indication of notability for the company – you have already been directed to read WP:NCORP, a notability guideline that is essential reading if you want to create a Wikipedia article about a company. All the draft says is that this is a "tech-enabled coffee chain" (whatever that is when it is at home), with a paragraph on funding and a list of store openings. The section WP:CORPDEPTH, which is part of the guideline I linked above, includes the sub-section "Examples of trivial coverage" which explains that such information doesn't indicate notability for a company. The information can perhaps be included – well, not the funding stuff since that's almost invariably irrelevant. But if there's independent coverage, not press releases, about store openings, that's something that could be in the article. But the draft can only be accepted if there is an actual claim to notability. --bonadea contributions talk 19:18, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Senior Editor, I remember you were part of the discussions on Alha, Udal of Mahoba, and one more page. It was discussed extensively and was decided as per closing comments of another senior editor. The pages definitely had stable version after it including all the relevant references. I think the pages should remain to that stable versions. There was literally no dispute until new SPAs jumped with disruptive editing. I think the page should also have protection. RS6784 (talk) 09:08, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just read over your edits--there's a line here between reasonable cuts and quantifying material as "promotional." The revisions you made to the opening paragraph were great, I wasn't sure how to write this part without being "promotional," which was why I resorted to using a citation to enumerate the store's stock.

But cutting down the historical parts, and removing the characterful headings, does not make for better history.

I appreciate caution as a new article is proposed or moved to mainspace, but the independent bookstore, and particularly the independent genre bookstore, like Science fiction, fantasy and horror bookstores is a particular, and passing, piece of Americana. You may not be aware, but Neil Gaiman in particular is an important, if not critical, figure in this scene (along with George R.R. Martin, as the sf & f scene has moved from the *frowsy* 1970 through the period when Gaiman, in particular, made at least some sf & F *cool* through to the commercialized present.

Wikipedia is about laying the groundwork for the researchers who will be writing the articles of the future. Most of the writers listed in the "early years" section of Dreamhaven's history are dead, but they are also regarded as among the "greats" in the field. Some researcher of the future is going to call up Wikipedia and scratch their head, wondering "what year did Harlan Ellison sign at Dreamhaven?" or, twenty years (or whatever) from now, "When did Neil Gaiman start becoming a cult phenomenon?" *That's* when a page on Dreamhaven is going to be valuable.

Again, I appreciate the work you have put in here. But let's find a balance.

Thanks for the attention-- Sicklemoon (talk) 14:57, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am familiar with the bookshop in question – you may not know this, but it is very well known in fandom (not as "Americana" which doesn't seem to be a particularly relevant descriptor). I hope you realise how patronising your comments about Neil Gaiman and GRRM are, but there is no point dwelling on that.

Wikipedia articles are not the basis for research, now or in the future; they are – or should be – summaries of what other, independent, publications have already said about a topic. As sff fans, we have a responsibility to present genre related topics in a very neutral fashion if we write about them in Wikipedia. Including multiple long quotes comes across as promotional. Creative section headings can be ok, but they still have to be descriptive. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 15:36, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A patronizing tone was not my intention. I had no reason to know that the reviewing editor working over my article was familiar with Dreamhaven or genre bookstores in America or SF & F in general, thus my preambulatory comment: "you may not be aware." Is there some politer, Wikipedia-senior-editor approved way I should have stated that?

I have had articles cut down, questioned, or sent back to draft space here on Wikipedia, either because a reviewing editor was being quick with their work, or because they did not immediately understand terminology or necessary context--or because I had made some sort of error. After checking in with those editors, it has seldom been hard to find a balance that seemed to suit both sides. The process of correction is, or should be, impersonal. VERY LITTLE about your response to my check in with you was impersonal.

Your point about fandom: "As sff fans, we have a responsibility to present genre related topics in a very neutral fashion." (emphasis mine) Excuse me?

The content of the original draft of the (not MY) Dreamhaven article is taken from published, and (by my judgment) reputable, sources. In a future draft, I would hope to see the article responsibly filled out in the three areas of the store's history, showing the store's significance in that historical context. Is this not the purpose of "developing" articles through the stages of stub to "A" class, or at least higher-class, articles? Perhaps *you* are editing as a "sff" fan, but it is not *my* intention to write as one. It is my intention to write a well-supported piece, adequately structured, and perhaps with sign-posts, to encourage some future editor to add and improve.

You write: "I am familiar with the bookshop in question – you may not know this, but it is very well known in fandom."

Perhaps you should not have been the one to review this article, as it would appear that you have a personal stake in the content. Given that you are familiar with the store, your editorial comment on the article itself "Seems notable enough to stay in mainspace – might need a closer source check though" reads as *highly* disingenuous.

As a relatively new Wikipedia editor, I am becoming increasingly aware of what it's like to fall (by innocent accident) into a powerful, more established editor's balliwick, and to get spanked because you're/one is (edit) not developing an article to some mysteriously pre-established model of how to write in that area. I can accept that there are reason beyond my ken for deletions, compressions, rearrangement. But your corrections and your tone here smack of something more than that. This Dreamhaven bookstore article is a generic piece, based on my looking at other mainspace Wikipedia bookstore pages to see what kinds of material have previously been regarded as acceptable. If there is some other criteria at work here, please let me know.

(BTW, we have different ideas of Americana but I think, post "American Gods," there would be published material in reliable sources to support my sense of that term's "drift", and perhaps even merit an update to, or expansion of, the topic as it is currently described on its Wikipedia page)

Sicklemoon (talk)

P.S. I also updated Dreamhaven Press while I worked on the store article. A question--I sourced that from the Dreamhaven titles on Abebooks. What is actually the Wikipedia-approved way to mention in-print/print titles? Citing Abebooks seemed like I'd be promoting Abebooks.

Good catch on the sources and copyvio! I should have been more thorough. S0091 (talk) 20:29, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@S0091: Thanks! It's a bit sad, but I have come to recognise the press release style a bit too well... --bonadea contributions talk 18:19, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --12:52, 1 June 2022 (UTC) (UTC)[reply]

Can you please explain the exact issue in it and how it is promotional? 2409:4052:2E8C:B62A:B100:48BC:33FD:44BD (talk) 07:54, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there are multiple problems, not least that the company has been engaging in attempts to use Wikipedia as a marketing platform for years. The stated reasons for declining the draft was that it doesn't show how the company is notable (see these guidelines), and that it is promotionally written. A previous discussion on the draft's talk page ended in a rough consensus that PharmEasy is probably notable – but the current draft does nothing to show that, and given the spamming issues, it's not strange that the volunteer reviewers want to see strong indications of notability and a very neutrally written text.

Looking at the current draft, some of the issues are

• that the first three sentences have an abundance of sources, much more than necessary to verify the minimum of facts – sources are there to verify the information in the article, and (to take an example) you don't need three different sources to verify the simple statement that they are located in Mumbai
• that the second and third sentence say almost exactly the same thing, with multiple sources, which comes across as promotional (as well as redundant)
• that the rest of the draft has only one source which is an entry in a list of resources, and which supports almost none of the content, so overall the draft suffers from both too many and too few sources
• that not all of the sources meet the requirements for reliable sources
• that most of the sources are not presented in a useful format – for instance "Frost Research Link" and "PharmEasy analysymason Link" contain almost none of the necessary information. A reference has to identify the source clearly, tell the reader what kind of source it is, and give enough information for the reader to be able to find the source themselves. WP:CITEHOW has more info on what a reference should include. --bonadea contributions talk 13:28, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for providing detailed feedback. The page is fixed as the suggestion. Please let me know if I need to improve anything. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2409:4052:2E8C:B62A:B100:48BC:33FD:44BD (talk) 05:32, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I was talking about my page you moved to draft space, Teenage pregnancy in fiction. I know it says indiscriminate list with a poorly written and unsourced introduction, but Teenage Pregnancy in Wikipedia is the only page that I found, but not in fiction because of a lack of sourcable websites or something. There's a TV Trope website over there, which includes "Teen Pregnancy". If not, I'm not really sure. Can you explain this? Or should I re-edit the whole thing like this one, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maternal_mortality_in_fiction It's a good thing if you can or someone can help my page Fortunewriter (talk) 15:31, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Maternal mortality in fiction is not a good article to use as a model, because it is largely unsourced and has almost no actual content except for the list of works. Look instead at Parallel universes in fiction; as the maintenance templates there say, it also has problems, but at least it is an encyclopedia article and not just a list of works picked without any clear rationale. An article about the concept of teenage pregnancy in fiction will need to be based on reliable scholarly sources (not newspaper articles or other non-scholarly works, and definitely not TV Tropes which is just a wiki), and it should discuss the concept of teenage pregnancy and how it is treated in different kinds of fiction, in different languages and cultures, and perhaps also through history. A list of works is the least important part of such an article. --bonadea contributions talk 16:06, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So I renamed from "Teenage pregnancy in fiction" to "List of fictional characters featuring teenage pregnancy" for good, because I was wrong about the title and it does not given some history or notable works about teenage pregnancy. Just a list of example or works or whatever is, like this one List of autistic fictional characters. There will be chance. Fortunewriter (talk) 02:26, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I want a Fair consensus , on the edits on West ta East, I have and am one who has paid and continues to pay a membership fee on YouTube to watch the show and use that as my understanding when making edits BUT the facts I bring from there main SOURCES such as ABC News, which you have not clearly read and are being adamant on knowing the show better than the fans and a loyal viewer who pays a Gold Membership fee on YouTube to watch it BEFORE you make another edit on this show, Kindly go WATCH and pay for it. it seeming very biased and ignorant & I ask people to judge fairly and undo the edits which @Bonedea has done. Thank you, Stay Blessed.123.208.65.230 (talk) 19:58, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Again, Wikipedia articles are based on secondary sources, not on what individual editors know based on their own experience. Again, articles in English Wikipedia are written in English. Again, random bold text is against the Manual of Style. Again, Wikipedia cannot be used to promote anything. --bonadea contributions talk 20:01, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I wanted to clarify, why did you write that the two siblings move to Afghanistan, when no sources state that? are you personally connected to the subject? just a curious question, Please clarify? I read the sources and it is not mentioned but if you're connected to the subject, then makes sense! ( in regards to West TA East)123.208.65.230 (talk) 18:39, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

All the sources say that the show is about them moving to Afghanistan, which is why the Wikipedia article also says so. Please read the response in the discussion you started at Talk:West Ta East. --bonadea contributions talk 19:45, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bonadea,

My name is Ethan, and I am a graduate student at St. Johns university in Queens. I recently attempted creating an article for one of the directors of the firm I am currently an intern at because I have to write a report on a mentor from my job. I choose Mr. Coulter and asked him to participate in an interview because he is very experienced and does the same investing as I. I am sorry for phrasing the article in a biased manner I do look up to Brett after my interview and I understand that some information may have suggested I could be him. I am not. But a lot of my classmates interviewed men already on wikipedia such as Howard Marks (investor) and I would like to create a page for Brett for educational and reference purposes I am not being compensated even for my internship lol. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SJUstudenteditor (talk • contribs) 08:07, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:01, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

Why is it that singers like Ghazal Enayat and the majority of afghan celebrities articles are sourced with YouTube videos or other kinds of sources but you’re so strict when it comes to Ramiz King or West Ta East? Due to Afghanistan having lack of media it’s hard to prove notability of them when they’re so famous within the country ? Einstientesla (talk) 12:26, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Einstientesla: Wikipedia articles should be supported by reliable sources that are secondary, independent, and provide significant coverage of the topic. If there are existing articles that don't have such sources, the solution is to either improve the sourcing or nominate the article for deletion (if sources can't be found). --bonadea contributions talk 17:26, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

But how did they get away with YouTube links? What can you do it it’s for a country that’s war torn and lacks media houses? Is it not biased and unfair for those artists and new celebs? Einstientesla (talk) 18:20, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Again, if you are aware of articles that don't meet Wikipedia's criteria for sourcing, please do something about those articles, but do not use them as models for new drafts. --bonadea contributions talk 20:31, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Isn’t the draft fine the way it is? Because me and several other users googled the game GTI Edition 35 and there are only 3 sources found (see here).

MegaMack02 (talk) 20:19, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@MegaMack02: No, the draft is not fine, and it cannot be accepted without reliable, independent, and secondary sources that talk about it in depth. Please have another look at the replies you got in that thread. No sources = no article. --bonadea contributions talk 18:14, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

Three years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:21, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you‚ Gerda! Very much appreciated. --bonadea contributions talk 08:37, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

hi i posted about Alireza Amirghassemi if you check this person has Farsi language wikipedia and i want make english language for him why you removed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kiava (talk • contribs) 09:11, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Kiava: I didn't remove the article, but I moved it to Draft:Alireza amirghassemi (I see that you have also created Draft:Alireza Amirghassemi). As it says in the notice on your user talk page, the article would need reliable sources that meet these criteria. I have added a note to the draft page explaining why the sources in the draft are not sufficient. I also removed some sources that are not acceptable in a Wikipedia article. English Wikipedia and Farsi Wikipedia are separate websites with different policies and guidelines. That there is an article in another Wikipedia version doesn't mean that there can automatically be an article in English Wikipedia about the same topic. --bonadea contributions talk 09:18, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your attention, and if there is no problem, leave the page at the top, and I will add more resources and ask Iranians living in the United States to help complete this project on request. Is there a way for me to click on this page? This page is not complete and others can help complete this project? Kiava (talk) 09:22, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have moved it back to draftspace, where you can work on it. --bonadea contributions talk 09:30, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There's no violation of copyright all sources provided by me are isbn certified and availiable on public platform like google , user peacepks has been faking his edit summaries please go through the history of the page to verify whether I'm right or wrong AuthenticSources2546 (talk) 22:42, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

U can also go through the talk page of the admin bishonen. Ive given my points there. AuthenticSources254622:42, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dear admin u can also go through the history of karan caste page as well he mass removed content and sources from there also, also added bad emojis in the page, he has done this to a lot of other pages also go through his history you will get to know, admin sitush had also warned him a long time back regarding his disruptive edits in caste related pages go through his talk page you will get to know. AuthenticSources2546 22:42, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

He was adding all kinds of emojis in karan caste page which is already extended protected due to past disruptive edits, should such activity be allowed in a reputed platform like wiki. He also removed sourced content and sources from bhoi dynasty page and routray surname page u can go through the history of these pages to verify AuthenticSources2546 22:42, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Combining sections about the same topic. --bonadea contributions talk 07:05, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bonadea, the user user:AuthenticSources2546 is adding regular & large copyright material in Wikipedia in Khandayat page. His Id already received 3 copyright violation warning from different admins including you & Bishonen. But still he is reverting Admin's edit each time & restoring his own copyright violation. To confuse Admin about his past, the above user simply deleted all the copyright violations warnings from his talk page. Seems like he don't care about admin & wikipedia policies. He is also engaged in personal attacks to prove his point. Can you please take some serious action ? Thanks Peacepks (talk) 03:20, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just stop it you have been completely exposed, dear admin u can go through my points in admin bishonen's page, I've already mentioned my points there and I've also mentioned my points in the above section, this user has faked his edit summaries just go through his edit history you will get to know AuthenticSources2546 03:20, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dear admin u can also go through his talk page where admin sitush had warned him of citing sources badly and representing the information contained in them in their distorted manner ignoring neutrality, u could go through the history of khandayat page he has done the same thing there alongwith removing reliable sources and creating fake summaries to confuse other editors. AuthenticSources2546 03:20, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@AuthenticSources2546: There is absolutely no doubt that you have added copyrighted text to the article, and restored it when it was removed (after you had been warned about copyright violations).

Compare:

From the source: "Because of frequent wars and foreign invasions a large number of tribals and farmers were recruited into the army which led to the formation of new sub-castes as [sic] Khandayats and Paikas." (Aspects of Socio-cultural Life in Early and Medieval Orissa, p30)

Your edit to Khandayat (caste): "Due to frequent wars and foreign invasions a large number of tribals and farmers were recruited into the army by the rulers of various dynasties this led to the formation of new sub castes as Khandayats and Paikas."

From the source: "Although a numerous well-defined body, the Khandayat do not appear to be really a distinct class. The ancient Rajas of Orissa kept up large armies and partitioned the land on strictly [sic] military basis. These armies consisted of various castes and races, the upper ranks being officered by men of good Aryan descent, while the lower ones were recruited from the low castes alike of the hills." (The Orissa Historical Research Journal, vol. 16 p22)

Your edit to Khandayat (caste): "Khandayats do not appear to be really a distinct class. The ancient rajas of Odisha kept up large armies and partitioned the lands on strictly military basis. These armies consisted of various castes and races, the upper ranks being officered by men of good descent, while the lower ones were recruited from the low castes alike of the hills."

These are two examples, the first two stretches of text I looked at. I am not an admin, but since you have posted this to Bishonen's talk page, she will no doubt act on it, and not in the way you'd prefer. --bonadea contributions talk 06:55, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, she did block you while I was typing the response above. --bonadea contributions talk 06:57, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

To be clear: copypasting text (or adding a very close paraphrasing of the text) is still a copyright violation even if you include a link to the source. In addition, it is plagiarism. --bonadea contributions talk 07:05, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I have made some edits to the draft (references), and replied to your comments at the draft help desk. Can you please move the article to the mainspace? Thanks!--Dwaipayan (talk) 16:47, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you posted this in the AfC Help desk thread as well; it's usually a good idea not to split discussions, so I'll respond there. --bonadea contributions talk 18:52, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol | July 2022 Backlog Drive
On 1 July, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Redirect patrolling is not part of the drive. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

(t · c) buidhe 20:25, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I restored your edits to the x in y articles that removed the list of people but figured you might be interested in this PRAXIDICAE🌈 00:05, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am not understanding, how to get reliable sources for this page. As per [WP:NBASE], https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Masayori_Shimura is notable. Should I leave this topic or how to move ahead? Lordofhunter (talk) 09:33, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Lordofhunter: How does he meet WP:NBASE? The draft says that he was a sports broadcaster who reported from the Helsinki olympic games. It also says something that might mean that he was a basketball player, or possibly that he reported from a basketball game. But there is nothing in the draft that even hints at notability, and the four sources say nothing about him. In addition, at least two of the four sources are not reliable sources. Where did you get the info that's in the draft? None of the sources verify it. --bonadea contributions talk 11:07, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

He was the member of Japanese Baseball Hall of Fame and notable as per the guideline. Lordofhunter (talk) 07:12, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The draft doesn't say that. And as long as there are no reliable, independent sources that talk about him, notability isn't shown. --bonadea contributions talk 07:32, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This source is saying he was the member. https://www.baseball-reference.com/bullpen/Masayori_Shimura. Lordofhunter (talk) 04:59, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We cannot use the "bullpen wiki" part of Baseball Reference as a source. It's just an open-edit wiki that anyone can add material to; see recent discussion here. Given that I've removed that source twice from that article with clear edit summaries, I'm concerned that you're still quoting it. Kuru (talk) 11:41, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Better than trout. Ari T. Benchaim (talk) 14:34, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! :-) --bonadea contributions talk 15:21, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciated your prior review for Draft:Boho_Beautiful. Please check my resubmision and comments posted on the page. If you believe it still sounds like an advertising or does not have reliable citations, please post your feedback here and give me a chance to revise, before you decline it, because the review period is very long. Chessterb (talk) 21:09, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The draft has been declined again. You always have the option to revise, unless the draft is rejected. By submitting the draft, you request a review, and it would be a bit counterproductive to post a review on a reviewer's user talk page. --bonadea contributions talk 07:51, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi could you tell me how you determined these to be paid pieces???

paid promo piece in local newspaper

brief, paid promo piece in another local newspaper Chessterb (talk) 22:30, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Bonadea, I appreciate your review of article about pakistani linguist Rehmat Aziz Khan, but I checked the deleted articles Rehmat Aziz, Rehmat Aziz Chitrali, and Rehmat Aziz GoldMedalist,]which were created from different IP address and not matched this IP, please check the IP address of the above two article and the IP address of this current article, the personality is notable, please search in google for more reference. thanks --¬¬¬¬ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 175.107.2.164 (talk) 09:29, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How can you know the IP addresses of the users who created those deleted articles? As for Draft:Rehmat Aziz Khan, there is no indication of notability in the draft, and there have been several community discussions on the articles about him, all coming to the same conclusion. --bonadea contributions talk 12:06, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! In the edit summary of moving the article back to draft, you mentioned history of undeclared paid editing. However, you did not mention that in the AfC concerns earlier. The concern in the AfC is generally about notability. I have expanded the reception section, with citations to reviews. And I am sure you can see it is a mainstream Bengali film, released to theatres about a month ago, and has been reviewed in several newspapers/websites. Despite your concerns about history of undeclared paid editing, the film clearly meets WP:NFO. Please move to the mainspace. Thanks!--Dwaipayan (talk) 19:21, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's waiting for review. --bonadea contributions talk 20:32, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As I said in a comment on the draft itself I won't touch it again, but if you look at the history, you submitted it a few days ago, and another reviewer commented that it was unclear how it meets NFO. Another editor, who had been creating and recreating an article about the film to the point where the title was create protected, moved the draft to mainspace without any discussion, and it was restored to draftspace by yet another reviewer, the day before yesterday. At that point it was not the best idea to move it back to mainspace again without addressing the reviewers' concerns. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 20:44, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that "it was not the best idea to move it back to mainspace " (especially now that you mentioned concerns about undeclared paid editing), however it is quite unusual to have a released mainstream film, with reviews in several newspapers, to wait at AfC. The AfC has a huge backlog, and it is wastage of the limited resources for such a straight forward case to await review in AfC. While I am not familiar with AfC, I am somewhat familiar for AfD, and this article would be an easy keep in AfD (that is why I mentioned another contemporary film article, from the same director, in the AfC comments). I guess with the expanded reception section (with citations), a reviewer would be able to pass it.--Dwaipayan (talk) 02:57, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bonadea your edits as the above section is a bit confusing to me. "in" or "at" the box office? We have seen uses of "at the box office". In line 60 of your revert makes "performances. and" which is a straight sentence mistake. A full stop ends the sentence, so it should be either "performances. And" or "performances, and" by grammar. "lent her to" used if "lent or to (someone)".
Further, I didn't understand the reason of removal of the book source "Hollywood Album : Lives and Deaths of Hollywood Stars from the Pages of the New York Times" as I added it as supporting source because the existing source is about her dead which the content of the article doesn't claim. I use citations as per article's content claim. With good faith, Regards _{- Signed by} NeverTry4Me ^Talk 01:08, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• "at", not "in".
• "performances. and" is of course incorrect, but replacing the full stop with a comma merely replaced one ungrammatical sentence with another, equally incorrect one. When there are lots of minor, erroneous changes made in the same edit, it is usually better to simply revert them all instead of sinking time into restoring them one by one, even if that means that one single correction is reverted. But in this instance, it wasn't a correction anyway.
• "lent her to" used if "lent or to (someone)" Sorry, I don't understand what you are trying to say. In any case, "her" is absolutely necessary in the sentence – Paramount did not lend 20th Century Fox to her, they lent her to 20th Century Fox.
• About the source, again I don't understand what you mean. The existing source supports the content.

Regarding your addition of sources: I assume that you have full access to all books you use as references, and don't just look at them in Google Books? --bonadea contributions talk 01:25, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You noted here that this was mostly a copyvio (I added a RD template) but the user creating it seems to have a problem with adding copyrighted material to WP. See Green Soldier Mime as well. PRAXIDICAE🌈 13:45, 9 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Nituparna Rajbongshi Please review this draft and tell me how to improve it in order to make it reliable and to meet Wikipedia criteria of notability Baruahranuj 08:41, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Where is the disruptive editing that you accused me of? Please provide a screenshot. I haven't edited anything.

I am forced to report that the admin Acroterion, under which you also wrote on my talk section, deleted my clarification request on his page. Ddelete013 (talk) 05:14, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ddelete013: "Editing" does not only mean "editing articles". In your user talk page comment immediately above my WP:AGF warning, [1], you said You do know that what you are doing causes severe damage to the Wikipedia project, right?, which is a blatant failure to assume good faith. Acroterion would have had every right to remove your post to their user talk page, but as a matter of fact, it was another editor who did that. --bonadea contributions talk 07:47, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Re-pinging @Ddelete013: as I failed to sign. --bonadea contributions talk 07:47, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Bonadea: as per your revert with this diff, I'm just curious why you didn't check the refs properly. The Rediff.com ref clearly says, "Security forces gunned down three unidentified ULFA militants at Namati area in Nalbari district of Assam at around 1 am on Thursday. The forces recovered one assault rifle, one Chinese pistol and an Austrian grenade from the slain militants.". And the Indian Express ref says, "The officer-in-charge of Nalbari police station Keshab Phukan was placed under suspension on Friday in connection with the death of an ULFA cadre's mother during a raid and search operation conducted in her house at village Namati in Nalbari district on September 8. and The Tribune (Chandigarh) stated, "Protests are rife in Assam over the death of a 60-year-old woman, mother of a ULFA militant, after she was allegedly beaten up by a search party of the police and CRPF personnel at her residence at Namati in Nalbari district.". As a senior editor, you know that 3 refs are enough to prove a claim. Even so, you have removed my edit with the statement, "not supported by sources, and sources don't discuss the village". My concern is, as you know about Indian media, they have a habit of informal reporting style which is known to you all, but they have written reports happened in that village. What else can be expected for that one-line sentence? _{- Signed by} NeverTry4Me ^Talk 19:29, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@NeverTry4Me: I'm just curious why you didn't check the refs properly. I am curious why you would make that assumption. I have read the references. Two of them were about the killing (in 2007) of a woman in Namati, who was the mother of a member of a militant separatist organisation. The third one is a timeline of incidents involving the organisation, and contains the sentence "July 23 [2008]: Three cadres of the ULFA’s ‘709 battalion’ are killed in an encounter with Army and police at Namati village under Ghograpar police station in the Nalbari district."

The sentence I deleted from Namati (which was not a revert) read as follows: "Namati village carries a history of being militancy affected area". Not only is that ungrammatical to the point of being difficult to understand, but it is not supported by the sources. The sources mention one fight between armed forces and militants, and one incident where a woman was killed by police. Neither source says anything at all about the village apart from mentioning the name as the location for the incidents, and neither source talks about the history of the area. We are not allowed to add original research based on our own interpretation of individual sources to Wikipedia articles. --bonadea contributions talk 20:21, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bonadea Thank you for the reply. I shall edit accordingly as per your assistance. Many more thanks with good faith. Sincere apology for hurting you though unwillingly. Regards- _{- Signed by} NeverTry4Me ^Talk 20:35, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, I was working on a draft article for ILENE at a steady pace that was not in the slightest bit ready for review/submission, when to my horror I found that after several days of me not updating the draft, a now deleted user @Ilovehistory16 practically hijacked the article, made unscrupulous "edits" that made no sense, and then randomly submitted an article that was not even ready for submission. Please advise on how I can prevent this from happening, or is this something to keep watch for? I also did have a question about sources. First, thank you for your feedback. This is part of the reason why I had not yet submitted the article for publishing. Aside from the interview with Brackenhoff, are iMDB credits not permissible sources? And are blogposts from Bandlab's marketing team automatically discounted, even if they are the officiants of the contests mentioned in the article? The goal is when I think the article is ready to submit even if it is a basic knowledge panel, that more fans can later be building to and adding to and hopefully not damage the article like this Ilovehistory16 user. I do believe the artist in question is noteworthy but am trying to make sure I don't lose my draft just because of frivolous actions. thanks. 247ice (talk) 15:10, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies, I forgot to link the draft in question, @Draft: ILENE 247ice (talk) 15:10, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --16:46, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Sir or Madam,

Natalia wonders why the atricle about her is declined. She believes she is well-known enough to have a page on Wikipedia.https://thehimalayantimes.com/multimedia/russian-actress-model-natalia-dvoretskaya

She continues her career in America, acting in American films. Also Martini is an international Brand, as well as Carte Noire. And she faced these companies with international actors such as Frédéric Diefenthal. The Himalayan Times which had the articles about her is an English-language broadsheet newspaper published and distributed daily in Nepal. And let's not forget that not all English-language magazines and newspapers duplicate their printed versions on their websites. Here is the information all in english about American Series with Her and all awards [2]https://www.blackbettyseries.com/?fs=e&s=cl

Kind regards, Yury Voropaev

Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:23, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for catching my errors in the Nicolette Lim article. I think I was just doing too many things at once and goofed up. Also good call on removing some of the other sources.

Dr vulpes ^{(💬 • 📝)} 21:54, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bonadea. Thanks for your comments on my submission for CityAlight. I'm wondering if you could have a read through the following I wrote on August 2 (on my own talk page) and let me know your thoughts.

I've actively sought to provide as many objective facts as I possibly can. I have also sought to implement any and all suggestions you've made in each rejection, and, most recently, visited the Wikipedia Help Channel (at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:IRC_help_disclaimer) to ask for suggestions as to how I can improve it and get it over the line. They agreed that the article was relevant and notable, but that I would probably need to add some additional independent sources to get it over the line. I spent over an hour doing additional research this afternoon and sought to add independent sources, so I find it a little discouraging to read your somewhat disaparaging (although I'm sure not intended to be) comments about the quality and perceived biases of the article. If you could provide me with some concrete suggestions for areas I could fix, rather than simply leaving comments such as "This gets more promotional with every resubmission" and "there's still no sign of notability", that would be greatly appreciated. I would also appreciate it if you could inform me what you mean by "independent sources," as my investigation into Wikipedia (and my conversation with those on the Help Page) all suggest that sources such as the Eternity News article (an independent News site that often critiques unbiblical Christian bands) would be a reasonable independent source, yet when added, you suggested that I had added "another non-independent source." I appreciate the hard work you do in keeping Wikipedia clean and of a high quality, but I hope you can see my intention here is to provide an article on a relevant and significantly recognised band within the Christian community, so if you have any tips on how I should go about this in order to get it approved (for no benefit of my own), I would greatly appreciate it. Lukaku's First Touch (talk) 02:41, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Lukaku's First Touch: Well, I would suggest that you start by fixing the citations as explained in my comment on 2 August. The list of references has to include information about the titles, authors (if named), journal, publishers, dates etc for each source – more information here, and here is a guide to adding citations. Of the references in the current version of the draft, two have approximately correct titles ("About CityAlight" and "2020 Dove Awards Winners List" – that's the kind of minimal variation that I think is OK), while the rest of them are descriptions of the sources rather than the source titles. There are two reasons we need titles and authors, page numbers, journal titles, issue numbers, etc: first, it tells the reader what the source is without making them follow a link to another website just to understand what the source is, and secondly, it makes it possible to track online sources when the original URL goes dead. (For sources that are not online, it's maybe more obvious why the information is necessary, but it's true for sources available on the web as well.)

The notability criteria for organisations explain that sources have to provide significant coverage of the organisation. That a source is reliable is always essential; in order to show notability, sources need to be independent and secondary, but an independent and secondary source that only mentions the organisation in passing doesn't indicate any notability – that is the case with the Eternity News source.

And it is a little troubling that you don't recognise the fact that when a draft is edited to add text such as "...the musical simplicity and versatility of CityAlight's music has sought to enable any church to pick up and play any CityAlight song", and to add promotional quotations in the first paragraph, that does make the draft more promotional. The draft is waiting for review, in any case – I simply posted a comment on 2 Aug, I didn't decline it. --bonadea contributions talk 15:59, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good morning, I recently seen you reverted the edit for ‘Dil Nawaz’ which is incorrect,

You can even see the cast list on google and check yourself, thank you Mynameismaria (talk) 11:09, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you Google ‘Zain Ullah movies and TV shows’ , you can see you have revert edits that are correct and been deleting them for no reason Mynameismaria (talk) 11:16, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I supplied the reasons in my edit summaries. Ullah's name had been spammed across multiple articles. In Dil Nawaz, the blatantly false claim that Ullah had a starring part had been added to the article – none of the sources mentions his name. The same thing had happened in several other articles, and I spent some time yesterday cleaning that up. WP:CASTLIST says that every single actor in a large cast should generally not be listed in the Cast section of an article. If the sources don't mention Ullah, there is no reason why Wikipedia would do so. And a Google search is not a source. --bonadea contributions talk 11:43, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:10, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I was wondering why you reverted my attribution of the reference to the specific individual who made the statement in the book. It references his personal statement, not a conglomeration of scholars. There may BE a conglomeration of scholars that believe this, but that is not supported by the reference. Cheers, LovelyLillith (talk) 03:09, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Because it made the statement utterly misleading. It's not exactly a controversial or unsourced claim that Biblical scholars in general do not view Genesis as a historical document. There might be individual fringe scholars holding the extreme view, but that's not a discussion that belongs in that article. If Wikpedia were to say "This individual scholar does not believe that Genesis is a historical document", it would seem as if that were not the mainstream, generally accepted insight. We don't want to introduce weasel wording like that, any more than we would say "This individual scholar believes that water molecules consist of two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom". --bonadea contributions talk 12:15, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there! I sent a request to change my name, I'd like if you could accept it. E.S. Cohen - א.ס. כהן (talk) 12:54, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@א.ס. כהן: I'm sorry, I am not a steward or global renamer. If you have requested a change of username, no doubt it will be processed by someone who has the relevant rights, but I'm afraid I cannot help you. --bonadea contributions talk 12:59, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello.

I noticed your comment on my talk page claiming my edits were "disruptive." First of all, please explain how reverting my own edits is "disruptive," because that doesn't seem to be the case on any policies or guidelines I researched; second of all, I was trying to retract my stupidity of trying to claim the former ownership of a currently blocked account; and third of all, I knew I wasn't gonna get a response because NeilN doesn't appear to be active on Wikipedia anymore, so I thought there was no use in waiting any longer.

Learn from my mistakes (Talk:AustinShow#Continuous vandalism + User talk:jpgordon#"Content disputes are not vandalism."), do your research before blindly claiming that reverting my own edits is "disruptive." Thank you. L337m4n (talk) 21:59, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may have forgotten the fact that you changed your user name since you made those talk page posts. This is an excellent example of why edit summaries are helpful – if you had used the ES to mention the fact that KullyKeemaKa is your previous user name, it would not have been an issue. So, yes, I made an error, and I'm sorry about that, but you could take this as a reminder to use edit summaries.

The fact that you were claiming to be a new account of an indefinitely blocked user would still have been a bit problematic – I'll respond to your user talk page explanation about that. --bonadea contributions talk 08:21, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Bonadea. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Draft:Harry Grammer, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: give them a chance to rewrite it, this is a draft after all. Thank you. GedUK  10:36, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, you recently declined an Article submission for the draft formerly titled "Violent Extremism in West Africa" on the basis of "recentism and original research".

- I've incorporated a suggestion from another Wikipedia editor, and modified the title to make the article scope more well-defined and in tune with its content. Are there still any recentism-based concerns on your end?

- About your "original research" comment, the basis of that opinion is not clear to me. Every point made in the article is backed by a citation. There are no novel claims or inferences made which are not already present in the cited sources.

If you insist that the article still contains original research, I'd like you to point out what specific parts of the piece contribute to this.

Thanks.

Tamedu quaternion (talk) 08:20, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This [3] may have been a joke in your direction. Kinda funny. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:26, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I had a comment that said the Lovable Curves page was spam? I am a bit lost, if you could help I would appreciate to learn more about your point of view. AWiseWoman22 (talk) 19:54, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@AWiseWoman22: Well, the entire draft Draft:Lovable Curves is promotional. Have a look at What Wikipedia is Not, in particular Wikipedia is not a means of promotion and Wikipedia is not a web hosting service. I removed some blatant spam in the form of promotional links to her social media accounts, when I was fixing some content that didn't meet Wikipedia's policy for biographies about living persons, but there is really no part of the text that is written from a neutral point of view. Since it doesn't look like she would meet Wikipedia's notability criteria anyway, it looks like it would be a waste of your time to keep working on the draft. --bonadea contributions talk 15:06, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thank you. I appreciate the help. new to wikipedia and working on tiktok stars that are up and coming. AWiseWoman22 (talk) 01:17, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I was able to interview her. I am still new to wiki. AWiseWoman22 (talk) 01:18, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I know what wikipedia is. I interviewed this person for biography and I added citations and links about family and places she mentioned and all of that. Plus, I want to specialize in tiktok stars. TikTok is the most popular and famous social media in the entire world. It is ripe with notable people and this one in particular I felt had notoriety as much more than a tiktokker but an actual author of a book, a musician public speaker ect... how is that not notable? I don't know anyone who has been successful at any of those things, do you? AWiseWoman22 (talk) 01:39, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Replied at User talk:AWiseWoman22. --bonadea contributions talk 08:50, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol | October 2022 backlog drive
On 1 October, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled and for maintaining a streak throughout the drive. Barnstars will also be awarded for re-reviewing articles. Redirect patrolling is not part of the drive. Sign up here!
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

(t · c) buidhe 21:16, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Issea sa is a registered company, is authorized and recognized to offer legally degree on line. How can a diploma mill be? See www.zefix.ch search issea Accreditation in Switzerland is a quality certification that is not necessary to be authorized to award university degrees. Issea is authorized and can confer university degrees even without accreditation (see sentence of the federal admininistrative court published in the article paragraph 2.1)) None of the news in the article mentions an independent reliable source. much published information is inaccurate or completely fictional contributions come from puppets of Giuseppe Macario who is cited on the net as a serial defamer and also boasts of being a professor at the People's University a competitor of Issea. Certainly it cannot be considered an independent reliable source. Elvirabet (talk) 13:14, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Bonadea,

Thank you for your comments with regards to the draft.

Would you be able to clarify what is meant by ‘reads like an advertisement’?

The draft is written to demonstrate notability, although of course I will change the tone accordingly.

Without wishing to contradict, the topic does meet notability criteria for both an academic and a musician, as already stated, with none of the sources being produced by myself.

Kind Regards,

J.H. JohnEricHiggs (talk) 20:29, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bonadea, just a heads up I have done some checking of the references used in the draft and noted all those that fail verification (which is a significant number and in some fairly blatant ways). I've left a note on the talk page, as well as comments in edit summaries. Melcous (talk) 09:48, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Melcous,

I think I see the problem now. If you are looking for something wrong you will find it. It's called a self-fulfilling prophesy. Please don't take editors of biographies in Bad Faith.

All the best to both of you,

J.H JohnEricHiggs (talk) 19:40, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

10 months ha passed since everything i posted was remobed. Please read this paper i found today (at least the introduction) ^[1]

Cubic general sieve has at least two importamt logical gaps, according to this paper.

Tne first one is that it only works with a special class of primes

The second one is you need to solve a certain Diophantus equation, the general solutions of which are never known.

These two simple facts described in the paper are enough for any reasonable person to conclude that cubic sieving is basicaly an experimental algorithm and you should never tbink of it as a real algorithm.

I wrote general number field sieving is quadratic number field sieving, because everything else are basically unproved conjectures from unverified simulations.

Simple fact checking is an important part of any editing activity, and sbould never be deleted ( as long the checking is simple enough for everybody, or at least for every experts), if you think that wikipedia should not be a fake. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aquahabitant (talk • contribs) 06:48, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --12:21, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed your changes to Morgan Obenreder. Been many years since I created that article. Are you planning any further work on it? -- James26 (talk) 21:38, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Qhqofficial2022 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Dog Home Foundation ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

At present the name of the NGO and their work was covered by all the media all over India, and I am now the new editor, I thought I should make a page with their name, but the draft was made, so I tried to edit

Kindly do the needful

Qhqofficial2022 (talk) 11:43, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there,

I saw that you declined my draft for IShowSpeed. I do not know what happened but I'm seeing that a user removed all the reliable sources I cited in the article and replaced them with random non-reliable sources before disruptly copy and pasting the source to the main space. For reference here was the article at the time I submitted: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:IShowSpeed&oldid=1113654452. Would it possible to rollback to the version I created so I can continue improving the draft. It sucks having worked so hard on research and creation just for someone to randomly destroy it and get the draft declined. Célestin Denis (talk) 15:45, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not to mention that the user basically ruined every chance IShowSpeed had of getting an article by creating the article before the draft got reviewed. Célestin Denis (talk) 15:48, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

User:Célestin Denis - On the one hand, you can restore an earlier version of Draft:IShowSpeed. If you need advice or instructions on how to do this, you can ask at the Help Desk (or maybe the Teahouse, but this is slightly more advanced than what the Teahouse usually helps with). On the other hand, because IShowSpeed was being repeatedly recreated in article space, the title has now been salted. It sounds as though the subject has two groups of proponents, and you belong to one group who are trying to improve the references, and the other group was simply trying to restore the article. So you can discuss with the other proponents. In the meantime, however, the title is locked; if you want the title unprotected, you can discuss with the locking administrator, TomStar81, but I am not sure how likely he is to be interested in unprotecting the title. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:01, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bless the tag team. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 09:14, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Bonadea,

Much has happened since the last newsletter over two months ago. The open letter finished with 444 signatures. The letter was sent to several dozen people at the WMF, and we have heard that it is being discussed but there has been no official reply. A related article appears in the current issue of The Signpost. If you haven't seen it, you should, including the readers' comment section.

Awards: Barnstars were given for the past several years (thanks to MPGuy2824), and we are now all caught up. The 2021 cup went to John B123 for leading with 26,525 article reviews during 2021. To encourage moderate activity, a new "Iron" level barnstar is awarded annually for reviewing 360 articles ("one-a-day"), and 100 reviews earns the "Standard" NPP barnstar. About 90 reviewers received barnstars for each of the years 2018 to 2021 (including the new awards that were given retroactively). All awards issued for every year are listed on the Awards page. Check out the new Hall of Fame also.

Software news: Novem Linguae and MPGuy2824 have connected with WMF developers who can review and approve patches, so they have been able to fix some bugs, and make other improvements to the Page Curation software. You can see everything that has been fixed recently here. The reviewer report has also been improved.

Suggestions:

• There is much enthusiasm over the low backlog, but remember that the "quality and depth of patrolling are more important than speed".
• Reminder: an article should not be tagged for any kind of deletion for a minimum of 15 minutes after creation and it is often appropriate to wait an hour or more. (from the NPP tutorial)
• Reviewers should focus their effort where it can do the most good, reviewing articles. Other clean-up tasks that don't require advanced permissions can be left to other editors that routinely improve articles in these ways (creating Talk Pages, specifying projects and ratings, adding categories, etc.) Let's rely on others when it makes the most sense. On the other hand, if you enjoy doing these tasks while reviewing and it keeps you engaged with NPP (or are guiding a newcomer), then by all means continue.
• This user script puts a link to the feed in your top toolbar.

Backlog:

Saving the best for last: From a July low of 8,500, the backlog climbed back to 11,000 in August and then reversed in September dropping to below 6,000 and continued falling with the October backlog drive to under 1,000, a level not seen in over four years. Keep in mind that there are 2,000 new articles every week, so the number of reviews is far higher than the backlog reduction. To keep the backlog under a thousand, we have to keep reviewing at about half the recent rate!

Hi, you reviewed Draft:Kim Gordon (designer) on October 6th. I took into account your suggestions and the suggestions of the previous reviewer and made some modifications. I was wondering if you'd be willing to take another look and let me know if you think more improvements are needed. Thanks! Chagropango (talk) 10:13, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bonadea.Hope you are keeping well. It has been sometime since I added additional references in this article and requested you to review it so that I can move it to main space under your guidance. Iam working in the process of cleaning my draft space. Thanks. Gardenkur (talk) 13:07, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Bonadea:.Hope you are keeping well. I observe you have rejected this article saying not sufficient reliable sources whereas I have added enough references as per Wikipedia policies. Request you to kindly guide me so that I can do needful. Thanks. Gardenkur (talk) 09:45, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Gardenkur: thank you for your message. I'm afraid I can't really do more than what I already did; I posted a fairly exhaustive source analysis on the draft page and in the thread you started on the AfC help page. The draft is in the exact same shape as when it was moved to draft space, in terms of sources (there are no independent sources, and nothing to indicate notability). It is a little disheartening to see that you re-added multiple copies of sources that had already been removed once or twice from the draft, including sources that we discussed here. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 14:09, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bonadea. Thanks for your detailed reply. Sorry saw you message and remarks in the article late. Will try to evaluate the references and will get back to you. Have a nice day. Gardenkur (talk) 07:39, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bonadea, just a note since I moved Draft:Morag Park to mainspace after you'd declined it at AfC. In practice, pages on biology faculty seem to get kept at AfD if they have at least a few papers (as senior author) with 100+ citations on Google Scholar or SCOPUS. Park easily passes that bar. As far as I know, that norm isn't documented anywhere (hence my discomfort with WP:NPROF, but oh well), but it clearly seems to be a bar used in AfD discussions. If you disagree with the move, feel free to bring Morag Park to AfD. I hope all is well! Happy editing, Ajpolino (talk) 19:45, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:MC Stan is not draft which I created I had submitted this article by mistake earlier.instead of draft of MC STAN Which I created Jisshu (talk) 11:56, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a suggestion on how to report what appear to be two different editors submitting slightly different but almost the same versions of probable UPE? I am thinking of Draft:Alice Blue and Draft:Alice Blue (company). Robert McClenon (talk) 16:31, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Robert McClenon: – I wish I had a good answer for that! WP:COIN doesn't quite cover this situation, I think, because there's a question of multiple users as well as of COI/UPE, and opening an SPI for multiple users who are not actually pretending to be the same person is also not ideal. (There is a third user, who created User:Swathi4352/sandbox about the founder of Alice Blue, and I suspect that's another account from the same paid outfit.)

Any talk page stalkers with a better response than mine? --bonadea contributions talk 12:39, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to WP:COIN, although I have had inconsistent experience with COIN. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:19, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi@Bonadea:. Can you visit my talk page and look at the revision history? I received an odd message. I removed it, but it is still in the revision history. Thank you!Cwater1 (talk) 18:40, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Bonadea, for my draft article, I provided reputable Filipino news sources. I am convinced, Geslani is relevant for enough to give him an article in wikipedia. When the child has been good (talk) 22:14, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi bonadea i dont believe the writing i put in his article was not of nuetral wording as it is factually correct and you may have seen recently the wikipedia page got brought up early on the latest joe rogan podcast where there are claims that the current iteration of the article is far from nuetral so i wanted to help both sides of that argument come to a middle ground. if there are no changes that can be made then i think a fair and reasonable explanation could be made. Badgerosman (talk) 12:31, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Badgerosman: thank you for your message. There is a very strong consensus in favour of using the term "pseudoscientific" without softening it as a descriptor of Hancock. This has been discussed repeatedly at Talk:Graham Hancock, and that is also the place to bring up any suggested changes. However, unless those suggested changes are strongly supported by reliable, independent sources, they will not be carried out. Be aware that Wikipedia does not want to present every possible point of view about every topic as equally valid (more on that here); in addition, saying that "Hancock's critics call his theories pseudoscientific" is arsy-versy – he is criticised because the theories he proposes are pseudoscientific, the theories are not identified as pseudoscientific because he is the one who proposes them. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 13:36, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Badgerosman Joe Rogan promotes conspiracy theories, etc. Doug Weller talk 19:24, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

His Netflix series has started so expect more on him and his books. Doug Weller talk 19:21, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oh joy! Oh rapture unforeseen! Well, forewarned is forearmed. Thanks! --bonadea contributions talk 21:55, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I recently submitted the draft. AGS Transact Technologies is a payment solutions provider in India. The company offers cash and digital solutions to merchants, banks and corporates. The company was incorporated by Ravi B. Goyal in 2002. Ken Research Report 2021 recognised them as the second-largest company in India in terms of revenue from ATM managed services under the outsourcing model and revenue from cash management and the number of ATMs replenished. There are three business segments under which they operate, namely: Banking Automation Solutions, Payment Solutions, and Other Automation Solutions for Retail, Petroleum, and Colour Sectors. These services are offered through its wholly-owned subsidiaries Securevalue India Ltd. and India Transact Services Ltd. Ongo & Fastlane are two consumer brands owned by this company. In 2019, AGS QRCash, an industry-first QR code-based cash withdrawal feature on ATMs was introduced by AGS Transact Technologies.

I got a response from your side stating the below reasons for the decline of the article. This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are: in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements), reliable, secondary, strictly independent of the subject Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

I tried researching this from my end but couldn't. It would really be a great help if you could please elaborate the above reasons in more simpler way. RiddhiG123 (talk) 10:43, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@RiddhiG123: First and most important, please address the questions and issues raised in the thread User talk:RiddhiG123#Managing a conflict of interest. (Please respond to those questions there, not here, and do that before you make any other edits.) Second, have you in fact followed all the links in the decline notice you quoted above? Which part of the information on the linked pages was hard to understand? --bonadea contributions talk 10:56, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Bonadea, thank you for your feedback. Your review is very helpful for us and we appreciate the time you dedicated to our text!!

1. Concerning the first point of criticism: We can change the part on the Rome Declaration and write an new text in a neutral style. (We have learned how to check for copyright violations in the Wikipedia tool)
2. Concerning the second point of criticism: We can delete the part “An effective outcome of geography education” as this might sound a little essay like.
3. We have one additional questions: Which other parts of the text should be changed to make our version acceptable?

For us the Wikipedia entry on “Geography Education” is very important therefore if there is the possibility to get in touch with you (maybe even by zoom), we would appreciate that, since we are not experienced in writing Wikipedia entries.

Nina Geo Edu (talk) 10:16, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Geo Edu: thank you for your message. First of all: when you say "helpful for us", "we can change the part", and so on, who is "we"? Each user account at Wikipedia should only be used by one individual, who should not share their login information with anybody else.

Second, about copyright – do not focus on what the copyright violations tool tells you. Use facts, not sentences, from the sources. The copyright tool shouldn't really be necessary for an article writer, since you already know which sources you use! Please read and make sure you understand this explanatory essay. There is a very good external resource on avoiding plagiarism, here, which you can also have a look at. Until these two points are addressed, you should not make any edits to the draft or any other Wikipedia pages. --bonadea contributions talk 13:33, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi!

My submission was rejected. What can I do to improve it?

Thank you : ) Leeleehall (talk) 10:58, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Leeleehall: thank you for your message! Your draft, Draft:Alastair and Fleur Mackie, was not rejected, which would have meant there was no option to revise and resubmit, but it was declined because it wasn't adequately referenced. All information in a Wikipedia article, in particular information about living people, must be referenced, with citations to reliable sources. The citations (footnotes) should be placed right after the information that the source verifies. Your draft has a list of sources, but no citations. In the decline notice is a couple of links to guides on referencing: this one is a good place to start.

Another important thing: to show that a topic is notable as Wikipedia defines notability, an article about the topic has to be supported by independent and secondary sources. One of the sources you listed in the draft, this one, is their own website, and two of the other sources, this and this, use text that was taken from the website (hence not secondary). This looks like it is a text written by them, so it's also not secondary. Hope this makes sense, --bonadea contributions talk 12:51, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Help me, Draft. Blackmountcom (talk) 12:12, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Blackmountcom: I'm afraid the draft you created, Draft:Akilbek Allan, has been rejected because Allan is not a notable musician. He might become notable in the future, but at this time there can't be a Wikipedia article about him. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 12:52, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I have added some source to the article please look at. Tell me what sources are needed for the article to be relevant in wikipedia, Thank you Arman Jandosov (talk) 05:57, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I was wondering if you can also restore a deleted article on another wikipedia. Arman Jandosov (talk) 06:01, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

https://kaa.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akilbek_Allan Arman Jandosov (talk) 06:03, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:19, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alaukik Rahi - Wikipedia only 1 reference and reliable source of this article, please help me Abhinav1976 (talk) 12:41, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Abhinav1976: I'm sorry, but I really don't think that individual is notable, and I believe the article should be deleted. Are you aware of any independent reliable sources about Rahi? --bonadea contributions talk 13:38, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

no sir, I don't know about him more Abhinav1976 (talk) 09:38, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have broken 3RR but I want you to remove that wikilink you just added after you reverted my edit.

SpyridisioAnnis Discussion 11:35, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@SpyridisioAnnis: Which wikilink? The one you were removing in Governor General's Award for English-language non-fiction? I asked you to self-revert your 4RR edit, but since you did not do that, and you also did not give a reason to remove the link, I went ahead and restored the link. Please read this post from me on your user talk page. If you think there is a problem with the wikilink, use the article talk page to explain your reasoning, and don't edit the article to remove the link unless other editors agree with you that the link is problematic. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 11:47, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

SpyridisioAnnis Discussion 11:51, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oh well. I really tried. 3RR report filed. --bonadea contributions talk 12:12, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have one quick question, what was the copyright violation for? ShowingGreed (talk) 12:05, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@ShowingGreed: thanks for your message. The text removed in this edit was a copyright violation, as it was taken from this Washington Post article with very minimal changes. Please have a look at this explanation. --bonadea contributions talk 12:11, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Yemsquare (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Mike Afolarin ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello, this article was first declined and I need to update the reason for the decline, but it seems another editor works on it without reflecting the reasons behind the declined and the article is now rejected, what can I do?

Yemsquare (talk) 12:36, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Yemsquare: as explained here and here and on your user talk page, there cannot be an article about Mike Afolarin at this time. He is not notable. If you want to edit Wikipedia, your edits can not be about Afolarin. If your only reason to edit Wikipedia is to create an article about him, I'm afraid there is nothing you can do here. You will simply need to go to other websites, where promotion of people is allowed. --bonadea contributions talk 13:10, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Prachi Vaishnav - Wikipedia this article is notable how. used Sourses are TellyChakkar and Times of India. why not me. I use also Tellychakkar, Toi, and Patrika news. Draft:Devaksh Rai - Wikipedia

Abhinav1976 (talk) 09:39, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean about POV phrasing? Men women and kids with holes burned in them was kinda the whole point of the controversy in the first place. It happened. That's why it is a controversy.

For sourcing I am doing the best I can with links that are over 15 years old. Many of them are from other articles nobody seems to have a problem with.

I agree with you the quotes are on the long side but that's because they have so much to say and paraphrasing takes the meat out of it.

So are you actually going to contribute to the Fallujah article or just hit and run?

GalantFan (talk) 04:59, 5 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of this type of info was in the article in the first place and whitewashers and weasel words deleted it. GalantFan (talk) 05:01, 5 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on User:FeronaHaj/sandbox, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

• It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.
• It appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free Web hosting service. (See section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion.)

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:41, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I added more references in draft page Devaksh Rai Abhinav1976 (talk) 15:41, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This article use also as reference times of india and tellychakkar. How and Why he is notable and have reliable source? Abhinav1976 (talk) 23:59, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

you just "copy and paste" the cliché without pointing out where is the "advertisement" in the article that you are accusing it of. You also claim that the sources are not reliable, while the sources are wide different from different news agencies and web news and even from TVs from different countries. Even one of the links is from the official police website. Please clarify which exact sources you think are not reliable and why? also, which exact sentences in the article you think are "advertisement". Thanks! 37.76.211.149 (talk) 20:35, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I did not reject the draft, I declined it. The difference is important – a rejected draft cannot be resubmitted. There is no copypasting involved. When a volunteer reviewer declines a submitted draft, she must choose one or two reasons for declining. Those reasons are indeed presented in a standardised format, to make it as easy as possible for the draft creators to understand what the issues are. You will have noticed that I also presented a specific comment on the sources. I won't insult your intelligence by listing exactly which sources are copies of the same text – you are just as capable as I am to read the text and see that it is identical :-) The advertisement problem is not an issue with isolated sentences but with the entire draft. However, the fact that the sources must meet the criteria outlined in the decline notice is more important than the tone issue. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 21:46, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

Should I then just post the photos without the source? Seems a bit counter intuitive for the common good. Hjalmar13 (talk) 08:03, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Hjalmar13: An image usually doesn't need a citation, but that does not mean that it would be OK to re-add the picture without the link. You can't just take an image from somewhere on the Internet and upload it to Wikipedia. It violates the original website's copyright. You also can't paste bits of copyrighted text into Wikipedia. As for the website itself, skandishop.com, that is not a reliable source. Don't add links to it in any Wikipedia article. Thanks, --bonadea contributions talk 09:24, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alright - thanks! Is this a reliable source? https://www.danishdesignstore.com/collections/designer-collections-arne-jacobsen

How can I know if sources are reliable? Aren't there links in other wikipedia articles as well? (like the one above) Hjalmar13 (talk) 14:59, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

— Moops ^⋠T⋡ 02:41, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

HI

Why are you trying to delete an article that was voted to stay? Muamalq (talk) 23:32, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It was not "voted to stay", and the rationale is presented on the deletion discussion page. --bonadea contributions talk 23:34, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I will agree with you to put it to a vote, but return the article as it was so as not to affect the vote Muamalq (talk) 23:53, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep in mind that it is not a vote! I have added a link to the previous version. It would not be constructive to revert to that version since it was blatantly inappropriate, and I spent a lot of time improving it. --bonadea contributions talk 00:00, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

I wish to keep an article, and for information, all talk about a topic is pinned on corporate websites, not a claim as I described it, and there are many characters on Wikipedia like this person Muamalq (talk) 00:08, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I am Twinkle. I have modified the Draft:Taaza Khabar as per WP:N. Can you please have a look and suggest me for further improvement? Also, if possible can you review it? Thanking you: Twinkle1990 (talk) 13:23, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Respected Sir. Please help me to improve this article. Draft:Sachidanand_Bharti Manish Panwar ^{(talk) |Contribs)} 13:15, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Bonadea,

Thank you for spending the time going through all of the sources in this article. I don't know if you read Arabic but if not, this must have been time-consuming. It's clear you tried to see if there was anything worth saving in this article and then decided to send it to AFD when you saw that it was a clearly promotional article. I think the deletion decision was appropriate and I appreciate you taking the time to work through this content for the project. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:53, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Prophet Muhammad don't have any real picture. I am respectful any art. But religion is not an art and this depiction can cause outrage. There is no need to being disrespectful to any belief, view and life style. This is not an art page and people are given false information. There is not a real proof. Prophet Muhammad did not want to people worship himself therefore he had restricted all of his images. People tend to worship images and tombs and it is not against art . Muhammad prevented all of this trading by image ban. The only trading comes through his words by books. IWikipedia is considered independent and respectful to all the beliefs. Muhammad picture is considered as insulting among muslims. It is known fact but they are insulted by a picture whether it exists or not. What is the value of this picture on global society? Nothing but misery Mfgl (talk) 21:50, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Responding on your user talk page. --bonadea contributions talk 21:52, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I understand wikipedia has some process but I don't need confirmation beliefs. Configuring browsers for what I believe is non-objective information. Problem is not related what I wanted to see. The real problems come from suspicious informations. There should be a mark on these types of contents. It will more accurate Mfgl (talk) 22:09, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I saw you were good with dealing with hoax articles. Can you deal with this too? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Talib_Shah

Everything there and added by that user is fake 94.25.85.100 (talk) 00:45, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

DEAR BONAEDA I WANT TELL YOU THE MISTAKE YOU DO BY EDITING PAGE LIST OF MOON MISSION ON TOMMOROW IF YOU WANT TO KNOW THEN REPLY ABHIGYAN ANUBHAV SK (talk) 06:31, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@ABHIGYAN ANUBHAV SK: Please do not type in all caps (LIKE THIS). As I explained on your user talk page, your edits to List of missions to the Moon had to be reverted for several reasons: it removed a reference, changed the text so it became impossible to understand, and added a category that doesn't exist. You have made several edits to various Wikipedia articles and other pages that have had to be reverted by your fellow editors. It looks like your command of English is not quite strong enough to edit English Wikipedia – but there are more than 300 different Wikipedia versions in different languages, and you are welcome to contribute to Wikipedia in your native language. Here is a list of Wikipedias. --bonadea contributions talk 12:34, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lander chandryyan was not crash it hard landed Awesome23!?h (talk) 15:46, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a name but removed by you Jordocofye (talk) 11:52, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Jordocofye: Yes, because there was no reliable and independent source. IMDb cannot be used as a source; here is an explanation of why that is. Also note that cast lists in Wikipedia usually do not list every single person who appears in a film. More info here. Besides, you added the name as a "cameo" and "starring" part, which is clearly not correct since none of the sources mentioned the actor. --bonadea contributions talk 12:37, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

	The Special Barnstar
	Wikilove to you ~Tallulah (talk) 20:49, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry if I made things hard for you and other members of the Wikipedia team. I'm going to stick to copyediting and bad link banishment from now on, so hopefully I won't be any trouble. I tend to learn better by experience, but I realize that there are places where you should really just read the user manual. Please accept this sweet dessert as a peace offering for you. ~Tallulah (talk) 06:14, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mmmm... baklava! Thank you! And don't worry – we all make mistakes and Wikipedia's guidelines can be pretty complicated. bonadea contributions talk 09:03, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Assalamualaikum. Kim bum setelah bff mulai kurang terdengar oleh internasional dan hanya terdengar oleh fans2nya. Br terdengar lg wkt 2020 lalu. (Silahkan translate sendiri ya) Akbar Alhadi (talk) 02:39, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not communicate in Indonesian at English Wikipedia. --bonadea contributions talk 10:59, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --14:15, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why was the draft declined? Draft:Pradip Adhikari the similar page 4K Gaming Nepal I added was approved having similar Sources and Links 202.51.80.152 (talk) 21:52, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. --bonadea contributions talk 22:03, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ApprenticeWiki ^contribs 11:12, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the edit that I made at The Bachelor (American season 27) before you reverted to blank as I am able to finish watching the first episode:

Could you check for the grammar fixes before I will re-edit the summary to make a better for MOS:TVPLOT in the popular American dating reality show? The one thing the summary is not made nonsense that I think it might be a good entry for the summary. ApprenticeWiki ^contribs 12:06, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

About the Kristy Scott article. 5 things I have to say

1. Removing citations that were gotten from cites that aren’t deprecated or blacklisted is bad practice, especially if the cites have their own Wikipedia page (which on its own is a sign of notability).

2. Obviously they were other citations there, but out of all the citations you removed you, the only citations from blue linked sources were Indian. Removing sites because they are from India and tagging them as “gossipy” is discriminatory.

3. There are several articles about the subject, but they were from deprecated sites like mirror and daily star of the UK and for that reason, I left them out because I know what I’m doing

4. I see you have been on Wikipedia for 16 years. You’re probably a millennial, with little appreciation for the fact that social media influencing have become a REAL thing. You must come to terms that social media personalities have become as REAL as any other branch of human professionals. The news they generate is in relation with the kind of content they create. It’s not one size fits all.

5. If my tone sounds rude, bear with me. I’m sleepy. Cheers

Amaekuma (talk) 22:17, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Bonadea:: Hi Bonadea, Thank you for taking the time to review the Draft:Caroline Klebl. I wanted to ask a few follow-ups regarding your feedback, especially as it relates to interviews as sources. I see a lot of the sources were flagged as promotional because they were interviews. I assumed an interview that is conducted and edited by an independent publication that fact checks its information, without the intent of promoting a subject but merely speaking to an expert in a subject matter, is considered independent. Would you mind clarifying why that is not the case?

1 is a trivial mention - this is a reference to the subject, which states her name and title. It is not meant to serve as anything else other than to verify who she is by an independent source. Is there a way to better do that so it is not deemed trivial? Or maybe a better place to put it? 3 is a profile on an organisation's website - this is profile on an independent, non-profit organization that certifies instructors. They are not paid to put her profile online, she is considered qualified under their guidelines. This will have been independently verified. 4 doesn't mention Klebl at all so is irrelevant - this is to verify that her guru was considered a "prominent yoga guru" (so as not to assume hyperbole). Happy to remove this, but that was the intention there. 5 is a profile on an organisation's website (more substantial than no 3, but neither independent nor secondary). - this article in LA Yoga was published in the both their website and print edition. It is not a promotional interview, but an article to discuss yoga using an expert as their source. Would you mind providing some clarity on why this would be considered an unreliable source? 7 and 8 are amazon.com links - this was just to verify that these books exist, not as a form of promotion. But definitely appreciate how that wasn't clear! Many thanks for your time. Cammur (talk) 05:31, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can you help me? What do I need to add to Ulricthemerc? Alink to his music? He is a published artist on Itunes, Amazon, youtube etc. Eeubanksa (talk) 01:47, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bonadea.Hope you are keeping well. I have observed you reviewing this article and sharing your reasons for moving to draft. Thanks for your suggestions. I have understood your context and will follow them in future. Apologies for the same. Thanks. Gardenkur (talk) 06:48, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --12:46, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Bonadea: Dear Bondea, Good day,yesterday evening I got alarmed to one of the most painful news ever which was you were deleting the page of Jeff O. Ajueshi personally I really don't understand the reason for doing so.I am his son and I thought it deemed right to make a page for my father who is a leading and renowned art curator and gallerist in Nigeria.He has done so much for art.yet,he hasn't had a Wikipedia page.This pained me and motivated me to make a page for him.Mr.Bondea I respect your decision but I pleadingly ask for your mercy to forgive me for the disliked things you may have noticed on the page that I myself may have not noticed.So,I ask for you to give me a second chance and help in improving the Jeff O. Ajueshi page. Thank you. Mi1LORDE (talk) 11:21, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Mind having a 2nd look at the Affiliate marketing? the change was for the heading that had no relation whatsoever to spam section that is listed in another place. Regarding citation, it was asked to add citations, so the "reflink spam" was out of place as well. Avizaz (talk) 23:57, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Avizaz: No, there was no misunderstanding. Two or three of the many entries in that list are not websites, so it would make sense to remove them. But I had to look pretty hard to find them. One thing I did miss was the fact that "personal website" was already in the list. That entry shouldn't be there at all. But that hostadvice.com is not a reliable or informative source is obvious – in addition it doesn't even support the claim, which makes it refspam. --bonadea contributions talk 09:48, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I understand why you changed the header back, but the addition of personal websites does add more than just "personal websites". Regarding the reference link, I added the link directly to the mentioned paragraph. If you consider the site unreliable, that's your decision.

Overall, please consider bringing back the text about personal websites that was added, with or without the citation. Avizaz (talk) 20:26, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there - I submitted my first article and it looks like you declined it. No harm no foul - I assumed there would be some issues. I am hoping you can provide a little more direction. A few things:

1. I am quite certain the article's subject meets Wikipedia's notability requirements. So as far as I can tell, that is not an issue.

2. I am a related family member of the person the article is about. I understand that while "strongly discouraged", that doesn't necessarily invalidate the article. Is it ok to add a COI Disclosure on the talk page of the [draft] article, and continue with the submission process? Or will the COI cause the article to forever be blocked, in which case I shouldn't bother submitting the article?

3. I have since learned that Facebook and Amazon are not acceptable sources. I will remove them and replace with something verifiable. Are there other sources that are not valid?

4. I see the article was rejected for not using a formal tone. Because of the COI (as per above), I worked to make the writing as neutral as possible. I wonder if you could provide some specifics? What sections or sentences would be considered inappropriate?

Many thanks for any information you can provide. Squasha4416 (talk) 15:21, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message, @Squasha4416:. I agree with you about his notability – many journalists and reporters are not notable even though they have written for notable publications, but Leland won a Pulitzer and it looks like there's quite a few independent sources talking about him.

As for your COI, you can definitely continue editing and submitting the draft! Thank you for posting the disclosure. Once the draft has been accepted you shouldn't edit the article directly but rather post edit requests on the talk page, but while it is still a draft there is no need for you to avoid editing it. This is in fact one of the reasons there is a draft process, so that editors with a conflict of interest can create a draft and submit it to be reviewed by an independent editor.

Other sources to avoid – excellent question! As you probably know, a key concept is that sources should be reliable. "Reliable" in the Wikipedia context means that there's good reason to believe that the facts published in the source have been checked for accuracy. This is particularly important in a biograpy about a living person, and it is tied to the policy of verifiability. It's impossible to give an exhaustive list of non-reliable sources, but there are some types of sources that should not be used, and you'll find a list of such types here. You can also check this list of specific sources that are often discussed, with comments on whether they are considered to be reliable or not – but note that if a source isn't on that list, it doesn't mean that it is necessarily reliable or unreliable! A short summary of what a reliable source is in Wikipedia, with a quiz, can be found here.

The tone of the draft – well, it's not extremely promotional, but there are phrases such as "he has written countless articles" and "many other awards", and overall a kind of journalistic style that comes across as more persuasive than informative. The section on Information style and tone in the explanatory essay Writing better articles discusses this.

The section on the Spotlight Team could be compressed; the article is supposed to be a biography of Leland, and the focus on this team feels a bit undue (though some of it could perhaps be added to the article The Boston Globe). In particular, the unintegrated quote could be removed, and the many short paragraphs, another stylistic choice that feels more like journalistic writing than encyclopedic text, could be trimmed and combined. Meta commentary such as the last sentence in that section, pointing to the interview, shouldn't be part of an article. If there is information in the interview that might be relevant in the biography, such information could be included with the interview as a source – I'm not sure that is the case, though, because it seems to be very much about the team and not about Leland.

Finally, a point you didn't ask about but I wanted to mention because it is pretty important: please do write the citations in a format that helps the reader understand what they are, with at least a minimum of bibliographic information. I formatted the first two citations as seen here (I also removed the amazon ref) to give you an idea of what it should look like. You don't need to do this manually in the article code! (I mean, you can do that, but it's a bit fiddly.) I used RefToolbar, a tool that's built into the editing interface. This is a guide to using RefToolbar. Remember to remove the old url-only references, though!

Apologies for the very long response. I hope you can find some of it useful. Best, --bonadea contributions talk 12:21, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fabulous reply and very thoughtful. I truly appreciate your tips and direction. Being my first experience, I was quite concerned that I would have one shot at submission and if declined, I would be banned forever. So I'm happy to learn that this is an iterative process, and my only goal is to work with you to get it right.

I would be VERY happy to let others edit the article in the future. My hope was to do the heavy lifting of the research and posting the initial article. But once it's "out there", I fully plan to back away and let others fill in the gaps.

One lingering question: I can find hundreds and even thousands of references to Timothy Leland in the Boston Globe. I am sure any of them would be considered a reliable source and it would be easy to use those articles as citations. But some - and even most - are probably behind a paywall. I have a subscription and can access the articles but I suppose others won't. Am I allowed to use them? Or should I only use them when other easily accessible sources are available?

Thanks again for your helpful note. I'll start on submission v.2.

PS. Are you "assigned" to this article? Will you be the one working on it until it gets published? Or is it randomly handled by any available editor? Squasha4416 (talk) 18:29, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead and resubmitted. I hope we are getting closer! Please feel free to let me know if we are not on the right track and will make the necessary edits. Many thanks. Squasha4416 (talk) 22:10, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello I dont know why you decline draft . Can you tell me resone? 202.86.221.164 (talk) 20:35, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello sir. I have further improved my Draft:Om Murti Anil#. Please have a look and guide me what to do next since there was issue of COI with original creator.

Regards!!! Gauravs 51 (talk) 08:26, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the draft is submitted for review so all you really need to do is wait for the review to happen. What you should not do is move the draft to article space yourself. By submitting it for review, you have asked for it to be moved, and so you don't need to request that in any other way. I notice that you claim to own the copyright of the photo you added to the draft. Is that correct? Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 09:07, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Bonadea Sir, I took the photo from the internet. That was probably a mistake, I accept. I will add something which doesn't have copyright infringement. Gauravs 51 (talk) 10:49, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Bonadea according to Wikipedia WP:PUBLISHED I'm added all sources in Draft:Sangramsingh Thakur Rajmama (talk) 20:38, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Rajmama: That a source is published does not automatically mean that it is reliable. Some published sources are reliable, others are not. And even if all sources are reliable and published, it does not automatically mean that the topic is notable. --bonadea contributions talk 15:22, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Bonadea even if all sources are reliable and published, it does not automatically mean that the topic is notable? Then when does he become notable? See WP:RS Rajmama (talk) 03:48, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A reliable source that mentions a topic in passing does not show that the topic is notable. An unreliable source that discusses a topic directly also doesn't show notability. You should stop focusing solely on promoting this actor as it will just lead to frustration. --bonadea contributions talk 10:36, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Bonadea I'm not promoting him I'm just stared my contributions so I'm taking one topic. I'm just clearing my doubts which helping me to another articles.thats it.. and please guide me how can I add his name in Indian Predator: Murder In A Courtroom you said add source I'm also added but you removed his name. And you say I'm promoting him. The one of Actor Indian Predator: Murder In A Courtroom he also does not have significant Coverage so its that means he is not a actor of this series? I'm just clearing my doubts.. Rajmama (talk) 16:56, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You added his name as a "starring" part in the infobox, with a non-reliable source which didn't say anything about starring parts (and which can't be used in Wikipedia.) It is a very common form of promotion to add actor names to articles about films or TV series they have appeared in, while claiming that they were "starring". Since you registered your account a couple of years ago, almost all your edits have been to add Thakur's name in Wikipedia articles or drafts. Please stop doing that. In addition, several other accounts, used by a paid editor, have also tried to promote him. --bonadea contributions talk 18:41, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Bonadea I'm not promoting anyone and I'm working on thakur's Draft because I'm created that draft. so that not means I'm promoting him..I'm also created indian predator page and also contribute in other articles. Every wikipedia user creat articles it that means they promoting that topic? You also created 67 articles so it that means you promoting them? Rajmama (talk) 21:46, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen you edit some difficult India-related topics. Jai Shri Ram has a new passionate editor (reminds me a little of certain SAQ-list discussions) since mid-March [4], your input would be appreciated. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:37, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång: How could I resist? :-) Thanks, I'll have a look. --bonadea contributions talk 15:04, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:07, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Bonadea,

Thank you for reviewing my draft for "simon t****well", (name censored so this does not show up on search engines as a search result, out of respect for his family), regardless of the wiki page being declined. I knew this man personally and have created this Wikipedia page in honor of his work so if anybody stumbles across his old releases, they can become aware of the man behind the music.

There is not much proof online regarding whether or not this person was even real, which is why I will never be able to include enough citations for you to approve the page - but I would love you to approve the page. There is nothing more I can do to verify the content.

Kindest regards, Themastermind111 Themastermind111 (talk) 06:52, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry for not including a subject title. Themastermind111 (talk) 06:54, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WOW you are a bored dude - maybe this is the only place you have any power in your life? 2601:589:4102:122E:E1F7:F456:7AEF:A423 (talk) 12:13, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's as if you knew me. Or not. --bonadea contributions talk 12:17, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The butt fumble has an article, and it is the exact same. The butt punt is way more famous now. The only reason you declined it is because you are from Sweden. You don’t like American football and that is why you declined it. I hope that Zlatan Ibrahimović gets injured, and you guys lose to the San Marino national team. Manny Manatee (talk) 20:12, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If I could walk in to your house, I would keep my shoes on to annoy you. Manny Manatee (talk) 20:28, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I would also talk extremely loudly, and sit right next to you on an empty bus or train. Manny Manatee (talk) 20:31, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That wouldn't improve the draft to where it would meet any notability criteria, now, would it? --bonadea contributions talk 11:54, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You just don’t understand American football. Manny Manatee (talk) 16:41, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You declined Draft:Muzamil_Mahmood_Dar as it doesn't follow notability. Can you tell what is the notability criteria for Football coaches in India. isn't I-League , I-League 2 Indian Women's League considered for notability. KashmirValleyEditor (talk) 06:25, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There are no special notability guidelines for football coaches. Why did you name the draft Muzamil Mahmood Dar? I can't see where any of the sources use that name? (That is not why it was declined, it's just something that struck me as odd.) --bonadea contributions talk 15:07, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Actually it is written as "Muzamil Mahmood Dar" on the official website of Indian football federation, this is the reason why i kept this name. Here is the link to that website: Muzamil Mahmood Dar.

If there are no notability guidelines for football coaches but you commented as "Submission is about a person not yet shown to meet notability guidelines" Can you mention those guidelines, i will try to meet those.

And one more thing, i wasn't aware that there is already a Draft available on Wikipedia, i got to know after i checked your comment on the draft.

Can you please merge that draft with this one.

.

I am currently working on few articles related to football and i guessed this Draft:Muzamil_Mahmood_Dar will qualify for wikipedia as the proper references are available and the person is notable.

.

Waiting for your precious feedback regarding improvement in this Draft. KashmirValleyEditor (talk) 15:52, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I hope this message finds you well. I am writing to you in regard to the Draft:Lukas O'Neall that I have been working on. I have made several edits and added sources to the draft, but it seems that it is still not ready for mainspace.

I appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia and your expertise in reviewing drafts. I have taken into account any feedback or suggestions you have provided in the past and have tried to incorporate them into my draft. I am committed to improving the draft and meeting Wikipedia’s standards.

I would appreciate it if you could help me fix the draft so that it meets Wikipedia’s standards and is ready for mainspace.ft.

Thank you for your time and assistance.

Best regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:6C56:6500:8C8E:949C:870A:400A:866A (talk) 01:13, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Primarily all information pertaining to the Operation comes from the Ministery of Defence extensive Record of Procedure, submitted to Commander-in-Chief fleet on the 8th of July 1983. The record is a comprehensive document which was subject to the Official Secrets Act for 30 years. I referenced the Record of Procdure and the author. Royal Navy Lieutenant Nick Hawkins. If you go to the wikipedia article on HMS Coventy you will see the entry mentions Operation Blackleg recovery , but does not link to a wikipedia entry on the dive and recovery of calsssified materials. regards Ray Sinclair ( Bachelor of Journalism from Queensland Univwersity of Technology @Bonadea Devargo007 (talk) 01:50, 9 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey as you reviewed the page i made for my client it got rejected .Can you just help me out as its an important page and needs to be published Triman Ranvir (talk) 09:29, 9 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No, sorry. The reasons are outlined on your user talk page, and I am not interested in using use my own free time to help people make money from this volunteer project. Besides, if you are not Triman Ranvir you can't use his name as your user name – the user name represents the editor, and each user should normally have one account only. --bonadea contributions talk 10:18, 9 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hii Sir, thank u for suggestion. I removed all the four unreliable sources. hope now look like notable ... thank u again, 🙏 Wiki97828 (talk) 01:15, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Wiki97828: No, I'm afraid that is a misunderstanding. Removing those sources was important (although several of the remaining sources are equally poor – you have to check each of the sources carefully) but to show notability there must be multiple reliable, independent sources. Have a look at the information linked from the decline notices. --bonadea contributions talk 11:27, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sir Please Convert My Sandbox In Live Article Sir I Need Your Help Sir Please

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Fishk/sandbox

this Is My Article Sir Please Check It Sir You Are The Editor That’s Why Sir I Come To You Sir Please Help Fishk (talk) 19:08, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but the text in your sandbox cannot become an article, as it is against the purpose of Wikipedia. Wikipedia cannot be used for promotion or to "spread the word" about someone. --bonadea contributions talk 19:13, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The recent edits on the CM article seemed interesting. Looking at []https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/Ramahare&target=Ramahare&offset=&limit=500], some ECP gaming happening, with the very large number of edits to add categories and commons tags to articles? Ravensfire (talk) 20:37, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I have a question regarding the draft being declined because it needs to be adequately supported by reliable sources. I have corrected the references and changed them. Could you please tell me if these sources are relevant and if there is anything else you recommend me to improve before resubmit the draft? Thank you in advance for your help! NikolettaYaneva (talk) 06:06, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Bonadea: You declined my recent article submission about Oliver Edholm, citing a lack of widespread media coverage in the submission. I agree that it was lacking in my submission, but it is definitely not lacking in reality. I have gone back and added articles from reputable international publications such as Business Insider, Tech Crunch, and ScandAsia. Please review the updated submission and if you feel it is appropriate accept the article/withdraw the denial. I am new to Wikipedia, so I ask for your understanding. Knowledgeforallintheworld (talk) 17:40, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Knowledgeforallintheworld: don't worry about it – many drafts are declined at first, and then improved to the point where they can be accepted. You have submitted the draft for review again, and it will be reviewed in due time. Previous decline notices and comments are not removed until a reviewer has accepted the draft. --bonadea contributions talk 17:52, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

	The Special Barnstar
	for making a proper report about sockpuppets of Ashishrawde16k in Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ashishrawde16k. ​​​​​​​𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️Let's Talk ! 15:25, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have mentioned my response to the COI notice on draft:Sohan Pappu.

That's why I have submitted it immediately. Could you please help me out with the draft? Draft:Sohan Pappu Lakshmijourno (talk) 19:18, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As explained in the decline notice, the reason the draft was declined is that there's no actual sign of notability. It was unfortunate that you decided to ignore the request not to remove previous AfC templates, btw. I could have saved a bit of time and energy I wasted on double checking all those references if you had not removed the info about the talk page discussion. --bonadea contributions talk 19:58, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

After you last 'decline' to the page Draft:Cadison, suitable changes have been made, keeping in mind conformity to Wiki guidelines.

Could you please check and advise accordingly? Anirvan.Basu.Wiki (talk) 18:24, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Anirvan.Basu.Wiki: You have submitted it for review successfully, so somebody will review it in due course – either myself or some other reviewer. What made you decide to write a draft about this product? If you have been hired or commissioned to write about it, you must make a disclosure – I'll post some information to your user talk page. --bonadea contributions talk 18:37, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bonadea! I hope all is well. You've had an open SPI clerk application for quite some time now, and following some internal discussion, I finally have an answer for you : If you're still interested in becoming a clerk, Spicy and I would be happy to take you on as a trainee. This would be a co-training arrangement where Spicy would be your primary point of contact for day-to-day training, and I would act as the supervising checkuser and provide additional input. This training model makes progress less dependent on the availability of a single trainer, and would allow you to draw on input and perspectives from multiple people; we've had good experiences with it in the past. Training would take place off-wiki; chiefly for WP:BEANS reasons, but also because I think training works best when it takes the form of an open dialogue (and userspace subpages aren't usually a great place for establishing those). We're flexible on the precise venue.

Without wanting to put too much of a damper on things, I will give you a word of caution that I am glad to have gotten before I started clerking: SPI work sometimes involves dealing with trolls and harassers, and thus carries an elevated risk of being on the receiving end of nasty on- or off-wiki comments and – occasionally – doxing attempts. These are risks that can be managed and mitigated, but I think they are something that you should weigh and consider before committing to the gig.

If you're still interested in becoming a clerk, and this arrangement sounds acceptable to you, please let us know so we can discuss next steps. Please feel free to think it over for a few days, and to reach out to Spicy, me, or any other SPI regular if you have any questions. I'm also happy to answer any queries via e-mail if you prefer.

We look forward to hearing from (and hopefully working with!) you. --Blablubbs (talk) 11:16, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Blablubbs: Thank you! This is just to confirm I've seen your post, and appreciate it – I'll respond properly in a couple of days' time, possibly by email (if so I'll notify you on your talk page, otherwise I'll reply and ping you here :-) ) --bonadea contributions talk 11:27, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to drop by and say thanks for volunteering. I'm sure that, if you decide to become a clerk, you'll make an excellent one. :) Spicy (talk) 23:11, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, @Spicy! :-) --bonadea contributions talk 09:23, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Spicy and Blablubbs: Very sorry not to get back to you more promptly – I ATE'NT DEAD, just been a bit overwhelmed with work this week. Will respond properly tomorrow. --bonadea contributions talk 21:37, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Added multiple salted pages to the nom, along with a history of the nom under so many name misspellings and title casings I'm frankly shocked we haven't caught them all by now. Nate • (chatter) 00:08, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I don't know how I've come here, but an article I've created does not exist. I do not understand how this project works now, but I worked hard on it. Having read some of the policies, it's up for some review. Can you review it for me? דפישולץ (talk) 12:34, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed the citations as per your suggestions (comment). Kindly have a look and provide any other instruction if needed. For Draft:Muzamil_Mahmood_Dar KashmirValleyEditor (talk) 09:02, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Bonadea. Please pay attention to the fact that there is one user who has distorted the page and made extremely biased against her, with criticism and controversies filling up the page. I would not revert to that version as it also contains a number of innacuracies, and the criticism comes first. Miamor2 (talk) 07:01, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, brand-new editor. How did you happen to find this article and become so unusually invested in it on your first day as an editor? Ekman is primarily known for the controversies surrounding her, and your preferred version does not only whitewash her image butis also rather promotional (AB described as a "leading daily" which is certainly not neutral, a long euologistic quote from a prize ceremony added in the lede, etc). --bonadea contributions talk 07:07, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I have been a member since 2014, not brand new. Ekman is not primarily known for the controversies surrounding her, if you see her Swedish page for example. She has been a journalist and author for 20 or so years. The controversies all date from the previous year. They should be placed after neutrally referencing her work. Miamor2 (talk) 07:15, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You made your first edits to English Wikipedia today. How did you happen to find this article out of the six million or so articles? Wikipedia versions in other languages are not sources. Why did you restore the Swenglishisms throughout the article and the promotional text in the lede? --bonadea contributions talk 07:33, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) I saw this thread and got curious, so ran some checks. Miamor2, Guccibelucci, and Alinsky1 are  Confirmed to each other. Perhaps you could be so kind as to create an SPI for them and ping me so I can apply the blocks? -- RoySmith (talk) 00:36, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See discussion on the AFCH talk page. Elected Statewide in Idaho, so meets WP:NPOL. Naraht (talk) 13:21, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not a politician, and the sourcing is incredibly weak in any case. --bonadea contributions talk 14:32, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, she is a politician. She was elected to a statewide position. Sourcing is not weak, and her predecessors had pages. Petjayso (talk) 03:15, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also Naraht has been on the site longer than you and has a point. Petjayso (talk) 03:17, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I checked. The definition of a politician includes someone holding elected office, which Debbie Critchfield did achieve. Petjayso (talk) 03:34, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:04, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your feedback on the draft page for Debendra. Can you help with what changes we would need to get this moving forward? Rahlvers (talk) 19:44, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hai Bonadea

Sorry to bother you. But can you please expedite this sockpuppet investigation process? Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/MovieBuffIndia

(BangaloreNorth (talk) 11:19, 22 June 2023 (UTC))[reply]

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

Hi, I hope you're doing well. This is regarding Draft:Abhishek Nigam, since you were last reviewer of the page and it was rejected more than a year ago, I want you to know that more notable work and reliable sources have been added up plus I've tried to improve the draft since last submission. I would like to ask you if you think I should submit it for review now or any changes/development should be made? Your suggestions are welcomed, thanks. ManaliJain (talk) 11:38, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Bonadea, a quick reminder, just circling back on this draft, any chance you could take a look when you get a moment? Thanks!— Preceding unsigned comment added by ManaliJain (talk • contribs) 07:05, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ManaliJain: You have improved the draft a lot since May 2022 and you should submit it for review. Also pinging Scope creep who last reviewed this in 2021. Jay 💬 17:12, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:22, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Bonadea,

I realized that I hadn't seen around on the project and just wanted to check in and see if everything is okay with you. Hope you are taking off for some summertime rest and relaxation. Any way, your absence is noticed and I hope you return when you get the editing bug back. Take care! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:42, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi!

I'm the person who added the "Trivia" section to the Planet Hot Wheels page. I just came back and was wondering why you removed it for being "clearly not notable" (actually wondering, I hope I don't come off as passive-aggressive). I'm new and that was my first edit, so if you could explain why it wasn't notable and worthy of removal, that would be much appreciated! Thanks!

Kind regards, TheLemoon27 (talk) 16:53, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please remove my draft called Draft:Miss Globe 2021? I do not want to edit it anymore and I know it is not notable and not worth being an article, but someone has submitted the draft again for review. I just wanted to wait for that draft to be automatically be deleted but @GlendaGlamourQueen has edited it and made the draft worse. Allyriana000 (talk) 04:59, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --14:27, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I hope you're doing well. This is regarding Draft:Babil Khan, since you were the rejecting reviewer of the page and it was rejected almost six months ago, I want you to know that more notable work and reliable sources have been added and I've tried to improve the draft since the last submission. I wanted to request you if you could review it again. Your suggestions are welcomed, thanks. ManaliJain (talk) 16:36, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I see you haven't edited in awhile, hope everything's ok. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:23, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --16:16, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:09, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas, Bonadea! Wishing you Season's Greetings and a Happy Winter Solstice! As the year comes to a close, I want to express my appreciation for your dedicated efforts on Wikipedia and extend heartfelt thanks for your assistance throughout the years. May the holiday season bring you and your loved ones abundant joy, good health, and prosperity.

RV (talk) 17:33, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --13:36, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --16:32, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:03, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that we have a race that illustrates why what Wikipedia calls edit conflicts are known in computer science and electrical engineering as race conditions. We didn't know that it was a race, to see which of us moved and declined them first, or moved and left for another reviewer. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:23, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! i've added a few more external citations to my whistlegraph article, and it seems they meet the criteria. I have external magazine coverage (Rhizome, Dirtyverse, Trendhunter, Rookie mag, Etc) as well as a few personal magazines that they have interviews in. Ksenjamajanov (talk) 21:59, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Bonadea!

I just wanted to thank you for this recent edit to the article on Word of Faith. As it stood, it resembled propaganda for the movement, as an inside description had been adopted as though it were a neutral description.

Sincerely, Nikolaj1905 (talk) 13:18, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

Five years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:17, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --12:16, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I declined your A7 speedy deletion for WebPros because it owns a notable product (cPanel) which is a credible claim of importance. But I don't think it meets notability so I've nominated it for deletion instead at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WebPros. -- Whpq (talk) 17:48, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bonadea! Concerning the newly created article Merano Poetry Prize, I have a question. Next to the authority control database field there is a link to the German National Library. This link is headed Germany but the Merano Poetry Prize is - although clearly a German-language prize - in fact an Italian Prize so the link should be headed "Italy". Could you maybe change this? I would do it myself but I'm not familiar with this kind of operation. Best, Takeru Watanabe (talk) 21:20, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My article was declined again and I am just wondering if you can give me some pointers. I will work on the tone to make it more like an encyclopedia entry but the note also says I need "independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed." But all of the sources cited meet those criteria except the company's own website which is only cited once. All other sources are independent and reliable like US News, Harper's Bazaar and US Chamber of Commerce. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you. Qemorio (talk) 13:51, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

Hello Sir, I have fixed many problems on Sultana Yesmin Layla's page. I have added the source correctly now. Can you or we remove the cleanup tag now? I think we can remove the tag because now it looks good. Happy Editing! SabujHossainBD001 (talk) 08:43, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

sir, i want to clarify many thing about this page. I have no connection to this subject or article. I have created this article because he is a notable singer in Bangladesh. and have a lot of news about him on the internet, and they prove that she is a notable singer, and I also provide many sources related to him. But you are editing this page wrongly, I am thinking. Consider me if I make any mistake. and let me know. SabujHossainBD001 (talk) 14:03, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy link: Sultana Yeasmin Laila

What is your connection to Asiankingboy (talk · contribs)?

What is your connection to Layla897 (talk · contribs)?

Why do you believe that I edit the article "wrongly"?

How do you know where and when the singer was born? --bonadea contributions talk 14:26, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Below I answer your four questions,

1. I don't have any connection to Asiankingboy.

2. I don't have any connection to Layla897. I searched the internet for Laila's information and found the picture and attached it and saw that it was uploaded by a user named Layla897.

3. I made his English page neatly organized from the information I got from the internet. That looked good and was right

4. I learned about his date of birth and place of birth from his official Facebook page. And also I watched some of his interviews. SabujHossainBD001 (talk) 06:31, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK. The Asiankingboy account was created a week ago and, after making ten "grammar fix" edits identical to the ones your account has been making and waiting four days in order to become autoconfirmed, they re-created a previously deleted article, and then happened to find the article you have been concerned with and remove the tag that you had just requested me to remove. Pretty remarkable coincidence. Almost as remarkable as the brand-new Layla897 account happening to upload copyrighted photos of the singer, claiming to own the copyright to them, and your happening to discover the photos at Commons two days later.

Anyway, the article still has major issues but has been improved a bit. As you may have noticed, I removed the cleanup template and added a couple of others which are still applicable. --bonadea contributions talk 14:09, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to Understand.

can you please add there date of birth and place?

According to the source

https://dainikamadershomoy.com/details/01919a2d0ee11

https://www.facebook.com/laila.closeup1/about_contact_and_basic_info

And what about notability? He is a well-known singer in Bangladesh. You can google and check a lot of news you can get about him to prove that he is a well-known singer. and most of the sources are reliable.

The main job of all our contributors is to improve and keep all articles good. so the reader can read perfectly.

happy editing.

Thanks SabujHossainBD001 (talk) 14:36, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And also, I want to know, can we add a copyright-free image? SabujHossainBD001 (talk) 15:06, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

? SabujHossainBD001 (talk) 03:02, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Bonadea! I am new editor and i would like to know why you think my draft on Saint-savian nationalism was written entirely from the perspective of the movement itself, there are no other reliable sources on the topic since everyone else that has written about Saint-savian nationalism were its enemies, best of luck! Draft:Saint-savian nationalism

@Bonadea: StefanJURJEVICCH (talk) 13:28, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, @BonadeaI hope this message finds you well. I would like to clarify that it was not my intention to advertise anything on Wikipedia. After reading your edit summary, I now understand that my choice of words made it appear as advertising, as I was relying on the context of the source. Thank you for informing me, and I hope to improve in the future.🌼𝓡𝓬 𝓡𝓪𝓶𝔃🍁 (talk) 14:57, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --16:34, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello ! Thank you for your feedback. I would like to know which part of article is copyright ? Faridgurbanov3 (talk) 11:50, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The entire thing appears to be constructed from closely paraphrased sentences from the sources. Surely you must be aware of where you got the text from and how you worked on it? --bonadea contributions talk 12:16, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have read sources and then write with my own words based on them Faridgurbanov3 (talk) 12:57, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is possible that you are unaware of what "your own words" really means. Replacing words by synonyms or changing the word order of an existing sentence a little is not the same as rewriting in your own words. Please read this information carefully. --bonadea contributions talk 13:20, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

but I wrote everything with my own words. Can you say which parts are not appropriate ? Faridgurbanov3 (talk) 15:01, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid that of you claim that the paragraph below was written in your own words, there's nothing I can add to what I said above. Did you read the linked information carefully?

Implementing proper security and network management has continued to vex organizations several reasons such as lack of established baselines, thus making it difficult to identify malicious Living-Off-the-Land (LOTL) activities [3]. This in turn makes it quite confusing for the defenders on the network to segregate between an authentic user’s activity and the same user engaging in a malicious activity. Hence, doing behavioral profiling, anomaly investigations, and active hunting for threats becomes problematic.

This is the source. The relevant bit is on page 2. Note that this is only one example. Removibg this paragraph from the draft will not fix the problem.--bonadea contributions talk 09:28, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've reverted the deletion notice since {{PD-USGov}} applies to that document you mentioned. Sohom (talk) 16:27, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I assume you also checked the other plagiarised sources in the draft? --bonadea contributions talk 17:11, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The other source is also CC-BY-SA 3.0, not sure about [5] but I can't find any blatant copyvios from that file. Sohom (talk) 20:14, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your feedback ! I have got 2 sources from S0091 and 1 source is government source Faridgurbanov3 (talk) 18:48, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and I told you CISA and the Symantec sources did not help with notability because they are primary sources/self-published, which leaves Cybersecurity but that one is not in-depth. My suggestion was to expand Fileless malware instead. S0091 (talk) 19:16, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But I think that all sources are reliable as one of them is CIA report which is government based article and second one is verified by Internet Security Threat Report (ISTR). Faridgurbanov3 (talk) 05:33, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello ! I reviewed all sources and I think that all of them are reliable. Can you review again ? Faridgurbanov3 (talk) 09:36, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Faridgurbanov3: please don't start new sections when you continue a conversation on a talk page. Regarding the draft, nothing has changed since the previous review. As explained (several times), the issue is not merely about whether the sources are reliable. Apparently, the sources are not copyrighted, but that doesn't remove the close paraphrasing / plagiarism problem or the need to write in your own words. If you decide to revise the draft, you can submit it for review again. --bonadea contributions talk 12:45, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 You are invited to join the discussion at User talk:Paulina Holzier § Your submission at Articles for creation: James Holzier (September 18). -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:11, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bonadea. Just letting you know about this as a courtesy since Paulina Holzier posted a reply to your post. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:13, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, is it ok now? I have added sources for the negative reviews and deleted more than half of the content. The existing sources can support the remaining content. Martinolau (talk) 19:54, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Martinolau: thanks for your message. Since you have submitted the draft for review again, it will be reviewed in due time – please do not move it to article space yourself. Keep in mind that since all reviewers are volunteers and are free to review drafts in any order (and are also free not to review any drafts at all), it is impossible to say when any particular draft will be reviewed, or who will carry out the review. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 14:02, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @BonadeaThe sources referenced are all independent Indian news articles or websites. Can you guide me on what exactly are the changes required to be made. ARGHJ (talk) 09:02, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ARGHJ: I'm afraid there's a misunderstanding here, of what constitutes an independent source. To pick just a couple of examples, this is a press release, this is a promotional blurb written by the subject, this is a press release, this is a press release or paid placement. Etc. Meanwhile, there's biographical information that has no source – where did you get the information about his date of birth, for instance? --bonadea contributions talk 09:18, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Recently rejected at AFC/deleted at AFD due to WP:NCORP--but more importantly, the draft's "Software review" section cites four reliable outlets, which would have otherwise made it pass under any other criteria. (Or is it a case of SIGCOV shortcomings?) Filing here (on behalf of page creator Janny'sDonuts (talk · contribs)) in hopes that this decision can be reconsidered. --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 02:06, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Slgrandson, thanks for your message. I'm afraid I would not be at all comfortable about accepting a new article about a topic that has literally just been considered non-notable in an AfD discussion, and in addition a topic which has drawn a lot of undisclosed paid editing by a medium-sized drawerful of sockpuppets. I notice that the draft creator has now requested that the draft be speedy deleted (after some weird page moves apparently to try to hide the rejection), so it looks like they are not going to try to submit it again in any case. How come you posted here on their behalf, btw? They are not blocked from what I can see. --bonadea contributions talk 16:01, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I realise it looks like I said that the reason I rejected the draft was only because of its history – I definitely saw no notability there (I think I said something on the lines of "the company is no more notable now than it was 3 days ago", based on the sourcing when I reviewed the draft), but as it has been deleted I can't comment on the sources now. Rejection rather than decline was because of the history of UPE and socking, and in the interest of not wasting more volunteer time on a non-viable draft. --bonadea contributions talk 16:07, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your review. There's no way for me to improve the draft if nobody is willing to explain what makes it a puff piece or promotional or provide a single example of it from the article. How can I see the sourcing of the page that was deleted in the AFD? MOST of my sources are from academic journals, authoritative writers (Chris Brogan / Andrew Keen / Keith A. Quesenberry) or known newspapers and websites (Los Angeles Times / Financial Times / El Comerico Peru / Atlanta) JJelax (talk) 19:43, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was reviewing the feedback you provided and noticed that some of my sources were flagged as press releases. However, I believe these sources to be independent and not necessarily press releases.

Could you clarify the distinction between an independent source and a press release? Additionally, could you provide some tips and indicators that would help us identify the differences?

For instance, what led you to conclude that this article, https://bangladeshpost.net/posts/the-curious-case-of-the-bangladeshi-taka-devaluation-146850 , is a press release rather than an independent piece?

What differentiates between these 2 classifications. Understanding the key differences between these classifications would be helpful.

Thank you very much for your time and service. Here is the link to the declined draft. Please provide me with further help. Thanks. Draft:Dollar Dialogue I will obviously address the other issues as well. But this issue was the hardest that I was not able to comprehend on how to solve.

Supreeth Nagella (talk) 14:40, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Dollar Dialogue Supreeth Nagella (talk) 14:41, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's pretty obvious from the style of the text – no independent source would write in that tone. And there is no named author, the byline is "online desk".

But the question is somewhat academic anyway since the source has nothing to do with the topic of the draft! --bonadea contributions talk 18:19, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest, it doesn't even look as if a human wrote the text, because it's riddled with internal contradictions like "In a world where financial markets are increasingly interconnected, Araf Malik’s study serves as a reminder that no currency operates in isolation." The grammar is fine but the meaning is... not quite nonsense but a bit of a non sequitur, characteristic of a large language model. Of course a human could also make that error, but in combination with other telltale signs, it makes you wonder.

Speaking of independence, Supreett Nagella, are you connected to Dollar Dialogue' or any of its hosts? Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 06:52, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You rejected my Joyride page is there any chance to review again thank you Toblerone101 (talk) 20:30, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Toblerone101: thanks for your message. No, when a draft has been rejected, there is no option to resubmit it for review. The brand is not notable, and there can't be a Wikipedia article about it. --bonadea contributions talk 20:33, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that it is notable to a younger audience Toblerone101 (talk) 20:35, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Toblerone101: But Wikipedia makes no such judgments, and doesn't segregate its readers based on their age – a topic is either notable, or it is not. If multiple reliable, independent, secondary sources have not written about a topic in depth, it isn't notable as Wikipedia defines notability. --bonadea contributions talk 20:37, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your review of my Draft:Thriveworks. I agree with your assessment, and I’ve made significant changes to ensure the draft is unbiased. I’ve reworded and removed content, particularly in the introduction, services, partnerships, and history sections, to address the concerns. I hope you agree with these changes.

As a reminder, I have disclosed my conflict of interest (COI) in every edit summary and on my user page. I fully respect Wikipedia's guidelines, which is why I chose to go through the Articles for Creation (AfC) process. I’d also like to take this opportunity to briefly explain why I believe Thriveworks meets Wikipedia’s notability criteria:

Thriveworks is notable based on the following:

Significant Coverage: Thriveworks has been the subject of detailed and direct coverage in multiple independent sources. These sources discuss the company in depth, requiring no original research to extract content. The coverage is more than a trivial mention, fulfilling the guideline for "significant coverage."

Reliable Sources: The sources used in the article have editorial integrity and meet Wikipedia's standards for reliability. I have ensured that all cited references provide verifiable evaluations of the company's notability.

Independent Secondary Sources: All sources used in the article are independent, secondary sources. These sources offer objective evidence of the company’s activities, partnerships, and contributions to the mental health space.

According to Wikipedia’s notability guidelines for organizations, a company is presumed notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. Thriveworks has met this threshold through articles published by respected outlets such as Behavioral Health Business, MedCity News, and Patch.

I believe the draft now fulfills all of the necessary criteria for notability and presents an objective, encyclopedic overview of Thriveworks. I would greatly appreciate it if you could review the resubmission, and I welcome any additional feedback.

Thank you again for your time, and stay safe! Mfunderburk (talk) 18:14, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[removing AfC notification]

@Significa liberdade: This is weird! I did not submit the draft – it was waiting for review, submitted by Pavolkrisko71, and I just removed some stray characters from the draft template here. I could have sworn I checked to see that the template wouldn't think I was the submitter, but clearly I was wrong.

In any case, it looks like Pavolkrisko71 saw the decline and your rationale, because the draft has already been resubmitted (with a couple of new sources) and been declined again. --bonadea contributions talk 10:14, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Bonadea! I noticed that you recently moved Wikipedia:Adham Yusupov to Adham Yusupov. This was a great move! However, because you are autopatrolled this move marked the page as patrolled. In the future, if you are moving pages, can you double-check to ensure the page isn't automatically marked as patrolled (unless you have patrolled it)? Thank you! Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 18:31, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Significa liberdade, and thank you for the reminder! Since this particular page was already tagged for speedy deletion and I was planning to keep half an eye on it, it didn't even occur to me to check for that, but I'll keep it in mind for the future. Happy editing, --bonadea contributions talk 09:29, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:APPNOTE. Doug Weller talk 14:47, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I did read WP:CANVASS before I posted to the editor's talk page. I interpreted "The audience must not be selected on the basis of their opinions" and "Notifications must be [...] neutrally worded with a neutral title" to mean that informing groups of editors based on their (perceived) probable interest in keeping a specific article, and using expressions such as "I do not believe it should be deleted" with a few bullet points arguing in favour of keeping it, actually does fall afoul of the canvassing guideline. The editor responded politely to my notice and we have had a conversation about it at their user talk page; if nothing else, they are now aware of the guideline, which they were not before. --bonadea contributions talk 14:57, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good point. Posting there, ok, comments not. Doug Weller talk 15:07, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I deleted Draft:Funny Bros, but as G11 rather than G5. I know what you were saying, but since the master was only blocked today and the draft was created earlier, I don't think it technically qualifies as G5. (Or did I miss something?) Hope that's okay; the outcome is the same, either way. Best, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 19:50, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --12:50, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As per your previous message, regarding appearance as an undisclosed paid editor. Let me clear about it, I am not paid editor and I am not charge any type of amount for creation or changes. You are talking you threaten to block me from editing on Wikipedia, not a big issue. But before take any action, kindly once check my article sources as mentioned. For clear in this message, I share the links below, please check and ensure that links given are both those of the Government of India's approved news Websites and I don't know what could be more reliable. Here are the links: 1. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/punjabi/movie-details/any-how-mitti-pao/movieshow/102893449.cms (Times of India) 2. https://www.ptcpunjabi.co.in/pollywood/amyra-dastur-wraps-up-shooting-of-her-punjabi-movie-any-how-mitti-pao-shares-video-416065 (PTC Punjabi) 3. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/videos/entertainment/regional/punjabi/any-how-mitti-pao-official-trailer/videoshow/103752955.cms (Times of India) 4. https://punjabi.abplive.com/videos/entertainment/harish-verma-amyra-dastur-interview-any-how-mitti-pao-punjabi-comedy-movie-abp-sanjha-746955 (ABP Live) 5. https://www.ptcpunjabi.co.in/pollywood/any-how-mitti-pao-first-look-poster-and-release-date-revealed-by-harish-verma-and-amyra-dastur-417767 (PTC Punjabi) 6. https://www.hindustantimes.com/cities/chandigarh-news/amyra-dastur-excited-to-debut-in-punjabi-cinema-with-three-diverse-films-showcasing-acting-range-in-growing-industry-101689869859052.html (Hindustan Times)

I will not edit anything unless you give me your opinion and on what you think the sources above (Times of India, PTC Punjabi, Hindustan Times and ABP Live) are promotional. Please check all related links on Google, Bing, Yahoo or any other search engine you like most.

Thanks & Regards, Masterstrock1 (talk) 10:32, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Masterstrock1: There are multiple problems with the draft, to do with notability and sources, and to do with promotional tone. First, notability. For a topic to be notable, there has to be significant coverage in reliable sources that are secondary and independent. Whether a source can be found through Google or Bing is 100% irrelevant, and what a government (of any country) thinks about a source is also entirely unrelated to whether it can be used in English Wikipedia.

A reliable source (such as Hindustan Times) also publishes much that is not useful for the purpose of showing notability, for instance press releases and trivial mentions of a topic. Again, there are four key concepts – significant coverage, reliable, independent and secondary. (Follow the links to those keywords in the notices you have received on your user talk page, if you are not sure what they mean).

Regarding the sources you list here:

1. Times of India can sometimes be used as a source; a review can be used, but not claims about e.g. box office figures. The automatically generated pages about movies in ToI's entertainment section only verify that the movies exist, they do not show notability.

2. A very brief press release promoting one of the actors in the movie doesn't show any notability for the movie (or anything else).

3. Promotional blurb without any actual content. Not independent, not secondary, not significant coverage. Doesn't show notability.

4. An interview in video form – it's unclear which claim it is supposed to support, but regardless, interviews are never secondary, and while they can sometimes be used to support uncontroversial claims, they don't show notability.

5. Another press release, this one about the movie poster being released. Same issue as source 2.

6. Hindustan Times is a generally reliable source, and the link you used appears to be an independent source. However, it is an interview (not secondary), and Anyhow Mitti Pao is only mentioned in passing – it tells us nothing about the film other than that it was being filmed at the time the interview took place.

Even if significant coverage in reliable, independent, and secondary sources arise found, the draft would still need to be revised to remove a lot of promotional text. The drafts and articles you have created recently are in general quite promotionally written (example: Part of it was shot within the UK, capturing a blend of international and regional flavors, making the narrative in this story rich and dynamic.), and several of them promote the non-notable company Reflection Pictures Studio one way or another. You have stated that you are not a paid editor. The reason I asked about that was that you have been advertising Reflection Pictures Studio quite a bit, for instance in this draft. Promotional editing is not allowed, whether or not there is a conflict of interest. How did you know that Reflection PS were involved in Anyhow Mitti Pao? None of the sources mention them, so where does that information even come from? --bonadea contributions talk 19:32, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Bonadea,

Thank you for reviewing my draft. You declined my draft, There are more than three reliable sources in my reference list. According to this ( https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:New_pages_patrol/Source_guide_discussions/Ghana ) & (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Nigeria/Nigerian_sources ) Like Daily Graphic(state-owned local newspaper), Peace fm online ,Vanguard Nigeria, Modern Ghana etc. In my opinion I think the subject is notable. Can you state the reason behind your decline because I don’t get it. Louisvmark (talk) 17:36, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings. I saw your rationale at Draft:Lifestyle and Mental Health. May I please point you to the editorials section where I demonstrate reliable, in-depth, and secondary coverage independent of the subject? Thank you. Biosthmors (talk) 20:12, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Bonadea, I do need help on improving this article as I believe Mr. Rituraj has been doing a lot of societal contributions through his entrepreneurial and political activities in improving quality of life for youth of India and also providing them lots of job opportunities via SIS Group's training centers. Do guide me how it can be showcased on the page and get the page re-live. thank you

Honestme (talk) 11:45, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Honestme: I don't doubt that he is a very worthy person and that he has made positive contributions, but I'm afraid that has no bearing on whether a person is notable as Wikipedia defines notability. --bonadea contributions talk 19:08, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bonadea,

For the New duplicate content, the Wikipedia rules suggest the following: But somehow, you have declined the old page with more accurate details and coverage from multiple sources( Obviously, more details).

Wikipedia rules for duplicate content:

Duplicate: There are two or more pages on exactly the same subject, with the same scope. If a duplicate article was recently created, it may also be a candidate for speedy deletion under CSD A10 criteria.

WP:MERGEREASON WP:OVERLAP WP:DUP

Note: If you want to demotivate the new users by mentioning self rules above wikipdeida rule. Do let us know. So that, we wont be putting efforts to put details to wikipedia.

Thank you.! Mohit Gandmal (talk) 15:42, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mohit Gandmal: The draft you had created was not an article, so WP:OVERLAP doesn't apply – there's no duplicate article. Why don't you want to work on the existing article? As I mentioned in my decline of your draft, if you believe that the article copied from your draft, you can request a history merge for reasons of attribution. Otherwise there is no reason why any reliably sourced content couldn't just be added to the article. Note, however, that most of the details in your draft could not be merged into the article because they are not sourced, not relevant, or not neutrally written. --bonadea contributions talk 16:19, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There were lot of comments already to better the previous article and it could have been mentioned then when it was lying there for 5 days already.

If an article with no pic and 4 -8 lines is better than the one having more research done, that a personal idea.

I have already taken logs of what accepted and what's rejected. That's logically, clear than a debate on random nitty-gritty. Mohit Gandmal (talk) 16:30, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bonadea, I hope you're doing well. I just wanted to know if you're interested in continuing with SPI clerk training. Spicy (talk) 20:36, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to mark you as inactive for now. If you're interested in returning, just reach out to Blablubbs or I. Thanks, Spicy (talk) 12:51, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, @Bonadea, Thanks for the review of my article, I did some changes in the draft pls check and give feedback for the draft is it following wikipedia guidelines. JesusisGreat7 (talk) 09:27, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comments, which will undoubtedly help improve the page.

I will do my best to make the necessary changes to meet Wikipedia's requirements. However, I find some of the critiques to be particularly challenging and, in some cases, possibly unfair. It seems as though this biography is being held to unusually high standards, which are difficult to satisfy. That said, I will aim to address the issues raised and may remove up to 70–80% of the content if necessary.

I was especially surprised by some of the specific comments, and I would like to provide clarification: Comment 1: The "Early Life and Education", "Education", "Academic career", and "Corporate career" sections are unsourced. Answer 1a: This is a reasonable point, though the circumstances are unique. The information pertains to the 1950s - 1980s in the Soviet Union, where no internet or accessible public records existed. Much of the content is based on Dr. Tetelbaum’s personal recollections, supplemented by official documents like diplomas and certificates. These documents are in Russian and exist only as hard copies. Should I take photographs and include them as images to serve as sources? Additionally, Wikipedia often rejects Russian sources as unreliable, which further complicates the situation. Answer 1b: Even more recent academia and corporate records, especially those for now-defunct entities like Silicon Graphics, Inc. or if you already do not work there, are unavailable. For this reason, LinkedIn can serve as a relevant and open-source reference, as it allows for transparency and verification by peers, including former colleagues. Comment 2: The text is entirely promotional and includes a lot of evaluative language. Answer 2: I have made multiple revisions to address this concern and have removed much of the evaluative language. If issues remain, I would appreciate specific examples or guidance to address them more effectively. Comment 3: The "Awards" section is largely unsourced and includes mentions of non-awards, such as entries in "Who’s Who" publications. Answer 3: I will remove mentions of non-awards such as “Who’s Who.” As for the legitimate awards, please see my earlier point about the difficulty of sourcing information from Russian records (Answer 1a). Comment 4: The list of publications has to be removed. Answer 4: I will remove the publication list. However, I would like to note that this list was included to substantiate Dr. Tetelbaum’s contributions to computer science. It helped demonstrate the tangible results of his work rather than relying on claims. In previous feedback, the absence of such substantiation was flagged as a concern. Comment 5: The "Personal Life" section is unsourced. Answer 5: Personal life details are inherently difficult to source. If this section is not deemed appropriate for inclusion, I will reduce it significantly.

One general observation I’d like to make is that my Wikipedia page was live from 2007 to 2024—17 years—without any significant corrections or challenges to the main points of my biography. This longevity could serve as evidence that the information provided is accurate and reliable.

Thank you again for your detailed feedback. I value your guidance and will continue working to refine the draft accordingly.

Best regards,

Alexander Tetelbaum

Atetelbaum (talk) 00:10, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Atetelbaum: Thank you for your message. Yes, requirements for sourcing in a biography, especially a biography about a living person, are stricter than for many other types of articles. There is no requirement for sources to be available online; a printed book can be an excellent source (provided it meets the requirements for reliable sources), and there is no need to upload photos of pages in the book. Regarding the promotional content and language, it unfortunately applies to the entire text, which needs a thorough revision – it is not just a matter of phrasing, but also of content, in that there are a lot of superfluous details.

If or when you submit it for another review, I will leave it for a different reviewer, so you will get further input. --bonadea contributions talk 11:32, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your prompt feedback.

I am currently working on improving the sourcing (wherever possible) and removing any promotional content. Since I am drastically reducing the size of the article—primarily due to the lack of reliable sources for events that occurred 30-60 years ago in different countries—and removing some sections, such as "Published Papers," I hope this will make addressing the issues more manageable.

The issues with the writing style may stem from the fact that I’m writing about myself. At this stage, I seem to be the most knowledgeable person to draft the content, particularly when it comes to early life and private details. However, I would greatly appreciate your advice on whether it would be possible to change the submitter to someone else within the Wiki community—perhaps someone who has already reviewed the page and is familiar with the topic—once the editing process is complete.

Thank you again for your time and helpful comments.

Best regards,

Alexander Tetelbaum

Atetelbaum (talk) 13:46, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

Hello, does having an IMDb page and appearing in big productions such as Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows, Ted Lasso and Doctor Who not make him notable enough? Spectritus (talk) 14:26, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

		The Articles for Creation Barnstar 2024 Top Editor
		In 2024 you were one of the top AfC editors, thank you! --Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 13:25, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]