User talk:MatthewVanitas/Archive 28

Archive 25

Archive 26

Archive 27

Archive 28

Archive 29

Archive 30

→

Archive 35

Decline: 1939 strange noise over Brooklyn

I see you wrote - from your own edit logs - that you gave my article (1939 strange noise over Brooklyn) the thumbs down on my talk page before you got around to the article itself. How very noble and quick to make a decision.

So much for the "encyclopdia that anyone can edit" when it has self appointed morons like you doing the "yays and nays".

Seriously though I am gob smacked at the process going on here, because you claim:
1. "This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources." Right so the New York Times is not a reliable source then? The same paper that has won 112 Pulitzer Prizes, more than any other news organization and is one of America's most popular newspapers?? What kind of argument is that?
2." While doumentation of the original event is a good start, to demonstrate a long-term significance you need to show later articles (news or academic) which comment about the past event. Are there books or academic papers on, say, meteorological phenomenon, conspiracy theories, etc. which refer to and discuss the impact of this event? You need to show that this is not simply a thing that happened and drew momentary attention and was never paid attention to again after that". Put simply what a load of WP:IDL. This event was reported in the New York Times. Are you seriously - as to being so much into your own ego - questioning this paper's editorial judgement? That this is not noteworthy enough? Its report states:

There was terror in the Brooklyn air last night [Jan. 9]. It caused the greatest mass fright since the too- real broadcast of a ‘‘Martian Invasion’’ but there is no indictment against the radio this time — in fact the mystery is as enveloping as was the terror. A weird noise, called by some ‘‘a big noise’’ that ‘‘flew, like a cloud’’ over Queens, raised hair and goose flesh on burghers in several wards. It was a vibrating sound like that of a distant airplane. It increased in intensity and pitch until it drowned out the rumble of traffic and all but muffled the wail of police sirens. Then the noise faded to a distant purr.

So a mass panic in two NYC borough's is not notable enough then? Really! If you think that then, you're more ego than brains. The fact is something happened and the New York Times thought it worthy of a mention. But incredibly making a remark on this to Wikipedia is not worthy of a mention. Wikipedia editors think themselves bigger and better than the New York Times. Now that is cringeworthy.
3. So much for this site's assumption of WP:GF. More like bending the rules to fit the case that fits the editor. I am not making the claim the New York Times did. But apparently that - for this purpose - is not a reliable source. GTFOH!

So it's not hard to see now why this whole site is sliding slowly up its own backside when self-appointed people such as yourself, make snap judgements based on their own woeful ignorance and lack of ability. But hey, don't shout at me. Take this up with the news desk at the New York Times because they're now classed as an unreliable source, making claims that are unverifiable.

I will just conclude by reminding you of how pathetic I think you are, and how, IMO you should focus on what you can do and leave the challenging stuff to people who have the capacity to understand, expand and move forward. 81.129.204.120 (talk) 21:31, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

You're being negative and unhelpful. I did not "the thumbs down on my talk page before you got around to the article itself", the draft itself is automatically a "Wikipedia Talk" page due to the nature of the WP:Articles for Creation format. But instead you prefer to leap to the conclusion that I did not read your article, despite it being clearly on a "Talk" page for admin reasons, like all AFC articles.

Secondly, I did not say that NYT isn't "notable", so that's a specious allegation. You have overall not provided reliable coverage since you've provided only one single source. You allege that "So a mass panic in two NYC borough's is not notable enough then? Really!"; well, that's true per Wikipedia:Notability_(events)#Duration_of_coverage: Notable events usually receive coverage beyond a relatively short news cycle. As very clearly stated in my comments: if this 1939 event is important, than people since 1939 will at least have occasionally mentioned it. It is incumbent on you as the submitter to find evidence that it has ever been discussed since.

I don't appreciate your allegations that I have failed to WP:AGF. I have followed AFC procedure, treated you politely, given explicitly clear indications of what should be fixed, and I have not deleted/blanked/salted your draft, but have simply Declined it. If you think I'm somehow a minority opinion, by all means visit WP:AFC Help Desk and ask for a different reviewer to take a look.

I don't appreciate your abusive language like "pathetic", and it's quite inappropriate of you to take something as incredibly minor as a temporary decline (and the vast majority of article drafts get several declines and improvements before being published, it's not some binary "amazing"/"terrible" judgment for eternity). And it is quite overblown to feel slighted by a rejection and instantly leap to railing against the gods, accusing other people of being "pathetic" and lambasting the Wikipedia project, which you were evidently quite interested in contributing to prior to receiving even the slightest constructive criticism. If you are unable to accept positive suggestions and feedback, you will most likely not enjoy editing Wikipedia; you must be able to tolerate developing consensus and working in a collaborative environment. MatthewVanitas (talk) 22:20, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Thyroid Cancer Ireland

I know this is probably very obvious but how do I 'review template'? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mary McGarry (talk • contribs) 22:49, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm not actually sure how folks usually do it since I review rather than submit, but I think there's usually a button or something. But failing that, you can use the coding {{AFC submission}} . But for your current draft I've already fixed it for you. Just hit the green button when ready (and your draft is not reading at the moment due to lack of WP:Sourcing). And if you are declined or delayed, make sure you don't remove the templates at top, because you need them to hit "Resubmit" when ready for your second and follow-on reviews. But definitely read the Notability policy I linked at the top, since you must demonstrate outside/objective/independent coverage of this organisation in order for the article to pass. MatthewVanitas (talk) 22:55, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your help Matthew, best wishes, Mary — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mary McGarry (talk • contribs) 22:59, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

So apart from reading up and learning about how wikipedia works there is nothing i can do right now? Am i right?, sorry about this!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mary McGarry (talk • contribs) 23:11, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Mary McGarry, I wouldn't say "nothing". You do need to be aware that you can't just write a few sentences about TCSI, add a link to your website, and expect it to publish. However, if news media, or medical journals, or whatnot are writing about TCSI and its impact, then it may qualify for an article under WP:Notability.

Mainly, you need to recognise that we must have evidence that outside parties find TCSI a subject to cover. Wikipedia itself does not cover brand-new or unknown things that don't already have coverage. We aren't a promotional site, we simply compile and summarise what other information brokers have observed. and if you do have such coverage (a good way to start is by pasting at the end of the article links to any news/academic articles which specifically cover TCSI), then the next step would be proceeding very carefully after having read WP:Conflict of interest.

Bluntly, if your sole interest in Wikipedia is "getting out the word" about TCSI, you're probably going to end up frustrated, since advertising is just not what we do here. If, however, you have a larger interest in sharing with the world your interest in health organisations, environmental health, cancer treatment medical developments, history of health programs in Ireland, or even totally different topics, then you may find it very rewarding to start out helping make small improvements at other articles in order to "build your skills".

There is a page of volunteer mentors called WP:Teahouse; if you are broadly interested in working on Wikipedia but don't know how to start out doing basic things to help out, go visit there and let them know what your general interests in, and the mentors can help you find an article about, say, history of medical issues in Ireland, where you can help out with some proofreading, or adding additional useful facts, help find sources to add footnotes, etc. Hope this helps! MatthewVanitas (talk) 23:19, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi Matthew, I know you said that this was not the way to reply to a message but I did reply to your last message but I don't think it was sent properly!!, just to say thanks for info as it was very informative, my intention is not to advertise as TCSI is entirely altruistic in its nature, I will take a break now and take on board what you said, I've read so many wikipedia's I never thought about what was involved before! Thanks again and all the best, Mary — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mary McGarry (talk • contribs) 23:40, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Any chance you could help

At Sarbans and Yusufzai (Pashtun tribe)? Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 11:23, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Help needed at Venezuela essay

Everyone, i need help B-A-D-L-Y! I keep making my article like an essay, and it keeps getting declined. If you can please look at my article (Venezuela essay) and put some advice for me, that would be awesome.

PLEASE S.M.S! (save my sole!) Unknown249 (talk) 21:41, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello Unknown24! The problem is, your article is an essay. We already have the article Venezuela, we don't need a separate page of you summarizing the country. I would just back down from that article, and start fresh on a new topic that we do need.

If you want to write about Venezuela, to find out what we do need, I suggest you visit Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Venezuela and introduce yourself there, ask how you can help. If you happen to live in Venezuela and like taking photos, see for pics we're looking for. You can also see Wikipedia:Requested articles for huge lists of articles we're "missing" that we would like someone to write.

Note, however, an essay is never the answer. If you're wondering what we do want, I suggest starting fresh by reading WP:Your first article to get a feel for how an article comes together. If you need help or get confused, you can always get help at WP:Teahouse from volunteer mentors there. Good luck! MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:54, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

thanks MatthewVanitas! Unknown249 (talk) 21:59, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

chris king robinson

Hi Matthew

You have just declined my contribution on Chris King Robinson, could you please let me know whether you require more info/sources or simply do not consider him worthy of entry as yet?

To clarify he is without doubt the most followed blues guitarist on twitter, and the second most followed guitarist behind Slash, his first self produced track hit number one on itunes and amazon blues charts, is this not enough for entry, if so we'll re-apply in the future

Thanks

Mark Rob33cinema (talk) 15:23, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello Rob33cinema, have you read WP:Notability (music) yet? The issue is we need to see coverage of him, not "Rob's individual analysis of Robinson's significance". Not trying to be snarky, it's just that we need outside authorities to recognize Robinson's achievements in order for them to be admissible. For example, in the unlikely event that someone self-produced an album and it sold 10,000,000 copies on Amazon and for some reason not a single news producer or academic took note of it, it still wouldn't meet WP:Notability.

It's not a purely arbitrary standard; the problem is without a requirement for outside substantiation, we'd have a flood of people claiming undocumented/able achievements, or "this person will definitely be recognized soon, so approve the article". So we had to draw a line somewhere, so WP:Notability is the policy, and WP:N requires evidence of outside experts taking the time to document/discuss the subject. Hope this helps! MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:27, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi Matthew Yes thanks I have just read through it Not sure if he qualifies but he has been featured severasl times in the local newspapers, he has been interviewed and featured in blues magazines, and dozens of online blogs and of course is massively popular on twitter I'll try and attach links of these onto the page

Thanks

Yan Li

Matthew,

That's great. I have literally reams of material on Yan Li. The two sources cited are my own book and a book chapter. Of course, I can provide page numbers, and additional sources academic and non.

This, by the way, just the beginning of a series of pages I hope to put up about contemporary Chinese artists and poets. I've only just discovered that these pages do not exist in English, despite there being considerable following for each in English speaking environments around the world (not to mention other locations-languages, but unfortunately I'm not proficient in more than two). I do therefore believe Wikipedia pages would be useful. By name, in case you're curious: Lo Ch'ing (Luo Qing 羅青), Hsia Yu (Xia Yu 夏宇), Zhong Biao (钟飙).

Thanks again for your help. I'll keep editing until you think its good to go.

-Paul — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paulmanfredi (talk • contribs) 18:05, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello Paulmanfredi. No worries, just flesh out with sources so it shows a wide body of coverage so we're not just getting a niche perspective. You can cite your own works provided that they are peer-reviewed and published. So not unpublished manuscripts, non-reviewed personal website, etc. There's a good guideline at [[Wikipedia:Attribution#Citing_yourself].

So far as Chinese spellings, overall we try to avoid cluttering the article with foreign-language script (other than the title term) unless there's not going to be a dedicated article on the topic soon, so that folks don't just put in every single person/city/org name with Chinese/Arabic/etc characters and make the text bulky.

I fixed a few minor formatting things in your draft, so when you do your next article, use this one as an example (bolding the title term, using the "lang-zh" template for Chinese, etc.

Really glad to hear you have a series of articles to flesh out! You may want to drop into Wikipedia talk:WikiProject China and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Poetry to briefly introduce yourself and mention what your intent is for this series of articles, in case others have input or suggestions. Project talk pages vary greatly in terms of participation, so don't take it personally if you get no reply, at least it'll be on record for other folks following those Projects. MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:04, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

reg: approval of article Mikhail group of companies

Hello MatthewVanitas, I have added specific references as per the feedback given for the rejection of the article upon the first submission kindly let me know regarding further changes if needed. Thank you Sid. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael.mikhail (talk • contribs) 21:46, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Category:Indian soups

Category:Indian soups, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 01:16, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Regarding Approval of ACP Computer Page

Hi Matthew,

It said that -

This submission's references do not adequately evidence the subject's notability—see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing, so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. What you can do: Add citations (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners) to secondary reliable sources that are entirely independent of the subject.

What references are we talking about?

Thanks and much appreciated.

Hello, Bernard at ACP Computer. Your references appear to be largely passing mentions of the company, like listing them among partners of another company, or that they carry X product. We need substantive discussion of ACP and why it matters, from WP:Reliable sources, not just business directory listings, "where to buy" pages, etc. Have you read the policy Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)? MatthewVanitas (talk) 14:22, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Editor's Barnstar
	Thanks for approving my article, and for the kind comments. Mungefuddler123 (talk) 15:09, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

BVRLA

Hi Matthew,

I've tried to clarify why the BVRLA is notable. I have done this by including the research published by Oxford Economics on why it is important to the UK, and included coverage on the Association by media such as the BBC, Fleet News, Business Car Manager and Leasing Life.

If there is anything else I can do to help, please let me know.

Many thanks JamieFretwell (talk) 15:14, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Articles_for_creation/Bawabat_Makkah_Co._(_Western_Suburb_)

Dear Matthew Vanitas,

Good Day as I hope this message find you well.

The fact that, It comes to my attention that, you had not approved my article addressed to ( Bawabat Makkah Co. ( Western Suburb )which you can found it on the below address :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Bawabat_Makkah_Co._(_Western_Suburb_).

Let me explain to you, the fact that I am beginner, and this is the first time that I publish an article, and I had tried my best to follow the publishing instructions and support my article with any reference available, but unfortunately since our project is in the beginning stages and we are currently working in develop our website then we can support this article with all reference that needs.

On the other hand, I highly appreciate your usual support and understanding the importance of our article, which is review one of the most important mega development project in Holy Makkah ( K.S.A ) and will gives non-Arab and non-Musilms an idea about such as huge projects that will change the fact of Holy Makkah specifically in urban development view..

Matthew, I need your support to approve my article soonest possible, and I am sure now you aware about my reasons and the difficulty in supporing my article with trustful references.

Kindly let me know about your final decision shortly, and sorry for the low level performance in English typing ).

All the best

Yahya Ibrahim Jeddah - Saudi Arabia yahya19777@hotmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yahya19777 (talk • contribs) 03:55, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Greetings Yahya19777, the problem is that your article is not providing the Sourcing needed to meet the WP:Notability guideline. You must show that this project has coverage in news media, business/architecture/etc journals, that it generally is receiving coverage by people not affiliated with the project. Right now the draft reads as an advertisement for the company and project, which is something not allowed ot publish. If this project is so huge and important, is there not extensive coverage of the project in media, academia, etc? Your draft now is just "Bawabat Makkah talks about itself", which is not a proper basis for an article. MatthewVanitas (talk) 12:55, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Don't Interfere with our school. Ok?

Don't Interfere with our school. Ok? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vjaasief (talk • contribs) 05:14, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

It is not "your" article, and you cannot simply undo appropriate, clearly footnoted edits in order to insert your own advertising. Your previous version was deleted by an admin (not me) for advertising, and we're doing so now with your re-creation. After that we'll undelete the improved version I put my effort into, and if you attempt to turn it into advertising again the article will be frozen to protect it.

I feel you're being impolite to a person who's genuinely trying to help the article about your school be up to Wikipedia standards. But regardless, you don't get to just write whatever you want just because you happen to be at the school. MatthewVanitas (talk) 12:51, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

I have done as you suggested at REFUND, restored the article to your version, and left a note for Vjaasief. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 15:09, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks JohnCD! MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:39, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Question about new article that was declined - advice is appreciated

Hello, This is in reference to the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Gregoryleathrum/List_of_Trails_in_McDonald-Dunn_Forest that you reviewed. We were building this page in the hope of creating sub-pages with information about many of the trails. (pictures, history, etc.) We wanted the McDonald-Dunn Forest page (which is now a page about many state forests in Oregon) to include a link to this new page. What is the best way to go about doing this? We wanted to create this reference page first before creating the sub-pages. Is it a better idea to have one large page with each trail as a different section? If so, in this case, that page could be rather sizable. We have done a lot of research into the McDonald-Dunn forest system and have personally hiked most of the trails and have pictures and other facts about these trails that we have gathered. Your recommendation was to enhance (or in this case, create) a page about McDonald-Dunn Forest, but if all this information is included, that page would also be rather sizable. This is our first time creating a Wikipedia page (obviously) - any insights on the best approach for this would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you! Gregoryleathrum (talk) 18:33, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your helpful editing

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		message Neckrub (talk) 22:45, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Hope I'm doing this right! Thank you Matthew for the highly helpful edits and suggestions you gave, which helped me get my first Wikipedia article published today! (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Yury_G._Kronn) As a newbie, I appreciate that you went above and beyond with assistance in the form of really clear directions--and a lot of patience. Best to you.

Disambiguation link notification for January 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Geremia da Montagnone, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Humanist (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:01, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Howard J. Buss

Thank you for your help with my page "Howard J. Buss." Your directions were clear and the fix was quick. Thanks to your explanation, I now know how to address similar issues in the future. - Sue Suemanning1972 (talk) 15:49, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

reply to message

First, as I am new to Wiki, I want to be sure that this is how I can reply to your messages to me. Is it? Linda Potter Linda Potter (talk) 16:32, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Yup. Hello Linda Potter, what can I do for you? MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:33, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

CDR reply

Great. Hi. First, let me say that actually posting the chapter publicly was completely accidental - I didn't even know I had. I certainly didn't mean to, as it wasn't finished - I'm surprised I could even do it without first submitting it for approval. So I'm sorry. I have to say, thought, that I wish you had assumed it was an accident instead of jumping all over me, you made me feel really badly as I certainly wasn't trying to work around you.

And thank you for your thoughtful comments and suggestions. I will re-work it. A question: do I resend it to you, or just resubmit for approval in general.

One more question: I am of course in complete agreement that what was published should come down. Is there anything I can do to hurry that along? Or will just doing nothing at this point accomplish the same thing?

Linda Potter Linda Potter (talk) 16:42, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello Linda Potter, (I keep mentioning your name because the coding notifies you that I've replied, {{u|Linda Potter}})Thanks for taking the constructive criticism so well; I didn't want to be rude, but I also didn't want to dance around the issue, so I'm glad that we're of good terms with it.

To get the premature draft taken down, since you are the only substantive author (of the version that's published now), you can paste {{db-author}} (I'm typing the "nowiki" code around that tag so it doesn't go active on my own page!), that will summon an admin, and that tag will tell him "I created the page and am the main person invested in it, and I'd like it deleted".

So far as AFC, definitely Submit in general rather than rely on one person. Editors go in and out depending on real life obligations, so best to stay in the group process.

For the article itself, it's hard to take a step back and look encyclopedically at a topic that interest you that you know a lot about. You have to kind of "clear your mind" and tell yourself "I can only say what I can source". Per WP:No original research, you can't draw your own conclusions, make your own prediction, join disparate facts together. Literally for everything in the article, imagine a "says who?" that needs a footnote from you. If you personally know that CDRs are illegal in Paraguay, but can't find it documented anywhere, it can't go in the article. You can't include your personal opinion that CDRs are a good idea, but what you can do is state facts (and another's statement is itself a form of fact, because they truly did say it). So "Implementing CDRs could result in higher arrest rates for parental negligence" with no cite is just your personal opinion. However, "The National Order of Police stated in their 2013 grand symposium that more CDRs would aid them in identifying negligent parents [CITATION to LA Times article noting they said that]" is just about perfect. We're not necessarily saying the NOP is right, we're simply reporting the fact that they said it, and readers can assess on their own how credible they find NOP.

Cut back on textbook-style methodological/conceptual stuff, cut out things covered in their own articles (the dictionary definition of Suicide, for example), and focus purely on what CDRs do (not what the textbook says, but what UNICEF, American Health Foundation, etc. recognise about CDRs), when they appeared, how they've spread, etc. You have to separate your personal brain from your encyclopedia brain: we don't create information here, we weave a tapestry of existing coverage into a concise whole to inform worldwide readers. Hope this helps! MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:58, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

RONCO Canada

Hello, Can you please explain why is the RONCO Canada page deleted? What is wrong with this submission? Why is Ronco USA allowed on wikipedia? I just need to understand what do I have to rectify to get my article published, like so many other similar posts about something interesting and unique and of value. Best, Digital 2014 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Digital 2014 (talk • contribs) 15:01, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello Digital 2014! Sure, basiscally none of your sources appear to be WP:Reliable sources or substantive coverage. Our overarching guideline is:

Articles require significant coverage

in reliable sources

that are independent of the subject.

The issues with each source:

• Aller ^ Newswire Today. "RONCO Canada". -- Press release or promo blurb
• Aller ^ {{cite web|last=Wikipedia|title=ISO 22000|url=[[ISO_22000}}]] -- You can't cite Wikipedia on WP itself, that'd be circular logic. Instead just leave the wikilink in the body of the text like ISO 22000
• Aller ^ RONCO. "Nitech®". Retrieved 2007. -- Company's own page, so not neutral
• Aller ^ PS Scientific. "Nitech Examination Disposable Glove". -- Commercial advert
• Aller ^ Profit Guide. "Canada's Fastest-Growing Companies". -- Brief mention on a list, while maybe worth citing just that stat, this doesn't stand alone as Substantive coverage because it doesn't really discuss the company.
• Aller ^ RONCO. "Timeline". Retrieved 1996 -- Company itself, not neutral. While citing the company a few times for non-controversal facts (HQ location, founding date, etc), it does not itself confer WP:Notability.

So far as "why does RONCO USA get a page"? Are you referring to the kitchen tool maker Ronco? If so, please look at their footnotes: plenty to major news media sources, showing that uninvolved parties have taken sufficient notice of Ronco to dicuss the company, its practices, its impacts.

I'm going to be on and off Wikipedia for a while, so if you have follow-up questions please ask at the AFC Help Desk where there's a larger crew to help answer questions. MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:37, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Bocajnomis

Hey Matthew is was just wonder what were missing is my article and if I needed to rearrange anything for it to be approved. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Simonjacoblive (talk • contribs) 05:19, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello Simonjacoblive, the issue is there's no evidence provided of WP:Notability. Broken down into its basics, the policy is:

Articles require significant coverage

in reliable sources

that are independent of the subject.

So far as Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Bocajomis shows so far, this is just some nickname you use on some websites, Twitter, etc. So having an article on it wouldn't be doing Wikipedia readers any favours, it'd just be letting you promote your "brand". Do also note, autobiography is strongly discouraged, here's reasons why: WP:Autobiography. Unless major media or academia is actively discussing this nickname (not even just passing mention, but digging down into it and its impacts on society), Wikipedia isn't the place for it. Hope this helps, MatthewVanitas (talk) 14:56, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Okay thanks for your honesty, inventively speaking, I can see you've got an idea of what I'm going after, may I ask where would you refer my creativity to be display for the mass to view... Your thoughts are highly recommended. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Simonjacoblive (talk • contribs) 18:06, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

If you want to write about subjects you don't have a WP:Conflict of interest with, and want to use proper sourcing and verification, then Wikipedia is great for that. Outside of Wikipedia, it's a huge internet out there, so it's up to you to find out how you want to express yourself. MatthewVanitas (talk) 00:09, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

pending approval - Vrishasen Dabholkar

Hi Mathew,

This is just to remind you that you are yet to review the changes done to the article "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Vrishasen_Dabholkar#References" post your suggestions regarding citations.

While the header of your page states that you are on a wikibreak, i have noticed that you are infact answering queries etc. So to be sure that you havnt missed looking at this artcile i thot of dropping in a line.

regards - SVD — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.19.20.14 (talk) 12:33, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Hansa Language Centre

Matthew,

Please reconsider declining my submission of the article for Hansa Language Centre.

Hansa Language Centre is a school. The google maps and their website prove that. Its inclusion in government bodies regulating education also proves that it is a school.

Any other information included in the article that is not available on their own webpage, such as the history of the company starting in Quebec, is information I gathered directly from the director of the school. There is not much content of this nature in the article, most of what is included is verifiable through their own website or the websites of the affiliations they are members of.

For reference, please see these other private schools that have accepted Wiki articles and note that they do not have any other or more extensive citations than the ones I've provided for the article on Hansa Language Centre:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Language_Academy_of_Canada

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Associated_Hebrew_Schools_of_Toronto

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayview_Glen_School

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_Preparatory_Academy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toronto_New_School

If there is anything that you think is in dispute and needs further verification, please tell me specifically what needs to be verified. I'm very surprised by your declining of this submission as there is no controversial content in the article.

Thanks for your time, Matthew — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thekradeht (talk • contribs) 17:06, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello Thekradeht. It's not so much that anything is "controversial", so much as that you've provided no reason that Wikipedia should be documenting this school. If all that exists is just business listings and their own site, it does not meet WP:Notability. If you run across other school articles that do not meet the standards, by all means feel free to propose them for deletion as well. If you'd like another opinion, please post your question at the AFC Helpdesk. MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:14, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Update: I have submitted the other schools to be looked over by an Admin for deletion if they fail to meet WP:Notability, under WP:Criteria for speedy deletion. MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:15, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Bayview Glen School

Hello MatthewVanitas. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Bayview Glen School, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A7 does not apply to schools. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 18:16, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Toronto New School

Hello MatthewVanitas. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Toronto New School, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A7 does not apply to schools. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 18:17, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

disambiguating "Wings Over the World"

The only problem I see is that I can't find instructions for changing the name of the current "Wings over the World" page to "Wings over the World (1979 film)". If I could find those instructions, then I don't see any other problems with this disambiguation page, do you? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.35.18.187 (talk) 21:49, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

I made your draft Wings Over the World (disambiguation); if it turns out that the film is not the primary target for searchers, we can move around the order. MatthewVanitas (talk) 22:21, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Alex Martinez

Hi Matthew,

I'll probably still be editing by the time you return so may I ask you a question?

When will Wiki allow me to post images I snapped myself of Alex's murals?

Please feel free to critique the present text etc.

Cheers

Bill — Preceding unsigned comment added by Graffitinucular (talk • contribs) 08:28, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello, reply given at the Help Desk, and on your page itself. Hope this helps! MatthewVanitas (talk) 14:18, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

First mosque vs oldest mosque

I have to say I can't see how these are really different articles. Dougweller (talk) 16:33, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Arguably there's a difference in terms of the latter would require buildings to still be standing, whereas the "first" article includes some mosques known from historical record. I wouldn't be totally opposed to merging them or anything, but my version has a ton of citations, etc. whereas the other is pretty patchy. MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:11, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

I've gone through the oldest one trying to make sure there's only one entry per country. The criteria for sources is basically ignored. There are some obvious problems with sourcing some of them - there are no or few reliable sources stating when they were built, and sometimes conflicting sources as to which is the oldest. I can now see the difference however, so maybe the answer is cleaning up the oldest. It should be like our List of the oldest buildings in the world which is better sourced than List of oldest church buildings. Dougweller (talk) 12:34, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

At List of first mosques by country the last two (at least) sources are blogs, and the last blog has at the top ""Since the time of Homer every European, in what he could say about the Orient, was a racist, an imperialist, and almost totally ethnocentric." Edward Said". Dougweller (talk) 15:14, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Another user added several countries, from Montenegro on down, and used blogs as sources, so those aren't mine. Mine are to GoogleBooks, generally to academic sources. I'm not totally against some kind of merger, but it would have to somehow take account of oldest existing mosque, and earliest mosques but no longer standing. MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:27, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, that was just a comment, I realised that your sources were the GBooks stuff. I really don't know how to deal with such a merger unless you allow both - oldest existing and oldest historically, which thinking about it might be ok. It would be more convenient to readers. Dougweller (talk) 17:39, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Article declined

There is no comment about why my article was declined. Can you help?

Thanks :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lizziebowgirl (talk • contribs) 19:33, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Did you read the big pink boxes at top, and the notes I typed at the very top for you? MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:46, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Posthab article

Hi, thanks for revieweing my article. I have made changes to it per your edits - please let me know if I should do anything else before it is reviewed again. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.117.136.115 (talk) 16:17, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Workmen's Auto Insurance

Hi Matthew,

I just got back from vacation and realized the page I was working on got deleted. I don't know why and I would like to know how can I make sure it get backs up again? I got a message from you and that's why I'm writing to you. If you are not the right person to talk to I apologize and I appreciate if you can redirect me to the right person.

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sangonca (talk • contribs) 23:38, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello Sangonca, the page you want is Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion. Just make sure you clearly indicate to them what the link for your deleted page was, including any "Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/" or "User:" prefixes. MatthewVanitas (talk) 02:06, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Matthew I hope this works! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sangonca (talk • contribs) 16:42, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

January 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Jamaican stereotypes may have broken the syntax by modifying 4 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• to the information provided by the [[World Drug Report]], about 10% of Jamaicans smoke marijuana.{{cn{{ Though many people might think that marijuana is legal, smoking in public results in being

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:34, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Matthew, Thank you for reviewing my submission so quickly. This is my first time creating a page, and I clearly don't have a full grasp of how this works. I gather the page was rejected because it did not meet "minimum criteria for inline citations". I've read through the guide and can't quite pinpoint where I"m off the mark. Could you clarify? Thanks! -Paul — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paulmanfredi (talk • contribs) 14:32, 14 January 2014 (UTC) Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Chayey Moharan may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• '''''Chayey Moharan''''' {{lang-he|חיי מוהר"ן}}) is the biography of Rabbi [[Nachman of Breslov]], written by his disciple and scribe Rabbi [[

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:44, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Isaak Hassler may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• {citation style}

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:05, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Ljuskrona may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• is a general Swedish term for [[candelabra]]. The literal translation of the word is "light crown]]. The word Ljuskrona also  specifically describes a folk art object and Christmas tradition that is

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:56, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Under the Spectrum-line

{{Unicode|∗A⋅∝9=Y& minus ;e {{frac|3.4⋅4.3/.2 ∓8|≜}2ɸ}within a negative§.000→9≠,2.3·3.000000917/one∝300÷Rç.500000019x7-1=∞}7{{Unicode| X-.Ӂ}β}θ} For each configure of (X) is always the samebut in some area's they are less in it's self.⋈-4h.H ∓≀₤¤{{angle bracket|β̞}d͡ʒ3}ɧ999999→⊗ — Preceding unsigned comment added by OdentheGray (talk • contribs) 23:35, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Article declined - Jack Laxer

Hi,

This article was declined.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Jack_Laxer

I don't know why this article was declined. I already added references.

Thanks for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nixols (talk • contribs) 02:58, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello Matthew. Stuck with the footnotes code

Hello Matthew.

First of all want to say thanks for you interest in helping me about Ignacio Solano Cabello article. Im having problems with the footnotes. I been trying for about one hour and a half to add those newspaper references but because my lack of experience seems imposible to me, im getting lost with this codes lines. Can you make me an example with the first link "Diario La Razón, Jardines verticales? I'll really apreciate that. I know that you have many things but now im stuck in that.

Really thanks, and grettings from Spain

--AlejandroOrmad (talk) 10:11, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

DaltonCanterLikesChristianHardcoreMusic

Hey Matthew I understand why the page was declined my computer messed up and deleted much of the information I had inserted I am going to fix it and send the page back in and hopefully my computer doesnt mess up at all. Technology is frustrating!DaltonCanterLikesChristianHardcoreMusic (talk) 18:19, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Snarcky

What are mostly recognized in the music industry, writing music or signing songs. For vocal song, they are naked without instruments, plus they can't keep pass without drums for the idea of rhyme. But I like the harmonic-tone in songs, and do not like all the electronic's keep it real! What changed the industry to Pop from Rock-and-Roll, my thoughts are that Rap was the biggest case in it.(I love my M.T.V) — Preceding unsigned comment added by OdentheGray (talk • contribs) 16:43, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

If you're going to write word salad, don't post it on my page. MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:28, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Battle of Smithfield (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Blackwater River

Vamp (film) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Graveyard shift

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:02, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Pass subject on the dieth not in hell

I perceive much within me, and my pages are of P-53's cancers. But like I was saying and will post another page but only three. But the talk page was broude in reading it, I think better if I take the time too breath? This pages I have on mine page are fresh information that the Law-of-our-Country has my uploads turned off, but be patient with our government and respect our law. For the basic science in membranes I know for a fact, that a needle-in-a-Haystack is in comsuppition of any land-beast, fowl-of-the-Air, creepy-crawler and spiechies-of-the-Sea. It's my thoughts that man is condemned through our comsuppiton, so it through it we are saved. We are put here to care for all the things of God, and inturn it cares back, but like I said it's like a needle in a haystack. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OdentheGray (talk • contribs) 03:36, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Again please stop posting on my Talk page. You either are trolling or have serious personal issues (as witnessed by your word salad). I do not want to see you posting on my Talk page. MatthewVanitas (talk) 04:36, 25 January 2014 (UTC)