User talk:Mccapra/Archive 11
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 5 | ← | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | → | Archive 15 |
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:47, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
Deletion enquiry
Why did u remove my article Ashish v chuncha (talk) 18:26, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
I’ve no idea either if that book is notable, but I love your attitude about finding out! LadyofShalott 16:01, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
- I'm now, intrigued about this book, it's a Spanish book called; Origen de los frayles ermitaños de la Orden de San Augustin, y su verdadera institucion antes del gran Concilio Lateranense the author has a detailed Spanish wikipage. --Devokewater@ 21:50, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
- Yes and there’s a whole battle within the Augustinians I knew nothing about. It’s a bit like ‘The Name of the Rose.’ The author is certainly notable (I’d never heard of him). Mccapra (talk) 21:53, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
- hi @Devokewater: and @LadyofShalott: I’ve started collecting links to begin building the new article and put them here. If you feel like contributing that would be great, otherwise I’ll get on and make a start in the morning. Mccapra (talk) 20:32, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
- Mccapra thanks for the update --Devokewater@ 20:37, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
"Origins of the Hermit Brothers of the Order of Saint Augustine and Their True Establishment Before the Great Lateran Council" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Origins of the Hermit Brothers of the Order of Saint Augustine and Their True Establishment Before the Great Lateran Council. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 19#Origins of the Hermit Brothers of the Order of Saint Augustine and Their True Establishment Before the Great Lateran Council until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Devokewater@ 15:18, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:43, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
Move to draft
Hello Mccapra, I wanted to talk to you about an article that you recently moved to draftspace: List of nobles and magnates of France in the 13th century. You said that the reason you moved it was because it lacked sources, but it is a list so according to the notability guidelines "Notability guidelines do not apply to content within articles or lists" --Tgec17 (talk) 13:56, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
- Hi @Tgec17: I’ve moved this discussion to a new section so it’s easier to follow. As you say the guideline says that the content of a list article does not have to be notable. What this means is that we allow lists where some of the individual elements are notable in their own right, and others not. We also allow lists where the topic of the list is notable though none of the individual elements in the list are (these are rarer). The last part of the guideline you referred to also says “Editors are still urged to demonstrate list notability via the grouping itself before creating stand-alone lists.” This is expanded on in WP:LISTN.
- I’m pretty sure the topic you are working on is notable so there’s no objection to that. However as the article creator you have to demonstrate notability by including sources that actually discuss the nobility of 13th century France as a topic. Also I’d suggest you look at some means of limiting the list or it will include tens of thousands of people. The fact that not every person in the list has to be independently notable doesn’t mean that the list as a whole can be put together without citing sources. Good luck with it. Mccapra (talk) 04:04, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar |
| I am very impressed with your work on the article Origin of the Hermits Friars of the Order of St. Augustine and His Real Institution Before the Great Lateran Council. It is the best AfD save I have seen in a while. SL93 (talk) 15:58, 14 August 2020 (UTC) |
Thank you that’s very kind! It was a bit of a crazy rabbit hole to go down but quite enjoyable to explore. All the best Mccapra (talk) 16:39, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
- I nominated it for DYK at Template:Did you know nominations/Origins of the Hermit Brothers of the Order of Saint Augustine and Their True Establishment Before the Great Lateran Council. Feel free to suggest better hooks. SL93 (talk) 01:53, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
- That’s great thank you. I’ve never done a DYK before and I’m about to jump in the car and drive to Croatia so I’m not going to be able to contribute much for the next few days. I’ve just moved the article to a new title and corrected the grammar mistake I spotted in your hook that came from the text I wrote: should be ‘older’ rather than ‘oldest’. My suggested hook would be ‘DYK that in 1618 a Spanish theologian claimed St. Francis of Assisi had been an Augustinian?’ But I’ll have to leave it to you to do as you think best. Many thanks for supporting this. Mccapra (talk) 05:02, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
Well done, enjoy Croatia --Devokewater@ 13:18, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
a draft page is now ready to be reviewed
this page has now been improved, take a look at it ant see if it is worthy of it now: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Toshihiko_Masuda — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jetcold0 (talk • contribs) 18:15, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for doing more work on this. I’m a new page reviewer but not an Articles for Creation reviewer so I can’t formally accept this back into main space - another editor will need to do that. However I have looked for possible sources to support this. I’ve only looked in English, not Japanese, but what I’ve found isn’t very encouraging. Following WP:CREATIVE we’re trying to find sources to establish that Masuda ‘played a major role in co-creating’ significant work. That I’m afraid I don’t see. I find occasional mentions of his name, but nothing more, and that’s not enough to support a biography. I imagine there may be better sources in Japanese, but it will take quite a bit to clearly demonstrate Masuda’s notability. This could be reviews of the films that mention him by name; sources indicating that he had some seniority in the collaborations he worked on; other animators praising his work or being critical of it. I guess there is unlikely to be one or two decisive sources so probably you will need to build up a picture of his importance with a larger number of sources. It’s clear that he was in the team that produced all these films but the question is whether his contribution was sufficiently distinctive to support a biography article. I hope that’s helpful, and good luck with it. All the best Mccapra (talk) 04:05, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
Translation from Italian
Hello Mccapra, thank you for kindly reviewing the article I created Tuscan Committee of National Liberation. You asked if the article was a direct translation of the Italian Wiki page? The article I created is not a direct copy/paste article which has simply been translated into English. Instead the article was translated into English in order to assist in the basic structure of the article. The listed sources were then used to expand upon this structure in order to add more depth to the article. Hope this answers your query. Thank you kindly --Domersr (talk) 09:33, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
- Hi that’s great. That’s what I usually do when I translate - use the other language article as a basis, and add other material, sources etc. The thing is when we do that we have to attribute it correctly for copyright reasons. You’ll see I’ve just added a translation template onto the article talk page. Whenever you base an en.wiki article on one from another wiki, just add that template into the talk page yourself. Happy editing! Mccapra (talk) 16:49, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
DYK for Origins of the Hermit Friars of the Order of Saint Augustine and Their True Establishment Before the Great Lateran Council
On 4 September 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Origins of the Hermit Friars of the Order of Saint Augustine and Their True Establishment Before the Great Lateran Council, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a 1618 work by scholar Juan Márquez claims that Saint Francis of Assisi (depicted) was probably an Augustinian hermit? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Origins of the Hermit Friars of the Order of Saint Augustine and Their True Establishment Before the Great Lateran Council), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:01, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:29, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
Re: Here Are the Aguilares!
Hello. Just wanted to inform you that I made some improvements on the Here Are the Aguilares! article that you added some manteinance tags on; mostly on improving the references and adding some notes about its reception. As such, I extend you an invitation so that you can take a look at it and check it out. Cheers.--EdgarCabreraFariña (talk) 05:55, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
Thank you
Mccapra, I appreciate your review of the article on Chilkat State Park and the bowl of strawberries, one of my favorite fruits. I lived on Mud Bay Rd. for many years and climbed Mt. Riley often. It's a beautiful little park and when I saw it was red under the category of Alaska State Parks I knew I needed to begin that article. I hope others can edit it further if they can find other sources. If not it's a cute little article to go with an amazing location for its size. Cheers! Tsistunagiska (talk) 15:21, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
- Also, anyone visiting Haines, which is near the park, has definitely got to try the fish n chips at the Bamboo Room. I understand it's closed temporarily due to Covid-19 (sad face). Hopefully it reopens. That's just coming from someone who grew up there. Much love!!!Tsistunagiska (talk) 15:30, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
Why did you delete all the text from this article, text that was there with permission as stated on the article's talk page? Did you read the Talk:Wentworth Park, Nova Scotia page where it clearly says "Permission has been received from the copyright holder to release this material under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported license. Evidence of this has been confirmed and stored by OTRS volunteers, under ticket number 2020050610005188."
You may have a reason but I don't see what that is.
- No you’re right that was my mistake. Actually some of the language in those sections was unencyclopedic and inappropriate as well, but to start with I’ll restore the version immediately before I began editing. All the best Mccapra (talk) 20:57, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
- OK I’ve now reverted most of my edits. I have kept the earliest ones though as they were removal of promotional and unencyclopedic language/material that isn’t appropriate for Wikipedia. All the best Mccapra (talk) 21:03, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
- I appreciate any edits to improve (or fix) any article I write so thank you. I'm not the best at encyclopedic language either so I appreciate edits for those purposes as well. Ken Heaton (talk) 18:29, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
- The following information is no longer there> Is it really all not encyclopedic? Can some of it stay if it is edited?
- Hi Ken - no it really isn't encyclopaedic! Our articles are built on short factual statements. There is a great deal of detail here which is relevant in a project promotional piece from a design company (length of paths etc.) and things about 'warm summer days' and feeding the ducks belong in magazine feature articles. You might take a look at other park articles to see how they're described. I really think it would be a good idea to leave it alone now. All the best Mccapra (talk) 19:01, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
- The following information is no longer there> Is it really all not encyclopedic? Can some of it stay if it is edited?
- I appreciate any edits to improve (or fix) any article I write so thank you. I'm not the best at encyclopedic language either so I appreciate edits for those purposes as well. Ken Heaton (talk) 18:29, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
- OK I’ve now reverted most of my edits. I have kept the earliest ones though as they were removal of promotional and unencyclopedic language/material that isn’t appropriate for Wikipedia. All the best Mccapra (talk) 21:03, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
Throughout the 1970s and 80s, the park was frequented by residents on Friday nights coming to see live music at the bandshell.
Walking paths
The paths are paved, either asphalt or concrete, 3 metres (10 ft) wide, well maintained, and are plowed and sanded for walkers in winter. The path surrounding the East and Central Ponds is 600 metres (2,000 ft) in length, the path around the West Pond is 575 metres (1,900 ft). There is a large, lighted pedestrian tunnel that passes under the four lanes of King's Road, connecting the west end of the park to the park lands along the shore.
Playground
The children's play area is much loved as one of the only shaded play areas in this section of the City. This is also one of very few areas with benches and available open space. The present Weevos playground at Wentworth Park in located in the east section of the Park, close to the bandshell. This playground is designed for children 2–5 years of age. There are a pair of tables with seat next to the playground. This modern playground was installed as part of the Wentworth Park Revitalization 2004–2010.
Ann Terry Interactive Fountain (splash pad)
The Ann Terry Interactive Fountain is both a lighted fountain feature during the evenings, and a children's splash pad recreation area on warm summer days. The splash pad is for water play and has little or no standing water, eliminating the need for lifeguards or other supervision, as there is little risk of drowning. There are six in-ground nozzles that spray water upwards out of the splash pad's raindeck, following a programmed pattern. The height of the sprays and the number of nozzles spraying increase as the pattern runs. The ground nozzles are controlled by a hand activated bollard button, to run for limited time. The water is fresh town water, the surface is a textured non-slip concrete.
In the evening the fountain starts automatically, the up lighting comes on, and the spray patterns begins, running for several hours as a decorative feature.
Ducks
For many families, feeding the ducks at Wentworth Park is an activity passed on from parents to children for many generations. The park is home to dozens of mallard and American black ducks who live there year-round, and have lived, and been fed in the park for over 50 years. While many residents come to feed bread to the ducks, this type of food is not conducive to the long-term health of the birds. It is recommended to feed the ducks halved grapes, corn, or leafy greens torn into small pieces.
Euromonitor International. Thanks. Please see article Talk/42
Thanks for the heads-up on my Talk page. I categorized the 42 refs (IN Talk:Euromonitor International) and would like to know if the 11 supportive are . . . enough is not the word, since even 22 would not be "enough" but does it make at least a reasonable impression, at least compared to the one-sentence, that it's not as bad as the 2016-deleted article? What made me think of the article was looking at Mintel and wondering why isn't there a counterpart article for Euromonitor. Pi314m (talk) 06:23, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks @Pi314m: that’s a useful summary. Also our article tag saying ‘needs more sources’ isn’t that helpful in this case. It’s actually quite hard to wade through 42 so I don’t think we need more overall. What we need is sources that relate to the notability of the company. For comparison, if we had an article about the Michelin tyre company it would not be helpful to have 42 refs to sources about vehicles that had Michelin tyres. One or two would be fine, but to establish the notability of the topic we’d need sources that talk about Michelin as a firm - founding, changing scope of operations over time, mergers, acquisitions, etc. You’ve got lots of links to sources where Euromonitor’s reports are cited, but that doesn’t support the notability of the firm itself. Mccapra (talk) 06:54, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
Thank you
Thank you for the article reviews. Best wishes from Los Angeles, // Timothy :: talk 19:44, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
Sambandh film moved to draft
Hi, one of the sources I took material for this film was the imdb (Internet movie database). Is that counted as a non-reliable source? Srirangam99 (talk) 04:54, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
Delayed Thank You!
Thank you for the kitten and review of my article on Paul Herman Rohland. Still learning but enjoying working in Wiki! KSS (talk) 14:59, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
moving the article vaibhav saxena to draftspace
Hi Mccapra, I got a notification about you moving an article I created to draftspace, citing lack of sources. I would like to tell you that I kept all the Wikipedia standards while creating this article and used all relevant sources listed in Wikipedia as independent sources for verification. Some of the sources are only available in print media and hindi language which was also referenced. Can I expect a bit of direction and guidance from you as to what all points or things need to be improved or taken care of? The article was also supported by Indian music groups on Wikipedia, though unfortunately, the group is not very active in updating the article. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiloverindia (talk • contribs) 08:59, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
- Hi yes of course. Sources 1, 2 and 3 are to YouTube videos which are not acceptable as a source. Source four is an interview, so also not reliable. 5 is a good source. 6 and 7 are fine for verification, but not for notability. 8 is just an online music selling website and not an in-depth review, so not helpful for notability. 9 I’m not sure about as I can’t read it. If it is an independently written piece about him it will be the second source (after source 5) that could support notability. 10 is just another online sales site. So I don’t doubt that the article you’ve written accurately describes the subject and his work. The question is whether he meets WP:CREATIVE. What the article needs is multiple in-depth reviews of his work by independent commentators. That wasn’t evident in the sourcing and that’s why it has gone to draft. Good luck with finding more sources. All the best Mccapra (talk) 09:23, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
Really appreciate your response, I know this is a notable source and let me try a bit more into sourcing about him. I hope I can take guidance from you now and then, not disturbing your but surely seeking advice on this one as well as another article that I will start drafting.
Bless you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiloverindia (talk • contribs) 07:18, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
Re: White War (film)
Hi, can you change White War (film) to White War (TV series) because it is not a movie.
A barnstar for you!
|
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar |
| "No act of kindness, no matter how small, is ever wasted." Thank you for going out of your ways and leaving kind and encouraging messages to many editors, including me. — The Most Comfortable Chair 09:44, 16 September 2020 (UTC) |
Moving article to draft space
I have been involved with Wikipedia since 2005. It is only in the last couple of years that my new articles occasionally get moved to the draft space. I assume this reflects a new consensus procedure and I don't object to it. Nonetheless, it raises the cost of creating new articles and takes away form the 'crowd sourcing' potential that has always been Wikipedia's USP. I don't see why editors don't try to improve articles themselves rather than moving them to the draft space. But never mind, the point of this message is to just make you aware that the experience of feeling my submissions are unwelcome is making me lose interest in participating in the Wikipedia community. If this is an issue for me, I expect it is also an issue for others, so it perhaps is worth mentioning. --Tibetologist (talk) 12:12, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
- Hi @Tibetologist:. Thanks for your message and sorry for taking so long to reply. I’m responding here rather than below to avoid getting two conversations tangled up. First of all I really don’t want to discourage you from creating articles! I don’t know how things worked in 2005 but you’re right much has changed since then, including the introduction of New Page Review. I guess you already know that if you are a long-standing editor with a track record of creating articles on notable topics you can apply to become autopatrolled? That way your articles won’t appear in the new pages feed and you won’t be bothered by any more reviewers.
- Anyway there’s a couple of things I wanted to say in reply. It’s just not the case that long-standing articles in other wikis necessarily show the notability of a translated topic. That argument is knocked down pretty much every week at AfD. Sometimes a new en.wiki article only has ‘indicative sourcing’ but when I look at the related article on the other wiki I see that notability is established by sustained coverage in multiple reliable independent sources. In that case the new pages passes review with no problems.
- In the specific case of the article you translated on Heinz Schuster-Šewc, the original did not show this. The de.wiki article had a single source, and that was to the subject’s home institution. It’s well established at AfD that this isn’t sufficient to pass WP:PROF. At AfD the onus is on the nominator to show that there are not sources, but at New Page Review the onus is on the creator to show that there are. If that hasn’t been done then the article should not remain in mainspace.
- Stub articles, partial translations etc are all fine and there’s no reason a topic has to be ‘finished’ in order to come into mainspace. It can be developed by others as you say. The big exception to this is notability. We don’t accept articles into mainspace if the topic might be notable. Providing the sources to demonstrate the topic is notable is down to the creator.
- Anyway I hope you’re able to find additional sources and Heinz Schuster-Šewc can come back into mainspace before too long. All the best Mccapra (talk) 03:32, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
- I don't know the relevant policies and ask your indulgence in telling me what current conventions are. My new pages tend to be on niche subjects, because I like to avoid edit wars. The reason I translated Heinz Schuster-Šewc is because he is author of the only Sorbian etymological dictionary. My argument for notability would be. Sorbian as a language is certainly notable. In general the most famous historical or etymological dictionary of a language is treated as notable (many English and Chinese dictionaries have articles). So, the only etymological dictionary of Sorbian is perforce deserving of an article, and if a book deserves an article, then the author must deserve an article. I could of course find book reviews, of the dictionary, or citations of it, etc. but I don't really want to spend that much time working on articles on Sorbian dictionary articles, because, well, I have a job and other hobbies. My usual rule is that I write articles for things that I look for on Wikipedia and don't find, but it does mean that I tend to not be an expert in the relevant area. Tibetologist (talk) 15:39, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
About a page that I edited
I've recently seen your edits on the page and I can say I translated all paragraphs that I translated without any translation machine; I could did some minor mistakes, but definitely not a wrong translation. Thanks for other tag, the sources are not so good though.Ahmetlii (talk) 09:00, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
- Hi @Ahmetlii: thanks for your message and thank you for creating this article in the first place. Wikipedia is a collaborative project so we are all constantly working on articles other people started and developed. We’re not trying to create ‘the perfect article.’ As part of the new page review process, reviewers tag articles to bring certain things to the attention of other editors. For example there is a whole team of editors who work on improving the English in articles that have been translated or were written in English by native speakers of other languages. The way to add an article to their worklist is to add the translation tag to the article. Eventually they will come along and tidy it up.
- The article you’ve written is good enough to come into encyclopaedia mainspace but like many other new articles it still needs work. Rather than worrying about this article, I’d encourage you to keep creating new articles to the same standard. Let others work on this one now while you find more topics to create articles on. You may think the text of the current article is ‘good enough’ but I’m telling you it isn’t. It has grammatical errors and in at least one place it is impossible to understand. It is difficult for a native speaker with no knowledge of the subject or of Turkish to make sense of. As most of our readers are not native speakers of English we have to take care that our articles are as clear as possible. I will restore the translation template in a while. Please leave it there and let others work on this now. Creating more articles like this one - or in any other topic you are interested in - is a great contribution to Wikipedia. Thanks again. Mccapra (talk) 05:39, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
How exactly is it a possible copyright violation for the National Lacrosse League on television article?
This link https://www.nll.com/about/history/ was used a solely as a point of reference and guide in terms of important milestone's the NLL's history on television. The NLL isn't like the big 4 North American pro sports leagues, where information about its media coverage is more readily available online. And it isn't like the words from that website were plagirized or copied verbatim. That particular website may give a singular paragraph as as summary, but nothing too in-depth. Instead of wanting to delete the article, why can't you instead, ask for the word structure and phrasing to be altered so that it isn't so obvious that you think it's being copied? BornonJune (talk) 03:50, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
- Might I add that this site https://www.nll.com/about/history/ doesn't name the announcers, so how exactly am I copying from the content from that there without any additional context? Again, if I just literally look the words verbatim from that site, and put them on Wikipedia, without any thing added or alerted, then I could see your point. BornonJune (talk) 03:55, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
- Hi here is the report on which the speedy deletion notice is based. You can see exactly where the text is identical. If you want to edit the article text to remove or alter the sections that are identical, I’m happy to take the deletion notice off. Mccapra (talk) 05:24, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
- Okay, so I reedited it to where it now has a 34.6% confidence that it unlikely made a copyright violation. BornonJune (talk) 07:36, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
Cüneid Zapsu
Dear Mccapra,
I have notice you have put a notability tag to Cüneid Zapsu. I am trying to understand, why? I am attempting to write about people that actually would deserve an article. Maybe there is not so much known about him but, he co-founded the currently governing party of Turkey (AKP) and was a key figure of the party for years. And he has created and at least co-owns with other members of his family one of the leading hazelnut producers in the world, Balsu. He alone exports more hazelnuts as the very most countries in the world. He is also very well connected in the business sphere, (probably one with the best contacts in Turkey), who gets along well with the Americans (Coca Cola, World Economic Forum etc.) as well as the Russians (Nuclear Energy, Rosatom). As to me he sure is notable, but I'd like to know with what you disagree (or you see still missing) in order to avoid a notability tag in the future. Thank you.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 08:22, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
- Hi yes it’s because the standards required for biographies of living people are very high. Please see WP:BLPRS. The article needs more third-party reliable sources. Just being a businessman who was involved in a political party does not make someone notable. All the best Mccapra (talk) 09:01, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
- Ok, got it, the person itself is not an issue, but the missing of reliable sources. I'll add some sources during the next 24h. More than the one I've just added now in the last few minutes.:) Thanks for the helpful explanationParadise Chronicle (talk) 09:43, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
Thanks!
Thanks for your encouraging feedback about Norma Wendelburg! T. E. Meeks (talk) 23:18, 28 September 2020 (UTC)