Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 18:50, 28 April 2015

Joseph2302 uses the Wikibreak Switch template, and plans to update this notice if a wikibreak is taken.

PLEASE READ

If you want to leave a message, please do it at the bottom, as a new section, for better formatting. You can do that by simply pressing the plus sign (+) or "new section" on the top of this page. And don't forget to sign your messages with four tildes, like this: ~~~~

Attention: I prefer to keep discussions unfragmented. If you leave a comment for me here, I will most likely respond to it on this same page—my talk page—as an effort to keep the entire conversation in one place. By the same token, if I leave a comment on your talk page, please respond to it there. Remember, we can use our watchlist and topic subscriptions to keep track of when responses are made. At the same time, feel free to send an alert to me on this page about a comment you have left elsewhere.

Thank you!

Archives

2015: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

This page has archives. Sections older than 10 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 2 sections are present.

If you've come to this page because you got a notification saying I'm patrolling your page, then it just means that I've checked your new page meets Misplaced Pages standards. If it didn't, then I will have tagged the problems on the article itself.

Block notes

Unblock Request

Joseph2302 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I apologise wholeheartedly and unreservedly for my ridiculous edits early this morning, they were completely stupid and unnecessary. I shouldn't have been editing Misplaced Pages at 2am when tired, as it leads to very bad decision-making- this is not an excuse, and in future I won't be editing when so tired, as it clearly compromises the quality of my decision-making. See for example my last unblock request, which was badly written and failed to address the issues properly. I know I've let a lot of people down, including myself and @Jytdog:, and I'm sorry. Also sorry to @Nakon: for having to clear up my mess, and @Mike V: for having to waste time Checkusering me, both of which wouldn't have been necessary if I hadn't been stupidly disruptive. With a few ridiculous edits, I've ruined the trust of many editors that I'd built up through thousands of good edits, and I realise this may casue semi-permanent trust issues with other users now. I realise that these edits were inappropriate, and I won't be doing them in future. I can confirm 100% that my account has not been compromised, no-one else in my house was even awake at that time, and I take full responsibility for my disruptive editing. If you look at my user contributions during this period, you will notice that there was a mixture of good and ridiculously bad edits, whereas a compromised account would only have made bad edits. Checkuser also suggests that my account has not been compromised, I don't know what more evidence I can give that my account has never been compromised, but it was me who made these dreadful edits. Please could someone remove the indef block for a compromised account, as my account is not compromised? I would understand if you wanted to impose a temporary block on me for disruptive editing instead, as this is what I'm actually guilty of. I'll definitely take this as a behavioural warning, and for a few days or so, I will engage only in uncontroversial edits, like working on articles on my watchlist. In particular, I want to work on improving my new article England at the Cricket World Cup, as some of the sections would benefit from rewriting and better sourcing. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:36, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Accept reason:

Per the discussion below and Nakon's assent, I've unblocked you. Please remember that you are in a sort of probation, which you agreed to below - another one of these episodes and your account will be indefinitely blocked. Take a Wikibreak when you feel that coming! §FreeRangeFrog 20:29, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

So far, I've seen good work from you - but there was that incident in February that got you a short block. Are you likely to go off the rails again? I'm not really expecting you to answer "Yes" to that - but I am wondering if there are reasons for it happening that you could address. There's only one way we can address things like this - and here we are. There are several possible reasons I can think of, but you must know the right one. I'm inclined to support an unblock, but with a warning that if it happens again, there would be no coming back, good contribs notwithstanding. So, are you sure that you can keep small relations (or so-called friends) out of your machine, or keep the lid on the bottle, or the weed in the packet? Or whatever it was that causes it? If you are given a fresh chance, don't blow it. Peridon (talk) 12:05, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

First thing, all edits on this account are made by me. I only edit using my account on my laptop and phone, both of which no-one in the world has access to. Whenever I leave my laptop (even for just 30 seconds), I always shut my laptop lid, so no-one can do anything. Hence, all edits using this account are made by me, and I'm 100% directly responsible for them.

I acknowledge I've been disruptive twice now (in February with some test edits/vandalism, and some stupid edits this week), and these aren't acceptable, and should not be ignored (despite my thousands of good edits).

Think one of the main problems is spending too much time on Wiki sometimes, and especially dealing with user problems (COI/new users/new pages). Generally when I do too much editing in too short a time (i.e doing it on-off for about 12 hours in a day, as I did the other day), the quality of my edits/decision-making seems to decline, and both these disruptive streaks have come at the end of long editing sessions. If unblocked, I would make sure I edit Misplaced Pages in shorter bursts (i.e. not in 12 hour spells, and not longer than an hour or 2 at any one time), as this would help keep the good editing, and remove the unhelpful editing. Also, I won't edit when tired/ill etc.. as my edits are worse in these circumstances.

I am definitely willing to accept a conditional unblock, with @Peridon:'s suggestion of "any more disruption=indef block" seeming perfectly fair to me. It would give me no motivation to ever consider vandalising Misplaced Pages again, since I enjoy contributing Misplaced Pages lots, and so I would not risk losing that privilege forever. Joseph2302 (talk) 21:32, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

I think giving Joseph a last chance wouldn't hurt - @Nakon, is it fine by you? Max Semenik (talk) 07:55, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Joseph2302, I'm surprised and saddened to see this. I look forward to when you can unconditionally guarantee that you will make only the responsible and helpful edits that I think of as typical of you. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:56, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

@MaxSem: Yes, this is OK. Nakon 20:20, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for unblocking me, I won't let you down. Joseph2302 (talk) 23:34, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of England at the Cricket World Cup

Hello Joseph2302,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged England at the Cricket World Cup for deletion, because it seems to be an article that was created in violation of a block or ban. Content created by banned users will be deleted immediately.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Roshan014 (talk) 11:43, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

@Roshan014:, I wasn't blocked when I created this article, there was no sockpuppetry involved. The article is completely legitimate under Misplaced Pages article policy, as it was created before my block. surely it shouldn't be deleted because I'm now blocked? Joseph2302 (talk) 12:10, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

help withEngland at the Cricket World Cup

I ccreated the England at the Cricket World Cup page. As I'm now blocked, someone has marked it for deletion as sockpuppetry /block evasion, however it was created before my block, so the article is legitimate. As I'm blocked, I cannot contest this at the article talk page like I usually would. Please can someone help this article not get deleted? Joseph2302 (talk) 12:17, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

This is fixed; an editor mis-read the CSD criteria. Kuru (talk) 12:41, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 21 April

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the England at the Cricket World Cup page, your edit caused an unsupported parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:24, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

 Fixed Joseph2302 (talk) 13:41, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	You reverted the obscene attacks against my userspace while I was offline, and I greatly appreciate that. It truly is a good thing you were there. So here is a Barnstar for your diligent efforts. Mr. Guye (talk) 03:46, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

@Mr. Guye:, glad I could help, their edits to your user page (and later mine), and other pages were clearly inappropriate. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:44, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

April 2015

When moving pages, please remember to fix any double redirects. These can create slow, unpleasant experiences for the reader, waste server resources, and make the navigational structure of the site confusing. Thank you. Joseph2302 (talk) 23:14, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

Can RENEE rochelle be moved to draft vs delete???

Can RENEE rochelle be moved to draft vs deletion???? 2602:306:3419:DBD0:F07A:9F69:1A0F:88A4 (talk) 00:24, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

please move to draft so that I can continue working on Renee Rochelle thank you 🏢2602:306:3419:DBD0:F07A:9F69:1A0F:88A4 (talk) 00:50, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

I've asked the user who put it up for deletion if it's okay to move it to draftspace instead, see Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Renee Rochelle. If they're okay with it, then I'll do it. Joseph2302 (talk) 01:03, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

If this happens, I would strongly recommend reading Misplaced Pages:Your first article- in particular, you would need independent reliable sources to show that Renee Rochelle is notable. Joseph2302 (talk) 01:06, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Also, @Nairobi Adams: so you are also aware of this. Joseph2302 (talk) 01:10, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Thank you - HJ Martin and Son

Thank you for declining the deletion for this page. I do have a question - many of the the factual items that have primary sources to the company webpage are also mentioned in the profiles that have been written about it and I have used as sources elsewhere on this page. Is it better to repeat those sources than to include some primary sources? With the exception of one or two things, I can probably remove most of the primary sources in this manner, but is seems redundant to me. That is actually why I had so many primary sources initially - I wanted to make sure I had as many as possible rather than just relying on the same sources. Thanks in advance for any advice.CdbgLaurie (talk) 11:14, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

@CdbgLaurie: In general, secondary sources are better than primary sources- the reason is that a company can write what they like about themselves, but secondary sources are independent, and also show notability i.e. if another company/organisation/newspaper think a company is good, it's better than that company saying that they're good. It's definitely fine to repeat secondary sources, as long as the information is in the source whenever you cite it. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:27, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Great - I will work on that later today after work and get those primary sources out of there. The nice thing about this particular company is that the secondary sources are quite solid - local and national magazines. CdbgLaurie (talk) 12:24, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Help

What is wrong in my page Hamlok Galaxy ( We are that What you think ) ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hgboyregun (talk • contribs) 14:53, 23 April 2015 (UTC) Not notable-WP:ORG, WP:GNG Promotional-WP:PROMO. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:55, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Oliszydlowski's case re: Rosa Raisa

Hello,

As I understand it, this should count as a 3RR violation. Since yesterday he has reverted three times her national identity by deleting "Russian". Please see the first three listed reverts/diff links. All three date from yesterday or today. The remaining two reverts from 2014 were submitted only so that you can see that he has been obsessing about it. It was a different user whom he "corrected" in 2014.

I personally know the author of her biography, I read the book carefully, and it is clear throughout the book from the interviews with her immediate family and her own letters that she was Russian-Jewish. This was also the her biographer's (Mintzer) view, clearly stated in the book. At the concerts, which are documented, she often sang both Yiddish and Russian songs with nostalgia of her childhood, so please do not let someone who is a Polish ultranationalist without any knowledge of this singer to abuse this public page about her.

Please reconsider your decision. Thank you.

Wikiuserthea — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiuserthea (talk • contribs) 21:50, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

To violate WP:3RR, you have to make 4 reverts within 24 hours, which they haven't- although it can still be editwarring even if you don't do 4 reversions in 24 hours. I know nothing of the actual article, so don't know which of you is correct. Someone at WP:AN3 might actually be able to help the nationality dispute. Also, I'm not an admin, so I won't be making an actual decision about what was wrong/right. Joseph2302 (talk) 21:55, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for clarifying it. I thought that 3RR meant 3 times. I'll edit the article by linking the statement of her nationality to the authoritative source (her biography & memoir) & page number, and if he continues reverting it despite this reference, I'll then take it to WP:AN3. Thank you for your advice and time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiuserthea (talk • contribs) 22:05, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

No problem. Joseph2302 (talk) 22:16, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Falklands War Article Dates

Hello,

I have tried to make the page better by actually fixing the date format.

Why should it be 2 April instead of the 2nd of April ?

Thanks in advance,

Teknote — Preceding unsigned comment added by Teknote (talk • contribs) 23:58, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

@Teknote:, the Misplaced Pages style guide for articles says that you shouldn't use ordinals (1st, 2nd, 3rd etc.) in dates- the guideline is here. Personally I agree that 2nd April is better than 2 April, but I'm sticking to the guidelines. Joseph2302 (talk) 00:04, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

I see, thank you for the information! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Teknote (talk • contribs) 00:14, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Guardian Angel

Thanks for helping with the problem of the user deleting deletion tags on the list (2015) page. They were doing so faster than I could handle it , being new. Plus I was trying to help them out at same time. Drjamesphillips (talk) 00:34, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

No problem, it escalated pretty quickly. When it's a notability issue, then discussing it definitely can work, but when it becomes a copyright vio issue, then removing copyvio tags is never okay.

In case there's an admin reading this soon, please delete The List (2015 film) as a clear G12. Joseph2302 (talk) 00:44, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Prkprescott is still going off on one with his cor celebre of the mulhall brothers. Another editor just tagged a notability check on the less notable brother and I think we just got called racists. Drjamesphillips (talk) 01:13, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Sounds about right, new editor making pages badly and complaining at everyone who spots their issues. They'll probably end up blocked sooner rather than later if they're resorting to attacking users. Joseph2302 (talk) 01:20, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your comments in my favour and against the individual that created the spurious Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents but I have already had my account deleted in protest at this action. Good luck with your time on wikipedia but users like him wil just continue to drive away reasonable individuals. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.41.132.127 (talk) 13:29, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Request on 16:03:25, 25 April 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Jdfinley1990

• Jdfinley1990 (talk · contribs)
  • User:Jdfinley1990/sandbox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

My submission was declined because you said it read like an advertisement and had too few credible sources. I went to great pains to make sure the article did not read like an advertisement and it may be helpful if you could pin point particularly egregious parts. The phrasing is a quick enough fix however, the sources present an issue because I'm unsure how many sources you would like. You state that YouTube is not a credible source and I agree, however the oral histories in the videos are sources. WOuld you prefer that I alter the citation in some way? Even if the youtube sources don't qualify as reliable sources, I listed 7 other sources ranging from a documentary to a traditional website to the NY Times. So my question is there a magic number I'm not meeting or did the inclusion of yotube sources just make you uncomfortable? I'm a graduate student so I understand the importance of citation. I'd like to resubmit the article in the next day or so and I'd like to find out what needs to be done so that it gets published.

Thanks

Jdfinley1990 (talk) 16:03, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

With sourcing, the rule is that basically everything you wrote needs a source to support it; the rule on sources is "more is usually better", as reliable sources show notability of the company. For instance, the "Basic Information" paragraph has only 1 source for 21 lines on text, and the "Sustainable Projects" paragraphs have only 2 sources (both of which are Youtube) in about 30 lines of text. The last 4 paragraphs also have no references currently either.

As for the tone, it appears to be promotional because there's too much information, which falls under the category of puffery, like most company/organisation websites have, but encyclopedia pages shouldn't. The "Basic Information" section for instance is not just providing basic information, but details about everything the organisation does (lots of details on many different events, every different house, recruitment info)- its too much information.

The "Sustainable Projects" section is also too detailed- there's no need to include details like what type of lights are used, there doesn't need to be a list of every plant in their gardens,

Sections on lifestyle, dinner nights,Annual sustainability seminar, Skill sharing definitely seem to fall under WP:PUFFERY, they have very little encyclopedic value. It also seems to duplicate the Basic Info section, where lots of these were mentioned.

Mission statements are generally not a good idea either, since they're used by companies/organisations to promote, and tend not to provide information.

To summarise, there is lots of unsourced information that gives the impression that this is an organisation webpage, not a

Don't be disheartened- very few people make a perfect article first time. It's a process of improvement, so that when you get it right, it's good quality. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:47, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Oops?

Hi Joseph2302, I noticed your edit to Draft:Bantam Cider. There appears to have been some confusion as the site linked as an example of copyright concern, http://www.ccb.se/about-ccb/, doesn't seem to relate to the general topic of Draft:Bantam Cider nor to any of the specific content within. I'm guessing a simple multitasking error—involving multiple browser tabs or some such—may have occurred. --Kevjonesin (talk) 23:39, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

@Kevjonesin:, yes clearly that makes no sense. I'll sort it out now. Joseph2302 (talk) 23:46, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for removing the erroneous link. I'm now curious as to your rationale for dismissing Boston (magazine), Brewbound, and Boston.com as not being "secondary reliable sources that are entirely independent of the subject"? --Kevjonesin (talk) 00:10, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

All the sources are reliable and independent, but in my opinion, 3 sources is not enough to show notability. Joseph2302 (talk) 00:12, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Global Scribes Inc

Hi! My page for Global Scribes Inc was declined and I was wondering if you could give me some specific advice regarding how to fix it? I would really appreciate it! Thank you!

Sophia ScribesoftheWorld (talk) 23:41, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

The main issue is that the tone of the draft is not neutral, it reads like an advertisement. It uses too many buzzwords, which seem to provide positive opinions of the organisation, rather than provide information. Examples include " They attempt to facilitate healthy, culturally-enriching relationships between young people while removing politics, religion, and socio-demographic segregation from the environment." In addition, there are only 2 independent reliable sources, which is not enough to show the company is notable- Misplaced Pages requires significant independent coverage, see WP:GNG and WP:CORP. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:31, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Request on 09:50:28, 26 April 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Dtdesign2

• Dtdesign2 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:WoltLab Burning Board (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

First of all, thank you for taking your time to review the article, I'm anything but an experienced author and therefore greatly rely on feedback in order to improve things. I have read carefully through numerous articles on secondary/tertiary sources, but I have to admit that I struggle to use the theory in practice. I can see the requirement of having secondary sources to prove things and decrease the chance of misleading or bogus sources. Yet, I feel that these rules are great for physical things or individuals, but it is a completely different story to deal with electronic software. There are two primary things I've taken account during writing the article:

• The article is primarily a translation from the one in the German Misplaced Pages, which has been approved by Moderators more than once. I assumed that if an article is sufficient for one Misplaced Pages instance, it should be in theory valid in another because there seem to be the exact same criteria applied (please correct me if I'm wrong)
• I've mentioned above that I'm having difficulties tossing in other sources and have taken a look at other forum software's articles, they're all built on top primary sources and have only used secondary sources to describe a few events that took place in the past (XenForo, Invision Power Board, phpBB and MyBB to name a few). I'm naming these to strengthen my point that in this very scenario, secondary sources aren't really contributing because the primary source themselves are accurate and more or less reliable

I would be glad if you could give me a few hints I can use to improve the article to qualify it as a Misplaced Pages article :)

Dtdesign2 (talk) 09:50, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Every Misplaced Pages is different, and has different rules for notability, so just because it's on German Misplaced Pages doesn't necessarily mean it meets the notability of English Misplaced Pages.

The main issue with the article is the lack of reliable sources- to be notable enough for an English Misplaced Pages article, there needs to be evidence of significant independent coverage from reliable sources, see WP:GNG. It also doesn't appear to meet any of the specific software criteria listed at WP:NSOFTWARE- note if it passes either WP:GNG or WP:NSOFTWARE, then the draft would be accepted.

I agree that a lot of software articles seem to be lacking in reliable sources, however they all have a few reliable sources. If a few (3-4 maybe) reliable sources could be found, then that might be enough, since that seems to be as many as some of the other articles.

Hope this helps. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:41, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Hello Joseph, I could use some help....

For reference, this discussion is about Draft:Kendall Almerico
Trentaaronsilver (talk) 12:55, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Hello Joseph. I am obviously struggling with figuring out which portion you consider to be "peacock terms" in this article. I would truly appreciate some guidance. If I may, I will go through each section and ask if you can point out where I am going wrong This is my first submission, and I plan to submit and edit more, but I would love some help so I know what is being down wrong. Thank you!

Kendall Almerico is an American entrepreneur, author and attorney. Almerico is the crowdfunding columnist for Entrepreneur.com. Almerico practices law with the Washington DC area law firm DiMuroGinsberg.

This seems pretty straight forward and no peacock terms.

Almerico was born in Tampa, Florida and attended Jesuit High School. After graduating from high school, he then attended the University of Florida where he received an undergraduate degree in Journalism and Mass Communications. Almerico attended and graduated from the University of Florida College of Law in 1988 with a Juris Doctorate degree.

This seems encyclopedic to me.

Almerico is a keynote speaker who has spoken about crowdfunding at the American annual invention trade show Inpex in 2014, crowdfunding industry conference Kickercon in 2014, the 3rd Global Crowdfunding Convention and Bootcamp in 2014, and events in Palo Alto, Miami, New York City, Aruba and Curacao in 2014-2015.

Is this the problem? Seems like I'm just listing some credited speeches, but maybe this is the "peacock" term area?

Almerico has also acted as a sports agent. Along with his law partner Brian Mooney, Almerico co-founded StarTrust Management, an sports and entertainment agency. StarTrust Management acted as an agent for professional athletes including NFL player Darrell Jackson, MLB players Dioner Navarro and Boof Bonser, former Toronto Blue Jays manager Carlos Tosca, United States Olympic Figure Skaters Caydee Denney and Jeremy Barrett] and NASCAR Sprint Cup driver Victor Gonzalez Jr. Along with Mooney, Almerico negotiated a $25 million contract with an $8 million signing bonus for Jackson in 2004. Almerico handled contracts and publicity for Gonzalez, Jr. in 2013, when he became the first Caribbean driver in NASCAR Sprint Cup history.

Maybe listing the clients here is the "peacock" problem? Seems like the last two lines have cited references and should be okay to me.

In 2010, Almerico co-authored Whoogles, a humor book published by Adams Media. "Whoogles" is a contraction of "Who Googled That," and the book is a collection of strange Google search suggestions and pithy commentary on the search results. Whoogles has spawned desktop calendars from TF Publishing in 2013, 2014 and 2015.

Pretty straight forward. I've seen this kind of language in other articles, so I assume this is not the problem.

Presently, Almerico acts as the CEO of FundHub.Biz, a website that provides compliance services for equity crowdfunding and Regulation D private equity offerings.

This does not seem so flowery to me. Just stating documented and cited fact.

Recognition VentureBeat named Almerico the 17th most influential thought leader in the crowdfunding industry as well as the top ranked practicing attorney on their list.. Kevin Harrington, noted entrepreneur and original investor "shark" on television's Shark Tank called Almerico "one of the top crowdfunding and JOBS Act lawyers in the country."

This is definitely a section that points out accomplishments and I guess could be considered peacock terms. But I thought pointing out awards won, etc. was a big part of an article (example: from Robert DeNiro "earned him an Academy Award for Best Actor for his portrayal of Jake LaMotta in the 1980 film Raging Bull. He earned nominations for the neo noir psychological thriller Taxi Driver in 1976 and the psychological thriller Cape Fear in 1991). If this is the problem, I could try to reword this section?

Thank you so much for you help. I truly appreciate the guidance.

Trent

Trentaaronsilver (talk) 12:55, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

@Trentaaronsilver:, the problem is that you didn't address many of the issue's from @Kikichugirl:'s issues from the 8 March submission (so Kikichugirl isn't confused, we're talking about Draft:Kendall Almerico)- all you did from the last submission was add 3 lines of unsourced text, which whilst good if sourced, is not helpful if unsourced.

The problem that Kikichugirl highlighted is that the "Career" section is written like a list of achievements, all of which seem to be in the form "He did this, and worked with all these amazing people/companies"- you ignored Kikichugirl's suggestion to restructure the article.

"Recognition" section seems okay to me, the quote "one of the top crowdfunding and JOBS Act lawyers in the country." is probably okay since it's sourced (otherwise it would definitely not be okay).

@Kikichugirl:, do you have any other or similar thoughts on Draft:Kendall Almerico? Joseph2302 (talk) 13:20, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Note: Seems User:kikichugirl is on a Wikibreak, if other users want to contribute then feel free. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:25, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Jack Leslie (public relations executive)

Thanks for your help. I split this submission into sections. (https://en.wikipedia.org/Draft:Jack_Leslie_(public_relations_executive)) Sorry. I'm not sure I'm linking correctly. I'm new at this ... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hjt1312 (talk • contribs) 13:45, 26 April 2015 (UTC) Hjt1312 (talk) 13:55, 26 April 2015 (UTC) hjt1312

@Hjt1312: Just to check, Jack Weslie's fullname is John W. Leslie, Jr., am I correct? Because John W. Leslie, Jr. is listed in 4 of the sources. And yes, it linked okay for me. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:57, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

18:24:00, 26 April 2015 review of submission by 2601:6:6080:599F:D070:DD83:82E6:9E79

• 2601:6:6080:599F:D070:DD83:82E6:9E79 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Physician Engagement (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

2601:6:6080:599F:D070:DD83:82E6:9E79 (talk) 18:24, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

You copy and pasted that last review and I changed the article as directed in the last review.

No I didn't, I just used the same template. And you are still trying to argue a point, read the last section with bullet points - that's clearly not WP:NPOV. Joseph2302 (talk) 18:33, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Response to Joseph2302

Ok. Do you mean the No original research policy? Sorry if you thought I was trying to vandalize. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123nopnop (talk • contribs) 21:49, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Replied on their talkpage. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:41, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Comment on a draft

Dear Joseph,

Previous submissions were denied due to Advertisement and Notability concerns. We removed the advertisement prose and added more notability e.g. interviews, co-authored papers from The Brookings Institution and Stanford. The latest comment you made is related to some citations using words from the actual press release. I did not know this was a problem and we will fix it asap.

COMMENTS Symbol opinion vote.svg Comment: The Accretive Health section is a copyright violation of . Until this section is removed or written in your own words, the article cannot be accepted. Joseph2302 (talk) 23:35, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Symbol opinion vote.svg Comment: There is a copyright issue in the paragraph about Accretive Health. The page is here. Please go through that paragraph carefully, excise anything that has been copied or closely paraphrased from the above link, and rewrite it in your own words. Thanks, wia (talk) 14:52, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

If we rewrite the two article citations above are we any closer to approval?

Thank you for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.147.84.77 (talk) 07:25, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Which article are you referring to? Because this IP address hasn't made any edits. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:41, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

User:Maj_General_Abdullah_Habibi

I'd like a second opinion here, This looks like a good faith effort to create an article (albiet by it's subject). I was told that maybe thiis should be run by AFC? However, there may be some COI/sourcing concerns so figured as you've done AFC reviewing, I'd ask for a second opinion. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:04, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

@Sfan00 IMG:, currently it's unsourced, so will never pass AfC. A quick Google search suggests there are quite a few sources on him, including this, suggesting he could become Minister of Defense. The list of military achievements would probably need to be changed, prose is almost better, and sources are essential for every claim made there, as it's a WP:BLP. I don't know much about Afghanistan or the military, but looks like with some work it probably would pass WP:GNG, and if they actually become Minister for Defense, then they'd also pass WP:POLITICIAN too. I think putting it through AfC would probably be the best option, since if they publish it as an article now, it will get probably get quickly deleted (unsourced autobiographies usually do), but with some work it could become a good enough article. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:41, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion Note of Helping Brainz

--Yedhukrishna Menon 14:41, 27 April 2015 (UTC) Hello Joseph, thanks for highlighting the same. Helping Brainz is a concept which encourages the youth for giving back to the community. I thought of creating the Misplaced Pages just to encourage the youth for the same, however I have deleted the sections which I thought would be promotional. Would be requesting the concerned to have a discussion before deleting the page. Kindly suggest me what next is to be done, before deleting the same. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yedhukrishnamenon (talk • contribs) --Yedhukrishna Menon 14:53, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

--Yedhukrishna Menon 14:50, 27 April 2015 (UTC)Joseph, I have deleted the 'history' section, if you felt it was promotional. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yedhukrishnamenon (talk • contribs) --Yedhukrishna Menon 14:53, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

@Yedhukrishnamenon:: I've replied at the article talkpage, Talk:Helping Brainz. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:06, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

--Yedhukrishna Menon 16:21, 27 April 2015 (UTC)I understood the fact the external links were inappropriately link, have created the same.--Yedhukrishna Menon 16:21, 27 April 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yedhukrishnamenon (talk • contribs)

--Yedhukrishna Menon 16:24, 27 April 2015 (UTC)Hello Joseph, I have added the references, other than them I don't have any other sources.--Yedhukrishna Menon 16:24, 27 April 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yedhukrishnamenon (talk • contribs)

--Yedhukrishna Menon 16:37, 27 April 2015 (UTC)The websites added in the references are 'online' newspapers published in Delhi. Consider this as a reply to your latest message.--Yedhukrishna Menon 16:37, 27 April 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yedhukrishnamenon (talk • contribs)

--Yedhukrishna Menon 17:29, 27 April 2015 (UTC)Hello Joseph, I am new to Misplaced Pages and I have uploaded the details of a young concept that I am working on. I know there would be mistakes, can you kindly help me out ?--Yedhukrishna Menon 17:29, 27 April 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yedhukrishnamenon (talk • contribs)

Draft:List of female visual artists from Vancouver

Hi Joseph, Thank you for your recommendation. Yes, the intention of the index created (list of Vancouver women artists) is to collaborate with other Vancouver librarians to create pages for those artists not currently linked to a page from our List of female visual artists from Vancouver. Is it against policy to keep a name up as "in process" until their page has been created? And, I only selected artists who do warrant their own page as per MOS:LIST Thank you Caroline Crowe https://en.wikipedia.org/Draft:List_of_female_visual_artists_from_Vancouver — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carolinecrowe (talk • contribs) 17:13, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

@Carolinecrowe: If you (or someone else) are planning to create articles about them, then it's probably okay, but I'm not 100% sure- WP:LISTPURP says that it's only bad if all the link are red links which isn't the case here. Note that if you're going to create an article for everyone, they're all going to need reliable sources to satisy WP:BIO.

Another thing is sourcing. Every person in the list will need to have sourcing saying that says they're both an artist, and from Vancouver- I notice there are some web and book referencing, which probably cover lot of people (I haven't checked for certain, but the VPL one look like it lists every artist in Vancouver, so might cover everyone).

Sorry if this wasn't very precise, I think it might be okay, but I'm not sure- the main issue I'm having is that I know nothing about art or Vancouver, so this is well-beyond my areas of expertise. Hopefully someone with some more knowledge will be able to properly review it soon. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:40, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

A.F.C. Bournemouth

I thought I had reverted an edit which changed Bournemouth to Portsmouth. If I read the history right, that is what should have happened. I don't know how that other material was restored by my edit. It was unintentional. Standing alone, I think I would have recognized it as improper. I am puzzled. Nonetheless, I thank you for catching the error and correcting it. Donner60 (talk) 21:26, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

yh, I tried to revert to clean versions, looks like I might have done it wrongly though. I've requested temporary semi-protection. Joseph2302 (talk) 21:28, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Also, lots of edit conflicts probably caused it too. Joseph2302 (talk) 21:28, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, again. Donner60 (talk) 21:36, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

North Lakes, Queensland

Hello Joseph,

Can you please give us a little more direction with the violation? North Lakes is a major development and much of the current news is about development. The existing content which we added to, references multiple commercial organisations (Westfield, Target, Coles etc.) and we took care to link to the 'Yamaha' wiki page, as those entities have with theirs. We also offered a link to projects page to verify the development is underway. We're wondering why A 28,000sq m IKEA superstore has been approved for Westfield's stage three development is acceptable, but a sizable development for Yamaha is not. We'd be glad of guidance here. Thanks Joseph.

Tpmbuilders (talk) 23:24, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Adding links to pages for sources is okay, but you added a link to your page- you could have chosen any website that mentioned that fact, but you chose your website, because it might give you a little bit of extra promotion. Joseph2302 (talk) 00:09, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

thanks

Thanks for notifying me about my accidental deletion. DGG ( talk ) 00:12, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

No problem, I assumed it was accidental. Joseph2302 (talk) 00:13, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

hey man

you don't want to create edit notes like this - suggest you ask an admin to revdel that for you. i know things get frustrating but stay cool. great to have you back btw. (would have emailed you but you have that function turned off) Jytdog (talk) 02:08, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Dear Joseph,

I am absolutely, not a rascist, I create a page for Mrs Vanina Takvorian the way I could, as I am not an editor of Misplaced Pages with experience like you. But I really think that you should have help me to improve the page as it was made in accordance of Mrs Vanina Takvorian and not to deleted it immediately. I really think you did it as a discrimination action, because you have an animosity with the History and more specifically "Marquis De Lafayette" Please, I will contact as tomorrow, some administrators of Misplaced Pages, and I really hope they will show me that Misplaced Pages is a fair place to edit a page about exceptional people and not base on discrimination acts.

Thanks

SD — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vanina Takvorian (talk • contribs) 02:15, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Viviana - You don't know what you are doing here and accusation was that his good work, taking care of the mess you made on your user page, was some malice on his part because is from the UK, was against our policies (see WP:AGF, WP:NPA and WP:OUTING and WP:TPG) as well as foolish. It would have been wise to simply ask what the problem was. Editing Misplaced Pages is a privilege, not a right, and if you continue, you will be blocked and lose your editing rights. Jytdog (talk) 02:22, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

@Jytdog:, I don't see what the problem is. They attacked me because I'm English- also, it's not really WP:OUTING since it's on my user page, but it was an unwarranted personal attack. I don't want incorrect comments from people who make personal, racist attacks to me on my talkpage. There's no debate- it was racist, they said the only reason I wanted their page deleted was because I was English, and referenced some random American/English thing I have no idea what it was. Also, if I add my email, is there a way that only certain people (e.g. autoconfirmed users) can email it- I don't want every new user who has a minor complaint about a page emailing me.

@Vanina Takvorian:, I do not accept your fake apology for your racist attack. Also, as I mentioned already, I didn't delete your page, but your userpage is not the place to create articles. Also, this is an official notification that I don't want you posting on my talkpage ever again. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:47, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Also, I don't actually know what American/English history you're actually talking about (American War of Independence maybe), so I definitely cnnot be discriminating against you because of it. According to WP:NOTAWEBHOST, it was an inappropriate use of a user page. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:07, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

hey joseph - on the email thing - nope, if you make it available, you make it available to everyone. i understand not wanting to make it available to avoid trolling. (i've never gotten a trolling email, for what its worth, and i have an email just for "jytdog" so it wouldn't bleed into RW stuff anyway) on my original point.. it is generally best to keep edit notes neutral and not react to personal attacks by making counter-claims. best to just say something about a "personal attack" rather than characterizing it. you will do as you will. viviana is off to a bad start for sure. (btw if you would like to discuss offline please feel free to email me) Jytdog (talk) 12:22, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Yh I kind of feel this has gone far enough, I'll definitely be more careful with edit summaries in future. Whilst I think what they did had wrong intentions, the fact is arguing about it endlessly isn't going to help build the encyclopedia. Can an admin please revdel the edit summary at the start, and the two changes where I blanked my user page in protest? Keeping these edit summaries is in no way going to help anyone. (admins who I think have this power: @Diannaa:, @Nakon:, @Materialscientist:) Joseph2302 (talk) 15:52, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 28

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:17, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

 Fixed Joseph2302 (talk) 10:19, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Recent edit to John Montague (poet)

Hi Joseph2302 Could you please amend /revert the changes you made on my behalf. Or how is this possible? They are concrete facts added on behalf of the person in question.Best (~~silver apples ~~). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Silver apples (talk • contribs) 11:37, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

@Silver apples: Misplaced Pages relies on reliable sources, not claimed facts. Therefore, I will not be readding unsourced content to John Montague (poet). Joseph2302 (talk) 11:43, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

It would be great to know how to provide a reliable citation for children/family? If you could help that would be much appreciated. Please advise. (84.203.34.64 (talk) 14:53, 28 April 2015 (UTC))Silver apples(Silver apples (talk) 11:50, 28 April 2015 (UTC))

@Silver apples: WP:RS provides guidance on what a reliable source is- examples of reliable sources generally include newspaper & magazine articles, books, obituaries (if the person is dead, which John Montague isn't), other websites. Things that aren't generally considered reliable are self-published texts, social media, Youtube, forums, or any anonymously-edited site (e.g. Wikia, IMDB).

In this case, you need to find a newspaper/magazine article, book or other website that has his children's names listed. This says it, but is a blog (so might not be considered reliable)-I'm going to add it anyway and see. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:10, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Also, to add sources to pages, there's a guide Misplaced Pages: Referencing for Beginners. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:13, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Thank you Joesph, much appreciated. I found a proper resource / citation with family names:here And thank you for the explanation and guide link, will read. (Silver apples (talk) 18:16, 28 April 2015 (UTC))

FUCK YOU!!!!

I AM NOT A FUCKING TROLL YOU LITTLE A-HOLE IM JUST STUDING AND MAKING EDITS. JEEZ MUST WIKIPEDIA BE SO STUBBORN AND ORTHODOX!!!!!! Coolidon (talk) 18:50, 28 April 2015 (UTC)