User talk:Xpander1: Difference between revisions

Ways to improve Armen Miran

Hello, Xpander1,

Thank you for creating Armen Miran.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

This is a fantastically well-written article but the references are weak. Can you find addiotional references via independent, reliable sources?

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|JSFarman}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

JSFarman (talk) 03:08, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Ways to improve Dina Emundts

Hello, Xpander1,

Thank you for creating Dina Emundts.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Hi. Thank you for doing this translation of a biography of a potentially notable living person. This article has no citations. The English Wikipedia has much stricter requirements fr sourcing than other language Wikipedia projects. As a BLP it cannot remain in Mainspace until it is fully sourced. Please also see Help:Translation, all sections, especially concerning attribution.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Kudpung}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 17:45, 15 January 2025 (UTC)

@Kudpung: I have added a few more citations to the page. Please take another look. Xpander (talk) 12:54, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

Ways to improve Jens Halfwassen

Hello, Xpander1,

Thank you for creating Jens Halfwassen.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

The single source is not sufficient to establish notability and the claims made in the article. As such, the potentially notable article does mot meet the criteria at WP:NPROF. Unverifiable content can be depleted.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Kudpung}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 19:23, 15 January 2025 (UTC)

@Kudpung: I have added several citations to the page. Please take a second look. If sufficient perhaps the tag can be removed? Xpander (talk) 12:56, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: North Rhine-Westphalian Academy of Sciences, Humanities and the Arts (January 17)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by DoubleGrazing was:  The comment the reviewer left was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:North Rhine-Westphalian Academy of Sciences, Humanities and the Arts and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:53, 17 January 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Xpander1! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:53, 17 January 2025 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi Xpander1. Thank you for your work on Ritter Schule. Another editor, SunloungerFrog, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice article. I translated the first sentence of "Thinkers attributed to the Ritter school" as that had been left in the original German, so I would be grateful if I have got the sense right!

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

SunloungerFrog (talk) 10:30, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

@SunloungerFrog: Thanks for your meticulous oversight. Yes it is very on point. Best. Xpander (talk) 12:40, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

Nomination of Armen Miran for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Armen Miran, 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/Armen Miran 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) 01:02, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

Advice

I very strongly suggest you say the following at ANI "I don't necessarily agree with what people are saying here, but I will drop the issue". And then do that, with no further comment there. ANI is kind of a dysfunctional free-for-all, and you're behaving in a way that others interpret as annoying, and ANI can sometimes be a place where people gang up on annoying people and get them blocked indefinitely. I'm not exaggerating, I'm dead serious; you're much closer than you think to getting blocked indef just for not dropping this. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, I'm saying that's how it is. Sometimes you take the loss and keep rolling on.

This does not mean I'm volunteering to talk to you about the issue you're bringing up; frankly, I'm finding this a little annoying too. I'm just trying to defeat the dysfunction and save you from inadvertently getting yourself blocked. Floquenbeam (talk) 00:08, 25 January 2025 (UTC)

In addition to the good advice from Floquenbeam which has worked for you, if you want to avoid more of your articles going the same way as Armen Miran, I strongly suggest that you 1) familiarise yourself with notability requirements and what kind of sources are needed in this English Wikipedia to prove it. 2) New Page Patrol is not an article doctor and while its patrollers are very correct, their decisions are sometimes perceived as brutal by newer, less experienced users. So consider creating your articles (and translations) as Drafts first and submit them for detailed evaluation where you might get more help on what to do to avoid them being deleted. (FWIW, way back in the day, I knew Klaus Schulze, whose misspelled name I have corrected for you; he and I were almost the same age. I lived in the same small village 'somewhere in the Lüneberger Heide' before I moved to Berlin.) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:07, 25 January 2025 (UTC)

@Kudpung But at the same time voted to delete the page of an artist who was inspired by him :) Xpander (talk) 14:39, 25 January 2025 (UTC)

Hello

Hello, how are you? What should you pay more attention to when editing and creating an article for the English Wikipedia? We also hope that English Wikipedia will be the largest source of information in the world? Thank you. Happy editing! (VVWiki8 (talk) 12:29, 25 January 2025 (UTC))

Some advice I was given on a previous draft of GdiG

Just in case these help! (Also, look at WP:AUTHOR in addition to WP:PROF. People in the humanities often pass by the former more easily than the latter.) Cheers –

I'm confused about what kind of additional sources are needed, however. It's a stub that only makes three claims. The first two are supported by citations, second of which is a scholarly Dictionary of Hegelian Thought (in which GdiG was deemed important enough to be given his own entry). The third claim is supported by the titles of his works, the list of which are taken from his CV, which is linked below and can easily be independently verified.

Sorry if the answers to this are obvious, btw. This is only the second article I created from scratch.

Regards, PatrickJWelsh (talk) 11:53 am, 18 September 2022, Sunday (2 years, 4 months, 9 days ago) (UTC−5)

The core question at AfC is "would it survive a deletion discussion?" and my current thinking is that it probably wouldn't. The key policy is WP:PROF and it is not clear that they meet it from the article and references. For example did they hold a named chair? Are they elected fellow of a learned society, etc.? Has their research made and impact? Here are a few things to help you get it over the line:

1. https://www.mcgill.ca/arts/article/exit-interview-professor-george-di-giovanni
2. Scholarly review - https://ndpr.nd.edu/reviews/freedom-and-religion-in-kant-and-his-immediate-successors-the-vocation-of-humankind-1774-1800/
3. Scholarly review - https://ndpr.nd.edu/reviews/the-science-of-logic/
4. Scholarly review - https://www.researchgate.net/publication/331894292_Book_review_of_George_di_Giovanni's_Freedom_and_Religion_in_Kant_and_His_Immediate_Successors_The_Vocation_of_Humankind_1774-1800_Cambridge_Cambridge_University_Press_2005

You would probably be able to find additional reviews of their works which is one way of showing impact.

Patrick (talk) 18:06, 25 January 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Patrick Welsh, Thanks for your suggestions. Is there a way to access the interview you provided? It seems to require some form of institutional access. Xpander (talk) 18:38, 25 January 2025 (UTC)

No, that's odd. I'd assumed it was for some kind of promotional alumni publication or something. You could try the Wayback Machine. Otherwise I'm not sure what to tell you. (Also, an interview with the subject by his lifelong institutional home is of rather limited use as a source for Wikipedia purposes.)

In all events, best wishes with the draft! There are a few places he's cited with attribution on the Hegel page, and it would be nice to have at least a stub to wikilink. Cheers, Patrick (talk) 18:53, 25 January 2025 (UTC)

January 2025

Your edit to Friedrich Heinrich Jacobi has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for information on how to contribute your work appropriately. For legal reasons, Wikipedia strictly cannot host copyrighted text or images from print media or digital platforms without an appropriate and verifiable license. Contributions infringing on copyright will be removed. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. Diannaa (talk) 20:47, 25 January 2025 (UTC)