User talk:Theroadislong

Welcome to my talk page. Click here to leave me a message .

KvdL

As it stands after your trimming, I think there may be sufficient sourced material for it to stand a better than 50% chance of surviving a deletion process. However, I am interested in your thoughts. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 13:25, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Yes I did wonder this, though the article South African Film and Television Awards doesn't mention her award, there are reliable sources for it and I guess the award is enough to clear the notability hurdle? Theroadislong (talk) 14:02, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

I think the community will make the judgement better than you or I. I want to steer clear of being the one to move it, if possible. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 14:10, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

@Timtrent: "I reckon you're brave enough", remember? ;) DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:20, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

@DoubleGrazing Brave enough I am. I just want to steer clear of it. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 15:39, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

I have given the creating editor firm advice not to edit it. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 17:26, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Timtrent: I just want to confirm the link I made here is to the correct and same subject at the AfD: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Karin Van Der Laag? Bobby Cohn (talk) 17:38, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

@Bobby Cohn Thank you. It still refused to show up so I put wikilink brackets round it, and now it does. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 17:40, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Light dawns. Her Facebook page is where she spells every part of her name with a leading capital. I have moved it to her presumed preferred capitalisation, and re-corrected the old AFD. Thank you Bobby Cohn for fixing that and Theroadislong for doing the heavy lifting.

I hope this lengthy saga is now at an end and we see no instances of WP:OWN. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 17:52, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Submission Declined

Thanks for reviewing my page. I've now taken the notes and amended it as per guidelines. Hope that works but if there is anything further, do highlight when you review and I'll rewrite. Cyto2015 (talk) 11:56, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

Several uncited paragraphs for Draft:Jewish educational media

The page Draft:Jewish Educational Media has a citation at every single paragraph besides for the list of book publications but that doesn't need references. there is a posted an archive of search results from the biggest judaica store in New York, Judaica World. of all the books see here.

so how can you say there is several uncited paragraphs?? 69.75.169.38 (talk) 00:42, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) The most recent reviewer is Sir MemeGod, not Theroadislong. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:22, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

for article creation of Irfan aslam

hi @Theroadislong can you please help me out to publish it.. because this Contributor named Saqib i can understand his intentions. i asked him multiple time for help he is not helping me out . not telling me how to do it. if you can it will be huge favour. Thank you. Faizullah Anwar (talk) 11:14, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

Your draft Draft:Irfan Aslam was declined 4 times and then rejected, there is nothing else you can do, the topic is not notable. Theroadislong (talk) 11:25, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

Submission declined

Hi @Theroadislong. Thanks for reviewing my article submission. I'm hoping you can advise me on what improvements I can make to depict the subject of the article as a notable person. She has published several novels that have won awards and has been the subject of Canadian media coverage in reputable national outlets such as CBC and the Globe and Mail a number of times. Would more citations help? Any input would be much appreciated. All the best. Ookeeffee (talk) 16:28, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Ookeeffee I thought it was borderline, if you would like to re-submit I will happily accept and let it take it's chances. Theroadislong (talk) 16:33, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Ok. I've resubmitted. Thanks very much for the help and the quick reply. Ookeeffee (talk) 16:42, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Declined due to not reliable sources

Thanks for reviewing my page Draft:Payara Services.. I have followed your advice and updated with independant sources such as DZone, ZDNEt, InfoQ and hope these resources are fine. If there is any other feedback, please let me know Cyto2015 (talk) 23:42, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Draft:DIALux

Hello Theroadislong, thanks a lot fore reviewing the Draft:DIALux article. I have tried to eliminate all the points you criticized. Your comments and feedback are always welcome. I really appreciate it. 37.201.193.229 (talk) 09:53, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Declined article

Hi Theroadislong,

I’m reaching out to better understand the reason behind the decline of my article. In your comment, you mentioned, "Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established."

As you may have noticed, I previously revised the article based on similar feedback. I added several independent publications, removed press releases, clearly stated when information is from the company itself, and included additional sources demonstrating the company’s relevance in research.

I genuinely believed these revisions would bring the article in line with Wikipedia's neutrality and reliability standards, so I’m unsure what further adjustments might be needed. Could you please provide more specific feedback on what remains problematic?

Thank you for your time and guidance.

Kind regards, 3DmicroPrintExpert (talk) 10:44, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi @3DmicroPrintExpert: you say you've removed press releases, but I count six sources that expressly say they are press releases, and I suspect there are others that don't say that but probably are. There is also a Forbes contributor article cited, which is not considered independent and reliable (see WP:FORBESCON). There may well be solid sources also, among the 50+ (on which point, see WP:REFBOMB for why such a large number of sources is in itself problematic), but they are obstructed by the dross. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:01, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi @DoubleGrazing

I thought the more sources I use, the better it will be for clarification, just like I'm used to doing when writing scientific articles. For example, in the previous draft I had a source that said that all these unis use machines from the company, and in a comment on a talk page I was told that one article isn't enough. So I looked for a source for each uni, which ends up in more sources. I'll look up the article you cited for me, but tbh for me as a scientist limiting sources doesn't make any sense at all. There are so many tiny/side rules here that I am learning from one draft to the next.

Yes, there are still press releases, but in the beginning I had a lot more of them. I was told that it wasn't a problem to use them as long as you cited them as press releases, which I did. So is it still problematic? Why is there even an option to mark a source as a press release if you can't use it?

Thanks for sending me that list of trustworthy and untrustworthy media. I didn't know about this list and will definitely check it out!

So do I understand you correctly that from your point of view adding all the sources made it worse than before and I should delete a huge amount of them? Is there anything else you would give me an advice on?

Sorry for all the questions, but I'm just trying to understand. 3DmicroPrintExpert (talk) 11:20, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure whom told you press releases are okay, but they absolutely cannot be used to establish notability as they are a primary source, and their use must be as such- only to source basic, factual information(like location, number of employees, etc.) 331dot (talk) 11:33, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

@331dot I think it was the person who rejected the first draft, but I don't remember who it was. But we were just talking about the use of press releases in general. Because I didn't cite it as a press release and wasn't aware that that was a category to use. I just didn't see it when I was setting up the first draft. Ok but for something like awards I think most of the time there are only press releases available from the uni/company that handles the award. Would you recommend just deleting those awards? 3DmicroPrintExpert (talk) 11:45, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Yes, the awards section should be removed, none of those awards have articles. If they did, it would be okay to cite them for the awarding of the award(i.e. it's fine AFAIK to cite the Academy's website to show a person got an Academy Award. 331dot (talk) 14:22, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Declined Draft Khadija Omar

Hey there, I already make her biography, sources per WP:SOURCES, pageantary when she goes to Competitions like Miss World Miss Universe Canada 2024 and appointed on Miss Universe Somalia 2024. Should i sumbit again or what! 77.77.219.225 (talk) 07:34, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

I aready replied on your talk page. You need to re-write the draft in a dry neutral tone (no adjectives) reporting ONLY what the sources say Theroadislong (talk) 07:38, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

@Theroadislong sounds good, I will add another source from Miss World 2021 when she was competition, there should be 2nd source per WP:SOURCE. 77.77.219.225 (talk) 07:43, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

Declined Draft

Hi @Theroadislong, I'm wondering why the article I've been working on keeps getting declined, and how I can improve it. Hectorvector27 22:45, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

As explained "Notability cannot be inherited and there is nothing there to suggest she is notable in her own right. Theroadislong (talk) 07:34, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

What part of nobility am I failing to meet, and how can I achieve it. Hectorvector27 15:58, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:BASIC. Theroadislong (talk) 16:14, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

@Theroadislong, so I add more references? Hectorvector27 17:01, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

That might help, but why do you consider Gramont notable in Wikipedia terms? Theroadislong (talk) 17:09, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

She was Countess of Tankerville. Hectorvector27 17:15, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

That is NOT a criteria for notability. People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other and independent of the subject. Theroadislong (talk) 17:26, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

I'm just confused, what do I add, what can I add? Hectorvector27 17:30, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

Perhaps you would find more help here Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk. Theroadislong (talk) 17:36, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

Draft declined

Hello @Theroadislong, regarding my Draft, I think you may have missed that the information in the sources are not solely coming from interviews, the two articles that mention interviews are independent reliable sources that have done their own research most importantly. Also, Wikipedia's 5 major guidelines don't say anything about interviews not being reliable sources. Biographies of famous people often mention appearances on platforms such as TED talks or documentaries, so this is similar to that. The biography only mentions in a neutral way that the subject appeared in a newspaper and was funded by external organisations. Thanks for the help! Hlfdalla (talk) 14:43, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

You are free to re-submit and get other opinions but I consider that Draft:Filippo Dall'Armellina currently fails WP:GNG. Not seeing any in-depth significant coverage. Theroadislong (talk) 15:01, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Karin Van Der Laag (2nd nomination)

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Karin Van Der Laag (2nd nomination). You've been invited because you took part in the first AfD discussion. Bobby Cohn (talk) 13:04, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

I know you're aware of the discussion, I'm leaving this notice on all the talk pages of editors who previously contributed but have not commented in the new one. Thanks, Bobby Cohn (talk) 13:05, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Kindly help me to republish Indic Researchers Forum draft page

Sources are officially in ANI news portals and Pak defense websites and many other secondary sources. so kindly rwe edit and publish this draft page 183.82.32.59 (talk) 10:21, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

There are no independent sources there, so zero chance of being accepted. It is also just blatant advertising. Theroadislong (talk) 10:27, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

edit

hey thanks so much for the help, but i think i override it by mistake i as already in to middle of it. so if you dont mind give it a look and i can send any links you my need for subject. thanks Wikimasterclassboss (talk) 18:01, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

Subject: Clarification and Request for Further Guidance on Sources

Dear Theroadislong,

Thank you for your feedback on the draft article for Spaceflight Simulator. I understand the importance of meeting Wikipedia's notability guidelines, particularly the need for reliable, in-depth, and independent sources.

Currently, much of the coverage surrounding Spaceflight Simulator is within niche communities, smaller tech sites, and forums like NASASpaceflight and some YouTube reviews. These sources do provide insights into the game's development, mechanics, and user reception, but I realize they may not meet the depth required. Unfortunately, major independent gaming outlets have not provided substantial articles on the game at this stage.

I would appreciate any specific guidance you could offer on how to proceed. Are there ways to strengthen the draft by utilizing these niche sources more effectively, or would you recommend waiting for more significant coverage in the future? Any suggestions on how to improve the submission to align with Wikipedia's standards would be invaluable.

Thank you for your time and assistance.

Best regards,

Infoadder95 Infoadder95 (talk) 11:15, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Reference User:Infoadder95/sandbox you say that you understand "the need for reliable, in-depth, and independent sources" but your draft has none, forums and YouTube videos are not appropriate, you will need significant coverage in reliable, [[WP:IS|independent secondary sources. Theroadislong (talk) 11:41, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Dear Reviewer,

I fully understand the importance of ensuring articles on Wikipedia are both reliable and verifiable. Unfortunately, the topic of Spaceflight Simulator lacks substantial coverage outside of forums, developer-published sources, and a few smaller review websites. However, it is important to note that Spaceflight Simulator has gained a significant following, with over 20 million players. It also draws attention from fans of related games such as Kerbal Space Program and Juno New Origins, which are similarly niche but highly popular in their communities.

I am reaching out again in the hope that this time, you can take my full message into consideration. I realize that current sources may not fully meet the typical standards, but I believe the game’s widespread popularity and influence within the simulation gaming community provide a strong case for inclusion.

Could you kindly provide further guidance on how best to move forward with this draft? Any assistance in refining it to better meet Wikipedia’s standards would be greatly appreciated. Otherwise this article would have to be rejected du to lack of coverage.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Best regards,

Infoadder95 Infoadder95 (talk) 12:22, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

having "a significant following, with over 20 million players" is NOT a part of the the notability criteria. "widespread popularity and influence within the simulation gaming community" is NOT a part of the the notability criteria. You are correct that the draft will be rejected due to lack of coverage. I'm sorry I can't help with that. Theroadislong (talk) 12:37, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

@Infoadder95 Please do not use Large Language Models to ask questions and to phrase responses to talk page discussions. No-one wishes to 'talk" to an LLM.

Both your messages here are LLM generated (0.99 probability), This is disruptive editing. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 12:41, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Hello,

I wanted to clarify that I do not use an LLM (Large Language Model) for generating my responses. However, after five years of working closely with them, my style has naturally adapted to the patterns commonly seen in such models. Also, as English is not my native language, I occasionally rely on them to refine my grammar and comprehension.

This particular response, however, was not generated by an LLM. I am also very addicted to highlight my main points by making them bold.

Infoadder95 Infoadder95 (talk) 12:48, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

There is a probability of 0.67 that the sandbox is LLM generated as well, regardless of your prior comment 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 12:49, 21 October 2024 (UTC)