User talk:Zppix/2017/April

Latest comment: 7 years ago by Legobot in topic Please comment on Talk:Abraham


Please comment on Talk:American Pekin

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:American Pekin. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

17:53, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

15:10:35, 4 April 2017 review of submission by Millind Seth


Respected Sir, this article aims to provide details of a school existing for over 55 years. The only context permitted to be public and unbiased are submitted in public interest (basic info about an institute). There are similar articles on Wikipedia such as St._John's_Universal_School Kindly reconsider my article sir. I believe the deceased founders of a non profit institution deserve to be known through your platform.

@Millind Seth:   Already done by SwisterTwister --Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ Talk 21:29, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Robert Plant

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Robert Plant. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

05:20:00, 6 April 2017 review of submission by Nirmit Arora


Respected Sir,

This is regarding the draft submission Rivigo. I have cited multiple sources for the information added to the page. The sources are renowned and reliable. There exists sufficient coverage on the subject which can be seen from the references provided. I want to know which part of the article you feel has not been written from a neutral perspective. I have removed certain parts of the article. Requesting you to check it again. There exist similar articles on Wikipedia already like OYO Rooms.

Thank you!

Regards, Nirmit

On declining Draft:V-Key

Hi @Zppix:, I understand that you have declined my submission of V-Key draft page and your comment was that it didn't meet the notability guidelines based on the references. My apologies, but I would greatly appreciate your help to point out the specific areas/sections/statements where I could improve on the references as I have tried to provide several independent sources - i.e. other than announcements made by the company. The independent sources are mainstream media such as key newspapers, online and TV coverage in Singapore as well as Southeast Asia. How else can I improve on the references? I do think it is notable, but perhaps I didn't present it adequately with the right references? Thanks much in advance! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adsiah (talkcontribs) 10:49, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi @Zppix:, I have made some changes - deleted content that could be deemed promotional and changed the references to include more mainstream media such as Straits Times, Business Times, Channel NewsAsia and CNBC. I have also tried to include a wider list of references so that it is not just from one or two company announcements. Appreciate if you could help me review again to see how else it can be improved? Thanks so much!

18:35, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Declined Submission of Draft: Tourico Holidays

Hi Zppix! I saw that you declined my submission of the the Draft: Tourico Holidays, but you left no comment. I am still trying to get a handle on things and be able to publish this article and that it meets the criteria and guidelines set by Wikipedia. If you can advise me on what I should do to improve the article as well as its notability, also if there is a specific concern that you may have about the overall article publication please let me know.

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by DayanaFabiche (talkcontribs) 19:34, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

@SwisterTwister: please answer this for me as you would be able to answer this better than I. re-edited to add my sig Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ Talk 19:19, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Borderline personality disorder

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Borderline personality disorder. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Bots Newsletter, April 2017

Bots Newsletter, April 2017
 

Greetings!

The BAG Newsletter is now the Bots Newsletter, per discussion. As such, we've subscribed all bot operators to the newsletter. You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future newsletters by adding/removing your name from this list.

Highlights for this newsletter include:

Arbcom

Magioladitis ARBCOM case has closed. The remedies of the case include:

  • Community encouraged to review common fixes
  • Community encouraged to review policy on cosmetic edits
  • Developers encouraged to improve AWB interface
  • Bot approvals group encouraged to carefully review BRFA scope
  • Reminders/Restrictions specific to Magioladitis
BRFAs

We currently have 27 open bot requests at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval, and could use your help processing!

Discussions

There are multiple ongoing discussions surrounding bot-related matters. In particular:

New things

Several new things are around:

Wikimania

Wikimania 2017 is happening in Montreal, during 9–13 August. If you plan to attend, or give a talk, let us know!

Thank you! edited by:Headbomb 11:35, 12 April 2017 (UTC)


(You can unsubscribe from future newsletters by removing your name from this list.)

19:32, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Astronomy

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Astronomy. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Request on 10:29:26, 19 April 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by AndrewStocker


Hi Zppix, thanks for reviewing my SafeCharge submission. I was wondering if you could provide an example of a notable source, as my understanding was we'd listed a number of notable sources. Would help me learn a lot about the process. Thanks!

AndrewStocker (talk) 10:29, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

16:40, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Abraham

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Abraham. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

20:15:15, 26 April 2017 review of submission by Sophocles1


I did delete the history section and moved the more concrete facts of it to the acquisition timeline since there was more "mythos" around that than fact, but I'm wondering what specifically in the references was considered not notable/reliable/independent. Among the sources are Bloomberg, Fortune, Gartner, Dartmouth's Business School, Forbes (US & India), International Business Times, The Hindu, etc. and each of them is specifically analyzing aspects of the Infosys Consulting practice. Wikipedia in general is a little western centric, but Infosys (parent) is in the top 5 largest global IT corporations and there is no wikipedia presence for their operating arms except BPO.. It's a massive gap. Willing to change it up of course, but I don't know what could make a more compelling case for notability other than (1) these prestigious institutions write about and are interested in Infosys Consulting, (2) it's a major operating arm of one of the world's biggest IT corporations and (3) it employs over something like 6000 people and makes millions in revenue each year.