User talk:Theroadislong

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Welcome to my talk page. Click here to leave me a message Face-smile.svg.

Thank you Theroadislong for reviewing Michael P. Snyder's page so quickly![edit]

I very much appreciate the feedback regarding links to Wikipedia/Amazon & I am going through the document now to remove these links, replace as many as possible with non-Wikipedia/Amazon links!

Cheers, McGuire Snyderlab|talk McGuire at Stanford Snyderlab (talk) Dec 17th 1:05PM Pacific Time

Request For[edit]

Linda Adler-Kassner Draft Article Updates[edit]

In response to - "press releases and YouTube are not reliable independent sources." - these items for [draft article] have been replaced with independent sources. Thank you.

mr o[edit]

Dear Kind Young Gentleman,

so i forgor to put the full list of students who look up to mr o (a lot) and his notable achievements. I will next draft.

Thank you, Jack

keeping Wikipedia clean is a good thing[edit]

Hello Theroadislong,

thank you for keeping Wikipedia clean.

You stated: "we require multiple in-depth coverage in independent sources, not their own website."

There is independent sources and I cited them subsequently.

You stated that the change of the article GHCup (Draft:GHCup) " disruptive and pointless to re-submit with zero improvement."

If that would be the case then I would say delete the "junk".

You tried your best by focusing on keeping Wikipedia clean - I suppose - is't it?

Regarding disruptive

I created (not destroyed) a page that would have been valuable for me - and I know that this would have been valuable for others. I am a paying, active member of Wikimedia Deutschland – Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V. - focusing on free knowledge. I get not a pence for this article - and not any money, and privileges. The only benefit that I have is same as yours. We share a value, and we can say contribute voluntarily, and I gain trust when I post my next article. Now, I provided further links that are not just links to their own website - but to news, univerisy websites and Q&A sites.

Regarding pointless

GHCup is new to me and probably new to a lot of Haskell users. However GHCup is considered basic - and is demanded by common IDE plugins for Microsoft Visual Studio Code. That why I started a recherche also in Wikipedia. Again, I consider this tool as basic for Haskel users because it is - and the source is citetd now.

If this is not sufficient - please contact me beforehand.

If you re-consider, after careful review, please release the article.

Thank you.

Best regards

Jörg Brüggmann

Help me to improve the Article[edit]

I just saw your message on the the talk page I am new on this platform, this is my first draft I have made, Please guide me my weak points so I can improve the draft. Thank you in advance and God bless you

Your draft article, Draft:Berlin Brands Group[edit]


individual contributor[edit]

The references are from linkedin and indeed. They aren't the new york times, but seem reliable to me. And as these are job role titles, these seem like appropriate sources. The articles are not mentioning the subject in passing. They are actually titled with the term. This is a real thing. It's big in the industry. I'm not making it up. And, it should be in wikipedia.

What in particular do you think is not up to snuff?

I've run into this on wikipedia before. Someone drops a pre-made blob of text on something as a critique. It may have lots of words, but it's not actionable. Stevebroshar (talk) 03:45, 18 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry but is NEVER a reliable source for anything, it is user edited. You will need at least three reliable sources that cover the term in depth. Theroadislong (talk) 07:15, 18 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


thank you for your speedy revision,

the subject of the article Draft: Joel Platt is notable due to their curation of the largest sports collection which contains some of the world's most historical sports artifacts, not just for meeting notable individuals. see Draft: Sports Immortals Collection

any additional assistance in constructing the article is appreciated.


R6830 (talk) 13:37, 18 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Sports Immortals Collection is not notable either so that isn't going to help. Theroadislong (talk) 13:43, 18 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Forres Sandle Manor Artical[edit]

Hi, thank you so much for reviewing the article about the school Forres Sandle Manor. I have made some new amendments to it. Can you help regarding why it is not quite there yet as a fully approved article? A huge thank you in advance, David David Woollatt (talk) 13:56, 19 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

See WP:NSCHOOL, not all schools are considered notable for inclusion especially private ones. You also need to address your conflict of interest. Theroadislong (talk) 13:59, 19 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Playmaker Capital[edit]


I have now updated my disclosure on user page 'Playmaker fans" to clearly state that I am writing the article for Playmaker Capital.

Please advise whether this is sufficient disclosure per Wikipedia's policy. If so, may I have permission to edit the Playmaker Capital article further before resubmitting it for publication approval? Playmaker fans (talk) 15:23, 20 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You are free to edit the draft Draft:Playmaker Capital and re-submit, but it doesn't appear to be notable. Theroadislong (talk) 15:52, 20 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Nothing serious[edit]

I saw that you approved William Davis Mackey, which includes a number of typical grammatical errors. Please have a look at such pages in the future. As of right now, I've corrected it. I was just curious about auto-patrol, really.  DIVINE  13:35, 21 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

User:FloridaArmy is notorious for creating poor quality, BUT notable drafts, I accept them but am not prepared to clean them up. Theroadislong (talk) 13:40, 21 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Haha, as I said before, it's nothing serious, I can understand that. Cheers  DIVINE  13:43, 21 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Can you please tell me? is it Florida or your auto patrol is being automatically working after the draft got accepted?  DIVINE  15:37, 21 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sorry DIVINE but I don't understand the question. Theroadislong (talk) 15:43, 21 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi, I have fixed those words again. Sometimes my laptop starts dancing unnaturally.  DIVINE  15:49, 21 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I am still not clear what you are asking me though, sorry to be so dense! Theroadislong (talk) 15:51, 21 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I thought FloridaArmy had autopatrolled, but when you accept a draft, you auto-mark the article as reviewed as autopatrolled. So, I was confused if this is you or Florida who has autopatrolled rights cause I didn't think or checked about it before and filed a complaint against him.  DIVINE  16:13, 21 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ahh I see now, yes I assume when I accept an article it gets marked as auto patrolled. I will try to remember to untag their articles as patrolled in future. Theroadislong (talk) 16:51, 21 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Forres Sandle Manor - Notable School[edit]

Hi, thank you so much for your comments. Forres Sandle Manor is as notable if not more so than existing UK independent schools who have articles such as Moyles Court, Ballard School, Sherborne School, and Canford School.

If you need further evidence, can you let me know so I can equip you with the details. Thank you again for your support in guiding me through the process, it really is appreciated. All the very best, David David Woollatt (talk) 14:56, 21 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

See other poor quality articles exist for that argument. Theroadislong (talk) 15:00, 21 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Draft for HealthySure[edit]

Hey@Theroadislong, thanks for the super quick review. Have removed external links from the page and tried to have a more neutral view. Can you please check this again and suggest any changes that can be made?

Thanks again! Yashdama (talk) 15:19, 21 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Still reads just like marketing and is poorly sourced. Theroadislong (talk) 15:44, 21 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Will try to get it edited from some neutral party as well
Any suggestions from you that I can implement here? Yashdama (talk) 16:36, 21 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Remove all unsourced content. Theroadislong (talk) 16:52, 21 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hey @Theroadislong removed unsourced content, also this article has no paid contributions.
Can you have a look now? Thanks in advance! Yashdama (talk) 06:17, 22 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Replying to your last comment on the draft.
Updated the draft. Removed details about company's product. Just the name remains. Has proper citation.
- Writing that the company allowed same-sex partners promotional ? I think mentioning this is informative.
- the sentence in growth section shows how awareness about healthcare because of the pandemic helped the company/insurance industry in the country grow, how is this not relevant for company's growth section? Yashdama (talk) 19:14, 22 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ok, I disagree and stand by my comments, but will not be reviewing the draft Draft:HealthySure again. Theroadislong (talk) 19:41, 22 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Alan Barnard Draft[edit]

Hi @Theroadislong. Thank you for the speedy feedback. Any tips on what I should remove to make it sound less like a CV? Thanks in advance. Also, the article has no paid for contributions. Kind regards Karini.goosen (talk) 08:42, 22 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi @Theroadislong. Which 5 links is still external links? Please give some guidance regarding that? Kind regards @Karini.goosen (talk) 07:16, 23 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Karini.goosen Here’s the first two it’s pretty obvious... [1], [2]. Theroadislong (talk) 07:30, 23 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Request on 19:26:23, 22 July 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Xavier Serif[edit]

I need assistance with creation of wikipedia page for Nelly Sfeir Gonzalez.. I am perplexed that the founding editor of a peer reviewed academic journal (Bolivian Studies Journal), past president of SALALM an association of professional librarians with international membership, and the author of several prize winning books does not qualify. Note the article includes the website of the Bolivian. Studies Journal, a book review from Hispania journal, an official list of past Toribio Medina prize winners from the SALALM website. Please have a professional librarian review the article. It appears the initial reviewer has very little knowledge regarding the administration of academic libraries. Kindly escalate this matter to someone with more expertise and knowledge of yhe field.


Xavier Serif (talk) 19:26, 22 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Looks like the draft was deleted as a copyright infringement. Theroadislong (talk) 19:37, 22 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:John R. Stuelpnagel[edit]

Information icon Hello, Theroadislong. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:John R. Stuelpnagel, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 00:02, 23 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Thank you for reviewing the Navarik wikipedia page. Navarik is important to many people in Vancouver and has a lot of employee's with Navarik on their LinkedIn employment history. Having a wikipedia page describe the company will help past, current and future employees with their career. Rhalldearn (talk) 00:15, 23 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That has absolutely nothing to do with Wikipedia's goals of building an encyclopaedia. Theroadislong (talk) 06:55, 23 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Makayla Malaka Draft.[edit]

Hello Theroadislong,

Trust this meets you well.

I appreciate your gesture of taking out time to comment on my draft, severally, I have taken out time to get independent sources for this subject, I was glad when I recently saw an independent source of the subject which is the last two references on my draft, there are three other references which pass for WP:GNG and I got approval for it by a Wikipedia editor.

Most importantly, these sources are from reliable Newspaper in West Africa. My major concern is why you keep saying it doesn't pass for a Wikipedia article, you've declined the article once and even before I resubmit the new one I have just drafted, I get to see your comment.

Please kindly explain how it doesn't pass for a Wikipedia article after getting independent sources to verify the authenticity of the subject. Thank you. Karissa 247 (talk) 10:43, 23 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It's not a question of " verifying the authenticity of the subject" you need to suggest how they pass WP:GNG or WP:NSINGER. Theroadislong (talk) 11:02, 23 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Explain why you rejected my Greeny Phatom article Pddevlin041 (talk) 12:35, 23 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pddevlin041 I declined your draft I did not reject it, the reason is given in the large pink box and IMDb and YouTube are not reliable sources. Theroadislong (talk) 12:38, 23 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Greeny Phatom is a fairly obscure web cartoon despite its cult following so the most reliable source you can is tv tropes and the official sources are all inaccurate Pddevlin041 (talk) 13:21, 23 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Unless there are multiple reliable independent sources, we can't have an article about it. Theroadislong (talk) 13:23, 23 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Regarding Draft:EasyPeasy Method[edit]

Good afternoon. May I ask why I failed to meet the source requirements for this page? Shlyst (talk) 19:17, 23 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sure... is a primary source, Unddit, YouTube and are not reliable sources, and don’t mention the topic. Theroadislong (talk) 19:32, 23 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

hi dear[edit]

Draft:Hubdar Brohi accept please thank you Hubdarbrohii (talk) 12:54, 24 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your draft was rejected like most us, you are not notable enough for an article, see Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not about YOU. Theroadislong (talk) 12:57, 24 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

AfC draft Draft:BUUNT[edit]

Hi @Theroadislong, I noticed you also reviewed Draft:BUUNT. I nominated it for speedy deletion, per Wikipedia:CSD G11. I wanted to get a second opinion on the article: do you think it could be saved? Or do you think the article should be deleted? Thanks, Urban Versis 32KB(talk / contribs) 21:07, 24 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Looks like it was deleted! Theroadislong (talk) 21:50, 24 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How to deal with Draft:Hubdar Brohi[edit]

Hello, it looks like to me that you rejected a submission of Draft:Hubdar_Brohi and the author resubmitted this and got only declined. The author is also repeatedly commenting on the AFC help desk. How to deal with this situation? QiuLiming1 (talk) 04:35, 25 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Looks like it has been deleted again, whilst I was sleeping. Theroadislong (talk) 07:34, 25 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The author and the rest of their puppet farm now indeffed. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:12, 25 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Seeds Corp. page[edit]

Hello Thero, Thank you for the helpful information you provided. I edited the article as per your instructions, now references can be found at the footer and I avoided to use any marketing expressions. Thanks again for your care! Assem Bahader (talk) 13:14, 25 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Tony Mitton[edit]

Hello. Many thanks for such a speedy review. Ive now added independent reviews of his work and some more prizes that he won. But it is always a judgement call about how much is needed. I'll try and find some more then resubmit. best wishes davidz Dz3 (talk) 14:36, 25 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Draft: Clare Snider Smith[edit]

So for the paper I am using for the Clare Snider Smith simply lists the countries and not the places or collections. It was written by either an Archivist or the Office of Advancement at Knox College. I wished to add where her work was found to have the article be accepted for her to be considered notable, but I do not have access to the information on where her works would be found outside of the country names. Helene Wiki User (talk) 15:39, 25 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The source I am citing is a lecture from an art history professor given at an event that I have a transcript from from the archives. How is that not considered a reliable/published source? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Helene Wiki User (talkcontribs) 15:47, 27 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Is the archived copy accessible via the internet or is just something that you possess? Theroadislong (talk) 15:50, 27 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I have a digital copy that's not connected to the archives, but the transcript is not on the digital archives. Helene Wiki User (talk) 15:56, 27 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I have fixed everything you asked. Can my article please be approved now? Helene Wiki User (talk) 16:27, 27 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I changed the line. Is that good enough to get the article approved? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Helene Wiki User (talkcontribs) 16:01, 27 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

About your last comment, that's a very short piece written by someone in the library. It only has 3 sentences. That is not the source I am using to say she helped develop the technique. Helene Wiki User (talk) 18:08, 27 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Playmaker Capital Submission[edit]


I have now added a number of reliable sources to the Playmaker Capital article. Can you please inform me of anything else that needs to be added or changed in order to have the article approved?

I am happy to make the changes that you suggest, but would just really appreciate as much guidance as you can provide.

Thank you. Playmaker fans (talk) 20:34, 25 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Tony Mitton[edit]

Hello Ive added external reviews inc. a nice quote from the guardian. Hope this is sufficient. david Dz3 (talk) 09:09, 26 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Ad65718 (talk) 02:45, 27 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hi, you just declined Draft:KURU Footwear. Could you please elaborate on the issue and how to improve it? Which parts sound like advertising so I can remove or fix? Downinit9 (talk) 08:14, 27 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The "Products" section seems to be sourced to a number of commercial adverts for the shoes. Do you have a conflict of interest by any chance? Theroadislong (talk) 08:28, 27 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Kinetic exclusion assay page, history[edit]

Hi Theroadislong, It looks like you removed the history paragraph from the end of the page I created describing kinetic exclusion assay on 9/27/21 and also added a note that this page may be edited or created by an undisclosed paid contributer. I was paid to create the page but I disclosed that as soon as I understood I needed to, shortly after the page was created. The history section you removed is accurate and neutral, why did you delete it? Would you please put it back? Besides providing a more complete understanding of kinetic exclusion assay it also provides a direction for readers interested in learning more.

Also I would appreciate it if you would remove the note since I have disclosed that I was paid.


the section you deleted


Kinetic exclusion assay was pioneered in 1995 by the founders of Sapidyne Instruments Inc., a scientific instrument manufacturer located in Boise, Idaho, USA. Tomofidabio (talk) 19:15, 27 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No that was correctly removed as unsourced. Theroadislong (talk) 19:38, 27 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Quad Studio[edit]

Dear Theroadislong,

I have added many references to show Quad Studio and the projects are well published, many of these design websites have a long history and have many followers. Please can you review again to see if it is fine. If there is anything still missing, please let me know.

thanks Kelvin Chu QUAD (talk) 06:48, 28 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Creation of Wikipedia Account[edit]

Hello dear Sir/Madam,

How are you doing?

Receive my greetings and best wishes!

I am requesting you to have my account created on Wikipedia. I believe that I am worthy and that my account should be activated. I have written so many articles and poem to educate people of the world.

Hoping to hear you kind response concerning my requisition.


Yours sincerely,

Emmanuel Nigel

Email: (Redacted) Emmanuel Nigel (talk) 01:31, 29 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your post above betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of how Wikipedia works.Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 01:40, 29 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Women in Red August 2022[edit]

Women in Red logo with mike.png
Women in Red August 2022, Vol 8, Issue 8, Nos 214, 217, 236, 237, 238, 239

Online events:

See also:

Other ways to participate:

Facebook icon.jpg Facebook | Instagram.svg Instagram | Pinterest Shiny Icon.svg Pinterest | Twitter icon.png Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 11:00, 29 July 2022 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply[reply]

your edit to kinetic exclusion assay[edit]

hi Theroadislong, On Sept 27 2021 you removed the history paragraph from the kinetic exclusion assay page and added a flag that it may have been edited by an undisclosed paid contributer. I have disclosed that I am a paid contributer and I have done my best to meet wikipedias standards for a neutral viewpoint. What do I need to do for you to feel right about removing the tag? Also, the brief history that was there was correct and seemed neutral to me, why did you remove it? I want to put it back but I also want to understand what problem you have with it. Thanks in advance.

tomofidaho Tomofidabio (talk) 14:15, 29 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The history section was unsourced and your user page has no disclosure of paid editing on it, you should NOT be editing the article at all and should using the request edit system on the article's talk page. Theroadislong (talk) 14:21, 29 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Revised Wikipedia article[edit]

Dear Theroadislong,

it's been about 5 months since our Wikipedia article has been rejected.

Therefore we have revised it and rendered the content to be conform in Wikipedia's ethos and purpose.

Could you please review it and see if you could release it?

Thank you, Dimitris Dcontu (talk) 18:13, 29 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry but it still doesn't seem to me, be appropriate content for a Wikipedia article, you can ask for other opinions here Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk though. Theroadislong (talk) 19:18, 29 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Tony Mitton[edit]

Hello in the section you say is unsourced I said "source as above". Would it be better to repeat the ref tag fro the previous section? thanks david Dz3 (talk) 08:40, 30 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, Wikipedia:Combining sources Theroadislong (talk) 08:49, 30 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please check this draft[edit]


Can you please check this page and let me know if there is any issue?

Draft:Shanta Holdings Pujan.saha (talk) 11:24, 31 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Brattstrom Draft[edit]

Hello -

I saw your comment concerning my initial submission and wanted to explain that I am aware of the errors that you cited. I am in the process of revising the entire article, including providing all required secondary sources. I am now a month into that process and the revised article is greatly improved over the initial. In your opinion, should I revise the draft as I go, or replace the initial with the finished revision? As you can tell, I am very new to Wikipedia, but I'm gradually learning its rules. Any suggestions you may offer will be appreciated. Thank you for your input. DINOMICK (talk) 22:49, 31 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hello Theroadislong,

Thank you for checking my Draft:AirSlate. I have thoroughly reviewed and corrected the issues that you've pointed out in terms of sources, additionally I removed the section that read like an adv. along with making other necessary edits.

Unfortunately upon resubmitting my draft was declined again due to the same reason.

Can you please assist in reviewing the entry and advise me what what should be rewritten or removed based on your expertise?

Thanks in advance! Veroni4ka.Lime (talk) 09:26, 1 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

David Paulides section changes[edit]

Thank you for undoing the YouTube entries. My main question is - The Wikipedia webpage shows (at the bottom) that there are two films but at the top it says "a film". Shouldn't one or the other be corrected? (i.e. : Should "a film" be changed to "two films"? Or should the second film be erased from the webpage?) Thanks for answering in advance.Markem (talk) 18:19, 1 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You reverted Bezau[edit]

Dear Theroadislong, you just reverted the page Bezau respecively the changes I made there. You can see for example on this independent source: and on a lot of other sources or simply on the school page, that the information I changed were correct and the old one is outdated. Anyway, as there were problems with you about another page, I leave it to you to stick with the wrong information (to which you reverted) or take your revert back. I can not spend more time on this issue. If you want to see it: proof is there, that the information I provided are correct. Best Byteutates (talk) 18:37, 1 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You are free to add the info back using the reliable source, but your original edit had no source. Theroadislong (talk) 18:40, 1 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • As you can see, there was no source before as well.
  • I provided the above mentioned source for the school page (among other sources) and it "was not enough as well". So, why should it be enough now? If it would - why was it not for the school page? Sorry, all this makes no sense to me. As I mentioned: either you are interested in having a correct page and finding the truth or not. If yes, you have the source now and you should know, that my changes were correct.
And yes, also this page had this independent reference: (among other references)
  • Let's close this. You seem to be a nice guy, but I can completely not understand how you guys reacted here and why a page about a public school can not go online and how it was marked as "advertisement". To rely on primary information is normal and ideal, as secondary information rely on primary information and there might be mistaces, when somebody copied the information from the primary ones. You probably know the game "telephone", where a child is saying a word to another one (very silently) and that one to the next. In the end you end up with a totally other word. That is why you want to rely on the primary source! So why you can not trust a public school page for information will be always a mystery for me. Anyway, thank you for your time and wish you a nice evening! Byteutates (talk) 18:53, 1 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You have misunderstood how Wikipedia works. Wikipedia has no interest in "truth" Wikipedia summarises what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a topic. We hardly use primary sources at all except for the most basic facts. Theroadislong (talk) 19:06, 1 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It seems to me, that what you write is not correct.
Let me show you with an example, that Wikipedia is using primary sources a lot: Go to page Edinburgh and check, where Wiki takes the information about the population. Guess what - yes, this is a primary source and you do not rely on a newspaper article, which prints the numbers of the population and has them from the primary source, but you use the primary source - which makes totally sense! You find also a lot of other examples, where primary sources are used. I explained to you, why you want to use primary sources (if you can and it makes sense). Did my explanation not make sense to you? You may want to refer to science, where you want to use primary sources. Obviously, to make your statement stronger, you may as well rely on other sources as well etc., but you would not use secondary data, when you can have primary data!
If Wikipedia has no interest in "truth" (we probably have different understanding here what truth is) - well then there is a problem, don't you think so / or you really think it is "good" to have a page, where you have independent sources, which show you something is that way and you leave it the other way? For example: you "know" (based on the independent source I provided to you, respectively I provided in the school page (or do you have other sources, which show, that you are correct?) that the information you reverted to in the page Bezau are not correct (you also did not mention anything about my comment, that the information you reverted to has no citation at all and just ignored my comment here).
So if you have no interest in having a page with correct information - well, then - at least I would say - there is a problem here. Anyway, you seem to be fine with knowing that a page you reverted to is incorrect (based on the sources at hand - again, if you have other sources fine, but so far it seems you have none and I already provided you with several (also in the school page); please don't explain me here again, that I can change it again, as I already did and asked you already - which you ignored - why the provided source should be ok here and was not on the other page) - so be it. Byteutates (talk) 19:41, 1 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Please ask at the Wikipedia:Teahouse for further guidance, you have clearly miss-understood the situation and have no confidence in what I am saying. Theroadislong (talk) 20:12, 1 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Dear Theroadislong, it would have been nice, if you could have answered my questions or have said something about my arguments, instead of just writting, that others miss-understood something -> what / why etc. and sorry, that is a lame way to end something? You may not see it that way, but I do try to see your points and relate to them, whereas for me it seems, that you do totally not want to see my arguments / points and I get no answer from you about my points. Anyway: have a good night! Best Byteutates (talk) 20:23, 1 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Help Review a new article[edit]

Hello Theroadislong, I have created a new article some days ago and it has be auto patrolled but it has not been review by a new page review, The page is DJ Kelblizz (Disc jockey). I think you will be kind enough to assist with the review process, thanks Favouredprince (talk) 21:58, 1 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I suggest you use the WP:AFC process next time, your article was speedy deleted as not notable. Theroadislong (talk) 08:15, 2 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I am not Happy, I feel bad that you did not review the article but you nominated it for deletion, thanks for your time. Favouredprince (talk) 22:32, 2 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I DID review the article, the result of the review was that it should be speedy deleted as not asserting any notability. Theroadislong (talk) 06:33, 3 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You didn’t do a google search, not a musical artist but a disc jockey Favouredprince (talk) 00:25, 5 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You didn’t do a google search, not a musical artist but a disc jockey Favouredprince (talk) 00:25, 5 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Favouredprince The article was deleted because it was "about a real person, which does not credibly indicate the importance or significance of the subject)" It is irrelevant that they are a DJ. Also deleted here Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DJ Kelblizz.The topic is not notable move on.Theroadislong (talk) 06:29, 5 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It's not advertisement. It includes info from reliable sources.[edit] includes information from reliable sources like Yahoo. It includes the criticism. (talk) 09:06, 2 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That doesn't preclude it being advertising too. Theroadislong (talk) 09:36, 2 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Draft:Mahmoud Shehabi Khorassani[edit]

Hello, Theroadislong, yes,You are right, I resubmited this draft without change because after a conversation (see below) with Missvain, She asks me to resubmit again, because my sources are solid and in the Wikipedia standard.Best regards

Hi, Missvain, Thank you for comments on this draft. I'm trying to determine why citations, for example: This book :

[Biography, scientific and cultural services of the late Professor Mahmoud Shehabi Khorasani, Association of Cultural Works and Honors.زندگی نامه و خدمات علمی و فرهنگی مرحوم استاد محمود شهابی خراسانی انجمن آثار ومفاخر فرهنگی, . ISBN 978-964-528-280-4 تهران: انجمن آثار و مفاخر فرهنگی ،۶۶۴]

Or, this article written in one of IRAN’s largest national and quotidian newspapers:

[Mahmoud Shehabi by Ali Najafi and Jalal Rafi: Ettelaat newspaper, national edition, Wednesday, August 23, 2009, Tehran, Iran [ ],

Or, another publication in the same journal : [Commemoration of the late Professor Mahmoud Shehabi: Ettelaat newspaper, national edition, Saturday, January 21, 2017, Tehran, Iran [ ]

Or, these important literary magazine of Iran likes:

Mehrnameh Magazine No. 48 August 2016, Pages 90 to 106, Tehran, Iran.

or Interview with Dr. Ali Akbar Shahabi: Kayhan Farhangi magazine, 4th of July 1987, page 5, Teheran, Iran.

and other mainstream sources fail to meet citation guidelines in this case.

So,I would ask you if possible to reconsider your judgment concerning this Draft Thanks Docteur Mansour Chehabi (talk) 08:33, 1 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Docteur Mansour Chehabi - Feel free to resubmit for reviewers to take a look at! Missvain (talk) 14:50, 1 August 2022 (UTC) Docteur Mansour Chehabi (talk) 15:51, 2 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Request on 17:14:04, 2 August 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by[edit]

My article on Impagliazzo's Five Worlds was rejected. I understand that the subject it covers is fairly specific and derives primarily from one reference, nevertheless, the topic it covers is widely used in research (e.g. [1], [2], [3] to list just three). In fact, the reason I created the page was because I found it ridiculous that Wikipedia didn't have a page on it!

[1] [2] [3]

Could you please help me in proceeding with the submission? I could add it to the main page on cryptography ( but the topic feels a bit more specific. Regardless, it should be there somewhere on Wikipedia. I appreciate your help in the matter. (talk) 17:14, 2 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your draft was declined, not rejected, (rejected would mean there was no hope) the references don't show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article they don't show significant coverage about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. If there are no more sources, then that indicates that we can't have an article about the topic. You could ask at the talk page of Cryptography but even there it will require independent reliable sources. Theroadislong (talk) 18:13, 2 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you for taking the time and answering! The concept of "minicrypt" and "cryptomania" is widely used in research articles on cryptography (of which I mentioned three but I'm guessing there are hundreds if not more). So it is certainly covered in independent sources although I am not sure how to clarify/emphasise this. Should I just add a bunch of references where the terms are used? This is perhaps a more general question anyway because I often find many things missing from Wikipedia which are of this nature, so knowing how to remedy the situation would help in general.
I am sorry for my ignorance and appreciate you indulging my silly questions. As for the article, I was anyway planning to add more details over time but I was hoping it could be a stub article to begin with and people could potentially collaboratively add material. Atulsingharora (talk) 06:59, 3 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hello, Theroadislong,

This article was created in 2006 and so moving it to Draft space after 16 years was an inappropriate move and has been reverted. Please only move recently created articles from main space to Draft space. The editor who moved it back to main space referred to this Village Pump proposal from earlier this year as an explanation for their reversion. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 01:49, 4 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Noted, thanks Liz. 08:14, 4 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
Thanks for reviewing Articles for Creation drafts. It seems every time I open up the AFC help desk you are helping others. Thanks again! weeklyd3 (block | talk | contributions) 20:32, 4 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hello! It seems my publication won't be admitted in Russian. Please, tell me how I could relocate it onto the Russian page? Artyom1983 (talk) 07:16, 6 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Here you goЗаглавная_страница Theroadislong (talk) 07:18, 6 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

New Page Patrol newsletter August 2022[edit]

New Page Review queue August 2022

Hello Theroadislong,

Backlog status

After the last newsletter (No.28, June 2022), the backlog declined another 1,000 to 13,000 in the last week of June. Then the July backlog drive began, during which 9,900 articles were reviewed and the backlog fell by 4,500 to just under 8,500 (these numbers illustrate how many new articles regularly flow into the queue). Thanks go to the coordinators Buidhe and Zippybonzo, as well as all the nearly 100 participants. Congratulations to Dr vulpes who led with 880 points. See this page for further details.

Unfortunately, most of the decline happened in the first half of the month, and the backlog has already risen to 9,600. Understandably, it seems many backlog drive participants are taking a break from reviewing and unfortunately, we are not even keeping up with the inflow let alone driving it lower. We need the other 600 reviewers to do more! Please try to do at least one a day.

MB and Novem Linguae have taken on some of the coordination tasks. Please let them know if you are interested in helping out. MPGuy2824 will be handling recognition, and will be retroactively awarding the annual barnstars that have not been issued for a few years.
Open letter to the WMF
The Page Curation software needs urgent attention. There are dozens of bug fixes and enhancements that are stalled (listed at Suggested improvements). We have written a letter to be sent to the WMF and we encourage as many patrollers as possible to sign it here. We are also in negotiation with the Board of Trustees to press for assistance. Better software will make the active reviewers we have more productive.
TIP - Reviewing by subject
Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages by their most familiar subjects can do so from the regularly updated sorted topic list.
New reviewers
The NPP School is being underused. The learning curve for NPP is quite steep, but a detailed and easy-to-read tutorial exists, and the Curation Tool's many features are fully described and illustrated on the updated page here.
  • Consider staying informed on project issues by putting the project discussion page on your watchlist.
  • If you have noticed a user with a good understanding of Wikipedia notability and deletion, suggest they help the effort by placing {{subst:NPR invite}} on their talk page.
  • If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process and its software.
  • To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:25, 6 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]