This is an archive of past discussions about User:Sulfurboy. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

As to Draft:Menahem Yaari, he is notable not under GNG - but because he meets WP:ACADEMIC. He meets many of the criteria independently. And only needs to meet one.

"Academics meeting any one of the following conditions, as substantiated through reliable sources, are notable.... "

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

• [He was awarded the Israel Prize in 1987, the Rothschild Prize in the Social Sciences in 1994, and the EMET Prize in the Social Sciences in 2012.]

3. The person has been an elected member of a highly selective and prestigious scholarly society or association (e.g., a National Academy of Sciences ...) or a fellow of a major scholarly society which reserves fellow status as a highly selective honor (e.g., Fellow of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers).

• [Since 1969 he has been a Fellow of the Econometric Society, since 1988 Yaari has been a foreign Member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, since 1991 he has been a Member of the Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, since 1993 he has been a foreign honorary member of the American Economic Association, since 1996 he has been a Fellow of the Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Sciences, he has been the President of the Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities since 2004, and he has been a Member of the American Philosophical Society since 2008.]

5. The person has held a named chair appointment or distinguished professor appointment at a major institution of higher education and research, or an equivalent position in countries where named chairs are uncommon.

• [He is the S.A. Schonbrunn Professor of Mathematical Economics at The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, and was the Chairman of the university's Department of Economics.]

6. The person has held a highest-level elected or appointed administrative post at a major academic institution or major academic society.

• [He was the President of the Open University of Israel from 1992 to 1997.]

He does not have to meet GNG since he meets the above. As the notability guideline makes clear: "failure to meet ... the general notability guideline ... is irrelevant if an academic is notable under this guideline."

I've added even more RSs for you.

And once a person meets the above criteria - and he does as supported by RSs - it is perfectly fine to fill out his article with his official institutional CV for routine, uncontroversial details.

The guideline makes this clear. "Once the passage of one ... notability criteria has been verified through independent sources, or through the reliable sources listed explicitly for this purpose in the specific criteria notes, non-independent sources, such as official institutional and professional sources, are widely accepted as reliable sourcing for routine, uncontroversial details."

Please think about this more after reading the above. 2604:2000:E010:1100:9801:527E:9A75:8F8E (talk) 18:30, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

I never stated the person was not notable, in fact I confirmed in my comments on the decline that person was in fact notable. The concern was the article relied almost fully on a bare pdf document. There's multiple problems with this, including not knowing who has access to that site to upload files, who created the file, when it was created, where the info on it is sourced from, who could edit it in an ongoing fashion etc. Further it would rely on a file that we have no idea how long it would be up for. All of this is very troubling, particularly when other sources are likely readily available. Please understand that standards for sources used in BLPs is incredibly high compared to other subjects, which can make our concerns with the sources seem tedious, but still very necessary. Cheers. Sulfurboy (talk) 20:19, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Step 1 is to determine whether he is notable. Because he is notable, which you said you agree with, per WP:ACADEMIC, the article should not have been declined. Just the reverse. The support for his notability meets WP standards. There were other documents that were RSs other than the CV that supported his meeting wp:academic. And he did not just squeak by. He met this standard in multiple ways. Overwhelmingly. Step 2 - The "bare pdf" document as you refer to it (there's no prohibition on the document not being pdf) was just one of the sources. It was an official institutional publication. And as I wrote above, it was at that point fine to use. Because as the guideline says "Once the passage of one ... notability criteria has been verified through independent sources, or through the reliable sources listed explicitly for this purpose in the specific criteria notes, non-independent sources, such as official institutional and professional sources, are widely accepted as reliable sourcing for routine, uncontroversial details." Anyway - I see another editor has already accepted the article. 2604:2000:E010:1100:9801:527E:9A75:8F8E (talk) 20:54, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

There was nothing that denoted the pdf as an "official institutional publication", just because it can be downloaded from a schools url, does not mean it was officially published by the university. Again, it's this amongst a myriad of things that make that source without supporting context quite troubling. I'm glad to see you were able to improve the article enough to allow for its inclusion. Cheers. Sulfurboy (talk) 21:11, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

can i get more idea on how to imporve the article, i have already edited it 4x https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Antonio_H._Castro_Neto thaks in advance! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marilen.buenviaje (talk • contribs) 06:12, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

I know it was declined for issues with citations, but I appreciate the amount of work that goes into your reviewing articles. Thank you for the feedback you were able to provide! Galehaut2 (talk) 13:06, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for reviewing a page I created Draft:Avery Yale Kamila. I'm new to this and working on pages that I've searched for in the past but don't exist. You mentioned that the links about vegan lunch were reliable but nothing else. I felt the ones about her work to ban pesticides also had reliable citations, as are the ones about her work generally. Could you clarify the difference? I want to get this right so I do it correctly on other pages. --BrikDuk (talk) 17:54, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Post which sources you're talking about and I'll review them.Sulfurboy (talk) 17:57, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Thank you - really appreciate your help. Here are the sources re: pesticides Billings, Randy (March 25, 2019). "Portland's ban on synthetic pesticides goes into effect". Portland Press Herald. Retrieved 2020-02-09.
Helmer, Jodi (2019-06-28). "Cities Limiting Use of Lawn Fertilizers, Pesticides". Lawnstarter. Retrieved 2020-02-09.
Nofa, Ct (2016-02-10). "Organic Land Care Program: Going Organic in Portland, ME: Portland Protectors Works to Eliminate Pesticides". Organic Land Care Program. Retrieved 2020-02-09.
Associated Press (March 31, 2019). "Lawns Peak Out in Portland, but No Pesticide Use This Year". U.S. News & World Report. Retrieved 2020-02-12.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by BrikDuk (talk • contribs) 18:32, 12 February 2020 (UTC) Apologies for the lack of signature on the earlier post. I posted trying to correct it at same time as someone else and the signature never attached. --BrikDuk (talk) 20:46, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

I can't see the Portland Press article as it's behind a paywall. As to the other three, two of those sources (Lawnstarter and Organic Land Care Program) are blogsites and wouldn't be considered a reliable source to denote notability. The AP one doesn't even mention the subject.Sulfurboy (talk) 20:52, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for those specifics. I find the information extremely helpful. The subject is mentioned in the Portland Press Herald article (and a number of other related articles from Portland Press Herald that I didn't cite). If articles are behind a paywall, does that make them a no-go? If not, would this reference be better? It mentions the group the subject founded in headline: https://www.pressherald.com/2015/10/07/portland-citizens-group-proposes-strong-pesticide-ban/ It includes this text: "The Portland pesticide proposal goes beyond weed and bug killers to include synthetic lawn fertilizers, which some believe run into nearby sewers and streams, contribute to the acidification of Maine’s coastal waters and harm the plant and animal species that live there. “This proposal pushes the council into action,” said Avery Yale Kamila, a founder of Portland Protectors."
Others that mention subject include: https://www.pressherald.com/2018/01/04/portland-council-approves-tough-synthetic-pesticide-ban/ and
https://www.pressherald.com/2019/08/07/city-grants-first-pesticides-waiver-to-cushings-island/ --BrikDuk (talk) 21:19, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

No, being behind a paywall in no way precludes a source from being used, I was just saying that because I was unable to review the quality of it. Also, please note that someone being quoted in an article does not neccesarily denote someone as being notable, the exception being if they were widely cited in multiple new outlets as an expert in their field. The issue here continues that there isn't any direct coverage of the subject outside of the one school lunch event. Sulfurboy (talk) 21:27, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Thank you. Your explanation is helpful to guide as I contribute. I'll keep that article in draft and search for reliable citations. Appreciate your taking the time to help me understand. --BrikDuk (talk) 15:18, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

Good Morning,

Thank you for the response. I am hoping you can assist with further specificity. The article title above (The Toven) was apparently rejected. Reason; "not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia". Please breakdown the meaning of "sufficiently" as it relates to notable. As I understand the guidelines. "notable" is the requirement and while accompanied with the word "sufficiently" can come off as ambiguous and unclear to the author. Currently I can find no such language in Wikipedia guidelines and rules referring to the phrase "Not Sufficiently Notable". Please assist with pointing this verbiage out if I am missing something.

Are you stating that the subject is not "worthy of notice"?

According to Wiki

If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list.

Provided were reliable sources DJ Rectangle DJ Rectangle-1995 Vinyl Combat, Ill Rated and Jayo Felony UndergroundJayo Felony-Underground album. Whereby The Toven performed and contributed to both. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spiritletters (talk • contribs) 15:37, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

Respectfully.

Asked at Teahouse and answered by an editor. David notMD (talk) 15:36, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

Hello Sulfurboy,

Source Guide Discussion

The first NPP source guide discussion is now underway. It covers a wide range of sources in Ghana with the goal of providing more guidance to reviewers about sources they might see when reviewing pages. Hopefully, new page reviewers will join others interested in reliable sources and those with expertise in these sources to make the discussion a success.

Redirects

New to NPP? Looking to try something a little different? Consider patrolling some redirects. Redirects are relatively easy to review, can be found easily through the New Pages Feed. You can find more information about how to patrol redirects at WP:RPATROL.

Discussions and Resources

• There is an ongoing discussion around changing notifications for new editors who attempt to write articles.
• A recent discussion of whether Michelin starred restraunts are notable was archived without closure.
• A resource page with links pertinent for reviewers was created this month.
• A proposal to increase the scope of G5 was withdrawn.

Refresher

Geographic regions, areas and places generally do not need general notability guideline type sourcing. When evaluating whether an article meets this notability guideline please also consider whether it might actually be a form of WP:SPAM for a development project (e.g. PR for a large luxury residential development) and not actually covered by the guideline.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 7095 Low – 4991 High – 7095

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here

16:08, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

Lars Van Ryckeghem, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Sulfurboy (talk) 16:56, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

Hello Sulfurboy,

I saw your comment on the draft and than you for reviewing it. But there's something I don't understand in your "Comment: Likely notable, but all claims in the article either need inline citations - sorry, my mothertongue is French. Could you please explain me what you mean by inline citations, in other words? I made the same article in French, German and Italian and there was no such a problem.

Thanks in advance. Best regards from Switzerland. --ElleW26 (talk) 17:02, 11 February 2020 (UTC)ElleW26

There are links in the decline notice on the draft page that explain what inline citations are. Sulfurboy (talk) 17:17, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, I looked at them and made changes - is it better now? --ElleW26 (talk) 13:33, 14 February 2020 (UTC)ElleW26

Dear Sulfurboy,

thank you for reviewing my draft - I'd be grateful indeed for any suggestion on how to improve it:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Elite_Network_of_Bavaria

I have added citations - I need to rely on German speaking sources, however, the only resource for information in English is the Elite Network's homepage.

What else could be done to improve it?

Thank you very much.

--Matthias.galler (talk) 13:52, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

It is not a requirement that your sources be in English. German sources are fine. However, I will note that it will typically make it easier for reveiwers if they can easily pull up a source or two in English that denotes notability. Again, not a requirement at all though. Sulfurboy (talk) 14:37, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

• 86.17.116.230 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Wales national football team results 2020-39 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

There is a Scotland national football team page for 2020-39 fixtures. The title is only following on from 1980-1999 and 2000-2019 pages. 2021 fixtures will not be known until 29 November this year.

86.17.116.230 (talk) 16:43, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

Yes, that's the point. Please see WP:TOOSOONSulfurboy (talk) 16:50, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

You both rated Pinkhos Churgin "start". And then tagged it on the page itself as a stub. Please explain. I think start was correct, and there was no need for the stub tag on the page. --2604:2000:E010:1100:54A2:7877:F67:385A (talk) 02:49, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

In your comments about the Draft:Plug In Institute of Contemporary Art article that I created the HTML that you posted broke my Talk page today. Could you please try your best to fix it so that it displays correctly again? Thx. Jimj wpg (talk) 03:53, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Done. Sulfurboy (talk) 04:02, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

a "Some of this article's listed sources may not be reliable" note regarding a "Some of this article's listed sources may not be reliable" tag you applied, which note you can find at Talk:Pinkhos Churgin. --2604:2000:E010:1100:54A2:7877:F67:385A (talk) 02:47, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Replied on articles talk page. Please have page discussions there. Thanks. Sulfurboy (talk) 03:38, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

I did. Thanks. I'm concerned that you simply made up a rule that does not exist. 2604:2000:E010:1100:91C5:EB30:170B:B63E (talk) 08:20, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

You needlessly replicated already existing and more camplete wiki projects here. Talk:Arie Zaban. --2604:2000:E010:1100:CCF9:9EDA:37EE:909B (talk) 11:11, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Fixed. Looks like something went wrong with the AfC script when the page was published. Sulfurboy (talk) 19:55, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi Sulfurboy and thanks for your work reviewing new articles. Please remember to check for violations of Wikipedia's copyright policy before publishing drafts. The most recent one I saw that had a copyright problem was Pinkhos Churgin, which had copying from https://www.encyclopedia.com/religion/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/churgin-pinkhos. There's been several others lately as well. Thank you, — Diannaa (talk) 13:34, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for catching that. Do you happen to know of a good backup tool for when CVDetector is down or moving slow? It seems the tool I used from years ago isn't as effective or reliable as it once was. Thanks.Sulfurboy (talk) 19:56, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi there. I noticed you marked several things I'd had under review as not under review. Fair enough on the time element but is there a reason you didn't reach out first? I actually had a legitimate reason for this - I am/was using them as teaching tools for New Page Patrol School and since some drafts take six months for reviews, it did not/does not seem like a deal breaker if they sit under review for a bit. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 18:25, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

(talk), Yes, I did it as part of routine maintenance and also because a couple of them looked ready for mainspace (looks like a couple were already accepted by other reviewers). I saw no movement on the page for days. I also double checked the talk page and the AfC comments to see if there was a reason why the pages were being held under review for days with no editing. It might be helpful in the future to leave a comment or post something on the talk page so people will know when they visit it. Also, holding active AfC articles under an indefinite reviews sounds a bit inefficient. Can those pages not be used as an example on a separate sandbox page? Either way, I apologize for the confusion and inconvenience. Sulfurboy (talk) 20:18, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

Sulfurboy, all AfCs submitted are under indefinite review which is why holding them for a teaching purpose doesn't seem against the spirit of anything especially given how huge the backlog is right now. Your comment about noting why it's under review is one I've given thought to before and decided against because it's a bit of inside baseball that might not be understood by the kind of editor likely to be at AFC. I'll give it some more thought. My bigger point was that I was clearly active and so perhaps you could have left me a talk page message before or even after having done this. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 17:59, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

You could maybe preface it with 'note to afc editors' or something along those lines in you message if you're worried about contributors not understanding what you're trying to say. And yes, you're correct about the backlog. However, it can be deceptive. What makes it to the end of the backlog is typically articles that need to be reviewed by someone with specialized knowledge in subject matter or language. A lot of articles are approved or decline in the first couple of days. I just worry about newer contributors being discouraged from contributing again when their article needlessly sits in limbo for months. Just because that's the status quo for some articles, doesn't justify it being acceptable. Sulfurboy (talk) 20:02, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Also, why coudn't these pages just have a copy stored on a sandbox page and have the teaching tool run from there? Sulfurboy (talk) 20:03, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi Sulfurboy. You technically violated 3RR on Benny D. Freeman: even though you made only 3 reverts of Bfreeman429, you additionally reverted the addition of a tag [1]. All four of those are reverts for 3RR purposes. I won't block you for this, since the tag removal seems like a technical violation at best, but please be mindful. Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 22:54, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Kevin, can you clarify how exemption seven of the 3RR doesn't apply here? Because that's what I was relying on. Thanks. Sulfurboy (talk) 23:36, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out. You're probably right that the BLP exemption might apply if clearly invoked; however, please remember that both the basis for the exemption and the invocation of the exemption itself should be as clear and blatant as possible (i.e. at least note the exemption in your edit summary, and preferably don't risk 3RR anyway). Best, Kevin (alt of L235 · t · c) 01:56, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

Sounds good. I'll do that from now on. Sulfurboy (talk) 02:00, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

Tony "UNK^6" Reynolds From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Submission declined on 12 February 2020 by Sulfurboy (talk).

First, thank you for reviewing this submission! That is sincere, and I'm definitely not mad, just trying to understand.

Please try to help me understand clearly what you are saying?

So do you feel that because the other co-author of the book is mentioned in greater detail (James "Buster" Douglas, the co-author being mentioned less is not notable?

I disagree with the passing title because one co-author is greater than the other, should not delineate the fact that this book was co-created by Tony "UNK^6" Reynolds. This book, "Buster's Backyard Bar-B-Q," would not have been created without both authors. (actually Tony Reynolds was the original creator...but that's not going in here.)

Although I will agree to disagree, feeling that being co-author of a book mentioned in numerous national publications is not just a "passing" mention. If Reynolds was a ghost-writer, I would most likely agree, but even ghost-writers get credit in Wiki.

FOX NEWS: https://www.foxnews.com/food-drink/buster-douglas-knockout-bbq

Second, before this is updated again

Tony "UNK^6" Reynolds is the primary feature of the story (and his creation), but of course, President Reagan will over shadow Reynolds in these stories.

https://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/reagan-hologram-real-planned-rnc-debut-203919642--election.html

https://deadline.com/2012/08/reagan-hologram-developer-didnt-want-to-distract-from-mitt-romney-report-327668/

http://www.msnbc.com/the-ed-show/reagan-hologram-resurrected

https://www.politico.com/story/2012/08/report-gop-nixed-reagan-hologram-080532

https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/08/ronald-reagan-and-the-case-of-the-missing-hologram/261838/

What do you think?

Akickincrowd (talk) 21:30, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

Dear Sulfurboy, I read carefully what you suggested to improve the page I wrote about D. Gazagnadou: Draft:Didier Gazagnadou and I would like to thank you.

For the notability issue (for academics), I just added Authority control that constitutes to my opinion published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Moreover, D. Gazagnadou has been cited in Nature (journal).

Actually D. Gazagnadou belongs to famous professors from University of Vincennes in Saint-Denis where Gilles Deleuze, Jacques Lacan, Bernard Maris, Helene Cixous and many others still teach or taught.

I would really appreciate if you could re-review the article. Thanks for your time.

Etoiledeneige (talk) 03:37, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

May I know why God father 2020 edits declined by you Firstclap (talk) 06:33, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Dear Sulfurboy, Thank you for reviewing my draft on Jawdokimov. Please check his prominence by doing a Wikipedia search on his surname. You will see that he is mentioned as Alex or Alexei Jawdokimov in several existing Wikipedia articles. Please let me know if I should refer to these articles in my draft in order to prove his prominence. I already referred to his filmography on IMDb. I have been following his work for some time. Although I did not know him in person, when I learnt about his death, I thought he would deserve an article. I don’t know the exact date of his birth and his death, but I’m trying find it out in order to make that information more precise. Best regards, Budabe Budabe (talk) 19:52, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

I would recommend reading the provided links in the message about the draft's decline. There are links to explain what is needed to show notability along with what is considered a good source to use. Sulfurboy (talk) 20:41, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Feel free to mark articles that you move to the mainspace through AfC as reviewed, especially articles which unambiguously meet an SNG. Although if you do so, make sure that they're properly tagged with all relevant WikiProject banners. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 00:03, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Rosguill I'll do that for sure for the ones that are SNG, but if you don't mind I think for the GNG ones I'd still like it to be seen by NPP in case I missed something glaring, at least until I get back in the groove of things from my extended absensce. Sulfurboy (talk) 00:34, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

That's fair, and if it's a subjective SNG (like NACTOR or NACADEMIC) feel free to also send those for a second review, but for clear yes-or-no SNGs (like most of NSPORTS) it's going to almost always be unnecessary. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 00:44, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Rosguill, thought I'd run this idea by you. I still don't feel comfortable reviewing my own pages that I approve. Feels a little too much like a fox watching the hen house. So instead I'm just going to keep a rough count of articles I approve in a day and then go review at least that many articles in NPP (and a few more) so that at least my contribution to the NPP queue is a net negative. Sulfurboy (talk) 00:45, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

I think that's a good idea, although I'm not sure I see why you feel more uncertain about articles you approve out of AfC than articles that you come across at NPP. Unless you're making significant edits to the AfC articles in order to bring them to an acceptable state, there really isn't any conflict of interest. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 01:32, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi my Sulfurboy, I'm new to this wikipedia, I fixed the article you denied me. I arranged well and left the article as natural as possible. Take a look please, and sorry for wasting your time but I want you to consider my article since I took hours to do it and also arranged it as you requested. This is the article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Emil_Cerda

I accept your suggestions to remove or put some words

Eltiguere300 (talk) 03:17, 18 February 2020 (UTC)Eltiguere300

Hello Sulfurboy, thank you for reviewing my draft article Daniel_Sonenberg. I'm still new at this, and published it too soon, but much later than I had hoped! I have just added some outside references and would like to have your advice as I relearn the Wikipedia way after a couple of years away. I am still editing the draft, and will continue to add to it in the coming weeks until it will hopefully be accepted. Lori Arsenault, Gorham, Maine (talk) 05:31, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

It's unclear what your question is...Sulfurboy (talk) 05:35, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

Greetings,

I must admit that I do not understand the rejection.

Cuis Smalltalk is frequently mentioned along with siblings Squeak and Pharo, both of which have web pages.

Searching GitHub for "Cuis-Smalltalk-*" shows ~30 repositories.

There are a number YouTube videos of Smalltalk conference talks on Cuis (ESUG, FAST).

There is at least one university with its own Cuis development image and Google group [2].

There is an active, vibrant development community using Cuis Smalltalk.

Cuis has different goals from Squeak and Pharo which has resulted in a significantly different dialect and technical structure. For example, the visual artifacts (Morphs) have origins relative to their containers rather than the screen origin, x@y positions use floats not integers, Features check their requirements and autoload them. IDE tools differ. Cuis is a different dialect of Smalltalk and deserves respect and attention in WIkipedia.

It is not like Cuis Smalltalk does not exist. Why allow Squeak and Pharo pages but not Cuis?

Please help me understand this, -Mike — Preceding unsigned comment added by MikeFilmore (talk • contribs) 16:10, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

I never stated the subject isn't notable, I stated the sources don't denote notability. I would highly recommend reading the articles that were linked in the decline message. Some of your comments indicate to me that you haven't done so yet. If after reading those articles, in particular WP:GNG and WP:RS, you still have questions I will be happy to help with any further questions. Sulfurboy (talk) 17:12, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi Sulfurboy,

I wanted to get your feedback on the Stasher page you declined and said it came across as too promotional. If you had any feedback, comments or edits that I can work off of that would be extremely helpful.

Here is the link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Chistina.mlynski#Your_submission_at_Articles_for_creation%3A_Stasher_Brand_%28February_18%29Chistina.mlynski (talk) 18:57, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

I would recommend reading the pages that were linked in the decline message. Sulfurboy (talk) 19:04, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

all sources come from (national news websites in Indonesia)? Kebajikan111 (talk) 19:54, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

I think that's accurate enough, without having to look at other sources. all sources come from trusted website "local languages" because these foods are still poorly known outside the country Kebajikan111 (talk) 19:57, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

itu bukan “cookbook” tapi penjelasan tentang makanannya Kebajikan111 (talk) 19:58, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

it's not a "cook book" but an explanation of the food Kebajikan111 (talk) 19:59, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

obviously that's an important topic! Kebajikan111 (talk) 20:03, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

This food is known in Indonesia. but not known in the outside world. that's normal, foreigners don't even know our national food like rendang sate (maybe it's quite well known), but Gado-gado? unknown but that's our national dish. Kebajikan111 (talk) 20:22, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

btw, that food is already listed in local Wikipedia (wikipedia bahasa indonesia) Kebajikan111 (talk) 20:25, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I started this new article and it was declined by another reviewer, I discussed with him and he suggested that I resubmit and find(wait) for another person to review it, would you please take the time to read through and review the submission?. Thanks! LilaMorillo (talk) 23:10, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Sulfurboy,

I declined several pages you had tagged as "uncontroversial speedy deletions" because they didn't include much information to justify a page deletion. If you want to delete a page because a different page needs to be moved to that location, please state which page needs to be moved. "Uncontroversial housekeeping" doesn't state a reason why a page should be deleted unless there is an obvious misspelling or mistake. Please be more specific in your deletion rationales and only use CSD G6 for pages that are uncontroversial and obvious deletion candidates. Otherwise, please use one of the other established CSD criteria. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:02, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Liz, Hmm, can you point me to an example or two? I haven't run into anyone having issue with my G6s before. Is the problem just that I'm not giving the name of the page? I always state that it's to move in an article from AfC, I just assumed it was pretty inherent which page was being moved in since they would have to share the same name. But I can just start directly putting in the draft link, that's no biggie. Sulfurboy (talk) 01:32, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

I'm not on a computer that is great for editing so I'll ask that you look at my contributions. There are 3 that I declined. Admins vary in how strict they are about speedy deletions and I'd guess I'm medium strict (or I just request fuller information with requested page moves). Others rarely raise any questions and just delete so you might not have encountered questions in the past, it depends on how much tagging you do. Let me know if you have any other questions. I just thought since there were 3 CSD G6 I declined, I should drop you a note. It's a especially tricky criteria because it requires the tagger to state why the page should be deleted where with the other criteria, they are more self-explanatory. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:05, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi Sulfurboy,

Thanks so much for reviewing my draft and suggesting edits. As requested I have added reliable sources, including a journal article, published book and SBS news feature. I would really appreciate if you could re-review the article. Thank you for your interest and time. Draft:Young Henrys

OleWriter2020 (talk) 02:23, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

You need to resubmit the article and then I can approve it. Sulfurboy (talk) 02:33, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi Sulfurboy, my apologies I thought I had already. It has now been resubmitted. Thank you so much. OleWriter2020 (talk) 09:46, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Approved. Sulfurboy (talk) 14:44, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi, just letting you know that I started this article, and not JHIMarket (who you left a message for when you left a comment). However, he did accidentally submit it previously, so it is an understandable mistake. Thanks, Thatoneweirdwikier Say hi 21:19, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

@Sulfurboy: The redirect blocking this draft has been removed, can you press the magic button please. Thanks. - X201 (talk) 14:23, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Done. Sulfurboy (talk) 14:45, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks - X201 (talk) 15:04, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Josef_Veselka_(Cardiologist)

how many citation do you need? There are a lot of page on wiki that have less numbers of citation and it is ok — Preceding unsigned comment added by EmporaHotels (talk • contribs) 15:06, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

If other citations are missing tags you are welcome to tag them with maintence tags. What other pages look like have no bearing on yours. You need to have inline citations for each claim made within the article as it is a biography of a living person. This is all fully explained in the links provided in the decline message. Sulfurboy (talk) 15:21, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for your message regarding my Hannes Bieger submission --> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Hannes_Bieger

Would love to know more about why it was declined, if possible.

And any tips on how to improve it.

Thanks! Much love, Marcus. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mgoldenbarnes (talk • contribs) 15:24, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Review the links provided in the decline message. In particular, we need to see secondary and reliable sources that give the subject significant coverage. You want to make sure the coverage isn't WP:ROUTINE. Primary sources can be used, but they aren't enough to denote notability. Sulfurboy (talk) 15:27, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi Sulfurboy, thank you for reviewing my article. I got a notice saying it was declined, because it would read more as an advertisement then as an independent article. I made some changes, wrote it from a more natural point of view and added references. I hope I fixed it. Should I send it in for review again?

This is the article I am talking about: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Vera_Luijendijk — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brigittevandam (talk • contribs) 15:50, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Hey Sulfurboy,

Thanks for reviewing my proposed article. Can you please explain why the subject is not sufficient for a separate article?

Unity as well as Unreal both have separate article for "List of games" besides their main article please see below:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Unity_games?action=edit

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Unreal_Engine_games#See_also

Looking forward hearing back from you.

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Katieee123 (talk • contribs) 16:27, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

hi, sulfurboy!

you reviewed my article about the alphacode programming language (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Alphacode), I saw you denied it because it had some problems with the references, can you maybe tell me whats wrong. why you denied it and what i should change?

tyvm ~luc de wit — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lukedewit (talk • contribs) 18:42, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

I would recommend reading the links provided in the decline message. Doing so will make it abundantly clear what needs to be done. Sulfurboy (talk) 18:52, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi, my Sulfurboy, how are you?

I already fixed the article and removed the words that were not neutral. Please review it and accept it since I lasted many hours doing it. Consider my request. I also take into account any advice from you and whether I should remove or put words. This is the article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Emil_Cerda

Eltiguere300 (talk) 23:40, 19 February 2020 (UTC)Eltiguere300

Hi,
Thanks for reviewing the draft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:GS-Calc. I added a few references and removed the "very compact" words (if this was a problem).
Jerryp.c5 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jerryp.c5 (talk • contribs) 19:22, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

hello Sulfurboy recently I did edits on my article Ntinda Vocational Training Institute, but declined. Please I request your help in pin pointing the references which are not reliable.--Sandrah.Akol (talk) 04:55, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

Dear Sulfurboy, Thank you for reviewing my proposed Wikipedia article, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Jei_Atacama. I am so very grateful to you for the very fast response after hitting "publish" on the draft yesterday. Even though some might be discouraged by a rejection, I am ready for the challenge of editing and getting this right! :) This is my first Wikipedia page submission and seeing the statement that noted it might be at least 6 months before anyone would be able to review the draft because of the long queue was a scary realization. Your response is encouraging and I can dig in again and learn and edit! Thanks for all you do (I see you are very very busy on here!). See you at the Tea House ... in the meantime, hope this cup of coffee helps to fuel your passion for Wikipedia. Best, PamelaAnnCruz PamelaAnnCruz (talk) 08:59, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi Sulfurboy, Thank you for your review. I added three more references for: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Mohammadreza_Goodary#2_news_website_and_one_relevant_wikipedia_entry_references_were_added_to_the_reference_list

Would appreciate your review. Thank you--Abmousavi (talk) 18:05, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

• Jingleman2 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Dan Shafer (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Jingleman2 (talk) 19:36, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

I do not understand your not excepting. It is the exact format as Frank Simms and several others including Sundance Head, and others from the Voice who do not have ANY published sources. everything I did is as accurate as one can get and NOT just passing mentions. Have a look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Simms. If you need others who are set up exactly the same [lease let me know. ALL of which have been published!

I'm not sure what you're talking about with other articles, that's of no concern to me and it should be with you either. We instead need to go by wikipedia policy. So far, the subject of your article wholly fails WP:GNG and WP:ARTIST. Someone that only is shown to have coverage from WP:ONEVENT (in this case being on the voice) is usually never determined to be notable. Sulfurboy (talk) 21:09, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi! Thanks for your very helpful feedback. I've gone through and added numerous inline citations, as requested. If more are needed, could you possibly notate where you think they should be? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Daniel_K._Podolsky,_M.D. Thank you! 22:23, 20 February 2020 (UTC)Kshear04 (talk) kshear04

Looks good. Approved. Sulfurboy (talk) 22:25, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

THANK YOU!!! --Kshear04 (talk) 22:56, 20 February 2020 (UTC) kshear04

Hi,

I would like to understand why you have deleted the article I created on Passu Tshering, due to notability issues, notably lack of quality references. The references include two prominent Bhutanese independent newspapers - Kuensel and The Bhutanese. There are two independent books, one published by Routledge, an internationally recognised academic publisher. Please can you explain to me why these do not meet criteria of reliable, published sources. Also, two of the references are to profiles of Passu and his organisation, so I dont think they can be considered passing mentions. Thanks. 17todotest (talk) 02:39, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

I am not necessarily mad, but I am confused when you say he is a "clear cut case" of someone famous for one thing. Am I supposed to summarize his book and his contributions to the field of transit planning? I am new to Wikipedia but I am not new to the subjects he is famous for (and I'd bet you are the opposite) so there needs to be some more fleshed-out exchange of info. [3]

Commented on your question at the help desk. Sulfurboy (talk) 06:33, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi Sulfurboy

Thanks for taking the time to review my article Draft:LinkSquares. I would like to improve this article and get it into a shape you believe is suitable for publication. I'm wondering if it is the nature of the sources? I did not cite all sources possible, so if for instance I included a citation from the Berkshire Hathaway owned Business Wire, https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20190307005489/en/LinkSquares-AI-Startup-Tackling-Contract-Analytics-Raises would that be sufficient? If I am misunderstanding the issue, please let me know!

Blackmetalheater (talk) 12:37, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

I would advise reading the articles that were linked to you in the decline message. Doing so will teach why, for example, the article you linked above isn't a good one. Sulfurboy (talk) 14:17, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

Do not type Draft: in front of the title of a draft when using the 'duplicate' option to decline a sandbox. The script automatically puts Draft: in front of the title, so that this duplicates Draft:Draft:, and results in a red link. See User:MariaKravitzF/sandbox, where you did this.

Thank you for reviewing, and for dealing with a large amount of various sorts of crud. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:11, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

Robert McClenon, Oops! Thanks for pointing that out. I think I've always done it that way, so no telling how many I've messed up lol. Sulfurboy (talk) 15:15, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

Yes. It isn't intuitive. Discovering that the script does that is strictly trial and error. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:24, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

Here is the obituary for Maynard Hubbard Salmon II. http://www.scdailypress.com/site/2019/03/12/conservationist-author-salmon-dead-at-73/ Also, here is a more current article noting Wild and Scenic river designation in his name for his work http://scdailypress.com/site/2020/01/18/moving-forward-federal-wild-and-scenic-legislation-pays-tribute-to-author-environmentalist/ CherieSalmon (talk) 23:21, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

I added two new obituaries, one from the Syracuse Post Standard and one from the New Mexico Wildlife Federation's Outdoor Reporter. Hopefully these are more reliable sources. I also added a line about the current legislation working it's way through the U.S. Senate with two news articles. Thanks for your help! CherieSalmon (talk) 15:37, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Sulfurboy! I've read your comments on the reasons you declined the company and found them reasonable. It doesn't look I can do much more about it as I haven't found more sources about the company. Should I leave as it is or remove the draft? I'm not a very frequent user, so sorry in advance for any delayed response. Also, thanks a lot for invitation to the Teahouse - looks promising=)). I would appreciate your advice on my contributions. With regard, Michael.--MichaelGrossmanjr (talk) 19:24, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

MichaelGrossmanjr, Either is fine. I hope realizing this company might not be notable won't discourage you from further page creation. Please let me know if you need any help. Sulfurboy (talk) 02:25, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

	The Original Barnstar
	Great work ! Visualreverb (talk) 11:55, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Tweenata — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tweenata (talk • contribs) 02:55, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Dear Sulfurboy,

Thank you very much for your review and for the comments on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Tweenata

I am not asking you to re-review the article by any means, but just wanted to emphasize that Efim Levitin had published many books on radio engineering which were very popular in USSR. Many had a very large circulation, some were printed 2 or 3 times, and one of the books, printed in 1960s is still listed in an online book shop as a antique hardcopy (out of print) ;) His books were used as reference materials by all the repair personnel as well as amateurs. His books were also translated into several languages.

He did a lot to popularize radio engineering in USSR and some amateur radio engineers even now are still using his books.

Just wanted to add that since, according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(academics), having published books counts (although I admit that I do not know whether his books were actually used in any Soviet higher education institutions).

He is not very well researched, and therefore at this point I do not have any additional secondary sources to be listed. I will keep looking, but unfortunately I do not have access to any Soviet archives. Perhaps, having this article in Wikepedia would allow people who have the information to come forward and add it.

Thank you again for your consideration.

Best,

tweenataTweenata (talk) 03:23, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Tweenata (talk) 13:33, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

Hello Sulfurboy, can you please review my response? Thank you. 2601:189:8200:5010:BDAE:379F:EF3:29AC (talk) 15:25, 22 February 2020 (UTC)