User talk:S0091

Draft:The_Portraits_(music_duo)

Hi there S0091

I've just returned to this article to try and resolve it after an extremely busy year in which I simply haven't found the time to focus on it properly. Now, I'd love to try and sort it out, with your help.

Last year I took a great deal of time reading and understanding Wikipedia's notability guidelines for musicians.

Three of the key points are these:

"1. Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself."

   I have included in the article references to articles in the major national newspapers Irish Independent (https://www.independent.ie/entertainment/music/single-honouring-those-who-have-died-from-covid-19-aims-to-reach-number-one-39880151.html), The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/media/2021/nov/11/john-lewis-christmas-advert-electric-dreams-arrangement-accused-copying) and Telegraph (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/11/12/john-lewis-accused-stealing-music-idea-folk-band-werent-edgy/) amongst others.

"2. Has had a single or album on any country's national music chart."

   This has been shown, with reference to the UK's officially recognised national music chart compiled by the Official Charts Company, as listed by Wikipedia, as published on 25 December 2020.

"12. Has been a featured subject of a substantial broadcast segment across a national radio or television network."

  The musicians in question were the subject of a key segment in December 2020 of ITV's flagship television programme "This Morning" in the lead up to Christmas that year, as well as a similar piece on Jeremy Vine's self-titled Channel 5 programme. These are two of the main national television networks. They were also featured on BBC Radio 2 (the UK's most listened to radio station) in 2017 in a programme that had a segment focussing on their song 'Nobody Can Ever Murder Love'. https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b08n102f

In the light of the above, I wonder if I could respectfully request that you review your decision to reject the article on notability grounds?

Please let me know if you need any further information from me.

Best wishes and have a good day

Euann Euaanmill (talk) 18:18, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Euaanmill First, thank you for taking to time to read through the guidelines as so many don't. With that, here is my assessment. The Telegraph and Guardian articles are about the same thing, the lawsuit, published at essentially at the same time (within a day), so they count as a single source (and also strongly suggests it was press release). I will also note most of the information in those articles is coming from the band or those involved (he said/she said/they said) so are largely not independent sources and I will further note The Telegraph states the song "didn't chart particularly well" and Guardian describes the band as "little-known". None of them provide in-depth coverage about the band. All three of the sources you provided were in the article before so had been assessed at least by one other editor (some of the sources by at least two) previous to my rejection, as was the TV/radio spots.

When reviewers assess a draft, mostly what we are trying to do is determine, if accepted, the likelihood it will be nominated for deletion and further the likelihood it will survive the deletion discussion. Based on my experience and those who had declined previously (really only counting the two before my rejection) this would not. The notability guidelines are indicators, not guarantees. What the community is mostly looking for is in-depth reviews of a band/artist's work by reputable critics/sources. The reason things like charting is listed as an indicator is because usually if a song/album is at the top of the charts, in-depth reviews exist even if not cited. I hope this helps at least some. S0091 (talk) 20:47, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi again S0091

Thankyou so much for taking so much time over this and for your other message about conflicts of interest which I feel I’ve responded to and dealt with but I can elucidate on further if needed.

If I could return to the clarifications you give on the specifics of the article itself, I note and completely accept your comments on the Guardian (etc.) articles and the reference to the act being “little-known”.

In response to this, I refer to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability#:~:text=On%20Wikipedia%2C%20notability%20is%20a,not%20have%20a%20separate%20article where an emphasis is placed on whether a subject is “worthy of notice” and it is expressly stated that notability “does not necessarily depend on things such as fame, importance, or popularity”.

In fact, in an earlier draft of the article, I specifically made reference to the fact that the act in question hadn’t achieved widespread mainstream success, but these references were removed by an earlier Wikipedia reviewer as part of a fairly heavy edit.

“Worthy of notice” I do believe them to be: the act’s career has shown longevity, a steadfast relevance to the social issues of the day over a period of nearly twenty years and a unique list of achievements in harnessing the admittedly limited power of their success to make a significant noise when raising awareness of social issues directly relating to their songwriting. These include creating a song featuring 2000 voices of regular people around the country to recruit new signers to the stem cell donor registry in the UK, raising thousands for a school in Burma/Myanmar with an album of songs about the country and the particularly notable case of their cover version of ‘Together In Electric Dreams’ which has had a widespread appeal and influence, including, it has been reported, on the choice of a major UK store’s Christmas advert music as per the articles I quoted earlier.

The selection of articles from The Guardian, Telegraph and Irish Independent I sent you previously was made because of their prominence and relative recentness, but I can see how these might have given the impression that the act referred to was something of a one-trick pony from the point of view of historical media coverage. This certainly isn’t the case.

You say “What the community is mostly looking for is in-depth reviews of a band/artist's work by reputable critics/sources” and there are certainly a plethora of these out there, in the form of reviews of the duo’s albums over the last two decades. Let me draw your attention here to five such pieces of coverage of their work and a French article about their music. I can provide more if needed. I hope to have your further feedback, and once again, many thanks for your time on this.

A number of these are available online, and some not, so for ease, I have copied some pieces to my Dropbox for simpler access for the sake of this conversation.

Eurorock magazine, March 4th 2009, review of ‘Timescape’ album: https://www.dropbox.com/s/cp5zq0tcn5wta6v/Music%20Review%20-%20the%20portraits%20timescape%20jeff%20perkins%20blog%20critics%20eurorock%20column.pdf?dl=0

Folking.com, August 2015, review of ‘Lions and Butterflies’ album: https://folking.com/the-portraits-lions-and-butterflies-sensorypulse-records-spcd006/

Fatea magazine, 2015, review of ‘Lions and Butterflies’ album:

https://www.fatea-records.co.uk/magazine/2015/Portraits.html/

Folk London magazine, August 2013, review of ‘Counterbalance’ album: https://www.dropbox.com/s/rvceqz9hdq3mxg2/FROM%20FOLK%20LONDON%20feb%202013%20counterbalance%20album%20review.pdf?dl=0

Rock n Reel magazine, July/August 2017, review of ‘Global Heartbeat’ album: https://www.dropbox.com/s/vxmvg4o2xgwtgtv/r2%20rnr%20portraits%20global%20heartbeat%20review%20july%20aug%202017%20crop.jpg?dl=0

Sud Ouest, August 2015: https://www.dropbox.com/s/9atigh3pwyxgp1c/du%20jazz%20aux%20accents%20folk%20article%20in%20sud%20ouest%20re%20portraits%20jazz%20in%20aout%202015%20festival.JPG?dl=0

Best

Euann Euaanmill (talk) 08:02, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

@Euaanmill for the COI, if you are not affiliated with the band, please post a response to the notice on your talk page stating that so it is recorded there and that should wrap it up.

You are right in that fame, etc. does not mean notability (under Wikipedia's definition). Usually that applies to things like YouTubers, number of plays from streaming platform, etc. For example, a YouTuber can have millions of views/subscribers and still not meet notability but it does go other way as well.

While I am not going to access your dropbox for security and other reasons, I did check out the websites.

Out the above sources, many are blogs, no info really about them or their standards, or offer PR services thus suspect. HOWEVER, the two I find most promising are Rock n Reel (established publication, broad distribution) and Sud Ouest, which I am assuming is Sud Ouest (newspaper)? If those are in-depth reviews (not interviews or what the band states) then I agree those are likely helpful. While sources do not need to be online, you might try archive.org to see if there's an archived screenshot available.

Assuming those reviews are helpful, I have added a template to the draft which allows for resubmission. Once you have added the sources, summarized what the sources say in the draft and resubmitted, let me know and I will leave a note on the draft for the next reviewer letting them know why its being submitted yet again as I will not review it again (another set of eyes is always better). You can quote a sentence from each source, which is typical for reviews as long as you attribute it to the source and cite it (i.e. Rock N Reel gave a generally positive/negative review, stating the album/song was "blah blah...."). I also suggest posting note on the draft's talk page outlining the three best sources (and only three) and how they establish notability. Be concise. S0091 (talk) 19:27, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi - many thanks once again for your in-depth help with this and your suggestions for the COI and additions of sources to the draft's talk page which I am currently doing. I do appreciate all your suggestions.

You've seen that I've been a little hasty over the last 24 hours and have submitted the draft for review before fully reading everything you've said above...very much my bad, apologies.

I've now edited the article further and left it in "submitted" mode, and hope the changes are fully visible to the next reviewer?

I have certainly focussed on the Sud-Ouest (yes, the French newspaper) and Rock and Reel magazine coverage. Although I have also kept the refs to FATEA magazine, which is, in my experience, a genuinely respected UK online music magazine with a folk focus, and likewise folking.com which I've found is fairly regularly cited on Wikipedia in other articles. I hope that is OK.

Thanks for your offer to leave a note on the draft before passing it on.

E Euaanmill (talk) 08:53, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

@Euaanmill oh yeah, that is fine and I see the sources, etc. are there so have added a note. The only issue is the RnR link to goes to the main site rather than to the review so update it if you can. Good luck! S0091 (talk) 14:18, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks again - shall do Euaanmill (talk) 11:34, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

We rave you draft

Hello there, i am not sure why after i edit the draft and was given the okay to submit, you declined it with the reason you did.. I would appreciate you explaining what's the problem and I will fix it. I want to note there are realted articles on alike magazines here in Wikipedia and this is an international magazine read by so many people... Raves2023 (talk) 06:48, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

@S0091hello, it's been 6 days so Im writing again. Can you please respond because my draft is blocked... Thank you. Raves2023 (talk) 10:49, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Hello @S0091, I am writing but getting no response from you. I will try and get help if you cant help me... please let me know. Raves2023 (talk) 09:21, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

We rave you draft

Hi @S0091, I just looked to see if you replied and I see you havent although you do reply to others so I thought before I am reaching out the chat to open a new topic.. can you please address my draft please and explain why you put a stop tag to it? I resubmitted it after I fixed it and there are more than 2-3 sources. I know it's been declined but I am new to this and I fix what needed. Raves2023 (talk) 09:29, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Raves2023 going by memory almost none of the sources are reliable. Many appeared to be PR//SEO, routine coverage about events or the like and often was what the publication said about itself which is not independent, none which are helpful for establishing notability. S0091 (talk) 14:52, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Hello @S0091, Everything there is not PR or SEO from the magazin side. Did you maybe see other magazin's pages? Raves2023 (talk) 16:42, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

@Raves2023 I didn't say everything was, I said many were PR/SEO, along with routine coverage, etc. I am not sure what you are asking. You are welcome though to present the three best sources (and only three, see WP:THREE) that meet WP:ORGCRIT (read that carefully) on the draft's talk page and I will take a look. Just ping me there. S0091 (talk) 16:54, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi @S0091, how do I do it on the draft page? wont that be visabel to all if let's say you will decide there are good..? can I please do it somewhere else? Raves2023 (talk) 10:04, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

@S0091, I will do it here and if that's not okay, Please let me know and I will erase it and place it wherever you say, here goes:

first I want to say I read what you said but still I cannot be sure I am choosing the right 3 so I will state a few more just to be on the safe side - please forgive me if it's too many:

1. https://megatickets.co.il/magazine/we-rave-you/ - this source is a dedicate articel on the magazin. Not Pr and written by the website team. It's in Hebrew but I can translate and send your way if you wish.

2. https://edmhousenetwork.com/we-rave-you-launches-the-essential-plugins-gear-catalogue-featuring-worlds-leading-artists1/ - is a huge site and this was written by Dylan Smith.

3. https://www.lux-review.com/winners/weraveyou/ - this is no text articel but it shows the award we rave you won for Best Electronic Dance Music Magazine 2020.

4. https://www.nhl.com/panthers/news/florida-panthers--we-rave-you-to-host-catz-b-side-electronic-music-performance-on-march-25/c-341722178 - im sure I dont need to present the NHL and if you'll scroll down you will see they also wrote on we rave you, the artists and also the the all articel is about the Panthers partnering with We Rave You.

5. https://amqueretaro.com/vsd/2022/12/16/yotam-dov-el-productor-influencer-y-fundador-de-we-rave-you-trae-grandes-planes-para-este-2023/ - this is an article on the founder and his plans for we rave you in title but it's all about the magazin. Also not a PR although you can pay to get written about in this website.

6. we are also on https://muckrack.com/media-outlet/weraveyou and https://www.1001tracklists.com/source/nqhlr3/we-rave-you/index.html - which not many get to be presented like that there...

Social Media - on instergram over 253K followers, on facebook 1.1M followers and 1.1M likes! Raves2023 (talk) 10:27, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Raves2023 looking at the first five, the first one is a ticket sales outlet so not a reliable source (and possibly not independent if they sale tickets for We Rave You events), the second and fourth sources are press releases/announcements by the magazine/platform and/or those affiliated with it so not independent. The third one is a non-notable award and the fifth one is an interview with the founder mostly containing what he says about himself and the platform so also not independent. The number of followers, etc. matters not. None of these contribute to establishing notability. S0091 (talk) 14:59, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

Dear @S0091, allow me to reply:

1. 1 is not just a ticket outlet, it's also a magazine.
2. 2 - is not from we rave you and they choose to write about without getting paid.
3. 4 is NHL.com which is the official web site of the National Hockey League and they are writing about the collab
4. 3 this is very notable award in the industry.
5. 5 Please check the bottom although I agree.

I stated the social so you will see how many people are touched by it. To sum it up, what can be done? I mean, this magazine is not a side magazine that 5 people are reading, it hostd huge events and is read by millions. I also took a look again in other magazines and I cant find the difference.. I know it's an ask, but please help me... Raves2023 (talk) 12:03, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

I'll share which I looked at:

DMA (magazine), DJ Mag and Debug (magazine) Raves2023 (talk) 12:09, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

@Raves2023 :

1 - It is a commercial site with its main focus being ticket sales as they state on the About Us page (also a large portion is an interview).

2 - "We Rave You, one of the biggest global media outlets in the electronic music industry, has announced...." (bolding mine). This is clearly emanating from We Rave You, not to mention their stated purpose is to promote the industry so not a reliable source: "EDMHouseNetwork is a network specialising in delivering promotion for a huge collection of artists & labels."

3 - Is actually the Flordia's Panthers site (as it states at the top) and is an announcement stating they have entered into a partnership with We Rave You. This is a primary source, not secondary. It can be used to support the fact the partnership exists but it is not independent because they are affiliated with We Rave You so not useful for notability, not to mention the Panthers are not journalists.

4 - There are a ton of awards across various industries that may be meaningful to the industry but the vast majority do not convey notability here. Examples of awards that may indicate notability (not a guarantee) are generally major awards like Pulitzer Prize, Grammy, BAFTA, Nobel Prize, etc. I also find Lux's stated purpose of their awards at least somewhat concerning: "Our primary responsibility is to ensure that our winners can benefit from the exposure that we offer, whether that be items in our free of charge marketing toolkit, or helping them select the most appropriate commercial package in order to get the most value out of their budget."

As for the articles you linked, see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXIST. In the early days Wikipedia did not even have notability guidelines and sources were not required. Looking at the ones you linked, the first two were created in 2006, as the very first notability guideline was being established. The third one was created in 2009. Even today articles can get by when they shouldn't and the guidelines still do change, with the last major change being a year or so to WP:NSPORTS making that guideline generally more strict.

At this point, there is not anything you can do as no amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability (read that). The draft is rejected, meaning it will no longer be considered and nothing presented here suggests anything has changed. If this draft were accepted, it would either be moved back to draft or be deleted as it would not survive a deletion discussion. I will also tell you that once an article is deleted, it is a monumental task to later get it accepted because the bar generally raises from mostly likely would not be deleted to indisputably notable, meaning there is no chance it would even be nominated for deletion much less actually deleted. S0091 (talk) 16:40, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

@S0091 Hello, I read what you wrote carefully and I cant say I agree with all of what you said... i do understand but it seems each source I placed, big as it is, was found not noteable, even Flordia's Panthers.. Raves2023 (talk) 14:17, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

@Raves2023 I am not sure why you bring up notability of a source as that is not the criteria to assess a source. If the New York Times writes about an event it is sponsoring that would not meet the criteria, just like if the NYT publishes a Q&A type interview of the CEO of a company or a press release/annoucement. Those are primary and/or not independent. In order for a source to contribute to the notability of a topic it needs to meet all four criteria: reliable, secondary, independent and cover the topic in-depth. None of the sources presented meet all four and I have explained why a couple times now. You are welcome to disagree but it doesn't change anything. I given this enough of my time so will not be engaging further. S0091 (talk) 15:27, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

Don't remove information about any article people need that information this is Wikipedia so don't do it again.

Don't remove information about any article people need that information this is Wikipedia so don't do it again. 223.239.24.91 (talk) 16:33, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

Richard Warren Reinhardt

I received notification today that my draft article on Richard Warren Reinhardt had been rejected for a shortage of sourcing. Obviously, I was disappointed -- having worked on it for many months, including extensive discussions with the subject of the entry -- but I understand (and appreciate) that Wikipedia has standards and rules.

You mentioned in your reply that writing biographical entries about authors and journalists can be tricky, and that was certainly the case here. Richard W. Reinhardt never sought publicity and very little has been written about him; indeed, this was an attempt to rectify that. It's obvious that he is a person of significant authorial accomplishment and community involvement.

He's also a person primarily from the pre-internet era, so online information about him is very sparse. He was particularly known in San Francisco in the 1950s and continued to publish books and articles and play an active role in community organizations thought the 80s, but whatever was written about him at that time in print is inaccessible.

I appreciated your suggestion to start by trying to post Wikipedia entries about some of his books. The most likely candidates are, as you identified, Out West on the Overland Train and The Ashes of Smyrna. Aside from that, I can try to dig up verification of his board service dates and other details.

I do hope you understand that my draft was very thoroughly researched based on the information I had available to me, including interviews with Mr. Reinhardt and physical copies of his books and articles.

I look forward to working with you on finding a way to post a Wikipedia entry about this important contributor to San Francisco's journalistic history in the last half-century.

P.S. I didn't understand the comment about not including links in the text. Do I take that to mean that I can link to other Wikipedia topics but not to external URLs? I thought links would help establish the connections between the subject and other topics, but I'm fine to remove the URLs if you advise.

Andy Reinhardt (talk) 04:31, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Certinal eSign

Our company page's submission has been declined due to the following:

Would be really helpful if you could help me with an email address if possible to discuss this further.

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

• in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
• reliable
• secondary
• strictly independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia. Cathy.miller123 (talk) 11:02, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Cathy.miller123 discussions should occur on-wiki so if you have a question, you are welcome to ask here. However, before you do please read through all the information linked in the decline message and the messages Jimfbleak left on your talk page. S0091 (talk) 17:26, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Incels.is

I won't put that content again, but it's pretty obvious Onion1981 (talk) 21:09, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

@Onion1981 if it is an obvious conclusion, readers will come that conclusion on their own. Wikipedia can only summarize what reliable sources have written in a factual, neutral manner. S0091 (talk) 21:16, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 5 June 2023

• News and notes: WMRU director forks new 'pedia, birds flap in top '22 piccy, WMF weighs in on Indian gov's map axe plea

• In the media: Section 230 stands tall, WP vs. UK bill, Miss Information dissed again

• Featured content: Poetry under pressure

• Traffic report: Celebs, controversies and a chatbot in the public eye

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:22, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

Reliable sources?

Hi, I see that you declined a draft for the Metallica song “Welcome Home (Sanitarium)” because most of the sources used were, in your words, not reliable. Can you please tell me what makes a source reliable on Wikipedia and provide me some reliable sources related to the draft’s subject?

(PS, can you also help me with another draft I’ve been working on, which is for White Reaper’s 2023 album Asking for a Ride? I’ve put a lot of work into that draft, only for it to be declined because of a similar reason.) KevinML (talk) 01:39, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

Hi @KevinML, can you provide a link to the draft? I have no recollection of it. In the interim, see WP:WikiProject Albums/Sources as a starting place. S0091 (talk) 01:43, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks!

Here’s the link: Draft:Welcome Home (Sanitarium) KevinML (talk) 01:54, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

@KevinML oh wow, back in December...no wonder I don't remember lol (and that unintentionally rhymes). There's a lot sources and I don't want to go through them all so can you point me three that you think supports notability? You can just give me the footnote numbers but please read WP:Articles for deletion/Welcome Home (Sanitarium) first. S0091 (talk) 02:06, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

Lilly Yokoi

Hi @S0091,

I noticed the article when someone mentioned it in the "WikiProject Film". I doubt the IP address will manifest itself and complete it. But i will gladly put in "Start" shape. Filmman3000 (talk) 02:44, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

@Filmman3000 awesome! Thanks!! S0091 (talk) 13:42, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Draft - National Police Federation page

Hi @S0091

I'm looking to resolve the sourcing issues you raised regarding this Wikipedia page draft, and I have a question. Your comment states that we only use one third party source - the CBC article - however I've linked to several federal government reports, annual reports from competing union associations, etc. Do those not count in any capacity as a third party source?

Also in regards to the comment that our web page should not be used in any capacity for sourcing beyond basic information, I used this page as inspiration and noted they source their own web page continuously. Could you advise on why this was acceptable but not for our page draft? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Association_of_Chiefs_of_Police

Thanks for your assistance! 2607:FEA8:A5A0:7E90:F47C:9A60:F4CF:35E0 (talk) 13:23, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Hi IP, sources serve two purposes, verifiability and notability. Primary sources are fine to sparingly use for verifiability but do not help to establish notability. Please also be aware WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, meaning there are plenty of articles that do meet standards. S0091 (talk) 13:35, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Re Lilly Yokoi

	copyeditor trophy
	Thanks for editing the draft and your help with publishing. Appreciated! Gryllida (talk, e-mail) 03:36, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Gryllida, this is an article that was "meant to be" despite obstacles. I was the reviewer who ultimately rejected the draft after doing a cursory search but like you, it was one that bugged me (i.e. I wanted her to be notable). A couple days ago the IP who created the draft removed all the AfC messages when I happened to be online so noticed it on my watchlist. We got into a bit of battle over it but ultimately it caused me look again. They had added some additional sources which piqued my interest so I searched again for more using a different method and found several which I added the draft so reached out the IP to get their help as clearly they are familiar with Yokoi. Around the same time you had posted messages about the draft on several projects seeking help which @Filmman3000 thankfully took up so here we are. I really appreciate you questioning the declines/reject and please do not ever hesitate to reach to me if you think I misjudged a draft (or anything else). S0091 (talk) 21:40, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Hello @Gryllida and @S0091,

Good job both, and thanks again for the trophy!

I intend to start a topic about about my disagreement with some of your edits. I will start below because I don't how much Gryllida wants to be involved, moving forward.

While pages that I've worked on have been flagged before. I never had that flag prior.

I have noticed that this phrase below isn't backed by the citation. It just confirms that she came back from a Harlem Globetrotters tour in 1957. Not the timeline of her touring.

Through the mid to late 1950's she toured with the Harlem Globetrotters where she would perform her tricks before the main event and between breaks. Filmman3000 (talk) 23:12, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

@Gryllida I was about to write a separate section for topic about my pointers. I thought to myself that you may be the right person to copy edit and remove the tag.

This my last edit before after moving the article.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lilly_Yokoi&diff=prev&oldid=1158929794

And this is S0091 last edit before the current one.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lilly_Yokoi&diff=prev&oldid=1159192972

Don't get me wrong "Early life and family" section by @S0091 is much better than the one I did.

I also think that making a Work cited section for the books that S0091 used, and that all links to newspaper.com be deleted after reviewed.

Give us your input if you'd to give further help with the article, if not its ok too. Filmman3000 (talk) 23:44, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

@Filmman3000 I will add another source or two to backup she the time frame she was touring with the Globe Trotters as I am still doing some research and will be expanding it. I am not sure why you think links to sources, such as newspapers and books, should be deleted though. The links are there so readers and editors can view the sources and is standard practice (see WP:CONLINK). Thanks for adding the photo! S0091 (talk) 13:38, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

@S0091 I was told at one point to reduce the URL, because it slows down a page when loading on poor connection, and privacy related matter. Also while I am not worried about Yokoi who's nearly a 100 years old, it could be problematic to open the press of someone too suddenly, and if it falls on someone impulsive catastrophic. I used to do it the way you do, but got reprimanded for it, these are the reason cited. Filmman3000 (talk) 15:44, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

@Filmman3000 see these recent discussions about making clippings and citing with Newpapers.com. I wonder if there was an issue at one time that may no longer be an issue? For the concern about the press, sorry, I don't see that as being valid. We use news articles all the time for BLPs. See also Ray Reardon, a BLP which is a WP:FA and uses Newspapers.com clippings (see footnote 18 for example) along with other archived news articles.

On another note, I added a couple more sources to support the time Yokoi toured with the Globtrotters. You think that is sufficient? I also noted in the The Sun-Advocate article dated 1959 (footnote 8) which was already cited, Saperstein states she had been with them for a couple years. I think the sentence structure is certainly better than what I had. S0091 (talk) 16:22, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

@S0091 Do your thing I am sure it will be awesome. Filmman3000 (talk) 18:25, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

Draft not accepted.

Hi S0091, Thank you so much for promptly reviewing my draft on an Indian film reviewer/YouTuber. I am new to Wikipedia editing and took up a person whose work I have followed for a while. I should add that I took it up as an exercise. Since there are many stub pages of similar personalities from India, I thought it would be easier to execute this one. I am going to follow your instructions and revise the draft. But is there something you want me to be really careful about?

Also, I couldn't find appropriate tags while drafting. Could you help me figure that out.

Looking forward to hearing from you.

Thanks RootsandMore (talk) 12:34, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

Hi @RootsandMore for Biographies of living people, in-line citations are required, which is noted in the decline along with a guide but you may find this guide more helpful along with Your first article. Also, be sure to read through everything linked in the decline message. I am not sure what you mean by tags? S0091 (talk) 16:49, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. Will go through these guidelines and try and improve the draft. By tags, I meant the categories section at the bottom of the page. Couldn't find them. RootsandMore (talk) 17:54, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

@RootsandMore categories should not be added while it is still in draft. They can be added if the article is accepted. S0091 (talk) 17:57, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

Opinion needed

Hi, Do you think the article Chipukeezy may not meet notability criteria? Thanks. PushaWasha (talk) 18:00, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Hi @PushaWasha I am not sure why you are asking me specifically. Given @Oaktree b is the one who tagged the article with notability concerns, I suggest asking him instead. He is a knowledgeable editor and from what I have seen, he seems to be quite fair. S0091 (talk) 18:10, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

It's alright. I just wanted your opinion. PushaWasha (talk) 18:16, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

@PushaWasha don't ever be hesitant to ask the person who raises an issue why they think there is an issue if you don't understand. I also see the article has yet to be reviewed by an WP:NPP reviewer. Once they do, that will give you another opinion. In the interim, Oaktree might reply here as well which they are welcome to do. S0091 (talk) 18:32, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Hello, I tagged it as it does have multiple sources used, I wasn't sure of the quality of each (see [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources#Sources] for the most common examples. To be honest, I'm not very familiar with Kenyan sources, so it might just be ok. The New Page Patrol will look at it and let you know, I glance at the list every so often, mostly to see what new articles we have in wiki (I'm curious!) and will tag some if I feel I can help the process. Thank you for asking, we're all trying to work together to build the best version of Wikipedia we can. Nice to have you aboard!Oaktree b (talk) 18:47, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Pinging @PushaWasha so they see this. @Oaktree b you might find User:Novem Linguae/Scripts/CiteHighlighter helpful. Based on a brief look, I see a couple "green lit" sources (Guardian footnote #8 and Nation #11). Of course this does not mean the others are not reliable but at least two have been listed somewhere as reliable. S0091 (talk) 19:03, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Oh cool, I'll bookmark that! Oaktree b (talk) 19:07, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Cherry Hill Park

I don't have a clue what else you want me to add to the page. I read the guidelines, but still NOTHING. Please help.

Contributor 118,784 (talk) 18:05, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Contributor 118,784 you need in-depth coverage by reliable sources such as newspapers, magazines, etc. See WP:42 for a guide on the type of sources needed and what to avoid. S0091 (talk) 18:14, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your correspondence. I have added a new section and submitted the page for review. Contributor 118,784 (talk) 18:25, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

@Contributor 118,784 check Google News but be careful, you only want to choose high quality sources. Here is one from the Washington Post and this one from USA Today. S0091 (talk) 18:27, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your help. Contributor 118,784 (talk) 18:32, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

㈜== A cookie for you, since you're a smart cookie. ==

B'dmm chh. Contributor 118,784 (talk) 18:33, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

Yum! :) S0091 (talk) 19:06, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR HELP, DUDE!! Contributor 118,784 (talk) 19:20, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

@Contributor 118,784 thanks for creating the article and coming here asking questions and seeking help! If you ever have questions or need help, the Teahouse is the place the go (also linked in the Welcome message I left you). Also be mindful of what put on your User page or elsewhere here. Everything you do here is public. I have requested WP:Oversight to delete portions of you User page for your safety. To be clear, you did not do anything wrong but the safety of our editors comes first (and yes, you are officially an editor once you made your first edit thus part of the community here). Congrats on your first article! S0091 (talk) 19:31, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

You got it. Thanks! Contributor 118,784 (talk) 19:37, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

Just wanted to let you know that this editor has been blocked indefinitely. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:07, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

Ketch Secor

Hello, S0091,

I have moved this article from Draft space to main space in case you want to tidy up the article. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:07, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

Stuart Land

Hello you previously declined an article that didn't have according to you have reliable sources.

The person has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment. This being his art being in major blockbuster films. Studios zealously guard the length of the tail credits of a film and for this he was not credited in most of them as an artist. Most artist arnt credited but none the less he made unique contributions to critical acclaimed movies which is the clause.

The person has received a well-known and significant award or honour, or has been nominated for such an award several times. This being his screen play awards. He has won significant awards in writing screrenplays that being the reviewers choice award.

Multiple independent sources are used may be combined to demonstrate notability. Primary sources are original materials that are close to an event. His audio interview regarding his work in blockbuster films should be enough for that. However there are other sources cited for additional proof.   

Creative professional. The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work. The movies hes helped create and his interviews regarding them. MNeivandt (talk) 01:25, 17 June 2023 (UTC)