User talk:KJP1/Archive 5

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

Hi! I’m the author of the draft:Juwaireya Alshomali, I am the also the author of the previous same draft I deleted it at first but then when I wanted to get it back it was too late, so I created a new page with same title and information but I added a little more information and now I’m asking you to reconsider my article and take the back the deletion request Jenan,SayedHadi,Zainab. (talk) 19:09, 2 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Jenan,SayedHadi,Zainab. - Hi, and thanks for getting back. But I'm afraid I still think your draft is not suitable. Wikipedia's an online encyclopedia, the world's biggest, and it provides coverage of Notable subjects. In this case, you have a moving, personal story about a young woman who suffered from cancer. But it's not a Notable subject. I'm sure there are many other sites where Juwaireya's story would be appropriate and would be of great value to other sufferers. With best wishes. KJP1 (talk) 19:17, 2 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you for replaying, i wanted to put Juwaireya's story in wikipedia because as you said it is the world's biggest encyclopedia, i wanted people to read Juwaireya's story so it can gives them hope and because i wanted to put light on someone who gave a lot of help to many people but unfortunately not everyone knows about it.
I understand what you're trying to do, but I'm afraid Wikipedia's not the site to do it. There are many other sites that would be suitable. All the best. KJP1 (talk) 19:32, 2 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello again, I am asking to take back your deletion request and read the article again because I believe that you'll change you're mind after reading it

Hi, firstly I'm requesting that the reviewer takes back the deletion request, secondly I'm asking the reviewer to read my article again after editing it because before i forgot to mention the good things that happened after Juwaireya's treatment but know i mentioned them and lastly i hope that the reviewer accepts my article and moves it to the articles section. :Jenan,SayedHadi,Zainab. (talk) 19:34, 2 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

We don't need a separate section for the same discussion. I've already explained why the draft isn't a suitable article for Wikipedia. KJP1 (talk) 19:47, 2 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Can you please take back your deletion request.
Jenan,SayedHadi,Zainab. - I'm afraid not. As I've explained, Wikipedia's not a suitable place for this draft. KJP1 (talk) 21:08, 2 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Can you read my article again because I’ve done a lot of changes — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jenan,SayedHadi,Zainab. (talkcontribs) 06:42, 3 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've had another look. It is not suitable, for the reasons outlined. KJP1 (talk) 15:38, 3 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

user rights[edit]

I have updated your account to include some user rights that as a New Page Reviewer you should already have. You are not obliged to use them, but they might come in useful when you are patrolling. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:57, 3 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

...(talk page watcher) KJP1, let the advance on the throne continue  ;) ...SerialNumber54129...speculates 09:29, 3 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Re: Westlife[edit]


A barnstar for you![edit]

Special Barnstar Hires.png The Special Barnstar
For cleaning up the dustbin of Wikipedia Draft space by nominating things for deletion. A month's supply of sneezing pills for the dust is included. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:01, 5 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Robert McClenon - Appreciated. But I’m well aware of the efforts of those, including you, who’ve been slogging away here for a lot longer than I. Best regards. KJP1 (talk) 08:25, 5 March 2018 (UTC) KJP1 (talk) 08:25, 5 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

07:38:14, 6 March 2018 review of submission by Rockjames630[edit]

Dear Sir - our earlier version was rejected stating it is a blatant advert. we have therefore amended and posted 2 versions here. kindly let us know if any of these versions will fit our insertion at Wikipedia. Many thanks. the two versions are given below:

Version 1 ""'ApnaCourse""' is an provider of education and training through online. They are based in Bangalore, India. They provide, and train varied courses with certifications from the respective governing bodies. Some of them are in the areas of Financial Management with Certifications like Financial Risk Manager (FRM), Certified Financial Planner (CFP), Chartered Financial Analyst (CFA) et al. Project and Quality Management with Certifications like Project Management Professional (PMP), PMI Agile Certified Practitioner (PMI-ACP) ® etc. IT Services and IT Security Management with Certifications like Certified Information Systems Auditor (CISA), Certified Information Systems Security Professional (CISSP), ITIL Foundation etc, and Certifications like Business Analysis and many more.

Satish Rajagopalan is the Founder, Director and CEO of ""'ApnaCourse""'. The seed of the idea was laid a couple of years back (2013) when Satish was at Mumbai. His friends used to prepare for the CFA and FRM exams and would apply to classroom training. But given the work pressure, they would miss out on most classes. Furthermore, some trainers were students who had passed the certification exams few weeks ago and had no prior teaching experience. This motivated him to bring the idea to existence. Thus, ""'ApnaCourse""' was born.

Version 2

""'ApnaCourse""' is an provider of education and training through the online medium. They are based out of Bangalore, India. ""'ApnaCourse""' imparts training's, with certifications from the respective governing bodies and from different domains viz Financial Management, Project and Quality Management, IT Services and IT Security Management, Business Analysis to name a few.

Satish Rajagopalan is the Founder, Director and CEO of ""'ApnaCourse""'. The seed of the idea was laid a couple of years back (2013) when Satish was at Mumbai. His friends used to prepare for the CFA and FRM exams and would apply to classroom training. But given the work pressure, they would miss out on most classes. Furthermore, some trainers were students who had passed the certification exams few weeks ago and had no prior teaching experience. This motivated him to bring the idea to existence. Thus, ""'ApnaCourse""' was born.

Thank you very much. kindly guide us wherever you think we need to refine. Thank you again. Rockjames630 (talk) 07:38, 6 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Rockjames630 - Neither draft will work. Wikipedia doesn't exist as a platform for companies to market their businesses. Both your existing draft, and these alternatives, are just that. The sourcing is weak, and the content is promotional. There are plenty of available platforms for you to advertise on, but Wikipedia's not one of them. KJP1 (talk) 09:42, 6 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Coflein RCAHMW[edit]

Hi, Coflein is down at the moment. Yesterdays message “A power outage has taken down our Coflein database this afternoon. We are working to restore it as soon as possible. Sorry for the inconvenience.” I will let you know when its up and running again. Charles.rcahmw (talk) 08:20, 7 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Charles.rcahmw - Charles - many thanks indeed for the update. I can't crack on with my Grade II* listed buildings in Monmouthshire work without that site! All the best. KJP1 (talk) 09:36, 7 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
KJP1 - Good news - Coflein is back online. Charles.rcahmw (talk) 08:20, 9 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

18:53:34, 8 March 2018 review of submission by MiataMama[edit]

This is my first attempt at an article and I'm not sure what you mean by "inline sourcing" - I tried to footnote everything I could using as many major sources as possible. MiataMama (talk) 18:53, 8 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

MiataMama - Hi, and thanks for getting back. Have a read of this Help:Referencing for beginners which will explain how we cite things on Wikipedia. "Inline sourcing" means that when you state something, you need to support it with a, directly following, citation. This is particularly important for biographies of living people. Then, have a look at something like this, Clarence Thomas, which shows how it works in practice. Lastly, don't indent paragraphs and be very careful to ensure you're writing from a Wikipedia:Neutral point of view and not promoting the guy. Regards. KJP1 (talk) 19:09, 8 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
P.S. - I see it is the only contribution you've made on here. Do you have a connection to Mr Parks? If you do, this needs to be declared, Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, and you need to follow the relevant guidance. KJP1 (talk) 19:15, 8 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, I have a connection but I did not write the article; however, I did the citations and posted it as a draft page. MiataMama (talk) 19:30, 8 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

MiataMama - Then you need to declare the connection. Who did write the page? Mr Parks? KJP1 (talk) 19:37, 8 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No, he did not write the page - another friend of his did. I think maybe I should take this page to my sandbox and play with it some more.

MiataMama (talk) 21:05, 8 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think that's a good idea. It's not really a good idea for a friend to write the article about Mr Parks, as they will struggle to be Neutral. Regards. KJP1 (talk) 21:07, 8 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

23:30:05, 10 March 2018 review of submission by Cblinford[edit]

Thank you for your time. We have attempted to revise the draft 40/4 Chair article to make the tone more neutral as you suggested. Cblinford (talk) 23:30, 10 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Cblinford - I'm afraid the draft has been rejected again, as you'll have seen. But a reviewer has taken the time to make very detailed comments on the draft. If you go through those and address the concerns, the chances of the draft being accepted will be much improved. Regards. KJP1 (talk) 06:50, 11 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Request on 23:48:23, 10 March 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Dardacloud[edit]

Dear KJP1, Thank you for reacting to my submission. I would like to dispute the decision for marking this page for deletion. First of all, I don't agree with the statement "self sourced bitcoin advert". Callisto is one of the most serious crypto projects out there. Secondly, it has nothing to do with bitcoin, as Callisto utilizes own blockchain & other resources. I do agree that the article is not well or correctly written, but I will make some improvements. And I'm sure that the Ethereum Classic and Callisto community will be more than happy to contribute to Callisto's page. May I please ask you to review the decision and let me make the adjustments? I would appreciate it. Thank you in advance, Dardan Yet another poor/self sourced bitcoin advert. Tagging for Deletion. Dardacloud (talk) 23:48, 10 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dardacloud - Hi, I'm afraid we're not going to agree on the merits, or otherwise, of the draft. You're fully entitled to contest the deletion, however, but here's not the place to do it. I can only recommend deletion, I don't have the authority to delete. If you go to the draft, and have a look at the deletion notice, there's a blue box titled Contest this speedy deletion. Click on that, and then make your case. Regards. KJP1 (talk) 06:45, 11 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your GA nomination of Monmouth School[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Monmouth School you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. Time2wait.svg This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Tim riley -- Tim riley (talk) 20:40, 11 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

My comments are now posted on the review page. Tim riley talk 12:58, 12 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Darley Park, Derby[edit]

HI. just replying to the below:

Hi - I'm afraid I messed up while trying to Accept your page. But you can now find it at Darley Park, Derby. I had to add Derby, as there is already a redirect page called Darley Park. Give me a shout if you've any queries. KJP1 (talk) 18:02, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Where can I now find the article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by OnFire238 (talkcontribs) 08:26, 12 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

OnFire238 - I'm afraid it has been deleted as a copyright infringement, something I should have checked. The deletion log is here [1]. KJP1 (talk) 16:37, 12 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Queens of Hearts Couture Cakes[edit]

Can't believe the latest edit to this article by new user User:AlexisClarke33 !!!! Theroadislong (talk) 21:44, 12 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Theroadislong - I suspect they are both socks of the original creator. Have put up for Afd. KJP1 (talk) 22:09, 12 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Theroadislong - And indeed they are, along with a third they created. The efforts people make to have an article on here are an interesting indicator of how important an advertising platform they think Wikipedia is! All the best. KJP1 (talk) 07:07, 13 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your GA nomination of Monmouth School[edit]

The article Monmouth School you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:Monmouth School for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Tim riley -- Tim riley (talk) 22:02, 12 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

DYK for Goat Canyon Trestle[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg

On 15 March 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Goat Canyon Trestle, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Goat Canyon Trestle (pictured) is the world's largest curved wooden trestle? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Goat Canyon Trestle. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Goat Canyon Trestle), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 00:03, 15 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Request on 07:16:49, 15 March 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Farhan ali khushik[edit]

hi, i just want to know why the haji imdad ali khushk article was not accepted as reason given by the reviewer that article doesn't have any source but the village is listed on the Khan Wahan article and don't have any article of the village Farhan ali khushik (talk) 07:16, 15 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Farhan ali khushik - Hi, you don't need many sources for places, but you do need some. You haven't got any. You need to find one/two mentions of the place in reliable independent sources and include them. If other Indian village articles have been posted that don't have any sources, they shouldn't have been. Hope this helps. KJP1 (talk) 07:21, 15 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Improper attack page note[edit]

I believe this edit incorrectly identified Draft:Muqeet Ahmad as an attack page. Since the draft appears to be an autobiography, I think it is a statement of the author's pride in being able to function as a software engineer without ever having needed to attend training for that profession. Clearly, the draft is not acceptable as an article, but I don't think it's an attack page. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 21:06, 15 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

WikiDan61 - You could be right, as I suggested in my edit summary, "I think it's an attack page, suggesting that the subject is unqualified. Either that, or it's an odd form of advertisement". But I'm not actually sure it is autobiography. The tone does actually read like an attack to me, particularly considering the cultural context where pride in qualifications is so strong. But we've no way of knowing as any editor could have chosen the username. So let's see how it plays out. KJP1 (talk) 21:18, 15 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Draft of Mackenzie Molner Review[edit]

Hi. Thanks for your input on the page for GM Mackenzie Molner. I edited the Wiki to Draft:Mackenzie Molner that I was constructing. I think it is still in my sandbox. Anyways, I think I know what you mean by "close paraphrasing" and I tried to eliminate as much similarity to reference [1] as possible. Please review, and publish if it meets Wikipedia standards. If there are further edits to be made, please let me know. User:Medical Imaging —Preceding undated comment added 03:12, 16 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Medical Imaging - Hi, and thanks for getting back. The draft's certainly improved but I'm still getting an over 40% match with the source I mentioned. If you go here, [2], and type "Draft:Mackenzie Molner" (don't use the quotes) into the Page title box, you'll see the close paraphrasing highlighted. That's what you need to get rid of. Regards. KJP1 (talk) 06:41, 16 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi KJP1, Thank you for finding time to review the company entry I submitted. I know Wikipedia is an open source for knowledge and I just shared an initial content for Bezalel a wireless power solutions. And the entry may be inadequate and lacking but that's the reason why there are editors that will guide users to doing things the right way. I may be a writer but definitely not an expert here. Also, if the sources are weak then maybe other contributors may add something here? Shane Haumpton — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shane.haumpton (talkcontribs) 03:26, 16 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Shane.haumpton - Hi, and thanks for getting back. There are a couple of things to consider if you're wanting to recreate the, now-deleted, draft:
  • First, Wikipedia's not the encyclopedia of everything. It exists to cover Notable topics. We define Notability as having received "significant coverage from a range of reliable, independent sources". So you would need to locate such coverage and reference it in the draft. If there isn't such coverage, then the subject doesn't meet the Notability criteria and an article isn't warranted.
  • Second, Wikipedia's not a platform for promoting things, although lots of people try to use it for that purpose. So, if you can find the necessary coverage, the subject still needs to be written about from a Neutral point of view. The draft you wrote didn't do that, which is why it's been deleted.
I hope this helps. Regards. KJP1 (talk) 06:34, 16 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please Review my Draft[edit]

Can you review my draft please? Hey guys! Welcome to my signature if you're reading this, I love ya! ~ Akram 01:17, 17 March 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by CoolAkramTV (talkcontribs)

Hi!, I'm the one drafting the article on Francis Martin Beltran Baraan IV. I shall make more improvements. He's notable, that's for sure. He's a public figure in the Philippines. I just have to cite the proper sources and make sure that they're all verifiable. He's a political blogger and political pundit, who's best known for his Twitter activism. That said, it it okay if reference sources of maintstream media that also mention him and quote his tweets? That way, it would prove his notability and relevancy in his field, too. He's one of the first few public figures in the PH I'm working on, so I'm really hoping my draft doesn't get declined for good.

I have already found independent sources that have mention him and his previous works in detail—at least 2 paragraphs talking about him. The other sources I'd use as reference would just be supporting links. Is that okay? Thanks! Don — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 07:53, 19 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply] - Hi Don. First question. Do you have a connection to him and, if so, what is it? Get back to me on that and we can then have a discussion on possible improvements. And new comments go at the bottom of a page. KJP1 (talk) 08:03, 19 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 19[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited St Donat's Castle, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Norman (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 09:14, 19 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Request on 16:06:07, 19 March 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by EllenMichelle[edit]

Hello. Thank you for your review of the Rhonda Parrish article. I understand your concern about being a "single-purpose author." The reason I created a Wikipedia article is because I'm in a Master of Publishing program, and we had an open knowledge assignment to contribute to or create a new Wikipedia page. I am a fan of Rhonda Parrish's work, and I saw that she didn't yet have a Wikipedia page, so I chose her as my topic. This is my first time working with Wikipedia, so I appreciate your feedback on the article. I will try to find better sources that do more than just list her books and stories published. There is a lot of information about her on her own website, but I understand that her own website is not a valid source so I'm trying to look elsewhere. She's published a lot of work and is known well locally, so I feel like she is a notable person enough to have a page. I will try to prove that better than I have already. Thanks! EllenMichelle (talk) 16:06, 19 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

EllenMichelle - Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! Thanks very much for getting in touch. A few thoughts. As a first effort on Wikipedia, it was very good. Your layout and structure was right, and you formatted the sourcing correctly. And I don't dispute that Ms Parrish may well warrant a page, it's just that the current sourcing doesn't demonstrate it. What we need is coverage from a number (not many) of reliable sources. Anything like reviews, notices, literary criticism, sales etc. would do. She doesn't seem to have that much of an online presence - is she an author with more of a local, as opposed to national, reputation? As to content, I'd probably only list her major works. Take a look at somebody like W. Somerset Maugham. He also wrote a lot but the article doesn't try to list them all. A bit more about her as a person would be good. If I can help at all, just drop me a line here. All the best. KJP1 (talk) 17:56, 19 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

07:17:48, 20 March 2018 review of submission by Marija919[edit]

Marija919 (talk) 07:17, 20 March 2018 (UTC) Could you please specify the places, where it seems like an advertisement? To my mind, there is just a brief description and short history of the company. Marija919 (talk) 07:17, 20 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Marija919 - I’m afraid, in my view, the entire draft is an advert for the company. KJP1 (talk) 07:33, 20 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dear KJP1, here is another entry I have found on Wikipedia: . The author here describes the services, pricing and rates, also uses links to the Revolut's website, but somehow the entry is in Wikipedia. In my entry, there is only a brief description of the company's activity and its short history, which only contains facts. I don't even refer to the company's awards here, so the text would remain as impartial is it can be. Furthermore, I used links only to relevant sources, such as the Bank of Lithuania and major Lithuanian broadsheets, and just cannot find any ways to write it from a more neutral point of view. Could you please provide some arguments to support your opinion that the whole draft is an advert? Maybe some comments on how to improve the texts? Marija919 (talk) 13:45, 22 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Marija919 - Ok, two questions from me, and then we can have a discussion.
  • What is your connection to the company?
  • Why do you want to have an article about the company on Wikipedia?
Regards. KJP1 (talk) 22:13, 22 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I work for the company, but marketing is not one of my responsibilities and I'm not paid for the article. I believe it is not forbidden to write an article about a company you work in, as long as it is written from a neutral point of view (which I believe I did). If I need to indicate in the article, that I'm an employee of this company, I'm comfortable with that, although I'm not sure how this should be indicated. Hoping for your help on this. I think that Paysera should have an article on Wikipedia, because it's a notable company, which has hundreds of thousands clients all over the world. Paysera also has franchisees in different countries, who have their article on Wikipedia (e.g. Paysera Bulgaria ( The company actually has articles on Wikipedia in other languages too (LT, RU, PL), and as this is an international company, it would be nice to have one in English. So how should I improve this article in order for it to be available on Wikipedia? Marija919 (talk) 08:11, 23 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Marija919 - Ok, my responses below:
  • Wikipedia:Conflict of interest - as an employee of the company, you have a very clear conflict. This needs to be declared and you need to read and follow our guidance on editing with a conflict;
  • Wikipedia:Other stuff exists - that there may be other promotional articles on Wikipedia isn't a strong argument for adding yours. This essay explains why;
  • Notability - I don't agree that the company is Notable, and I believe your draft is, and is intended as, advertising for the company. I appreciate that you have a different view, but I'd point out that your article has been declined and deleted 7 times previously. So that's 8 editors, including me, who disagree with you;
You can resubmit, but I have to say that, in my judgement, it will rightly be declined again. Regards. KJP1 (talk) 15:22, 23 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

08:13:59, 20 March 2018 review of submission by Saurav.webkul[edit]


I have made changes in content part and tried to remove the part being shown as promotional or advertising. Can you re-review my article for further suggestions and improvements?

Saurav.webkul (talk) 08:13, 20 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Drafting Brij Bhushan Mani Tripathi[edit]

My dear friend and reviewer , I have done all the referencing you told me and I think you should now review my article if anything you seem is not right you may just tell me I will correct it so I think you should go and submit it . If you wanna contact me xxxxxxx — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aditya Mani Tripathi (talkcontribs) 06:01, 21 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Aditya Mani Tripathi - Hi, I left detailed feedback and stressed you needed to read it and act on it. But you haven't done that. When you do, I'll have another look. I've blanked your phone number as it's not a good idea to post personal details on here. KJP1 (talk) 08:01, 21 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@KJP1 sir now I have done referencing properly please see it once more and accept it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aditya Mani Tripathi (talkcontribs) 09:26, 21 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

10:44:00, 22 March 2018 review of submission by Rachitsharma28[edit]

I wanted to write a short wiki about the company Greenbrrew Green Coffee but every time I wrote it you people declined it because the wiki was not according to the policies and terms of the website. Please let me know the exact procedure of how to write a precise wiki so that it doesn't look like an advertisement or promotion. Rachitsharma28 (talk) 10:44, 22 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Rachitsharma28 - Hi, it's not whether it looks like an advertisement, it is an advertisement for a company that the sourcing doesn't show is Notable. Can I ask, do you have a connection to the company? KJP1 (talk) 07:51, 23 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

22:34:25, 22 March 2018 review of submission by[edit]

With all due respect (which is none) the latest comment is total nonsense. The original comment asked for coverage of the subject, this was then actioned. This article was written from a completely neutral viewpoint - I suggest the latest reviewer gets a dictionary and looks up the meaning of neutral. No opinions have been expressed in the article. Only facts stated. Perhaps Wikipedia need to review the competency of their reviewers (talk) 22:34, 22 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply] - Thanks for your feedback. Good working with you. KJP1 (talk) 22:37, 22 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

10:59:29, 23 March 2018 review of submission by Tanya ZQ[edit]

Hi! Thank you, that you reviewed our Zeroqode article. I made several changes and want to ask you to re-review draft zeroqode. I've published changes but I am not sure that article went to you for re-review. How to understand this? And if you don't see this article for re-review please tell me what I need to do to sent article to re-review?

thank you! Tanya ZQ (talk) 10:59, 23 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

16:08:18, 23 March 2018 review of submission by Supergirl101[edit]

Hello - I have added wiki and external links to the text area of this listing. Please let me know if anything else is needed. Many thanks! Supergirl101 (talk) 16:08, 23 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Supergirl101 - I’m afraid this isn’t how we do it. You need to read Referencing for beginners to get an idea of how we do sources. KJP1 (talk) 17:13, 23 March 2018 (UTC) KJP1 (talk) 17:13, 23 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Request on 04:42:32, 24 March 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Grommi[edit]

Hi. I was working very hard to create a draft for a company that I know about. It is the first time I've tried participating in Wikipedia. The first moderator was very helpful, and assisted me greatly in fixing my draft. You, however, were not, and instead deleted my work. That upsets me greatly. I would have much appreciated if you helped me to improve it so I could potentially reach a publish point.

You brought into question the age of my account. That was disrespectful. I've lurked on Wikipedia for years and wanted to contribute, especially considering how ESL is gaining in the U.S. and China. I'm saddened because it felt like instead of helping, you reached a conclusion that was one-sided.

I cited the website because if you try to search for research for Qkids, there is very little material that comes up. It has not been marketed in the U.S. You questioned my sources, but you didn't offer any suggestions on how to improve that. If this is an encyclopedia, as you claim, then there is an entry for Qkids required. How are we supposed to enter this company if it does not have reliable sources? Where do you fix that paradox?

You mention it as an advertisement for the company. Can you specify what portions were an advertisement? The previous moderator gave clear, concise examples and I learned a lot from it. I've looked at competitors for the ESL market. ( As you can see, they literally open with a "VIPKID is a leading Chinese online education firm". You allowed this, but deleted mine?

Was it for the sources? If they pour money into sources and marketing, that makes it reputable? I wouldn't trust a Qkids source from a marketed source. Why would you? I literally even tried to draw from reviews from LinkedIn, Facebook, and Glassdoor (The ratings of hundreds of employees) and that was not acceptable. But those sources are? Grommi (talk) 04:42, 24 March 2018 (UTC) Grommi (talk) 04:42, 24 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Grommi - Hi, and thanks for the feedback. I'm afraid I can't comment on the detail of the draft as it's been deleted. I didn't actually do that, as I don't have the authority to delete things, I can only make recommendations for deletion. I will have done so in this case because the draft was poorly sourced, didn't show that the company was Notable and read as an advertisement. Two wider points:
  • Wikipedia's an encyclopedia, but it's not the encyclopedia of everything. We try only to have articles about subjects that are Notable. And we define Notability as having received significant coverage from reliable sources independent of the subject. So, if such sources don't exist for Qkids, and you say they don't, then we shouldn't have an article about it.
  • Advertising - to advertise a company, an article doesn't have to say something like "Qkids is fantastic". It just has to be here. It's the presence on Wikipedia that gives the Google hits and the credibility - not overtly promotional prose. But, to be blunt, I think you know this already.
Regards. KJP1 (talk) 06:39, 24 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Draft:Nicolas Hazard[edit]

Hi KJP1 thank you for reviewing Nicolas Hazard page. As suggested, I deleted all embedded eternal links from the body of the text. I also created a new "External Links" Section which seems to me in line with the Wikipedia guidelines on external links. Could you have a look and let me know if it meets wikipedia standards and if there is anything else I could do to improve the page ? Thank you. --Gregoireo (talk) 13:37, 25 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Gregoireo - Sure, I'll go have a look shortly. KJP1 (talk) 13:43, 25 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Speedy deletion contested: Draft:Skyhill[edit]

Hello KJP1. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Draft:Skyhill, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not G11 stuff. Thank you. ~ Winged BladesGodric 14:01, 25 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Winged Blades of Godric - Thanks for letting me know. On reflection, I wonder if I should have gone the Mfd route? I'm pretty certain the draft doesn't indicate Notability. KJP1 (talk) 14:10, 25 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
In a nutshell, your's question has got no policy-based answer that will always lead to the desired outcome, inspite of the precision of your evaluation about the prospects of the draft .
WP:NMFD, (which IMHO, was derived from an aberrative RFC), decided that the draft-space can be the indefinite linger ground for any draft, that does not satisfy any CSD criterion, provided it is not tendentiously resubmitted.The community basically opined that even stuff that was hopelessly non-notable reserved their right to be a draft and can't be subject to MFD, on such grounds alone.
You can though choose to try your luck at MFD, which can go either way, depending on who turns up to !vote.(Esp. given that of late, many !voters (including me) are discounting the enacted policy and so often than not, our practice reflects our policies.)
A more silent way to pull the same deal would be to successfully convince the submitter about the non-availability of any minimal prospect for the draft and use G13 to push it off the shelf.Best, ~ Winged BladesGodric 15:17, 25 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Winged Blades of Godric - Very helpful advice, for which many thanks. I'll think about the best way to go. On the wider, philosophical, question, it is a conundrum. I've great sympathy with the "everyone can edit - that's how we built the biggest online encyclopedia in the world" view. But I'm not sure its proponents quite realise just how attractive this achievement has made Wikipedia as a platform for promotion. You don't have to spend long at Afc to get an idea of how strong the push for promotional content, often paid-for or motivated by self-interest, really is. For now, I'm just going to take a break as I've a PR/FA candidate brewing. All the best. KJP1 (talk) 18:30, 26 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Virginia Minnich article[edit]

Hi. Thanks so much for reviewing my article on Virginia Minnich. I appreciate the feedback. I will work on re-phrasing and I'm hoping that other people will have access to additional sources. I'm also planning to submit the article to peer review to improve it further. Also, is it okay for me to add this picture under Fair Use? Thank you! Biochemlife (talk) 08:49, 26 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Biochemlife - My pleasure, it's a good article and it's a joy to come across something worth reading in the deluge of Afc submissions! I'm afraid I'm no expert on image licensing but I've two suggestions. Commons Village Pump here, Commons:Village pump/Copyright should be able to advise. If not, User talk:Nikkimaria is very knowledgeable about many things, including copyright and licensing, and very helpful. If you asked, I'm sure they'd advise. All the best. KJP1 (talk) 08:59, 26 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks so much! It's been a great first article experience and I really appreciate everyone's patience with a newcomer! Biochemlife (talk) 09:01, 26 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 26[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited St Donat's Castle, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Breton and Agincourt (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:41, 26 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Reliable? I think so. [3] Legacypac (talk) 10:09, 26 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Legacypac - Looks alright, as long as we don’t end up sourcing Wikipedia with Wikipedia! KJP1 (talk) 10:25, 26 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

April 2018 Milhist Backlog Drive[edit]

G'day all, please be advised that throughout April 2018 the Military history Wikiproject is running its annual backlog elimination drive. This will focus on several key areas:

  • tagging and assessing articles that fall within the project's scope
  • adding or improving listed resources on Milhist's task force pages
  • updating the open tasks template on Milhist's task force pages
  • creating articles that are listed as "requested" on the project's various lists of missing articles.

As with past Milhist drives, there are points awarded for working on articles in the targeted areas, with barnstars being awarded at the end for different levels of achievement.

The drive is open to all Wikipedians, not just members of the Military history project, although only work on articles that fall (broadly) within the scope of military history will be considered eligible. This year, the Military history project would like to extend a specific welcome to members of Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red, and we would like to encourage all participants to consider working on helping to improve our coverage of women in the military. This is not the sole focus of the edit-a-thon, though, and there are aspects that hopefully will appeal to pretty much everyone.

The drive starts at 00:01 UTC on 1 April and runs until 23:59 UTC on 30 April 2018. Those interested in participating can sign up here.

For the Milhist co-ordinators, AustralianRupert and MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:53, 27 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Insane ranting[edit]

I have Source Or Proof Or Gazeteer On My Article If You Not Post My Article I Will Complain You All And Your Wikipedia Member Was Abusing Me And Change My Article If You Wanna Proof i will Give You Proof — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pradeep Suryavanshi (talkcontribs) 11:33, 27 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Good to hear from you. KJP1 (talk) 21:45, 27 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank You![edit]

Thank You for your feedback regarding the article I am currently improving (Ferenc Molnár)! I will definitely be incorporating your suggestions! Stories Alive (talk) 17:01, 30 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]