User talk:Vanderwaalforces

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Archives (Index)

Your GA nomination of Sunday Iyahen[edit]

The article Sunday Iyahen you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Sunday Iyahen for comments about the article, and Talk:Sunday Iyahen/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of SafariScribe -- SafariScribe (talk) 14:04, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Christian Jung[edit]

You rated my article on Christian Jung as of a low standard and a stub. I have to admit that you are perfectly right, and I was conscious that plenty of improvement was needed at the time I created it. So why did I create it? Another editor had included Christian Jung in the List of geneticists, a list that I have been going through systematically in search of errors, missing infoboxes, inappropriate entries, etc. Unfortunately the link given led to the wrong Christian Jung (the politician) and there was no article about the right one. On checking the record of the right one I saw that he is indeed a distinguished scientist (with h = 55) and I thought that an article was definitely needed. So what to do? If no one had bothered to create one before now then I should do it myself, and that is what I did. I was hoping that editors with more knowledge of plant breeding than I have would see it and be encouraged to expand it. So, if I recognize that an article ought to exist how do I set about finding an editor able and willing to do it? Athel cb (talk) 08:43, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Athel cb Hello there. Thank you for reaching out and for your contributions to Wikipedia. Creating a stub can indeed be a catalyst for further development, especially for a topic that clearly meets the notability criteria, as evidenced by Christian Jung's h-index of 55 and his Leibniz Prize. It's a constructive way to invite collaboration from other editors who might have the expertise to expand the article with more detailed information and references.
To find an editor with the specific knowledge to enhance the article, you might consider reaching out to other editors through relevant WikiProjects, such as WikiProject Biology or the Science and academia workgroup of WikiProject Biography. These groups often have members with a keen interest and expertise in the subject matter. Additionally, you can tag the article with the {{Germany-scientist-stub}} which can also attract the attention of editors working on Category:German scientist stubs, by the way, I have tagged the article. You can also write a message to those WikiProjects and let them know of the subject you think passes notability criteria and anyone interested will end up creating an article on the subject. Don't forget that every Wikipedia article starts somewhere, and your efforts have laid the groundwork for what could become a comprehensive and informative resource.
Regards, Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:05, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Too long[edit]

Good day @Vanderwaalforces, its over three months now I guess lol my draft Draft:Ebony Goddess Mystique has been on the review list after making all corrections. Any idea on how the review can be checked so I could be happy to my contribution on the Wikipedia world. Meligirl5 (talk) 20:25, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Meligirl5 Hi there, thank you for your contributions. The backlog is a bit overwhelming currently and a reviewer will definitely get to it soon. Please stay patient as almost everyone here is a volunteer. Regards, Vanderwaalforces (talk) 21:32, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Meligirl5 (talk) 09:04, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please unreview Turning Point: The Bomb And The Cold War[edit]

Thank you for reviewing Turning Point: The Bomb And The Cold War. But, as a main editor/creator I am requesting you to unreview it. The entire page has become a long list of people interviewed. This wasn't what I planned when I started making it. I have asked other editors at the talk page to improve it using the information from the series and the reviews that have pointed out its flaws. If there is no improvement, then I would like to put it back into draft. Charlie (talk) 05:16, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@CharlieMehta Okay. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 07:17, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Vanderwaalforces Thanks. Charlie (talk) 03:47, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bhasha Bicharok Jar[edit]

Hello Vanderwaalforces, according to WP:AFDTODRAFT#2, the draftification of Bhasha Bicharok Jar is invalid. Could you kindly revert your non-admin closure so that the deletion discussion can proceed? However, the author has the right to tag their article for deletion under G7, and it's up to the admin to decide whether to delete it or not. Thank you. GSS 💬 09:50, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@GSS Hi there. But I have seen cases where the author draftified such as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roberto Vannacci, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Bunker (upcoming film) (2nd nomination), etc. What difference does this one makes please? Vanderwaalforces (talk) 10:03, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It appears that in the first case, the nominator was in the process of nominating the article when it was draftified "Whoa the page must have been draftified while I was nominating, my mistake. shelovesneo (talk)". In the second case, the author requested draftification "I'm content that the article be moved back to draftspace until new and reliable information about this film is published. The Film Creator (talk)", which is not the case with "Bhasha Bicharok Jar". What you think? GSS 💬 10:09, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In the second case where the author requested draftification, it is just the same as this case where the author draftified it themself. I do not see an exact problem with the author moving this particular article to draft while at AfD, but in any case, per AFDTODRAFT, you should inform the author who moved the page while at AfD to either move the page back to mainspace or you move it back yourself, which I am not sure of, so that I can undo my closure, either will work. Overall, I do not see a serious problem with this because like I said, I have seen plenty cases like this even recently. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 10:28, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, but these seem like easy tactics to circumvent the deletion process. Anyways, I've left a message on their talk page asking them to revert their move. If they don't, I will nominate the draft for deletion instead. GSS 💬 10:36, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That makes more sense. I mean, MfD. But let's see if they'd move it back first. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 10:45, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tupocracy[edit]

I didn't want to mention this on the article's talk page, at least yet, but see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics#Tupocracy. Doug Weller talk 13:03, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller Perhaps, the community needs to decide on what to do with the article. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 13:22, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. If no one else does I'll take it to AfD. I'm hoping someone else will, I've got stuff more important for me to do and sadly not a lot of time left to do those things. I keep getting distracted by nonsense. Doug Weller talk 13:44, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Doug Weller I'm so sorry about the latter. Yeah, it better be AfDed. I will leave it for someone else to nominate so that I can see what they have to say about it, lol. Thank you for despite the distractions, you're still a great admin! screams great admin. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 13:48, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks very much for the kind comments, they help keep me going! Doug Weller talk 14:22, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Vanderwaalforces&oldid=1225225602"