Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 19:13, 16 October 2015

Start a new discussion thread

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48

This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present.

In the event that what you seek is not here then it is archived (0.9 probability). While you are welcome to potter through the archives the meaning of life is not there.

Reid's Heritage Homes

Hi Tim,

Thank you for your feedback on the Reid's article. I found it a challenge to balance the requirement for notability with the requirement that it not be advertorial.

Reid's is the first company in Canada to create these energy neutral homes. This has been covered in a variety of major independent sources, including CBC Radio 1, the Toronto Star, the Department of Natural Resources, and Metroland media. This would all seem to indicate notability. The difficulty is that when I note the evidence of this notability, it can start to look advertorial.

Can you give me a recommendation on how to make this more neutral sounding, while still demonstrating the notability to justify a Misplaced Pages article?

Thanks,

Graeme — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sharsel84 (talk • contribs) 18:03, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

It can be hard. References verify notability. We require references from significant coverage about the topic of the article, and independent of it, and in WP:RS please. See WP:42. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources. With good references, only one per fact you assert, the tone may be almost totally flat. Aim for Dull-But-Worthy and you will get there, assuming they pass WP:CORP. Fiddle Faddle 18:07, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

{{coordinates missing}}

Hi. I'm writing to users who have used the "coordinates missing" template in the last year. Could you please use the standard template "coord missing" instead? While the "coordinates missing" template is a redirect to the "coord missing" template, and thus works fine in articles, using "coord missing" directly makes a number of automated bot workflows work better by eliminating the overhead of having to track down the uses of "coordinates missing" to eliminate the redirects. Thanks, -- The Anome (talk) 12:29, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

 Done will try my best to remember. Fiddle Faddle 12:54, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you! -- The Anome (talk) 12:36, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Abigail Jain, Smita Nair Jain, Rajiv Jain

Hello Timtrent,

Please see these pages, its about me and my parents. They are quiet famous.

1) https://en.wikipedia.org/Abigail_Jain

2) https://en.wikipedia.org/Draft:Smita_Nair_Jain

3) https://en.wikipedia.org/Draft:Rajiv_Jain

Regards

AbigailJain1992 (talk) 17:18, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

@AbigailJain1992: Avoid editing articles on them directly, please. Drafts you may edit. You have a prima facie conflict of interest Fiddle Faddle 17:24, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

@Timtrent: Trust me ... that i never lie. i won't do all the cheating that going different computer, pretending new user name and editing all different pages mabout my family. I was told by my friend that you shouldn't do. They will delete it. I am a great follower of Mahatma Gandhi

There is no conflict of interest.

By definition, you have a WP:COI. You may edit the drafts. You are absolutely discouraged form editing any article to which you are connected that is not a draft. It matters not whether you lie or not,whether you are trustworthy or not. What matters is that you are unlikely to be objective because of the conflict of interest. Fiddle Faddle 17:32, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Request on 23:13:34, 8 October 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Calais1984

• Calais1984 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Medical Error Action Group (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Calais 1984 Username Sorry "Reviewer" you've lost me. Finding it difficult to fathom your "unreliable sources" response. Some details are pre-internet availability, as previously mentioned in a help request I didn't receive an answer to. Each and every source cited is available in hard copy (as previously advised). How do you suggest it is done? Not everything is on the internet. You may like to expand of what sources are unreliable. If government press releases have been removed due to age, is that deemed "unreliable"? We have the hard copies; that's where we have obtained our reliable sources from. You have already advised us that we had too many footnotes, - fair enough with listing our publications - so what gives with "sources unreliable"? It's a Misplaced Pages page, isn't it? Doesn't that cover things pre-internet age? The required format for External Sources and Further Reading is what is difficult to work out how to do it. But I have looked at other Misplaced Pages pages and their External Sources and in identical format. So, over to you guys. It really is complicated trying to fathom Wiki it if one is not a computer nerd. PS: What is puzzling is that there is a Misplaced Pages page for Graeme Reeves which is full of inaccuracies from top to bottom and containing factually incorrect information. How did it get uploaded onto Misplaced Pages? It discredits Misplaced Pages.Calais1984 (talk) 23:13, 8 October 2015 (UTC) Calais1984 (talk) 23:13, 8 October 2015 (UTC) Calais1984 (talk) 23:13, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

@Calais1984: Our role as reviewers is to seek to ensure that an article will not immediately be subject to one of our deletion processes when it is accepted. That is why we push it back to the author. We want to accept articles. I answered the most important parts of your question. Sources do not need to be online, but they need to pass WP:RS. Reliability does not pass with age.

The word "we" concerns me. It implies that you are part of the organisation. Please see WP:COI and understand that those rules will apply very fully once the draft is accepted.

No precedent is ever set by any article for any other. If it were we would have a brutally fast descent into idiocracy.

If by "over to you" you mean that it becomes someone else's job to make this draft acceptable, that may happen, but it is unlikely. It is down to you. So, if you have a precise, rifle targeted question about the comments I have left for you, please ask it. My answering a general and all encompassing question about life the universe and everything leads me to answer 42. Fiddle Faddle 06:51, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

ChicagoFreelanceWriter COI/Paid editing

Hi Timtrent, I noticed your report on UAA for ChicagoFreelanceWriter - odd that they didn't see it as a username violation given it could be easily shared... Anyway! I recently reviewed their AfC and declined it due to lack of notability. I also reminded them to respond to your talk page messages, so hopefully that helps get the message across for you. Cheers. samtar 11:40, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, Samtar. I have placed a report here. I only mind paid editing when it is not correctly disclosed. Fiddle Faddle 13:57, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

WOP

God damn, your pathetic rationales for deletion are coming back to bite you. Next time, put some effort into it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.170.49.27 (talk) 19:12, 16 October 2015 (UTC)