User talk:Mcmatter/Archive 5
 | This is an archive of past discussions. 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 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | → | Archive 9 |
Please save "Mukesh Officials" Page
He belong from Barmer district and approx 26Lac+ people live in Barmer and He is first artist from Barmer. He belong from small village and he already collab in "Hold On" song for Covid 19. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Writerassishroy (talk • contribs) 05:17, 17 July 2020 (UTC) Yes you can save it please help him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Qaciwaa (talk • contribs) 05:21, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
- @Writerassishroy: nothing you have stated here or in the article meets the criteria for inclusion in Wikipedia. Just because he is first in something does not mean they automatically meet inclusion criteria. The first and most relevant inclusion criteria is general notability guidelines, musicians have even further criteria at WP:NMUSIC none of which this person meets. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 05:23, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
Tagging of Lotanna Igwe-Odunze
I recently removed a speedy delete tag that you had placed on Lotanna Igwe-Odunze. I do not think that Lotanna Igwe-Odunze fits any of the speedy deletion criteria because "is the inventor of the Ndebe Writing System for Igbo" is a Claim of significance which in this case is supported by sources.. If you wish, you may try using the simple proposed deletion (PROD) process, or the full articles for deletion (AfD) process, instead. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 21:19, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
Tagging of Mukesh Officials
I recently removed a speedy delete tag that you had placed on Mukesh Officials. I do not think that Mukesh Officials fits any of the speedy deletion criteria because There are several claims of significance in the article. Writing or performing a hit is such a claim. If you wish, you may try using the simple proposed deletion (PROD) process, or the full articles for deletion (AfD) process, instead. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 21:29, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
- With this decision (and a G4 check), I've re-tagged it for AfD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mukesh Officials. Thanks. --Finngall talk 22:48, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
Mukesh Officials
Please don't put bad tag and all. please remove all tag i self delete this page in 3 days because we don't want someone insult the artist like that. and one SVTcobra said this think he is not poor etc and put bad tags on him why. He don't have any Mac or Good quality mic etc etc he have use 1900rs guitar and who one wear sleepers in official music video. He don't have any shoes than he do like that and please do insulting artist. I just want to clear all tags and than i remove that page with respect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Qaciwaa (talk • contribs) 07:07, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
- @Qaciwaa:, the tags are not bad or good and are not intended to insult the artist. They are simply saying that the artist has not been noticed by other enough to for an encyclopedia article about them. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia about notable subjects that have received significant coverage by others, like the media, reference books or been awarded high standard awards such as a countries top 100 hits. None of these milestones have been achieved by this particular artist. We wish him all the best and to keep trying but Wikipedia is not an advertisement tool or the place to grow, it's the place we write about you after you have already made it big. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 15:26, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
You might want to read the source before you restore material that someone claims is not properly sourced. As the editor removing it claimed, the source does not name Jeff Leach. It also does not say he cheated on his girlfriend. It is a WP:BLP violation to restore that statement as is. You've already restored it three times, so I suggest that you also read WP:EW. Meters (talk) 04:04, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
Draft:Donald Lewis Sparks
You declined this draft as as no indication of notability. However, I am going to revise it slightly and accept this. Although it was written in a somewhat promotional style, there was no possible question of notability . The relevant standard is WP:PROF, and the individual is the holder of a named professorship at a major university. If adequately referenced, according to the rules there, this is sufficient evidence of notability for an article. WP:PROF of course is completely independent of the GNG--they are alternatives. This is one of the few cases where a special notability guideline has firm consensus to over-ride the GNG--the status of most others is , as you know, considerably disputed/ DGG ( talk ) 04:50, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
- DGG (talk · contribs) no worries at the time of my denial I don't think there wasn't even any references to confirm anything except they existed, but I can't remember since apparently it was also a copyright violation and I can no longer see the version. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 14:30, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
appreciation
I want to express my appreciation for your continuing work over many years in reviews new drafts and articles in fields where I would be completely lost. It greatly reassures me when I know that other people are working effectively rapidly, and (in those case where I can tell) extremely accurately in places where I am unable. (Those few editors who seem to work quicker are in my opinion notably inaccurate.) DGG ( talk ) 06:26, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
Hi Mcmatter,
I must admit I am puzzled why this was nominated for speedy deletion. It does not meet the WP:A7 set of criteria. Yeditepe University exists. It has a engineering faculty.
Were this something along the lines of the (notional) "Yeditepe University Faculty of Engineering Student Association", that would be an obvious A7.
It would appear to me that, in the absence of evidence of notable individual Yeditepe University Faculty of Engineering graduates or academics, this article would be better as a WP:REDIRECT to Yeditepe University#Faculties
Your thoughts about this?
Pete AU aka --Shirt58 (talk) 10:51, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
- @Shirt58: Faculties are generally not notable or significant enough to warrant their own article, this is no exception. The references are all primary and offer nothing to say anyone else considers this organization significant to write about. The A7 criteria does not say it does not exist, simply that it is not significant enough to warrant it's own article here on Wikipedia. In the future please read the criteria for CSD prior to removing the tags as your argument of it exists it not really efficient to counter an A7, no one said it didn't. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 13:18, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
Castleman Disease Collaborative Network
Hi McMatter,
Thank you for your kind words of welcome and for your feedback on my edits to the CDCN page. I'm not sure if there is utility in doing this, but I created and submitted a draft of a separate page for the CORONA project (title: CDCN CORONA Project) that includes additional information on the data collection process and the progress we've made so far (ex: we completed Phase I resulting in the publication of a paper, we are currently working on Phase II). I know that there is already a section on it in the CDCN article, but I thought it was worth a try. I realize that it make up to 3 months for the article to be approved... is it faster then to just create the article and have the editors modify or delete if they wish?
Thank you, --AlexisDarlene (talk) 18:03, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
Nomination of ESentire for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article ESentire, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.
The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ESentire until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:04, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
Thank you ...
... for having wished me a good night. I read that now, after my morning routine of thanking people. I don't want to blow up the deletion discussion for the opera singer, but I have been requested to write articles on the one available source from GSL alone which is the bible of opera singers. We can't expect - as requested by a different user - online reviews for a singer whose prime was in the 1970s, and I have no access to paper clippings. I will now change my plan for today (a new article) and improve "her" instead, because I hate these tags on top of article that discredit the content. Can't help feeling a bit pushed. I'll notify project opera when done. - No idea why you feel you have to do all this, instead of just tagging for better sources. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:54, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
- @Gerda Arendt: As a new page patroller, I see how little the tags actually do on most articles, this one had already been sitting for 2 hours with an in use tag. This is a method, used by some, to prevent tagging and nominations of articles not meeting inclusion criteria. I looked for sourcing myself, including going to the Dutch and German Wikipedia to see if they had better articles on her. As I have admitted I had to use translators for most of my searches I couldn't find anything to help support the article. It's not my goal to make more work for anyone, but I do want to see the a reliable encyclopedia about notable subjects. The article looks to be in a much better place now and will probably be kept in the AFD discussion. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 14:43, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
- I could see that you are new, or you would have withdrawn as soon as I mentioned GSL. Nothing wrong in learning. The article is in better shape now, but would have been in five days anyway, without cutting my outing short (by beginning too late). I hate deletion tags fervently, DYK? My first article was deleted in minutes but rescued, one was deleted, but all others kept. I wanted to write Requiem (Martin) today, remembering the atrocities of 9 November, not to search for refs for a woman who recorded alongside Sutherland and Pavarotti, two of the greatest names in opera history. - Motherly advice: tag for sources missing and wait a week before subjecting an article to deletion if in doubt, - I'm not talking blatant promotion and such things, of course. Nobody will be hurt ;) - Perhaps I'll write about the Requiem after all. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:31, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
Updated article - Draft:Debbie Haski-Leventhal
Hi Mcmatter Thank you for reviewing my draft article. I had issues with the referencing formatting but it has now been corrected. I would greatly appreciate your review and any suggestions. Foureasternroad (talk) 23:30, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message
 | Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
McMatter, the page in reference was not created for the use of promotion. It is a work in progress for the reference of a prominent public figure. Kindly refrain from tagging the page as such.
- Korrectorr — Preceding unsigned comment added by Korrectorr (talk • contribs) 04:26, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
- @Korrectorr: The only thing that is not promotional is his first career which that isn't even sourced. The portion about his education does not even seem factual as I can't find any evidence that any accredited university offers anything like a Bachelors of Science in Public Speaking. Nothing else in there is written from a neutral point of view. Tell me how it's not promotional? McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 04:32, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
- @McMatter: As I have stated, it is a work in progress among us and his company. You are correct to say that there is no such thing as a "B.S. in Public Speaking." It was placed there as a placeholder, as we literally just created the page less than an hour ago and surprised to find that that someone had already monitored the page within 5 minutes. You can view more about his source here: https://lifestyleguide.com/article/influencing-lives-and-inspiring-millions-interview-with-eric-feng I'm not sure from what point of view that it is not considered "neutral," as we are not biasing any views for or against his works. What specifically are you referring to that is "not neutral" as you have stated?
Please don't Delete my Company Page in Wikipedia (Warriors Entertainment)
Hi, my name is Sean Junior, Founder & Chairman of Warriors Entertainment. Please don't delete our Company page on Wikipedia, because we're already registered company and well known company in Our Country. Our clients are not giving us projects and declined there's project and giving to others due to no page on IMDb and Wikipedia. So I have already added in IMDb Click here to view our Page. So please don't do a Speedy Deletion and I believe you understand our struggles in this 4 years (2016 - present). And, I believe you understand our situations in this current pandemic. Thank You so much. Please help us. May God bless you, sir
From, Malaysia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Seanjuniorworks (talk • contribs) 12:34, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
Draft:penny O'Brien
So i did what ye asked me and remove the IMPD and game manufacturers and now I'm working on gettin' more informations so i want ye to review it again and tell me what's wrong and I'll check it and fix it! So cheers! Photos of rdr2 (talk) 16:45, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
- @Photos of rdr2: Looks like Anguswoof has already reviewed it for you a couple times. Please take some time to click through the links in the messages that have been left for you. As I have said before if someone else in a reliable source has not written about Penny then we will not allow an article about her. Has any magazine or news agency ever written about her? If you can't say yes then your time may be better served elsewhere until such time as she get's noticed by a bigger audience. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 19:00, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
Daniel cormier
Stop being biased and deleting things off Daniel Cormiers page Mmakingpin (talk) 03:26, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
Aida Habtezion
You left a message that the "Aida Habtezion" that I created lacked "sources".
But I provided [1] What additional credible source? Erescholar (talk) 09:58, 4 December 2020 (UTC)Erescholar
References
- @Erescholar: that source is considered primary as it is written by her employer and does not be used to confirm notability. We need to see other sources to prove her notability. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 14:38, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
- This is strange! If Stanford University statements on Dr. Aida Habtezion is deemed inadequate because the University is her employer, where would one go to get additional credible information. The other source would Dr. Habtezion's statements
on Linked-In. But those aren't independent sources. They are her own words. And going to Pfizer wouldn't work because the latter will her employer.
By the way when you say "we" in your responses, who do you mean?
Erescholar (talk) 16:29, 4 December 2020 (UTC)Erescholar
- @Erescholar: Then maybe she doesn't warrant an article at this point if no one outside of her employers have taken notice of her. You may need to look through WP:GNG and WP:NACADEMIC to see what is needed to establish notability for inclusion. When I say we I am speaking the collective we of the English Wikipedia as this is a collaborative project. Please don't make a new heading each time you reply just indent your reply with a colon. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 16:50, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
@Mcmatter: I don't agree with yopur suggestion that that Dr. Aida Habtezion should wait to get her page on Wikipedia. After all, being chosen a Chief Medical Officer & head of Worldwide Medical & Safety within WRDM is a major achievement. Erescholar (talk) 04:01, 5 December 2020 (UTC)Erescholar
- @Erescholar: That's fine, she may very well qualify for a page, hence the reason I didn't recommend the page for deletion. The problem right now is there isn't enough to show she meets any of the inclusion criteria, an associate professor is not enough to meet WP:NACADEMIC alone, being a CMO is not enough to meet WP:ANYBIO. If you can provide reliable sources to proves she meets any of these criteria then please add them in the article and submit it for review. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 04:44, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
Marjon Lambriks
Do you remember Marjon Lambriks, soprano? - Look! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:15, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
New Page Patrol December Newsletter
Hello Mcmatter,
- Year in review
It has been a productive year for New Page Patrol as we've roughly cut the size of the New Page Patrol queue in half this year. We have been fortunate to have a lot of great work done by Rosguill who was the reviewer of the most pages and redirects this past year. Thanks and credit go to JTtheOG and Onel5969 who join Rosguill in repeating in the top 10 from last year. Thanks to John B123, Hughesdarren, and Mccapra who all got the NPR permission this year and joined the top 10. Also new to the top ten is DannyS712 bot III, programmed by DannyS712 which has helped to dramatically reduce the number of redirects that have needed human patrolling by patrolling certain types of redirects (e.g. for differences in accents) and by also patrolling editors who are on on the redirect whitelist.
| Rank | Username | Num reviews | Log |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | DannyS712 bot III (talk) | 67,552 | Patrol Page Curation |
| 2 | Rosguill (talk) | 63,821 | Patrol Page Curation |
| 3 | John B123 (talk) | 21,697 | Patrol Page Curation |
| 4 | Onel5969 (talk) | 19,879 | Patrol Page Curation |
| 5 | JTtheOG (talk) | 12,901 | Patrol Page Curation |
| 6 | Mcampany (talk) | 9,103 | Patrol Page Curation |
| 7 | DragonflySixtyseven (talk) | 6,401 | Patrol Page Curation |
| 8 | Mccapra (talk) | 4,918 | Patrol Page Curation |
| 9 | Hughesdarren (talk) | 4,520 | Patrol Page Curation |
| 10 | Utopes (talk) | 3,958 | Patrol Page Curation |
- Reviewer of the Year
John B123 has been named reviewer of the year for 2020. John has held the permission for just over 6 months and in that time has helped cut into the queue by reviewing more than 18,000 articles. His talk page shows his efforts to communicate with users, upholding NPP's goal of nurturing new users and quality over quantity.
- NPP Technical Achievement Award
As a special recognition and thank you DannyS712 has been awarded the first NPP Technical Achievement Award. His work programming the bot has helped us patrol redirects tremendously - more than 60,000 redirects this past year. This has been a large contribution to New Page Patrol and definitely is worthy of recognition.
Six Month Queue Data: Today – 2262 Low – 2232 High – 10271
To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here
18:16, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
A7 on Marguerite Ray
Hi Mcmatter -- I understand why you A7'd this, but could I request that you pop names like this into Google for a moment before going for the speedy? It can make Wikipedia look biased if such articles are deleted without consideration of whether there's any notability to be hunted out. Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 04:34, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
CSD tag
Hi Mcmatter! Regarding the A7 you placed here, I'd suggest reading this thread to see how it played out. Please remember that sources aren't required to meet the WP:CCS standard, and that we shouldn't tag newly created pages that appear to be under construction too quickly; draftifying probably would've been less likely to make the editor feel bitten. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 08:56, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
Photo copyright
So i saw at penny O'Brien you got a photo deleted for a copyright ( and I'm sorry!😅) can i use photos from her own Instagram or from getting images?:) Photos of rdr2 (talk) 07:43, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Photos of rdr2: The same issue arises with any image you pull from online, unless you can prove it is released under a compatible license, you can't use it on Wikipedia. There are some exceptions for non-free use you must be familiar with and follow the procedure found at WP:NFCC. However any image added will once again be deleted if the article is and the AFD discussion is leaning the way of delete. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 15:19, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
Grand! Just want to ask you one question! (Thanks for stickin' with!) If i put a photo then put a reference to the photo will it be deleted or it's gonna be okay? Thanks once again mate! Photos of rdr2 (talk) 15:09, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
And please can you remove the speedy deletion? :) because i fixed the problem and I'm waiting an administration to remove it! :) Photos of rdr2 (talk) 16:09, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Photos of rdr2:, you have to make sure that you have put up the correct reasoning for Free Use and the corresponding license. These can then only be uploaded to the English Wikipedia, not to the Commons as Commons can only accept certain creative commons licenses or public domain. I'm not sure which speedy tag you wish me to remove, if you are talking about the article, that is a Article for Deletion discussion and must stay until the discussion is complete and I'll be honest there is still not enough proof for inclusion per WP:N. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 19:46, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
Lad...I'm running out of time and the article penny O'Brien needs to be done for her birthday so i ask you to review it and read what i wrote in the speedy deletion discussion first! Please it's need to be done :) Photos of rdr2 (talk) 19:39, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Photos of rdr2:, her birthday has no bearing on the article what so ever. You need to prove she meets any of the inclusion criteria, we don't just allow any articles. Let me break it down;
- significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions - Being a voice actor for one game does not satisfy this, she needs to have been a major part of multiple notable projects.
- a large fan base or a significant "cult" following - So far this does not seem to be the case.
- made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment - Being a voice actor in a game is not unique, prolific or innovated.
- Each of these poinst also must be backed up with reliable sources confirming what you state, this does not include IMDB. Simply put she does not currently meet the inclusion criteria. No pleading will change this, the only thing would be proof anyone outside of her affiliations have noticed and written multiple articles about her, not just mentions or quick overviews. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 20:09, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
Grand... Photos of rdr2 (talk) 20:12, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
I understand...so the article won't work now...ok..but I really don't want it to go waste can i transfer it to a draft? Photos of rdr2 (talk) 20:17, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Photos of rdr2:, Absolutely you can copy it over to your sandbox for later. I wish her all the best and hopefully she gets noticed and cast into more roles and you can bring her back to Wikipedia. Don't delete or move the current article, I would instead recommend that you make a note on the AFD discussion asking if the article is deleted if it can be sent to your sandbox or Userfied for you to work on if she does become notable enough for Wikipedia. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 20:21, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
Fair enough..thank you lad! For everything! Hope to see you on another article again XD Farwell! Photos of rdr2 (talk) 20:29, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for reviewing! I've updated the page
Mcmatter,
Thanks for reviewing the page/article that I created "Commercial Finance Broker". I've added more sources, can you please review it again?
Thanks again for your effort.
Queen Maverik
Queen Maverik also known as Queen or Maverik, is a YouTuber Gamer from Canada. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Winniewiliski (talk • contribs) 13:16, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
- @Winniewiliski:, why does that matter to me or Wikipedia? Wikipedia is platform to write about things that have already been written about by others in reliable sources. The purpose is not to advertise, make known or write about every possible topic. Continued pushing like this could lad to your removal of editing privileges on Wikipedia for promotion. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 14:27, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
Notability
Dear Mcmatter,
Thank you for your feedback. Both of the sources I've used came from websites with big following that operate independently of the topic. I've also noticed many current pages on Wikipedia, especially on youth organizations, do not match the criteria for notability either. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by RogerStone780 (talk • contribs) 01:40, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 15 February 2021
Could you assist me in creating my wikipedia biography Josephclarke17 (talk) 22:08, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
Biography for Cubanlynk
asking assistance in creating a wikipedia Biography for Musician Cubanlynk — Preceding unsigned comment added by Josephclarke17 (talk • contribs) 22:10, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
Request on 17:43:31, 19 February 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Mitral8
Thank you Mcmatter for your rapid and correct review. I made a mistake on the last line, the idea is not to create a new word but a valid water management concept that is abbreviated for easier writing/saying. I will edit the article by adding more info about the concept, and resubmit.
However, as you probably noticed, I have declared that I have Conflict of Interest with the subject matter, which is Sustainable efficiency of water management and planning. Do you have interest in water? In order to make it more objective, can you be the author of this article? I need help.
Finally, I am sorry if I am making a mistake in writing to you, I am new in Wikipedia editing and confused what to click and how to write things.
Mitral8 (talk) 17:43, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
- {ping|Mitral8} You need to make the article on a clear and concise subject that has already been discussed in other multiple reliable sources. Wikipedia is not the place to publish new ideas or concepts. I'm not sure what your conflict of interest is, unless you work for a company called Sefficiency or promoting your own research. If you happen to be an expert in the subject or avid follower does not necessarily mean you have a conflict of interest it just means you may have issues with the neutral point of view policy. I have no knowledge on the subject matter nor any current interest in expanding on my knowledge in the subject matter. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 19:00, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
Request on 18:35:06, 21 February 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Ggopmi
Dear McMatter,
I wanted to create a page in Wikipedia devoted to the scientist M. I. Shvidler.
I am a volunteer, and I made my best efforts to collect all references both in Russian and English. Sure, Mr. Shvidler had more publications than presented, the institutions where he worked has undergone radical changes since collapse of Soviet Union. Still, I found and added the references for your considerations.
Please let me know about my mistakes and omissions.
Thank you. Have a great day.
Gregory Gleyzer ggopmi@yahoo.com Ggopmi (talk) 18:35, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
Ggopmi (talk) 18:35, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
Reply to speedy deletion request by RwiTexx
Hey! I deleted the page! I meant to put the title as User:RwiTexx instead of just RwiTexx. Thanks! --RwiTexx (talk) 15:40, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
Elaine Benes
Hello. I ask that you please allow my edits to her page. I replaced all the periods with exclamation points as its a reference to the show. Not vandalism. Entenmannshimsham (talk) 19:10, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Entenmannshimsha: It doesn't matter what it is a reference to, this is an encyclopedia not a fan site. Any further changes along this line may lead to lose of editing permissions.McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 19:13, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
Thats a shameEntenmannshimsham (talk) 19:21, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
Proposed Deletion Of Skeppy Page
Hi. I have contested the deletion of Skeppy on the page's talk page. Of course, I'm not asking you to do anything, I'm just informing you. EGL1234 05:00, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
Kiran Kumar Grandhi
Please man dont delete the page beacuase he was living human and he was the owner of delhi capitals franchise in ipl Hjnshb (talk) 15:04, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Hjnshb: I have a better idea, work on these articles following the WP:YFA process and make sure you can prove they have their own notability not tied to their parents. There seems to be a history with the particular articles and a history of ban evasion and Sockpuppetry.McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 15:14, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
Komito Analytics
Hi Mcmatter, thank you for taking time to review my article.
Today, you declined my article about Komito Analytics (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Komito_Analytics) referencing to G11 (Unambiguous advertising or promotion, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion#G11) criteria.
I spent a lot of time preparing this article, and as examples to follow I used other wiki pages on similar topics from this list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_web_analytics_software
In my opinion, some of them look like advertising more than my article, which does not have a single mention that could be considered advertising or promotion.
Moreover, I am new here and this is my first article, could you please help me to figure out what exactly was wrong with my article?
Thank you in advance, Carolyn Hodges (talk) 04:49, 27 March 2021 (UTC) Carolyn — Preceding unsigned comment added by CarolynHodges (talk • contribs) 04:40, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
- @CarolynHodges: so the issue with your draft is it is far too promotional the most prominent example is the Popularity section in the article. References to popular features are a source of opinion and once again very promotional and not even support by any reliable source. Please read through the links provided in the decline message to better understand the policies within Wikipedia. Judging by the tone and composition of this article I would say you have a conflict of interest when it comes to this topic which can make it difficult to write about it in a encyclopedic manner. I have done you the favour of cleaning up the draft and removing anything not supported by a citation and anything promotional in tone. The issue left now is there are no independent sources left to establish notability. I think looking through WP:NSOFT may also provide some guidance on what makes software notable on Wikipedia. 14:53, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Mcmatter: Great! Thanks for the detailed explanation. BTW, in the Popularity section, there was a reference to a book with a link to Google Books, which is part of a reliable source, do I need to add it back later? Carolyn Hodges (talk) 20:30, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Mcmatter: I've re-submited this page with your changes, I've added a few references to book and mentions by influencers in the web analytics field. Please review if you have time. I really appreciate what you are doing. Carolyn Hodges (talk) 21:17, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
The Army Cadet League of Canada
Your reverting of edits was well intended, but much of the information presented in its current format is horribly inaccurate. Citations and references are either no longer existent, or severely outdated.
The history section, as an example, is a complete fabrication. Cadet Services of Canada was a military organization, on par with a Corps in the Canadian Army. It was not, and could not be, the precursor to the ACLC. The organization which could perhaps be a precursor to the ACLC is the Cadet Services of Canada Association, which was much like a regimental association. The CSofC Association had two priorities: working for the benefit of the CSofC and working for the benefit of the Army Cadets. It was asked to drop the CSofC and focus on the RCAC. It refused, leading the way to the formation of the ACLC. Upon formation of the ACLC and its recognition as supervisory sponsor of the RCAC, the CSofC Association lost its seat at the National Cadet Council table (with VCDS) and any federal funding. The ACLC was formed in 1971 and the CSofC Association folded later, without a purpose (CSofC no longer existed, becoming the CIL and later CIC).
If anything, the CSofC Association became what is the CIC Association and Branch Advisory Council....................which is a battle for another day.
My question to you is simple: Do you want to help make this page accurate? If so, please contact us: https://www.armycadetleague.ca/contact/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rwgill (talk • contribs) 12:36, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Rwgill:, so firstly if your work with the association you should not be editing the article and should in fact be making recommendations on the talkpage, you should also be following the WP:COI policy. Now on to the content it does not say on par with a corp what it does say is was a part of the military reserve and part of the association, [[1]] still, unless you can provide a valid reference to support what you are saying we can't accept your word on the matter just because you work with them. From what I see you typing and what the reference I linked prior and the article they don't seem to be that far off. The CSofC was a military organization and a part of the reserves. In the 70's the CSofC was disbanded and the ACLC was formed and took over representing the RCAC on the national board. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 15:22, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
@Mcmatter:, so you cite a 20 year old military controlled reference that dedicates 50 words to history of The Army Cadet League of Canada, written with less care than what one would take to make a grilled cheese sandwich. The League refuted that when it came out and is working with CJCR to ensure that such subjects are taught correctly and accurately.
I ask again, do you want to help make this page more accurate?--Rwgill (talk) 23:21, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Rwgill: you still haven't provided any reliable source to refute anything in the article or even a change in the history of the ACLC. The article does not say CSofC became the ACLC it says the ACLC was formed and replaced the CSofC. So unless you can provide any reliable published source to support your changes we cannot accept them. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 23:26, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
My Draft: Space Exploration
I made a draft, Space Exploration. You rejected it. If I make it better, can I submit it again? 64.121.103.144 (talk) 15:57, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
I made a draft, Space Exploration. If I make it better, can I submit it again? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.121.103.144 (talk) 15:58, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
@64.121.103.144: if you can make it an article about a valid concise topic you absolutely can re-submit, however an essay is not what we are looking for. Please read through WP:YFA to help. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 16:01, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
Eddy Baker
Hello!
On March 30th, you rejected my article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Eddy_Baker. I totally agree with your reasoning why, as I did not cite as many sources as I could've/should've. So, I went back and cited every sentence I wrote with one or more reliable, notable, clear, and objective sources just to be extra sure. I'm just dropping you a message just to let you know I made the changes you requested and re-submitted.
Thanks!
Yeetboy606 (talk) 23:32, 2 April 2021 (UTC) Yeetboy606 (4/2/21)
Undeleting J.D. Mata article and moving to draftspace
Hello Mcmatter - thank you so much for your thoughtful and helpful comments - multiple times - during the Afd discussion re the article on J.D. Mata! I listened to your and others' comments and I believe I had greatly improved the article by the time Spartaz closed the Afd as a delete. More specifically, I had found two reliable secondary subject-independent sources focused on the subject of the article, which I believe along with the Best Directing nomination cited in the article demonstrate his notability. However. at this point I would just like the draft back so I can work on it and find additional support for his notability that meets Wikipedia guidelines from both presently existing reliable sources and additional reliable sources I believe are bound to be created in the future as his ongoing works are further reviewed.
I am writing to you, because you gave very fair advice the first time around to the first closer of the discussion advising him to relist AND because the closer of the relisted Afd, Spartaz, has now - just a few days after deleting the article and then refusing my request to restore it to draftspace - placed himself on hiatus and posted a disparaging comment about Wikipedia on his talk page expressing his utter frustration which I feel like he has taken out undeservedly on my very reasonable request to restore it to draftspace for improvement. I can assure you that if the draft is restored I will not submit it for consideration as a full article until it is significantly further improved. Larry Grossman (talk) 08:42, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Larry Grossman: at this point you can try and request it be draftified at WP:REFUND make sure to include in your request that you spoke to Spartaz he declined to review the AFD close and has now taken a wiki break, so you are now unable to ask for him to draftify the article. The reviewing admin may still decline due to the overwhelming delete consensus in the discussion and may just tell you to start over again in the Draft space. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 22:39, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you, Mcmatter for taking the time to give me your considered response. I just checked WP:REFUND and it appears that really what I should use is deletion review, so I will go that route. I would also like to address directly your comment that there was an overwhelming delete consensus. The problem with that conclusion is that the earlier votes were on the unimproved article. Each time a vote gave a supportable reason for deletion, I addressed it by revising the article to directly address their concerns. Now I understand why restoration of articles deleted as a result of the Afd process is via the deletion review process. The earlier deletion votes really should be validated in the context of the fully improved article. Also, the only way to validate those votes would be to at least temporarily restore it, so I will request that, as well. Larry Grossman (talk) 03:46, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Larry Grossman: good luck, I feel deletion review will endorse the close. It does not often go into "validating" early votes. I followed and participated in the discussion and still did not think he met the inclusion criteria. As a fair warning you may have the Conflict of Interest term thrown at you a few times, as your persistence could be seen as an indication of paid editing or a severe conflict of interest. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 05:22, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you, McMatter. I would like to directly address your suggestion that I my persistence suggests that I have a severe conflict of interest or am a paid editor. I do not have any conflict of interest and I am not a paid editor. I created the article because I looked him up because I wanted to know more about him and when I found that there was no article about him I started one. This is the same reason I started all the other articles I have started since I started editing Wikipedia more than 17 years ago in 2004 and includes articles such as the Manilla Galleon {uncredited - I hadn't yet started a user account but my IP address was logged and I put my initials "LG" in the edit comments}, Misión San Fernando Rey de España de Velicatá , and King Christian X Land. It also includes the articles on Owen Roberts (aviator), Fiesta Inn, Meadowmont, North Carolina, and TUFESA. Those last four are articles are ones for which I also fought successful deletion challenges in prior years. All the articles I start I believe passionately should be here and it brings me great pleasure to see that those four articles remain that I had the time and energy to fight deletion processes on and that as a result of my anti-deletion efforts other editors been able to improve them and countless readers have learned from them, because I was persistent - which is my nature. Moreover, I am seeing an increasingly worrisome issue in Wikipedia of articles on notable topics being deleted simply because the editors who put their precious time and efforts into writing the articles did not know how to answer. Once I have properly dealt with this issue of what I believe is the improper deletion of the J.D. Mata article, I intend to look for other worthy articles being attacked by editors with a penchant for deletion to assist the editors who have invested their time and efforts into those articles to improve them to meet all community set standards and place my vote to keep, once I have assisted those editors in bringing those articles up to snuff. I believe that Wikipedia and society at large benefits greatly if all notable - though relatively obscure - topics are covered, so yes I am persistent on keeping this topic in Wikipedia. However, I am willing to accept a draft status so that I can improve it and resubmit it through the community review process. Larry Grossman (talk) 07:08, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Larry Grossman: I wasn’t accusing you of having a conflict just warning you others may believe there is. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 13:36, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you, McMatter. I see - thank you for the heads up that that might be thrown at me. ...and Happy Easter! Larry Grossman (talk) 18:29, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Larry Grossman: I wasn’t accusing you of having a conflict just warning you others may believe there is. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 13:36, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you, McMatter. I would like to directly address your suggestion that I my persistence suggests that I have a severe conflict of interest or am a paid editor. I do not have any conflict of interest and I am not a paid editor. I created the article because I looked him up because I wanted to know more about him and when I found that there was no article about him I started one. This is the same reason I started all the other articles I have started since I started editing Wikipedia more than 17 years ago in 2004 and includes articles such as the Manilla Galleon {uncredited - I hadn't yet started a user account but my IP address was logged and I put my initials "LG" in the edit comments}, Misión San Fernando Rey de España de Velicatá , and King Christian X Land. It also includes the articles on Owen Roberts (aviator), Fiesta Inn, Meadowmont, North Carolina, and TUFESA. Those last four are articles are ones for which I also fought successful deletion challenges in prior years. All the articles I start I believe passionately should be here and it brings me great pleasure to see that those four articles remain that I had the time and energy to fight deletion processes on and that as a result of my anti-deletion efforts other editors been able to improve them and countless readers have learned from them, because I was persistent - which is my nature. Moreover, I am seeing an increasingly worrisome issue in Wikipedia of articles on notable topics being deleted simply because the editors who put their precious time and efforts into writing the articles did not know how to answer. Once I have properly dealt with this issue of what I believe is the improper deletion of the J.D. Mata article, I intend to look for other worthy articles being attacked by editors with a penchant for deletion to assist the editors who have invested their time and efforts into those articles to improve them to meet all community set standards and place my vote to keep, once I have assisted those editors in bringing those articles up to snuff. I believe that Wikipedia and society at large benefits greatly if all notable - though relatively obscure - topics are covered, so yes I am persistent on keeping this topic in Wikipedia. However, I am willing to accept a draft status so that I can improve it and resubmit it through the community review process. Larry Grossman (talk) 07:08, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Larry Grossman: good luck, I feel deletion review will endorse the close. It does not often go into "validating" early votes. I followed and participated in the discussion and still did not think he met the inclusion criteria. As a fair warning you may have the Conflict of Interest term thrown at you a few times, as your persistence could be seen as an indication of paid editing or a severe conflict of interest. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 05:22, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you, Mcmatter for taking the time to give me your considered response. I just checked WP:REFUND and it appears that really what I should use is deletion review, so I will go that route. I would also like to address directly your comment that there was an overwhelming delete consensus. The problem with that conclusion is that the earlier votes were on the unimproved article. Each time a vote gave a supportable reason for deletion, I addressed it by revising the article to directly address their concerns. Now I understand why restoration of articles deleted as a result of the Afd process is via the deletion review process. The earlier deletion votes really should be validated in the context of the fully improved article. Also, the only way to validate those votes would be to at least temporarily restore it, so I will request that, as well. Larry Grossman (talk) 03:46, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
Your rejection
A while ago, you rejected Draft:Space Exploration. I have added a lot to it. Please change the title to American Space Exploration and re-review it. 64.121.103.144 (talk) 16:57, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
- @64.121.103.144: While the article is a much better article then it was when I first rejected it, I would probably still decline it as a duplication of NASA and would recommend you edit that article instead to include any missing information. If you still wish to have someone else review it I will add my comment and revert the rejection allowing for you to resubmit. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 17:17, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
My Draft
You rejected my draft. Please undo that so I can expand it. Link: Draft:Starship SN11. 64.121.103.144 (talk) 18:05, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
Want to put your rejection back?
I'm perfectly content that it be rejected Fiddle Faddle 18:07, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Timtrent: I’ll let your decline stand for now. I don’t honestly think it will be expanded enough to warrant its own article. The text so far is a cut and paste from the other article, the only addition is the table supported almost entirely by social media posts. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 18:13, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Sanat Sawant
Hello Mcmatter,
I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Sanat Sawant for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly indicate why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.
If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.
You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!
Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
JW 1961 Talk 17:15, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
- Apologies for this landing here via page curation, I realise you only re-directed this often deleted (under various variations of the name) to draft. Have a great evening JW 1961 Talk 17:24, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
Eddy Baker
Hi McMatter. You declined my submission https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Eddy_Baker on March 30th. A few days after that, I made the changes you asked for (I added better, more numerable sources), then posted on here to let you know. You didn't reply to my message, and now it's been deleted/moved because enough time passed. My submission is still awaiting re-review. If my fixes do/did not satisfy you, please let me know how I can improve my submission to your liking! I'm here, ready, and open to any critiques you have. I'd really like to get this page up, or at least have it attended to.
Thanks,
Yeetboy606 (talk) 22:15, 10 April 2021 (UTC)Yeetboy606
- @Yeetboy60: I have reviewed and I am unsure if ti would pass an AFD based on the criteria of WP:MUSIC. I am not seeing anything reliable really discussing Eddie in any detail. The Uproxx article is not considered reliable as it was just about a performance he did for them. Genius and Datpiff are just track listings. I don't bother looking at any social media such as Twitter and YouTube because they can't be used to establish notability as they are not considered reliable. I won't decline yet, in case someone more familiar with the all the different music sub genres may feel differently, however I can't find anything else to help either on my precursory searches. The article needs to based on what others have written about the subject. These sources need to be independent and have a history of fact checking. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 22:54, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Mcmatter: Got it, thank you for explaining. I replaced the citations from UPROXX, Genius, Datpiff, Twitter, and YouTube with independent, objective, fact-checked articles about Eddy Baker (and details about his career) from the publications LA Weekly, HipHopDX, No Jumper, Lyrical Lemonade, and Masked Gorilla. I resubmitted it with these new changes. Also, in accordance with your citation rules, there is no appropriate way to cite the sentence I wrote about Chris Travis leaving Eddy Baker's larger rap group Seshollowaterboyz. Chris Travis left the group via a tweet, but citing Twitter is forbidden; his departure is talked about extensively in multiple interviews and broadcasts on well-known YouTube channels, but citing YouTube is forbidden; and the Wikipedia page for Chris Travis says, "He is a former member of Seshollowaterboyz, a collective with fellow American rappers Bones, Xavier Wulf and Eddy Baker," and the Wikipedia page for Seshollowaterboyz denotes Chris Travis as a past member, but citing other Wikipedia pages is not allowed. Neither Wikipedia page has a citation for this event, presumably for the same reasons I'm finding. So, for the aforementioned reasons, I contend that my sentence about Chris Travis leaving Seshollowaterboyz should not have a citation, in accordance with your citation rules. I just wanted to cover that in here in case you might've rejected the article because that sentence doesn't have a citation. I hope the five new independent sources I included adequately demonstrate that Eddy Baker should have a Wikipedia page. If for some reason you don't like any of these new sources, I'm still happy to fix them for you, if need be. Thanks!
User:Zyxrq / User:NewsHusk
Hi Mcmatter,
you just placed a speedy delete on User:NewsHusk, but what should happen before the delete is an undo of his page move. You see User:Zyxrq is a new (and troubled) user, who seems to have thought he can just change his user name by moving the page himself, instead of requesting a rename. So this move would need to be reverted by an Admin before one can delete the pages User:NewsHusk and User talk:NewsHusk. --Sprachraum (talk) 01:25, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
Jess Wells
Perhaps you can help me with this. I am mentioned in an article in red type and the reader is told "there is no page for Jess Wells". What can I do to create one or have one created? I had read recently that one can write an autobiography (I know, it's bad form) but my page (Jess Wells) has been deleted. Thanks for your help. Here's the source of the link: [[2]]Scribegrrl (talk) 14:48, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
Avioth
You ask for reference sources when I cited the only one I know of. I was working on the basis of something being better than nothing, and frankly that didn't deserve an anarchist dismissal. I indicated it was in dire need of more work, but simply to junk it in favour of nothing reaffirms my despair at WP, which is why I'm not posting in my own name. Given that architecturally the French Government recognises it as having an architectural feature is national importance, you should surely do better. In the mean time, I revert to my established position, your source policy is in dire need of updating, because it no longer recognises current academic thinking.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.217.82.74 (talk • contribs)
- Actually our policy is proper academic procedure, the primary difference being we do not accept primary sourcing because we cannot verify it per WP:OR. The "reference" you provided only served to established it exists and doesn't support any of the essay like comments left. If no one else has written about the structure then maybe it isn't notable enough for it's own article. Please refer to WP:NBUILDING and WP:YFA for guidance. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 19:09, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
Eddy Baker (Hello?)
Hello! In regards to my submission https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Eddy_Baker, I have made every revision you've told me to make, explained and justified each change, notified you politely, and kindly asked if there's anything else that would satisfy you. The least you can do is respond, or not delete my messages from your talk page. It's disrespectful. Also, it's wrong that I have to go through all this to publish a page on Eddy Baker, or at the very least get you to tend to this submission, when less prominent / written about members of Eddy Baker's rap group (such as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Travis) have Wikipedia pages with very far fewer sources (2 citations compared to 8) and ZERO attempts at proof of notability–which is the very issue you've fixed upon my submission. It's not right. I know I'm following all of the guidelines and I know that the just thing is that Eddy Baker's page should be published.
Yeetboy606 (talk) 01:58, 19 April 2021 (UTC)@Yeetboy606
- @Yeetboy606:, first off I am a volunteer, I don't get paid to do any of this. Second my talk page is automatically archive by a bot. Thirdly The page will get approved when it gets approved as this project is run by volunteers. I already told you I will leave it to another reviewer to review it. The process is the same for anyone who is coming here to promote any artist on Wikipedia. Creating a new article on Wikipedia is not an easy task and the reason we recommend most new users not come in and try to make an article as their first task like you did. This and your tone here in this message makes it seem like you may have a conflict of interest with this subject. [3] I have gone through and would still decline the article as near I can tell none of the references but one are considered reliable, and the one that is only mentions the subject. Has anyone actually published anything in depth ABOUT Baker or something that actually support they meet one or more criteria of WP:SINGER? I will not be reviewing the article that way if you disagree with my review you can wait until another reviewer comes by to look at it. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 03:19, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
Komito Analytics
Hi @Mcmatter, could you please review my draft once again? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Komito_Analytics
Thank you, Carolyn Hodges (talk) 23:59, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
Speedy deletion declined: YSN Flow
Hello Mcmatter. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of YSN Flow, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: This article is not a WP:G4 candidate as it is significantly different the article deleted via Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/YSN Flow The artist has been signed to a major label (Republic Records) though only sourced from the label's website. Post 2019 coverage in XXL (magazine) is an indication of at least significance, if not notability. No prejudice to a second AfD. Thank you. Shirt58 (talk) 09:47, 21 April 2021 (UTC).