User talk: Sophisticatedevening

Welcome to my talk page!

• Please use the Reply button to reply to a message, or add topic (+) to start a new section.
• If I have left a message on your talk page, please DO NOT post a reply here, instead, reply there.
  • Mention me using the "Mention a user" button in the Reply box or type out {{ping|Sophisticatedevening}}.
  • I will have your talk page on watch and will note when you have replied.
• If you prefer to manually edit the page to post:
  • Use an accurate and appropriate heading.
  • Indent your comment by using an appropriate number of colons ':'.
  • Sign your post with four tildes (~~~~) at the end.

Please click here to leave me a new message.

It is 4:44 AM where I live. If it's the middle of the night or during the working day I may well not be online. For accurate time please the page.

DYK for Parasitic ant

On 7 May 2025, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Parasitic ant, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that queen parasitic ants can lay their own eggs inside of a host's colony? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Parasitic ants. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Parasitic ant), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:03, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Draft:Christopher Mellon AfC review inquiry

Draft:Christopher Mellon...

Thank for your review. I have a concern. You wrote as the edit summary:

I'm afraid that after spotchecks I do not see this passing WP:GNG. The article is still ref bombed with reliable looking titles, but very little content about him as a person.

And the full decline:

I'm afraid that after spotchecks I do not see this passing WP:GNG. The article is still ref bombed with reliable looking titles, but very little content about him as a person. Take the space.com one for example. He is mentioned a single time, and not even a whole sentence, just the ending. Then take Washington Post. Again, barely any actual content about him, it just name dropped. CBS news, just a short transcript of an interview with him. This does nothing for notability at all. Ref after ref, and I still don't see it. Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, just a few sentences, one of which is just a quote he said. I am not at all confident that if this were to be moved to mainspace, this wouldn't just be deleted again at WP:AFD.

You began and ended about 28 minutes later, to read a dense 1,996 word article (6-8 pages printed) plus the time to "spot check" the citations, and write out your responses?

The article sources detailed here: Draft talk:Christopher Mellon#Notability and References analysis show up to ten (10) WP:SIGCOV and WP:RS compliant sources, with over 2,800 words about the WP:BLP subject.

There's already at least one person who was tough on the sources saying they would !vote Keep at Afd based on my draft.

Can I ask how you were able to analyze all this so incredibly quickly and come to this conclusion? Can you please explain the policy/rules based errors I have in my comprehensive review of the sourcing on that talk page? -- Very Polite Person (talk) 18:02, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

While I appreciate the effort you took to provide your own source assessment, I do disagree in that I do not see the WP:SIGCOV needed despite the table. I outlined the summary of my check in the decline reason, so I'll reiterate here. What is provided right now are mentions in a bunch of reliable sources. But just name-dropping him isn't enough, and as I said before, I do not think this would survive an AfD if accepted. As for the time, I don't see how me spending 30 minutes reviewing through this is "quick", given all of your sources are online. The word count and prose is fine, but that's just not the issue here. I never saw or stated that I saw any "policy/rules based errors", and I still don't. Again, I appreciate the effort, but I don't see a WP:GNG pass here. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 18:18, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

May I ask you to reconsider Draft:Christopher Mellon, and give the article and sourcing a more thorough review given I've uncovered a book published by the Brookings Institution by notable author Susan L. Marquis, which substantially covers, addressed, and reinforces Mellon's role in the creation of the United States Special Operations Command? It was previously limiting in sourcing to Boykin on that, but this book (1997, my edition is 2011) is an exemplary source.

Details on Marquis source: Draft talk:Christopher Mellon#Susan Marquis

I've also uncovered a major controversy he was involved in during his secoond Senate career, to the point he was personally defended in the Wall Street Journal by US Senator Richard J. Durbin. We've now got him on likely notability for his role in creating USSOCOM, being a Mellon, his Department of Defense work, his role in oversight of the National Security Agency to the point upset the White House during the Iraq War, all from 1985-2016, and only then are we even getting to his UFO-related affairs since then. Everything before the UFOs is around 2/3 of the article--the UFOs only come at the end, which itself is a notability boost on the sourcing.

Substantial expansion: Draft:Christopher Mellon (Diff 1289360122)

Thanks for your time. I'm genuinely struggling to fathom how he's not notable for WP:GNG based on the several substantial pieces on him and his career. This article would be a trivial AfD Keep as written. As @Gråbergs Gråa Sång: wrote on the talk page there, "GNG allows for 'many streams make a river' when source content is more than a trivial mention. If this was an afd, I'd say keep based on these sources." -- Very Polite Person (talk) 03:43, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

Just in the interest of fairness, I usually do not review the same draft twice. If you have found better sourcing and believe it meets WP:GNG now, then I encourage you to resubmit it and another reviewer will get to it when they have a chance. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 12:31, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

Review

Hi. Sorry to randomly contact you but I have a question.. I've been editing Wikipedia for nearly a decade now but only recently started to make a habit of doing it daily so there is many things I am still learning. I recently got a notification saying you reviewed an article I created. What does that mean? I apologize for an obvious newbie question even though I'm not really a newbie, just uninformed 😅.. I would greatly appreciate you telling me what that is all about and what it means whenever you do it? If you do not have time to answer, I completely understand. But hope to hear back from you soon.. Thanks! Bruteforce7700 (talk) 15:34, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

Oh no worries, so there's this kind of system in place called New Pages Patrol to help control the influx and "quality" of new articles. When articles are first created, moved to mainspace or created from a redirect, they need a special flag to them that allows the article to be indexed by search engines. People with the New Page Reviewer user group have the ability to kinda set that flag and allow it to be indexed after they examine if it needs CSD, PROD, Maintenance tagging etc. If the article is fine, it's marked as reviewed and nominated/deleted if not. Just kind of a method to help deal with problematic pages. I think I reviewed one of your articles so once the search engines/scrapers get to it it'll show up on Google and LLMs. I'm actually just reviewing for the May backlog drive, you should sign up or request at WP:PERM if your're interested in that kinda stuff. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 16:17, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

Request on 20:44:35, 8 May 2025 for assistance on AfC submission by IvanBrajkovic

• IvanBrajkovic (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Kraj Programa (band) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello!

I am wondering about the references I added while submitting Kraj Programa article. The references posted are all articles from well known publications in Croatia, but they are, of course, in Croatian language. The references talk about the bands sound, live energy and ethos. The article was declined because of the references and I am not sure why.

Could you please provide more insight what is expected from the references?

Thank you in advance!

Regards, Ivan

IvanBrajkovic (talk) 20:44, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

The language isn't really the problem all are acceptable, it's that the coverage isn't really about the band itself, it's about other events that the band is either a part of, opening for, etc. That isn't the significant coverage needed for WP:NBAND. I also see interviews, which don't help since it is just the member talking about themself. Take the Avril Lavigne one from index.hr for example, I only see 1 sentence with the band. Then the torpedo.media; the article isn't about the band, it's about a music event that they closed and they were only given a few sentences to at the end. Also on a lesser note the article prose needs some work for neutrality as phrases like The band is known for its "do it yourself" approach, years of dedication, and focus on quality is not reflective of a neutral point of view. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 21:33, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

I Thought I Was Better Than You

The blocking redirect at I Thought I Was Better Than You has been deleted. — Cyrius|✎ 23:54, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 23:55, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

what does this mean?

"This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of music-related topics). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia." how can I make Draft:Path to the Moon (1956 song) better? Can I have suggestions? TheNonEditor (talk) 01:45, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

I would recommend taking a look at some of the notability guidelines for this like WP:NSONG and the rest of WP:NMUSIC, if you are unable to find any sources to support it's notability then it is unlike it will pass those guidelines. If you are able to identify any new sources to support it then feel free to resubmit it when you're ready. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 01:56, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

Draft:Aviation Psychology and Applied Human Factors

Thanks for your review,

I have improved the draft and added several external references. I would be happy to have additional suggestion if required

Thanks a lot Mickael303134 (talk) 18:29, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

None of the sources are about the journal, it's only links to papers hosted on the journal itself, and these don't really help establish it's notability. WP:NJOURNAL might have some guidance on specifically what makes a journal notable. It doesn't really matter the size or "importance" of it if there are no reliable and independent sources discussing it at length, not just mentions. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 18:38, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Sucking louse

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Sucking louse you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Snoteleks -- Snoteleks (talk) 01:21, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

@Sophisticatedevening Hello, I've left a review and put your nomination on hold for the next seven days. There are still some fixes needed. Please see the comments I left. Thanks in advance! — Snoteleks (talk) 02:46, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Sucking louse

The article Sucking louse you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article needs changes or clarifications to meet the good article criteria. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Sucking louse and Talk:Sucking louse/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Snoteleks -- Snoteleks (talk) 03:01, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Sucking louse

The article Sucking louse you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Sucking louse for comments about the article, and Talk:Sucking louse/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Snoteleks -- Snoteleks (talk) 14:22, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 12

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Amblycera, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Wiley.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:57, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Sucking louse

Hello! Your submission of Sucking louse at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! ~Darth Stabro^{Talk • Contribs} 00:15, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Amblycera

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Amblycera you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of ZKevinTheCat -- ZKevinTheCat (talk) 03:45, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Request for review

Hello @Sophisticatedevening I have made edits to the draft:Karan Aanand regarding its expansion. The artist has played lead roles in many films and serials, and has also produced 2 films. I think it meets the criteria of WP:NACTOR. Please reconsider it. Neuroswasthya (talk) 05:28, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

I usually do not review the same draft twice, however you are welcome to resubmit it for another reviewer to look at it. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 12:37, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Ok thank you @Sophisticatedevening 122.177.96.230 (talk) 05:16, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

abracadabra_La

Hi, I'm a new wiki writer/editor and I am not sure how to address the issues that were sent back to me. i.e. the response says that my article/submission was created by large language models (AI) and no AI was used. I am trying to get this right but I also don't know know how to address something that is just not accurate. \ HHSILVER (talk) 14:34, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

The draft was deleted as an advertisement, so I am unable to look back and see specifics. However, LLMs tend to have very obvious similarities in how they write, one of which being a very promotional tone. If you would like you can ask the deleting administrator for it to be restored through WP:REFUND. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 16:11, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

I'm not sure what kind of hazing this is. But this was not advertising in any way. It was also not written by LLM's and nor was it promotional in tone or meaning. What is clear is that there are editors reading quickly and not reading carefully or helping a new editor get up to speed. The deletion of my work is an aggressive and not productive act. I spent hours on this and to say it was written by LLM's is just flat out wrong. I may not be an encylopedia writer but I know how to write and this quick dismissal of my writing is not productive. HHSILVER (talk) 17:54, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

There is no hazing, but I am sorry you feel that the deletion is aggressive. I cannot do anything further with this, and I encourage you to heed the deleting administrator's advice and consider rewriting it again after reading through the links provided. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 18:03, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

I had specific notes for WIKI editors in the last draft. I don't think it was even read. To ask me to re-create work that I spent hours on and to casually say re-write is not helpful or productive. Never in my wildest dreams would I think that editors who didn't even bother to contemplate what was written would trash my work. Which was considered and carefully put together. If there is a way to get it back so I can copy offline would be appreciated. This whole thing has left a bad taste in my mouth. I appreciate standards bu this is just not inviting or productive. I guess I thought it was more a collaborative community. But to keep hearing my work was written by an LLM when it wasn't or that it was an advertistement when it wasn't is not productive. HHSILVER (talk) 18:11, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

I understand it can be frustrating as this is your first time writing an article and to feel like your work is being trashed, but again I cannot help you with this. You have to show the deleting administrator why it should be restored if you would like a copy of it. Again, sorry this has been so frustrating. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 18:16, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Amblycera

The article Amblycera you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Amblycera for comments about the article, and Talk:Amblycera/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of ZKevinTheCat -- ZKevinTheCat (talk) 04:04, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

BigDeuceFOF

Thank you for moving the article to draft space. I’ve added new Google News–indexed sources and cleaned up the formatting. If it meets the notability guidelines, I’d appreciate a review when you have time. Thanks again. Bigdeucefan2 (talk) 01:11, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for working on it, it's submitted so someone should be able to take a look at it soon, cheers. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 01:16, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Articles for Creation backlog drive

Hello Sophisticatedevening:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive in June!
The goal of this drive is to reduce the backlog of unreviewed drafts to less than 1 month of outstanding reviews from the current 3+ months. Bonus points will be given for reviewing drafts that have been waiting more than 30 days. The drive is running from 1 June 2025 through 30 June 2025.

You may find Category:AfC pending submissions by age or other categories and sorting helpful.

Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.
There is a backlog of over 3200 pages, so start reviewing drafts. We're looking forward to your help! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:25, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

• If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list or alternatively to opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page.

AfC mailing list

Hello,

I noticed you modified the AfC mailing list, and included in that was the changing of "Newsletters" and other talk subpages to the root user talk. Why did you make this change? Many users such as myself prefer to keep these notifications separate from other talk messages.

Thanks! ~ Eejit43 (talk) 00:29, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

@Eejit43: Oh apologies, when I was creating the list petscan gave me the user pages instead of the talk ones (the talk list was very short), so I just AWB added the talk myself. Some folks had the categories on a subpage that they transcluded onto their user page, so I was manually going around and changing those to the root, and I must have missed that yours said newsletter. Super sorry about that, I've never made a mailing list before so I'm still trying to figure it out. Cheers, Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 00:37, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

No worries! I should note that that appeared to happen to all users- there were ten usages of "Newsletters" subpages, and seems like about the same amount of other miscellaneous subpage names. These have all been changed to the root user talk page.

Do you have the bandwidth to fix these changes? If not I'm happy to help and comb through the diff. ~ Eejit43 (talk) 00:44, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Yup I'll fix those, do you mind sharing the specific diff? Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 00:45, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Amazing, thanks! Here is the diff since your major revision up to the current version. ~ Eejit43 (talk) 00:48, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Alrighty, I think I got all of them. Thanks for letting me know, Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 00:59, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Request on 13:23:04, 23 May 2025 for assistance on AfC submission by Adaniel

• Adaniel (talk · contribs)
  • Hilda Grīva (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
  • Draft:Hilda Grīva (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I had been a very active Wikipedian on the Hungarian Wikipedia, but in the last years I only worked with Wikidata, Commons and Wikibase. I would like to improve with data and biographies English, Hungarian, Dutch pages, and I hope that I can add many relevant new improvments and new articles. I understand that many things changed on Wikipedia since I edited the encyclopedia part, but I would really like to this well, and I would be very happy if you would review and comment on my second try of this submission.

Adaniel (talk) 13:23, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

I usually do not review the same submission twice, however you are welcome to resubmit it and another reviewer will take a look. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 13:52, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

Aviation Psychology and Applied Human Factors: still under review

Hi,

I would like to publish the article submitted to Aviation Psychology and Applied Human Factors, if necessary, but it has been under review for quite a long time now. Would it be possible to receive any additional feedback, if needed, so that I can make the required revisions, right now the process is blocked— or alternatively, to proceed with the publication of the article?

Thank you in advance for your time and consideration.

Best regards, Mickael303134 (talk) 11:31, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

The process is not blocked, it is submitted for review. There is a queue of over 2900 drafts awaiting review, but it will eventually get one. I personally still don't see it meeting WP:NJOURNAL, but another person will assess that as well. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 16:37, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

Follow-up on Castle of Venus Draft

Hi Sophisticatedevening,

Thanks for your time reviewing my draft article on the Draft:Castle of Venus. I’ve revised the text carefully to make the language is super-economical and matches Wikipedia's Manual of Style, avoiding anything that could seem vague, speculative, or promotional.

I also wanted to mention that I speak Italian and have reviewed Wikipedia's Italian page on the Castle (Castello di Venere), including their references. However, I've cited the English-language research I used to compile the article. I also think using the English references are better if anyone wishes to learn more. I've only included the citations of Italian news sources where no English equivalents exist.

If accepted, you might want to associate the Castle of Venus article with the Italian Castello di Venere in the language drop-down.

The revised draft is available here: Draft:Castle of Venus.

If you have any additional suggestions or concerns, let me know.

Thanks again for your feedback, Kned Wiki (talk) 11:54, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

I declined your draft as it appears written almost entirely by AI. Please rewrite the draft in your own words instead. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 16:33, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

How to get a role: "Authenticated Users"?

Hello, @Sophisticatedevening. I'm joined on Discord server. I just follow the instructions by typing /auth and clicking link it says: "Success! Authorization sent to the bot! :)". So, what can I do now? –HirowoWiki (📝) ^w^ 22:37, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Doesn't look like it authenticated yet, I'd give it a few hours or so to make sure it's not down or anything and try /auth again. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 22:47, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Okay, but there was a problem. Should I revoke access and try again (2 times in a row)? –HirowoWiki (📝) ^w^ 22:49, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

So, I will wait for few hours, right? –HirowoWiki (📝) ^w^ 22:52, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Yea I would wait for a bit, if you want you can try /deauth just in case, or DM a mod or someone who knows how the bot works. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 22:55, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

When I typed /deauth, WikiAuthBot2 says:

You are currently not authenticated to this server. Run this command in a server where you are authenticated.

–HirowoWiki (📝) ^w^ 22:57, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Yeah I'm not too sure about that, I would DM a mod if you're still having issues with it. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 23:04, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Oh, okay. Thanks! –HirowoWiki (📝) ^w^ 23:06, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

I notice that restarted the bot and it works! :) –HirowoWiki (📝) ^w^ 00:01, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

Nice! Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 00:04, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

Owww, thank you! ^w^ –HirowoWiki (📝) ^w^ 00:05, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

Draft:Rasmus Søndergaard

Hi Sophisticatedevening, first I have seen you around and appreciate your AfC work. One bit of advice for drafts like this, even if they translated it to English, it would not meet notability so in those instances it is best to decline for both. Doing so (hopefully) keeps them from resubmitting just to be declined yet again. Keep up the great work! S0091 (talk) 18:54, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

Will do, thanks for the advice! Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 18:57, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

review

Thank you for your feedback. I have: 1. Removed all promotional language per 2. Ensured every claim is directly supported by cited sources 3. Used only independent sources (government, industry, media) 4.Maintained strictly neutral point of view throughout The revised draft: - Uses factual descriptions instead of marketing terms - Separates company operations from broader tourism context - Cites only verifiable information from reliable sources Could you please confirm if this approach meets Wikipedia's standards for local businesses? Sara1599 (talk) 17:56, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

Your draft is likely AI-generated, and it still does not show how it meets the notability guideline for companies (WP:NCORP). You have made zero edits other than submitting again after I declined it as well. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 18:00, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

This was by mistake, I'm taking time to carefully study and procedures before making any further edits. Thank you for your patience as it's still my first try, I'll keep trying till I get it right. Sara1599 (talk) 18:43, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

Draft:Ant International

Hi, thank you for the previous feedback. I've now thoroughly updated the draft of Ant International to address the notability concerns.

The article includes multiple independent, reliable, and in-depth secondary sources from publications such as South China Morning Post, Reuters, Wall Street Journal, and others. I've also improved formatting and citations in line with Wikipedia standards.

Could you please kindly review the updated draft again? I’d greatly appreciate your time and feedback. Apriliantosetyadi (talk) 21:48, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

I usually do not review the same submission twice, however you are welcome to resubmit it and another reviewer will take a look. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 21:51, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your response and for clarifying your review process. I appreciate your time and feedback on the earlier submission. I will resubmit the draft for review by another editor as you suggested. Thanks again for your guidance! Apriliantosetyadi (talk) 21:59, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

The World Destubathon

Hello. You're invited to participate in The World Destubathon. We're aiming to destub a lot of articles and also improve longer stale articles. It will be held from Monday June 16 - Sunday July 13. There is $3338 going into it, with $500 the top prize and $250 worth of prizes for architectural articles. If you are interested in winning something to help you buy books for future content, or just see it as a good editathon opportunity to see a lot of articles improved for articles which interest you, sign up on the page in the participants section if interested.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:59, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

Seeking feedback on PuppySpot draft and notability

Hi @Sophisticatedevening! I’m following up on the PuppySpot draft you previously reviewed. I recently posted a message on the draft’s Talk page to ask for final input, since there’s still no clear consensus about whether the subject meets notability guidelines. The language has been revised for neutrality, and the cited sources are the best available—there’s no opportunity to improve them further.

If you're willing to offer a final opinion, it would really help clarify whether the draft should move forward or be set aside. You're welcome to reply here or on the draft Talk page — either is appreciated. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft_talk:PuppySpot

Thanks again for all your time and feedback so far. SBCornelius (talk) 16:51, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

I mean looking back at it again, I'm not 100% this company will pass WP:NCORP. Thank you for your work fixing the neutrality issue though, but I think you will need to resubmit for another opinion. There is a backlog drive going on, so your draft will probably receive a review quickly. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 17:06, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi again,@Sophisticatedevening. Thank you for all of your thoughtful input on this. As much as I would like to resubmit for a final opinion, I worry that resubmitting without making any changes could be seen as a nuisance. I try hard to respect people's time here, so I may have to admit that we've already reached a consensus on this. SBCornelius (talk) 15:30, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

arielko

thank you. i will be back. and better :) Arielkoartist (talk) 18:45, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

Hodges, James & Smith

I was disappointed to see my contribution rejected as there were a number of links and references, and I thought everything was worded objectively. What specifically made you reject it? Tiger-Soren (talk) 09:16, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

I declined it as Discogs is not a reliable source (see WP:RSDISCOGS), and your draft is almost exclusively supported by it. You also cited a Youtube video from "TopPop", which also does not look particularly reliable. I don't see notability from the sources you cited here. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 14:41, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

Draft:David_White_(domestic_abuse_campaigner)

See talk on above Wdm001 (talk) 17:47, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

@Wdm001 Replied. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 18:01, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

Article wizard error!

Hi. I just write new article but can't submit in draft for review, then I copy on my Sadbox. When I wanna publish it showing "An automated filter has identified this edit as potentially unconstructive, so it has been disallowed. If this edit is constructive, please report this error. Disruptive behavior may result in being blocked from editing.". May you help please? The name of article is: "Death of Mitra Ostad"Human Right Wiki (talk) 14:34, 7 June 2025 (UTC)

@Human Right Wiki: Sure, I moved it to Draft:Murder of Mitra Ostad, I'll put a report in at WP:EFFPR, it's submitted now. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 14:35, 7 June 2025 (UTC)

@SophisticatedeveningThank you Human Right Wiki (talk) 14:37, 7 June 2025 (UTC)

High Fade wikipedia rejection

Hello! I am one of the creators of the High Fade Wikipedia and am trying to get it submitted. For clarification, why can't interviews be used? For small bands such as this, notable sources of information through some scholarship or literature is scarce. If you can, is there any tips you could give, or should we just leave it? Thanks. Vinnistar (talk) 18:01, 7 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi, interviews are not acceptable in proving notability as it is just the person talking about themselves. Sources need to be secondary and independent, so something like a label for a brand having an article on it would not be acceptable since they are affiliated and just essentially promoting it. If small bands like that have scare sourcing, then that is likely a sign that they do not meet the notability guideline for bands (WP:NBAND). Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 18:05, 7 June 2025 (UTC)

Request on 19:10:44, 7 June 2025 for assistance on AfC submission by CaptainKarthick

• CaptainKarthick (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Veena Vidhyalaya Matriculation School (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

KGiSL Institute of Technology - Wikipedia, actually i have referenced this page, this article only consist of two references, same like, i have added the trust and government official site where our entire educational institute details can be viewed. What kind of reference have to add apart from this, if you go to the reference site and enter the details, our entire school details can be viewed. can you identify and help me on this. What am i missing apart from the article i mentioned, can you help me on this, Im new to Wikipedia

CaptainKarthick (talk) 19:10, 7 June 2025 (UTC)

Your draft's sourcing only consists of the school website and link to the homepage of a government directory. This is not enough to establish notability. The draft needs multiple independent, reliable and secondary sources to meet WP:NCORP. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 19:17, 7 June 2025 (UTC)

Corrado Codarini entry

Hello: I saw that you rejected this proposed listing. Could you explain why a very similar one for Jimmy Arnold, also a member of the Four Lads singing group, was approved?

Jimmy Arnold (musician) DavidinVentura (talk) 22:17, 7 June 2025 (UTC)

Your article was declined instead of rejected, I would take a look at WP:BANDMEMBER first. He does not demonstrate notability on her own, and if the article were in mainspace it would be redirected to The Four Lads. For the Jimmy Arnold article please see WP:OTHERSTUFF. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 22:22, 7 June 2025 (UTC)

Question from Asian Aroma Wedding planners (11:05, 8 June 2025)

hi who can setup my wedding event planner website --Asian Aroma Wedding planners (talk) 11:06, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

@Asian Aroma Wedding planners: You don't. Wikipedia is not an advertising platform, nor is it a web host for your website. We are an encyclopedia, not a business directory. --Hammersoft (talk) 13:01, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

Details box

Hello. May you help for make details box for my article please? If you teach me one time then I do it for next article. Human Right Wiki (talk) 14:57, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

Sure, so for that one you want to use the template Template:Infobox person. When you go into the article (make sure you're in source editor), you can copy and paste:

:{{Infobox person
:| name          = <!-- defaults to article title when left blank -->
:| image         = <!-- filename only, no "File:" or "Image:" prefix, and no enclosing [[brackets]] -->
:| alt           = <!-- descriptive text for use by speech synthesis (text-to-speech) software -->
:| caption       = 
:| birth_name    = <!-- only use if different from name -->
:| birth_date    = <!-- {{Birth date and age|YYYY|MM|DD}} for living people supply only the year with {{Birth year and age|YYYY}} unless the exact date is already widely published, as per [[WP:DOB]]. For people who have died, use {{Birth date|YYYY|MM|DD}}. -->
:| birth_place   = 
:| death_date    = <!-- {{Death date and age|YYYY|MM|DD|YYYY|MM|DD}} (DEATH date then BIRTH date) -->
:| death_place   = 
:| other_names   = 
:| occupation    = 
:| years_active  = 
:| known_for     = 
:| notable_works = 
:}}
:

You can remove the comments, then just fill in the different sections for the person. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 15:11, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

Thank you again Human Right Wiki (talk) 15:24, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

Help! Draft:AdoroCinema

Hi, @Sophisticatedevening. I really appreciate your work and enjoyed the feedback on Draft:AdoroCinema. Do you have any advice on how to improve the page?

I believe the page has consistent sources, including widely circulated newspapers in Brazil (Folha de S. Paulo, Exame), as well as five academic works as sources. I believe that the point of view is not appealing, and furthermore, regarding its importance to the Brazilian public, since it is a niche universe in the country that attracts a large audience and is well recognized (just type “AdoroCinema” in Wikipedia in English and you will see that it is widely used as a reference).

Anyway, I would like some help to continue expanding the content with quality, references, and good writing. I would appreciate your help in thinking about this, please. Thanks a lot. Mtvdanilo (talk) 18:13, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

I would focus more the company itself, rather than things like The website offers a variety of features, including:. The draft needs some work on the WP:PROMO language, like serves as a comprehensive platform for film enthusiasts in Brazil. The draft mostly focuses on how it helps people, instead of neutrally summarizing the company. Feel free to resubmit when you have done this. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 18:17, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

Draft:John Aielli peacock terms

You're absolutely right! I'd inadvertently included the phrases of an adoring reporter, which I should have quoted or omited. I've quoted it now and also tweaked a few minor items. Aielli was a very unusual person, partly famous for being "weird". Putting his wiki together has been a challenge. Mbcoats (talk) 03:04, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

No worries, feel free to resubmit when you've addressed those. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 13:53, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

Oh no! 😭, I was just good, but you declined everything...

You made me unlucky.... MCPEFanAUTTP (talk) 09:12, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

Draft:Insightful

Hey, just saw you rejected the article. Was hoping you could give a little more insight into why - the template reasoning doesn't make a lot of sense to me, given there are quite a few reliable sources in the article that give in-depth coverage to the subject. Basically, what exactly is the article missing at present - I'm more than happy to do additional research and whatnot, I'm just looking for a little bit more to go off. Toa Nidhiki05 (Work) (talk) 14:47, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

Most of your sources are not actually about the company itself. Take the CNBC for example. What does that have to do with the company? A Ctrl+F reveals that it is not even mentioned in there. Same for NPR and MSN. You also cited the company website and an article that just used the company's own statistics. These are primary sources and do not convey notability. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 14:51, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

I wouldn't agree with that assessment:

• The Saturday Paper - Coverage of employee monitoring software, including insightful, which gets more than a passing mention.
• PC Magazine - Product review from an extremely noteworthy outlet (PCMag)
• Sifted: Coverage of the company by Sifted, an outlet tied with/run by Financial Times/
• Business Insider: Coverage alongside other major employee monitoring software.

Not every source covers the company in such detail, but there are ones that do in pretty great detail - sufficient to meet notability standards.

The company website is cited for one thing - office locations. I'd have no issue removing it if that's a major objection, but most pages on businesses do include that. And the sources you are contesting provide additional clarity on the controversy regarding employee monitoring software. Those could be removed, but it might provide the impression that Insightful and other software like it have been received far more positively than they actually have been - basically, undue weight. Toa Nidhiki05 (Work) (talk) 17:35, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

Again, the Business Insider does not mention the company at all, Sifted is just a short mention in a list (not WP:SIGCOV), PC Magazine is just a pros and cons list, then moving on to some other company. The Saturday Paper is probably the best one listed, however it looks like an op-ed. I still do not see WP:NCORP, however if you disagree you can resubmit for a new review. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 17:47, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

I think you misread the PC Magazine review? It's not a simple pros/cons, and it doesn't move on to another company - Workpuls is what Insightful used to be called before it was renamed. It's a very long review of Workpuls (what is now Insightful). Toa Nidhiki05 (Work) (talk) 17:51, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

Oh apologies, I missed the editor note up top. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 17:53, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

That's alright! A general guideline I've seen thrown around for notability is three really good sources - if we count PC Mag, would it be fair to say that Insightful probably needs at least one more high-quality, independent source to establish notability? Toa Nidhiki05 (Work) (talk) 18:18, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

I agree, if you are able to find another I encourage you to resubmit and hopefully another reviewer will too as well. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 18:30, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

Rejected Draft article: Marc Mac

Hello there!

Thank you for taking the time to review my article.

I am unsure how to proceed, should I remove the less creditable references completely?

For this article I have also cited scholarly articles, accredited websites and books.

Also so sorry for my copy paste error with including your comments with your signature! I did not think of that and know now to be more careful.

Learning the protocols and Wiki-language communication as I go!

I&I22 (talk) 15:24, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

Your sources are primarily interviews, which are primary sources that do not help demonstrate notability as it is just the person talking about themself. You also cite multiple unreliable sources like Medium, Spotify, and Bandcamp. I recommend removing these and rewriting accordingly. Feel free to resubmit when you have done this. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 15:28, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

Please help to edit my first article

Hello there,

Thank you so much for quick response, which is right. As it's a first article, I don't have much right words so used chatgpt to help me to find right words.

Please help me how can I resolve this issue. I'm a learner please ignore if any mistake happen Ouroptimum (talk) 15:55, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

Your draft has been deleted as unambiguous advertising and promotion, I cannot help you with it further. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 16:06, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

My late grandfather

Dear Wikipedia Reviewer,

Thank you for taking the time to review the draft article on *Mr. Nanninthamby Eliyathamby*, a Ceylon Tamil community leader and philanthropist in early Singapore.

I understand your concerns regarding the lack of strong inline citations. I wish to clarify that multiple reliable sources exist, and I am currently in the process of securing visual scans and archival records to reinforce the article.

These include: - A published reference in *Celebrating 100 Years: The Singapore Ceylon Tamils’ Association (1910–2010)*, which documents his ceremonial key presentation to British High Commissioner Malcolm MacDonald. - Annual obituary listings in *The Straits Times* (since 1958), marking him as a figure of enduring public memory. - Mentions in *The Jaffna Dynasty* by Kandiah Kunaratnam (1984) as a notable trader and donor. - Historical donor records from the Sri Senpaga Vinayagar Temple, where Mr. Eliyathamby contributed a significant sum to the building fund in the 1950s.

I am actively gathering these materials and will be uploading scans to Wikimedia Commons to support inline citations. In the meantime, I kindly request that the draft not be permanently declined or deleted, as this is a heritage article intended to document one of Singapore’s early Indian pioneers.

If you require any assistance verifying these sources or would be willing to suggest improvements to bring the article in line with Wikipedia’s notability standards, I would be grateful.

Warm regards,

• Surya Devan E*

Grandson of Mr. N. Eliyathamby Wikipedia User: [YourUsername] SuryaDevanE (talk) 15:58, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for the message. However, since I am presumably talking to a human and not an AI, please rephrase this in your own words. Thanks! Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 16:08, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi there,

Thank you for reviewing the article and getting back to me. I appreciate the feedback.

I understand the importance of originality and I’m reaching out personally as Mr. Eliyathamby’s grandson. I’m working on gathering more sources and scans (e.g., his appearance in the SCTA book, obituary clippings, and temple donor records). These are family-held materials, and I’m doing my best to get them archived or cited in a verifiable way.

I hope to revise and strengthen the article with proper formatting and references in the coming days. If there are any specific improvements you recommend, I’d be happy to work on them.

Thanks again for your time and for helping preserve stories like my grandfather’s.

Best regards,

Surya Devan SuryaDevanE (talk) 16:29, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

The draft you submitted has zero sources, making it impossible for me to verify the information or gauge his notability. Please add these before resubmitting. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 16:35, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

@[1]

SuryaDevanE (talk) 17:15, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

Draft: Marc Mac article

Hello there, Thank you for reviewing my article, Draft: Marc Mac. I am checking in as the citations also included many scholarly JSTOR articles and published books. A quick note to let you know that I have removed the references that you considered dubious from Medium and Bandcamp.

Were those less reputable citations the only issue preventing the publication of this article?

Much thanks I&I22 (talk) 20:15, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

That was the main problem, the draft was supported primarily by those unreliable sources, as well as most of the sourcing coming from interviews given by him. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 20:24, 12 June 2025 (UTC)