Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4

NOTICE-- Expanding upon the message above, new comments not made at the bottom of this page or edits to existing threads will in all likelihood not receive prompt responses. Thank you for your understanding.

Hello @SamHolt6‬:, thank you for the updating. Please add the below language to the Reference page for number 1 and please hyperlink (“Street Ball...”.)

1. Davis, Jesse (January 16, 2019). "Street Ball: Memphis and Manhattan filmmakers team up to premiere independent film Out of Bounds". Memphis Flyer. Retrieved February 10, 2019.

OutofBounds2019Film (talk) 23:18, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dear @SamHolt6:, We have tried to follow wikipedia's instructions for copyright, and have made our content available for use following cc-by-sa 4.0 rules. Could we please request to have the Tokai Park and Tokai Arboretum pages reinstated? If there are any parts of the text that wikipedia has an issue with, could you please just flag these, and we can rewrite them if need be. But I cannot do a thing with this page being marked for deletion. If there is something I still need to do, but have missed, could you please let me know? Kind regards, Arebelo (talk) 11:17, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Arebelo: thanks for reaching out. If you have 1) placed a notification on the site(s) you own that the text on said sites is now in the public domain via the (CC-BY-SA), the Creative Commons, or (GFDL) licences, or 2) have sent an email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org expressing that Wikipedia can use your website's text, then we can considering reinstating the articles. Would you be able to give me links to the websites you want use to use text from so I may vet them? Thanks.--SamHolt6 (talk) 14:47, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dear @SamHolt6:, Thank you! That's wonderful news! I've been so confused and struggling to understand what to do. What a relief to see a light at the end of this tunnel. Here is the website: https://www.inaturalist.org/projects/tokai-arboretum/journal; he has added: "Tony Rebelo cc-by-sa 4.0" on the page. Please let us know if there was another issue? Arebelo (talk) 15:08, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating Joan Falkiner.

A New Page Patroller Nizil Shah just tagged the page as having some issues to fix, and wrote this note for you:

Thank you for interesting article. Reference for death of date would be helpful as well as expansion of the infobox. More reference would be better. Regards.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can reply over here and ping me. Or, for broader editing help, you can talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

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

Nizil (talk) 11:35, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

...And they're back. I guess I'm going to have to AfD this? None of the articles they use shows significant coverage about this person. This just quotes them once. This doesn't even mention them. and I'm not even sure what this is. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 06:47, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@HickoryOughtShirt: I see. Let me draftify (per WP:PAID and WP:COI, paid editors must send articles through AfC) the article; if they object to it, then COIN and probable AfD.--SamHolt6 (talk) 06:49, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I guess "Ok then please remove this page" was just a dream. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 06:50, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@HickoryOughtShirt: it seems they are continuing despite my note to them. Ah, well what can you do. This is where I bow out for the evening, but tomorrow this will likely end up at COIN, ANI, or AfD. Best.--SamHolt6 (talk) 07:05, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sam, I responded to your comments on my talk page. Thanks Venndiagram8 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Venndiagram8 (talk • contribs) 15:06, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sam,

my recent page was deleted, even after i removed the copyright content. I fail to understand. Thank you for your patience.

Regards, Kalpesh — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kalpesh.popat (talk • contribs) 10:00, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Kalpesh.popat: Ok, but note that my message to you regarding a possible conflict of interest needs to be addressed. If you persist in editing without making some attempt to respond or communicate, you will likely be reported to WP:COIN.--SamHolt6 (talk) 21:31, 23 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@SamHolt6: Thanks Sam, i didn't knew how this work. I did left message on --Nathan2055 user id since i received the first notification from that id. Can you guide if i can attempt again to create the page ? This is the message i had left on that id:

"Dear Nathan, Thank you for reviewing my efforts to draft a wiki article on Balipara Foundation. I have made the necessary changes. This foundation was the first one to recognise the efforts of Jadav Payeng in 2013, later on he was the recipient of Padam Shri in 2015, a very prestigious recognition of Government of India. This is one of the many things they do, to preserve and protect the nature and bio-diversity in North East of India. Any guidance to improve the article will be valuable"

Hi! Reaching out because I know you've been helpful with cleaning up Stash in the past. I've posted some COI edit requests to the talk page of that article that I'm hoping will bring more context and detail while maintaining neutrality. If you have a moment, I'd love if you could take a look. Thank you! Mary Gaulke (talk) 02:43, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I will consider it, but note that I have never edited the article in question in any major way; I only moved the article in the aftermath of a paid editor being blocked.--SamHolt6 (talk) 22:24, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your response! To clarify, I had noticed you played a role in removing sections of that article in the aftermath of paid interference. I'm now working with Stash to attempt to flesh out the article stub in a way that's ethical and in line with Wikipedia policy. To that end, I've proposed some new text for the article to replace the deleted sections, and I believe it meets Wikipedia's standards for neutrality and notability. Any help you can provide with reviewing these proposals would be tremendously appreciated. I'm striving to achieve some kind of consensus around my suggestions, but having difficulty getting much feedback. Thanks again for your time. Mary Gaulke (talk) 18:55, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey SamHolt6, I wanted to ask why the pages Savory & Moore and Savory & Partners were deleted? I've provided some content for those pages because I'm personally familiar with the Savory family and the content there is based on facts. I was wondering if you can have a second look at those two pages. Kind regards and thank you for the great work at WikiPedia! G33k.mk (talk) 12:19, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry if you feel that way but I have entered the information available to me. I have not taken any kind of payment. I was trying to fill in regarding people who are making a mark in Blockchain Industry.

@Arnegiske11: Ok, but note that you did recently upload an image ([1]) created by the subject to the Wikimedia Commons; This implies some sort of connection, as how were you able to obtain permission to use an image produced by a subject you were writing about? Please clarify, and note that if you have any sort of connection to topics you write about, you must disclose said connections.--SamHolt6 (talk) 20:40, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I issued a GS block and a topic ban - 10 seconds on DuckDuckGo is enough for me to doubt the claim of lack of payment above. MER-C 05:25, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bonus marks for managing not to include a link to Samarkand in the article :(.

In fact, pretty much nothing in the article tells us where the siege was; nothing locates the city. --Tagishsimon (talk) 04:44, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Tagishsimon: Oof that is embarrassing...forgetting to link to the besieged city. I will address this, thanks for the tip-off.--SamHolt6 (talk) 05:05, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sam,

This is with regards to your declination of draft article - Xclusive Yachts. Can you please assist me with the problem? This is an acclaimed yacht charter company in Dubai ad hosts multiple public figures every month. I feel it is good to have a wiki page since has international customer base.

Can you please help me where I could possibly change the tone of voice so that I can get it live?

Please help! Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neha Maria Thomas (talk • contribs) 07:29, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey SamHolt6, I just wanted to let you know that I've updated my page to reflect the COI for Savory & Moore and Savory & Partners pages. Can you please let me know what I could do to make sure these pages are published? Thanks in advance! Apologies for misunderstanding the rules, it's a lot to take in G33k.mk (talk) 09:17, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. My response to another editor at User talk:SamHolt6#Savory & Moore sums up the situation.--SamHolt6 (talk) 00:35, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

		The WiR December editathons provide something for everyone. New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/101|Photography]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/102|Laureates]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/103|Countries beginning with 'I']] Continuing: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/00/2018|#1day1woman Global Initiative]]
		Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!): BBC 100 Women 2018 (To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 13:55, 27 November 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Can you tell me why did you accept YVR Skylynx when the only references are primary? I don't see how this passes WP:CORP. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 16:23, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Jovanmilic97: Hello. My answer would be that, as an AfC reviewer, I judge the merit of most smaller articles as I would if I were viewing the same article in the new page feed. Thus, looking at the article I see it has claim to significance (60,000 daily riders) and is not overly promotional (the article is too stubby); as such, I had no qualms about letting the article through AfC, though the article required some cleanup and remains sourced only to the bus line's website. I also have a tacit understanding with WikiProject BUSES and WIkiProject TRANSPORT that small, stub articles about bus lines should not be treated with the same level of zeal apply in regards to other company articles.

This is all my personal opinion. Anyone can nominate the article for deletion, and I don't believe I would have any reason to contest such a nomination. Best.--SamHolt6 (talk) 16:45, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

		The WiR December editathons provide something for everyone. New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/101|Photography]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/102|Laureates]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/103|Countries beginning with 'I']] Continuing: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/00/2018|#1day1woman Global Initiative]]
		Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!): BBC 100 Women 2018 (To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 16:39, 27 November 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Good evening from Coreca, I am writing to greet you and know how you are. I'm pretty good for now. I am writing to ask you if further help is possible regarding the article you have reported to me and created by me. If something can be done and repaired I would be very grateful. waiting for your news, I wish you a good evening. thanks again for the availability--Luigi Salvatore Vadacchino (talk) 18:24, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Luigi Salvatore Vadacchino: I have added two sources to the article, but footnotes are needed to show which sources states Letizia had a role in which show.--SamHolt6 (talk) 05:30, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just seen your action on this. What's your plan for this article? I reviewed it as it seems to be valid; while the user has a declared COI I don't see the article as hugely problematic-this business is defunct, after all, and has been for a quarter-century. I'm OK with it being draftified but are you planning to put it into the AfC queue? Blythwood (talk) 19:54, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Blythwood: good afternoon. My plan for the draft is dependent on a question I asked an admin earlier. The issue with the article is that it seems to be identical version of the article that a now-blocked, undisclosed paid editor (User:CowboyKing) created for the company. I am guessing that G33k.mk kept a copy of this article on-hand and then executed a copy-paste move; this is an issue as the content currently at Draft:Savory & Moore remains effective native advertising. So for now, I have asked an admin to check to see if this recent incarnation of Draft:Savory & Moore is in fact identical to the UDP draft, and also to see if such an article would be eligible for deletion via G5. If the admin advises me against this, then I will consider submitting the article to AfC.--SamHolt6 (talk) 20:18, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Blythwood: @SamHolt6: It is indeed the case. I kept a copy, due to the work put into that content, I didn't want it to go to waste, and I had a feeling it will get deleted. I thought the only issue was the fact that it was uploaded by a blocked user, not the content itself because as I've mentioned, the content is valid and there's not really any advertising happening there. It's a historical place that existed and is now a part of a museum. I will submit it at AfC. Thank you for the clarification. EDIT: Actually, I won't submit it for AfC myself, as I've realized that you mentioned you will do it. Please do consider keeping this article, I don't want to interfere anymore and cause any more issues. Also, please consider the Savory & Partners, which was also deleted due to a ban on the same user. --G33k.mk (talk) 07:18, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have submitted the draft to AfC. However, as the content was generated contrary to Wikipedia's terms of use (see WP:PAID), I have restored the UDP template as well.--SamHolt6 (talk) 05:14, 29 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations on getting the top spot in WAM this year! I read a few of your articles (I think you thanked me for a minor copy edit I did on one). They were good. (I know we've still got a few hours left depending on time zone, and the final tallies aren't in yet -- I haven't even had any of my entries scored yet! -- but it's been pretty clear for a while how it was gonna turn out.)

I don't give out barnstars, but if there isn't a WAM barnstar I think there probably should be.

Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 13:47, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Hijiri88: thank you for your kind words, and for your copy-editing. I have had a great time participating in WAM this year, and am hoping* to finish 1-2 more articles by the end of the drive. Best. SamHolt6 (talk) 15:06, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations for our annual Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year awards are open until 23:59 (GMT) on 15 December 2018. Why don't you nominate the editors who you believe have made a real difference to the project in 2018? MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:26, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey,

I was asked by the artist to create a wiki page on his behalf, and I used his bio as he requested.

What parts of the content do you feel merited deletion?

If you can let me know, I will amend.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by MattOConnell (talk • contribs) 07:10, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@MattOConnell: Hello. I requested the article be deleted as the article in question was overly promotional, which is to Wikipedia's requirement that articles be neutrally written. If memory serves, the article contained—in addition to a good deal of quality content—a fair bit of puffery and non-neutral prose. I reccomend you read other, similar articles, WP:MOS, and WP:PROMO.

In addition to my note above, be advised that Wikipedia holds editors with a conflict of interest to a certain standard. This standard (WP:COI) mandates that you disclose your connection (while also avoiding WP:OUTING) to the subject and refrain from directly editing articles related to the subject you have a conflict of interest in regards to.--SamHolt6 (talk) 17:15, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I was working on Alireza Golipour and I'm adding more details. He is one of prisoners in Iran and by a google searching you can find a lot about him.Nikoo.Amini (talk) 18:48, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"This user is interested in Economic History" appears on your page twice. Cheers EnTerbury (talk) 23:42, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Removed the duplicate, thanks for the notification.--SamHolt6 (talk) 23:55, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sam,

I will revisit the content proposed for the Al DeLoner page and endeavour to make it more neutral- as I said I simply used an English bio written for the artist.

I will resubmit within a day or 2 and you can see if you’re happy with my amendments-

Thanks Piccadilly (talk) 17:51, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 18:02, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello sir,

I am Daniele Favilli and I am actually working on the wikipedia page for myself.

As an artist I believe it necessary for such page to be up on wikipedia. This is even more true when several wikipedia pages list my name but there's not a wikipedia page about DANIELE FAVILLI yet.

Also, I wrote the page in Italian and I would like it to be reviewed from an italian wikipedia carer as there's not only the english language in the world.

Please contact me as I would like to have the page published in the nbewarest future

Thank you

Daniele Favilli — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daniele Favilli (talk • contribs) 16:47, 6 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sam, I'll reply to this on his talk page if that's OK Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:41, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Jimfbleak: certainly! As far as your edits are concerned @Daniele Favilli:, my colleagues seems to have linked you the relevant policies; Wikipedia strongly discourages the writing of autobiographies, and articles created here on en.wiki must be written in English.--SamHolt6 (talk) 15:13, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

On the disambiguation page, I'd like to move your new line up to replace the 2nd para (which I had put there a while ago) as:

*A conspiracy theory, as a legal term, is a theory of a case that presents a conspiracy to be considered by a trier of fact.

Would that work? Humanengr (talk) 03:10, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Humanengr: certainly, whatever you feel is the most appropriate. My main intent was to ensure the article did not have to be tagged as an orphan.--SamHolt6 (talk) 03:17, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please accept my submission! Enjoy these kittens

Anon145 (talk) 03:38, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I have updated the section with references based on beginners guide. Kindly request you to review it. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by VengalK (talk • contribs) 07:51, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@VengalK: OK, I will take a look within the next hour.--SamHolt6 (talk) 16:15, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Sam,

Can you please review the new version of the article when you get a chance?

• RANGANATHAN JANARDHANAN (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Shri. R. Janardhanan ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

RANGANATHAN JANARDHANAN (talk) 07:35, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Sam,

Good Afternoon. There is one article published on the IBM Blog about Janardhanan. Will that be considered as the reliable source?

Hello @RANGANATHAN JANARDHANAN:, a single source is not sufficient. Also, going by the similarity in your username and name of the article, I am assuming you are writing your own biography, which is another problem. Csgir (talk)

Hi Sam,

I've just had a meeting with my collaborators. I am embarassed and apologetic to say I have learned that a paid editor was contracted for the In Search of the Truth project and collaborators involved. I can only presume this is the user Ansari. Not sure what to tell you other than I'm sorry to have wasted your and my assistant's time.

Kind regards, Jim

@Therealjimricks: the formerly undisclosed paid editor has now properly disclosed their paid connections on Wikipedia. As such, I have removed the UDP tag from Jim Ricks immediately. Thank you for you patience, and good luck in you future endeavors Jim. Best.--SamHolt6 (talk) 23:50, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• VengalK (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Delaware Shore ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi,

I want to have the article i have written reviewed at the earliest. I was putting the references wrongly earlier. I have looked the beginner's guide and fixed it. Please review it. Thanks!

VengalK (talk) 05:03, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@VengalK: I will more or less echo other edits and say that, while the article's content is good, its references must be fixed. For example, you have used off-wiki external links to cite information in the Critical response subsection instead of generating a proper inline citation.--SamHolt6 (talk) 16:02, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

49.205.219.212 (talk) 08:52, 15 December 2018 (UTC)Hello SamHolt6, requesting you to clear the reason for disapproving the Wakefit page. All the references are from authentic website[reply]

Ip, the reasons for my declining of the draft are at Draft:Wakefit. I will note to you here that articles on Wikipedia must be supported by reliable, in-depth, independent sources per WP:NCORP, and that articles about companies must posit a claim to significance.--SamHolt6 (talk) 15:59, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Voting for our annual Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year awards is open until 23:59 (GMT) on 30 December 2018. Why don't you vote for the editors who you believe have made a real difference to Wikipedia's coverage of military history in 2018? MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:17, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In declining the article SERPENTYNE please refer to the 143,000 plays of one track alone on YouTube

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YqHCQ_XSJJk

More edits and links to come Frankcastle1

So 146,000 people watching something doesn't make it something people are interested to find out about?

Anyway the article is a starting point. More to come.

Frankcastle1 (talk) 23:52, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(talk) 23:49, 16 December 2018 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Frankcastle1 (talk • contribs) 19:36, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Frankcastle1: promising, but please note that to be covered in Wikipedia, topics must have accrued reliable, independent, in-depth coverage in WP:RS. Note that YouTube is not a reliable source, and YouTube views are not considered to be indicative of significance.--SamHolt6 (talk) 19:46, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I've added several published and reliable and independent sources about this subject. Why does my article get rejected over and over? I think sources like LA Times or Vice are quite 'reliable' and 'independent', right? Please let me know. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ivan Flebbe (talk • contribs) 09:58, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Ivan Flebbe: hello. Articles about musicians must meet WP:NMUSICIAN. Your draft may have enough sources to pass this criteria, but this needs to be reflected in the draft's text. Best.--SamHolt6 (talk) 16:04, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've just added this biography on wiki and it will need some time to gather all sources and informations. So hoping that it'll not be deleted... thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Srgmpdn7notes (talk • contribs) 15:16, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Srgmpdn7notes: the issue is less so about notability (the subject seems to be notable) and more about the tone of the article; it is far too promotional, which Wikipedia does not do. Phrases like "Pandit Arun Bhaduri is gifted with a deep and sonorous voice, a brilliant range and a rare fluency" is an example of WP:PROMO. Fix these issues by righting neutrally, and the article will likely stick.--SamHolt6 (talk) 15:26, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please help me to fix the issues as i was not concerned about this policy and hope that this biography will not be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Srgmpdn7notes (talk • contribs) 15:48, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sam, may I ask which specifically of the following sources are not considered independent and third-party? If I know which ones Wikipedia objects to, I will look for suitable replacements. In the comment it was mentioned that IMDb and Goodreads were unsuitable, and thus I found different sources to verify certain information. I can replace whichever ones here are considered problematic, then I will replace those accordingly.

• Times Ledger (https://www.timesledger.com/)
• Patch.com (https://patch.com/)
• Boston International Film Festival website (https://www.bostoniff.com/)
• The Numbers (https://www.the-numbers.com/)
• InkTip (https://www.inktip.com/)
• Pen Works Media (http://penworksmedia.co.uk/)
• Barnes & Noble website
• Book Database (https://bookdatabase.online/) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elana A. Mugdan (talk • contribs) 20:44, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Earlier today, I had resubmitted an article for creation. Initially, the article only contained one source which was the result of the request becoming declined. I went back and added sources from external places, however the article was declined and I got the message that there was no change, although I had added four more sources. I wanted to check with you first as I did not want it to seem like I was spamming the resubmit button. Article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Feitian_Technologies

Mbrown18 (talk) 00:25, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Mbrown18: hello. Looking at the relevant draft, I declined the draft for failing to meet Wikipedia's guidelines for evaluating a company's notability. The relevant policy (WP:NCORP) notes that companies must have accrued significant, in-depth, independent coverage in reliable sources. From my viewing of the draft this morning, Feitian Technologies has yet to accrue such coverage, and hence I declined to allow the article through WP:AFC.

Now for more important information; I am assuming from your account's lack of edits that you are somehow connected to User:Feitian US, who was recently blocked. If this is the case, you must disclose that this previous editor was an account; see WP:SOCK for how to do this. Furthermore, if you have any sort of connection to Feitian, you must disclose said connection on your userpage.--SamHolt6 (talk) 01:12, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@SamHolt6 Thank you for the response. And yes, I was unaware of the username policy, but will get that done. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mbrown18 (talk • contribs) 01:40, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @SamHolt6! Thanks for reviewing my article (Draft: AB Tasty). I understand that the sources weren't sufficient at this time. I know a lot of the sources I provided (like web articles) are originally in French; is this one of the reasons it was rejected? Or if I were able to find more sources in French (along with ones in English) would that help? Also, I wanted to check if there were any issues with the writing/facts included in the article that should be addressed? Thanks again for the help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RosieElroy (talk • contribs) 21:58, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@RosieElroy: hello. The draft as it stands needs to cite more in-depth (WP:CORPDEPTH), independent information so as to meet WP:NCORP criteria. Please note that while some references can be used to cite information, these same references do not always confer the needed notability on a subject. For example, while your draft does cite reliable sources, references that are announcing funding, inclusion in non-notable lists, or trivial mentions do not establish the notability of AB Tasty. For that, you need to cite more in-depth sources.--SamHolt6 (talk) 17:42, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sam!

I recently submitted an article about Kansas City artist Renée Cinderhouse. The article was declined citing a lack of significant coverage. I have edited the article and added more external sources as citations and in the Bibliography section (i.e. Review Magazine, KC Studio, NortheastNews, The Kansas City Star, Daily Record News). The References list now has 17 entries. Additionally, you noted that another article by a different author was submitted and rejected recently, my article was suspect of "sockpuppetry," as it was "not dissimilar enough from the past incarnations"... While I have done exhaustive research and based some of the content I wrote on the artist's own writings and published bio, I have endeavored to not copy verbatim any other writers, authors or journalists' work while writing this article.

I hope the new expanded references satisfy Wikipedia's requirements for notability. Please advise if there is anything else I ought to add/expand/edit, etc.

Thank you very much!

Best regards, Sebastian SebastianLeño (talk) 23:51, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@SebastianLeño: Morning. My advice is to ensure you feel the article addresses the reasons the article was deleted a week ago; the relevant AfD is Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Renée Cinderhouse.--SamHolt6 (talk) 14:55, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@SamHolt6:. Sam, Happy New Year and thank you for your patience. I am trying to expand the article's references. I see that someone else submitted an article on the same artist, and that one was rejected as well. However, since it has been deleted, is there any way I can access it to see if they had any sources I may have missed? I hope that combining some of the previous writer's sources with mine may address the notoriety and sources concerns. Thank you again!

SebastianLeño (talk) 02:28, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there,

I'm writing to you about the page submission you recently rejected for the furniture company MYCS. From what I read on the Wikipedia guidelines, the level of media coverage I referenced would be enough for MYCS to qualify as "notable". There are more articles that I can also reference, if I increase the number of references would this mean that the article would be accepted upon resubmission?

With regards to the sources being in German, nowhere that I saw in the guidelines did it say that the sources needed to be in the language of the page submission. Did I miss this somewhere?

Thanks in advance for your help and advice here!

Cheers,

Natalie — Preceding unsigned comment added by Natalie3692 (talk • contribs) 16:19, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Natalie3692: the relevant policy in this case is WP:NCORP, the way in which Wikipedia determines if a company is notable enough to be included in the encyclopedia. From my reading of the draft and its sourcing, the company fails to meet NCORP; many of the sources cited are press releases announcing funding, while others are trivial in nature or only make passing mentions of MYCS. WP:Primary is also an issue, as articles in which the company founders are interview cannot be used to demonstrate the notability of the respective company.

To address another portion of your comment, note that Wikipedia does not require sources to be in English. However, to establish the notability of a subject, all sources are judged against NCORP. Note also (this may not apply in this instance) that WP:AUD has to be considered, as this is the English Wikipedia and not the German Wikipedia. Best. SamHolt6 (talk) 17:29, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SamHolt6!

First, thanks for reviewing the page.

I'd like to create an official page of the iTechArt company, and the content appears to have a problem with cite resources and also COI. I've written this page in a neutral style and provided official facts about the company. It is not intended to promote the subject. The company is well-known and trustworthy, so the content should be useful for the audience.

Could you please elaborate on the issues and how it's possible to manage them.

Sincerely, Maria — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maria Tsarouva (talk • contribs) 11:54, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Maria Tsarouva: hello. I declined to accept your draft through AfC as the draft does not adequately indicate the subject meets WP:NCORP. For articles to be allowed onto Wikipedia, they must meet certain notability criteria; for companies, this criteria holds that said companies have been the subject reliable, in-depth, independent coverage in reliable sources.

Also, note that if you have a conflict of interest in regards to the subject, you must disclose it per WP:COI.--SamHolt6 (talk) 19:30, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@SamHolt6: Hi SamHolt6! Thank you for the comments, I've reviewed once again the links and disclosed the COI. Please, see the current updates. I hope I managed to consider all your notes.

January 2019, Volume 5, Issue 1, Numbers 104-108 Happy New Year from Women in Red! Please join us for these virtual editathons. January events: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/104|Women of War and Peace]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/105|Play!]] January geofocus: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/106|Caucasus]] New, year-long initiative: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/107|Suffrage]] Continuing global initiative: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/108|#1day1woman2019]] Help us plan our future events: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Ideas|Ideas Cafe]] To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list Image attribution: Nevit Dilmen (CC BY-SA 3.0) --Rosiestep (talk) 17:40, 21 December 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Be advised that after this point I will be on Holiday in Holland until the new year!--SamHolt6 (talk) 19:31, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My new year wishes to you (in advance). Csgir (talk)

Best wishes for this holiday season! Thank you for your Wiki contributions in 2018. May 2019 be prosperous and joyful. --K.e.coffman (talk) 00:37, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply] Noël ~ καλά Χριστούγεννα ~ З Калядамі ~ חנוכה שמח ~ Gott nytt år!

Hello! Kevin from Wikipedia Asian Month here. Thank you very much for your contributions this year, and congratulations on creating the most articles on the English Wikipedia to become our WAM Ambassador! Because you have created at least 4 eligible articles, you are qualified to receive a special WAM postcard from an Asian community. If you would like one, please fill out this form by January 10. All personal information you submit will only be visible to select organizers in charge of postcards, and will be destroyed once postcards are sent out. If you have any questions, please drop a line on my talk page or ping me. Any more details regarding your Ambassadorship will be sent at the later date. Thank you, and happy holidays! ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 02:10, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The article BizPac Review has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Article about a non-notable news site. Site itself is basically a blog.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. LionMans Account (talk) 20:51, 27 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article BizPac Review 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/BizPac Review 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. LionMans Account (talk) 17:11, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SamHolt6 - I've just seen you've rejected the Contis Group page I drafted, as you said it's likely to be unsuitable because of previous attempts that were rejected. However, I've actually added a bunch of new links that weren't there before to prove noteworthiness. These are numerous and feature Contis in the title of the articles. One of them is from Business Insider (36m monthly uniques), which has Contis in the title. Surely this is enough to make it a noteworthy article? If not, could you please advise on why not? As I've seen a number of companies with far less coverage that still have Wikipedia pages. Just to be clear - I am only interested in getting noteworthy facts published to wikipedia in an unbiased way. I have no interest in promotional posting or excessive detail or anything of that nature, as you'll hopefully see in the copy. Thanks for your help :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tedwards86 (talk • contribs) 18:58, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Tedwards86: the key policies in this instance are WP:NCORP and WP:CORPDEPTH. Both of these policies (though CORPDEPTH is part of NCORP) mandate coverage be independent, in-depth, and significant if it is to be used to establish the notability of the subject. Press releases are not considered in-depth enough to establish notability. Furthermore, the draft you have edited does not posit a credible claim to encyclopedic significance, which articles are required to make. My advice is to add more in-depth sources to the article, and cut out the press release-esque (announcing partnerships, new products, services).--SamHolt6 (talk) 22:51, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@SamHolt6: Thanks for the feedback SamHolt6 - totally get where you're coming from for some of those pieces of coverage, however, I would again draw your attention to the below paragraphs from the Business Insider coverage (as mentioned, 36m monthly uniques), which I believe clearly demonstrate description, commentary, discussion, analysis, and evaluation of the company, as per WP:CORPDEPTH. I totally get that there is a news line from a press release that has inspired the piece in the first place, but this piece clearly goes into independent analysis by the author. Hoping you'd agree? Paragraphs below as reference...

"Contis provides banking services to customers directly, but allowing other companies to use its technology might be a more lucrative business. Its offering for customers directly, dubbed Freedom by Contis, is available for consumers and businesses. It allows users to sign up in 2 minutes, after which they receive a Visa contactless debit card, which is connected to Freedom's app.

"However, it seems that allowing other companies to use its tech and offer these services may be a more lucrative option for Contis, as the UK's neobank market is getting increasingly crowded. As such, it is becoming more and more important for new players to go to market as quickly as possible. That means a number of players will likely be interested in working with Contis to launch their services at a faster pace than working alone." Tedwards86 (talk) 10:33, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I have gone through this draft previously and found it was declined several times due to it couldn't meet Wikipedia criterias and recently it seems the person is more popular than before but now in a different category . So I draft it again and put some reliable sources .

Would you please look at it and see if for now it's we'll meet the Wikipedia page creation criteria .

Here is there draft https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Mr_Puaz

Thank you Ndizibanana (talk) 10:52, 5 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment pending.--SamHolt6 (talk) 16:37, 5 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Sam, just saw you have declined Mr Puaz's draft ad I have seen your comment as per below but I wasn't able to understand .

"Declining on the basis that notability is not inherited from the subject's clients (per WP:NOTINHERITED), and noting that more in-depth coverage about Pauz himself needs to be cited. Noting that these issues persist and were some of the reasons raised at the two previous AfDs (both of which resulted in a Delete outcome"

If possible would help me understand if the person as per your view is notable . I can understand previously who ever created it had some issues and it could be there were no reliable sources or independents links. But now this person is way too popular across East Africa and sourcess say who he is. I will real appreciate we're this it goes wrong as to look at it now and leave behind what the other user was doing.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ndizibanana (talk • contribs) 14:21, 5 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ndizibanana: my advice is to cite more in-depth sources; for example, more information about who Pauz is (as opposed to X's manager or Y's manager) would be welcome. Sources also need to be cited that indicate why Pauz is WP:NOTABLE when he is separated from his clients/partners. These sources should also be reliable, independent from the subject (no interviews), and in-depth. Cheers.--SamHolt6 (talk) 04:19, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@SamHolt6: Thank you for the advice however i went through the links like BBC and it also state exactly who this person is and and some of his creative works he did withing his career as a Talent Manager but also other artist he had worked with. I can give you an examples of the links which i believe detaila down who he is and what he did or does.

some of the are in swahil but can be translated

( a ) https://www.bbc.com/swahili/habari-46748076 ( This explains who he is apart from the break up )
( b ) https://nairobinews.nation.co.ke/chillax/manager-ditches-arrogant-bongo-star-harmonize/
( C ) https://newsofafrica.org/tanzania-singer-harmonizes-manager-mr-puaz-quits-job-due-to-singers-pride.html  
( d ) https://www.the-star.co.ke/news/2019/01/09/harmonizes-manager-mr-puaz-leaves-wcb_c1872599 ( This one even explain the record label he was signed as a Talent Manager )

and so much more on the website , more than 30 newspapers write about him and his career mean he is notable with his Talent Manager career.

I would ask you to re-check again and consider it for your review . Thank you.Ndizibanana (talk) 17:44, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I just got a message in my talk page about deleting an article about something I don't even know what it is: Global Knowledge Training.

Please make sure I am the right user to be notified about such deletion, or else do not advice on that and delete notification where available. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jago84 (talk • contribs) 17:52, 5 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Jago84: hello. The speedy deletion notification is automatically sent out to the editor that created the tagged article. Looking into your created articles ([2]), you did created Global Knowledge Training on 2010-10-25. Hopefully this clarifies.--SamHolt6 (talk) 18:07, 5 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am unable to get why you rejected (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Mehran_Spice_%26_Food) and what should be modified to Make it published. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kelashkumarbatra (talk • contribs) 15:24, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Kelashkumarbatra: hello. I rejected your draft article as, to secure a place on Wikipedia, companies must show that they meet WP:NCORP. My suggestion to you is that you add more sources to indicate that Mehran meets NCORP.--SamHolt6 (talk) 16:46, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I read wikipedia guidelines on paid editing #Conflict of interest and already disclosed paid editing on my user page, requesting you to restore all the pages that were moved into draft space by you.NeedaAnsari00 (talk) 18:47, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@NeedaAnsari00: my short answer is no. Per WP:COI and WP:PAID, editors with a conflict of interest should send their articles through WP:AFC, which was never done. As a member of WP:AFC and an editor with both new page reviewer and page mover rights, this falls within my purview as an editor and I am more-or-less mandating this be done by you, especially considering the outcome of both COIN threads concerning your account. In a similar vein, I am noting (per your userpage) that you are not fully in compliance with Wikipedia's disclosure policy; note you must list which entities have paid for which articles you created. Please ensure you are in full compliance with WP:PAID. Best.--SamHolt6 (talk) 23:33, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@SamHolt6: Thanks for the information. I have listed the person in parentheses after the name of each article who paid me.--NeedaAnsari00 (talk) 08:30, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• NolitaRaa (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Danny Yeung ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Good day - thank you for your feedback on my article on Danny Yeung. I am highly confused as to why the sources cited are not acceptable. I researched acceptable Wikipedia sources - including credible news articles from reputable media houses. The sources listed are from these so I don't get why they are being denied?

Please could you help clarify - the news sources speak of the subject in detail, as well as his accolades, backing up the facts made in the article. I have checked many other published articles on living persons and the links I cited correlated. They are not press releases, or just mention the subject in passing. They are full articles on him and his company from reputable news sources.

I appreciate your time and clarity.

Many thanks

NolitaRaa (talk) 06:33, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I just received your message that the article was declined, but I have a question. I'm trying to write something on Adam Denlinger precisely because there is not much information about him as he was a random guy that now is a singer of an important Metal band. The problem is, there is literally nothing yet published about him, there is that Facebook interview and what you can see in MaYaN official website but that's it. He's new in the field :( However, he is a friend of mine and I can expand the information based on his own voice. Can I do that or it is not possible? Is it possible to create a wikipedia page on somebody that is new in the musical stage and hence there is nothing published about him, yet?

Thank you in advance for your response :)

Lizette drusila (talk) 02:28, 10 January 2019 (UTC)Lizette[reply]

@Lizette drusila: Hello, hopefully I can offer some information. Subjects on Wikipedia are judged against notability criteria, which in this case would be WP:MUSICIAN. Unfortunately, existence alone does not mandate inculsion, and as such reliable sources must be used to cite information and establish the notability of the subject. Given (as you noted above) that Denlinger is an up-and-coming musician, these sources likely do not exist and thus it is very likely too soon (WP:TOOSOON) to create an article about him pending coverage of him in a reliable source. As for your personal questioning of Delinger, this cannot be cited as a source as it is WP:PRIMARY information. Hope this helps, sorry for any disappointment. SamHolt6 (talk) 02:39, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Dear Sir I'm a new contributor to Wiki and have gone through the notability clause and have added more reliable references as adviced by you. The subject has appeared in CNBC, CNN TV18 and Radio Channels many times but I did not add them earlier. I researched again and have cited the same. I also came across India Today which is No 1 News Journal in India which has information about the subject which has been cited as well. The subject has also issued few reports which have been added in further reading.

Hope requested information matched the Wiki Standards and article gets accepted. Thank You — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiexpert1234567 (talk • contribs) 03:38, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Wikiexpert1234567: please see my comment at Draft:Sidharth_Sogani; the latest version of the draft is still deficient.--SamHolt6 (talk) 05:49, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Sam, Hope you are doing good.

I have just created a page for a company who deals in Business Software, CRM Sofware, Call Centre Softwares, and SMS software across the world. Keeping in view that the society needs the services of such companies I have created the page for the organization. I am also working on all other pages too to enhance the wiki visibility by keeping in view the wiki guidelines.

Request you to kindly untag speedy deletion for this page or suggest we best possible way come up with the solution. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sintujaggi (talk • contribs) 14:15, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Sintujaggi: I fully support the inclusion of notable companies in Wikipedia, but please note that Wikipedia is not intended to promote such topics. The article you created has been deleted (per my tag) as being overly promotional; it even referred to the company in the first person! Note also that if you have a conflict of interest in regards to Telebu, you must disclose it. Best.--SamHolt6 (talk) 16:46, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Replied to your doubts about the subject: SOGANI. Have given clarifications. Also mentioned reference in published books with ISBN and author details signifying the expertise of the subject. Hope the reply solves your queries and doubts. Best Regards Thanking you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiexpert1234567 (talk • contribs) 03:58, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I am facing issue regarding reliable resources for Portea Healthcare. I used links from following sources: bloomberg, fortune india, economic times, business standard, techcrunch. Oyo rooms, justdial like brands also used these kind of sources. Kindly guide me what else i have to do to get the page approved. Regards (Lata121001 (talk) 12:10, 11 January 2019 (UTC))[reply]

Thanks for creating that! Ran across another "death of the golf course community" article [3] and wondered if an article on these types of communities existed. The word "agrihood" sounds riduculous to me but I have nothing better!--Milowent • ^hasspoken 15:42, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Milowent: my story is similar, because I read about a thing called an Agrihood in a Marketwatch article around a year ago. I found enough to write a stub article, and so here we are. It seems like it is a growing trend and an interesting concept, so who knows what the future holds? Thanks for the recent improvements. Cheers.--SamHolt6 (talk) 15:57, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:BizPac Review Logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:23, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reviewing. Really appreciate your efforts. We've got many independent sources as listed below. will it suffice? Fashion2Fibre Private Limited Strategic Alliance for which Fibre2Fashion was vouched Credit for notable advance in affective computing in Textile Listing as best source for Garment and Textile --43.239.55.81 (talk) 08:23, 13 January 2019 (UTC)Best Source for Textile and Garment[reply]

Not too late, I hope ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:36, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Gerda Arendt: never too late for seasonal greetings. Thanks Gerda!--SamHolt6 (talk) 14:08, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Sam, i have made some additional changes and additional links on the draft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Mr_Puaz kindly have a look at it as i also got some help from En help desk and seem to be fine by now. Thank you in advance.Ndizibanana (talk) 19:28, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Sam, just added another details and links , I know your very busy but once you get time kindly have a look again. Also I have seen someone removed the tag and I don't know how to replace it back. If it's necessary kindly help if not and you find it now well for a page I will also appreciate it. Thank you Ndizibanana (talk) 21:19, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Sam Holt,

My name is Richard Wolf. I am contacting you about the fact that you removed the article about my filmmaking career (Richard Wolf filmmaker) from Wikipedia's mainspace. I respectfully request that you reinstate the page to the mainspace because I did not pay anyone to write this article, so I find it very unfair that the article be removed from the main space. Also the article is based on quotes from very established and verifiable sources such as The New York Times and The Hollywood Reporter. So I respectfully request that the article about me is placed back in the main space. This is not a promotional piece. It is a long and established career based on very established opinions and sources.

Best regards,

Richard Wolf

Ayazkala (talk) 21:27, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ayazkala: hello. Unfortunately, I will not be reinstating Draft:Richard Wolf (filmmaker) as there is credible evidence the article was created in violation of the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use. Note that the draft of your biography was created by a blocked undisclosed paid editor (whom retroactively admitted to editing for pay) and has been the subject to edits by another suspected paid editor; this situation is not helped by the fact that an image of Wolf was furnished by the subject to the now-blocked paid editor, and that said image was confirmed by Wikipedia:OTRS. Note that, given undisclosed paid and conflict of interest tags are contingent on suspicion alone, the draft will remain tagged with such tags until it is re-written in light of the evidence of UDP/COI activity. I will point out that the draft in question will not be deleted, and there is always the possibility an experienced editor will be able to salvage Draft:Richard Wolf (filmmaker), submit the article to WP:AFC, and thus allow for the article to return to the mainspace. Thank you. SamHolt6 (talk) 22:20, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Sam,

One must not be considered guilty for the acts of others. I do not know if the editor was paid for other works, but I did not pay him to create my entry. If he did eventually for others, this was not the case with me. Unless Wikipedia can prove that I actually paid the creator, I should not be punished for acts done by third parties. Re the photo I provided, it is a rare photo of me in Afghanistan during Taliban rule. It depicts me in my profession, so I believe it is suitable. I frankly don't understand why one single person - you - can decide alone what Wikipedia publishes. To whom can I appeal against the decision of a single editor? You cannot operate on the basis of suspicion without providing proof or harming other people who did not pay for the creation of the article. I should not be punished by the eventual misbehavior of others. I hope this injustice can be rectified. Regards, Richard Wolf Ayazkala (talk) 16:41, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ayazkala: hello again. Unfortunately you may be miss-understanding policy and the reading of article templates. To clarify, Draft:Richard Wolf (filmmaker) is tagged for undisclosed paid editing and conflict of interest editing; however, the text of said templates is intentionally non-definitive (see the use of may and appears) and thus are not contingent on evidence, only suspected intent. I will assume good-faith (WP:AGF) in regards to your statements above, but this does not change the fact that the editor who created your article remains blocked for undisclosed paid editing. As per your point about my ability to decide what Wikipedia publishes, I hold New Page Reviewer rights and Page Mover rights, and the article (now draft) in question falls within my purview as an editor due to its recent creation per WP:DRAFTIFY. Please note that another experienced editor conducted the same action as I did [4]. The point in my last comment in regards to letting WP:AFC process the draft still stands.

@Ayazkala: If you wish to appeal this discussion, please start a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard. Thank you. SamHolt6 (talk) 18:29, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ayazkala: also, If I can ask; why edit using the name Ayazkala?--SamHolt6 (talk) 19:24, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Sam,

I use the name Ayazkala because I have been subject to identity theft in the past and try to be careful in public spaces. Of course I am willing to provide any further information to Wikipedia about myself, as long as it is protected. I am currently in Africa, filming a documentary in the largest urban slum in Africa, so I am drenched in sweat, tired, with my lungs full of dust and a poor internet connection. I have no intention to question your authority or ability. I would just kindly like to ask you to step back for a minute and ponder that everybody is innocent until proven guilty. I did not pay the person who created this draft. If he did anything else that is wrong, I should not be punished as I am being punished by having the article removed from the main space. Humbly I reiterate that I am not an unknown person. My work has been scrutinized by The New York Times, The Hollywood Reporter and The Village Voice, among others, and I have received major awards, all documented in my entry. Being in Wikipedia for me is not self-promotion or vanity, it is a chance for people to know the basics about my career and to see that social films still matter through the work of those who make them. Best Richard Ayazkala (talk) 20:36, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sam,

You recently declined my new submission. Could you expand a little bit on it and give me some assistance on how can I fix it and be approved?

ThanksAlanTuringOk (talk) 12:21, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@AlanTuringOk: yes. I declined your submission because your draft did not cite any third-party, non-primary sources. Without such sources, I cannot allow the article through AFC. You can fix this problem by citing more sources, but please ensure these new sources meet establish the company's notability per WP:NCORP.--SamHolt6 (talk) 14:00, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@SamHolt6 Ok, I understand. But what kind of sources would I need to cite? Something that tells when the company was founded? Or what the company does? Thanks! AlanTuringOk (talk) 13:41, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@AlanTuringOk: ideally, you should cite sources that indicate why the company in question has a claim to significance, how it is run, and how it is distinct and different from other, similar companies. More ore less, make sure WP:CORPDEPTH is covered, and stay away from any WP:PRIMARY sources.--SamHolt6 (talk) 14:20, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@SamHolt6: Thanks Sam. Would a source like this one work? AlanTuringOk (talk) 13:30, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@AlanTuringOk: No. As noted by NCORP, press releases and trivial mentions are not considered to be in-depth enough to establish the notability of a subject. For this reason, PRnewswire is almost never an acceptable source. Also, any type of source that includes the word "announcement" in its title normally falls into the same category as PRnewswire. SamHolt6 (talk) 23:28, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dear @SamHolt6 ! Could you, please, explain why did you rename SendPulse on Draft:SendPulse and how to make this article acceptable? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ласті (talk • contribs) 15:33, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ласті: hello. I moved the article to the draftspace per WP:DRAFTIFY, as I felt the article was not adequatly sourced in such a way to pass WP:NCORP. For example, the article cites too many of what NCORP referrers to as trivial mentions or press releases; note that news articles covering product acquisitions or announcements of funding fall under this category. You can fix this issue by citing more in-depth coverage (WP:CORPDEPTH) of the company.--SamHolt6 (talk) 14:17, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sam

Thanks for reaching out and offering to help. What would be the best way for me to get the correct logo to you and for it to be updated. Please forgive my lack of knowledge in how to use Wikipedia. I can email the file but not sure how to find your email. Do you need a PNG or EPS or JPeg?

Best Paul.

@Taylor78377: hi. To email me, go to my userpage at User:SamHolt6 and look at the far left side of the screen (under the Wikipedia logo). There should be multiple blue links; click on the one titled "email this user" and you will be taken to a tool that will generate an email. Alternatively, you can copy-paste a URL between two brackets like this [5]. PNG would be preferable, but JPeg will also work. Best.--SamHolt6 (talk) 14:06, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sam. @Samholt6 Thanks so much for all this. I will go and try to email you now as i cant upload images to wiki yet to then link you to. UPDATE: Hi Sam - just tried to email you and in the search for the email user it says you are not listed?

Best Paul.

@Taylor78377: hello again Paul. Click this link [6] and you should be taken to the tool. Email me some text using this, and then I will respond using a more traditional (gmail) email from the same address. If that does not work, please link me a webpage containing the logo you want to use.--SamHolt6 (talk) 14:32, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sam. @Samholt6 That email way still isn't working. It doesn't locate you as a user :(. The logo is the Northumbria Uni one at www.northumbria.ac.uk - we have a white an black version. Someone updated the wikipedia with the black version of the logo but it is wrong as the book is black and it should never be black. This normally happens when someone just inverts the white version of the logo. The black version of the logo should always have a book with plain white pages. You can see the black version correctly here on the official verified University student Twitter https://twitter.com/NUstudents

I can supply them as a PNG

Thanks again for all this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Taylor78377 (talk • contribs) 16:33, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Taylor78377: I have made the swap at Northumbria University, choosing to use the logo found on the Uni's website. A Wikipedia bot may be along shortly to fix any resolution issues. Is this satisfactory?--SamHolt6 (talk) 16:50, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sam. @Samholt6 That is amazing thank you so very much. Have a great week. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Taylor78377 (talk • contribs) 14:41, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Sam, hope your good . Minor editis been done on the Draft:MrPuaz with additional notability source which also shows ( BBC described him as a powerful musician ) also in the article it explains his career as a Talent Manager .

Kindly have a look when you get time.

Thank youNdizibanana (talk) 08:15, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sam,

This is to inform you that I have not got paid in any form for creation for page Ravi Puravankara. I am new to wikipedia and I made frequent edits on the wiki page by seeing other wikis available on the wikipedia, just to make it more relevant and informatic for wikipedia users. Request you to please remove the notice and stop the process of deletion of this page. Further, I want to inform you that I am a student and I am ready to share my financial details with you, if required. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Digitaldubey (talk • contribs) 09:46, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

OK, just checking; your account shares the name of a PR firm.--SamHolt6 (talk) 00:12, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please tell me the name of PR firm? But you can trust me that I don't know any single PR firm. I am cricket enthusiast which is trying to learn wikipedia. Till now, I have made several edits on cricketers wiki page and created one page for ravi puravankara. Puravankara group is a notable name in real estate and their wikipedia page were not available, so I thought, I have 2-3 new subjects for subjects, so I tried to create provident housing , but the page got disapproved. First time I am in conversation with a wiki moderator on talk page becoz I was unaware how to talk with a wiki user. Requesting you to please not delete my page, as it was my first page on wiki. Further you can advice me what to post and what to not post. My next topic is wiki for Anuj Puri and a location wiki Shakra bazid. Let me know if I can work on that. Digitaldubey (talk) 02:04, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Digitaldubey: this is the firm's website [7].--SamHolt6 (talk) 04:08, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Trust me, this PR firm is not mine. My sir name is Dubey and since I am interested in Digital marketing, so I kept this name. And this name is inspired by Digital Deepak, who is a leading digital marketer in India. The firm that you mentioned is from Uttar Pradesh. I am from Bihar and currently resides in Bengaluru. I never been to Uttar pradesh. I will request Wikipedia team to do a thorough check, as this finding is completely wrong. Digitaldubey (talk) 09:12, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I receive no payments from VaVichi Clothiers I really needed help with getting this Article up to standards, you are the first reviewer that i have been able to communicate with. Can you please inform me of what parts need revision or should be removed, also Which references need to be reviewed? Im sure ABC is a leader in News across the USA, RRSpin is a viable news source for the Roanoke Rapids Area, The BBB is a federal Company, IMDb is an accredited site across the web I have been comparing this article with others in similar fields and i'm having a hard time detecting promotional text — Preceding unsigned comment added by Royalty375 (talk • contribs) 00:23, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Royalty375: are you certain you are not affiliated with Vavichi Media, as you previously stated [8]? Also, existance alone does not merit inclusion on Wikipedia; companies must meet WP:NCORP, and I do not see your draft as meeting said requirement.--SamHolt6 (talk) 00:33, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sir i'm am just a practicing historian/teacher hoping to add a Company that is making a huge impact in the world from a very small and challenging location. We are proud of the things that this company has been able to accomplish locally and internationally and feel that it should be properly recognized. They are blazing a trail with landmark accomplishments and inspiring youths across the United States with a following of close to 80,000 people to date. I need your help here, i am willing to make any changes needed to make this article acceptable by your company's standards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Royalty375 (talk • contribs) 01:06, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I do apologize for the draft I prepared and how it was not accepted. This is my first time attempting to write for Wikipedia and as I have disclosed I am doing so for an employer. It is not my intention to make an advertisement of the magazine, but simply to give some information about the magazine. I do not wish to create trouble, but would very much appreciate a hand in order to try to get a page for the publication 'Le Grand Mag.' Thank you. VanessaLGM (talk) 10:27, 25 January 2019 (UTC)VanessaLGM[reply]

@VanessaLGM: Hello. Another editor responded to your inquiry at User talk:VanessaLGM#COI.--SamHolt6 (talk) 14:00, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

February 2019, Volume 5, Issue 2, Numbers 107-111 Happy February from Women in Red! Please join us for these virtual editathons. February events: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/109|Social Workers]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/110|Black Women]] February geofocus: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/111|Ancient World]] Continuing initiatives: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/107|Suffrage]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/108|#1day1woman2019]] Help us plan our future events: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Ideas|Ideas Cafe]] Join the conversations on our talkpage: Socialites Twitter - Forgotten African American Suffragists Women in Red image uploads to Commons Image attribution: Johntex (CC BY-SA 3.0) Subscription options: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Outreach/List|English language opt-in]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Outreach/International list|International opt-in]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Outreach/Opt-out|Unsubscribe]] --Rosiestep (talk) 20:10, 26 January 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Dear SamHolt6,

I understand your concern about my relation with the article that I wrote about Editage. However, I would like to clarify that, I am no way connected to Editage company in terms of any financial benefits. I am a researcher doing research on genetics and applied science in Bangalore University, India. I have recently used the service of Editage and was so happy to receive their help, that I thought to write a few note about them so that other researchers comes to know about them and take benefit of their service. Since this kind of company and service is very unknown to the researchers community and sharing this company details will help all researchers and scientists to utilize this service.

Since wikipedia is a great place to share noble information, I preferred to contribute for a better good. Please let me know if I am able to answer your question. I will be grateful if you help me to publish this article. I shall be obliged to abide by the all policies of wikipedia.

With Regards,

Kousik --Kousikb.inc (talk) 05:13, 28 January 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kousikb.inc (talk • contribs) 17:30, 27 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Kousikb.inc: hello again. Unfortunately, credible off-wiki evidence seems to contradict you statement. Working on your comment above, undisclosed paid editing and conflict of interest editing is prohibited by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use. Please clarify your status.--SamHolt6 (talk) 14:19, 28 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@SamHolt6, please guide me that how can I prove that there is no monetary transaction is linked with this article. I have wrote it based on my findings on the internet and no way connected to the company at all. Please guide me as I am not able to understand how to clarify that. As I said, I am an researcher and customer of Editage and in no way I have received any payment to write this article from the company. Please suggest if this clarifies my status.

Kousikb.inc (talk) 16:58, 28 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dear SamHolt6 I've just added several references.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18chuck (talk • contribs) 03:02, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I will review it again if I come across it in my feed.--SamHolt6 (talk) 04:56, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dear SamHolt6, I do not have any conflict of interest for this article. I am doing this article as part of my project in my college. I am studying BCA (Bachelor of Computer Application) 5th semester in Kathmandu, Nepal. And as a part of my project work or assignment, I have to have an article approved in Wikipedia. If it is approved I get good grades at project work. If not, I might get lower grades. Hence, in order to get good grades in my academic result, I need to get this article online. The reason I chose this subject is because I live nearby this organization (about 2 km walking distance). The reason you think that I have conflict of interest for this article is obvious because earlier I tried to write about the Managing Director of this company. That article didn't get approved. Therefore, I changed the subject and wrote about the company itself because I thought writing about living persons and getting it approved is difficult, in fact, very difficult. So, I wrote about the Company itself "City Express Money Transfer". Please believe me that I do not have any COI with the subject I've written. I researched about the article in details via Google. I collected the references also from Google. I am neither paid to write this article nor do I have any connection with the company directly. Please suggest me how I can get this article approved. Please tell me if I should remove some lines. I have neither exaggerated anything or tried to defame the company. I have only re-written what the references have mentioned. Please approve my article.

(Your suraj (talk) 04:13, 29 January 2019 (UTC))[reply]

@Your suraj: noted; I will assume good-faith and so will discount the COI suspicion. So, your next step should be to find more sources from your draft. Wikipedia has a strict notability (WP:NOTE) criteria for companies know as WP:NCORP. Basicly, if you are writing about a company, your sources must be in-depth, independent, and must establish some claim to significance. Cite enough of these, and your article will be let through WP:AFC and published. This is my advice.--SamHolt6 (talk) 15:14, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@SamHolt6 Thank you very much for understanding brother. I will provide more references this time. (Your suraj (talk) 09:16, 12 February 2019 (UTC))[reply]

@SamHolt6 I did everything as you told me. I also added some more references. Still Bkissin declined my article yesterday. Please help!! Your suraj (talk) 07:03, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• JS in London (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Third Bridge (company) ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi there,

I'm confused as to why the AFC Third Bridge (company) was declined. This is a legitimate company in an industry (Expert network) that Wikipedia acknowledges, with the company's competitors, such as GLG and AlphaSights also having Wikipedia articles associated with them. The article as drafted is currently only 8 sentences, with references to legitimate and verifiable third-party sites for all statements other than the former name of the company and the partnerships the firm has entered into. I'm happy to remove reference to some of those, but I note the competitors' pages are full of references to company press releases at best or no third-party citations at all.

If you could please provide some guidance here, it would be much appreciated. As stated in my original creation, my aim is for this page to be purely informational and not promotional, which I believe I had achieved at first edit. JS in London (talk) 15:41, 30 January 2019 (UTC) JS in London (talk) 15:41, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:NCORP, and note that existence alone does not mandate inclusion. I would offer more notes, but the response at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk#15:34:30,_30_January_2019_review_of_submission_by_JS_in_London is sufficient.--SamHolt6 (talk) 00:14, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• MarciHughes (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Aaron Marino ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

MarciHughes (talk) 20:05, 30 January 2019 (UTC) MarciHughes (talk) 20:05, 30 January 2019 (UTC)marci hughes[reply]

@MarciHughes: hello again. I really can only reiterate my earlier advice; the draft in question does not conform to WP:MOS, and thus cannot be let through WP:AFC.--SamHolt6 (talk) 20:57, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Oldoaklanddental (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Verastem Oncology ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I reviewed "substantial sources" vs "passing mentions", and all articles that are listed are substandial, dedicated to the founding and notable history of one company. 1) A news article discussing a prolonged controversy regarding a corporating - most sources are related to this topic. The company was founded to create a drug to treat mesothelioma, which is a deadly form of cancer. The promising trials subsequently failed. 2) report by a consumer watchdog organization on the safety of a specific product - the company and its failed drug is covered on the advocacy pages and consumer watchdog websites regarding mesothelioma.

Wikipedia itself has at least 10 mentionings of verastem, and they link to a broken page. Please actually read the sources and reconsider. let me know if I can resubmit. Oldoaklanddental (talk) 14:20, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oldoaklanddental (talk) 14:20, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Oldoaklanddental: hello again. Looking over the draft in question, I stand by my previous review; the article still lacks sufficient coverage in in-depth, quality sources as mandated by WP:NCORP. NCORP is clear for example that routine business announcements, funding announcements, etc, are trivial and do not confer undue notability on a subject. Other sources cited (two from the company itself and thus [[WP:PRIMARY) like Bloomberg (a standard profile page) and the Forbes article (written by a contributor to Forbes and not the magazine itself) will also not cut it. The next step you should take is to cite more sources, or submit the draft again. Thank you.--SamHolt6 (talk) 14:49, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am adding more sources, in particular around the molecule that failed in the trials since it was very promising cancer stem cell class. Are FDA and NIH scolarly articles and pubs considered "substantial"? Thank you.Oldoaklanddental (talk) 14:54, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@SamHolt6: Added in depth sources on the trials, discontinuation reasons and scietific publications as sources. I resubmitted, although not sure if you are the editor who will be reviewing again. Thank you Oldoaklanddental (talk) 17:13, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Oldoaklanddental: all well and good. I may be the next reviewer, or may not be, depending on the size of today's AFC haul.--SamHolt6 (talk) 22:46, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@SamHolt6: You declined it again, and I basically sourced every sentence. Anything else you see that is wrong with the submission?

Before I prod or AFD this could you give me your reasoning behind accepting it? It's almost entirely primary sourced, and the few secondary sources don't discuss the topic beyond passing mention. (And that's ignoring the COI and the fact the creator is promo-only editing) -- ferret (talk) 00:03, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ferret: noted. While the draft's (now article's) sourcing is sub-par, the topic makes passable chance of meeting WP:GNG; this is also considering the relatively loose nature of WP:NOTE when concerning software as opposed to say biographies or company articles. The heavy use of primary sources and trivial sources is irrelevant if one sees the topic as passing GNG, on the condition that these lacking source be used to cite information in a neutral manner. That being said, I believe an AfD would result in a delete vote on the basis of the topic failing to meet WP:GNG. As far as the creator's COI is concerned, the article was submitted to AfC as is requested at WP:COI, and the article does not seem to be overly promotional towards the subject. I considered filing an SPI after seeing the second, seemingly-SPA account editing the draft, but decided against it as the edits seem benign. Best.--SamHolt6 (talk) 00:20, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

AFC is the correct route for a COI edit, I agree, but the user's only other edits are to try to add the topic to lists (starting over a year ago). Their goal on wikipedia is self-promo-only. That said, it's at AFD now. -- ferret (talk) 00:29, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SamHolt6, thanks for bringing the COI concerns of my recent edits to attention. As I'm still a novice and learning editor I appreciated learning more about Wikipedia's views on COI. I have since updated my User page to properly disclose this concern.

I wanted to seek your assistance to help republish the quarantined article. Seeing as you are a fair and unbiased 3rd party, would you be willing to help me with this project of adding an article for the VIPKid page? I noticed some comments regarding Notability and Violations of WP:NOT. However seeing as I collected substantial amounts of reliable 3rd party sources regarding the article subject and did my best to state facts and avoided opinions I would like your help to understand the specific concerns regarding these areas.

I appreciate any assistance you can offer in this regard. It is still my personal project and goal to create an article for VIPKid. Dzstoyanov (talk) 18:52, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

SamHolt6 - I'm inclined to approve Draft:VIPKid but I wanted to get your input before doing so. In light of the fact Dzstoyanov has disclosed his/her COI on their userpage, are you comfortable with me removing the undisclosed COI template? Chetsford (talk) 19:36, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Noting the above. Confined to mobile editing for the next day, but I will try to comment by 4 Feb.SamHolt6 (talk) 23:44, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Dzstoyanov:@Chetsford: thank you both for your patience. As things stand, I declined Draft:VIPKid on the grounds of the current draft not citing enough in-depth sources, as is required by WP:NCORP. However, this does not mean VIPKid is not notable; a before check on my part showed some promise. I would therefore recommend the draft be improved and re-submitted to AfC. I would also like to offer a third possible approach. Dzstoyanov, if you would be willing to allow a neutral editor to create an article about VIPKid, we could dispense with any possible COI issue; I myself would be willing to compile a stub this week, time permitting. Thanks.--SamHolt6 (talk) 01:14, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Dzstoyanov:, vis a vis SamHolt6's observations above, I think you could probably get this up to notability fairly easily. You have three dedicated profile articles from RS currently and, from a quick check, there are a lot of sources out there which are RS and provide SIGCOV you could add: e.g. Fast Company, the Financial Times, Education Week, etc. Chetsford (talk) 01:23, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@SamHolt6: I would be honored if you created an article for VIPKid, I think that would help remove any lingering concerns regarding COI bias and set the article on a good and neutral start. I'll be happy to supply additional contributions afterwards via Request Edit. @Chetsford: Thanks for your suggestions as well, if SamHolt6 ends up not having the time this week to write the article, I'll revise the current draft with additional RS and resubmit it for review. Cheers! Dzstoyanov (talk) 18:49, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Dzstoyanov: hello again. I have compiled and created an article at VIPKid. I am fairly confident that company is notable, though I will note that articles are not the domain of any one editor and as such the article can be deleted if another editor does not agree with my notability assessment; I am, however, optimistic about the article surviving. As noted above, if you have any suggestions as to changes, you can use the request edit system on the article's talk page. Wishing the best, and thank you Dzstoyanov for the courtesy you have extended towards myself and User:Chetsford. SamHolt6 (talk) 00:00, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@SamHolt6: Thank you SamHolt6, it's a lovely article and a wonderful foundation for me to build upon. My sincere gratitude to you and @Chetsford: for all your help and advice! Dzstoyanov (talk) 01:08, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please remove the warning that the article may have been provided on a paid basis. We have provided over a dozen independent sources, including Forbes and the Australian financial Review, that each validate that the author of the post is a founder of the business.Jcsharp1122 (talk) 12:07, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In creating the information stub for the company I founded, I researched several other venture firms and noted the extend and nature of their citations and the factual nature of their entries. I believe I did everything correctly when submitting my entry for Hatcher+, and I believe that the citations (from Forbes, Australian Financial Review, Venture Insider, and other publications) go at least as far to validate these facts as most other entires from the industry.

The only thing I can think of is that these publications are not based in the US. Could that have a bearing on this outcome? I note that there are far fewer entries on Wikipedia for non-US firms than US venture firms - and many lists are far from complete with respect to Chinese, European, Indian, South Asian and Australian firms. If, as I suspect, the references involved in the citations are being rejected because they are not American, then perhaps this policy needs to be reconsidered.

Please take a second look at the submission - or provide some detail on how it is incorrect or incomplete. And please note that I am not being paid to write the article, as has been stated - I founded the company.

Thank you.

Jcsharp1122 (talk) 17:52, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Jcsharp1122 - I don't want to speak for SamHolt6, however, from a quick perusal of the sources you used, many are not WP:RS. Specifically: Forbes (we generally don't consider Forbes articles written by contributors, versus staff members, to be RS), PRWeb (this is a newswire and, therefore, is not WP:INDEPENDENT), and so forth. Others provide only WP:ROUTINE coverage. I think the Business Standard article is great. If we could get a couple more of these in there, and filter out some of the others, you'd be well on your way to having an approval-ready submission. In terms of other articles you've seen on WP that don't meet the standards being demanded of you here, it's true that WP has many sub-par articles. Where we can find them, we delete them. But I do understand it can seem unfair that you're being held to a seemingly higher standard by going through the preferred process for COI contributions instead of trying to sneak an article in through the backdoor. If it's any consolation, and I know it's probably not much, I think I speak for many editors when I say we do appreciate you taking the extra effort to make the appropriate disclosures and submit via AfC rather than directly introducing the article yourself and not disclosing an affiliation. Chetsford (talk) 01:31, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Jcsharp1122: I will more-or-less reiterate the comment above, and note that while Wikipedia does not have any policy against citing non-English sources, editors do consider WP:AUD for en.wiki. I am more concerned about the seeming lack of quality sources that would allow the draft to meet WP:NCORP, but as before the comment above already explains that. As for the other matters at hand, you must disclose if you are receiving any form of compensation or benefit from editing Wikipedia; this is per WP:PAID and the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use, and is non-negotiable. In a similar vein, please note that Wikipedia editors are not permitted to share accounts, and company accounts are not permitted; I am bringing this up as you referred to yourself as "we" on several occasions. Thank you.--SamHolt6 (talk) 01:44, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SamHolt6. My article SQ Lac was recently reviewed and denied by you. The denial reason was for conflict of interest, but I do not have any relationship with the subject. Also, all of the websites used for reference have been accepted on Wikipedia before. I used the Wikipedia article pages “Gunna (rapper)” and “Lil Baby” as an example for accepted, credible references because they are used the same websites and have similar articles to the article I submitted. Please clarify and provide recommendations based on the nature of the article. KieraOwens (talk) 16:12, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@KieraOwens: hi. To clarify, I declined your draft not because of a conflict of interest but because the subject seems to not meet WP:NMUSICIAN criteria; I am particularly concerned that much of the article's sources are covering a yet-to-be-released EP. My suggestion would be to read over the various criteria laid down at WP:NMUSICIAN and try to find sources indicating SQ Lac meets these categories. You should also not be citing YouTube, iTunes, or Spinrilla as they are not reliable sources. Best.--SamHolt6 (talk) 19:10, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you deleting the article to a meaningless page? This article has 28 references from diverse international study groups, including reviews and meta-studies - why has all this content been deleted? This is a blanket removal - you didn't bother to use the Talk page. Why not? What is your interest in deleting scientific work? What is your COI ?

62.178.124.233, note that the article in question was created by an editor with a conflict of interest who seems to be set against numerous other editors. My edit was conducted to return the article to a stable version.--SamHolt6 (talk) 21:36, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have already declared that there is no COI. From Wikipedia:Dispute resolution: Follow the normal protocol When you find a passage in an article that is biased, inaccurate, or unsourced the best practice is to improve it if you can rather than deleting salvageable text... If an edit is too complex to explain in an edit summary, or the change is contentious, add a section to the talk page that explains your rationale.

and: Focus on content Focus on article content during discussions.

Only ~ ToBeFree (talk) has commented on the article content. The Root analogue dental implant talk page has none of your input. My complaint is that you're blindly reverting with no explanation or rationale. The 'numerous other editors' are set on doing exactly the same. Your so-called 'stable' version is meaningless - compare it to the original. Logicwhatelse (talk) 14:59, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Logicwhatelse: respectfully, the content you added to the article was removed twice by two different editors; you revert of my revert was also subsequently reverted. In light of this situation, it is safe to say that (in the scope of the wider WP:BRD process) we're at the point where WP:NOCON comes into play. As such, the article will be reverted to the last stable, uncontested version of the article in question—and my revert successfully brought the article to this state. Now the issue should be discussed on the article's talk page so that a consensus can be established, but... frankly, your messages to other editors, denial (true or untrue) of having a conflict of interest, and multiple attempts to have the page protected from vandalism have poisoned the well. You must note that on Wikipedia community consensus trumps most guideline policy (such as the bits cited above), and most senior editors are aware of WP:COITALK and their patience with you is wearing thin, while at the same time the article in question has attracted more attention. Without the consent of these editors you will not gain any ground on the article, so continue to use the talk page; at this point a WP:RFC may be in order.--SamHolt6 (talk) 15:21, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your balanced reply and advice. We'll use the talk page, and hope that discussion can resolve the issues. Logicwhatelse (talk) 16:55, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I've been trying to figure out why the Fontaines D.C. article has been deleted. It seems to meet all qualifications. Can you specify? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.103.20.178 (talk) 22:53, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. It seems the article you are asking about is at Draft:Fontaines D.C.. It is a draft that was rejected by several AFC reviewers on the grounds that the band does not meet WP:BAND criteria for inclusion on Wikipedia. From the page history, it seems an editor also tried to create the article in the main space but failed to due so. With this all said, you should improve the draft at Draft:Fontaines D.C. and try to send it through WP:AFC. Best.--SamHolt6 (talk) 22:58, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi: You draftified UDI Dance; Gottalentfan has recreated it, apparently by copy/paste, so I thought you might want to take a look. Yngvadottir (talk) 20:58, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Yngvadottir: addressed; thank you for the heads up.--SamHolt6 (talk) 23:01, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		Impressive work tactfully addressing the VIPKid issue. Chetsford (talk) 02:41, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sam, You contacted me about this page - its fine to delete it. Someone suggested to me a while ago that I should set up a Wikipedia entry, but I don't think it is the right thing for us at the moment (thought this building does have some historic interest). thanks Clare — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.254.5.123 (talk) 14:57, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thank you for your understanding IP. I highly recommend against editing Wikipedia with a conflict of interest, given WP:COI is a policy.--SamHolt6 (talk) 15:01, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey SamHolt6, thanks for reviewing the Matt Goulding page. I submitted the draft to AFC. Happy to remove any language that sounds like PR.

@Lschwartz2416: acknowledged, but please keep my COI inquest in mind and respond at the earliest possible convenience.--SamHolt6 (talk) 19:12, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@SamHolt6:, understood—I have written non-Wikipedia articles for Roads & Kingdoms in the past, but I'm not getting paid to edit or write Wikipedia pages. I don't believe I have a COI.

@SamHolt6: while assumption of good faith is a key Wikipedia policy, credible off-wiki evidence seems to contradict your statement. If you are in any way in violation of WP:COI or WP:PAID, you must follow both policies; the same goes for if you have any connection to the topics you are writing about. I have moved several articles you created to the draftspace for being in possible violation of WP:NOTADVERTISING, as well. Best.--SamHolt6 (talk) 00:34, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@SamHolt6: I will repeat that while I have written non-Wikipedia articles for Roads & Kingdoms, I am not getting paid to edit or write Wikipedia pages. I am doing this on a volunteer basis. I have submitted the pages for review—I think you will find that they objective and cite third-party sources, and I have removed any language that might seem like promotion. I have also added COI to my User talkspace to show that I am in good faith.

@Lschwartz2416: thank you for making some effort to disclose a COI, but note that there is a distinction between regular conflict of interest of editing and paid editing; for the purposes of Wikipedia, note also that (per WP:PAID) interns are considered to be paid employees as they are editing for some form of compensation. If this applies to you, ensure you are following WP:PAID—undisclosed paid editors are prohibited from editing per Wikipedia's terms of use.

On another note (I will assume good faith and hold that you are a standard COI editor), you should continue to improve the drafts you have created; you seem to be engaged with several different editors, so this approach seems to be productive so far. Assuming these AFC reviewers accept your drafts through WP:AFC, you articles will be returned to the mainspace. Best.--SamHolt6 (talk) 03:48, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@SamHolt6: Understood. Please let me know if anything else comes up.

Hello SamHolt6,

Thanks for your recent message on my talk page regarding disclosure of advertising for paid WP editing.

The reason nothing is posted in that regard is that I do not advertise.

I have been doing freelance writing in the corporate communications arena for over 20 years. One of my clients asked me to update their Wiki page, they liked what I did, and mentioned me to a colleague in need of help. The word spread, and I keep getting more work by referrals.Tlvernon (talk) 18:56, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Tlvernon: understood, apologies for any undue alarm my inquest caused. This policy was designed with editors who use larger freelancer sites like Upwork in mind. If your referrals are word-of-mouth, I imagine you are exempt. If you do ever choose to offer services online in a visible, public location, keep this policy in mind, however. Best. SamHolt6 (talk) 19:07, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

		March 2019, Volume 5, Issue 3, Numbers 107, 108, 112, 113 Happy Women's History Month from Women in Red! Please join us for these virtual events: March: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/112|Art+Feminism & #VisibleWikiWomen]] Geofocus: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/113|Francophone Women]] Continuing initiatives: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/107|Suffrage]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/108|#1day1woman]]
		Other ways you can participate: Help us plan our future events: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Ideas|Ideas Cafe]] Join the conversations on our [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women in Red|talkpage]] Follow us on Twitter: @wikiwomeninred Subscription options: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Outreach/List|English language opt-in]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Outreach/International list|International opt-in]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Outreach/Opt-out|Unsubscribe]] --Rosiestep (talk) 22:09, 18 February 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

You are deleting primary source information -- specifically a 8/21/2017 "reaffirmation of objectives" by the President General of the United Daughters of the Confederacy. Those objectives state clearly that the UDC opposes racism. Third party interpretations are presented that say it is a racist organization, but the organization itself says it is not.

A true white supremacy organization would not state that they are not racist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.96.253.34 (talk) 00:12, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That is a laughable statement. Darn near ALL racists deny being racists. Thanos for bringing this lovely quote to my attention from the UDC "We are saddened that some people find anything connected with the Confederacy to be offensive."^[1] which is pretty tone deaf since the point of the Confederacy was to protect slavery. Legacypac (talk) 00:39, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@97.96.253.34 and 97.96.253.34: I am in agreement with Legacy's point above, and will note that secondary sources will always be preferable to primary sources.--SamHolt6 (talk) 00:41, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The article First Opium War you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:First Opium War for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Alex Shih -- Alex Shih (talk) 03:22, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @SamHolt6,

We just received an email stating that our page was going to be deleted. We did not do anything inappropriate and only followed your instruction to add more media references. We just submitted the revised article with added media references as per your request. We would like our page to be reactivated and our four references in the "References" section to be converted to actual reference links. Also, we would like the #4 and #5 hyperlinks at the bottom page of the "External Links" section to be deleted. Please assist. Thank you in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OutofBounds2019Film (talk • contribs) 21:10, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sam,

Nice to e-meet you. I saw you helped out with the Soundwalk Collective page. I am currently under some scrutiny regarding my financial involvement with the collective. I understand how it looks, but I am not paid, I have been a fan of their work since 2010. I was wondering if you can give me some advice in proving my independence from the subject matter, i.e not a providing a COI. Thanks Sonnenalle44 (talk) 12:10, 7 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The article Drunken Peasants has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This article relies on primary sources for everything except the Milo incident. Given that the main focus of articles on that subject is Milo and not The Drunken Peasants and that there are no third-party sources about the podcast, it does not meet notability criteria.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Alduin2000 (talk) 01:55, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Good afternoon SamHolt6,

We are taken aback by this notification. We just received an email notification regarding your concerns with our film. First and foremost, Staci, our intern was informed by a Wiki representative that there was a COI with her association to our company. At that time, she and no one else from our office has submitted or attempted to submit an article for our film. We do not appreciate you labeling Staci as a "Suspected Sockpuppet" as she created the initial article under her own volition. We were not aware that another article was submitted. And we do not know the individual or individuals that submitted another article. It was not submitted at our request or on our behalf. To conclude that our office has "Suspected Sockpuppets" submitting articles for our film is false and offensive. As far as the copyright violation, on March 7, 2019 our office followed the proper implementation process to submit the copyright authorization document via email to Wikimedia Commons. Most importantly, the initial document submitted by Staci has somehow been made available online by an unknown third party. Just to be clear, Staci nor anyone from our office posted it there. Here is the link. https://en.everybodywiki.com/Out_of_Bounds_(2019_film) We find it utterly ridiculous that you are attempting to prevent someone else from their freedom and right to post online. That in it itself is uncalled for and unsettling. Lastly, please refrain from the false accusations and defamatory comments against our company.24.47.115.67 (talk) 18:07, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Noted IP. Operating with WP:AGF in mind, maybe I can lend some insight to the situation. To begin, I first came across Draft:Out of Bounds (2019 film) in early February. This draft was created by User:OutofBounds2019Film User talk:OutofBounds2019Film, and I declined the draft in question for a content-concerned reason; I also began following the editor's activities as their username implied a conflict of interest, which Wikipedia mandates editors disclose. Anyways, this first incarnation of Draft:Out of Bounds (2019 film) was deleted in early march as a copyright violation, and User:OutofBounds2019Film was softblocked as their username violates Wikipedia username policy. Notably, another editor edited the first incarnation of Draft:Out of Bounds (2019 film), but as the draft was deleted I felt no need to keep track of this editor. Also noteworthy was User:OutofBounds2019Film's referring to themselves as the plural "we", which is an issue as Wikipedia accounts may not be shared between people. Compiling these facts, I felt that some sort of either sock puppetry or meat puppetry was occurring, but as the relevant draft was deleted and the infringing editor blocked there was no reason to pursue further action.

As you seem to know, today I found a second (the current one) version of Draft:Out of Bounds (2019 film) created, and saw that it was created by a new editor. Given the history of the draft and the previous creator, credible evidence existed that a possible sock/meatpuppet case was unfolding; as such, I filed a sockpuppet investigation. This investigation was closed as User:OutofBounds2019Film is (per Wikipedia SOFTBLOCK policy) entitled to a new account if they so choose. Unfortunately, this closure prevented Checkusers (a feature of Wikipedia designed to find those editing from the same IP address range) from finding if User:OutofBounds2019Film is using any sock accounts against policy. If your intern is not part of this previous group of editors, then I sincerely apologize for any alarm I may have caused, thought I will also note that as an editor it is within my purview to act on credible evidence of rule-breaking—my intent is was not to defame or harass.

Moving on from ckeckusers and SPIs, it is clear from your edit above that you and presumably User:Nineminutesuntil have a connection to the film in question. As such, you both must come into compliance with WP:COI and WP:PAID, as Wikipedia considers interns to be compensated employees who must disclose their connections. I will also place UDP/COI templates on Draft:Out of Bounds (2019 film). Instruction for how to do this can be found at WP:COI and WP:PAID; feel free to ask me if you have any questions. Best.--SamHolt6 (talk) 23:42, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello SamHolt6,

Thank you for the details and your understanding. OutofBounds2019Film account has been blocked preventing any login. Sorry, it was not known that the account was soft blocked or blocked. Nothing was intentionally done and please accept this apology if anything was misconstrued. It is understood that you have a job to do in which that is highly respected. Just to be clear again, there is not any sockpuppetry or meatpuppetry occurring nor has it occurred. Just so you know, Staciwilliams126 can no longer edit because her draft was deleted. In response to your statement, “you and presumably Nineminutesuntil have a connection to the film in question.” That user is not an intern. Screeners for the film were sent out locally and in other states. As I stated in the previous post, a copy of the draft was posted by an unknown third party. If you do a Google search and type Out of Bounds 2019 Wiki you will find the following link. https://en.everybodywiki.com/Out_of_Bounds_(2019_film) Thank you for the UDP/COI templates. What is the proper way to take the appropriate measures to come into compliance since OutofBounds2019Film has been blocked and Staciwilliams126 draft has been removed? Lastly, once all is in compliance will the article you’ve mentioned be considered for approval?24.47.115.67 (talk) 02:40, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings again SamHolt6,

After reading the above in depth information I just wanted to say that I do not work for the production company. I already responded to your other message so I'll ask the question here since everyone who may be able to help is possibly in this thread. My article was deleted because I did not have permission to use the cover art. Any idea on how I can get permission to use the cover art and who do I need to grant me the permission? Any help would be amazing. Thanks in advance!Nineminutesuntil (talk) 23:33, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello SamHolt6,

When the user account was initially setup, it was mistakenly thought that the user name chosen should match the name of the proposed listing. Once it was determined that was not the case, the user name was changed. Then, a notification was sent stating that intern Staci was in violation of the COI policy. The aforementioned was unbeknownst at the time. At no time was anything done with any ill intent. Also, to address your concern with the term “we”; it was merely speaking about our company as a whole. And not in the sense of multiple people from our company using an account etc. Again, there is not any sockpuppetry taking place nor did it ever take place. 24.47.115.67 (talk) 01:10, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings SamHolt6,

Glad to meet you. I found out a moment ago that my article was deleted due to not having permission to use the cover art. Since my draft was deleted will it be retrievable? Will you please let me know how I can get permission and who I need to grant me the permission? I'm concerned and would like any info that can help. Thanks for your help!Nineminutesuntil (talk) 23:15, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Nineminutesuntil: hello. It seems that your draft was deleted as being a copyright violation—this was done not because the cover art was copyrighted, but rather because an editor deemed large portions of your text to be infringing on the copyright of an off-wiki site. It this case, the deleting admin saw your draft as a copyright violation of text at http://picdeer.com/outofboundsmovie. Hopefully this clarifies.

In addition to this response, I would like to ask if you have any sort of connection with the film; I am asking as the film's creators recent created a draft for their film that contained the same exact copyright violations as your draft did. SamHolt6 (talk) 23:58, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@SamHolt6: Thanks for your quick response! After reading your response, I revisited the link you left, which leads to the film's IG page. Not only did I include my own wording and change some of the wording for the character descriptions in my draft. But I went a step further and added additional characters with descriptions that are not on the film's IG page. I have no problem citing the film's IG page as a reference. That should suffice correct? Please let me know. Thanks!Nineminutesuntil (talk) 00:51, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No I do not have any sort of connection with the film. Any similarities in my work is due to information that I found from doing my own research online. However, I did include my own wording and cited my references. I would like the opportunity to add IG as a cited reference so that my draft would be considered to be accepted. Please let me know. Thanks!Nineminutesuntil (talk) 00:51, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there,

I recently asked for some help on a help page provided by wikipedia, and an expert got back with me stating to reinsert the references I had removed, which I did.. and that he did not see a notability issue with my page. All of this was done through Wikipedia. I am wondering why it's not passing? I appreciate your time.

(Benny2828 (talk) 15:10, 18 March 2019 (UTC))[reply]

@Benny2828: hello. Per your contributions, I am guessing the advice you are referring to is this [9] archived discussion at the AFC help desk. I agree with the responding editor there when they said that most small companies are not notable enough to be included in an encyclopedia; this is more or less what three other editors, including myself, have decided when declining your draft article. The way you can address these concerns is with the citing of reliable, in-depth, independent sources that indicate why Benny's Pizza is notable; the key policy to read is WP:NCORP.--SamHolt6 (talk) 17:24, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 19 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings User:Samholt6. Would you mind taking a lok at these drafts for me? Thanks. FloridaArmy (talk) 11:09, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sam, I left a message for you on my talk page. Anthropologialist (talk) 13:04, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Replied to there.--SamHolt6 (talk) 18:40, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  Draft Ashi Singh can you please tell what is the exact reason you reject this article, also please tell me how to improve this article.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sumancutie (talk • contribs) 17:48, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply] 

@Sumancutie: hello. You can see my explicit reasons for rejecting the draft in my comment on said draft, but I will surmise here that I did not see any substantive improvements since the draft's last decline. In addition—though some changes were made—the draft did not address the issues raised (the citing of unreliable sources) at either of the AfD concerning the subject. You can address these concerns by adding more in-depth, independent sources to the draft.--SamHolt6 (talk) 18:44, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

April 2019, Volume 5, Issue 4, Numbers 107, 108, 114, 115, 116, 117 Hello and welcome to the April events of Women in Red! Please join us for these virtual events: New topics: Gender studies / United Nations / Dance Geofocus: Portuguese-speakers Continuing initiatives: Suffrage / #1day1woman Other ways you can participate: Help us plan our future events: Ideas Cafe Join the conversations on our talkpage Follow us on Twitter: @wikiwomeninred Subscription options: Opt-in (EN-WP) / Opt-in (international) / Unsubscribe

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:02, 25 March 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

(Please excuse this post if it is a duplicate!)

Hi SamHolt6. In early February you rejected Draft:Digital Bridge Holdings at Articles for Creation, because the citations were based on press releases rather than feature stories. While many of the citations can be characterized that way, I wanted to see if you saw the covert story (see pages 6-7) in AGL Magazine (a trade publication) and the feature story in WSJ. I was wondering how you’d feel if I reduced the reliance on some of the weaker citations to focus on these two? CReissmeier (talk) 21:22, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I updated with relevant footnotes the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Jean-Claude_Vignoli

Thanks in advance for reviewing it!

Malaga345 (talk) 00:23, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Malaga345: hi Malaga. Thank you for adding citations to your draft. Currently, the AFC backlog is fairly long, but I can assure you myself or another reviewer will take a second look at your draft at the earliest possible convenience. Best.--SamHolt6 (talk) 01:07, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the edits and concerns being expressed now do seem rather...familiar, don't they? BubbaJoe123456 (talk) 01:45, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@BubbaJoe123456: they certainly do, and I have reverted the edits as they lack consensus. A SPI may be in order, but would probably return only stale results as the suspected* sock is rarely active. Best. SamHolt6 (talk) 16:09, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello SamHolt6,

I wanted to ask about your deletion of the page for John Baldecchi. I noticed it has been posted in the past but through some edits, I believe I have been able to focus the article and make sure the information is supported by references. Thanks so much!

Gracie1553691 (talk) 22:14, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Gracie1553691: certainly. To clarify, I did not delete the article; at the time, the article was unreviewed (a status granted to all new articles) and so I (as a new page reviewer, who is endowed with the right to move articles) moved the article to the draftspace for further improvement. I conducted this move as there was concern that the article subject was not notable, and that the article was created in violation of Wikipedia's terms of use; specifically, a note (Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard/Archive_138#Digital_Riot_Media) at WP:COIN noted the article was likely violating Wikipedia's policy on undisclosed paid editing and conflict of interest editing. Best. SamHolt6 (talk) 23:24, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry SamHolt6, I could have saved you the trouble of replying by letting you know that I blocked the account as a confirmed sock.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 23:27, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ponyo: ah I see. What will I do now that my daily allotment of courtesy has been drained? Thanks Ponyo. SamHolt6 (talk) 23:31, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your courtesy is needed to balance out my jadedness!-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 23:33, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sam: Thank you for your comments. I am new to Wikipedia and this is my first entry. The two main issues you raise appear to be the possibility of COI and the notability of the organization I am introducing, 'Reputation Institute'.

1) COI: I am not a paid contributor or public relations advocate for Reputation Institute, but it's true that I am a retired researcher, have participated at different conferences it organized, and that's why I felt equipped to create this entry, and believe it deserves to appear in wikipedia. I am fine to acknowledge that, but unsure how to indicate it in the source code. Please help me here.

2) Notability: Reputation Institute is widely referenced in both academic journals and gets extensive international media coverage. But most of its notability comes from (a) the visibility and contributions of its academic founders and (b) the products it has developed (RQ and RepTrak) rather than the company itself. That's why I highlight those two areas and have focused the entry on the five criteria for notability as they apply to the company, its founders, and its products :

1 significant: there are extensive citations to the company and its founders, to the conferences and journal they created and to the RQ and RepTrak products they developed 2 multiple: I cite multiple academic and media sources, 3 independent: these sources are all independent and verifiable 4 reliable: most of the sources I used are academic journals that reference the company, its founders, and the products 5 secondary sources: I have cited academic references and media coverage the company, its founders, and its products

I would appreciate your guidance to improve this entry further. I think it's an organization that deserves to be in Wikipedia for its contribution to knowledge development in the specialized field of reputation measurement --the public deserves to know about it. Topedits (talk) 13:58, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Topedits: hello. From my looking at the article again, you seem to be on the path to success. My advice would be to continue to add reliable sources to the article (read WP:NCORP and ensure said sources meet this strict guideline) and strive so that the article does not read as overly-promotional. Due to the immense huge size of WP:AFC's backlog (1000s of to-be reviewed drafts) I will not be re-reviewing your draft soon, but there is a good possibly me or one of my fellow reviewers will take another look in the next few days. Best.--SamHolt6 (talk) 18:24, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Im confused because Brillstein Management has a page and they are a peer company. I wouldnt consider Variety superfluous or our clients...we represent people, name dropping to get our artists paid is our job. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Erafala (talk • contribs) 01:43, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Erafala: hello again. Wikipedia does have a comparatively strict criteria for a company to be considered notable; this policy, WP:NCORP is clear that it is the quality of the coverage that matters, not the amount or the publication. The variety article you mentioned, for example, is a standard company announcement/press release detailing the opening of a new office. Such type of sources are explicitly named as trivial by NCORP, and the others cited in the draft in question are not much better. As far as your mentioning of "our clients", please note that undisclosed paid editing violates Wikipedia's terms of use and such activities must be disclosed, per WP:COI and WP:PAID; if you are affiliated with the company, please make the necessary disclosures ASAP. Thank you. SamHolt6 (talk) 01:54, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello sir,

I am Corey and I am working on the Wikipedia page Mailcoms Ltd for my business. You did decline the page which is fair enough.

As a company who serves the UK nationwide, we believe it is necessary for such a page to be up on Wikipedia as we have been in business for over 10 years and we are a leading franking machine supplier within the UK.

Please contact me as I would like to have the page published in the future if possible. Any assistance provided in getting this completed will be greatly appreciated. However if you 100% believe the page is not worthy for Wikipedia, then we will accept this.

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Coreyrocks0106 (talk • contribs) 10:34, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I have fixed what you wanted me to fix. But, in WP:MUSIC there is a line that states "A mere claim of significance, even if contested, may avoid speedy deletion under A7". Doesn't that mean my article is valid?