Royiswariii

If you want to search my archives, just search "From The Vault" Example:From The Vault (1)

GAN for Risa Hontiveros

Hi! I noticed that you nominated the article Risa Hontiveros for Good article status. You do not appear to have made significant edits to the article prior to this, and there is no discussion about nominating the article on its talk page. Current practice is that only editors who have significantly contributed to the article are able to nominate it (see the nomination instructions). I have consequently removed the nomination for now. Consider discussing whether the article is ready to be nominated with the article's principal editors on the talk page. Thank you. Nineteen Ninety-Four guy (talk) 14:02, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

CSD tagging

You cannot tag a draft with WP:G13 if it is not more than six months since its last edit. Please do not revert admins who decline your CSD requests. -- asilvering (talk) 17:35, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

I apologize, but thanks for correcting me :) Royiswariii | D-GENERATION X | u can talk me :) 00:41, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Pang War

Hello Royiswariii, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Pang War, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: There is sufficient context to identify the subject of the article. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 17:01, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi Whpq! Can I at least move to the draft to edit more and to review it at AfC? Royiswariii (talk) 17:09, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

It is now a sourced stub, so I see no reason for it to be at draft. -- Whpq (talk) 17:12, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

This is noted, thanks! Royiswariii (talk) 17:15, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Talk:University of Santo Tomas/GA4

Royiswariii, you opened this review nearly two months ago, and have yet to begin it. In the meantime, it would have been eligible for the current ongoing GAN backlog drive, but that drive has only ten days to go, and the chances it might be picked up if made available are growing slimmer by the day. If you aren't going to do the review, it isn't fair to the nominator to keep it locked up like this. Please post something to the review page soon, whether it is the actual review or your withdrawal so that another reviewer can be found. Thank you for your prompt consideration. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:30, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Draft:List of Project 7 contestants

Hi, the red line of Draft:Project 7 is the seperated article that i am planning to use it for, its not completed yet, but if you want you can help me with the link.

Here Draft:List of Project 7 contestants HongLock (talk) 17:59, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Draft:DIALux

Hello Royiswariii, thanks you very much for taking the time to review the DIALux draft article. I really appreciate your help on improving it. Could you please help me to understand why you think that is not relevant for wikipedia? Please let me know in detail what you are missing and how it can be improved. The topic itself is already present in 5 other languages. Over 400 international lamp and luminaire manufacturers, including global players such as Ledvance, Philips and Artemide provide their models for the DIALux platform. None of these brands would take this effort if this software would not be a reliable and accepted tool for lighting planning and simulation. The article contains references to research projects all over the world. How can the relevance for a mention be further increased? All of the reasons for rejection mentioned so far were understandable, but now there is a lack of details. Thanks for your help! 2A02:908:1C24:5700:2948:7787:EE9E:1EB3 (talk) 08:07, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi, 2A02:908:1C24:5700:2948:7787:EE9E:1EB3!

Your Draft Article has stop to resubmit due to multiple declining of your draft article.

Frist, WP:COI, WP:NOTPROMO, fails on WP:GNG.

Second, because of IP Address edits, maybe some reviewers skeptical to accept it. There is a comment of a AfC reviewer that your draft article sounds like a introduction of a software and it fails on WP:NPOV and I believe that the tone wasn't an encyclopedia article.

Third, As I said you got multiple decline of your draft article and it's still the same what reviewers say to your draft article (WP:NPOV, WP:BROCHURE or WP:NOTPROMO and WP:RELIABILITY).

This is the summary the reason why I stop to resubmit your draft article, I hope you understand.

IF you have any questions, don't hesitate to visit my talk page, Thanks! Royiswariii (talk) 09:21, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

@Royiswariii, you stopped resubmitting because the article has been declined in the past?

This is the reason? Really? Did you see that there were many changes to remove all existing objections? It is no longer the state it was once rejected. I can't understand how you blame the rejection on other people's rejection history. It's about the current status of the article and your assessment. Saying it's being rejected because it's always been rejected is a bit odd. Unfortunately, I cannot see a real reason. All objections raised so far have been responded to promptly.

Can one of the last reviewers perhaps see a positive change? @Theroadislong @AlphaBetaGamma @SafariScribe

I edit the article on several devices and use different networks. (Computer, tablet, phone) This is the reason why my IP Address might vary. Perhaps, I should have registered before but now it looks like registration is no longer necessary for me because there is not button to resubmit any more. 2A02:908:1C24:5700:4CDE:ADB1:3F9E:FD6E (talk) 13:33, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

I closely check your references

ResearchGate is not reliable sources in Wikipedia because some research papers are not undergone for peer review and it may have a conflict, so quickly fails in WP:GNG.

HAL is not reliable too because anyone can upload without undergone peer review, still WP:GNG.

To be fair, some references that you added is considered as reliable as long as they are credibility and significant coverage. Common mistake of submitting in Articles for Creation that they didn't check the sources if they are credible or not, and citing a Facebook, Twitter, Reddit etc. quickly fails on WP:BLOG and it may nominate for speedy deletion in mainspace, in draft article if they use that, the draft might not to resubmit again.

In your case, you have a slightly improve but the sources are still not reliable.

I know it really upset but i'm following the rules of AfC, if you want a help you may go to Teahouse or in AfC Help desk.

I hope you understand, thanks! Royiswariii (talk) 14:06, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for explaining.

In probably all references there are scientific institutions that offer the same content that I referred to Researchgate/HAL for. I prefered Researchgate because it is generally freely accessible to everyone.

You can view the work there even without an account from a scientific institution. Unfortunately, I was not aware that Researchgate is not a reliable source.

If I had received this information, I would have changed the references to point directly to the institutions. 2A02:908:1C24:5700:4CDE:ADB1:3F9E:FD6E (talk) 15:18, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Speedy deletions

You tagged Katie Bales with both WP:A7, and WP:A1. The context (A1) was obvious. She is a law professor at the University of Bristol. As already stated before, please read and understand the speedy deletion criteria before tagging. Also taking a shotgun approach of spraying multiple criteria are not helpful especially when they are wrong. -- Whpq (talk) 02:27, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

I apologize, I thought it was a no context of WP:A1 because of no citations. Royiswariii (talk) 02:32, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Please read what A1 states. There is nothing about a lack of citations. -- Whpq (talk) 02:36, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Oh, so I think it's just failed on Notability? Royiswariii (talk) 02:37, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

The article was deleted WP:A7 but not for failing notability. Please read criterion carefully. -- Whpq (talk) 02:47, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

I understand now, thanks for clarifying, and I will be more careful in the future. Royiswariii (talk) 02:52, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Hello @Whpq:,

I just looked at the other posts here and noticed that it's not just my Draft:DIALux that has received strange treatment. I'm afraid in my case it was also the shotgun approach and unfortunately my article has been finally rejected. (see above) Could you maybe take a look at this sometime?

Please bear with me for still not having an registered account. 2A02:908:1C24:5700:CC68:A30:1014:18D2 (talk) 07:39, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

What's going on?

Hi, I presume you were talking about the plot synopsis quote for Tinā. I'd attributed it to the Film Festival (no author was avaliable) but now I understand that there can be no circumstances a quote of that length can be used for a plot synopsis. I've removed it and rewritten it in my own words. I apologise for wasting your time. Can you shut your investigation now please Dhantegge (talk) 02:30, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Request on 14:05:56, 24 October 2024 for assistance on AfC submission by Iochone

• Iochone (talk · contribs)
  • User:Iochone (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I am wondering if you could help me get an article published. I am being told it is because of a copyright violation but I worked hard to NOT copy the article in question but to rewrite it matter of factly appropriately for Wikipedia. Unfortunately it is one of the few sources foer the information so I did have to rely on its content. Is there something wrong with that? Not sure how to proceed. Please let me know what I can do with the sources for the article to make it more acceptable. I think it is worthy of inclusion. I first noticed a need for this article when I was looking at the wife of Henry Fonda's biography and there was a blatant error linking to an incorrect page so I tried to correct that. Then I found an interesting wealth of information about the topic that could be related to many other pages and did not have its own entry and so I attempted to incorporate it into a new page.

the page I created was https://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Draft:Craig_House_Sanitarium&action=edit&redlink=1 the person who seems to have deleted it is https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/User_talk:Diannaa

Can you help? thanks.

I would be happy to work with her to correct whatever is wrong with the page but I am not sure what it is.

thanks, Isabel

Isabel Ochone (talk) 14:05, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi Iochone!

I check the deletion logs and you have a copyvio and they link what's copyrighted. Wikipedia and Wikipedia Commons take seriously the copyright violation here WP:COPYVIO because wikipedia is a Nonprofit organization under Creative Commons Attributio-ShareAlike 4.0 International License, I recommended to make a draft article here.

If you still have a questions, leave a message here or go in Teahouse there are many experienced editors too!

Thanks! Royiswariii (talk) 14:33, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Issuing an inappropriate warning

I've reverted the you issued as the article had NO external links at all. Please pay careful attention to what you are doing. The number of visits I've made to you talk page about your mistakes indicates to me that you need to slow down and consider what you are doing before you do it. -- Whpq (talk) 14:18, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Copyvio cleanup

If you spot copyvio, removing the link to the copied source and exchanging it for a citation needed tag is not the solution! You need to remove the text that was copied from that source. Thanks! -- asilvering (talk) 11:36, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

Improper Copyright rejection

It seems your recent action rejecting Article for Submission titled Draft:Immunocapitalism on the basis of copyright violations was absolutely unjustified. Every material taken from other sources was properly cited to the appropriate source. Based on your action, you may not understand the appropriate policies of https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Wikipedia:Non-free_content nor https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Wikipedia:Copyright_violations and, in my opinion, interpret very restrictively (falsely so perhaps) the meaning of the word "brief". I will trim the already brief quote and resubmit. And if you have objections to what I'm saying, please explicitly explain what part of what I'm saying you take issue with and why, instead of just restating policy or your reason for rejecting the article. Wickster12345 (talk) 14:28, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Justin Johnson

Hello there,

You declined this draft here with some vague reasonings. You should not do that. Drafts should not be declined solely on the basis that they contain bare URLs as references. While properly formatted citations are encouraged, the presence of bare URLs is not a valid reason for decline. Instead, contributors should be encouraged to improve the references for clarity and longevity, but the draft’s substance and relevance should remain the primary focus during review. You could have just left a comment there. Your decline removed the draft from the eyes of other reviewer who could have verified the sourcing. Regards. Hitro talk 14:42, 25 October 2024 (UTC)