User talk:Snowycats/Archives//2020/October

Mark Fried (Music Publisher) page deletion

Hi there,

I'm a bit confused why this latest draft of the page was deleted. The piece was edited to be less promotional and more biographical. Several sources are listed throughout.

If the article needs to be stripped bare to just a few verified facts, I can do that. Could you give me a clearer idea of what content must be removed?

Thank you, Noah Fried NoahFried (talk) 01:45, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

NoahFried, The draft was not deleted, it was moved from mainspace to draft space for further improvement. It not significantly different than what you had in the sandbox 4 years ago [1]. Please make significant changes before resubmitting it for acceptance into mainspace. Snowycats (talk) 01:48, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

@Snowycats understood, thank you. NoahFried (talk) 01:51, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

NoahFried, Best of luck. Let me know if you have any other questions. Snowycats (talk) 01:56, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Black Heart Saints - Article Help

Hello, could I please ask for your assistance in getting the following article up to standards for publication? https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Draft:Black_Heart_Saints

I would appreciate any advice you may have. Thanks for your time! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Athousanddaysbefore (talk • contribs) 19:49, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Athousanddaysbefore, Since February of 2020, you have made one addition (even though it was done incorrectly) of the charts link in a header at the bottom of the article. To start: properly integrate that into your article and re-submit for review. Snowycats (talk) 21:48, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

For Lee/Timchula Architects, what are the desired changes for citations

Hi, For: https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Draft:Lee/Timchula#Added_more_citations_and_articles_mentioning_the_lead_architects_of_the_Lee%2FTimchula_Architecture_firm%2C_which_has_major_skyscraper_and_civics_projects_in_the_United_States_and_China

I have book citation and various architecture web links that indicate Lee/Timchula were designers of major skyscrapers in China, including Shenzhen Citizen Center. This website on Shenzhen Design Specifically states this: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2095263519300913#:~:text=At%20the%20heart%20of%20this,international%20design%20competition%20in%201996. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.23.21.94 (talk) 19:31, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Priwayat - Article for Creation

Hi, I have now referenced two news articles on the subject (both are by independent media outlets, and one of them has the highest readership in Malaysia). Does that not qualify as "significant coverage"? Please let me know how else the article can be improved for it to be approved?

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thoril82 (talk • contribs) 04:15, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Thoril82, Please review all of the links in the reason for the decline and you will find the standard we require is significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources Snowycats (talk) 04:19, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Resubmitted Black Heart Saints article

Hi Snowycats, I've edited and resubmitted based on your suggestions. Thanks so much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Athousanddaysbefore (talk • contribs) 15:59, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Athousanddaysbefore, Hi there. As the submission was rejected, you are actually unable to resubmit it right now. I do not see any revisions that would indicate notability. The only change that you have made is removing the note from the bottom of the article. Snowycats (talk) 17:22, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Would I be able to delete the page and submit again? The previous reviewer made a comment that suggested that the Austin Chronicle award/story did in fact give notability to the subject matter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Athousanddaysbefore (talk • contribs) 16:47, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Athousanddaysbefore, Responded to you over at the help desk. Snowycats (talk) 18:42, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Resubmitted Bowery Wall article

Resubmitted the Houston Bowery Wall article with additional info + resources to better show significance in art and culture.

https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Draft:The_Houston_Bowery_Wall — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hypnotoad78 (talk • contribs) 00:34, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

draft Whitechapel Centre

Hey there. I've only just started editing and writing on Wikipedia so I wanted to choose a charity or organisation to practice writing a page. I read over the links page some more and I think I can see where I went wrong now. Please could you advise me where I went wrong? I feel like I need more sources that aren't from the Whitechapel website but can you confirm my thinking is correct here? Also, should I use more than one hyperlink back to the official page or not? I'm really eager to learn because I love using Wikipedia and think it would be great to contribute regularly providing I can get it right. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eh1294 (talk • contribs) 09:44, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Hey, it says you made an edit a few second ago, but I can't see anything yet. I'm going to look for some more sources now to confirm the information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eh1294 (talk • contribs) 10:25, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Hey there, I've added some more external sources. I will keep looking and trying to make this better but please do directly let me know so I can learn and make articles better, thanks :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eh1294 (talk • contribs) 10:45, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Hey Snowycats, hope you are well. I noticed the article was declined again and i'd like to know why. The Whitechapel Centre is a prominent charity and it is included in lots of local news articles and websites. I can't find anything to verify the history outside of their website, so I'm going to go ahead and remove this. I did think that because it was verified by a directgov website (UK Government/Council) this information would be considered verified but after reading wikipedia's citation information again, I think maybe it is right that it should be deleted. I'd love to hear your thoughts on this though. I am not sure how much more neutral I can get than using news articles though to report on a charity. please can you advise me on this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eh1294 (talk • contribs) 13:29, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Snowycats, Thanks for the quick response. Regarding the "Michal Alberstein" text, I'd be glad for more specific advice on citations and tone. The citations include a European Union article on Michal Alberstein, two university websites (European University Institute and Bar Ilan), and journal articles in reliable sources, such as Harvard Negotiation Journal, and more. Please also help me understand where the tone is not neutral. Thank you for your help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amirnofit (talk • contribs) 12:16, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Draft:List of Digimon Adventure (2020 TV series) characters

Hello, I read the comment, but I must admit I need help, please. Thank you. Fico Puricelli (talk) 19:59, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Fico Puricelli, As per the other reviewer's comments: Separate articles for TV characters are only created when there is substantial reliable source commentary on the characters e.g. if there is a body of critical literature (from newspapers or journals) analysing the characters and/or a substantial amount of detail about the characters' inspirations or other behind-the-scenes info from the creators, widely covered in secondary sources. Wikipedia is not the place for a list of all characters of a show (try Wikia, with no notability requirements for fan content). Snowycats (talk) 23:11, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination

A tag has been placed on User:King Rudra requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Snowycats (talk) 04:48, 26 October 2020 (UTC) King Rudra (talk) 04:53, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Request on 10:10:58, 26 October 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by WikiCpa

• WikiCpa (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Vijey Kumar Ghai (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi, Could you indicate which of the Sources you find as not Reliable and which ones you consider Not verifiable. The main part of the article which is the Indo-Pakistani War and the subjects participation and notability in it is supported by 3 published sources which includes the official record of the Indian Army. That way, perhaps, we can remove the part you consider not supported and leave in the part that you consider supported. Thank you for your assistance. 

WikiCpa (talk) 10:10, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Draft: R. Parameswaran

Thank you for taking the time to review this article twice and for your helpful feedback, as this is my first article. The tone was moderated in the following ways: (1) I removed the statement that the book was "well received" even though this is born out by the reviews. (2) I removed the quote from the Washington Post review that said the writing in the book was "masterful". Now every quote or fact about the author or his work is cited and accurately reflects the source. I have taken efforts not to misrepresent the sources or the picture painted by the totality of the sources cited. And there are no opinions or assessments of my own in the article; everything is cited. As such, I am not sure what more I should do to moderate the tone. I would be grateful for any specific suggestions you may have that you think could improve the article, and I would be happy to make further edits. Thank you again for your time and much appreciated feedback! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bigsamosa (talk • contribs) 12:13, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for reviewing the article JioNews Help Needed

Hi Snowycats, I read your feedback related to my JioNews article. The last edit was made from a neutral point of view. According to me, the references which I have added to the article are reliable sources that are independent of the subject. If the references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article, I would request you to highlight the content or the references which are creating obstacles for getting my article approved. Rohit TrivediWP (talk) 10:49, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Baked Alaska

The user CozyandDozy made an unsourced edit in which he claims an individual is a "neo-nazi" with no substantiate source. Looking at his history of edits in Wikipedia it appears his primary purpose is defame people. The edit i made was consistent with the sources of the article and will be reverting it. Druaga18 (talk) 17:26, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Druaga18, Thanks for clarifying! :) "no reason given for the undo" lacked detail so I was hoping you could further justify. Snowycats (talk) 17:34, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Hey. I saw your message about the 2020 Pittsburgh Steelers season about the removal of edits for no apparent reason. Sorry about that, I edited that on my phone and didn't look like it went through, so I tried doing it again, and I didn't understand. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.88.24.182 (talk) 20:28, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Response to issues

Thank you for your commitment to upholding Wikipedia norms. Very much appreciate your scrupulous behavior and fair and reasonable attitude. Publius In The 21st Century (talk) 05:30, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

The proposed article does not have sufficient content to require an article of its own, but it could be merged into the existing article at Dwayne Fields.

Hi Snowycats. Thank you for your comments. What do you mean with the statement above? And by merging, do you mean uploading information on the website? When writing, I read through a number of explorer's pages and followed the same format to write this. Plus, Dwayne has been under fire for a comment he made regarding the black rural UK, which is why I decided to write this page as I believe it could help me learn a few things. Please advice.

Thanks. Elishama Elishama Kaunda (talk) 07:58, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Elishama Kaunda, You can merge your content into that of the one that already exists. Snowycats (talk) 19:08, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

article moved to Draft:Voice to Service Request

Sir, ThankYou. Thanks for moving the article (VtSR, Voice to Service Request) to the correct location.

I'm just a layman when it comes to navigating in this Wiki World. Hope to understand it in time to come.

Two requests : 1. How to ensure that the concept I proposed is not a duplicate on Wikipedia ? 2. Would you suggest any videos to understand the process of creating a page in Wikipedia ?

Thanks again, Abhijit Rao

AR7777777 (talk) 10:22, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

We don't predict the future on wikipedia or share our original research thoughts. Snowycats (talk) 19:09, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Waiting for Color Denied Submission

Hi!

I just wanted to ask how I can improve the submission for my page Waiting for Color before I re-submit it. You said in your notes that I need to use footnotes to reference the information, which I've done. Any advice would be much appreciated.

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pisatel88 (talk • contribs) 13:03, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Pisatel88, The sources that you have cited do not confirm the details of the longer form sentences that you have written. I'd suggest double-checking your sources and ensuring you are not drawing opinion/additional analysis in. Snowycats (talk) 19:12, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Draft: George Sully

Thank you for reviewing Draft:George Sully. I have read your decline reason and WP:MINREF, but I am still confused about what has not been cited properly. Can I have more specific information on what is missing in the draft? Thanks! Z1720 (talk) 14:24, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Z1720, Read the red box at the top of the page. It has details on what our inline requirements are. I suggest you utilize more of those. Snowycats (talk) 22:54, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Snowycats. Thank you for responding, but I do not find the comment helpful. Yes, I know what inline citations are; that is why I had inline citations at the end of every paragraph (except the lede, see below) and at the end of almost every sentence. However, an inline citation is not required at the end of every sentence as stated in WP:CITEDENSE. Instead, all the information before a <ref> tag is covered under the source in the <ref> tag. If you feel that a sentence contains a controversial statement and needed its own citation, I invite you to specifically quote the sentence from my draft in your feedback.

I chose to not include citations in the lede as the information is included in greater detail in the rest of the article. Although not specifically banned, I did not assume any information in the lede was controversial so did not feel the need to cite the lede as talked about in MOS:LEDE. Again, if there was a specific sentence or fact that should have an inline citation, then I invite editors to specifically quote it in their feedback.

I felt the feedback you provided was condescending towards me and unhelpful. Wikipedia is a collaborative project and it is difficult to collaborate if there is not clear, specific feedback from other editors on what needs to change. What I was looking for was a specific example from the draft that needed an inline citation, but the response asked me to "read the red box" (which assumes that I have not read the red box and does not WP:AGF) and to "utilize more of those" without describing where or in what context. My advice, and you can take it or leave it, is to slow down your AFC reviewing and take the time to engage editors asking for feedback and give specific advice using quotes and examples from their article. Afterall, there is WP:NORUSH and we can all afford to slow down to create the best project possible. I think WP:FAC is a great place to find examples of clear, specific feedback.

For what it's worth, I have added in more inline citations and your request and fixed up an area that was grammatically incorrect. I will be reposting my draft shortly. Thank you for taking the time to read my comment and reviewing my article. Z1720 (talk) 23:51, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Z1720, I'm sorry you feel that way, as that was not my intention. Our BLP standards are strict, and I intend to uphold those in my review process of any article that I come across. WP:AGF would be an extreme statement, as I do assume good faith of any user that asks further questions about their draft submission. The way I see it is that if you understand our expectations but don't make improvements, I can not know what you understand. If you take a look, most AfC drafts do not receive detailed feedback. I appreciate your time and efforts to make Wikipedia a better place.

Best, Snowycats (talk) 23:56, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for reading and responding to my comment, and I am sorry if I upset you. I have left feedback for people on FAC, responded to feedback to get my first article to GA this month, and responded to several AfDs (in fact, my interest in George Sully started as an AfD discussion about a different article, but that's a whole other story). I understand that the red box contains a short amount of information. However, that info confused me and I needed more clarification, hence this talk thread. When I asked for additional feedback, I was expecting the same quality that I had seen on WP:FAC and WP:GAN, and maybe my expectations were too high. When I read your response for clarification, I was taken aback by how general it was. When I read other responses on this talk page about other drafts, I was concerned by how short the replies were. It sucks getting stuff rejected and I have rejected things all the time and gotten harsh responses like this. However, I try to give constructive, specific feedback whenever I can. I want improve and follow #4 of WP:HERE, and I want to make sure I understand WP:BLP. However, I can't figure out what I'm doing wrong with short, generalised feedback.

I hope you will take this conversation to heart and continue to showcase that you are WP:HERE by quoting from the draft and commenting to help readers understand how to improve. And if that's not the way things are done at AfC? Well, I would ignore all rules and do it anyways. I'm going to re-read WP:BLP this week to make sure I am following this (very strict) policy in my future submissions. Thanks for your feedback today and let me know if you have any questions or responses. Z1720 (talk) 00:23, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Z1720, You did not upset me, I get it! I appreciate your insight, as well. :D

I will be sure to make sure that I leave detailed feedback in the future for you, especially as you have made an effort to communicate in-depth with me.

Feedback is generally shorter on AfC as the pre-determined feedback, especially for the first decline, can help an editor get back on track for a re-submit. I totally understand how that can be frustrating as an editor that wants to improve their article.

If you ever want to chat more, you can find me here or on IRC - I'm in almost every major Wikipedia channel on there.

Best, Snowycats (talk) 00:27, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Z1720, P.S. You have good news awaiting :) Snowycats (talk) 00:28, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Request on 15:14:21, 27 October 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Kvng

• Kvng (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Abdallah Ougazzaden (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Can you give me some specific suggestions as to what needs to be improved for this draft to be accepted? I am familiar with the linked articles in the decline message but I am unable to map this advice to problems in the draft.

~Kvng (talk) 15:14, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Kvng, While your article may be notable, it is essential to maintain a neutral tone as much as possible. I suggest reading the red box at the top of the page for more insight into rewarding. Snowycats (talk) 22:55, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Snowycats, as I said, I am familiar with the linked articles in the decline message (red box). Can you tell me specifically what set off your WP:NPOV detector with this one? Do you think this would be deleted if I moved it to mainspace myself? ~Kvng (talk) 23:07, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Kvng, Comments in the early life and education section are fluffy and uncited... making me conclude that there could be a COI, but I left it at fluffy NPOV. The career section reads like a resume. Why is every role important if the articles don't exist? What makes them notable? If you want me to be picky: "over 450 pages..." is a bit bold. Snowycats (talk) 23:39, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Snowycats, "published over 450 papers and generated 26 patents" may sound like WP:PEACOCK but it is also a statement of notability describing why the subject meets WP:NPROF. We ask authors to explain early on why the subject is notable. Reviewers and readers want to know. Can you suggest a more WP:NPOV of presenting these impactful accomplishments?

I have deleted the "Early life..." section. Keep in mind that inexperienced and COI authors are often incapable of fixing WP:NPOV issues to the satisfaction of some reviewers. Please consider taking a crude crack at it or accepting drafts with flaws so they can be improved in mainspace.

You did not answer my question about prospects for deletion here. I see this as unlikely and so intend to resubmit and accept the draft. ~Kvng (talk) 23:51, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Kvng, Appreciate your changes. I get the PEACOCK reference, I think it can stay as you justified it, for now. I'll approve it because it seems that the subject is notable at the end of the day. Snowycats (talk) 23:58, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

October 2020

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Zoie Palmer. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.
• Edits: You deleted infobox fields 1 and Personal life content that was sourced 2. Your summary "removing unsourced content due to media bias and assumption" is a both false and biased POV.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 21:50, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Pyxis Solitary, Hi. I appreciate your warning. However, this edit was done after verifying Zoie's identity in the -help IRC chat and looking at the sources. The "sources" were making an inference that she was coming out by thanking her partner.

She is no longer with said partner and did not come out. If you look at the source, it only says that she thanked her partner - there was no mention of coming out.

I will be restoring my edits. If you feel strongly against that, even though the information is drawn from inaccurate inferences, feel free to revert again.

Best, Snowycats (talk) 21:53, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Warning: do not engage in an edit war. Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 21:55, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

@Pyxis Solitary: I would be more worried about restoring disputed personal information to a BLP that is referenced solely to two extremely subpar sources.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:59, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

The information is supported by the sources. Hello! magazine is a legitimate, reliable source.
"3. She came out publicly last year, thanking her TV producer partner, Alex Lalonde, while accepting the Fan Choice Award at the CSAs." - https://ca.hellomagazine.com/film/02014102810886/10-facts-about-lost-girl-star-zoie-palmer . Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 22:01, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Inclusion of sexual orientation in a BLP requires explicit self-identification by the subject, especially if disputed as it is in this case. A throw-away line in a "10 facts about..." or "what you don't know about..."-type articles doesn't cut it. This could probably be reviewed further at WP:BLPN. -- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:12, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Then take it to WP:BLPN and seek consensus that your edits and User:Snowycats are acceptable.
WP:BLP requires reliable published sources. Nowhere does the policy require "explicit self-identification by the subject". Furthermore, the sources used are not "tabloid journalism". Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 22:15, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

@Pyxis Solitary: It is in WP:BLP, specifically at WP:BLPCAT (and the related WP:EGRS). Regardless, I've broached the topic at WP:BLPN so that consensus as to what extent, if any, the material should be included. In cases where sensitive personal information is involved, it's almost always best to leave out the disputed content until consensus can be reached.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:41, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Pyxis Solitary, Not an edit war. I'd consult Ponyo's explanation. Happy to see what BLPN has to say. Snowycats (talk) 22:34, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Draft: David F. McGowan

Hey, so I see you said my submission was not in formal enough a tone. Could you give an example of what I need to change? Trying to make sure this article is perfect enough for Wikipedia. Thanks for the help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.177.150.49 (talk) 04:29, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Brian_C.H._Fong

Noland28 Hi, This draft page (Draft:Brian_C.H._Fong) is my translation from the wiki page in Chinese: https://zh.wiki.x.io/wiki/%E6%96%B9%E5%BF%97%E6%81%92. There should not be major copyright concern as I verified each of the reference sources I quoted and they are all in order. Is there any thing I should do? I am new to creating a new page on Wiki. Appreciate your help! Nolan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nolan28 (talk • contribs) 06:54, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

You recommended I take the dispute to WP:DRN

Hi,

Thanks for your response.

After reading the rules, I’m not clear how to use that forum.

I can prove that two of the usernames are the same person (at least one is a sock puppet).

One username is directing a third username (Using the talk page) to make certain edits to make the write up the subjects activities more prestigious (their word).

There’s been a history of this type of activity since 2013. There’s been a good bit of recent history of the same type of activities including the use of a sock puppet.

I’d speculate that the subject of the article is using paid freelance editors since the two usernames that the one editor is using describes that as the profession. The third editor is obviously accomplished at making changes but the username account is only about a week old and would appear to be taking direction from one of the other usernames.

Are you certain WP:DRN is the correct forum to use? If you say yes, I’ll start the process.

Thanks Fat Irish Guy (talk) 00:16, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Fat Irish Guy, Hey - I'm not quite sure you have the correct editor? Could you please show me where we discussed this?

Cheers, Snowycats (talk) 03:57, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

You responded to the help request on my Talk Page yesterday. Fat Irish Guy (talk) 04:01, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Fat Irish Guy, Ah yes, thanks for clarifying. WP:BLPN is going to be the best place. :) Snowycats (talk) 04:05, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks my friend Fat Irish Guy (talk) 22:58, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Rejected Draft on missing the mark on notability.

Hello @snowycats!

You left a comment on my draft copy (https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Draft:Shaun_McClure) about sending you any marks on notability. Shaun has been mentioned on a variety of websites, that I've already attached to the draft, but you can also view his name on various game-related wikis, for example, Gremlin Interactive, which mentions him as the graphics artist. Also, he is included within the list of developers on the ZX Spectrum Games, Actua Soccer where he is titled the designer, Rod Land where he is the credited coder and, finally, Bubsy in Fractured Furry Tales where he is credited as the artist.

I've also included within the draft links out to magazine articles about him, and additionally, World of Spectrum is a reputable gaming site that has been around for over 25 years, to have his gaming credentials on their website is huge.

I'm new to writing articles but after finding fellow designers like (Simon Brattel & Antony Crowther, that you can find on the spectrum page), I'm confused as to why another designer is not viewed as deserving to have a page.

Any help is much appreciated! Thank you.

Wikisheep20 (talk) 13:53, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Wikisheep20, Many of the sources you used do not meet WP:RS to establish notability. Can you identify WP:THREE for me? :)

Cheers, Snowycats (talk) 04:14, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Draft: Hector Carlos Lora

Hi Snowycats, thank you for taking the time to review my article and leave behind such helpful feedback. However, I am a little confused as to what you mean when you say that my sources are not reliable. I used government and news articles. Is there any that seems to be particularly untrustworthy? If you were able to highlight these for me, I would greatly appreciate it and act on it. You can find the article here: https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Draft:Hector_Carlos_Lora. Thank you in advance for your help. LMPAJ (talk) 04:10, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

LMPAJ, [2] is an interview and should generally be avoided. I also don't see how [3] supports the claim he was the first American Latino and first American of Dominican heritage to become the Director. Could you please clarify that?

Cheers, Snowycats (talk) 04:13, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Declining Draft:Maria Svarbova

Hello dear colleague Snowycats,

Thank you very much for quick feedback for the Draft article. I'm quite new on English Wikipedia, but I've already published some articles on Slovak Wiki, so I'd be happy for any hint on English Wiki, which is much more strict.

So I've already fixed exhibitions part as Blablubbs suggested – it was much heavier, but I cut down it to the top 3-5 most notables each year. What is the ideal number for Wikipedia? Because I see this feedback also from you.

And what are the next steps how to change it to the more encyclopedic way? I've already rewritten it 2 times, so I'd welcome an advice or some example from more experienced editors. I don't want to break any Wiki rule, but there may be also a problem with my level of English.

Do you think I should ask for help in LiveChat?

Thank you for your time, I really appreciate that.

Jakub JakubTomis (talk) 21:01, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

JakubTomis, There is no hard and fast rule for a set number. You want to make sure that you throw out any fluffy language that may come across as sales-y. Snowycats (talk) 17:28, 30 October 2020 (UTC)