User talk:Bobby Cohn/Archive 7

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Bobby Cohn. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

←

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

About Eleanna Finokalioti (Eleanna Fin) draft

@Bobby Cohn: Hi Bobby I read your notices about my draft of Eleanna Finokalioti, can you please tell me exactly where are the problems on my article (at references I guess) so I can fix them??

Thanks

George Liristis Georgelgreco (talk) 18:25, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Georgelgreco: have you read my comment or looked at the draft to see my revisions? At the risk of repeating myself, I've already tagged some of the most problematic sections with {{citation needed}} and {{unreferenced section}}. Bobby Cohn (talk) 18:40, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi Bobby again...Yes, I read carefully what you posted...First of all...

1) I George Liristis declare that I don't have any family relationship with Eleanna Finokalioti, I am her biographer and photographer and I want to show to the wikipedia world her work, her talent and her whole story because I think she deserves that..Please tell me if I have to say more about that, to fix the problem.

2) I am going to find more sources foe your other two noticies about Early life and other activities...

Thanks Georgelgreco (talk) 18:52, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

@Bobby Cohn: I forgot to ping you above Georgelgreco (talk) 19:02, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

@Georgelgreco: WP:COI is not only concerned about familial relationships, but other ones as well. The fact that you've chosen to highlight that fact and omit anything else is ~~rather~~ extremely suspect. If she's hired you to be her biographer and photographer, that sounds closer to the policy on WP:PAID editing than just a simple COI, which is not just community guideline but a Wikimedia Foundation policy and you are required to disclose this. Please do so on your userpage. Thank you, Bobby Cohn (talk) 19:02, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

@Bobby Cohn: No no. she din't hire me...I do that for free because I believe to her abilities Georgelgreco (talk) 19:07, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

@Bobby Cohn: Please tell me what exactly to disclose in my page and I will do that.... Georgelgreco (talk) 19:11, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Go to User:Georgelgreco.
Top right hand corner, click Create source.
Copy and paste {{paid|employer=Eleanna Finokalioti (Eleanna Fin)}} to the page.
Click the blue Publish page link at the bottom.

Thank you kindly, Bobby Cohn (talk) 19:16, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

@Bobby Cohn: i did that...Can you see it?? Georgelgreco (talk) 19:22, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Georgelgreco: yes, thank you. You are now in compliance with the Wikimedia policy on paid editing.

Small note, I made a minor change, you can see that I did it using this link: Special:Diff/1258988038. I gave you the wrong parameter but the end result makes it look better. Compare Special:PermaLink/1258988038 with Special:Diff/1258987546. My apologies if this caused any confusion, sometimes Wikipedia templates trip up the best of us, but it should be fine now. If you are okay with it, no further action is required on your part on your user page.

I look forward to you addressing the maintenance tags on your draft.

All the best, Bobby Cohn (talk) 19:29, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

@Bobby Cohn: Thank you very much....So after that are you able please to remove the first notice (A major contributor to this article appears to have...etc) on my article?? Georgelgreco (talk) 19:36, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

That actually butts up on the edge of my knowledge, I will be honest with you @Georgelgreco. I'm going to give a tentative answer below and invite the editor who tagged it to weigh in here, @DoubleGrazing.

On one hand, it no longer "appears" and the appropriate template is now on the talk page.

On the other hand, the page still needs to be checked for neutrality. But that's why it's in the draft space.

I'm inclined to wait before making any action. Rest assured however, that because you've followed the correct procedure and that it will be reviewed before being published, the message won't be placed on the article once reviewed and published at AFC. Sorry I don't have a better answer for you right now. My suggestion would be to focus on the citation issues, the rest will eventually fall into place. There is no rush to these things. —Bobby Cohn (talk) 19:55, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping, Bobby Cohn. The draft might still need cleanup, but now that the COI has been disclosed, I'm happy to remove that tag.

Thanks for the disclosure, @Georgelgreco. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 20:04, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Ah, was going to remove the tag, but Timtrent is always two steps ahead of me. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 20:05, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

@DoubleGrazing I follow from the front! 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 21:48, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

@Bobby Cohn:I am working now to our other two notices about 1) Early life and Education and 2) Other Activities..and I do my best to follow 100% all what you want about me...

@DoubleGrazing: Thanks for what you wrote...If there is anything else I have to do by my side please tell me... Georgelgreco (talk) 19:59, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

@Bobby Cohn: I can see now this:

This article contains paid contributions. It may require cleanup to comply with Wikipedia's content policies, particularly neutral point of view. Please discuss further on the talk page.

What means cleanup?? Can I remove it with editing by myself? Georgelgreco (talk) 20:14, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

@Georgelgreco: don't remove banners that you haven't placed or addressed. The key phrase is "may require". Rest assured that once accepted, it will mean that your draft has been checked and the tag will be removed before your article is published. Bobby Cohn (talk) 20:16, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

To be scrupulously fair, a reviewer may decide, even with the banner present, that it stands a better than 50% chance of surviving an immediate deletion process (assuming notability is verified), and may accept it as a borderline case. In that case that banner would remain. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 21:51, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Here I sit, wearing my rose-coloured glasses, 20-odd replies later pondering the philosophy of AfC, the intersection of N and NOT, and their impacts at AfD. Someone better give me another task before I'm lost to a self-reflective rabbit hole. Bobby Cohn (talk) 22:27, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

I love it!

I suppose the simple explanation is that AFC takes out the trash and lets good potential material through, while making mistakes.

By design, but not always by implementation by all reviewers, it is intended to be helpful, encouraging, and also an optional gatekeeper.

The wild west days when pretty much anything could end up in mainspace also had paradoxically less pressure on AfD

Your new task is to ponder the extra intersection of N and NOT with K and KNOT 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 22:34, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

25 November 2024

@Bobby Cohn: I did major changes and corrections to my article about Eleanna Finokalioti (Eleanna Fin)

1) I found and corrected ALL archived links for every reference source

2) I removed movies movies and Tv shows without reference sources

3) I removed a section OTHER ACTIVITIES because I don't have source to put on refereces

4) I added critical proof about IFPI charts on10th week of 2017 about the album

5) I added new section about Radio appearances

So, please can you fix the appearance of section Radio appearance?? Because I can't do it well...

Tell me what other is for fixing....

Thanks so much Georgelgreco (talk) 20:36, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Georgelgreco, I've removed some of the maintenance tags {{unreferenced section}}, but I have not conducted a check of the references or assessed the subject's notability. I will say that some places look like WP:CITEKILL. Once a fact is demonstrated by a WP:RS, it is acceptable. Two is alright for contentious or big claims. Anything else is gilding the lily and will often raise the suspicious of AfC reviewers. Bobby Cohn (talk) 20:51, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

@Bobby Cohn: Thanks for your quick responce. Please when you finish a checking of references, tell me if I hove issues (and where are the problems) so I have to find other sources, or remove something...And after that please tell me when to resubmit it...

Thanks so much Georgelgreco (talk) 21:07, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Georgelgreco, in addition to your cite overkill issues, something else you should consider is the phrasing throughout the article. Let me give an example:

Finokalioti has actively embraced the stage since 2010 (Human Voices), engaging in a professional career as an actress and singer.^[1]^[2]^[3]

References

^ Ordino press team (21 October 2010). "Human Voices". (Ordini GR). Archived from the original on 14 November 2011. Retrieved 21 October 2010.
^ Lifo press team (21 October 2010). "Human Voices Show". (Lifo). Archived from the original on 23 November 2024. Retrieved 21 October 2010.
^ Vournas, Thodoris (21 October 2010). "Official Director's Website". (Thodoris Vournas). Archived from the original on 12 March 2019. Retrieved 21 October 2010.

Your references do demonstrate she acted in Human Voices in 2010. So, as above, you only need one. Then: "has actively embraced the stage"? That's not neutral. In fact, it sounds pretty promotional. Checking the references show that that hasn't been said about the subject. So we can't say it here. If it has been said, then it should be attributed.

That's the kind of wording that is cause for concern about the {{coi}} tag, see the wording "It may require cleanup to comply with Wikipedia's content policies, particularly neutral point of view."

I would recomend, now that you've added the citations to facts, going through it with a fine tooth comb and making it sound neutral. Neutral is dry.

Look at it this way, neutral phrasing is boring. The facts themselves are interesting and should speak for themselves. Anything else is WP:PUFFERY and won't help in making sure the COI tag is removed.

All the best, Bobby Cohn (talk) 21:22, 25 November 2024 (UTC)Bobby Cohn (talk) 21:19, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

@Bobby Cohn: Thanks for your notices...So you suggest to keep just one reference for every source?? Also I completely understant about neutral. I will configure out it later, wherever need it...

thanks again Georgelgreco (talk) 21:40, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

@Bobby Cohn:Hello again...I changed the phrase "Finokalioti has actively embraced the stage since 2010 (Human Voices), engaging in a professional career as an actress and singer"with someting simple and neutral keeping just one reference. Georgelgreco (talk) 14:50, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

@Bobby Cohn: Do you believe I am ready to resubmit the draft?? Georgelgreco (talk) 16:41, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Looks like you've already gotten to it. Best of luck, Bobby Cohn (talk) 20:49, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Desh Pal S. Verma Biography- This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources.

Courtesy link: Draft:Desh Pal S. Verma

Hi bobby! I know its not common practice to review the same page over and over again but i really enjoyed your through and helpful feedback! If you have the time could you please review Dr.Deshpal Verma's biography? I was having issues regarding my sources not being reliable enough. The first four sources of the biography I believe are the issue but I cannot for the life of me find the proper way to cite these sources as most of the awards or accolades were given to dr. verma back in the 60-80's and the internet was not around back and i cannot seem to find an archive of previous award winners. For instance, citation #1 under the stacie award he recieved in 1981 he is listed on the website as a former winner however since he won it so many years ago however there isnt a profile listed for him. next citation #2 for the RSC I just linked his page under the member directory under the year he was elected (1986). Next citation #3 for the MPMI i listed an old archive file for volume 1 issue 1 which dr.verma helped edit. Lastly for Citation #4 I linked the university of picarde jules verne website but i cannot find any list of former laureate winners (honorary Ph.D) I mean the guy has a medal to prove it and all haha. I hope this makes sense, I really appreciate your time and effort you've spent helping me! I hope you have a good thanksgiving! Vermadesh (talk) 20:51, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Vermadesh, if you think then everything is as well cited as it can be, you are welcome to resubmit. My suggestion would follow that of WP:BACKWARDS, but maybe a little less-harshly. Without having considered the sources myself, and going off of your understanding of them:

If citation one appends the statement "received National Research Council's Steacie Award given by the Governor General of Canada Edward Schreyer in 1981 for being the best young scientist is his field" but only supports "received National Research Council's Steacie Award given by the Governor General of Canada Edward Schreyer in 1981" but not "for being the best young scientist is his field", then cut the later part of the sentence.
If I'm understanding you correctly that the source demonstrates the year he was elected and all the statement says is "He was later elected as the Fellow of the Royal Society of Canada and the member of the Canadian Academy of Sciences in 1986" then this would be acceptable, provided the source gives verification for both these organisations.
Citation number 3 I did open to get a better understand of what you're talking about. It looks like the article that accompanies the opening volume lists the subject as "Senior Editor for prokaryote symbiosis", see [1]. As such, this citation would properly verify the statement "In 1987 Verma was a Senior Editor for the newly established International Society of Molecular Plant-microbe Interaction" but does not support "founded".
Unfortunately, I can't help with this one. Are there WP:OFFLINE citations that would back up this claim. What about a secondary source that describes the subject as having received this award? Does a profile exist anywhere else of him that demonstrates this?

Something else that needs to be discussed. If you are not, as you suggest here, the subject of this article, then your use of his real name as your username here would be against our username policy, see WP:REALNAME. I'm going to leave you a notice on your talk page which should provide further instruction on how you can go about changing it.

Thanks, Bobby Cohn (talk) 21:12, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Vermadesh,

After my note, I saw that the previous review was particularly concerned about the first 3 citations. I made the changes that I suggested above myself, and did some further tagging for verification of references. I also corrected the lead to just limit to information in the body (see WP:LEADFOLLOWSBODY) and made it sound neutral. In doing so, I addressed the {{autobiography}} tag. I also rereviewed the draft and tagged some citations for verification myself. But I am now satisfied that the existing maintenance tags and demonstrated notability should not preclude publication of the draft to mainspace. As such, you will see the notification on your talk page now.

Please do address the issues with your username. Further, I would suggest you not edit the mainspace article directly. See our policy on WP:COI, conflict of interest editing. Aside from simply adding the relevant citations where requested, propose any new changes to the article on the talk page, using {{COI edit}} or the Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard.

Thanks, Bobby Cohn (talk) 21:35, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Lat Drop AfC

Hello Bobby Cohn, what are your specific reasons for declining me and what do you suggest I do? SheneganShaw (talk) 22:20, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi @SheneganShaw, it looks to me like this topic is not WP:Notable, that is, I'm not seeing significant coverage of the topic. Presently, an entry in a general list manual and a how to video are all that's listed, I would like to see more in-depth coverage if I were to approve an article in the topic. Bobby Cohn (talk) 22:23, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

University of Michigan Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering

Hi Bobby, I believe I have now resolved the HTML issues on this page. Can you confirm they are resolved? Are there any other issues I need to look at? Mhinawi (talk) 03:19, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Mhinawi, the article looks properly formatted now at least. I've removed my comment as it is now redundant. I also removed an external link and converted some to references. Something else you should consider is writing a lead section. You just need to give a brief description and summary of the subject. You can read more at WP:LEAD. Best, Bobby Cohn (talk) 03:43, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

@Bobby Cohn I have written a lead and added an infobox. Mhinawi (talk) 04:54, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

My Draft:Shin_Heike_Monogatari_(novel)

Hello Bobby, may I start with your comments on my article Shin Heike Monogatari with regard notability. This issue is cleared. Shin Heike Monogatari is better known as "New Tale of the Heike". Wikipedia hat the articles "Shin Heike Monogatari (films)" and "Shin Heike Monogatari (TV)". I found also several translations in English. So the English reading communities know already about it. The next topic you discussed was foot notes. I want to make it easier. You find my recent, improved draft. Please check it and let me know what your assessment is. Yutaka Hayauchi (talk) 15:13, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Yutaka Hayauchi, your draft only has citations to the novel itself, but if you are so sure you've demonstrated notability then go ahead and resubmit, I shan't decline it, given my attempt to proffer advice. Bobby Cohn (talk) 20:27, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I will go ahead. I cited in my presentation the assessment of Prof. Shimamura, a Japanese literatur scientist. In each books of the novel in Japanese, one finds appendixes with his literature assessments. Foot notes simply point the volume numbers of the novel, but in them, we find the appendixes. THere, very comprehensive classifications in the Japanese literature and his thoughts about the intensions of Eiji Yoshikawa to the nevel are included as independent discussions. Yutaka Hayauchi (talk) 07:33, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Centra Tech

Hello, Bobby Cohn. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Centra Tech, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 15:09, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

Guidance please

Please look at Special:Contributions/MehdiAlireza plus their block history and my conversations with them on the talk page. I'm happy for guidance to me (on my own talk page, please, or yours), and/or guidance to them on their talk page.

Synposis:

AI generated drafts
Use uf user and draft/sandbox talk pages to draft artciles
Promotion of own work
Non notable neologism
Potential language issues inhibiting understanding, potential each way

I don't think I am the person to advise them any more. They seem unable to hear me. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 15:17, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

Responded at User talk:Timtrent § In re: Another user's PAID/COI and AI editing. Thank you, Bobby Cohn (talk) 17:45, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

Mistake moving page

Hi I accidentally moved a talk page to a regular article name, Im trying to move DAA (Irish company) to DAA (company), can you help with this Mind the gap 1 (talk) 20:55, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

@Mind the gap 1: Yes, please, stop what you're doing. As fast as I can click on page histories to find the route you took, there are more mistakes to undo. Please wait. Page moving can make things very difficult to clean up. Bobby Cohn (talk) 21:21, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Anuvadi Svara discussions

You have edited the page, and wrote that they're unsourced but they were sourced. Kharavela Deva (talk) 16:54, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Kharavela Deva, as you can see, everything I removed in my edit was unsourced, I left the rest. I cited WP:PROVEIT, I would encourage you to add the content back in if it can be supported by inline citations. You may find Help:Referencing for beginners helpful. Bobby Cohn (talk) 17:10, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

I wanted to tell that you, please revert the edits. As you don't know anything about this subject. Yeah, I know Wikipedia is not a place for 'experts' or a scholar and It was cited. Kharavela Deva (talk) 16:09, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

@Kharavela Deva: I can't really tell how to interpret this message, but I've removed copyright violations from the page that copied from https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/anuvadi and https://www.britannica.com/art/anuvadi and the page is presently marked for revision deletion. As it says in the note I left on your user page:

Contributions infringing on copyright will be removed. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information.

You have to write in your own words and cannot copy wholecloth from external materials. Bobby Cohn (talk) 16:14, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Clarification in the RM Close

Hey @Bobby Cohn,

Thanks for your RM close at Talk:Zenbook#Requested move 22 November 2024. I have seen you have moved from ZenBook to Zenbook, but it is not clearly mentioned in the closing statement about the move. Do you think you can edit to add a line saying something like, I have moved to ZenBook. Thanks for your time! ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 15:17, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Hello @Bunnypranav: Ah, of course. I spent so long on the wording of the closing decision that I forgot to make it clear from the get go what the closure was. Thanks for your note here. I've made the correction in the closing statement. I hope it's more clear now, but feel free to let me know if I've still got tunnel vision. Best, Bobby Cohn (talk) 15:20, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

That looks good. Thanks for the quick fix and reply! ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 15:22, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anuvadi Svara

This editor is starting to be troublesome. A minute after the AfD notification they draftified the article. Your prior interventions with them mean you may get through to them. Move the draft back to mainspace or close the AfD as moot, either is fine by me 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 11:41, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Timtrent, unfortunately this isn't the first time this ... *ahem* page has played it fast and loose with removing deletion templates, as you might be able to surmise from the edit summaries in the now revdel'd page history and with the editor's prior talk page warnings. I try to be cognizant of my own feelings; presently I think my own ability to AGF with this editor has worn thin, so I will try and temper my opinion and explain the next parts as factually as possible.

There's two things at play here. On one hand, at least as far as I can tell from your nomination statement at AfD, you were looking for dratification at AfD, so that's now the outcome. It could be procedurally closed, there really isn't much of a DRAFTOBJECT left.

On the other hand, I don't know if time in the draft space will be spent to improve the article. I can't help but feel like this might be a way to skirt the lens of AfD, and I tend to agree with the first option you've presented above and the one @Spiderone has asked about at the AfD—that this should just be seen at AfD and remain in the mainspace. I don't know what you have seen or the extent of your BEFORE, but I think it ought to just be dealt with and either (1) determined to be notable, in which case minimal effort might be needed to copyedit it down into a suitable long term stub, or (2) determined non-notable through actual community consensus.^[a] I think I will likely choose to not voice an opinion at the AFD nor will I revert the move myself, I think I'm too involved at this point. Let me know what you think about either of those paths, Bobby Cohn (talk) 13:06, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

I think the editor is trying to stretch good faith, but it may be a CIR issue. I've left a further comment at the AfD after Spiderone's reinstatement

I never thought of our needing a Cats and Coffee warning on Wikipedia before! 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 13:15, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

@Timtrent: I thought about it and, with a cup of coffee consumed and a replenished ability to AGF, did listen to your inital appeal here and left a message, hopefully helping in explaining some of the current and past situations this article has been through. You'll have to let me know if something came off as too BITE-y or unhelpful, but I do hope that it could get to the point where the article is in a suitable space and condition. Bobby Cohn (talk) 14:38, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

I saw. I have no real idea if they appreciate(d) it, though. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 18:41, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

Okay, so in conducting a self-guided crash course on Indian classical music, it looks like a music style called the Raga is typically formed using notes that, when brought together in their musical style, are called (in order):

The vadi svara or vadi note, see Vadi (music). This is the root note.
The samavadi, a secondary note.
The anuvadi—of course being where we find ourselves here— another secondary note and often listed third in these types of lists.

As an aside, I think the correct AT of the article in question should probably be Anuvadi but one hill at a time.

The first two do have articles,^[b] it's possible that all three are truly notable and their lack of content is a result of systemic bias. There might also be an argument to make that the content from all three ought to be merged into Raga, either as not notable or a violation of NOT.

Is grouping all three at the AfD right now too much of a hounding? I can't say that I would've been doing this type of cleanup if not for the initial issues. I'd love your thoughts. I think there's an argument to be made that all three should be merged to ~~Raga~~ Svara, Mukhya Svaras or Svara Graha.

Let me know, Bobby Cohn (talk) 15:09, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

One hill at a time. After some tome has elapsed a requested merge can handle all three, wth editors who have an interest in the field taking over. Yes, that was a shirt answer to a long message. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 18:40, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

Nothing wrong with brevity, it is a skill that escapes me from time to time. I'll take it as meaning there aren't any fundamental issues with my approach or attempts at improvements to the article. As to your above message, if we were in this for the thanks, we definitely have the wrong hobby. Bobby Cohn (talk) 03:48, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

Notes

^ In my cozy Saturday morning worldview right now, those are the only two options. Please don't pop this bubble until I've finished my coffee.
^ I know, I know

"BlueSky" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect BlueSky has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 7 § BlueSky until a consensus is reached. Raladic (talk) 20:01, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Parth Moghe

Hi Bobby! Can you help me with the problems in my draft. I have just started writing on wikipedia. I thought I have enough references for submission of my draft Inhumane Life (talk) 16:06, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Inhumane Life, you'll need to source everything using inline citations, this can be done by following the guides at Help:Referencing for beginners. Presently your article has a weird mixture where some are correctly placed, and then there is a large collection of links at the bottom of the draft. This would be your next step in correcting the article. Bobby Cohn (talk) 16:10, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

Hi Bobby, Can you help me personally with it? Inhumane Life (talk) 16:17, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Inhumane Life, are you asking if I will (re)write or edit the draft? Beyond standard copy editing to assist with the minutia of Wikitext, no I won't. I did not write the first draft, so I don't know from which references you've pulled the information from to be able to place the citations inline. See the guidance on WP:BACKWARD, I definitely won't be rewriting someone else's draft backward. Bobby Cohn (talk) 16:51, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Hussain Tahir

Hello Bobby Cohn, Thank you for reviewing my submission on Dr. Hussain Falamarz Tahir. I would like to understand more about why it was deemed contrary to Wikipedia's purpose. Could you provide specific feedback on how I can improve it? Best regards, [Ridademello] Ridademello (talk) 16:59, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Ridademello, after multiple rounds of feedback from reviewers, the draft article was still not being revised to meet our WP:NPOV policy. In addition, it is not referenced with reliable sources that are independent from the subject and who discuss the subject in-depth, in such a way to try and satisfy our WP:Notability (people) policy. These were all explained in the prior declination decisions and a reviewer asked you to review these and address these concerns before continuously resubmitting the article. Bobby Cohn (talk) 17:06, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

Exact issue with references

Courtesy link: Draft:AG Capital

Hi Bobby,

Thanks for being editor for my article. May I know what exactly is wrong with my references as generic refusal message doesn't give any actual idea on what's wrong. I've used second-source hi-quality links/ references for my article but for some reason they don't align with Wiki guidelines still. Eorling James (talk) 09:25, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Eorling James, your sources aren't independent of the subject, in fact they don't discuss the subject at all. What you need to do is summarize what reliable, secondary sources say about the subject of the draft. These sources need to cover the subject in-depth, preferably three of them (see WP:THREE) to demonstrate the subject is notable, see WP:NCORP. Thanks, Bobby Cohn (talk) 13:30, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

Draft article page edits / Exness (company) / advise for references

Courtesy link: Draft:Exness

Hi Bobby,

my name is Uros, nice to e-meet you. I've wrote article about Exness company that you have reviewed after I have submit it for second time. First rejection was on behalf of quality of references I have used. Following that comments I have done research and added additional references to article. I have reviewed similar live wikipedia pages as reference (eg. FxPro; https://bs.wikipedia.org/wiki/IC_Markets; https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/AvaTrade). I wanted to ask you what to focus on when further editing and adding references to my article. Also I believe I have followed guidelines on neutrality tone (I did it by looking on guidelines and on other Wikipedia pages of companies). I appreciate your feedback and advise 🙏 Ufbelgrade (talk) 16:15, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Ufbelgrade, before we continue: on your talk page, I left you a message about undeclared paid editing, see User talk:Ufbelgrade § December 2024. As it says in the warning, please review that and make any necessary declarations before continuing to edit. Once you are following the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use, then I would be happy to provide assistance. Thank you, Bobby Cohn (talk) 16:20, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Bobby Cohn, can I ask for your assistance on how to move forward with my article editing? I appreciate your feedback. Thank you. Ufbelgrade (talk) 11:49, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Ufbelgrade, I would not focus on other articles when drafting a new article. There are many things that have not yet gotten around to being cleaned up, or may not be notable and have not yet be sufficiently reviewed and may yet still be nominated for deletion, see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. If you still however feel it would be helpful to base your writing around an existing article, anything that has been reviewed and rated as a WP:Good article or WP:Featured article would be what to look at. Further, the bs: and the es: have their own policies and no bearing on the content on the English Wikipedia.

I left the COI and PAID notice because the sources tend to follow just promotional releases from the company or follow what the company has said about itself, which Wikipedia does not care about. Instead, we want to see what independent, secondary and reliable sources have said about the subject. If enough of them have discussed the subject in depth, then we consider the company notable in the Wikipedia sense of the word, see WP:NCORP. If the company is notable, then we must ensure that any article on the company must be written neutrally, in accordance with our WP:NPOV policy. Everything said on such an article needs to be verified using (again) reliable sources, see WP:V.

With those policies satisfied, then and only then can a draft article be accepted for mainspace publication.

You may find the page WP:42 helpful, as well as some of the information on Help:Your first article. Let me know if you have any specific questions. Thanks, Bobby Cohn (talk) 19:45, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

Mommy Ched

Hi Bobby! I would like to ask what specific part of my article "Momm Ched" I need to fix? I appreciate if you pin point on what part I need to edit. Thank you! MommyChed (talk) 07:03, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

Hi @MommyChed, I assume based on your username that you have a conflict of interest with the subject of the draft. Please see the notice I left on your user talk page at § Managing a conflict of interest. It has relevant information about disclosing a conflict of interest as well as guidance on writing about topics with which you are closely connect to and the inherent difficulties in that process.

As for the draft, you need to make sure that everything is sourced to reliable sources and there is sufficient coverage in secondary sources independent of the subject to demonstrate notability, see WP:NBIO. You then also must ensure that the draft complies with our content policies and is not promotional and is strictly neutral in tone, see WP:NPOV.

In addition, while not directly assessed during review at AfC, the style of the article likely plays a large role in how it is perceived and presently it is very strangely formatted and bolded. Often times, in conjunction with the non-neutral tone, this will cause reviewers to further perceive it as non-neutral and decline it for the reasons I have just given. I would therefore also advise, having some experience with this, that you review the Wikipedia:Manual of Style and ensure that it also doesn't look promotional either.

Best of luck, Bobby Cohn (talk) 16:52, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

S F S HIGH SCHOOL, Agiripalli

Courtesy link: Draft:S F S High School,Agiripalli

Help me to get acceptance for above article. 103.252.145.222 (talk) 06:24, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Did you not review the feedback from the first reviewers? They tried giving you guidance twice. I will quote them here in full:

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.

and

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:
in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)

reliable

secondary

strictly independent of the subject
Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Reviewing these will help you write better articles in the future. As for this subject, it is not notable and the article has been rejected. See WP:NSCHOOL. It will not be considered further. Bobby Cohn (talk) 16:23, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Pat Taylor article

Hello Bobby, Thanks for your feedback on my article. I am working on addressing the concerns you mentioned in your response. I have a question for you about context. You requested more background for readers not familiar with the topic. Do you mean more background on jazz dance, dance in general, or choreography and choreographers? I note there is a Wikipedia article on jazz dance that could be linked to this article. Defining jazz dance could be a lengthy topic, but I'm happy to give it a paragraph if you think it's warranted. Thanks, Wroliver (talk) 20:48, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Wroliver, I think you've misinterpreted my review, which is fair, the default pre-filled comments are sometimes vague. Mea culpa. Instead, as I mentioned in the comment, you need to determine what this draft article is about. Think of it this way: should the draft be located at Draft:Pat Taylor or Draft:JazzAntiqua Dance & Music Ensemble? What is the subject? When I had reviewed the draft, it hadn't decided. Then, the only context needed about the subject and anything about the other is only relevant as it relates to the subject. Everything else is unnecessary, and will tend to get the suspicions raised of reviewers at AfC who are looking for notability, and are not concerned about the other as notability is not inherited. Hope this helps, but I'd be happy to clarify further if you have any other questions. Best, Bobby Cohn (talk) 22:24, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, Bobby. That makes total sense. I've decided to go with a biography of Pat Taylor, and the dance company will naturally be a secondary part of it, since that is her major achievement. I'll resubmit it when it is ready.

Sincerely,

Wroliver (talk) 23:31, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

New pages patrol January 2025 Backlog drive

January 2025 Backlog Drive \| New pages patrol
On 1 January 2025, a one-month backlog drive for new pages patrol will begin in hopes of addressing the growing backlog. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Each article review will earn 1 point, while each redirect review will earn 0.2 points. Streak awards will be given out based on consistently hitting point thresholds for each week of the drive. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:52, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

Changes in REPowerEu

Hi Bobby, I would like to ask, what specifically I need to change if you be more precise that would help me in crafting a decent article. Nadeem Afzal989 (talk) 14:37, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Nadeem Afzal989, there is no need for a draft article. The subject already exists on Wikipedia, you can edit it without creating someone new. Include the well-referenced items in the draft in the article that already exists at REPowerEU.

Good luck, Bobby Cohn (talk) 14:44, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Maternity_capital

USER BLOCKED

It was, in fact, under the purview of a topic ban. Bobby Cohn (talk) 23:06, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Dear colleague: You declined the aforementioned draft, supposedly due to: "This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources". It seems to me, that there are plenty of good references now. I want to understand, what is missing - and- how it can be improved. A side note: there are many published articles in English Wikipedia, which are of much lower quality, than this draft. Also, I would appreciate you share your SPECIFIC comments on the article page (rather than via emails between the two of us), since I am not the only editor involved with this draft, and the others should know about your objections. Walter Tau (talk) 15:35, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Walter Tau: there are large sections of the draft that go unreferenced. Further, like I said in my comment, the article is written as a violation of our WP:NOT policy. This may as well be moved to a state-sponsored website laying out policy and document requirements.

To this point, this draft falls under the purview of your topic ban as was explained to you on your talk page.

Also, we have never conducted any emailed correspondence, either about this draft or any other topic. And you are aware that shared accounts are a violation of our username policy, per WP:SHAREDACCOUNT, yes? Bobby Cohn (talk) 13:16, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

Dear Bobby Cohn, thank you for your interest in the aforementioned article draft. Unfortunately, your comments are too generic and are not helpful for improving the article. Could you please provide specific examples of: missing references and examples of specific statements, supporting your conclusion: "Articles generally require significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic." Using such generic statement is not helpful - they can be used to kill any article.

Furthermore, you seem to have some knowledge of the subject matter. How about YOU make the improvements, that you find most needed ! That is the real collaborative spirit of Wikipedia.

Also, since you mentioned a "topic ban", I would appreciate, if you provide a reference to it, as well as explain how it relates to this article Maternity Capital.Walter Tau (talk) 14:10, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement § Walter Tau. –Bobby Cohn (talk) 21:00, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

If I'm mistaken and this isn't applicable, then I'd be happy to walk you through and explain the maintenance tags currently present in the article. Bobby Cohn (talk) 21:01, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

important message to bobby cohn

(Redacted) — Preceding unsigned comment added by John smith 5982 (talk • contribs) 19:03, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

Happy holidays!

	Happy holidays!
	Wishing you a Merry Christmas filled with love and joy, a Happy Holiday season surrounded by warmth and laughter, and a New Year brimming with hope, happiness, and success! 🎄🎉✨ Baqi:) (talk) 11:02, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Happy holidays and a wonderful New Year to you too @Jannatulbaqi!

–Bobby Cohn (talk) 12:14, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

Thomas G. Shearman

One additional cite for Earle book: Open Library OL5084339M; LCCN 74155472

Thanks, Art A.N. Field (talk) 22:27, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

@FIELDCONSULT: Hi Art, thanks for the information. I've made the changes to the bibliography section per the information at openlibrary.org. I see you also added some more OL numbers in the article but they may have been reverted. Apologies if the Wiki markup and <ref> tags can be difficult to approach at times. I will take a look at those edits as well and see if I can restore them properly when I get back from the holidays.

All the best and happy New Year! —Bobby Cohn (talk) 15:19, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Islamic Front in Aleppo

CLOSED

Edits reverted as a contribution by a sock account. Please don't come to my talk page looking for legitimacy. Bobby Cohn (talk) 15:06, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

i saw the (Draft: Islamic Front in Aleppo) and i added more references and information on the page XD Living (talk) 20:28, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

Once I went looking for it, I could see the changes. I'm not sure I would say it's "fixed", @XD Living—I've left a comment with some guidance. I won't decline it a second time, but I would suggest that the neccessary changes be made. It also a little sparse on details. Make sure your showing in-depth (WP:SIGCOV) coverage of the topic itself such that the topic meets our WP:Notability requirements. Otherwise, this might be better added to an existing topic.

Kindly, Bobby Cohn (talk) 15:37, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi Bobby Cohn. Thank you for your work on Stretcher railings. Another editor, SunDawn, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thank you for your contribution to Wikipedia! May you and your family have a blessed day!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 00:50, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Hi @SunDawn, thanks for your kind words; and to you and your family as well. Happy backlog month! Kindly, Bobby Cohn (talk) 02:56, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

mistake

I am the owner of SSoursecreator account and also this account JResourceCreator. I created both accounts but now understand that using multiple accounts to edit Wikipedia is against Wikipedia’s policies. I will use only this account ([JResourceCreator]) going forward and ensure compliance with Wikipedia's guidelines. JResourceCurator (talk) 19:43, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

I need help publishing a wikipedia page on someone, however I think I have made a mistake by publishing the same draft from two different accounts, what can I do to fix the mistake? thank you JResourceCurator (talk) 19:44, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

That's fine, we don't ban people for making honest mistakes. I see you've already made the declaration on User:SsourceCreator so that is good. Bobby Cohn (talk) 20:03, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

@JResourceCurator: as to the draft, I see that it's been reviewed at Draft:John Achkar. So my suggestion would be to try and incorporate some of the feedback given to you by the previous reviewers in your writing before resubmitting it for review. I would look at Help:Your first article and Wikipedia:Everything you need to know. These article pages give a summary of the things you'll need to fully understand before writing an article, namely our Wikipedia:Notability, Wikipedia:Verifiability, Wikipedia:Neutral point of view and Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not policies. Feel free to ask here or at the Wikipedia:Teahouse if you have any specific question. Good luck! Bobby Cohn (talk) 20:07, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

"Progressive Christianity (Disambiguation)" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Progressive Christianity (Disambiguation) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 January 9 § Progressive Christianity (Disambiguation) until a consensus is reached. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 00:39, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

Curtis Winery draft

Hi Bobby, just touching base to let you know I have adjusted the Curtis Winery descriptive page . Please check to see if it is suitable? Curto83 (talk) 01:54, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Curto83. In your edits, you removed the AfC history, which specifically notes . As for the draft article itself, without even looking at the prose that made me consider this an advertisement in the first place, I'll note that the draft article is entirely void of references. To answer your question: no I do not believe this is suitable at the time of writing and if I were to come across this draft I would reject it.

Have a look at Help:Your first article and Wikipedia:Everything you need to know. They give a brief summary of our Wikipedia:Notability, Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, Wikipedia:Reliable sources and Wikipedia:Verifiability policies, all of which this draft struggles with.

You answered on your talk page that you are not being paid to edit, but your username still suggests a conflict of interest (WP:COI) with the subject. What is your relation to the Curtis Winery brand? Bobby Cohn (talk) 02:26, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

Hi Bobby,

I am a member of the Curtis Family and would like to add our family history into wikipedia in the McLaren Vale wineries list as that is where it belongs. Curto83 (talk) 22:13, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

Please review the "Breg(ADISSP)" , and help to edit the fifth paper in the references

Hi, I added reliable resource for the "Breg(ADISSP)" new item, please review for forward publish. More, I added the fifth paper in the reference part, please help to edit it as others. I cited it in the place with "[5]". Thank you. LDN007 (talk) 15:17, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

Hi @LDN007, I've formatted the citation with {{cite journal}} and placed it in the bibliography section. If you'd like, you may place it in the article around information that it supports in between <ref> tags, but I cannot do that. I didn't write the article and I am neither familiar with the subject nor the citation. I won't write the article WP:BACKWARD, as you suggest I do for you. For more help with referencing in the article, see Help:Referencing for beginners. I've also conducted some cleanup in the article, but your strongest challenge yet will be demonstrating notability, see WP:GNG for more information, but the subject needs to be discussed by independent and secondary sources. All the best, Bobby Cohn (talk) 15:33, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. But it doesn't work LDN007 (talk) 15:39, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

@LDN007: while I generally disagree with broad sweeping statements, there's probably some truth to the fact that a lot of things are broken in the world right now. With that said however, you're going to have to be a little more specific—I have no clue what you're talking about. The page is there, it hasn't been deleted; the reference template still works, I can see it; and presumably Wikipedia is online and accessible, that's what we’re both using right now.

Also, no need to fracture discussion and start new threads. Simply click on reply and use the box underneath this conversation. Thank you, Bobby Cohn (talk) 15:50, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

Christina Lecuyer

Hi Bobby, I see that you rejected my page for Christina Lecuyer. Can you elaborate as to why?

I've found significant coverage of the subject in all forms of media and many of them are reliable and independent sources:

This is mainstream media: NBC Sports
This is a television news broadcast station: KNWA FOX24
These citations are local newspapers: Edmonton Sun, The Sentinel Record, Arkansas Democrat Gazette
These are magazines: Arkansas Money & Politics, ScoreGolf
These are golf associations/tournaments: Southlands and LPGA

What am I missing? The page was originally rejected, but I revised it and found additional supporting sources. Per Wikipedia's guidelines I'm allowed to create a new page for review with the revised changes. Gottulat (talk) 16:12, 15 January 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Gottulat, I don't believe it differs substantially from the version that was rejected. Wikipedia guidelines also do not approve of gaming the system to avoid scrutiny or the escape unfortunate page history, as you did both here in the sandbox but also by creating a new user page of a non-existent user. Please discuss the initial rejection further with the original rejecter if you believe new sources demonstrate notability.

Further, have you been paid for your contributions to Wikipedia? Bobby Cohn (talk) 16:31, 15 January 2025 (UTC)

@Bobby Cohn I'm sorry, I didn't intend to "game the system". I was actually trying to publish the content from my sandbox and it wouldn't let me change the title from "user sandbox" so I googled what to do and the Google AI recommended moving the content (admittedly probably not the best idea to trust the AI). Once I did that, there wasn't a way to submit it, but the page title was changed, so I moved the old one to draft and was then able to publish the new one. I am new to wikipedia and unfortunately learning as I go, which hasn't been going well.

I've not been paid to contribute. I'm just trying to get writing and editing experience and thought I would start by creating a page for someone I saw on The Big Break, that didn't already have one. Is there a better way to get started on Wikipedia? Gottulat (talk) 20:13, 15 January 2025 (UTC)

@Gottulat: that's fair, but you should know that writing an article as a brand new editor is something that is often cited as one of the most difficult tasks on Wikipedia. It also is not a good idea to trust the output of a large language model at all. If you truly believe that your new sources do demonstrate WP:N, then the proper thing to do is discuss it on the reviewer's talk page who originally rejected the draft. Before you do, my suggested reading would be WP:THREE, that would be your best case for arguing N succinctly. Otherwise, if you are looking for more tasks to be helpful, I will leave a message on your talk page with some helpful links. Bobby Cohn (talk) 00:59, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

Ryan Richman Page

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hi Bobby! My name is Shivani and I was just wondering whether you could give me a little more insight as to why the Ryan Richman wiki draft was declined? I saw that you had stated there was not enough inline citations, however I believe we have cited as much as we possibly could given the websites we had to reference. Thank you very much for your help! Shivanisiva2025 (talk) 20:36, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Re: Powerchalk

RHow is this article an 'advertisement'? The service is no more. I simply was providing a history of the site with all true statements. Any search of historical web traffic will support the numbers in the post. I get weekly emails wanting to know what happened to the site. Be specific about which statements you doubt. Chazhenry (talk) 15:48, 17 January 2025 (UTC)

@Chazhenry: because it's an advertisement for yourself and your own work, and not a summary of what secondary sources have said about the subject. I see that it's not that you're being paid, it's that you are the former owner of the service. You even put in your draft article • Created by Chaz Henry, and then linked to your LinkedIn profile in an article of which you are not the subject; that takes some gumption. Review Help:Your first article and see that we only care what independent sources have said about the subject.

As for which statements I doubt? Everything. You don't have any inline citations:

Predating all manner of screen capture? Says who. I.e.: ^{[citation needed]}

First deployed by the Cincinnati Reds and Los Angeles Dodgers on private sites? ^{[citation needed]}

PowerChalk LLC licensed the ChalkTalk Telestrator to USA Diving, USA Baseball, Disney, USA Softball and more? ^{[citation needed]}

I'll save us both and not continue. Review WP:Notability and WP:Verifiability, and then read WP:Referencing for beginners.

As for the fact that you get weekly emails, that sounds like a problem that is unrelated to the purpose of Wikipedia. It's not for web service hosting or promotion. Bobby Cohn (talk) 16:58, 17 January 2025 (UTC)

May I encourage you?

I'd like to encourage you to follow pictures in drafts, sandboxes, and dubious article to Commons. There is addition good to be done be seeking the deletion of incorrectly licenced files. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 16:41, 15 January 2025 (UTC)

Hey @Timtrent! You absolutely may encourage me further. I do, from time to time when I notice egregious examples, tag problematic files for speedy deletion over there. But that is about the extent of it, and I have to remember to use {{copyvio}} manually each time. May I ask, is there a tool that allows for a friendlier UI with logging, much like WP:TW does on en:?

And if I do begin to add this to my regular procedures of my checks of new draft, is there a crash course of project pages you suggest I read? Akin to en:WP:CSD. I know that prior to diving into patrol work here, I made sure I read and re-read every relevant P&G so as to not make an ass of myself, that's my typical MO. Bobby Cohn (talk) 19:05, 15 January 2025 (UTC)

There is a superb tool. Check my user rights there, which is what you need in order to be allowed to use it. You may have them already there. The tool is available in the gadgets: c:Help:VisualFileChange.js but tick it in the gadgets. Twinkle is ported to Commons now, too, but Visual File Change is far superior for our file work

Crash course: Start small, do not nominate enormous batches all at once. Build up your knowledge by reading and doing. Mistakes can be reverted. Again, look at mu contributions to get an idea. I am by no means an expert.

Tick also "Quick Delete", "Reverse Image Search" both of which are very helpful. And have fun. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 20:53, 15 January 2025 (UTC)

My top and tools menus look like this after implementing the relevant gadgets:

The extra gadgets take a bit of getting used to. To get the Visual File Change to operate you will need to apply for the c:COM:AP user right (you can tick ot in gadgets bt nothing happens without the right). Your track record here should influence the outcome of your application positively there If you are asked to wait, then Twinkle will allow you to do a lot, but I prefer VFC 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 22:34, 15 January 2025 (UTC)

The application rationale should be along the lines of "I wish to be more effective in helping with poorly licenced files. I have been recommended VisualFileChange, and I understand I will need this right to be able to use it. My track record is yada yada yada". It is potentially worth listing your enwiki rights. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 22:42, 15 January 2025 (UTC)

Unfortunately—but understandably—declined. Looks like I might be able to install (but not use) VFC as a JavaScript app. I will try again once I have a more thorough understanding of the project and a contributions count to reflect it. In the mean time, I will be sure to add checking commons images to my regular practice of initial glances of drafts and I'll have to conduct cleanup and deletion tagging manually. Bobby Cohn (talk) 02:38, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

I used to have it installed as a javascript, but lost the use of it when they introduced the extra rights level. I applied for the right. I did have a more substantial contributions record of some 400 edits by then, all in the deletion area. There is a strong likelihood of your obtaining the right once you are several edits in excess of the 200 target. I say that because I am never a fan of applications exactly at the threshold.

Tick Twinkle on Commons and it will give you a decent, but limited, toolset. You will soon reach the desired edit level.

Tick the other things I suggested if you have not yet done so. The image search is very useful.

Toolset

I use the following rationales:

This is, or appears to be, a picture of the uploader, but there is no evidence that the image is under an acceptable free licence. Ownership or possession of a photo, proprietorship of the equipment used to take the photo, or being the subject of the photo does not equate holding the copyright. The copyright holder is the photographer (i.e. the person who took the photo), rather than the subject (the person who appears in the photo) or the person possessing the photo, unless transferred by operation of law (e.g. inheritance, etc.) or by contract (written and signed by the copyright holder, and explicitly transfers the copyright). Evidence of any transfer of licencing must be sent via COM:VRT
FBMD in metadata. Unlikely to be own work. Copyvio? Correct permission is required See COM:VRT
Photographs of books, posters, photographs, or other media, screenshots, and some artefacts, are photographs of copyright material, and should be deleted unless and until satisfactory permissions are received by the process at COM:VRT
Google Lens finds one or more versions of this prior to upload here
Tineye finds one or more versions of this prior to upload here
Yandex finds one or more versions of this prior to upload here

With no EXIF data I often flag the image as "No permission" Good luck and enjoy the area 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 09:36, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

The only subtlety is knowing when to use SD and when to use DR, If in doubt use DR, which takes an arbitrary time, sometimes immediate, sometimes extraordinarily long.

I've made mistakes. I apologise at once and learn. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 09:46, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

Hey @Timtrent, would you mind taking a look at c:Special:Diff/985607799. I used no permission, but I was trying to find a place to put the rationale you mentioned: This is, or appears to be, a picture of the uploader ... Or is that unnecessary? Bobby Cohn (talk) 18:26, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

Works perfectly. The No Permission route needs no other rationale 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 20:52, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

Otherwise it is a speedy deletion F10 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 20:53, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

I have a set of boilerplate rationales for many occasions at User:Timtrent/Reviewing whcih you may find of use. the enWiki ones I doubt will be useful. The Commons ones should be 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 21:05, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

hi

im listen. little confusing but will try to follow you Gigako1981 (talk) 16:44, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Gigako1981, I'm not sure what, at all, you're looking to do, or even referencing. Care to be a little more specific? Help me help you. Bobby Cohn (talk) 16:46, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

Clay Holstad Wiki Page (Rhode Island FC Footballer)

Hi Bobby, I think I made the inline citation edits that you'd asked for. Hope this time this page will be accepted. Thanks for your help and all you do for wiki!

Pat Patrickmckennaa (talk) 20:39, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Patrickmckennaa, good job on making the changes. I've done some minor copy-editing and resubmitted it for you. All the best, Bobby Cohn (talk) 22:39, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

A favour, please

I am working with Edward Myer to help him get Draft:Bruse Wane to a point when notability is ether verified, or we can say with clarity that notability does not yet exist. We are doing this at a section on his talk page.

Instead of making a formal AFC review (we have decided together not to resubmit it until we verify notability) I wonder if you would contribute to the user talk page discussion and add your guidance.

You can see that we are working "a task at a time" and that there are likely to be more tasks to do until we get to the point of submission.

Current sources 4, 7, 8 and 14 are greenlighted by Novem Lingae's reference grading tool, none, now are contra-indicated. The media stye in Hip Hop appears to be video based, unsurprising with a music genre.

It's not that I have run out of advice, it's that I am wondering whether to suggest that he strip the draft down further, or whether it is acceptable as it is. Or, put plain, I would like some help, please. I have "rescued" Edward from a very probable indef block and woul like to hero him succeed. He wishes to edit in his socialist area of Hip Hop, so getting it right for him is important for Wikipedia.

In case yo say "I know nothing about Hip Hop." nor do I. Bt we both understand editors who have had a painful start on Wikipedia and both know how to help them 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 07:59, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

Hey @Timtrent, I've responded and I agree, it would likely be best to demonstrate notability before re-arranging the proverbial deck chairs on the Titanic. Like you, I took a cursory glance and think that there might be something there. I think (hope) the tabular approach is an easier way to tackle it and more approachable and visual, and I hope not too bite-y, but please let me know if I've missed the mark with my methods and approach. Forgive me, I can't seem to find the reference grading tool in the past discussion so I hope I'm not duplicating efforts. Bobby Cohn (talk) 17:16, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

References had not been graded previously.Thank you for setting that ball rolling.

Yes, there are two issues. Now that a great deal of verbiage has been cut as well as inappropriate references you are right that demonstrating verified notability is the key task. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 19:37, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

RM for G-caron

No one actually objected to moving that to "Ǧ", can you explain why you did not declare a consensus for that title? —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 20:29, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

Hey @BarrelProof, I actually did find consensus and move it there. (Though it is no excuse) I'm still getting the hang of an RM user script that I'm finding might be more trouble than it's worth when the close is complicated. I will be sure to go back and include a clear closing statement. Thanks for the heads up. Kindly, Bobby Cohn (talk) 20:38, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

Sorry for not noticing that what was what you actually did. Yes, please clarify the closure statement so that others who come along and read it later will understand what happened. I might not be the only person who gets confused. But then again, maybe it's just me. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 20:40, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

@BarrelProof nothing unreasonable about the request at all, I'm more than happy to clarify. If it tripped you up, it is likely to trip up less experienced editors as well. Thanks, Bobby Cohn (talk) 20:49, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

Draft:Foundational Black American

I revised the article you declined. How do I resubmit it? thx Dominoconsultant10 (talk) 23:40, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Dominoconsultant10, you removed it when you removed the line that said . I've restored it for you, but you should know that your referencing is incorrect. As I mentioned, review Help:Referencing for beginners. Also note that Wikipedia does not use html markup tags as you have done but rather, we use simpler Wikitext. The two of these together will allow for better integration with our inline citation system. This will also need to be corrected before a draft can be approved.

Are you using a tool or service, or using a large language model to help you write this article? Bobby Cohn (talk) 00:45, 25 January 2025 (UTC)

draft irishcgm

please I'm begging you man , please accept my article draft “irishcgm” I have been trying and working hard on creating an article , I'm literally pleading man please accept it or please could you kindly create one for me. 176.249.137.138 (talk) 01:07, 25 January 2025 (UTC)

Draft:Mario Farrugia Borg

Dear Bobby,

Thank you for your feedback on this page. The Feedback has been implemented and now believe that this page is ready for formal review to be accepted. I thank you for your help.

Kind Regards,

Adam

Office of the High Commisioner Adamosfb2511 (talk) 10:37, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Adamosfb2511, thank you for implementing the corrections. I see that you have already resubmitted, so another editor should be along shortly to conduct the review.

An additional note, I see you have declared a COI on your user page, but as you are a member of staff in the subject's office, you will instead need to follow the WP:PAID instructions; a slight but important distinction in accordance with the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use. I will leave a notice on your user talk page with more information.

Thanks, Bobby Cohn (talk) 14:01, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

Clare Wright Page

Hello, we made a page called Clare Wright and you had commented saying it's "void of references", can you please let us know what this means? As there are references in the page. Please let me know how to fix this. DesignCurator 2024 (talk) 12:04, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

@DesignCurator 2024, who is "we"? Wikipedia accounts may not be shared and each member of your team must have their own unique account.

Wikipedia does not have pages, Wikipedia has articles. Articles are supported by references, especially if the article is a biography of a living person. Presently, paragraphs 1, 2, and 3 in § Career of Draft:Clare Wright have no citations. In addition, there are promotional sentences that also do not have a citation.

To fix these issues, instruct other persons using your account to create their own and not to share this account, and add citations that support the facts in the draft article or remove the facts that cannot be supported by citations. Bobby Cohn (talk) 13:11, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

Right argument, wrong case

Moeed Pirzada would fall under India-Pakistan, not any of the Arab-Israeli conflict Arbitrations. But your argument is still more-or-less correct given the meatpuppetry around Pirzada's article. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 18:12, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Jéské Couriano, an unfortunate copy-paste error that, given the subject matter, is extra embarrassing. And given that the discussion has been closed, it looks like my mistake will be immortalized. I have to admit I'm rather embarrassed by that one, but I'll keep a closer eye in the future. Thanks for the heads up. Bobby Cohn (talk) 18:18, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

Draft:Mario Farrugia Borg

Dear @Bobby Cohn,

Thank you for the help that you have already given me. However, I am an intern for this office and therefore am not getting paid to do this. I had recieved some help from other editors and was told that this was the case.

Many thanks Adamosfb2511 (talk) 22:31, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

@Adamosfb2511: interns are included in the policy of WP:PAID, please read the policy. I will quote the relevant part here: Interns are considered employees for this purpose. I will duplicate this again on your talk page. Please make the disclosure. Bobby Cohn (talk) 22:36, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

You have to understand how much that argument really isn't going to fly when you use your office to sign your posts. —Bobby Cohn (talk) 00:54, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

RE: Draft - Society for Equity Neuroscience

Thanks @Bobby Cohn. Points well taken although as a first time editor I see why so many people seem to be so frustrated with the medium and its consecutive and at times conflicting reviewer input. This is a notable subject given its mission/remit and coverage by several secondary sources. I have now re-expanded key descriptions. Thanks again.

Las-Giddy 1995 (talk) 18:38, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Las-Giddy 1995, I understand your frustration; witing a new article from scratch is often noted as being one of the more difficult projects for a new editor to tackle. Note that what makes an organisation notable in the Wikipedia sense of the term is discussion of the subject by secondary and independent sources, we don't really care about its mission/remit for establishing notability. I see you've resubmitted, so another editor will pick the draft out from the queue and conduct their own review.

Thank you for responding to the PAID notice on your talk page.

Best of luck, and happy editing. Bobby Cohn (talk) 20:37, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

Jack Rechcigl - new draft

Hi Bob, I hope this finds you well, it's being a while since I talked to you. I still have some doubts, since my submission was declined, I’d like to know if I can start again by submitting only part of the original article. If that portion is accepted, I could then gradually add more to the same article. My main goal is to have at least some information about him included, and if that works, I can expand on it over time. I also want to make sure I am doing it correctly to avoid another rejection. If it's possible how should I proceed? I will be working on the draft, should I send you the draft? @Bobby Cohn AgroLover (talk) 18:18, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

Hi @AgroLover, last couple times you left a message, my replies went unanswered, but the advice is still valid. See my previous replies in the archives at the following locations:

Likely what you need to do is do a lot of cutting what isn't appropriate, see the previous advice.

Good luck, Bobby Cohn (talk) 18:22, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Bobby Cohn Thank you for your guidance, and I apologize for any messages I may have missed—I sometimes think I’ve responded when I haven’t. I’ve now edited the article up to the section where the Florida Ag Expo begins. I know you previously explained the process, but I would appreciate your feedback on the parts I’ve worked on so far to ensure I’m on the right track. Additionally, if this section is acceptable, would it be possible to publish it as is and add the remaining content once I’ve completed it? AgroLover (talk) 22:42, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

Hi @AgroLover, I'll look at the difference between the old version and your recent changes with this diff link: Special:Diff/1255630350/1277483926 and I'll let you know my thoughts.

The good: right away I see that there's some positive changes to reduce promotional wording: This is perfect and exactly like what I described needed to be changed to remove WP:OR and unnecessery promo and WP:PEACOCK words. The paragraph continues on for more of the same, and without checking the inline citations, I also see that when describing praise (as opposed to presenting it in Wikivoice) as with the following change: That this is supported by a citation to an external source not authored by the subject.^[1]^[2] That is exactly what I meant in my 21 August 2024 message. Well done, and thank you for heading my advice. If the rest of the edits continue in this fashion, the article will be a lot better off once published.

The bad: from a cursory glance, it looks like some citations for personal information has been removed. As this is just a generic fact about the subject, and one that can be verified by the source regardless if it is independent or not, this is actually okay to leave (I'm assuming this is a graduate thesis?). Alternatively, a biography from an organization that he belongs to would also not be independent but okay to cite to for basic facts. Otherwise, this statement is unsourced. In a biography of a living person, everything that could be challenged needs to be sourced or removed.

To your orignial question on if it could be published now: as with anything, I would say it depends. I've given my opinion that WP:Notability is not what is precluding this from being published but rather the content of the article itself, see both of my "

Comment:" messages at the top of the draft article. You've hit on the advice I have given in my previous replies, that it the draft wasn't written correctly, it is easier to largely cut and then re-add the content as appropriate moving forward (per WP:BACKWARD).

So in a way, I do endorse that idea. However I say that and I emphasize the idea that the content to be re-added must still follow all the correct policies once added in the mainspace; publication now and then working on it later inappropriately is not a way to game the system. The benefit of working on it in the draft space versus the mainspace is that you can leave the inappropriate text in place in the draft space and fiddle around with it, remember WP:there is no deadline or rush to publish. But once placed in the mainspace, anything inappropriate can just be challenged and removed immediately by anyone on site, there is no grace period for WP:BLPs.

So it's up to you. I will ask for the thoughts of another editor here whose opinion I respect greatly. But if you are set to go down that route, here's how I would recommend you proceed:

You can copy the contents of the article to your sandbox, located at User:agroLover/sandbox, so you have an easily accessible copy for later.
Per the last bit of advice at WP:BACKWARD, go through the remainder of the draft article located at Draft:Jack Rechcigl—everything beyond § Florida Agricultural Expo if that's what you say you have done—and cut judiciously everything that is inappropriate. This would be the version that could then get moved to the mainspace.
Becuase there is no deadline, you can work on the article section by section in your sandbox and move paragraph by paragraph to the mainspace as it becomes acceptable and within policy.

In my opinion, I do think the subject is notable, and Wikipedia would be better served by having an article on the subject. That is, after all, why we're all here. I hope this helps. And remember, my opinion is just that, I'm by no means the be-all-end-all decision maker. I'm just giving you the best advice I have after poking around this website for a while as a hobby. Remember, we all started somewhere. You've definitely picked one of the harder tasks a new editor can tackle in trying to write an article, but you are on the correct path, so thank you for your efforts and and thank you for incorporating the advice.

—Bobby Cohn (talk) 16:25, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

@AgroLover I have been asked to look at the advice here. I am in general agreement with all of it. Why not resubmit it, and let me or Bobby know? Or one of us may do that on your behalf after a decent interval of at least seven minutes 23 seconds. It seems to me to pass the hurdle of WP:NPROF. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 17:09, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

Hello Bobby, I am so glad you liked it and that I am on the right track. Now that it was published but it still has this info on top of the page: "This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. The specific problem is: Somewhat bloated and will benefit from editing down. Please help improve this article if you can. (February 2025) (Learn how and when to remove this message)."

What should I do? What would be the best way for me to continue to work on it? Thanks again for your help. AgroLover (talk) 17:55, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

Hi AgroLover -- I discussed with Timtrent, you can see our reasoning in this discussion thread as well as in this thread; we felt that because the subject was likely notable enough for Wikipedia, the best course of action was to accept and allow for the cleanup with the article in the mainspace. As I mentioned here on your talk page, the maintenance template on the top of Jack Rechcigl can be addressed by following the same cleanup guidance we've discussed above. Continue doing the clean up work as you had been, make sure everything is well sourced, as I pointed out above. If you are stuck on something or need further advice, please feel free to ask. Best, Bobby Cohn (talk) 14:02, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

References

^ "Focus on Younger Generation: Jack E. Rechcigl (1960-)". Zpráavy SVU SVU News. pp. 8–9.
^ "University of Florida Research Foundation". ufrfprofessors.research.ufl.edu. 19 February 2025.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Five Nights At Gumball's

I just saw that my article has been nominated for deletion, but I've seen articles that are very poorly structured and remain Emilia delmonte (talk) 14:44, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Emilia delmonte, while it is true that there may be a lot of other sub-standard articles on Wikipedia, the concern for the deletion discussion solely focuses on the acceptability (in this case, WP:Notability) of the subject at hand. It is possible that no one else has gotten around to reviewing (and proposing them for deletion if they are unacceptable) or improving (if the subjects are in fact notable) the articles that you've seen. That is to say that we can't argue for the existence of an article on subject based on the existence of another, we instead need to focus on established policies and guidelines.

I notice you are a new editor, Welcome to Wikipedia! The next steps for this article are to argue for or against its inclusion, you will likely want to review WP:NVIDEOGAME and the General notability guideline. If you are looking for other ways to contribute, you may consider improving those other articles you have identified or helping clean up by nominating those articles for deletion if (after doing due diligence) you don't believe they are notable either.

Thanks for your interest in improving the project! Kindly, Bobby Cohn (talk) 14:55, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

I just moved my page to draft and it was moved back to be deleted. I don't think it's fair. I want to try to improve it. Emilia delmonte (talk) 14:58, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

@Emilia delmonte: You are welcome to express that opinion in the deletion discussion. This is a collaborative project and we like to assume good faith so it is likely that may be considered. Just note that if you do that and then unilaterally move it back at a later date to avoid scrutiny, it is considered gaming the system; you're best bet would be to respect the AfC process if you do.

My concern however, is that if the subject isn't notable in the Wikipedia sense of the word, then unfortunately no amount of work in the draft space will cause it to be acceptable. Bobby Cohn (talk) 15:08, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

"Template:Transl." listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Template:Transl. has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 13 § Template:Transl. until a consensus is reached. —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 08:08, 13 March 2025 (UTC)

Thank you

CCP was wholly appropriate the Linder talk page. I don't think I have pleased the paid editor on their talk page. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 14:50, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

You're welcome

. Interesting. I thought the article was pretty egregiously obvious promo, so good catch on picking up the breadcrumbs. I had some edit conflicts, I know that we both happened to be patrolling the same areas at the same time. Maybe I'll jump in there and point out some of the glaring issues as a part of the feedback and suggestions they claim to be welcom[ing]. I'm not sure how you managed to leave a bad taste in their mouth. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ You put it well with that paid interpretation, you should be aware of the rules if you're going to accept payment for it. —Bobby Cohn (talk) 15:02, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Plus they were warned elsewhere. They didn't need judgements, apparently. 😇 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 15:05, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

I added a small section to my user page which you may agree with, or may not. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 15:17, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Ignorantia juris non excusat. Bobby Cohn (talk) 20:44, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

I have learned something today. I had a classical education, literally, and my son and his wife are lawyers. Obviously that means that they are leeches and parasites on the face of society, but I had not heard the nation tag before. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 23:50, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

I was only familiar with the English phrase, but following your change from know to abide by really hit home. So a quick search and a redirect later, I thought it a pretty apropos response. Bobby Cohn (talk) 23:56, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

I have made it a usable thing with {{Subst:User:Timtrent/Paid}}, if that appeals to you. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 23:12, 13 March 2025 (UTC)

Looks good. Might I suggest <em> tags in lieu of ''italics'' styling for emphasis? There's a full explainer here MOS:EMPHASIS but in short, for accessibility. Bobby Cohn (talk) 13:16, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

Bobby, Hi, can you help me with my

Wikipedia account, and an article.

I didn't know that promotion is prohibited, and I created an article with the title "Senad Dizdarević: A Journey of Awakening and Liberation" describing my work.

The article was deleted.

Now, I can't login into my account. "Wrong user name or password"

Extended content

When I try to create a new account with my name, it says that user Senad Dizdarević already exists.

When I type my name in the search field, it says that there is no user with this name.

???

I have two questions for you:

1. Can you help me with retriveing the account?

2. Would you write an article about my work?

I am a journalist, author and writer of 12 books for self-development.

I manage two webpages.

One with almost 300 articles on my collaboration with advanced space friends, and other with articles about the religion, and non-existence of god.

I discovered the first valid evidence in history that god does not exist because that is not possible. I describe it in my new 4-part book series "It's finnaly proven god does not exist The first valid evidence in history"

I also write about lucid dreaming, life on other planets, awakening into Pure Awareness, Evil Karmic Organization, karma, incarnation, and karmic Matrix.

I think that my work is useful for Wikipedia readers.

Bobby, thank you for your help and answer.

All the best to you.

Senad Dizdarević 2A00:EE2:600:EE00:D0F7:5296:FA21:AA54 (talk) 19:35, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

Your account Senad Dizdarević (talk · contribs) is not blocked, you can view that on the block log. You draft, located at Draft:Senad Dizdarević: A Journey of Awakening and Liberation was deleted as it was clearly unambiguous promotion. Your userpage was also deleted, because you were using it as a personal web host. Wikipedia is not interested in what you have to say about yourself and we don't care to host your self-promotional material, as you clearly are not able to write neutrally about yourself. As Wikipedia:Autobiography says, "If your life and achievements are verifiable and genuinely notable, someone else will probably create an article about you sooner or later."

Please stop spamming our collaborative project with your junk advertisements.

All the best to you as well. Bobby Cohn (talk) 20:08, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your answer.

How can I access my account?

On the user page - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Senad_Dizdarevi%C4%87 says that "This page does not exist.

The deletion, protection, and move log for the page are provided below for reference."

If I understand correctly, you don't want to write an article about my work.

Are there other writers on Wikipedia that maybe would? How to reach them? 2A00:EE2:600:EE00:D0F7:5296:FA21:AA54 (talk) 20:40, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

If you've forgotten your password, you can visit Special:PasswordReset or copy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:PasswordReset into your address bar.

You may suggest an article be written at Wikipedia:Requested articles. Otherwise, you may find more generic help at the Wikipedia:Teahouse.

Good luck, Bobby Cohn (talk) 20:44, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

Thank you

SOCKS ARE INHERENTLY PERSONA NON GRATA

Rather unfortunate use of my talk page to legitimise sock acivity.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Thank you very much for improving the article on Algerian BMPT-62, I am taking notes on your methods on correcting mistakes in the article to improve myself in the future :) KitoMaxi (talk) 20:06, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

@KitoMaxi: you are quite welcome! We all started somewhere and we learn by doing! Writing an article is one of the larger tasks someone can take on, especially for a new editor. I'm happy to help out and I don't mind answering any questions you might have.

~~Welcome, and thank you for your contributions to the project!~~ Bobby Cohn (talk) 20:11, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Tag "clean up" in Leonard Ceeley's page

Hello, You have added a Clean Up tag to this page, and I can't figure out why. I am rather new to Wikipedia, and I don't understand what the problem is. Could you tell me specifically what is wrong so I can correct it? Edmond Furax (talk) 07:38, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

Hey @Edmond Furax. In regards to the Leonard Ceeley § Theatre and § Filmography sections, there are no citations. And then § Filmography and § Television have some weird bold formatting that isn't consistent, I wasn't sure if this is trying to convey extra meaning or a mistake. You could consider using a table, such as at Cynthia Erivo § Theatre, and note the use of the reference column with the {{Ref.}} template. Bobby Cohn (talk) 13:21, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

Hello, I have modified the formatting, which was indeed a mistake (bold removed, names of films in italics), and I will consider using a table. As for the citations on theatre and filmography, the references are in the six sources mentioned. Should I include them as references too? Or do you mean something else by "citations"? Edmond Furax (talk) 08:37, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

My page regarding suman roy

USER BLOCKED

You can lead a horse to water.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Courtesy link: Draft:Suman Roy

Suman Roy is someone well known in Toronto and Globally. He is also one of Canada's ambassadors for food security at the UN. Can you tell me what I did wrong so I can create this page successfully? William3636 (talk) 16:43, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

Hi @William3636, absolutely, I'd be happy to point you in the right direction. Previously, the draft articles were written very promotionally, contrary to our policy on neutral point of view. To address this, I would suggest adapting how you write your articles.

Collect all the references from independent and reliable sources that you plan on using in the article.
Write about the facts that are present in those sources. Write only about the facts and in a neutral and dry tone. Consider the advice at WP:WIKIPUFFERY; we don't want to advertise for the subject, we want to describe them. If they are interesting, the facts should speak for themselves, it is not up to Wikipedia to promote them or make them seem more important than they actually are.
Use the sources that you pulled the information from and cite to them inline in the text. If you aren't sure, follow Help:Referencing for beginners.

Hope that helps. Bobby Cohn (talk) 16:52, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

Is there people who can write for me cause I am new to this? William3636 (talk) 19:27, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

@William3636: you may list it at Wikipedia:Requested articles if you'd like. This list tends to often have an excessive backlog and the page itself warns it is more like a list of ideas for interested editors to peruse. We are not an on-demand article writing service. Most requested articles will not be written. If you are looking for more help, the Wikipedia:Teahouse and they may be able to better guide you in writing an article as a new editor. You may also find Help:Your first article helpful if you do want to tackle the article yourself. Good luck —Bobby Cohn (talk) 19:42, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

@William3636 please note that if anyone offers to write the article for pay, it is almost always a scam; please read Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Scam warning if someone reaches out to you. Be careful out there

. —Bobby Cohn (talk) 19:45, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

I just republished it. I did put alot of sources as well as humanized it more. If someone can tell me that if it is acceptable or not. If not tell me what I need to change. William3636 (talk) 20:20, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

@William3636: I'll take a quick look:

Suman Roy has had a distinguished career
is deeply committed to confronting systemic inequalities
was instrumental in writing the city's first
Suman’s impact extends far beyond local communities to the world stage
Feed Scarborough has grown into a vital organization
With his visionary leadership, Suman has been awarded numerous prestigious awards globally.

To be honest, I don't remember the original one that was speddily deleted for being promotional, but if I were to come across this draft organically or if I were to see it in the mainspace, I would mark it for deletion.

I don't know how you interpreted my previous advice: "Previously, the draft articles were written very promotionally, contrary to our policy on neutral point of view." and "Write only about the facts and in a neutral and dry tone. Consider the advice at WP:WIKIPUFFERY; we don't want to advertise for the subject, we want to describe them." as instead a directive to "humanize" the subject, nor do I undertsand how you think the current version would be acceptable.

—Bobby Cohn (talk) 20:39, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

So then the one I currently have is too promotional then? If so, I will rework it. William3636 (talk) 20:43, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

@William3636 nor may you copy from websites, ~~as has previously been explained to you on your talk page,~~ as it is a copyright violation. A previous version of the draft was also deleted for the same reason. The text has been removed and the previous reversions have been marked for deletion. Bobby Cohn (talk) 20:46, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

Any websites we copied from has been our own so we own the content. William3636 (talk) 20:48, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

@William3636, oh so you have a WP:Conflict of interest? Are you the subject or have you been WP:PAID to write about them? Bobby Cohn (talk) 20:52, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

I am not getting paid for writing for them. William3636 (talk) 20:53, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

@William3636 then what is your connection to the subject? Bobby Cohn (talk) 20:53, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

I am a friend of his. William3636 (talk) 20:54, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

It is Mr. Roy's own content, so he owns it. William3636 (talk) 20:54, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

Which means you don't and Wikipedia cannot rehost it as it will be a copyright violation. Please declare your WP:Conflict of interest. Bobby Cohn (talk) 20:56, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

How do I do that? Im sorry this is really confusing for me. William3636 (talk) 20:58, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

@William3636 I would suggest you read the page I linked for you, WP:Conflict of interest. That would be where I would start if, after reaching out for help from another editor, they provided me with advice and links. Bobby Cohn (talk) 21:00, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

Please do not delete it. William3636 (talk) 20:46, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Tim Peel

Great job re-creating the Tim Peel article! As the last person to attempt writing an article about him, I appreciate your neutral and informative writing. White 720 (talk) 23:29, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

Thank you White 720, I really appreciated your note! I'm glad you liked it. —Bobby Cohn (talk) 12:13, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

thanks im try im trying to get a good grade on a prank can you publish the lorax page ill take it down quickly after you publish it pls

USER BLOCKED

Good luck with that.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

thx Fuibo46 (talk) 14:52, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Draft:Davi Santiago

SOCKS ARE INHERINTELY PERSONA NON GRATA

Attempt to use my talk page to legitimize sock activity.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

@Bobby Cohn It's a pleasure to talk to you. I'd like to ask for your time to take a look at an article I'm seeking to publish calledDraft:Davi Santiago. If you can help me with this review and publish it, please know that I am very grateful. Etlevs (talk) 21:34, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Etlevs, nice to e-meet you. In my opinion the draft reads very promotionally and takes a lot of words to say very little. See WP:PEACOCK. Consider:

which became a bestseller and underscored his early entry into literature.

The easy PEACOCK realy applies here.

and Opinião e Notícia covered his claim that publishing a book at 15 was once deemed impossible.

So he claimed that something he did was impossible, and someone else wrote about his claim, and we're going to promote it? A little undue if you ask me.

As a speaker, Davi conducts events throughout Brazil, sharing his experiences and inspiring young audiences.

Again, a little promotional. I'm don't speak Portuguese and I'm not familiar with the publication but even if that was said, we should at least attribute it and not present it in Wiki-voice.

His dynamic presence again, PEACOCK? If it has been said, attribute it ... has been noted by Criativa Online, which emphasized his ability to generate real results amid a competitive market.

So grammatically, something funny has been done here. Again, if it is a quote, attribute it properly. Buuuut this almost makes is sound like the mere fact that Criativa Online covered his work is grounds for praise itself. A little too close to the sun on WP:No original research if we're reading into something that isn't there; and the ambiguity is suspect, but as Wikipedia editors we are tasked with assuming good faith.

Furthermore, Surgiu highlighted that skeptics who doubted his potential were proven wrong.

What? Again, if this is quoted praise, attribute it and let our readers decide for themselves.

ABC Reporter stated that no other young individual has matched his accomplishments in entrepreneurship, literature, and leadership. Correio do Litoral detailed his financial success, noting that he amassed significant capital before age 15.

Okay, this is how you actually attribute praise and not make reviewers raise their eyebrows. Good job. I'm not familiar with the reliability of either of these publications and again I don't speak the language, but this is how it should be done. That paragraphs mostly continues the same, however ...

Ootimista covered an incident in which a critic unexpectedly requested an autograph, highlighting his cultural impact.

Woah, WP:OR alert. As above.

My 2¢. All the best. Bobby Cohn (talk) 23:19, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

The pleasure is all mine, @Bobby Cohn! Well, I have done my best to follow your perfect guidance. Please feel free to check and I ask you to change anything that is necessary. Again, I tell you that I am eternally grateful. Etlevs (talk) 01:15, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

@Etlevs heads up, § Media coverage is presently^[2] entirely in Brazilian Portuguese. Bobby Cohn (talk) 15:21, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

@Bobby Cohn I added more references, but I couldn't find them in English because he is a mentor in Brazil. I believe we can consider them, taking into account that such references, even in Portuguese, are partner portals of Google News, with many years in the market, etc. I have been carefully analyzing each one. Etlevs (talk) 16:21, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

Nice. As I said, I'm not familiar with the publications or their reliability. Feel free to continueimproving the article while it awaits review. Cheers, Bobby Cohn (talk) 16:40, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Thanks, and few questions..

Hi Bobby

Thank you for moving my draft article Draft:Gamma ray tomography - Wikipedia from my sandbox the right place.

A couple of questions:

-I do have some COI, among them citing myself and being affiliated with the institution where most of the research on the topic have been done. I have added a declaration of COI on the talk page of the article. I am, however, not sure if this is done correctly or sufficiently.

-Where do I go from here? Are there steps that I should take or do I just wait? Are there in your opinion something lacking with article that should be addressed immediately to ensure limited hold ups?

Being a newbie I do appreciate any guidance

-Stian Stian.H.Stavland (talk) 09:57, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Hi Stian, welcome to Wikipedia! I left the {{COI}} template as an indicator because of the citations in the article, but I will swap that out for an AFC comment template instead, used to convey messages to authors and other reviewers more clearly while still in the draft space.

Thank you for extensively declaring your COI on the talk page. I don't expect there to be an issue but sometimes we on Wikipedia are worried about people spamming their own work and links through the project. You may read more about it at WP:SELFCITE. I don't see any glaringly large issues with the article, but I will leave it for someone more comfortable with the topic area to review it. I'll swap out the {{COI}} tag for a comment mentioning our discussion here.

Because we're Wikipedians, of course we have many more policies, guidelines, and essays about writing about your own work that you may find relevant if you'd like to do more reading on how the project operates in the backend, you can find them in the Wikipedia: and Help: namespaces. You might find Wikipedia:Expert editors and Help:Wikipedia editing for researchers, scholars, and academics to be relevant to your work.

To answer your questions:

You have done so adequately (thank you again). Just make sure to sign your posts: if you're writing in the source editor, you do so by using four tildes (~~~~); and if you are using the Add topic or the Reply tool, the software will do it for you automatically.
There's nothing further that needs to be done (or that could frankly speed up a review, unfortunately there is a backlog). Neither physics nor math are my strong suit on Wikipedia so I won't be able to identify any issues with the article, aside from the basic copy editing that I've done to bring the article more in line with our WP:Manual of Style. I've watchlisted the page, so I'll try and stay abreast if its status changes.
1. When the review does happen, if it is declined, the reviewer should be able to provide more specific feedback, but if not you may always ask them on their talk page as you did mine. Addressing issues quickly will help get the draft article back in the queue. Some reviewers may re-review drafts on requests, especially if the issue they identify is small that can be easily remedied, but some reviewers will not re-review drafts at all.
2. If you're looking for more things to do on the project and you want to contribute further, we greatly appreciate expert contributions! Feel free to write more about your own work or topics that need attention at WP:WikiProject Physics, it looks like they maintain a list of "Pages needing attention". You might also want to create and edit your user page located at User:Stian.H.Stavland. You can write about your current and former affiliations and credentials the (and also introduce yourself) and simplify the length of the COI disclaimer you choose to leave on each article talk page.

Thank you again for your contributions! Feel free to ask any other questions you may have.

All the best, Bobby Cohn (talk) 20:08, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Hey @Stian.H.Stavland quick followup, I did swap out the {{COI}} tag for a more explanatory comment. I'll also explain what I mean by notability in the Wikipedia sense of the word. For an article to exist on Wikipedia, we want it to be covered by sources secondary to the topic. This is a little easier to define for a biography of a person or an event than an abstract scientific topic, but if there are papers where they don't research the topic but rather (1) cite it or use it in their analysis or (2) discuss the implications of it or discuss the potential of its use cases without it being the topic of the research in that paper, then in my opinion that would make this much more clearly notable. The reason I say that these should come from papers where the topic isn't the subject of the research is because papers that are doing the research on the topic will tend to "promote" it (for lack of a better word) to sell its usefulness to reviewers. Secondary and independent papers discuss it don't necessarily have the same incentives. It's the same reason a lot of our articles on films have a "Reception" section, it shows that people are talking about it, therefore it's notable. These don't necessarily have to come from articles not written by your lab/institution but all the better if they do (in my opinion). Sorry for the wall of text, but this did come to mind as an answer to your question on 'is there anything else you can do'. Of course I thought of it after I sent my first response. Hope that helps, but let me know if you have a follow up. Bobby Cohn (talk) 20:45, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Well, now I'm re-reading "§ Applications in Multiphase Flow Research" and I'm thinking you may have? Unfortunately, it's physics so it's all Greek to me, so apologies if I'm giving you redundant advice. Bobby Cohn (talk) 20:49, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Draft:Heath Creech

Hi Bobby! Thank you so much for your review and appreciate the directions you provided for me to help better the chances of approval. I believe I have gone in and reformatted the copy to be more of an encyclopedia. Can you please review it again and let me know if i have addressed all the feedback you shared?

If there is something specific you have a question about please don't hesitate to let me know! LegacyByIO (talk) 00:05, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Hi @LegacyByIO, you still have a lot of sections that are unreferenced and it still reads highly promotional to me. Bobby Cohn (talk) 14:24, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Reviewing pages

Hello,

Could you review the following pages-

Arhopala norda

Arhopala trogon

Arhopala avatha

Arhopala camdana Mitsingh (talk) 09:03, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Some of those were already done. I tend not to make reviews on request a habit, but they were quick and easy stubs. Cheers. Bobby Cohn (talk) 14:33, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Thanks! Mitsingh (talk) 14:58, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Could you also review these - Arhopala zeta

Arhopala alkisthenes Mitsingh (talk) 12:51, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

Hey @Mitsingh, when you're moving items out of the draft space, you can remove the AFC templates as I've done here. Also note that stub spacing no longer requires two blank lines since December 2024, per WP:STUBSPACING. It is also good practice to create the associated talk page and sort the articles into WikiProjects. WP:RATER (easily installed with User:Enterprisey/script-installer) will do that for you and you can assign it to the Lepidoptera WikiProject. Bobby Cohn (talk) 14:12, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

Aftershock

Hi Bobby,

I hope you're doing well. I noticed that most of the product listings were removed from the Aftershock PC article, with the reason being that they were presented as a bulleted list of products. I was wondering if it would be acceptable for me to rework this into neutral, informative content about the company, which could then be submitted to the talk page for vetting.

Additionally, could you kindly provide any feedback on whether there are still any issues preventing the COI tag from being lifted? I'd appreciate any guidance on how to address this matter and improve the article's neutrality. Repsjared (talk) 22:34, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Repsjared, correct; I removed the list of products because Wikipedia is not a catalogue of product listings. If you would like to summarize what reliable sources have said about the company and suggest and improve to the talk page using {{edit COI}} or the Wikipedia:Edit request wizard, that would be the correct next steps. Editors who respond to the edit request will provide feedback with your suggested edit when you've drafted it.

Yes, I still believe the article is worded promotionally and the COI tag is appropriate. Bobby Cohn (talk) 00:28, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi Bobby,

Thanks for your response and feedback. Following earlier advise from an editor, I had completely rewritten the article, referencing what I believed where well-structured Wikipedia pages to ensure it adhered to Wikipedia’s neutral tone and style guidelines. So, may I please ask what specific areas in the article need improvement? Repsjared (talk) 01:39, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you again, but after reviewing the article closely, I noticed certain words that might come across as promotional. I have highlighted these terms below and would appreciate your advice on whether they are contributing to the concerns about the article's tone.

1.) ...it expanded its "product offerings" to include gaming desktop computers in November 2014

2.) In February 2022, Aftershock PC announced Aftershock Endgame, a "major expansion" of its headquarters, encompassing an experiential centre, a service centre, and a production bay.

3.) Level51 PC rebranded to Aftershock PC "in order to unify" Aftershock PC's identity across Singapore and Australia.

4.) It later partnered with Secretlab, a long-time collaborator, "to provide customers" with an in-store experience for its gaming chairs at Level51's showroom. Repsjared (talk) 01:58, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Repsjared: yes, as well as the reliability of the sources that are promotional interviews or churnalism and whether the article gives due or undue weight appropriate for the subject. This will require additional work and research from an unaffiliated volunteer editor.

My advice? Propose the changes you want to make and consider walking away. You've made something and it's now been published on Wikipedia—you can be proud of that fact and move on to writing about something else. Unfortunately you chose to write about something that you have a COI with, and you may or may not be expecting a contribution in kind for doing so. As such, the tag is a sign of respect to our readers who deserve to know if the content may not be written neutrally. I didn't place it, but I agree with its presence.

Continuing to push the issue is exactly the kind of thing that the COI tag should be concerned about, and failure to move on makes it seem like you are only here for a single reason: to promote the page. Bobby Cohn (talk) 11:49, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello Bobby,

Thank you so much for your detailed response and advice. I really appreciate your kindness, and completely understand your all points. Frankly, my biggest takeaway is to avoid creating articles where I have conflict of interest. Also it's imperative that I follow your advice to propose changes and step back.

I have already created two fresh articles unrelated to me, and have one in my draft. So, I will continue to contribute in that direction in my spare time.

Thanks again for your time and guidance! Repsjared (talk) 01:13, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

Jack Rechcigl

I am sorry about messing up this article. I believe I must have edited an old revision trying to add the image back in to the current version of the article. Again, Sorry for my mistake and thanks for catching it and fixing it. Captain-tucker (talk) 13:28, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

Hey @Captain-tucker, no issue, harmless mistake. I notice that there was also a bunch of missformatting and <nowiki> formatting that was in since that last I remember seeing the article. It was good, I checking it for some more cleanup and got around to doing some further tidying. Happy editing! Bobby Cohn (talk) 13:36, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

[1] Ordino press team (21 October 2010). "Human Voices". (Ordini GR). Archived from the original on 14 November 2011. Retrieved 21 October 2010.

[2] Lifo press team (21 October 2010). "Human Voices Show". (Lifo). Archived from the original on 23 November 2024. Retrieved 21 October 2010.

[3] Vournas, Thodoris (21 October 2010). "Official Director's Website". (Thodoris Vournas). Archived from the original on 12 March 2019. Retrieved 21 October 2010.

[4] In my cozy Saturday morning worldview right now, those are the only two options. Please don't pop this bubble until I've finished my coffee.

[5] I know, I know

[6] "Focus on Younger Generation: Jack E. Rechcigl (1960-)". Zpráavy SVU SVU News. pp. 8–9.

[7] "University of Florida Research Foundation". ufrfprofessors.research.ufl.edu. 19 February 2025.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)

[1]

[2]

[3]

[a]

[b]

[1]

[2]

About Eleanna Finokalioti (Eleanna Fin) draft

Desh Pal S. Verma Biography- This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources.

Lat Drop AfC

University of Michigan Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering

My Draft:Shin_Heike_Monogatari_(novel)

Concern regarding Draft:Centra Tech

Guidance please

Mistake moving page

Anuvadi Svara discussions

Clarification in the RM Close

"BlueSky" listed at Redirects for discussion

Exact issue with references

Draft article page edits / Exness (company) / advise for references

S F S HIGH SCHOOL, Agiripalli

Pat Taylor article

New pages patrol January 2025 Backlog drive

Changes in REPowerEu

important message to bobby cohn

Happy holidays!

I have sent you a note about a page you started

mistake

"Progressive Christianity (Disambiguation)" listed at Redirects for discussion

Curtis Winery draft

Christina Lecuyer

Ryan Richman Page

Re: Powerchalk

May I encourage you?

Toolset

hi

Clay Holstad Wiki Page (Rhode Island FC Footballer)

A favour, please

RM for G-caron

draft irishcgm

Clare Wright Page

Right argument, wrong case

RE: Draft - Society for Equity Neuroscience

Jack Rechcigl - new draft

"Template:Transl." listed at Redirects for discussion

Thank you

Bobby, Hi, can you help me with my

Thank you

Tag "clean up" in Leonard Ceeley's page

My page regarding suman roy

Tim Peel

thanks im try im trying to get a good grade on a prank can you publish the lorax page ill take it down quickly after you publish it pls

Thanks, and few questions..

Reviewing pages

Jack Rechcigl

zproxy.org