User talk:Jbonapar

Welcome! (We can't say that loudly enough!)

Hello, Jbonapar, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

If you have any questions or problems, no matter what they are, leave me a message on my talk page. Or, please come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{Help me}} on your user talk page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

Please sign your name on talk pages and votes by typing four tildes (~~~~); our software automatically converts it to your username and the date. We're so glad you're here! Meatsgains^(talk) 02:45, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Meatsgains thank you for the advice! I have made changes to the ref styles, i'm curious if you think this is sufficient and improved the page. Jbonapar (talk) 13:24, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't double-checked all of Bearcat's detailed analysis at the deletion discussion, but if that's accurate, then no, the page hasn't been improved sufficiently to be kept (and further changes to the reference styles wouldn't help when notability is the issue). The current references look good to me as far as the formatting goes, but again, see Bearcat's analysis regarding the quality of the references. Those I checked indeed looked not all that good to me. And there's quite a bit of unreferenced content, too. Meatsgains may have additional comments. Huon (talk) 22:08, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I must respectfully disagree. References like, "Comeherefloyd" is considered one of the top 100 Music blogs in North America. Ottawa Life is one of Canada's capitals top local magazines. the band has appeared on charts across Canada, nationally which is one of the guidlines for wikipedia. If you follow wikipedias guidlines, the band fits the criteria easily. Just tonight, they are being played in Virginia, USA and the UK. Just because a website isn't as large as Rolling Stone, doesn't mean they are inconsequential. As mentioned in the article, the band plays with and is releasing an album with a international music star and oscar nominated composer, Sune Rose Wagner. Thus, I strongly disagree with the notion that it is unnotable. Jbonapar (talk) 22:39, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Paragon Cause for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Paragon Cause is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paragon Cause until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. — Jeff G. ツ 08:12, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, im curious why this nominated for deletion, this band fits the guidelines, it includes Sune rose wagners new project, an international music icon. Jbonapar (talk) 11:40, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Jbonapar. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the page Paragon Cause, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. — Jeff G. ツ 08:13, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

HI jeff, I'm happy to disclose a conflict of interest if that is appropriate. My goal was to provide an unbiased article on the band. I've published over 30 peer-reviewed medical articles and have firm understanding of this process, including disclosure of conflicts of interest. Dr Bonapartes Peer Reviewed Articles

I am looking into doing that, but I honestly think, given the circumstances, this article should stay up. I am helping this band with promotion right now, with my writting and research skills. I believe that they meet the criteria for inclusion on Wikipedia, I wrote the article with care to seem impartial and not 'promote' the band but state facts. I went and made a few edits to try to make it appear as impartial as possible. I am more than happy to alter/delete anything that appears in any way as self promotion. I think it can be a channege between making the article so that all the facts are stated to assure inclusion and at the same time, limit self promotion and or promotion. I am not owned, paid or anything by the band, just helping. I am the brother of the Creator of The Night Time Podcast, hence my association.

I'm going to look at how to disclose any conflict of interest and insert that. Jbonapar (talk) 12:46, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Also of note, I am unpaid and do not recieve any financial compensation nor do I have any financial interest, just helping out with writting and organization skills. I'm trying to figure out how I fully disclose a conflict of interest. I have things inserted, But I am not sure if I need to 'describe" the COI somewhere. Still looking on Wikipedia for that information. Jbonapar (talk) 16:16, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: The Night Time Podcast (March 31)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by SamHolt6 was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of websites). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Not seeing the necessary, in-depth sources needed to establish the subject as notable. Too many of the sources cited make only passing/trivial mention of the podcast, and the Corus sources is a standard press-release concerning a recently-acquired property, putting it in WP:PRIMARY territory. More in-depth sources detailing the actual podcast, preferably at the regional, national, or international level would be needed to accept this.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

I am not sure what type of articles you deem appropriate, there is a full article from The Cape Breton Post, a newspaper From Cape Breton, Nova Scotia, an article from The Chronicle Herald, a newspaper from Halifax, Nova Scotia. Vice Media. The podcast is one of the top 50 POdcasts in North America. Can you provide an example of what you would like? Jbonapar (talk) 13:29, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:The Night Time Podcast and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:The Night Time Podcast, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and will be deleted.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

SamHolt6 (talk) 04:11, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jbonapar! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! SamHolt6 (talk) 04:11, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to the submission and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and will be deleted.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Jbonapar (talk) 17:28, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia isn't Social Media

And nobody "posts" "pages" to it. It's an encyclopedia of notable topics, editable by anyone with access to WP:Reliable sources.--Quisqualis (talk) 00:30, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, I'm not sure what you are referring to. Just a bit of background, I'm a surgeon with over 32 peer reviewed publications.. Can you please let me know what you are referring to, or is this passive aggressive? Jbonapar (talk) 01:47, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: The Night Time Podcast has been accepted

The Night Time Podcast, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Hell in a Bucket (talk) 01:04, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Paragon cause

Hello Jbonapar,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Paragon cause for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly indicate why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

CentreLeftRight ✉ 05:12, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, im not sure why ypi marked this? It fits the guidelines for Wikipedia, the band ia the new project that includes Sune Rose Wagner of The Raveonettes, he is an international rock icon and even has his own personal page as well as multiple other band pages? I think this is in error, he is very notable and should be included Jbonapar (talk) 11:44, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is it possible to get this set up easily again if this is in error? Jbonapar (talk) 11:45, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Paragon Cause for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Paragon Cause is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paragon Cause (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Bearcat (talk) 17:28, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Paragon Cause

Firstly, the article did not say that Sune Rose Wagner is a permanent member of Paragon Cause — it just said he produced an album, which is not the same thing as being an actual member of the band, and working with a notable producer is not in and of itself a notability criterion under WP:NMUSIC. And even if the article was just badly worded and he really is an actual member of the band, that still wouldn't be a notability clincher — NMUSIC's test for "notable because it has members who were already individually notable for other reasons" requires the band to have at least two members who can say that, not just one.

Secondly, playlisting on individual radio stations is also not a notability criterion; to be notable because of radio airplay, they have to be playlisted by an entire national network, not just individual radio stations. So airplay on KEXP or CFNY or WPNH or KBUU or KXRN or any of the other individual radio stations you named is irrelevant — if you're talking about North American radio airplay, the only way that translates into an automatic notability pass is if that airplay took place on CBC Music (which is not the same thing as CBC Hamilton, so that listicle does not prove that the airplay criterion has been passed!) or one of NPR's nationally syndicated music shows (i.e. World Cafe or All Songs Considered). Getting played on individual stations does not count for anything toward that criterion — even if the station is technically affiliated with a larger network, it still doesn't pass that criterion if that station playlisted the band themselves on their own local programming. Either the airplay was simultaneous across the entire national network, so that every single person who was listening to the network across the entire country heard the song at the same time, or it does not count toward NMUSIC #11 at all.

Thirdly, the charting criterion is not passed by "FMQB Submodern" or by college radio station charts — in both Canada and the United States, the only chart that can get a band over NMUSIC's charting criterion is Billboard.

Fourthly, no matter what notability criterion you claim a band passes, it's still not passed just because you say it's been passed — the notability test is not the things the article says, it's the depth and quality of the reliable source coverage that can be shown to support the things it says. A band isn't notable just because its album got reviewed in a local interest magazine in their hometown, or because they got a short blurb in a listicle — even just to get over the "notable because they have media coverage" test, a band still has to have a broader range of substantive media coverage about them than just one or two short blurbs. And because bands and musicians sometimes lie about passing notability criteria they don't really pass, in an attempt to sneak around our inclusion criteria, even a band that claimed to pass every criterion in NMUSIC would still not be kept if they couldn't show the correct type and volume of sources to verify that their notability claims were actually true.

And finally, you need to familiarize yourself with our conflict of interest and autobiography policies. Even if your band could be shown to clear our notability criteria, you still would not be entitled to write the article yourself. The rule is not that as long as you declare your conflict of interest you're allowed to just go ahead and do what you want — the reason you have to declare your conflict of interest is because the article has to undergo a special standard of heightened scrutiny to ensure that it's fully compliant with our rules, and isn't just an attempt to misuse us for self-promotional publicity. So even if you do someday accomplish something that does actually get you over our notability criteria for bands, it still won't be your prerogative to put yourself into Wikipedia on your terms — the article will still have to be written neutrally and independently, and supported by stronger media coverage, by somebody who has no affiliation with the band or your record label or your management and promotional teams. Bearcat (talk) 16:08, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My goodness, some of you folks really make Wikipedia editing unemployable. Hence why i stopped for a while and stopped donating. There are ways to do this in a nice manner, the first individual who nominated for deletion seemed very pleasant about the process, which is wonderful, but my goodness Bearcat. Jbonapar (talk) 00:26, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]