Wikipedia

User talk:Sjb72/Archive 9

< User talk:Sjb72
Latest comment: 8 years ago by MediaWiki message delivery in topic The Signpost: 06 January 2016
Archive 5←Archive 7Archive 8Archive 9Archive 10Archive 11Archive 12

The Signpost: 24 December 2014

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 31 December 2014

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 07 January 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 14 January 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 21 January 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 28 January 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 04 February 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 11 February 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

xkcd inspired vandalism

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

  Thank you for protecting all those articles that xkcd suggested to vandalize – Majora4 (leave a message) 17:49, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

No worries. xkcd now has a new comic up, so hopefully it will be less of a problem now. Stephen! Coming... 07:58, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

George_Roberts_(aircraft_engineer)

Latest comment: 9 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hi Stephen. I have had 2 deletion notices on the article George_Roberts_(aircraft_engineer). A very respected and important figure in Australian aviation. May I suggest it seemed a little too enthusiastic to receive 2 notices considering how old the page is. May I suggest that editors may spend their time doing a bit more editing or housework than critique. cheers — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnmarcusokeefe (talk • contribs) 11:23, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

I agree, two notices does appear a bit much. First of all, one of them was bot-generated (i.e. automatic computer response); that was because a lot of the original text appeared to be copied and pasted from another website. The copied text was removed, and so was notice. The second was posted because a (human) editor thought it met the criteria for speedy deletion; it didn't, so I removed the notice.
As you edit more and more on Wikipedia, you will see lots of messages on your talk page appear. The vast majority of these will be helpful comments and suggestions, or maybe inviting you into a discussion into how an article should be written. The most important thing to do is remember that it is highly unlikely anyone is picking on you; they just want to help.
If you haven't already seen it, if you look at the top of the page, you'll see the History tab; if you click on that, you can see the edit history of the article, talk page, user talk page, etc, and can use it to see who did what edit. I'm not sure if you are aware or not, but I didn't post any deletion notices on your page; I was the one who removed one of the speedy deletion tags on the article. If you have any other questions, comments or concerns, please don't hesitate to ask. Stephen! Coming... 12:51, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank You for your reply Stephen. My error and apologies. Thank you for your help by removing the notice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnmarcusokeefe (talk • contribs) 21:01, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Reviewing of page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kc0293/Sujok_Therapy

Latest comment: 9 years ago7 comments3 people in discussion

Dear Sir

Recently my article regarding "Sujok therapy" was marked under speedy deletion and has been deleted by you.

I have created another article with link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kc0293/Sujok_Therapy

Can you please kindly suggest me the changes that have to be applied to this article so as it doesn't get deleted again.

I will be really thankful to you for this

Smile RegardsKc0293 (talk) 08:38, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi. I’m sorry, but I had to delete it immediately as it is a copyright infringement of this material. Copyright violations are taken seriously and immediately removed – see this page for more details. Please note that there is also an issue with regards to it being non-notable and possibly even Original Research; both of these are grounds enough for deletion. Stephen! Coming... 08:49, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
If you believe you can turn this into an article suitable for Wikipedia, then by all means write it out in your own words, but I must caution you that I have my doubts that it is likely. Sorry! Stephen! Coming... 08:50, 19 February 2015 (UTC)


Thank you very much for your guidance.

But i would like to draw your attention to the fact that I had first created a wikipedia page on Sujok Therapy on 18 Feb 2015 at 0930hrs GMT which was deleted after about 10 hrs. [1] but the first post on this website for the same material was first published at 10:55 PM (IST) yesterday.

You can see their blog yourself

They have copied my material and now since my first page was deleted now I am unable to repost my material.

Please kindly look into this matter.

I will be really thankful to you for this

Smile RegardsKc0293 (talk) 09:19, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for pointing out the timings; I accept that copyright is not an issue, as far as the blog is the case. However, there still may be copyright isssues with regards to the source of the original text. I'm not saying that you copied it word for word from the books that are referenced, but it does have that "feel" to it. And that, I fear, is the crux of the problem.
  • If it is copied from the books, then it is a copyright issue, and it will be deleted.
  • If it isn't copied from the books, then it is written as an advert, or at the very least appears to be promotional (see WP:ADVERT)
  • If it isn't intended to be an advert (it does happen that an editor gets over-enthusistic about subjects they are passionate about and ends up accidentally writing something that looks like an advert), then it has issues of notability. There are no verifiable third party sources (Amazon links don't count, and the other links don't show anything to back it up without subscribing to Medscape.
  • Regardless of the above, it is also written as a "How To" guide, which is not what Wikipedia is about (see WP:NOTGUIDE).
All of the above is sufficient reasons for deletion. If you want an article about this, you need to model it more on something like Aromatherapy, which describes what it is about, not how to do it. Please note that it also includes the criticisms of aromatherapy, because the article is balanced. And that's the thing you have to be aware of. If you are weriting this article to promote this type of therapy, you have to remember that even if the article is allowed to remain, anyone can edit it, and should any controversy associated with the therapy occur, you can guarantee that the article will be updated to include it; provided it is properly referenced, you won't be able to get removed. There are no owners to an article!.
So ask yourself why you want this article written - if you are doing it to promote this therapy, then you have come to the wrong place. If you to spread awareness of this therapy, this is also classed as promotion, and you have come to the wrong place. If you want to write a How To guide, then this still is the wrong place. If you want a balanced article about this therapy and don't mind that it will potentially show the negative side to this therapy (and can show that it is notable), then by all means, get editing!
I've not restored it, as I can see that the original article has been reposted. Stephen! Coming... 10:38, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
I've blocked this user for repeatedly recreating a highly promotional article under various names. He takes no notice of guidance, and the text and images are copyright violations which I don't believe were self-created for Wikipedia. This is an Single-purpose account intended only for promotion. Since you have been involved with his articles, feel free to modify the block or remove it if you think my action is unjustified Jimfbleak - talk to me? 11:14, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
Citing the "legal" precedence of Wikipedia vs Messrs Donald, Daffy and Howard, I'm happy with what you did ;-). Cheers! Stephen! Coming... 11:17, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 February 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 25 February 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 25 February 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 04 March 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Providence(religious movement)

Latest comment: 9 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hi Stephen, Do not mean to trouble you, this is GIOS, I asked you for assistance with the Providence religious movement article several months ago. Not sure if you remember, but at last contact I had been temporarily blocked for edit warring.. as a newbie I unintentionally violated the 3 edit rule, which I did not know about, and just wanted to ask for basic advice before proceeding.

My primary concern with this article is that while it uses academic sources to analyze the Providence group, the article takes the accusations and reports of critics and cites them as the ACTUAL claimed beliefs of members--when in fact, there are extensive publications by the Providence group that detail members' beliefs in their own words (which would obviously be very different from what the critics would say).

    • My argument is simple: the Providence article should have the same format as other articles on controversial religious groups, which feature a section on member beliefs and also a section on criticism and controversy, so as to remain unbiased.

Sourcing some of the publications by Providence and Jung Myeong Seok, I was able to put together this brief section(would include full citations on actual article). If its not too much trouble, I was hoping you could give it a once over just to make sure I am doing everything according to Wikipedia standards.


:Beliefs/Theology

Members of the Christian Gospel Mission ascribe to the following tenets of Christianity: belief in God as the Trinity of the “Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit”; belief that Jesus of Nazareth was the Messiah sent by God to save a fallen humanity; and belief that Jesus will return a second time in order to fulfill God’s final Will and Testament. Members hold that the Bible itself must be interpreted, and that the events within the Biblical text do not conflict with science when understood correctly.
In his writings, Jung Myeong Seok frequently states that is not enough for individuals simply to believe or “have faith” in God. Rather, he states that in order to achieve spiritual success, faith must be “put into action” and that human beings must fulfill their own responsibilities before God. He teaches that taking action is the “law of the Heavens” and God’s “basic law of justice.” Members The following excerpts from Jung’s Heaven’s Words, My Words provide a brief example of these teachings:
“You do not transform just because you have heard the Lord’s Word of life. Only ‘those who absolutely keep and act upon the Lord’s Word’ will transform.”[6]
"Even though the air is next you, if you sit still, you cannot feel it. If you are fervent and run, then you can feel it as your clothing and hair flutter in the wind. God, the Holy Spirit, and the Holy Son, are like that too."

'

Moreover, Jung teaches that the extent to which individuals put faith into action will determine success in the physical world as well. He writes:
:"The person who takes action on his thoughts is the one who fulfills his dream. The person who does not take action is the one who shatters his dream."
“A person has both a body and a spirit. Therefore, you must always believe and take action thinking about [those] two things. Then both your body and spirit will not incur losses but do well and prosper.”''


Thank you so much. If its too much trouble to ask for your assistance, just let me know and I can ask elsewhere. GIOSCali (talk) 06:24, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Apologies for the delay in responding, but it's been a busy few days. I am really not the best person to ask about this, as my experience on these matters is extremely limited. I would suggest asking at the Help Desk for their thoughts, or if you'd rather people with more experience on religious articles, try the talk page on Portal:Religion. The help desk is constantly monitored, but by people with more general experience; the Portal will have those who are more experienced with this type of article, and the preferred tone of text to use, but it isn't as active.
Whatever you decide to do, you may find yourself with a differing opinion to other editors. The important thing to do is to follow the Dispute Resolution process, and not accidentally engage in any edit wars.
Do please let me know if there is anything else I can help out with. Stephen! Coming... 10:32, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Stephen, will do-- GIOSCali (talk) 20:34, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 March 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 18 March 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:35, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

.

Carborundum Universal Limited - page deletion

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello Mr. Stephen,

Greetings..!!

As you know, we have created a new page "Carborundum Universal Limited" which was recently deleted by you from wiki.

Kindly note, that page is not created for Advertising purpose.

Carborundum Universal Limited is one of top 3 Material sciences company in the world, having Mines, Manufacturing facilities across the world.

This page was primarily created to express the various material grades developed by CUMI & its presence.

Please restore the page, and also advice which content seems to be advertising in nature. so that we will remove those contents.

Requesting you to restore the page.

Thanks in advance

Regards Sameer Sameer 03:41, 24 March 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sameer.udt (talk • contribs)

The problem with the article was that it reads more like a business listing rather than an article about the company. The fact that you describe the reason behind the article being created as ..."to express the various material grades developed by CUMI & its presence" only reinforces that this was created as an advertisement. Although it didn't show up in the deletion reasons, there was an additional problem that parts of the text had been rewritten from the company's own website. As well as compounding the whole advert problem, it also has copyright issues. And if you own the copyright for the site, then there is now a conflict of interest problem.
If you are connected with Carborundum, then might I suggest checking out this list for more suitable places for a listing? If you are not connected with the company, then please let me know. Stephen! Coming... 08:01, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Deleted page Carborundum Universal Ltd

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hello, You have recently deleted the page Carborundum Universal Ltd with ref to Unambiguous advertising or promotion. Plz Specify the area which appeared as an advertisement. Plz Help in that. SiloniSam (talk) 03:51, 24 March 2015 (UTC)SiloniSam

Please see my reply in the section above. Stephen! Coming... 08:02, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost – Volume 11, Issue 12 – 25 March 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:25, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Carborundum Universal Ltd

Latest comment: 9 years ago11 comments3 people in discussion

Hello, Thank you Mr.Stephen. I got it and I am not connected with Carborundum. The article had only about the company's history and subsidiaries,I don't know where comes the advertisement in that history or subsidiaries. And I would like to recreate the page with modifications. So let me know the possibilities. SiloniSam (talk) 03:55, 26 March 2015 (UTC) SiloniSam

If you wish, I can restore the article and move it into a user area for you to work on. Then, when you think it is ready, ask and I'll check it out and move it if it is acceptable. There are a few things you need to do to to the article:
  1. Try and change the tone of the article so it is less a list and more of an article. I appreciate that this is rather vague, so have a read of the Manual of Style and other articles (particularly the Featured Articles) to get a feel of the article style to go for. Try and avoid PEACOCK|flowery language; all this should help reduce the risk of it being mistaken for an advert.
  2. Make sure the article is well reference|referenced with at least three independant notable third party references; press releases do not count. If there is insufficient references, then the article would not be allowed to remain under notability guidelines.
  3. Keep it balanced. If you know of problems in the history of this company that made the news, then it should be included (with references).
Let me know if you want to go ahead with this, and I'll put it in User:SiloniSam/Carborundum Universal Ltd. Stephen! Coming... 07:47, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Hello Mr.Stephen,
Thank you Stephen. I am ready to work on it. You can restore the article to my user page. SiloniSam (talk) 10:49, 26 March 2015 (UTC)SiloniSam
Article restored. Please note that there is no guarantee that even after working on it that it will be acceptable to Wikipedia Standards. Good luck. Stephen! Coming... 12:54, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Hi, StephenBuxton! You appear to have restored this article to user space without addressing the copyright problem (if you refer back to this version you will note that I nominated it as G12 as well as G11, even though you didn't include that in your deletion rationale). Could I ask how you wish to proceed here? It's my understanding that articles deleted as copyvio should never be restored (because it makes the restoring admin party to the copyvio). One option would be to delete all body text and revdelete the history; another might be simply to delete it again. and let the user start again from scratch. I don't think it can be left as it is (well, it can, but I would then blank it and list it at WP:CP). Many thanks, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 15:27, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
The reason I didn't list it as one of the causes of deletion is because there wasn't any copyright violation, at least not any that I could see on the website you listed in the Speedy deletion notice. The duplicate detection report showed one sentence that had a lot of the text (implying a rewritten sentence), and several other sentences that contain key words of business sections; not enough to delete. Unless there is another website that the text is copied from? Stephen! Coming... 16:53, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Obviously we don't see this in quite the same way. What I see is a substantial amount of foundational copyvio which has been neither fully removed from the article nor deleted from the history. Do you believe that to be acceptable? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:06, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
I have deleted a lot of the history, so that the copy vio material is no longer available. As for what remains, I can see one sentence could do with a better rewrite: ("Carborundum Universal Ltd(CUMI) was established in 1954 as a tripartite collaboration between the Murugappa Group,India, the Carborundum Inc,USA and the Universal Grinding Wheel Co. Ltd.,UK."), which I have done. Hopefully that is better now? Stephen! Coming... 17:27, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

No, sorry, not really. You've deleted the earlier history instead of rev-deleting it, so that attribution is no longer correctly given for the content, and you have not removed the copyvio. Please also see http://www.cumi-murugappa.com/history.swf. The whole article needs to be properly checked. I've listed it at WP:CP for processing, I hope you will agree that that is the best way forward. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:21, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

I think it is for the best that you've passed it over to those who are experts in how to handle copyvio, and I'm more than happy for them to take over. There are two problems that I see - firstly is that I look at the duplicate report, and I can see that it consists largely of phrases that would get used anyway, such as company and product names; if there is a problem with that, I clearly don't know enough about copyvio law to make a judgement on it.
Secondly, when I was looking at comparing the article with the source you stated, I could not see all the other copied material, as it is only just now that you point out the other source. Yes, I can see the History section has a lot of copied text. No, I didn't see it before, as I was only looking at the website you highlighted. It's a shame that you didn't mention that website previously, either in the original CSD, or in your earlier messages to me; I probably would never have restored it. The frustrating thing was in one of my previous replies to you, I did ask if there was anything else I should be checking it against, and you didn't state it at all.
I'll follow the CP report as it pans out, and use their actions to learn from my mistakes. I won't be taking any further action on this page, as I don't want to make it any worse. I am sorry for the error, but had I had all the information to hand, I would have been able to take a more informed decision. Thank you for pointing all this out to me, but please, in future, give all the information. Stephen! Coming... 07:53, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, Stephen. I'm sorry if I have appeared even marginally confrontational here – that is not my intention. Please understand that both WP:CP and WP:SCV are severely backlogged. Faced with a page which is (1) blatant advertising (2) an unambiguous foundational copyvio and (3) an in-yer-face COI, I do not feel obliged to trawl through every single word to establish exactly where it was copied from; that would, in my view, be a pointless waste of time. In a case like that, if the bot has correctly tagged a copyvio I'm inclined to take the bot's word for it, tag for deletion, and move on to the next, even though I know that the bot doesn't always pick exactly the right page. In this case, if I had seen any need to look further I would quickly have found this.
Your initial response to Sameer (who I note refers to himself as "we") higher up this page seems to me spot-on (you mention the advertising, the copyright problem and the COI); I'm not clear why you then changed your mind. You could, if you feel so inclined, save time all round by changing it again and re-consigning this to the spam bin. If you don't want to do that I will, with your permission, re-add the speedy deletion tag and let someone else deal with it. I've watch-listed this page, so there's no need to leave me talkbacks. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:46, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost, 1 April 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Temporary Page

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello Stephen,

Sorry to disturb u again. I have recreated the page,User talk:SiloniSam/Carborundum Universal Ltd/Temp and seems like u r frustrated to do further actions on my page. Please help me to improve this page and do the needful. Just like everyone I am also learning from mistakes. Thank you. SiloniSam (talk) 04:23, 2 April 2015 (UTC)SiloniSam

The Signpost: 01 April 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 08 April 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 15 April 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 22 April 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 29 April 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 06 May 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 13 May 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Amaris

Latest comment: 9 years ago12 comments3 people in discussion

Hello, I'm currently drafting a new article about the company Amaris in my sandbox. Since I'm not acquainted with the people who created the previous versions, would you please let me read the content of the deleted page on 30 April 2013? I want to make sure that my version is an improved one and can be accepted here. If you have free time, would you please visit the sandbox and give some comment, it will be very appreciated. Thank you. Amavie thien.cc (talk) 07:08, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi! I have added a version in the page history of your sandbox. To find it, you can either go to your sandbox page, select the tab marked "History", and then click on the version created by me, or by clicking this link. I have reverted the sandbox back to the version you created, as the deleted copy I put in isn't particularly brilliant (no notability, and bordering on advertising).
As for your article, it is not ready for moving into Wikipedia. I have reworded some of it to make it less like a press release and a bit more in tone like an encyclopedia article, but more is still needed. Also, notability has not been shown, as far as I can tell. I cannot tell from the references not in English, but of those references that I can read, none of them are suitable sources; they are all press releases or business directory entries. For this to avoid deletion, you need at least 3 articles about Amaris that are NOT press releases and are from reliable third party sources. The one thing on there that comes closest to showing a little bit of notability (the bit about ranking by Challenges magazine) does not show any references at all. Please note that this in itself is not enough to show notability, but depending on a suitable reference being used, it could be used to help support a notability claim. You would need to show a reference to the Challenges Magazine entry, either online or to the print edition; a link to a statement about this on the Amaris website would not suffice.
I am copying the above comments, and putting it in the talk section of your sandbox. Let me know when you want me to have another look at it, or if you have any questions about my thoughts. Stephen! Coming... 06:50, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

20 May 2015

Hello, thank you for your comment. I really appreciated your help. Since you asked for more notability to be shown. Can you give comment about these facts and pdf from printed articles? Can they be used to help the article be accepted?

They are saved on amaris.com but is scanned pages from printed articles from actual independent sources, not Amaris' own statements. Hope they will be fine. (I'm sorry because they are in France, I'll try to find more English sources)

  • Amaris ranked as a top recruiter in 2015 (Challenges magazine)
http://www.amaris.com/media/207807/2015-01_challenges_recrutement.pdf
  • Amaris among the most dynamic firms and top recruiter (Capital magazine) in May 2015 (east of france) :
http://www.amaris.com/media/217303/2015_05_18_capital.jpg
  • Deloitte Technology Fast 50 award 2013  : 50 most performant IT firm (Amaris is ranked 38)
http://www.amaris.com/media/108364/2013-12deloitteclassement_2013.pdf
  • Top 100 Recruiteurs in 2014 in Challenge Magazine (Amaris is ranked 80) :
http://www.amaris.com/media/102597/2014-01challenges-recrutement_entreprises_2014.pierre_cuin.pdf
  • Amaris ranked among the best consulting firm in Decideurs Magazine (2014) in strategy&management in the Health, Pharma & Biotech sector. Amaris has a “strong notoriety”:
http://www.amaris.com/media/204009/2014-12d_cideurs_palamr_s_cabinet_conseil.pdf
  • Top 100 of French businesses for their international expansion strategy (L’expansion Magazine, July 2014):
http://www.amaris.com/media/102254/2014-07l_expansion-les_entreprises_championnes_de_l_export.pdf

Thank you for your time. Amavie thien.cc (talk) 08:22, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, but none of these are any good. As I pointed out, they need to be Third Party sources, not from the company's website. The reference needs to be to the originals, not the copies. Stephen! Coming... 08:28, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
Please actually open the links not look at the web address, thank you. The originals are all printed out and not have online version. For example, I have the printed Challenges magazine confirm that Amaris is top recruiter in 2015, how can I show it to you or Wikipedia if I can not upload it to some server? Is the problem here is that uploaded these pdf on amaris.com? Will it be accepted if I post it on other image hosting page? Once again, these are not Amaris own statement or press release. Amavie thien.cc (talk) 08:43, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
Before I do that, can I please check something: do you work for Amaris? Stephen! Coming... 08:47, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
Yes, but I confirm I understand about Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, Nick-D has informed me about this.Amavie thien.cc (talk) 08:50, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
What do are doing is a clear violation of WP:NOPAY then. Nick-D (talk) 08:52, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
But this is just an extra task, not a serious job. An employee want to write about his company, but not payed to do so then still considered as violation of NOPAY? Amavie thien.cc (talk) 08:57, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
You have a financial connection, that is enough to show COI, even if you aren't being paid to write this article. Have you read This Essay? I strongly recommend it, and ask yourself seriously why you are creating this article? Remember, if a controversy occurs regarding Amaris, and it hits the news, it will almost certainly be added to the article, and there is nothing you will be able to do about it, other than make sure that the tone of the controversy is neutral. I will NOT be advocating the return of the article created by you, and I recommend that you find other places where you can write about Amaris. 08:59, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
Ok, I may not understand the policy enough, sorry. In this case, can I request for the page creation from an Wikipedia user? They can use the links above and my sandbox. Will it be ok? Amavie thien.cc (talk) 09:06, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Requested articles is the place to do it. Give them the reference information, but NOT to the copies on the Amaris website, but to the original magazine articles (include date, page number, etc). Also I strongly recommend that you include in your request the declaration that you are an Amaris employee. Feel free to include a link to the sandbox article: I would suggest you post a link to the version as it stands using the history tab, rather than just posting a link to the snad box; that way you can carry on using it for other work. Stephen! Coming... 09:12, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
OK, thank you for the advices. Amavie thien.cc (talk) 14:53, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 May 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 27 May 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 03 June 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 10 June 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 17 June 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 24 June 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 01 July 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Warrior Games

Latest comment: 9 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Stephan, please can you provide a copy of the deleted article Warrior Games? The 2015 event has increased in significance, receiving more media coverage; it now includes the British Armed Forces so has international participants; and the event inspired the Invictus Games; so I believe it may meet criteria for significance and notability, but I would like to start by seeing what existed previously. Many thanks. Whizz40 (talk) 14:06, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Apologies for the delay in responding, but I was away for the weekend. I have had a quick look at the deleted Warrior Games pahe, and from comparing it with Invictus Games, it looks like it isn't the one you are thinking of. There isn't much on it, but the basic description is as follows:
Warrior Games is an American video game developer and was founded in August 27, 2013. The office is located somewhere near or in Baltimore, Maryland. He is currently working on a few projects that might be arriving on your computer in the upcoming years.
If this is the Warrior Games you are after, then I'll see about restoring it into a userfied area. If it isn't I'll leave it deleted. Stephen! Coming... 09:21, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
thank you stephen, this is indeed not the one, so no action needed. Many thanks for looking into this. Whizz40 (talk) 09:58, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 08 July 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 15 July 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 22 July 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 29 July 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Requesting original article to work on for Swathanthra Malayalam Computing

Latest comment: 9 years ago9 comments2 people in discussion

Hi, you recently acted on the speedy deletion flag of Swathanthra Malayalam Computing. After the page was marked for deletion I was trying my best to make it encyclopedic. And, as far as notability is concerned, I had at least put 4 different newspaper links. Could you please retrieve the original article for me so that I can work on that in my own user namespace and get it reviewed by someone before moving it to main namespace? (I was sincerely trying to explain the situation in the talk page, but there is no way to see the response on the talk page. So, could you also tell me what made you feel like the references I had put or the language I used was not enough? So that I can improve it.) --asdofindia (talk) 10:21, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

The biggest problem you had was that none of the references you used were proper references. All the items that I clicked were either press releases, or from SMC's own website. None of those are acceptable at proving notability. If you can find me at least one item that shows notability, then I will restore the page, userfy it and let you work on it. Without that though, all you will be doing is wasting your own time, as the article would never be accepted without it. Remember, to qualify as an acceptable reference, the item needs to be:
  1. From a notable third party source. A respected newspaper or magazine would be a good example; a review by an unknown blogger is a bad example. The "About" page on SMC's own page is a really bad example.
  2. It is an unbiased report. An independent and honest review from a respected magazine is a good example; a reprint of a press release is a bad example, no matter how prestigious the magazine that is printing it is.
  3. It helps to demonstrate notability. An article about SMC, perhaps winning a notable industry award, would be a good example; an article about something entirely different that mentions SMC in passing is a bad example.
If you can do that, we can work on how to edit the entry so it reads a bit less like a press release or advertising copy. For more help on demonstrating notability, please read this page.
If you have any more questions, please don't hesitate to ask. Stephen! Coming... 15:39, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
Remember - one item that demonstrates notability will get me to userfy the page. However, you will need at least three good references so that the article can be moved back into Wikipedia. Stephen! Coming... 15:41, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for that response. I don't know what links you were clicking over. The Google cache shows 14 links under references. None of that is from SMC's own website. I had made sure that the only first party link was in the External links section. There were 3 links to pages on the websites of well known FOSS projects - GNOME, KDE, and Mozilla. These links are proof that SMC is leading the translation of all those projects into Malayalam. Then there were 3 links to Google Summer of Code websites 2007, 2013, and 2014 showing that SMC was a mentoring organization in those years. But I guess what you're saying is that these are not newspapers or magazines and therefore does not imply notability.
Agreed, there are (2 + 3 =) 5 links that are reprints of press release. And one link which is not about SMC and SMC is passingly mentioned in it and another which is about an event that SMC was part of. I understand that none of the links in this paragraph might be useful in establishing notability.
There is only one link remaining which was the first link in the references list. This one, unlike all others, is by a reputable newspaper in Kerala (Mathrubhumi) and is directly about SMC. The two pictures in that are banners of SMC. Unfortunately it is written in Malayalam, which I assume you can't read. But I hope you can see the URL and the tags in the article.
Now I've to find two more links, right? I'll try, okay? Please bear with me if I still find worthless links.
  1. Online Malayalam literary movements neglected by Viswa Malayala Mahotsavam is from The New Indian Express newspaper and compares SMC with Malayalm Wikipedia.
  2. Fight to save Malayalam gets sloppy has a quote from a former vice-chancellor of Kerala University which compares SMC to Malayalam Wikipedia again. This one is in The Hindu
  3. Let us salute the Linux localisers again from The Hindu which says "The Swatantra Malayalam Computing organisation has taken a lead role in growing open source computing in the state"
One of the reasons I'm facing difficulties finding links is because "Swathanthra" can be spelled in different ways because of translation from Malayalam. And the other reason is that Malayalam newspaper websites did not use Unicode encoding in the past (which ironically was corrected very much thanks to SMC's work itself in influencing Unicode standards and creating unicode fonts) and therefore I can't even search old Malayalam articles about SMC. And now the community has grown so old that most of the articles that come are just reprints of press releases.
I keep seeing many newspaper links about SMC getting accepted on GSoC, SMC camp, SMC launching libindic project, SMC celebrating 13th anniversary, SMC launching Indic keyboard, etc. I understand none of these matter when it comes to notability. But I think it's okay to be a bit considerate because fonts, localization, etc is a relatively non-newsworthy topic for newspapers and therefore not a lot of coverage is given to the organization per se, compared to the events and projects. --asdofindia (talk) 17:10, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
I stand corrected about using SMC's own page; I looked back at the deleted page, and I had mistaken the Google Developer pages for SMC as SMC's own about pages. Although, in my defence, they did look like the usual "About us" pages so often seen.
What you have shown me above (and this relates solely to the English pages; my knowledge of Malayalam is next to zero) are links that do not show notability. On another talk page, one editor directed your attention to WP:ORG. I'd like to do the same, but this time to one particular section: Depth of Coverage. Nothing you have shown me gives anything more than a passing mention of SMC, which is insufficient for notability. If newspaper or journal coverage is an issue, then there may be other ways of showing notability, but it will be harder. Once again, have a read of WP:ORG, and decide if it meets the criteria. If it does, and you can demonstrate it, then I'll happily restore the article for you. But if not, then I fear (for the time being at least) you are fighting a losing battle.
Remember though, if you disagree with my deletion and cannot persuade me to undelete it, you may appeal at WP:DRV. Stephen! Coming... 17:34, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
I don't disagree with your deletion. You're following WP guidelines. My disagreement is probably with the situation in which SMC is in. It does a lot of commendable work, but there are no in depth reviews about it (except the one in Malayalam). Maybe I just am unable to find the links. I'll ask others to help and maybe some magazine/newspaper might indeed cover SMC in depth if some community member pushes for it. Whatever way, when I do get some more links to establish the notability, I'll come back to you. Till then, happy administratoring :) --asdofindia (talk) 17:53, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
It might be worthwhile creating the page on the Malayalam Wikipedia, if it doesn't already exist. If you do come up with anything for the English Wiki, do come back to me and we'll take it from there. Till then, happy editing :) Stephen! Coming... 18:00, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
Hey, I'm back (a bit sooner than I expected). There's a page about SMC already on Malayalam wikipedia since March, 2008.
So, I got help from a lot of volunteers of the SMC community to find sources that establish notability. They gave me some articles much better than some of the links I put here earlier. I was dismissing many of them as reprints of press release or as passing mentions. I then read WP:GNG and learned that sources do not have to be available online or be written in English; and WP:NRV which says the topic should have long term interest. Also, later in that guideline it says "whether people independent of the topic itself have actually considered the topic notable enough that they have written and published non-trivial works of their own that focus upon it - without incentive, promotion, or other influence by people connected to the topic matter." I also figured out that there is no fixed number of sources required since sources vary in quality and depth of coverage.
And then I went through all the articles collected in the media coverage album of SMC's facebook page. Most of these are in Malayalam. And there is varying amount of depth of coverage. So what I'll do now is, upload the relevant photos to an imgur album with caption that translates the context and the relevant portion of the text, the approximate date at which these were published so that the long term interest is established and other relevant information. Please do note that SMC is a non-profit organization and none of these are paid promotions or advertisements. Rather, it was the newspapers themselves who decided to spend their effort on covering SMC's role in many events (probably triggered by a press release, but the independ author has done non-trivial work of their own in each case as will be demonstrated below).
Imgur album with title and caption detailing depth of coverage in each
Please note that the above album does not include the earlier most deep coverage in Mathrubhumi newspaper; and another slightly less deep coverage in Deccan Herald. Also, there are no online copies of these articles other than the images I uploaded because the websites hosting those news have changed their software after publication or didn't have online version at all. In case you don't trust me on the analysis of above articles, please do consult any Malayalam administrator or editor you trust to verify. And thanks a lot for making me go through the nuances of wikipedia guidelines. I would like to end with a single link to this article in The Hindu about IDN regime which potrays SMC as a serious organization capable of criticizing official policies.
Also note that none of these are links to technology magazines; but instead they're all links to mainstream newspapers. This, because Malayalam has a very small audience for technology related articles and therefore there aren't enough (or any) magazines writing about technology. --asdofindia (talk) 05:34, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi! I have restored the article and userfied it. You can find it here: User:Asdofindia/Swathanthra Malayalam Computing. As for the references, they do appear to show notability, but you should be careful about how to go about referencing them. I'm not an expert on the correct format for referencing, but I think there might be an image copyright issue with scanning the articles and putting them online (although I see you do give the origin sources). My knowledge of image copyright law is very limited, so this is my advice: Write the article as you see fit, and include the references you have shown me above. Then once you've tidied it up, I would recommend going to The Help Desk and asking their opinions on the referencing. If you want me to have a look over the article as well, let me know when you're ready for my input.
The text, at the moment, is looking reasonably neutral (CSD Advert was probably a bit harsh) but it is all too easy for it to go back as you add more text. Have a read through of WP:PEACOCK to see the sorts of words and phrases you should avoid.
Please note that after all this, there is still no guarantee that your article will be moved back into Wikipedia mainspace, but I will add that it is a lot more likely than how it was about a week ago! Stephen! Coming... 21:58, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 August 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 12 August 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 19 August 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 26 August 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 02 September 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 09 September 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 16 September 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 23 September 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 30 September 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 07 October 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 14 October 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 21 October 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 28 October 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 04 November 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 11 November 2015

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 18 November 2015

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

ArbCom elections are now open!

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:47, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 November 2015

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 02 December 2015

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 09 December 2015

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 16 December 2015

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 30 December 2015

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 06 January 2016

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Sjb72/Archive_9&oldid=1125492252"