User talk:AngusWOOF/Archive 25

Draft:Luie Luie

Hello,

My draft page for the musician, actor, and screenwriter, Luie Luie, was denied by you on September 22, 2022. I have since made significant additions to this page that further explore Johnston's career in music and film. Many more references have been added as well as a complete discography section. Please reconsider approving this page.

Thanks Sbwhitt (talk) 23:02, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Sbwhitt, please remove IMDb, film freeway as those are not reliable sources. Also minimize the references to the record labels or retail stores. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 23:34, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Sbwhitt, which criteria does Luie Luie meet in WP:MUSICBIO? You may want to bring that up in the comments. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 23:41, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Sandi's Song

Hi AngusWOOF...There is no chart information on the album but I did provide links about the album. Should be enough for criteria to meet. Both Allmusic and Christian Music Archive have good info on the album. Joelcab123 (talk) 18:31, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Joelcab123, if there are some reviews from CCM and other magazines/papers, same with possible awards and honors. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 18:14, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Will do. I'll do some research online. Hopefully I'll find some PDFs of some back issues of CCM or other publications. Thanks! Joelcab123 (talk) 18:21, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Can you look at Sandi's Song again? I added an additional link in the Professional Reviews section. Joelcab123 (talk) 19:49, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Joelcab123, where is the Professional Reviews section? I do see some kind of table with star ratings, but where is the Allmusic rating coming from? If it's from users, it will probably not be acceptable. Rate Your Music isn't acceptable. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 20:31, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Yes I meant to say the Review Section. The Allmusic rating is from them, not the users. You can click on the link to check it. I will take off the Rate Your Music. Joelcab123 (talk) 20:37, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Request for article review

Hello, hope you are doing great. Can you please review Draft:Krishand RK? Thanks 116.68.97.109 (talk) 10:43, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Puree diet

Hi there. I'm the person who created the Pureed diet article. Did you even check the references? How exactly are those not reliable? Please, explain, I'm very confused. --Pek (talk) 16:03, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Pek, I moved the article to draft and redirected it to Soft diet. The term appears to be covered by that article so it really should be merged there. If you feel it needs to be a separate article, please initiate a split request on the talk page for that article. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 16:11, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

So we have article about liquid diet, which is also mentioned in the article soft diet, but it has it's own article, so why exactly pureed diet can't have it's own article then? --Pek (talk) 16:14, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Request for review

Hello, I hope you are doing well. Could you please help me for reviewing this draft? Actually, two reviewers did the review already. I provide the link of my discussion with them for your information: Reviewer 1 and Reviewer 2. It seems that we need third reviewer for final check. I tried a lot to find reviewer for the draft and I will open a discussion on the related projects as well to find potential reviewers. I hope that you can help me with reviewing the draft. Thank you in advance. Scholartop (talk) 18:28, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Scholartop, I agree with Paul2520 and Dodger67 in that it should go to the WikiProject Mathematics group to discuss. AFC approvals don't go by the "third reviewer for final check" process. It's more like if the user keeps resubmitting the topic and it's declined over three times without significant improvement, it's more likely to be rejected (no more retries). AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 20:27, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

OK thanks. Scholartop (talk) 03:18, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your comment on my draft but I already discussed in WP:Mathematics project. It is not related to this project. I also removed the article from this category. Could you please change your comment? Scholartop (talk) 17:11, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Work management

After receiving your comment on September 1, I made some additions and corrections. Could you please check again and give me some advice? Mocha c jp (talk) 06:55, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Mocha c jp, the topic is covered by Work management software or Project management. I don't believe it's worth trying to flesh it out as an independent term. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 09:40, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

In response to the opinion "Isn't "Work management" and "Project management" the same?".

"Work management" and "Project management" have different purposes. Therefore, the details of the explanation will be different.

Broadly speaking, both "Work management software" and "Project management software" belong to "Collaborative software". Also, a lot of "Work management software" and "Project management software" are very different in their behavior. Mocha c jp (talk) 10:45, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Mocha c jp, if you think there needs to be a distinction between the two terms such as work management software vs. project management software, or work management vs. project management, then you'll have to discuss that at the talk page for project management software or WikiProject Software or WikiProject Business. See if you can get consensus that they should be considered separately. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 10:49, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Notability

Hello there, I undid your revision here as there are more than enough sources on this article to make it reach the GNG. And if you really want to check the notability of footballers, you should probably see lists like this one. Coco (talk) 17:59, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Coco, how does he meet WP:NFOOTY then if he's in the next-gen or transfer but hasn't played in a regulation game in the league? Is he in by virtue of WP:COLLATH? I don't see a huge college career achievement. You can answer in his talk page. If it needs to be discussed whether Next gen qualifies for that, then we can discuss at the talk page for WP:NFOOTY AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 19:06, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

• The article reaches the WP:GNG, because of significant coverage, please answer on this point otherwise it's pointless.
• I did not mention WP:NFOOTY, and as of now these football specific guidelines are not used anymore (just click on the link), the articles about footballers currently created are judged only based on the GNG.
• There is no such thing as a "college career" in association football.
• Being in the "Next gen" list from The Guardian doesn't qualify for anything. I was just showing you this list as an example of footballers' pages created solely based on GNG, with most of them including less significant coverage than the page I created.
• Please remove this template asap, so that I can go back to creating this article.

Coco (talk) 20:17, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Coco, can you present the WP:THREE documents that enable this person to meet WP:GNG then? You can do so at the talk page in the notability section. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 20:47, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Sardunya

Hi, the article that you have contributed to has been updated. Gazozlu (talk) 20:24, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Discord invite

Hey there. Congrats on being on the backlog drive leaderboard already. Off to a great start! If you want to hang out with other NPPs, consider joining us on the NPP Discord. Discord is live chat software that can be really fun. If not no worries. Thanks and see you around :) –Novem Linguae (talk) 00:14, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

About the anonymous editor on the Wiggly, Wiggly Christmas page

I’ve noticed that you’ve been revising a section of the Wiggly, Wiggly Christmas page that an anonymous user keeps manually reverting, from what I’ve observed, to what they feel is the way it should be. Personally, I feel that no matter how many time your fix that section the user keeps editing, they’ll still revert it to make themselves feel good about their “work”. I feel that either there should be an edit protection on the page or the user should get blocked from editing (as I feel their edits might be perceived as vandalism, or at least approaching vandalism level), but I don’t know what needs to be done. What do you think needs to be done? Dipper Dalmatian (talk) 12:55, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Dipper Dalmatian, it depends on who the IP editor is:

If it's Dcelano, he has made a number of low-quality edits over the years, especially with adding really trivial content about the cast in their videos. Stuff like "you can see Anthony's sister in the audience" or "Murray uses a Takamine guitar in this video". You can see his SPI page at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dcelano/Archive. Unfortunately he has extensively edited the Fandom entries, but Figureskatingfan and I have been dealing with him for over a decade.

If it's that IP hopping vandal, they usually try to add unsourced Recording dates and unsourced Release dates, and redo the track listings, I usually ask the admins to range block those IPs or sometimes raise the RFPP on the offending pages.

My guess is that the archiving of the YouTube videos is more Dcelano's kind of interest, but the more annoying one is the IP hopper as you've dealt with them much more often especially Yummy Yummy (album). AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 13:09, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

@AngusWOOF, @Dipper Dalmatian: My first thought was that it is Dcelano who's been doing those edits; this article is one he's been fixated in the past. The guy can be relentless and it's been exhausting to have to deal with him over the years. We've kept him pretty much in check, though, and once he figures out we're onto him, he leaves and goes back to cause trouble in his other venues. Blocking and page protection seems to be the most effective ways because it makes it hard for him continue and he seems to give up and go away for a while. Even if the IP isn't him, I think that requesting a block on the IP and asking an admin to put at least temporary protection on the article is the most effective way to deal with this. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 14:50, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

I agree, as the user has just manually reverted AngusWOOF’s work. Dipper Dalmatian (talk) 08:27, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

why was the checkuser declind? Jena (talk) 15:21, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Jena, it's because it's an IP I guess. I tried RFPP but they declined that too since it was a single IP. I put a warning on the IP's page about edit warring, will see how that goes. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 13:52, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

so if someone is doing Bad things but they are an IP they can get away with it? no that sucks ! Jena (talk) 14:35, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks DatGuy for adding protection on the article! AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 17:00, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

TImes of India

Hey! Thanks for letting me know we shouldn't use this source. It came up when I was using the search engine for reliable sources so I assumed it was reliable. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 18:02, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

Blaze Wolf, no prob. Since it's a video game, you can check WP:VG/RS to see if the sites that are creating news articles are on the reliable list. There seems to be a lot of video game sites covering it, so even then the primary source of the actual website can probably be replaced with secondary source references unless it contains interviews and production detail. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 19:29, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

Probably. And I had used the VG search engine initially and then switched to RSSE so I could get stuff from non-gaming sources. I've added info regarding leaks that happened prior to the reveal now, attributed to a Spanish source and Digital Trends. It could probably be written a little bit better, however I think that info would be appropriate to include in the Development and release section. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:36, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

I think I've done just about everything i can with my draft with the info that we have. Would it be alright if I moved it to mainspace? (would much rather not submit it to AFC and possibly have to wait several months before someone looks at it) ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 23:02, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

Blaze Wolf, I'm an AFC reviewer so it wouldn't take months. But it looks like another editor has started the CSD process anyway. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 12:12, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

@AngusWOOF: Yep. I already got another AFC reviewer on Discord to review it and they said it was good for me to move. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 14:02, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi...

Hi friend how are you? MD Hydrogen 123 (talk) 03:06, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Fall of X

A tag has been placed on Fall of X requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

No clue what this is

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Mooonswimmer 16:25, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Like you saw, I took care of that. However, you are an involved editor (cos you created the redirect...) so I "took ownership" of the header you put on the talk page. Until Wolvie's claws rust, make mine Marvel! - UtherSRG (talk) 18:43, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

UtherSRG, thanks, no worries. I didn't know what that was either. I figure if it becomes an event / series with multiple comics released, then it can become an article, so best to stick it in draft for now for more developments. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 19:50, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Criticisms of Nintendo

Hi there Angus, with the news of Nintendo paying the Bayonetta voice actress $4000 for the franchise, I think it would be a good time to revisit creating a page to document all the minor, major, and popular criticisms of Nintendo just like the other big companies. Following up on your comments on my draft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Criticism_of_Nintendo, I've just added a comment on the Nintendo page to see if we can get a criticisms section on the main Nintendo page, and I will also change the timeline order if they approve. I feel this is also better as a separate page since large companies usually want their main page to be "PR friendly", so I think we should make a new page just like the other similar tech companies.

• Criticism of Electronic Arts
• Criticism of Facebook
• Criticism of Apple
• Criticism of Google
• Criticism of Yahoo!

Sorry about the 2 year late response, haha. I just saw some criticism of Nintendo on my newsfeed and got reminded of my draft. Thanks for reading and your service to Wikipedia. WeJustWantToPlay (talk) 17:59, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter October 2022

Hello AngusWOOF,

Much has happened since the last newsletter over two months ago. The open letter finished with 444 signatures. The letter was sent to several dozen people at the WMF, and we have heard that it is being discussed but there has been no official reply. A related article appears in the current issue of The Signpost. If you haven't seen it, you should, including the readers' comment section.

Awards: Barnstars were given for the past several years (thanks to MPGuy2824), and we are now all caught up. The 2021 cup went to John B123 for leading with 26,525 article reviews during 2021. To encourage moderate activity, a new "Iron" level barnstar is awarded annually for reviewing 360 articles ("one-a-day"), and 100 reviews earns the "Standard" NPP barnstar. About 90 reviewers received barnstars for each of the years 2018 to 2021 (including the new awards that were given retroactively). All awards issued for every year are listed on the Awards page. Check out the new Hall of Fame also.

Software news: Novem Linguae and MPGuy2824 have connected with WMF developers who can review and approve patches, so they have been able to fix some bugs, and make other improvements to the Page Curation software. You can see everything that has been fixed recently here. The reviewer report has also been improved.

NPP backlog May – October 15, 2022

Suggestions:

• There is much enthusiasm over the low backlog, but remember that the "quality and depth of patrolling are more important than speed".
• Reminder: an article should not be tagged for any kind of deletion for a minimum of 15 minutes after creation and it is often appropriate to wait an hour or more. (from the NPP tutorial)
• Reviewers should focus their effort where it can do the most good, reviewing articles. Other clean-up tasks that don't require advanced permissions can be left to other editors that routinely improve articles in these ways (creating Talk Pages, specifying projects and ratings, adding categories, etc.) Let's rely on others when it makes the most sense. On the other hand, if you enjoy doing these tasks while reviewing and it keeps you engaged with NPP (or are guiding a newcomer), then by all means continue.
• This user script puts a link to the feed in your top toolbar.

Backlog:

Saving the best for last: From a July low of 8,500, the backlog climbed back to 11,000 in August and then reversed in September dropping to below 6,000 and continued falling with the October backlog drive to under 1,000, a level not seen in over four years. Keep in mind that there are 2,000 new articles every week, so the number of reviews is far higher than the backlog reduction. To keep the backlog under a thousand, we have to keep reviewing at about half the recent rate!

Reminders

• Newsletter feedback - please take this short poll about the newsletter.
• If you're interested in instant messaging and chat rooms, please join us on the New Page Patrol Discord, where you can ask for help and live chat with other patrollers.
• Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
• If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be a reviewer, please ask any admin to remove you from the group. If you want the tools back again, just ask at PERM.
• To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Don't redirect my newly created pages

@AngusWOOF, I worked very hard on the pages you made redirects to. I was gonna move the content, but first needed to make the new pages, modify them, so they fit within the new title scope. Please, don't just redirect them. Qwerty284651 (talk) 14:28, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

Qwerty284651, are you splitting the content from the other tournament pages? Otherwise it's a major content fork and shouldn't be duplicated. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 15:14, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

@AngusWOOF, I split the content by moving it to the pages I created. I am aware it's content fork. And, yes, duplication is not what we want. Cheers. Qwerty284651 (talk) 15:17, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

Qwerty284651, please use {{copied}} template on the talk page then. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 15:20, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

On the talk page of the page I am copying from or copying to? Qwerty284651 (talk) 15:22, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

On both. I'll place one for the 2015 ones as example. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 15:26, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. Qwerty284651 (talk) 15:28, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

Qwerty284651, can you redo the navbox for the premier tournaments? There should be two rows for the by year, one for Premier Mandatory & Premier 5 and a different row for regular Premier. Using the if conditional statements is very confusing. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 17:31, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

I used the Premier Mandatory/5 years for the namesake yearly articles and the Premier tournament years for the Premier yearly articles. That is why I did those if statements in the first place. Having 2 rows of years would be confusing. Qwerty284651 (talk) 18:22, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

I didn't want to make a new fork navbox just for the Premier Mand./5 tour. aricles, so I modified the existing one. I have never seen a navbox with 2 rows of years. Having them within the same group would not make any sense. Qwerty284651 (talk) 18:37, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Qwerty284651, what's wrong with two rows of years? One would be for PM/P5 and the other for regular Premier. Otherwise you should recombine the year pages. You can prioritize PM/P5 for the first row, and put regular Premier in the second row. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 20:06, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

I would have to consult my Wiki project for that implementation, i.e. seek consensus. Qwerty284651 (talk) 20:49, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Notice of noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. BattleshipMan (talk) 14:29, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

MFS Article

Hello AngusWOOF,

I was able to find her on works for sale on this Oricon site, but not on the Oricon page that you linked.

I was not able to find any "official-type" charting information. I did see that they have charting info listed for Apple Music, iTunes, and Spotify listed on this site. (e.g., Spotify • Daily Viral Songs • America • TOP 1 • 16 Oct 2022)

Here are a few (Japanese) articles about her, a single release, her as part of a remix, and announcing her at an event.

Overall, they are a new artist so they may not have listings in larger places? I am not sure how charting and all of that really works and am rather new to Wikipedia editing in general.

How should I proceed from here? Add all of these to the article and then click "Submit the draft for review!"? Thank you for your help. Notawiki (talk) 01:01, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Notawiki, new artists usually don't get Wikipedia articles yet because of WP:TOOSOON so that's where it stays in draft until they get some music that charts on something major like Oricon or Billboard. If they get a bunch of writeups that are not promotional, that helps too. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 14:40, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the info! Notawiki (talk) 23:06, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

New England Patriots records declined article for creation

So I’ll have to do is format it like the Kansas City one and it will be accepted? How long will I take after that, the same couple of months like before or does it get sped up cause it was reviewed once?

Thank you Pats6XChamps (talk) 07:40, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

Some of the AFC (articles for creation) folks review from the latest submission instead of the earliest, otherwise it could be random. I was looking at some of the baseball team articles as reference first, but then saw the Kansas City one so I figure getting a similar format to that one would work. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 07:53, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

Early end of the backlog drive

A few days ago, new page patrollers got the backlog to zero. Due to the unprecedented success of the backlog drive, it will be ending early—at the end of 24 October, or in approximately two hours.

Barnstars will be awarded as soon as the coords can tally the results. Streak awards will be allocated based on the first three weeks of the drive, with the last three days being counted as part of week three.

Great work everyone! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:50, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

Request on 02:57:32, 29 October 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Mercuryruileo

• Mercuryruileo (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:DVD-Cloner Software (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

When I visit "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVD_X_Copy", in the "See Also" section, the related article for "DVD-Cloner" does not exist. I created and submitted this new article on "DVD-Cloner" to round out related article citations. Is this page: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVD_X_Copy" a sufficiently qualified reference?

Mercuryruileo (talk) 02:57, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Dark_Factor_of_Personality

I kindly ask you to re-review the draft on Draft:Dark_Factor_of_Personality. The discussion at the Dark_Triad page confirmed the split request, so the materials on the Dark Factor was removed from the Dark Triad, so your point that the article already exists no longer applies. 2003:E5:1F1F:4200:1142:623F:CC5F:C29A (talk) 16:19, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

okay i'll get on it AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 03:03, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

Thank you! 2003:E5:1F1F:4200:79F6:D0CF:331F:DE06 (talk) 12:23, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

October 2022

Hello and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I saw that an article you created, Elegant Weapons has not been added to any categories. According to the guideline Wikipedia:Categorization, every article should be in at least one category. Please help by adding categories to the articles you create. You can take a look at the categorization FAQ. If you need further help, ask at the Teahouse. Thank you. --Jax 0677 (talk) 08:15, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

NPP Backlog Drive Awards

		The New Page Patroller's Barnstar
		This award is given to AngusWOOF for collecting more than 100 points doing reviews and re-reviews, in the October NPP backlog reduction drive. Thank you for your contributions. Zippybonzo | Talk (he|him) 09:40, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

		Rack and pinion Award
		This award is given to AngusWOOF for collecting more than 15 points per week doing reviews, in the October NPP backlog reduction drive. Thank you for your contributions Zippybonzo | Talk (he|him) 09:40, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

Megan Reid third-party tag

Hi AngusWOOF, I saw that you placed a third-party tag on the Megan Reid article I just published. The article has five sources, including a news article from an independent site. All the information from her university, club, and league is basic biographical and statistical information, and those sources are standard for articles about athletes. What do you think is missing?

Cheers, Kabest (talk) 20:24, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Yes, those are standard, so where are the other sources outside of the university and club that give significant coverage of the person? General news sources, like:

• https://www.ktvu.com/sports/bay-area-native-leaves-firefighting-job-to-play-professoinal-soccer
• https://www.lamorindaweekly.com/archive/issue1609/Megan-Reids-serpentine-path-to-professional-soccer.html
• https://www.si.com/tv/soccer/2022/10/10/mexico-chile-stream-international-womens-soccer-live
• https://www.latimes.com/sports/soccer/angel-city-fc/story/2022-08-10/angel-city-monterrey-tigers-femenil-friendly-recap
• https://www.sfchronicle.com/sports/article/NWSL-franchise-bid-could-put-Bay-Area-on-pro-17254147.php - photo only
• https://www.latimes.com/sports/newsletter/2022-10-04/nwsl-failed-soccer - for the "megan reid who played every minute this season"
• https://www.sfgate.com/collegesports/article/Virginia-made-waiting-worthwhile-for-Bay-Area-5936205.php
• https://prosoccerwire.usatoday.com/2022/10/01/megan-reid-angel-city-nwsl-emt-virginia/
• https://www.lamorindaweekly.com/archive/issue0803/DFAL-All-League-Teams.html

AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 20:44, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Those are all great sources (I'll note that I already used the Pro Soccer Wire article!), and obviously more citations always help.

However, there's a bit of a disconnect between the issue you seem to be suggesting above (not enough citations) and the one indicated in the tag you added, which says that the existing sources are "too closely associated with the subject, potentially preventing the article from being verifiable and neutral." Sources like the league website, her university bio, and her old club's list of alumni are the only primary sources that exist. In sports, organizations like that, which collect data, are the ones you would use to fact check secondary sources like a news article. They are the closest thing to neutral information that exists, and there's no more reliable third party that could be used to verify their accuracy. The notion that a KTVU reporter might have more accurate information than UVA or the NWSL is ludicrous. Kabest (talk) 23:30, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

It's mostly that they were overwhelmingly primary. Maybe I should tag that instead of third-party. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 23:50, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

That seems like the more suitable tag to me. Kabest (talk) 00:11, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

You can read WP:INDY and see what Wikipedia says about comparing primaries to secondaries/third-parties. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 23:51, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

New review of AVIXA

Hey Angus - I'm taking over this orphaned entry for AVIXA (Draft:AVIXA - Wikipedia as the original author never bothered to improve his/her entry. Taking your points to heart:

1. I examined their website and didn't see the exact text used here. 2. I cleaned up some of the more personal language that made it read less than neutral.  3. Scoured the net and archive.org for relevant sources. 

Thank you so much! Jeddav (talk) 19:11, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

Jeddav, the membership and the certifications sections need to be completely rewritten. They read like they are coming from their website, structurally. People don't need to know what the levels of membership are called or the specific certifications they offer. Wikipedia is not a course catalog. Thanks for removing some of their reference websites and replacing them with others. If you can find other journals that cover the organization, that will help. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 21:10, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the feedback. I appreciate it. I'll edit and resubmit. Jeddav (talk) 21:28, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

Review Required

Hi Angus,

I have added more citations and increased the number of words by adding the research centers into the article. May I request you to perform a peer review please?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Advanced_Technology_Research_Council — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rakanya (talk • contribs) 17:16, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi Angus,

I got my article reviewed by you but has been declined. I was paid for writing the article and I need to make a disclosure of that but it the article did not show me anywhere to disclose that.

The article is about a Research organization initiated by the Government of UAE.

Kindly help. Rakanya (talk) 13:12, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Rakanya, you can read WP:COI and the "how to disclose" section. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 13:18, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for prompt response. I was, in fact, trying to disclose that I am being paid for creating this page on behalf of my client, ATRC, but I jsut did not know how to disclose since the page did not ask for disclosure anywhere.

My question still is how do I disclose?

I tried adding this

{{connected contributor}}

on top of my talk page, but I do not know if that would help.

Since you are a reviewer and have lots of experience, is this something you can help me with?

Many thanks once again! Rakanya (talk) 04:26, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

okay i'll try to format the box proper AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 15:27, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Here are the comments posted by you -

Symbol opinion vote.svg Comment: Also do not use honorifics such as His Excellency. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 12:32, 22 September 2022 (UTC) Symbol opinion vote.svg Comment: Please note that Technology Innovation Institute article already exists, and ATRC could redirect to it unless it covers a lot more. The TII research centre details are covered in that article. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 12:31, 22 September 2022 (UTC) Symbol opinion vote.svg Comment: Needs more external news sources that cover this and that are not press releases / promo items. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 12:29, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

1. I am removing the honorific - His Excellency 2. ATRC is the mother institute under which TII functions, since I am trying to create a page for ATRC and have a restriction of 150 words, I am limiting the article to around 150 words. 3. I am including more news and citations

Once I complete doing this, can I paste it here for your review? Just asking — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rakanya (talk • contribs) 02:02, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Rakanya, why the 150 words? AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 05:41, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi Angus,

Thank you for pointing that out to me.

During my training on how to write/create a wikipedia page, we were advised not to cross 150 words in the first attempt to publish. While it is not a rule, however, longer articles have a lesser chance of getting published is what we were advised. Hence my understandinng of 150 words.

Kindly aadvise as I would like to understand it from an expert like yourself, the correct way of writing/creating a page.

Thank you once again!

Regards,

Rakesh Rakanya (talk) 06:21, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Dear Angus,

I have followed all your instructions and made all the changes that were required for the page.

Could you kindly help in approving it??

Regards Rakanya (talk) 11:25, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

Underage smoking in Australia

I've declined your speedy deletion request for Draft:Underage smoking in Australia, because it is nowhere near to being similar enough to the previously deleted article for deletion as a repost. However, I agree with you that the new version has an "essay like" character, somewhat like that which led to the deletion of the earlier article. JBW (talk) 21:25, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

UBW, thanks, I didn't have a means to confirm that, but yeah it looks like a student assignment. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 21:40, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

Self-worth Page

Hi Angus Woof, did you just delete the entry I made to the self-worth page? There are many authors and psychologists that are sending our the message that self-worth is NOT the same as self-esteem. I do not understand why wikipedia self-worth page redirects to self-esteem. I tried to add some content today and it has vanished, to return to redirect. I saw your tag on one of the edits. Can we at least talk about it? Best wishes, Adam. Adam Bradley Giles (talk) 18:14, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

Please discuss this as a split request on the talk page for self-esteem. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 18:15, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

Ok thanks for the quick reply. I have posted as you requested. Can we speak there? Adam Bradley Giles (talk) 18:30, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

Spoon Murder 2

Hello. Why did you delete the page? There is evidence of the existence of the film on the Internet, and there is also a page on kinopoisk (the most authoritative Russian film site) Methos God (talk) 13:14, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

You have no sources that show it is a notable film. No critical reception or major awards. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 13:18, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

I added a link to film.ru and the festival where this film was presented. Methos God (talk) 02:01, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Do you have critics reviews? Other mainstream papers and websites that review the film? AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 16:21, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

@Methos God: just adding external links to an article is not the same as referencing; please see WP:REFB for advice on this. I've moved this back to drafts, please don't move it into the main article space again, until it is supported with adequate sources to establish notability and support the article contents. Thank you, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:14, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

JVKE

What do you think is going on here? It looks like a fan, but might be a connected editor. It looks too fan-like to be a classic UPE. As I've said before, the writer has industry and bold going for themself; I kinda like their work. And the subject may meet GNG, based on presented sources. It's not really my editing field. I was just watching the behavior. I was thinking of marking it reviewed. What's your take? BusterD (talk) 03:57, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

BusterD, you can tag it {{fansite}} if it gives that vibe. If it reads like a press release you see on their website or the bottom of a magazine you could tag it {{Press release}} or {{Advert}} and draftify it. But it seems like the person himself might be notable, then it probably is ok to mark reviewed. If you suspect the main editor is associated with the person, like family or friends or business partner then you could tag {{COI}} and {{autobio}} but I usually reserve that for user accounts that have the subject's name or family with it. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 16:20, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

If it's a connected editor, I'll be disappointed. They've picked up the basics quickly and frankly I prefer it when UPEs are less competent. I've asked the editor directly about coi on Talk:JVKE and will accept their answer in good faith. I would not be surprised if the editor turns out to be the artist themself, but I would be sad about it. I'll await a response, then mark it as reviewed. If they are merely a fan, I might put the page up for DYK. It's a very impressive first effort. I want that editor on OUR team. BusterD (talk) 17:08, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Some connected editors know how to do Wikipedia coding, and they tend to create entire articles offline before posting it for the "first" time. But it doesn't excuse them from COI. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 22:17, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

Boilerplate text for Draft refusals

Please consider not simply using boilerplate text when refusing article drafts, especially in contentious cases. Please see Draft:Raegan Revord for an example when the boilerplate is unnecessarily unhelpful and probably inflammatory. Thank you CapnZapp (talk) 16:29, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

CapnZapp, it's been declined 5+ times and resubmitted without addressing the fundamental notability issue. What would you suggest in rejecting? There isn't a spot for "other" like in the decline template where you can write a custom response. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 17:24, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

What would you suggest in rejecting? First off, I am not objecting to your rejection decision in any way. I am merely saying the boilerplate text is not always appropriate. In this case I find it likely to enrage those that would like the draft approved. As you say, there is considerable energy spent on achieving this. Making it clear the draft is not rejected because Ms Revord is somehow "not notable" would be very helpful, as I see it. CapnZapp (talk) 17:29, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

There is no "fundamental notability issue" that can be "addressed", as if the only reason the draft is rejected is because editors somehow made a mistake or overlooked something. The quality of editing and the quality of the article is more than high enough. All editors can do is wait until a second notable role falls in Ms Revord's lap, so the article can meet NACTOR. This needs to be possible to say, instead of "Ms Revord fails notability" like she was some random unknown person. CapnZapp (talk) 17:31, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

Why are you referring to her as Ms. Revord? Are you associated with her or other talent agency? AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 17:57, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

nope.

I just can't be bothered to spell her first name :) CapnZapp (talk) 18:06, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

CapnZapp, are there two WP:GNG articles that show notability for Revord? Can you list them? AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 18:09, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

Now this is getting confused. Revord does not yet meet NACTOR. That does not mean it is a good idea to tell Wiki editors (especially new-ish ones angered their favorite actress is lacking a wiki page) that she "isn't notable".

Much better to specifically state the real reason the draft is denied: because her article doesn't meet NACTOR. You know what NACTOR specifies, I know it, but the requirement for more than one significant role is not obvious.

"Doesn't meet NACTOR" is not the same thing as saying "isn't notable". For experienced Wikipedians perhaps it's equal. To most people it is not. The first will make people realize the correct action is to wait. The second will make people ask themselves where the draft can be improved, or what they have missed.

Please don't assume readers will understand that when your boilerplate text states "not notable", your actual, specific, reason for denying the draft is that the article is about an actor without "many" significant roles.

Hope that finally explains my involvement. CapnZapp (talk) 19:14, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

If she meets WP:GNG with the 2 sources, then that can override WP:NACTOR This can explain some of the other actors who are really only known for one role. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 19:43, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

I'm sure. That is also not the point I'm trying to make.

Telling editors their drafts are denied with "not notable" is actively unhelpful in cases where the draft is really only denied on a technicality. When an editor is told "not notable" their first (and second) instinct is try to see what they missed about establishing notability. It would in contrast be very helpful to tell them the technicality that caused the draft to be denied; essentially (and I'm simplifying here) explaining that there is (likely) nothing they can do but wait. Until the actor has two roles, they simply don't have two roles. CapnZapp (talk) 21:54, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

I strongly dispute the feel of the phrase "it's only a technicality", as that suggests it's a minor or overlooked small detail that could be technically corrected or else ignored due as being overly beaurocratic. No. It's a facially fatal failing inherent to the subject itself at this time, based on consensus WP standards and multiple editors' readings of this specific article in that light, essentially 100% un-fixable by any editor at all, and possibly is completely irredeemable forever into the future unless some actual facts of the subject itself change. DMacks (talk) 10:34, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Again I don't disagree.

My point is that telling a new-ish Wikipedian she "isn't notable" is much less helpful than being specific: "the reason this draft is not approved is because the subject isn't shown to meet WP:NACTOR".

In the first case an inexperienced Wiki editor might go "what do you mean not notable - she's massively notable!" In the second case, chances are much higher the editor goes "oh! she needs a second role before Wikipedia accepts her page".

In the first case, there's a significant risk of unnecessarily antagonizing the editor, or making them waste a lot of effort improving the article. But the article is fine. It's not the article's "fault" Revord has not yet had a second role.

The second phrasing is much better at giving the editor the info they need in order to understand that the only proper response is to... just hold off and wait. When (and indeed if) Revord gets her second significant role in a notable film, everything else about the article is already easily of passable quality, and the draft will likely get approved as soon as notability re: this second role can be established.

I really don't know how to explain it better. I have tried several times, and truly hope my message gets across this time. Regards, CapnZapp (talk) 13:37, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

Possible solutions

CapnZapp, we need to see if AFCH can accomodate an "other" text like with their declines. In the meantime, I have rearranged your comment to the top of the reject. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 17:33, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

CapnZapp, there's a Film draft notice for Draft:Five Nights at Freddy's (film). Maybe a similar template can be used on the draft itself. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 17:35, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

This talk page lurker likes that as a starting place. - UtherSRG (talk) 18:10, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

The problem is that AFCH reject only has two options at the moment:

• n - topic is not notable
• e - topic is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia

so we really need more options such as

• custom - enter reject reason in the box below

The custom one is an option in AFCH decline, so if we can bring that over to the reject side that will help

AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 19:48, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

working with one of the AFCH devs on getting that added. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 20:18, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

Reject, though, is dead-end. "Need to wait until something further happens" is not dead-end. Just a pause. I would think "decline for now" makes more sense than "reject for now". *shrugs* - UtherSRG (talk) 20:21, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

When the event that makes it notable or timely happens, then it can be marked as submitted again. AFCH has options to do so. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 20:24, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

It was decline for now for six months, then someone wanted to submit it again without any new notability information, hence the reject. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 03:28, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

I don't think it's "inflammatory" to simply state the fact that a topic does not merit an article, merely disappointing and possibly discouraging. But I would support an option for including some wording in the reject message that it's an unacceptable topic at this time for cases where the subject may reasonably become notable in the nearish-term future. But I don't think the message-box itself needs to explain in detail what the specific failing is, since presumably a reject will have other AFC comments or explanations in the preceding declines. DMacks (talk) 10:34, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

UtherSRG, DMacks, CapnZapp, you may want to chime in at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation#Additional_reject_reasons? AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 22:15, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

In conclusion(?)

I'd like to ask if y'all agree to this: Now that we have learned that a submission rejected can be given extra text, so we don't need to rely solely on "This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia" in the (rather specific) case when the only hang-up is NACTOR, there might possibly no longer be a need to find solutions? (It would do the trick for me, at least) Regards CapnZapp (talk) 21:18, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

It can't be given extra text. You'd have to move the extra text afterwards to the top. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 06:14, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

New message from Sjones23

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Grave of the Fireflies § Plot summary format. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 23:00, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:07, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Create Article: Sohan Pappu

Could you please help me with my first Article creation

Could you please help me with it. Because I found this person in google very exiciting. At such age he has been into many news channels and interviews with his tremendous work. If I can suggest you respectfully, I request you to please create by your name. Johndharmadeep (talk) 19:35, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Johndharmadeep, it's not a mere "I found this person on Google", but it appears you have associated with this person at an organisational level and are agreeing to help promote his causes. So there is a major conflict of interest that needs to be disclosed. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 01:01, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

ANI notice re: Kinfo Pedia

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

And yeah, the Hoogenakker piece is a problem. 2601:19E:4180:6D50:0:0:0:8D29 (talk) 00:53, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

2601:19E:4180:6D50:0:0:0:8D29, thanks for letting me know. The article is quite dry in listing his work and references to external news articles and play programs that show he indeed was in the production, but it seems the other editor's embellishments make those listings like a promo piece, especially with the talks about padding the sentence with number of episodes and commercial views. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 01:05, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Well, first, I think you should receive combat pay. Agreed that tone isn't the issue with that bio now. Rather, it's the intent to list everything, which isn't what we do--just because sources exist, doesn't mean the content is necessary. In that respect, it has become a resume, and it doesn't help that we're actually using his resume as a source, even if only six or ten times. It's a red flag that tells us what the article's bigger issues may be. One of the things Kinfo doesn't get is that this sort of factual overkill backfires; a bio is far more effective when the half dozen or so major roles are emphasized. All the extra credits are fine on a resume, or as exposition for a published biography--here they look like someone is trying to promote the subject, or perhaps shine a light on their own research. Cheers, 2601:19E:4180:6D50:0:0:0:8D29 (talk) 01:23, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Yep, it's why we add the IMDb link and the official website to the External links, if people really need to know what episodes and any really minor roles. I have commented out some of the entries that are exclusively sourced to resume / bio profiles for now. That editor really wants to make the Wikipedia article the detailed research article. Again, the content would be so much better served on their own fan website where they can even make their own screenshots and photos of memorabilia. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 01:52, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

I've edited a lot of voice actor filmographies, and they are highly susceptible to listing the most trivial roles. There are hundreds of entries where they are credited as "additional voices" or walla loop groups, and I've had to scrape all that cruft off their filmography articles. Many entries also rely heavily on the actor's input/resume, so in those cases I look for 1) external publications mentioning they have a starring role in the series first, and then 2) the actor making a tweet about playing the specific role. See talk:Cristina Vee filmography for better examples. There's a ton of commented out work that wouldn't be missed. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 01:59, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Africa project 2023

Hello, I am talk:Cnyirahabihirwe, I started my work through my Sandbox " Wiki Loves africa Project 2023" and I still working on it, and I realized that it has been moved to the main page, I would like to ask you if you could move it again to the my sandbox work space? I still working on it.

Thank you very much talk:CnyirahabihirweCnyirahabihirwe123 (talk) 12:19, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi Cnyirahabihirwe123, did you still want me to move the project page from Wikipedia:Wiki Loves Africa 2023 to your sandbox? I tweaked the links so that the Coordinators and other pages go to the right spots. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 15:04, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Thank you for doing that , please do, I really wish to stay there ( sandbox) for a while, once it will be done I will notify you to put it in the suitable place.

Thank you very much Cnyirahabihirwe123 (talk) 15:11, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

 Done, it is now at User:Cnyirahabihirwe123/sandbox/Wiki Loves Africa 2023 AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 15:59, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Move Wiki Loves Africa project 2023 from Wikipedia sandbox to metapage sandbox

Hello AngusWOOF, Thank you first of all for moving WLA 2023 to Wikipedia Sandbox, and I am now working safely to the page, but I would like to ask you if metapage has sandbox? I tried to find the sandbox of metapage but in vain, if it exist, is there any possibility to move the page Wiki Love Africa 2023 from Wikipedia Sandbox to metapage Sandbox?? Because that page which I am creating is a metapage not wikipedia article.

Please I need your help

Thank you Cnyirahabihirwe123 (talk) 07:14, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello , I got the link to create a metapage in sandbox, Perhaps we must do it manually, I am working on it, and thank you very much

Have a nice day Cnyirahabihirwe123 (talk) 07:40, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Cnyirahabihirwe123, I'm not sure how to move stuff to wikimeta, maybe you can ask one of the admins there? AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 17:24, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

	Merry Christmas, AngusWOOF
	Or Season's Greetings or Happy Winter Solstice! As the year winds to a close, I would like to take a moment to recognize your hard work and offer heartfelt gratitude for all you do for Wikipedia. May this Holiday Season bring you and yours nothing but joy, health and prosperity. Onel5969 TT me 20:07, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks Onel5969! Great interacting with you on discord too! Merry Xmas! :) AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 17:21, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Mayor Max

I know you declined my request to have an article about Mayor Max III on Wikipedia. However, I noticed you also seggusted we added a general article about all three Mayor Max's (Mayor Max (dog)). Could we discuss some ideas for this proposed article? Thank you! JordanJa🎮es92🐱9 (wanna play?) Wikipedia ⭐ 22:24, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

A general article could cover all three dogs and any future dogs still under this scheme, and then Max II would merge to that one. If a different animal becomes mayor then it could be renamed as Mayor of Idylwild, (county), California AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 00:35, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Is it okay if I edit Mayor Max II as such then move the article to Mayor Max (dog)? JordanJa🎮es92🐱9 (wanna play?) Wikipedia ⭐ 19:38, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

That would work too. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 22:46, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!

Trailblazer101 (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Trailblazer101 (talk) 16:48, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Request on 16:20:27, 19 December 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Smecomplete

• Smecomplete (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Daniel White (real estate developer) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Just looking for more feedback on a recent article that was kicked back. It said it read like a LinkedIn page. That being said, this person is of interest due to their business ventures, which is why it would be similar to LinkedIn. There are references to the individuals sports and college career, however, there is not as much coverage there as there is on their business ventures so more of the emphasis is on that. There are a number of very reliable sources including Business Journals, Omaha Times and others that are on there which I would think are relevant.

Smecomplete (talk) 16:20, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Smecomplete, I was thinking more of articles that focused on White's life and career, where he grew up, went to school, first few jobs, how he became famous. Less of the press release stuff or ones where he is just quoted in a byline. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 17:23, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

So I've only become aware of the subject due to his business dealings and these are how he's become a person of interest. He has a European Hockey background but not a ton of references there outside of "HockeyFights.com" which isn't the best citation and also has his birth place and date incorrectly listed. Also, I can't see why a person's early life would dictate the importance of their business endeavors since then? I've come across literally 20 businesses owned by this guy, one of the largest homes in LA and more - all pretty worthy subjects. I appreciate the pointers though and anything else you could provide would be great! Smecomplete (talk) 16:49, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Annamalai Kuppusamy

Hi, Annamalai Kuppusamy is current president of BJP for the Indian state of Tamilnadu. A State level politician who had received significant press coverage. Since you reviewed last time, can you please re-review it again. Thank you. Perumalism (talk) 08:29, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Happy New Year, AngusWOOF!

Happy New Year!

AngusWOOF,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
— Moops ^⋠T⋡ 23:39, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

— Moops ^⋠T⋡ 23:39, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 2

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of stories set in a future now in the past, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page World Trade Center.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Pigment articles

Hello! It looks as though the discussion of splitting off zinc white from zinc oxide has quieted down. Do you think it would be appropriate to move forward with the split? I also created drafts for titanium white and lead white that can be split off from their associated chemical articles. Thanks for your perspective. Owunsch (talk) 18:29, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

New Pages Patrol newsletter January 2023

Hello AngusWOOF,

New Page Review queue December 2022

Backlog

The October drive reduced the backlog from 9,700 to an amazing 0! Congratulations to WaddlesJP13 who led with 2084 points. See this page for further details. The queue is steadily rising again and is approaching 2,000. It would be great if <2,000 were the “new normal”. Please continue to help out even if it's only for a few or even one patrol a day.

2022 Awards

Onel5969 won the 2022 cup for 28,302 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 80/day. There was one Gold Award (5000+ reviews), 11 Silver (2000+), 28 Iron (360+) and 39 more for the 100+ barnstar. Rosguill led again for the 4th year by clearing 49,294 redirects. For the full details see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone!

Minimum deletion time: The previous WP:NPP guideline was to wait 15 minutes before tagging for deletion (including draftification and WP:BLAR). Due to complaints, a consensus decided to raise the time to 1 hour. To illustrate this, very new pages in the feed are now highlighted in red. (As always, this is not applicable to attack pages, copyvios, vandalism, etc.)

New draftify script: In response to feedback from AFC, the The Move to Draft script now provides a choice of set messages that also link the creator to a new, friendly explanation page. The script also warns reviewers if the creator is probably still developing the article. The former script is no longer maintained. Please edit your edit your common.js or vector.js file from User:Evad37/MoveToDraft.js to User:MPGuy2824/MoveToDraft.js

Redirects: Some of our redirect reviewers have reduced their activity and the backlog is up to 9,000+ (two months deep). If you are interested in this distinctly different task and need any help, see this guide, this checklist, and spend some time at WP:RFD.

Discussions with the WMF The PageTriage open letter signed by 444 users is bearing fruit. The Growth Team has assigned some software engineers to work on PageTriage, the software that powers the NewPagesFeed and the Page Curation toolbar. WMF has submitted dozens of patches in the last few weeks to modernize PageTriage's code, which will make it easier to write patches in the future. This work is helpful but is not very visible to the end user. For patches visible to the end user, volunteers such as Novem Linguae and MPGuy2824 have been writing patches for bug reports and feature requests. The Growth Team also had a video conference with the NPP coordinators to discuss revamping the landing pages that new users see.

Reminders

• Newsletter feedback - please take this short poll about the newsletter.
• There is live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
• Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
• If you no longer wish to be a reviewer, please ask any admin to remove you from the group. If you want the tools back again, just ask at PERM.
• To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Declined article - Sheila Voas

Can I ask what count as reliable sources given that most of the citations I included are from national news papers or independent websites? The page itself was based on the one for her English colleague Christine Middlemiss, though obviously the details are different Mogms66 (talk) 11:49, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Mogms66, a bunch of the sites are associated with the subject in some way, so they aren't independent and could be getting their information about the person directly from the person. Also, the greater concern is that it's formatted much like a resume, highlightiing achivements and roles in that bullet list style. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 12:44, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Mogms66, I went ahead and put the article in mainspace. Still need to find some more independent sources, but she's been in a highly notable position in the government. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 14:51, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Draft - HWS Round Robin

Hey. I've revised Draft:HWS Round Robin to more clearly explain its background and importance to the debate community. I've also updated the list of non-university references to include articles from Business Insider, Finger Lakes Times, The Daily Star, and Joy FM. I hope it meets the standard. Nintendo2000 (talk) 14:25, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Krakoa for deletion.

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Krakoa is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Krakoa (3rd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

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 until the discussion has finished. Nekivik (talk) 08:33, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Thank you for participating in Articles for Creation's January 2023 Backlog Drive! You reviewed 100 drafts, for a total of 102 points. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 00:44, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

COI notice

I'm not following this COI notice at all, Angus. The article subject - Marlana Thompson - is born in Canada. SFnativeAKM specifies on their user page that they were born and raised in San Francisco, and their username strongly suggests that. You cannot wander around dropping speculative and intimidating COI notices on people without very good cause. What *exactly* led to this notice? You say on the article's COI template "author appears to be related to AKM". Please explain the "appears". SFnativeAKM is a new contributor, working within a Smithsonian editathon. On reflection, could you be more wrong than you were? Please consider the damage that this sort of thing can cause. --Tagishsimon (talk) 20:05, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

AKM expands to Akwesasne Mohawk. That's my reasoning. If it expands to something else, then you can correct it, and remove the tag. It's an apparent COI that can be explained away. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 22:39, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Tagishsimon, SFnativeAKM replied to the COI notice, so it's all good. :) AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 14:37, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

Declined article: OM-89

Hi Angus, thank you for your review of our article. We have updated all reference sources to include online links to the original sources; these include peer-reviewed articles and FDA-approved product informations. We have also removed the single reference (and associated claims) that was written by the company who originated the drug.

With regards to a more generic name for the drug, OM-89 is in fact the official generic name. It has no molecule name since the drug is a lysate of bacterial contents (i.e. all the molecules within the bacteria).

Concerning the article havingbeen written like a brochure to promote the product, we have obviously prepared this article professionally (we are paid contributors on behalf of our client) and have been careful to adhere to editorial rules of neutrality, reliable publshed sources etc.

Are you able to confirm whether the updates are sufficient, or clarify any other specific points we should also be addressing?

Many thanks. This is us Europe (talk) 11:34, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Kush Rach, you may want to check out some of the articles in WikiProject pharmacology to see the format of the article. Here's a list of articles that are almost Good Article status: [1] Also please remove the copyright symbols per MOS:TM AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 17:20, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Request on 08:13:47, 19 January 2023 for assistance on AfC submission by Kaunitzj

• Kaunitzj (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Adaptive noise cancelling (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi Angus, I understand why you may think Adaptive Noise Cancelling should be a subpage of Active Noise Cancelling. There is a lot of commonality in these terms. In fact these are two fundamentally different topics in different scientific disciplines with some incidental overlap. Active Noise Cancelling is a topic in the field of Acoustics and Adaptive Noise Cancelling is topic in the field of adaptive systems and signal processing.

The first thing to note is that relating Adaptive Noise Cancelling to Active Noise Cancelling is a matter of semantic confusion. In Active Noise Cancelling 'noise' means noise in the physical sense that one can hear. In Adaptive Noise Cancelling 'noise' refers to any interference that is corrupting a target signal in communication or control - an artifact in the electric signal. The terms 'noise' and 'interference' in the latter context are used interchangeably. The use of the word 'noise' in adaptive noise cancelling is unfortunate precisely for the above reason. In fact the chapter in the book by Widrow and Stern that deals with adaptive noise cancelling is entitled "Adaptive Interference Cancelling". However, the term "adaptive noise cancelling" is the one now well established.

Active Noise Cancelling is an area of acoustics that deals with the suppression of sounds that represent noise in physical spaces by introducing another version of the noise sound. According to the article this has apparently been done without adaptive techniques, long before the development of adaptive noise cancelling techniques in signal processing.

As the draft article explains, Adaptive Noise Cancelling is a technique evolved from work in adaptive filters and had nothing to do with work in active noise cancelling in acoustics. Once adaptive noise cancelling was developed as a technique in signal processing it was recognised and adopted as a technique that could also be used in acoustic active noise cancelling. However active noise (acoustic) cancelling can be done with or without adaptive techniques and only a few noise cancelling headphones use adaptive processing. On the other hand, Active Noise Cancelling is just one of the many applications of Adaptive Noise Cancelling (see the draft article).

So the application of adaptive noise cancelling in active noise cancelling is somewhat incidental and represents an intersection between the two fields that is a minute part of both fields.

I hope that the above explains why including Adaptive Noise Cancelling under Active Noise Cancelling article would be inappropriate and why both topics need their own articles and should be kept separate. They should both also retain their names which are now in common usage.

Nevertheless, the above represents a common source of confusion. Thank you for highlighting this. I will include an additional paragraph in the draft to deal with this (summarizing the above) and then resubmit it. I hope that this satisfies your concerns.

John Kaunitz (talk) 08:13, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

I just wanted the discussion to occur at the talk page for noise cancellation so folks there on the WPs can agree on how to split it out. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 08:16, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Adaptive Noise Cancellation

Hi Angus

I noted your reference to the Adaptive Filter entry. It is true that adaptive noise cancelling relies on adaptive filters but both are significant concepts and major topics in their own rights. I have referenced both Adaptive Filters and Least Means Squares Filters in my submission. In fact there is a much stronger argument to combine these latter two topics than to try to absorb Adaptive Noise Cancelling into Adaptive Filtering. I have no interest in attempting this as I believe it would be the wrong approach to combine two such major, essentially different, topics in the one article.

The LMS Filter is just the basic version of Adaptive Filters and I don't see why it is treated separately. In any case I was intending to contribute to the Adaptive Filter article once the Adaptive Noise Cancelling article has been dealt with. John Kaunitz (talk) 00:29, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

John Kaunitz, are you getting any feedback from the WikiProjects regarding this? They should be the experts on how to allocate the terms. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 00:42, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

No. I am new to Wikipedia and not quite sure what it takes to have a submission approved and who is involved. The whole thing seems to me like an interminable obstacle course but I will keep trying a little longer. It seems to me that I have demonstrated that Adaptive Noise Cancelling merits a Wikipedia entry, given already existing entries, and I provided a draft. The treatment of this article should not depend on what may or may not happen to other articles in the future. John Kaunitz (talk) 01:30, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Okay, I will ask some WPs to chime in. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 18:44, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Nearly there?

I think Draft:Terror_on_the_Prairie article is in pretty good condition, good enough to moved from Draft into mainspace. I've addressed many of the concerns you had, removed all but two of the references to Dailywire, and the Critical response section now is far better than back when you declined the article (IMDB score FFS!?!). Any comments? I think it got enough coverage in reliable trade journals like Deadline and the Hollywood reporter to more than pass WP:GNG and I think most of the controversy around it (and Carano) has died down, so now readers can appreciate (or ignore it) as a minor Western flick. Feel free to comment here or on the article talk page, I'll check both places. -- 109.79.174.17 (talk) 10:25, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for cleaning up those Daily Wire references. That should help it along. Are there any more mainstream film review websites that can be cited? See WP:HORROR/S for a list. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 13:41, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

There are only six reviews listed on Rotten Tomatoes. I'd rate Film Threat and Starbust magazine higher than the others but I wouldn't normally reject a critic that was listed by Rotten Tomatoes, especially when so few critics were available. (The Daily Wire is yet another walled garden and politics aside I think most critics would still not make the extra effort to review it, even if invited with free pass as I believe critics were. I think keeping it exclusive is counter productive, I'd be surprised if they didn't sublicense it eventually.) If I thought there were any better options leftover[2] I'd use them. We've gone from a Reception section that wasn't properly referenced and included user voted garbage like IMDB scores to something I think is about as good as we can expect for a minor film and gives readers a fair view of the film. IIRC Christian Toto worked in some capacity with or for the Daily Wire, removing him might be necessary to assuage the hard skeptics but I have no prejudice and his review is as critical as any other. If you think any particular critic should be removed I'm open to discussing it further, but I think that would need to be in context on the article talk page for the record. Sources are scarce and I'm not sure it would ever be possible to get the article up to the highest standards but I think it passes the low bar and is maybe even C class quality or close to it. -- 109.79.174.17 (talk) 14:35, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

it's nearly there. You can resubmit it and see what other AFC reviewers think. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 20:48, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Gabriella~four.3-6

Just want to let you know that I believe that Gabriella is back editing at 75.197.63.100 (talk · contribs · WHOIS); I wouldn't block unless the IP edits again (as it hasn't edited since the 18th), but I figured I should let you know. wizzito | say hello! 02:27, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Please allow Amity Blight her own article

Hi, I would like to present my case that Amity Blight from The Owl House deserves her own article. Not only is she a significant character within the show itself (being the love interest of the main character, having her own story involving her family relationships), but she is significant for Disney animation since she is the first major lesbian character in a Disney property. Amity is a major talking point regarding the show as a whole, with many fans citing her as their favorite character, analyzing her character progression in videos and articles, and is a big selling point regarding LGBT representation. To deny her an article alongside Luz Noceda feels like an insult to such a significant character that means so much to people, especially since there are other less significant characters that have their own articles. Once again, I ask kindly: please allow a Wikipedia article for Amity Blight. Thank you so much and have a wonderful day. ShinjiGrille58 (talk) 05:37, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Did you see the comments on the draft? I was calling for a split discussion from the characters list and consensus to split. Also the plot is too excessive. If you look at other characters such as Marinette Dupain-Cheng the plot section is way smaller in comparison to the development and reception for the character. Also, fans saying it's their favorite character doesn't help notability. It needs reviews from newspaper and notable website critics. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 15:29, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

See also The Bride (Kill Bill) and how the plot section doesn't overpower the rest of the article. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 15:34, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thanks for your help and clarification! Final Cut (talk) 23:51, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Zinc white

On 5 February 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Zinc white, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that zinc white was found in several versions of The Scream? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Zinc white. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Zinc white), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. 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.

-- RoySmith (talk) 00:02, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

Not a single blog used as a citation on Draft:Tell Me What You See (book)

Hi, Angus. Thanks for taking a look at Draft:Tell Me What You See (book). I saw your reason for deletion was "Critical reception listed is mainly non-notable blogs." Please note there is not a SINGLE blog used in the article citations. Instead, there are international magazines, national newspapers, university projects, etc. I've written a longer and more complete explanation at Draft talk:Tell Me What You See (book) if you're interested, and thank you again. --Kentuckian in NY (talk) 19:10, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

Kentuckian in NY, I found five blogs, see talk page there. They might be from notable journalists and bloggers though, but blogs nevertheless, that need to be reviewed. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 00:01, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

Again, these aren't blogs. They're newspapers, a national literacy project, etc. Just because articles are posted on the web does not make the site a blog. Kentuckian in NY (talk) 15:34, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Asirko Muhamad-Ogly

Hey AngusWOOF. Is there a chance that my next submission could be approved? Even though we don't know much about Asirko, we know that he was naib of Mountainous Chechnya which means that he was a big name and just wasn't a nobody, isn't this enough for it to be notable? There's also 4 reliable sources scited. WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 19:49, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

It's also good to mention that in the Russian Wikipedia, there exists pages about Naibs that are smaller than my page about Asirko. So why wouldn't my page exist too? WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 19:52, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

WikiEditor1234567123, other language Wikipedias may have different standards on what is a notable article. On the other hand, if the article is translated from Russian Wikipedia, you should probably note that, and see if you can bring over the citations they used there. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 17:31, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Noted, thank you. I will see what I can do. WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 17:33, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Reviewed a Draft:Lists of monarchs by time

@AngusWOOF submitted in the Articles for creation pls submit me 122.2.121.186 (talk) 11:09, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

Draft was deleted because of IP block evasion. See Wikipedia:Teahouse AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 17:28, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Cecchini Riccardo

Hi AngusWOOF, I've read the reason why the submission failed. "Please indicate which criteria he meets for WP:NACADEMIC". I would like to point out that in Italy, once the university degree has been acquired at the end of the studies, the title of "doctor" can be used, in the event that one or more university courses have been taught, the title "professor" can be used. I have read the guidelines that you have kindly attached to me, in the case of Riccardo Cecchini we are talking about a Biography that contains the overall reconstruction of his professional life. I ask you if I can reformulate the draft in order to be able to resubmit it with a different category. Thank you for your valuable work on wikipedia, I look forward to your kind reply. Greetings from Italy! Ivanop1980 (talk) 02:07, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Ivanop1980, removing Dr. or Professor from the title is because of MOS:DOCTOR. We don't include honorific titles into the subject's article title unless that is their common name like Dr. Seuss. That said, can you list out which critieria Riccardo meets in WP:NACADEMIC? AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 02:14, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi Angus, sorry for the late reply, I've been away for work! Thanks for the clarification on why removing Dr. or Professor from the title. I'll list the reasons why Riccardo Riccardo meets in WP:NACADEMIC, as described by the Wikipedia:Notability (academics)#Criteria:

1."The person's research has had a significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources."

"Riccardo In 2004 he carried out one of the first censuses of new religious movements in Italy." I report the independent source (national newspaper) present at the link I added to reference 1:

the text is the result of the work of a group of young anthropologists, former students of the teacher, who are also co-authors of the study commissioned by the Region. They are Anna Maria Baiamonte, Riccardo Cecchini, Nicola Cinalli and Paolo Trecoli. As a scientist, the professor has always tried to follow the evolution of the esoteric environment, tracing the map of movements, their basic conception and above all unmasking without half measures the many charlatans who steal (and still do) popular credulity. In Italy, Satanism represents a particular case: there are few "official" groups, the followers don't want to talk about themselves, they are afraid of being considered criminals. The partnerships are subject to frequent divisions. So the sources of the phenomenon are scarce and uncertain. Limit that the authors confess. «In Italy at the moment - explains Riccardo Cecchini, 33, one of the authors - there is a private, do-it-yourself Satanism, made up of micro groups, which is difficult to monitor. With this book - he says - we have tried to give a scientific image of the phenomenon. Drawing these conclusions: rationalist Satanism (atheist, ed) is decreasing in favor of the religious one". The book is not all here. In the world of the invisible neo-paganism is gaining space and visibility.

_________________________________________________

2."The person has received a highly prestigious academic award or honor at a national or international level."

"In 2022 he received the Lazio Star Awards in recognition of his scientific career". I report the independent source (national newspaper) present at the link I added to reference 2:

"Among the winners of the event: the sports journalist Amedeo Goria former competitor of Gfvip 6 hosted by Alfonso Signorini, the Rai and Mediaset author Marco Salvati, the dancer Katia Santantonio aka Gipsy Rebel, the singer Vito Iacoviello aka Hania former competitor of the show channel 5 TV “All together now ” and X factor Romania who presented their new single “Post it” during the award ceremony, the Roman director Stefania Cofano, the anthropologist Riccardo Cecchini."

__________________________________________________

Dear @AngusWOOF, I hope I haven't bored you with all the attached text, I remain at your disposal if you need any other information. Grateful for your attention I wish you a good job. Ivanop1980 (talk) 00:36, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Ivanop1980, can you put that info on the talk page for the person? That way other AFC reviewers can see it. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 09:16, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi AngusWOOF, thanks for copying my content on the talk page! I resubmitted the page for verification, I wish you a good weekend. Ivanop1980 (talk) 01:15, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

You sent me a draft: Marsha Diane Akau Wellein, Submission declined on 21 Jan 2023 by Angus Woof.

I need help with editing it. I got an email from Laura Walters who said that she was an experienced Wikipedian and can help me. I replied say yes - tell me the cost, your background, etc. After that I never heard from her. Please tell me who to contact. I want to get the information in the format you, Wikipedia wants. Dr. Marsha Diane Akau Wellein welleinmd@hotmail.com ph. 808 330 6008 my URL: marshawelleinbooks.com Please respond.

  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Marsha Diane Akau Wellein Welleinm (talk) 23:21, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

@Welleinm: If you are in fact a paid editor, you must disclose so, otherwise you could face a block from editing. 47.227.95.73 (talk) 23:23, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

I am not a paid editor. You sent a notice saying that the information about me for Wikipeida is in the wrong

format. I am asking you for help, in getting it into the right format. Someone, perhaps you know, can assist me in doing so. Please kindly advise. Dr. Marsha Diane Akau Wellein welleinmd@hotmail.com 98.150.164.97 (talk) 23:26, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Welleinm, I didn't send you any drafts. Another editor, SamuelNaah has posted it. Is SamuelNaah associated with you or your organizations? AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 16:29, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Welleinm, my suggestion is to have someone else rewrite the draft from scratch and without using any information from your websites or correspondence. If they can find information about you from major newspapers, journals, magazines, then that can help establish notability. Personal information such as date or birth or children's names should not be listed unless that has been made public. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 00:33, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

I've combined the drafts to Draft:Marsha Wellein, please have edits updated to that one. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 00:34, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

47.227.95.73, she appears to be the subject of the draft. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 00:22, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Copy and paste move

May I ask why you're doign a copy and paste move of Draft:Lovejoy (band) instead of a proper move? ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 16:22, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Blaze Wolf, I needed to preserve history of the redirect as requested by Ss112. If there a better way? Histmerge doesn't seem to work since the author started doing the draft in parallel. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 16:25, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Hmm... I'm not sure. Looking at WP:CUTANDPASTE I'm seeing something that mentions what we should do in this case. See WP:PVER. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 16:29, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Not sure if we need to tag it with parallel version but at the least I have the copied tags for the discography copy over. Both versions were updated with the same information. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 00:20, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Review of this Draft:Mumbai CSMT - Sainagar Shirdi Vande Bharat Express

Hi @AngusWOOF, I request you to review this page since this upcoming train has the sources of evidence that it's going to be launched on Feb 10 2023. I request you to direct this page to the main Wiki article. Hope to get some good response from your side. Thank you. Harshul12345 (talk) 12:46, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

I'm requesting a histmerge, will see if it goes through. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 16:33, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Ok thanks Harshul12345 (talk) 08:10, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

Amity Blight draft

I haven't worked on every part of this draft (mainly edited the "Creation", "LGBTQ+ representation", "Character", and "Reception" sections), but my understanding was that there was consensus for an article on Amity on Talk:Luz Noceda#Article about Amity. I was unaware of any other split discussion. In terms of "way too much detail and plotline regarding her role in the series for the season sections", I agree, but am, personally, but it seems like a beast to cut down. In terms of the "the reception section" needing "better referencing from folks", I'll see what else I can find, but I'm doubtful that there is much on "discussion on roles and impact outside the series" and whether Amity had "influenced creation of other characters" (my guess on that is a no, but I could be wrong). Historyday01 (talk) 00:47, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Historyday01, that's not really a split request discussion if it's done from Luz's article. Please do it from Talk:List of The Owl House characters, and involve the other WikiProjects, including Fictional characters, LGBT, Animation. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 00:51, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

To be clear, I was NOT the one who even created the page in the first place, but I have only contributed to the page. I would be fine starting a discussion of the List of The Owl House characters talk page, but I don't want to go too overboard on involving all sorts of projects. Historyday01 (talk) 04:33, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

It needs to involve the other projects as they have insights as to whether it can be generally notable. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 17:47, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Ok, update, there is a discussion on the List of The Owl House characters talk page, I came across, which could be, arguably, seen as a split request, and there was consensus there to create pages for Eda and Amity. Historyday01 (talk) 16:47, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Historyday01, it needs to be a formal one, see WP:SPLITTING AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 17:46, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Ok. I have some experience splitting pages before and I have found some additional sources, which I'm slowly adding to the draft, along with some inaccessible ones, also here and here... but when I have time, surely, I'll put in a request for a split discussion. Historyday01 (talk) 23:02, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

FYI, I just started a discussion at Talk:List of The Owl House characters#Separate page for Amity Blight and posted about it on various WikiProjects. Historyday01 (talk) 01:42, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

Historyday01, it's better to have a stub-level article that meets WP:GNG in sourcing and referencing, so that it can be approved, and then expanded upon. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 00:52, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Ok. I personally think that stub-level articles are nice, but they are only useful to a limited extent. I personally think the article could use work but seems pretty good when it comes to sourcing. Historyday01 (talk) 04:35, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Draft:The trending people

Hi, Angus. Thanks for taking a look at Draft:The trending people saw your reason for needing more external news sources that the "site is one of the largest media platforms." Please take look again at google news, and Bing there are sources. And then help me to create this draft into an article space. Manish Khouriwal (talk) 10:16, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Manish Khouriwal, Google and Bing searches aren't reliable sources. You need other newspapers and websites that discuss and review it. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 17:46, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Request on 16:01:37, 21 February 2023 for assistance on AfC submission by Slacklazes81

• Slacklazes81 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Les Cox Sportifs (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I recently tried to publish a Wikipedia page for one of my music projects but it was declined with the following reasons given: 'This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified'. The comment the reviewer left was: 'Please indicate how this band meets WP:MUSICBIO. I only see some passing mentions in articles. Do not cite discogs or own website / retail.' 

I fully appreciate that it isn't generally advised for people to create a Wikipedia for themselves or for their own projects but as we're currently an unsigned act without management, we're left with no choice but to try and publish this independently.

I can confirm that we are an established act who has:

1: toured extensively over the years with well established acts, all of which are on Wikipedia. 2: published releases with record labels with worldwide distribution (Discog links submitted to confirm said labels, releases and dates etc). 3: received extended radio play from the BBC as well as performaing a live session on BBC6 Music (details of our formation and who we've toured and collaborated with are also included with the link provided by way of reference). 4: have contributed songs to film soundtracks (IMBD link submitted). 5: have had our songs re-recorded by other acts with articles and reviews on The Guardian etc to confirm this). 6: are mentioned on 2 existing Wikipedia pages. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=les+cox+sportifs&title=Special%3ASearch&ns0=1 7: still have existing reviews on the likes the NME website and others.

Should I include all of these links as references in addition to citation links?

Should I edit down the draft to a bare minimum? Unfortunately, we're not able to back up all information with articles as a lot of our early interviews and reviews etc have since disappeared offline but I've tried to be as factual and neutral as possible when providing biographical information and context of our formation etc.

Many thanks for your cooperation on this matter.

Slacklazes81 (talk) 16:01, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

Slacklazes81, you have a conflict of interest in writing this article, so you would have to declare that and follow the guidelines listed in WP:AUTOBIO and WP:COI. I would rewrite the article to the bare minimum and cite only external news sources that give the band significant coverage and that are not associated with you or your record labels. Include only information that can be cited to those sources. Do not cite Discogs or IMDb as those are user generated. Do not cite to your website or record labels except for the very bottom where it says external links, and there you just put down one site per WP:ELMINOFFICIAL. The list of criteria you can put on the talk page and indicate how they specifically meet WP:MUSICBIO, That will give AFC reviewers a chance to check criteria. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 18:01, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi @AngusWOOF, thanks for taking the time to review the draft and for the additional advice. I will definitely take this on-board and will try and condense it all down and resubmit by the end of the week. For clarification however, none of our releases to date have been published on our own labels. Our last EP was self published via Bandcamp but regardless of whether a release has been "officially" published by another record label or not, it is still very standard practice for most independent musicians, producers and bands these days to still upload and publish their releases via said streaming and download site, which for many acts is now their default "official" site. This is why I included this in the link section. Slacklazes81 (talk) 18:45, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

PS - Please can you advise further on how I declare a conflict of interest? Slacklazes81 (talk) 18:51, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

You can go to WP:DCOI and put the {{UserboxCOI}} template on your user page. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 19:14, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

If you have an official website, you can use that instead, or put in a Twitter account there. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 19:15, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

Draft:PepSeq

Hey AngusWOOF! My friend and I worked on putting together a wikipedia page with the goal of summarizing the 'PepSeq' method, which was published in Nature Protocols last year. It is our first time contributing to Wikipedia so we apologize for not hitting the nail on the head the first time around. We received your feedback and tried to change the tone of the article so it doesn't read like an essay. Please let us know what we can do to make sure it meets Wikipedia standards.

Thanks KaranvirSingh 01 (talk) 01:40, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

Dispute resolution

I have filed a dispute resolution for the Springbar page you rejected in January.

{{subst:drn-notice}} Xlea Nollmav (talk) 15:43, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

Gabriella~four.3-6

Hi, reaching out as you are familiar with this LTA (the only other person who seems to be familiar, Cyphoidbomb, has not edited since last year). I notified you back in Feb. of the IP 75.197.63.100 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) that I believed was Gabriella. I now believe that the range 2600:1001:A100:0:0:0:0:0/44 (block range · block log (global) · WHOIS (partial)) (last edited March 4) may be Gabriella, but I would like a second opinion on the /44 before going to SPI or an admin due to the fact that I don't have much evidence. Here's what I noticed:

1. Both IPs are Verizon IPs that geolocate to New Jersey, similar to Gabriella's range 72.68.0.0/20 (block range · block log (global) · WHOIS (partial))

2. Both IPs have edited List of Bob's Burgers characters, which has been edited 58 times by the /20 range (per XTools). (75.197.63.100 also edited List of Osmosis Jones and Ozzy & Drix characters, which matches up with Gabriella's interest in animation.) The /44 has only edited the list of Bob's Burgers characters (the other three edits are most likely other people), which does seem a little weird when looking at the pattern of edits by the /20 range (editing multiple articles and not just one).

3. The writing style is quite similar, especially the fairly liberal usage of hyphens: compare 72.68.0.59 ("lavender-purple", "violet-purple", "light-purple"), 75.197.63.100 ("school-announcements", "song-record"), and 2600:1001:a100:2a61:9076:4084:212:70f1 ("tucked-in", "theme-music"). Also compare 72.68.0.59 and 75.197.63.100 (use of italics and partial quotes) However, this by the /44 doesn't seem to fit, as the edit is in fact removing a description that Gabriella added. wizzito | say hello! 23:39, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

You can file an WP:SPI report. I'm not familiar with her editing habits on stuff outside Barbie/Monster High. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 23:43, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, will do. wizzito | say hello! 05:32, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Help!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Crepe_Runner Salaam06 (talk) 20:04, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

What about Crepe Runner? AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 21:52, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Draft: Me (Jisoo song)

Hi! The draft article I created for Jisoo’s Me, is meant to follow the format of Lalisa (single album), as that’s what YG Entertainment labeled it themselves as. Thanks! Beulagpinkeu (talk) 21:45, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

This depends on whether the song and the single album will be separately notable. With Lalisa there aren't other songs or albums to confuse, but the title for Me and Solo involves a lot more different artists, albums, EPs, singles, songs. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 21:52, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Should I title it “Me (Jisoo album)” then?

Beulagpinkeu (talk) 21:57, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

It really depends if it's going the way of one article like Jennie's Solo or two articles like Lalisa's self-titled. My suggestion is to go with the one article that covers both song, single album, EP, album, single for now until they really make a difference in reception and awards. In the case of Lalisa's self-titled, they had two singles off her single album that were independently notable. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 22:32, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

The track list is currently unknown so it’s unclear if there is also a track named “Me” on it, which is why I asked to change it.

Beulagpinkeu (talk) 22:36, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Merge pages request

Hi! Could you please merge this page or rename it to this article’s title?

Thanks, Beulagpinkeu (talk) 22:00, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

At this point, Nkon21 has made it a redirect that can be revisited closer to release and recommended to use Me (single album) as the title. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 19:20, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Draft: Source of Income Discrimination

Hey! Hope you are doing well. This is the first article I have created. How much content do you think I need to add? Is there a specific section that is lacking information or just need more filler? The content would be best as its own page, since source of income discrimination is broader than section 8 policy (Minnesota and Wisconsin have source of income laws that don't include section 8 housing vouchers). Thank you for your time.Catboy69 (talk) 02:09, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Catboy69, I'm trying to figure out how it is separate from Discrimination in awarding Section 8 housing or Housing discrimination in the United States or Class discrimination. Also if it is a neologism, you may want to write up a section on how the term came to be. Is it applied to outside the US as well? AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 02:31, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

AngusWOOF Originally I was going to fix up Discrimination in awarding Section 8 housing, but it needed a lot of work and should be renamed, especially since it isn't discrimination in the awarding of housing vouchers but rather discrimination due to someone receiving housing vouchers / government assistance (source of income discrimination). Are you able to rename articles? If the article was renamed I could probably fix it up / merge my content with that article. I have not seen the term "source of income" applied to other countries, so I am not sure if it is just a US problem or not. It could be a good addition to Housing discrimination in the United States as well. Catboy69 (talk) 02:53, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Catboy69, another option is to raise the topic in WikiProject Discrmination WP:WPDISCR their talk page, and see what would be the appropriate spot for it. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 19:17, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Greg Gage

Thanks for your feedback, WOOF. I am new to editing, and wanted to add a neuroscientist that came to my school. I have tried to add more citations to original sources and cleaned up the language to be more neutral. I hope it is OK for now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SuperSerena1455 (talk • contribs) 19:52, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

17th Seiyu Awards

What had been at this title in article space that you tagged for G6? I am leaving the draft for you to accept since I see that you had questions about some of the information. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:37, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Robert McClenon, I was just clearing out the redirect since the event has happened and is notable. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 02:20, 17 March 2023 (UTC)