User talk:Tseung Kwan O/Archive 4
 | This page 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. |
16:13:30, 17 July 2016 review of submission by HattieWalker
- HattieWalker (talk · contribs)
Hello Tseung,
Thank you fo the review of my Draft --Lawrence "Larry" Watson. I want to point out that characterizing the references as too general may not be quite appropriate, As a social justice artist and social entrepreneur Mr. Watson is mentioned in each of the references I provided. He is often a oarticipant at social justice events, and as such may be mentioned at the end of most of the references I provided. I will resubmit the article and pay attention to your feedback, I am concerned that the references are viewed with an understanding of Mr, Watson's unique contributions as noted in the references provided. Again, thank you for the consideration you gave to my article. HattieWalker (talk) 16:13, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
HattieWalker (talk) 16:13, 17 July 2016 (UTC)Hattie Walker
Barry L. Houser Article Updates (Resubmit)
Hey there,
A few weeks back you rejected my article about Barry L. Houser. When I inquired, you told me that after re-reading, you thought the subject was notable and that with a few minor language/wording changes the article could probably be approved. I do not know if you have the ability to approve it now, but I have made the changes and if you are able to look at this and approve it, I would appreciate that!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Barry_L._Houser
Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tjjozefowicz (talk • contribs) 18:13, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
Submission Review for Article : Clement Dzidonu
Hi, Tseung Kwan O!
I deeply appreciate your moderation on the article "Clement Dzidonu". Kindly be informed that i have tried re-editing the article based on your review.
The article has been re-submitted for review, i hope this time there wouldn't be any issue.
Link : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Clement_Dzidonu Thanks
Kenny Dabiri 22:47, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
Draft HuH7
Prior to development of 3D culture of the HuH7 cell line, hepatitis C virus could not be cultured in the laboratory, which means that the current range of blockbuster drugs targeting hepatitis C could not have been developed. The article is referenced and it is not clear to my why you thought it was not notable. Gak (talk) 15:19, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
Draft: Arum Rae
Hello Tseung,
I see that you have denied my article draft for Arum Rae due to a lack of notability. In looking at the criteria for musicians and ensembles here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(music)#Criteria_for_musicians_and_ensembles I see that you are correct but in looking at the composer and lyricist section Arum fulfills criteria 1 and 4 which are both stated in the article. It's my understanding that this warrants verification of the page? I have also removed certain references that I was advised on the KIWI chat were not reliable sources. Please let me know what else I can do to ensure this articles publication. Thank you. Hyangst (talk) 16:51, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
Request on 20:52:53, 18 July 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Aswieconek
- Aswieconek (talk · contribs)
Hi, in reference to Marcel Sternberger's declined wiki page: How many more sources do we need? Also, are the current sources considered reliable? If there are any that are not acceptable, can you tell us which ones? Thank you.
Aswieconek (talk) 20:52, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
Draft: Franz Fischnaller
Hello, I see that you denied my draft for Franz Fischnaller. I have read the rules many times and I have given good references. I had references from the Unesco patrimony of digital artists, Ars Electronica digital arts which is an established institution in the digital arts, if not the most important in Europe right now, Interviews taken of the artist, books, he had works in most museums in the world who deal with digital art... I have found an extended list of other places he appeared in (so many conference proceedings, etc...), but I don't know... does it make sense to put references to some text that doesn't cover the phrase you wrote, just the person. I really do not think this is the purpose of wikipedia, making a list of all the places the subject appears on the internet. All the sources I have cited are notable from all wiki points of view. This artist is also very researched, he works with at least 2000 students every year, participating in events all over the world, working with scientists, artists and a huge range of people who would search for him and would be a good add to wikipedia. Best and please tell me if you do not agree with something and which of the sources you find not notable --AM0405 (talk) 22:26, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
14:21:25, 19 July 2016 review of submission by Stuartlipo
- Stuartlipo (talk · contribs)
Hi Tseung, further to our previous correspondence, please may you give me an update regarding the review of my article and how to contact an admin in order to have the redirect removed from the current GATCA page. Thank you.
18:30:15, 19 July 2016 review of submission by Spinto94
Hi Tseung Kwan O. I would like clarification as to why you rejected my article for Tim Pickering. I feel that I have properly demonstrated his success as a financial adviser, particularly in commodity trading. I have also provided sources that deem him to be a notable figure by providing a link to a Globe and Mail article that profiles Pickering for his investing decisions. I also cited the decision by Alberta Venture Magazine to consider Pickering one of the most influential people in Alberta. I also source the reputable publications that use him as a commentator on oil prices, such as the Wall Street Journal and the National Post.
What else would be needed to deem him a notable figure?
Article on Gatja Helgart Rothe
Dear Tseung Kwan, I'm still waiting on your response on my article on Gatja Helgart Rothe. As a response to my first post to you about this, on 21:01, 12 July 2016, you said that the amount of referenced in my article provided enough coverage, and that you were willing to approve my draft. Could you please follow up with me regarding the approval and publication of the draft, and any other steps to take in regards to it? I would really appreciate it. Thanks! -- Juan Pablo Pacheco 15:46, 20 July 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Juanppacheco (talk • contribs)
17:06:41, 20 July 2016 review of submission by Afeltner0016
- Afeltner0016 (talk · contribs)
Hello, I have been reviewing the page I submitted and I was hoping you could look at the changes I have made so far and let me know if there are still large red flags. I appreciate you input and time! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:David_M._McLean_(Musician/Instructor) (Afeltner0016 (talk) 17:06, 20 July 2016 (UTC))
- Afeltner0016, the key problem here is that the article is an advertisement for him and his services. To help you get started revising, I emoved the most obvious sections. The key factors for notability as a musician are at WP:NMUSIC. Please rewrite your drat to emphasise the factors covered there, eliminate miscellaneous material, and resubmit. DGG ( talk ) 01:54, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
03:54:42, 21 July 2016 review of submission by Nick Number
- Nick Number (talk · contribs)
I'm not the original creator of this draft, but since I was independently starting to work on an article about this person, I went ahead and applied some style fixes to this. Please let me know if there are any remaining concerns. Nick Number (talk) 03:54, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
17:52:41, 21 July 2016 review of submission by DeyoGlines
- DeyoGlines (talk · contribs)
Hi Tseung Kwan O, it says above your review to ask if I need more help. I did go to the link provided, but can you dumb that down for me? I'm not sure what I'm looking to revised since Dr. Chorin is a published author, can you give an example edit? Thank you so much--DeyoGlines (talk) 17:52, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
Billingham Bags
Hi Tseung.
Thanks for reviewing my draft, can you expand on how many more references I need to make it notable? I ask as the article currently has 10 references, does it need 2, 5, 10 more? I've compared it with existing Wikipedia articles for photography equipment and the pages for Lowepro (7 references), Manfrotto (2 references), Think Tank Photo(5 references), Tamrac (1 reference), Gitzo (1 reference), Hama Photo (1 reference) and Velbon (0 references) all have fewer references than my article yet are approved Wikipedia pages?
Thanks!
Nathenoo
Nathenoo (talk) 22:00, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
- {U|Nathenoo}}., you are comparing the articles on this very specialized small producer with articles on much larger firms. I am not sure whether or not the WP consensus will support an article on this subject. I will accept it , and then list it for an AfD decision, and you can take your chances. DGG ( talk ) 01:57, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
15:14:39, 22 July 2016 review of submission by DatGuy
Hello Tseung. I've recently noticed that you declined the article above, saying 'Some parts of the article have too many references (4 in a single sentence), while some parts of the article are unreferenced.' and linking to CITEKILL. It is not overkill since it cites a reference for most of the facts made. Basically, I suggest that next time if an article already has sufficient sources (which this one missed a couple in products), don't hesitate to accept it. Cheers, Dat GuyTalkContribs 15:14, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
Ajai Vir Singh
The article I wrote on Ajai Vir Singh has been declined because of lack of adequate reliable sources. It was my understanding that newspaper articles are reliable sources. Also, I don't understand what non trivial references include. Could you please help me understand this better? And what exactly should I do to have the article accepted? Thanks. WikiMurk (talk) 16:12, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
- User:WikiMurk, what you wrote was an an advertisement, not an encyclopedia article. You use adjectives of praise, attribute accomplishments to him without specific sources, includehe sosrt of description that would be more suited to a web page, We don't do advertisements. I also remind you that if it should happen to be the case that you have a paid WP:Conflict of Interest, with the subject, you need to declare it ge according to our Terms of Use, particularly with respect to paid contributions without disclosure DGG ( talk ) 04:01, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
03:50:04, 23 July 2016 review of submission by Christian Vallance
Tseung Kwan O,
Thank you for reviewing the article Canton Masonic Temple
You had put a note saying that "More references are needed to verify the claims made in this article."
The problem is that there isn't very many references that can be sited.
Can you please tell me how I would be able to go about finding more information since there is very little written about it In the first place?
- Christian Vallance, sometimes, there just aren't references for things. I notice that a lot of the unreferenced information in the draft is relatively trivial things, like how many people can sit in a room or when AC was put in. These sorts of facts can easily be removed from the page without impacting it as a whole. In other words, if you can't find a source for something, or it's a relatively minor point, simply remove it. It is better to have a well-referenced, two-paragraph article than a twenty paragraph article that is unverified and full of non-encyclopaedic content.
- As a comment on notability - not every building is notable. What makes this one worth talking about? It seems like most of your references are general books regarding Canton and its history; did anything significant happen at the Temple? Is there a reason why this building is special, or is it just another Temple in another American city? If the answer to either of those questions is "not really", then chances are it doesn't meet the criteria for inclusion on Wikipedia. If you want more help, stop by the Teahouse, Wikipedia's live help channel, or the help desk to ask someone for assistance. Primefac (talk) 16:22, 23 July 2016 (UTC) (talk page stalker)
23:39:52, 23 July 2016 review of submission by Khalaf Smoqi
- Khalaf Smoqi (talk · contribs)
Hi, as you can see, I haven't resubmitted the draft again due to the fact that it had been rejected many times, therefore, I need your help; I need you to do the necessary changes to make it meet Wikipedia's criteria. Please feel free to add, remove whatever you find it necessary. Thank you very much in advanced
Please stop reviewing new articles
The tags you have been adding are erroneous,and have consistently been removed by other editors : Naval Consolidated Brig, Miramar does not need context--anyone interestd in the subject would know perfectly well what its talking about, and there is no need for expert attention. The same is true for Fort Leavenworth, Quercus schottkyana and Fruit of the poisonous tree and many other articles you have tagged simialrly. The article on an actor Arthur Kelly (actor) does not need further context, nor do any of the others where you added that tag. You changed kibbutz in Sha'ar HaAmakim to kibbutz (community) saying it was a clearer explanation. A kibbutz is a very specialized type of community, and the linked article on it is the explanation--the term is not a synonym.
As far as I can tell, the problem is at least in part that you may not have a sufficient understanding the subjects of the articles, or of what is needed for an acceptable WP article. . On the other hand, your grammar corrections have been quite correct. Please confine yourself to such problems until you better know what WP articles are about. When you are ready to go further, look for and add references to insufficientoly references articles.It's the best way to learn, and we have a few hundred thousand of them. DGG ( talk ) 02:16, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
NPP
Please completely stop patrolling articles and placing maintenance tags on them. Many of these articles are written by university professors about their subjects and who have neen contributing to Wikipedia for years. Please take the advice of DGG and confine yourself to very simple maintenance tasks such as grammar corrections or reverting blatant vandblism. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 16:15, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
WOW
did you see what varun did? on my draft article.. he copied and pasted it in order to get credit for creating a new article. I am shocked at the lengths people go to in order to claim credit. Utlimately I dont mind since the article will be published. But it is a serious lack of honour to copy my work and publish the article rather than editting the existing draft. I would love your feedback on this. 190.46.24.169 (talk) 21:15, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
- 190.46.24.169 Please assume good faith. I think he may have been trying to do a proper acceptance of the article but didn't know how. He's cleaned it up further also,. I'll give him some advice. I also reworked the acceptance so it now shows on your usertalk. DGG ( talk ) 23:20, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
- Yes I relly did not know how to accept that, that's why I copied and pasted to publish it, but now I know and shall not make future mistakes. VarunFEB2003 (talk) 09:57, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
- Fair play Varun did a lot of good work on the article, So I thank him for the good work. Apologies I didnt realise that he made a mistake with the submission. I now see it was an honest mistake. The most important thing is that there is another article on its way to being created. Thanks to all involved! :-) 190.46.24.169 (talk) 06:17, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
- Yes I relly did not know how to accept that, that's why I copied and pasted to publish it, but now I know and shall not make future mistakes. VarunFEB2003 (talk) 09:57, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
Hello, thank you for your comment on my article. I checked the sources again and the (for me not so trivial mention as it included quite a long paragraph about Once and was done by BBC) was deleted and I found some other ones that state the same facts. Please review it again and I really hope that this time it will pass your review. If not please feel free to let me know what exactly you think is not wikipedia conform. Thank you very much in advance! Lisa wac22 (talk) 12:59, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
More problems
After all the above warnings, you tagged . Old Slab for bLP source and for context. The context is perfectly clear, and it's a type of building on residential estate, not a person. DGG ( talk ) 02:54, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
final Warning
You must immediately stopping tagging articles unless you discover major problems like vandalism or copyvio. For the time being, please limit yourself to fixing grammar and spelling and formatting errors. You're good with that, and we have a few million articles that need checking. It is unreasonable expecting other peopleto spend their efforts correcting your errors. DGG ( talk ) 02:54, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
Draft:C.B. Ramkumar
You've not approved the draft on account of a reference being irrelevant, (your example was '"What is global warming" tells me nothing about the subject of the article') but the reference was cited since I was pointing out that the subject of the article (Ramkumar) was the person who wrote those articles, which is why they are referenced. If I'm not wrong, that makes their presence in the references warranted. Correct? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.51.38.101 (talk) 09:02, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
- Akshaysimp, including an article written by the subject of the Wikipedia page does nothing for demonstrating notability. As a PRIMARY source, the subject's own writings do nothing more than verify that they wrote something. Primary sources are strongly discouraged and should only be used to verify uncontroversial information. As an additional note, even when you are given a poor review, resubmitting immediately without changing anything is grounds for an immediate decline. I am reverting your resubmission and will leave some constructive feedback on how you can fix the page before resubmitting again. If you want more help, stop by the Teahouse, Wikipedia's live help channel, or the help desk to ask someone for assistance. Primefac (talk) 18:55, 26 July 2016 (UTC) (talk page stalker)
13:01:13, 26 July 2016 review of submission by Moswanted123
- Moswanted123 (talk · contribs)
Hi, I used serveral independent and well known, reliable and objective sources in the mbb se article. Can you point out where exactly the problems lies?
MBB SE is a company with a long standing history, revenues and high market cap (with corresponding importance).
Thx, Moswanted123
- Then please include it in the article. I find it hard to understand what MBB SE is when I am reading the article. I need to click onto several of the references (some are in German and I need Google Translate) in order to understand what MBB SE is.
- Several other problems still exist (see other reviewers' comments), but you're close to success.
- Tseung Kwan O Let's talk 14:45, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
18:24:06, 26 July 2016 review of submission by Marianneverrone
Hello! Last time this draft was declined I specifically asked the editor what needed to be fixed and they told me to add 5-10 more sources to increase the notability of the article. I addressed this issue and I am not sure what needs to be fixed with this draft. Please let me know what specific changes I should make. Thanks.
Marianneverrone (talk) 18:24, 26 July 2016 (UTC)marianneverrone
Akash Deo
Hello,
You previously endorsed the PROD for Akash Deo. This has failed and I have moved to delete the article via the AfD process. This is a courtesy notification to allow you to give input.
Thanks,
NPP
You've had your last warning which you have chosen to disregard, If you tag any more articles, to prevent you from continuing, I will be obliged to block your account without further notice. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:03, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
I see no reason in doing so. Everybody makes careless mistakes. Your logic is like "this guy made a few careless mistakes out of 2500 edits and he's only a user. Let me block him! Hahaha!".
Blocking somebody is not the correct way to solve problems. It is simply illogical to block a uesr because he made a few careless mistakes with tagging. People learn from mistakes, and these mistakes are easily fixable on wikipedia. Just click undo and state why. DONE!
You're simply demanding that I stop all tagging, which I believe to be wrong. Avoidance is not how problems are solved, both in real life and in wikipedia. That is not logical nor civil, and not the way wikipedia works. Use reason, not admin power. That's all I would like to tel you, Mr Kudpung.
And please don't pick on somebody's edit records. There are far more meaningful things you can do out there. For instance, try investigating into the page called "Andy Loo" first. You'll discover a big chain of problems. Not just with that page alone, but with the frequent editors of that page, and the page that link to that page. And there's more underlying. With your admin power, it should be easy for you, Mr Kudpung. Tseung Kwan O Let's talk 12:46, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
- Tseung Kwan O, I really think you need to rethink your approach to Wikipedia. You've had lots of complaints about your tagging, but you're acting as if there's no big deal about it. Well, if this many people are objecting, it IS a big deal. The point comes that an editor's mistakes are sufficiently disruptive that they outweigh the good that editor does. Please scale back a bit. Take some more time to learn how to do these things well. Then we won't have to be here. I'd hate for such a cool username to go to waste. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 03:37, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks for all your comments, both appreciations and negative criticisms. I am making progress.
Tseung Kwan O Let's talk 12:28, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
WP:SIGAPP
While, we're making progress here, I'd ask that you consider changing the appearance of your current signature, which, in its yellow iteration, is not easily readable -- at least to my eyes -- as is required by WP:SIGAPP. I see you only switched to yellow recently and seem to still be experimenting. Please consider changing it back, Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:05, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
- OK! (default setting is set to be red. yellow is manual change for each individual signature)
Tseung Kwan O Let's talk 15:39, 1 August 2016 (UTC)