Jump to content

User talk:Mgbo120/Archives/2019/March

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


Submit

Sir..please submit erfan khaki article..if need something do it for me please sir Arman Aryamehr (talk) 10:17, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

Request on 14:24:59, 1 March 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by No sense of humour


Many thanks to user ~~Cheers~~Mgbo120 for reviewing my draft at 09:57, 14 February 2019 (UTC).

However, I am not sure that I understand the comment: “Still requires more news-related references.”

To the best of my knowledge, references should be independent and verifiable, which, I regret to inform you, news-related references are not. The references I provided on Prof Knight are to his scientific publications, to his citation records, to his scientific awards and to his fellowship in the Optical Society – chief scientific professional organization in Optics and Photonics. Please consider Wikipedia's criteria for notability: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(academics)

The first 3 are:

1. The person's research has had a significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources. Prof Jonathan Knight is one of the people who invented photonic crystal fibres. You can simply look at the Wikipedia page on this subject and check the names of the people whose scientific papers are cited there: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photonic-crystal_fiber His contribution was unambiguously recognized by scientific prize: Rank Prize Funds Optoelectronics Prize, 2018, "For the invention and realisation of photonic crystal fibres." AND it has unambiguously been recognized by the Institute of Physics Optics and Photonics Division Prize, 2012. Moreover, it has unambiguously been recognized by his Fellowship of the Optical Society of America, 2011, For pioneering development of the photonic crystal fiber and particularly its application in nonlinear frequency conversion and supercontinuum generation. Incidentally, this recognition unambiguously fulfils the next 2 Wikipedia criteria:

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

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

As for myself, please note that this is the first Wikipedia page I am creating. I chose Prof Knight because I thought that this would be an easy enough process, given the subject’s notoriety. I was hoping that the experience would be informative and educational, so that I would be able to build upon it and create subsequent pages. Following long delays and seemingly pointless feedback, I now feel bounced around and frustrated, despite my admiration for the Wikipedia process and aspiration to be part of it.


No sense of humour (talk) 14:24, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

No sense of humour, the draft requires more independent references to scale through in line with WP:BIO. Look for more and add. ~~Cheers~~Mgbo120 17:36, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Murburn murcat edited

Hi Mgbo120,

The Murburn/Murcat article was corrected with inline citations as advised by you. However, it is still not re-reviewed. Could you please let me know if any more edits are required for it to be published? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Murburn/Murcat_concept — Preceding unsigned comment added by Annvinod (talk • contribs) 06:19, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Annvinod resubmit it. A reviewer will review it as well. ~~Cheers~~Mgbo120 18:17, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Liu Xijun (disambiguation)

Sorry for not disambiguate in the proper way. How does en-WP handle duplicate name entries instead? --Enyavar (talk) 20:37, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Enyavar, disambiguation is only necessary where there are at least 2 titles with existing wiki pages. In your case, only one title has a page. The other title doesn't have a page.~~Cheers~~Mgbo120 19:44, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Question from Jolyon Lambert

Hi Mgbo120,

Sorry to disturb you but on 17th of Feb you declined my article about 'Patria Watch Co' based on a lack of context. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Patria_Watch_Co I added a lot more contextual cited material and resubmitted it 3 weeks ago. I am not sure of the usual process, but are you able to review the re-submitted article or is it random? (Apologies, I'm new to Wikipedia).

Best wishes,

Jolyon — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jolyonlambert (talk • contribs) 09:23, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

User:Jolyonlambert Yea, great on the updates. Review is mainly done at random. Any other reviewer will come across it.~~Cheers~~Mgbo120 20:12, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

User:Mgbo120 Ok, thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jolyonlambert (talk • contribs) 09:10, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.17

Hello Mgbo120/Archives/2019,

News
Discussions of interest
  • Two elements of CSD G6 have been split into their own criteria: R4 for redirects in the "File:" namespace with the same name as a file or redirect at Wikimedia Commons (Discussion), and G14 for disambiguation pages which disambiguate zero pages, or have "(disambiguation)" in the title but disambiguate a single page (Discussion).
  • {{db-blankdraft}} was merged into G13 (Discussion)
  • A discussion recently closed with no consensus on whether to create a subject-specific notability guideline for theatrical plays.
  • There is an ongoing discussion on a proposal to create subject-specific notability guidelines for chemicals and organism taxa.
Reminders
  • NPR is not a binary keep / delete process. In many cases a redirect may be appropriate. The deletion policy and its associated guideline clearly emphasise that not all unsuitable articles must be deleted. Redirects are not contentious. See a classic example of the templates to use. More templates are listed at the R template index. Reviewers who are not aware, do please take this into consideration before PROD, CSD, and especially AfD because not even all admins are aware of such policies, and many NAC do not have a full knowledge of them.
NPP Tools Report
  • Superlinks – allows you to check an article's history, logs, talk page, NPP flowchart (on unpatrolled pages) and more without navigating away from the article itself.
  • copyvio-check – automatically checks the copyvio percentage of new pages in the background and displays this info with a link to the report in the 'info' panel of the Page curation toolbar.
  • The NPP flowchart now has clickable hyperlinks.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – Low – 2393 High – 4828
Looking for inspiration? There are approximately 1000 female biographies to review.
Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:18, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Jose A. Tejedor Sources

Hello,

I was wondering how I could improve my sources for the article. One is from the museum in Spain where the painting is on display, and the other is a book where on page 5 it shows the winning painting. Apologies as they are rather Unintuitive, is there anyway to remedy that?

Thank you! Banjonosepicker (talk) 21:13, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

User:Banjonosepicker, try searching on news media. The current references you have there are not good enough to scale the page through. ~~Cheers~~Mgbo120 18:43, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Question about review process for Draft:Electromagnetic Radio Frequency Convergence

Hey,

Thanks for your comment on the wiki page for electromagnetic RF convergence. I beleive I have addressed your comment (and added citations to the lead section). I am not all too familiar with the review process and wanted to know what the next steps are. Do I wait for you or another reviewer to review the page? Also do I leave your comment up and wait for someone to remove it or do I simply remove it? I'd appreciate any information or help you could provide.

Thanks Achiriya (talk) 00:38, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

User:Achiriya Good job. it will be reviewed by any reviewer. ~~Cheers~~Mgbo120 19:09, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Analena Jentsch

Hello, just wondering why my edit on the draft Analena Jentsch page was declined when the Emira Abbes page has the same amount of references. Thanks

Try adding more references.~~Cheers~~Mgbo120 19:08, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

I know I’m just asking why the Emira Abbes page that has the same references is a page when the Draft:Analena Jentsch page isn’t. Thanks TracyFleuryFan (talk) 19:54, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

Tiamat's Wrath - two versions

Hello -- it appears that shortly after you moved the article on Tiamat's Wrath to draftspace: Draft:Tiamat's Wrath, I re-started the article in the main article space: Tiamat's Wrath without having known about the prior version. I believe that my version is adequately sourced (please feel free to check me on that). Do you have any suggestion on how to prevent folks from working on the draft while the main article exists? Delete the draft? Something else? Thanks! -Kenirwin/(talk) 01:16, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Pomio Kivung

By what standard did you consider the article on Pomio Kivung to be undersourced? There are two, thorough, academic-quality sources cited, with inlines for both. Do I need more inlines? I’d firmly disagree if you mean that there need to be more than two academic sources for this rather obscure religious phenomenon. Kielbasa1 (talk) 19:27, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

User:Kielbasa1, Try adding more refs to boost the page. From my judgement, the refs you have are not enough.~~Cheers~~Mgbo120 18:03, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

The issue seems to me to pass notability standards easily, and there isn't a single claim made in the article not backed up by reliable references. I see that you mostly deal with biographies, but three published academic references (from well-respected anthropologists) about a single religious phenomenon in Papua New Guinea is well enough. You can't just say "it doesn't have enough sources", the quality of those sources matters. There is nothing whatsoever in WP:NOTE or WP:CITE about a minimum number of references, which would be a ridiculous requirement in any case.
I don't know if you have access to the references, or if you're at all informed about religious anthropology in general, but going forward I would strongly recommend that you look into the nature and quality of references before passing a crude judgement about their quantity. Kielbasa1 (talk) 18:30, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Mgbo120/Archives/2019/March&oldid=891011131"