User talk:Qcne

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

Hello! Welcome to my talk page. Click here to leave me a new message, and remember to sign your post using ~~~~.



Archives (Index)

This page is archived by ClueBot III.
It is approximately 10:13 PM in this user's locale. (Purge to update.)
Skip to top
Skip to bottom


The Signpost: 25 April 2024[edit]

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:49, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DW(Music Producer)[edit]

Thank you for your note. I've made adjustments to fit a neutral tone. Itme42069 (talk) 11:03, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Itme42069, "creating a distinctive sound that resonates with a broad audience. His music reflects the eclectic fusion of cultures he has experienced in his life, from the rhythmic beats of Mexico to the gritty trap sounds of Atlanta" is still present, which is still unsuitable for Wikipedia.
Wikipedia should only summarise what sources state about a subject. Qcne (talk) 11:06, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much for flagging. I've made adjustments. Itme42069 (talk) 11:12, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I've made the requested changes. Is it good to go? Itme42069 (talk) 17:02, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is this approved? Itme42069 (talk) 00:54, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Itme42069, it's certainly written better and is now in the review pile. To ensure acceptability, it would be good to see three sources (only three) which prove notability under WP:NMUSIC. The three sources must be independent (no interviews), secondary (not from his own label), reliable (not Reddit or Twitter), and show significant coverage (not just a passing mention). Qcne (talk) 10:12, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AFC[edit]

Thank you for reviewed my previous articles. There is some new article about "foreign nationals detained in Iran". Please kindly and check:

Claggy (talk) 16:36, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aleks Le Draft[edit]

Hello. I am the person who made the Aleks Le draft you rejected. This is my first time trying to make an article and I am struggling in trying to make it notable. The sources I used have been used on other accepted Wikipedia articles and I don't know exactly how many roles I should source. I am aware that some topics don't need to have a wikipedia article, but in comparison to other voice actor's articles what is mine missing? I'm also aware that if a topic doesn't have notable sources, it doesn't deserve to be a wikipedia page. If you could, could I have advice for what to do next time? And is it possible to rewrite about Aleks Le again at a different time if I include better and more notable references? Stupei acedefective (talk) 21:45, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Stupei acedefective. The problem is your sources are mostly unsuitable:
- Fandom.com sources cannot be used.
- Tvtropes cannot be used.
- Twitter cannot be used to establish notability.
- Sportskeeda cannot be used.
The rest of your sources do not provide WP:SIGCOV.
I just don't see this person meriting a Wikipedia article yet.
Please note too that we have tens of thousands of poor quality articles that no one has gotten around to improving or deleting yet, so if you were going to base your draft on an existing article please use a WP:GOOD one. Qcne (talk) 07:31, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your engagement at User talk:Lord Milner[edit]

It's past the point of being constructive. At this point let us admins handle any unblock requests. Thanks. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:28, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, you're right. Qcne (talk) 15:34, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sometimes it's best to let people scream into the void for a while. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:39, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Leevale Athletic Club - Submission of new article[edit]

Hi Qcne, May I discuss 'Leevale Athletic Club' please.

Firstly, let me bring to your attention 2 other athletic clubs in cork that already have published articles.

Raheny Shamrock Athletic Club - I would argue this has less mentions of the actual club than those I have provided for Leevale. It also has less Olympians and successful athletes.

Letterkenny Athletic club - The only links I can see to establish this is a club are links to its own website. Again I have provided more in the way of external club references and also club members who have been olympians.

I have also had the argument posed that wikipedia cannot publish articles on all clubs. This I understand, but this club is over 50 years in the making, is arguably the most successful club in Ireland (most definitely the most successful club outside of Dublin) and has boasted numerous Olympians throughout its history.

Letterkenny & Raheny regularly compete against Leevale - hence the relevance

I also see numerous US based track & field clubs - scanning these, again I see numerous mentions of notable athletes, people who have been members & coaches, but very little if anything linked to which establishes that the club even exists.

I maybe wrong, but I thought the whole idea re Wikipedia was to have an ever evolving/ upto date encyclopaedia of information. I wouldn't know the complete story of Leevale's history and success. My thought process was to have something published which would allow for others to then contribute to.

I think I need to understand (given the 2 Irish athletic clubs noted above) what is it they have that the Leevale article does not?

Regards Peter PeterO888 (talk) 15:13, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @PeterO888.
It's very unfortunate but Wikipedia has many tens of thousands of poor quality articles that no one has bothered to update or delete yet.
Raheny Shamrock Athletic Club and Letterkenny Athletic Club are both very poor articles which were created in 2007 and 2008, before Wikipedia had refined it's notability policies. I would not accept them if they came through the review process and have now tagged them both as possibly not being notable.
Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information, but instead an encyclopaedia of "notable" topics, using our special definition of notability we have developed over the last 20 years. If we had no policies on what merits an article or not we would quickly be completely overwhelmed by spam, something which seems to eventually happen to every popular website. As such we do gate keep what topics can have their own article, but because we're all volunteers and we get several hundreds of new articles a day it is a constant battle.
The core issue with your draft, then, is that you haven't proven notability through the use of your sources. Notability is not inherited, so even if the club has connections to various notable athletes that fact does not make the club inherently notable, unless you can prove notability through the use of multiple independent reliable sources that significantly cover the club. Note that sources do not have to be accessible online, just published.
I wonder if instead a better approach to take would be to add a brief section to the various Leevale athletes's Wikipedia articles explaining their connection to the club (with a reliable source, of course). This may be a lower barrier of entry.
Writing a Wikipedia article is really difficult, and I'm sorry this is a frustrating process. I hope the above helps, but do let me know if you have further questions.
Best, Qcne (talk) 15:27, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
HI, thanks for your reply.. It was most helpful. Quick question, can I continue to edit the Leevale article, (continue to build it) or do I need to start again?
Rgds PeterO888 (talk) 07:49, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@PeterO888 Absolutely you can continue to improve it. And if you think you can prove notability, do let me know and I would be happy to have another look before you submit for another review.
Drafts get deleted after three months of no activity, but you will get notified before that happens.
I'd recommend closely reading WP:NORG which will help you understand our notability guidelines.
Best, Qcne (talk) 08:09, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A question[edit]

Hi Qnce, I have a question: if the subject have enough popular but don’t have good sources, can it be an article or no? And I will crete a draft about Newton’s Third law, because the subject is popular, and if it become an article, I will crete drafts about the other Newton’s laws. علي العالم (talk) 17:29, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @علي العالم, I am confused as we already have an article on Newton's laws of motion. Could you explain a bit more what you mean? Qcne (talk) 17:56, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Newton’s laws are popular, and need to be articles, so I will create drafts for them, at first, I will create a draft about the third law. And you don’t answer my question. علي العالم (talk) 18:29, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@علي العالم I am really sorry, but I do not understand your question. We already have an article on Newton's laws of motion, please do not create a draft about the third law. You are free to improve on the existing article. Qcne (talk) 18:31, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

InZOI draft question[edit]

Hello Qnce, thank you very much for taking the time to review my article. I had some questions about the whole "too soon" thing, and also similar games that have wikipedia articles. Currently the life sim genre has other titles that have wikipedia articles, like "Life by You" and "Paralives", that also have a similar amount of sources. Due to the fact that InZOI has information from the official Krafton website and showcase trailers, along with articles like Gamespot and and PCgamer, (which the other two game wikipedia articles use), it would be OK for the InZOI article to use too, especially when it is confirmed and sourced correctly. Many games before release already have Wikipedia articles, without offical reviews of it. I think also with a game of this size, being produced by a company of this size (also responsible for making PUBG), it isn't too soon for it to have an article. I hope my article can be reconsidered for publishing

thank you Loftt 01 (talk) 10:03, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Loftt 01.
We review articles on their own merit, not compared to existing Wikipedia articles. Wikipedia unfortunately has many thousands of poor quality articles that no one has gotten around to improving or removing yet.
New topics must meet our notability criteria. You prove notability by showing significant coverage in multiple reliable, independent, secondary sources.
Regarding Draft:InZOI, please find my analysis of the sources:
  1. From the game's own website - so not independent.
  2. This source is okay.
  3. A press release, so not independent.
  4. This is an average source, but GameSpot can be unreliable sometimes.
  5. The publisher's Youtube, so not independent.
  6. A press release, so not independent.
  7. This is an okay source.
  8. The publisher's Youtube, so not independent.
So you have two okay sources and one average - so you're nearly there! We typically would like to see three good sources. If you can find some more analysis/discussion/evaluation/commentary of the game from mainstream independent game journalists which are not just regurgitated press releases, it is probably ready to be accepted.
Hope that helps, Qcne (talk) 14:57, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Mein (TV Series)[edit]

Hey there, Hope you're doing great. I wanted to work on the mentioned draft and then submit it as per WP: Articles for creation after adding citations in it. Kindly guide me how can I submit it after doing so? Appreciate your cooperation in this matter.182.182.127.226 (talk) 14:08, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for adding sources. I have unrejected the draft and submitted it for review. Qcne (talk) 15:50, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your immediate action. Let me know if there are any other issues related to it.182.182.122.61 (talk) 16:06, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

School for Commercial Communication[edit]

Need assistance. Not able to solve problems. In my eyes it's an interesting (historical) subject. Worth saving it. MJJdeG (talk) 21:52, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @MJJdeG.
You need references. All information must be referenced on Wikipedia using published sources. You have a blank References section in your draft and then a bunch of External Links which are not formatted like a proper reference.
Imagine you are writing a scientific paper, do you think your current draft would be acceptable with no references and random external links?
To solve this is relatively easy: please follow the tutorial at WP:INTREFVE which uses the Visual Editor (like Microsoft Word). After every statement you need to cite, just click the Cite button to add an in-line citation.
However, it is worth noting that only notable topics merit a Wikipedia article, using our special definition of notability which you can find here. You prove notability by showing significant coverage of the topic in multiple, independent, reliable, secondary sources which are then referenced using in-line citations following the above. Currently it is hard to reviewers to determine notability because of your poorly formatted references. Note: sources do not need to be online, only published. The WP:INTREFVE tutorial can help you format the references properly.
Finally, I presume from your username you are Marien de Goffau. This means you have a conflict of interest in this topic and need to be careful when writing about it. You should also declare your conflict of interest. Please see that link for guidance.
Writing a Wikipedia article from scratch is really difficult - akin to performing in an orchestra when you've never played a musical instrument before.
I hope that answers your questions, but let me know if you have any further ones.
Best, Qcne (talk) 22:00, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your response. I completely agree with you and for me your answers are clear. Still, everything remains (a bit) difficult for me. I'll try to make adjustments using your directions. Please provide the necessary help and corrections. 62.45.104.189 (talk) 19:28, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your response. I completely agree with you and for me your answers are clear. Still, everything remains a bit difficult for me. I'll try to make adjustments using your directions. Please provide the necessary help and corrections. MJJdeG (talk) 19:30, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @MJJdeG, hopefully the tutorial at WP:INTREFVE will help. Qcne (talk) 19:59, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have a source (published). Available as a JPG and not on line. How can I use that?
The available sources are in Dutch. How is that work? MJJdeG (talk) 22:01, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @MJJdeG.
You can't link the image directly, but it's totally fine to use an off-line non-English source. Cite it appropriately (if it's a book, cite it as a book; if it's a journal, cite it as a journal; etc). You may have to use the manual cite feature. Qcne (talk) 07:44, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't get the explanation about an off-line source.
How do I do that?
Used 3 references. Is that done OK? MJJdeG (talk) 15:25, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
References on Wikipedia can be online (accessibly via a web address) or offline (only accessible by going to a physical location such as a library). As long as you format the reference correctly so it can be identified correctly by readers, we don't mind offline sources.
Thanks for adding some more sources, I don't think it is quite there to pass WP:NSCHOOL or WP:ORG yet, however. Qcne (talk) 10:54, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I myself cannot develop further. My limits have been reached. The question is whether this stage is reasonable or should further development follow? To continue is beyond my capabilities. Then I need a helping hand from others.
In my opinion, this subject is really historically important. Was a transitional moment in the European advertising world (Netherlands Belgium France Germany). It would be a shame not to document this. MJJdeG (talk) 12:31, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft: VTOL Vr[edit]

Hello, I noticed that you have declined my VTOL Vr submission. If you could please specify what I would need to improve to heighten my chances for getting approved, I would greatly appreciate it. Daniel the mc goat (talk) 16:25, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Daniel the mc goat. Basically what I said in the decline comment. Your draft currently lists the sort of information which is better suited to the game's own internal wiki, or a forum or blog or something.
Wikipedia articles should mainly paraphrase what reliable independent secondary sources state about a subject. So in VTOL VR's case it could be game journalism websites that review the game or discuss it's development. You'd then build the draft based off those sources, paraphrasing and summarising them.
You'd end up with a simple and short article that would consist of sections discussing the game development, the release, the reception, and basic information about the features. All that must be referenced from those reliable independent secondary sources. That means don't use the VTOL VR Fandom Wiki or wiki.gg, and avoid as much as possible the Bdynamic studio's website.
A useful guide to read might be WP:NVIDEOGAMES.
Hope that explains but do let me know if you have any further questions. Qcne (talk) 16:34, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much! Daniel the mc goat (talk) 16:38, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

damn[edit]

i have been caught in the act AWETheBird (talk) 17:36, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't vandalise Wikipedia, @AWETheBird. You're wasting our time and this will lead to your account being blocked. Let me know if you have any questions. Qcne (talk) 17:37, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Deletion Nomination of Draft[edit]

Hello,

Last night my draft has deleted with the reason `A tag has been placed on Draft:Mojé Assefjah, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.` I think now it`s proper: The language is neutral and sources are solid, there is no promotional or advertising activity. Could you please check it again?

Best regards, Thank you so much. Ozgunbatu (talk) 08:45, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Ozgunbatu. It was speedily deleted and is no longer accessible. If you want to create it again you can but please very carefully read WP:SPAM. Qcne (talk) 10:22, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Genesis gym[edit]

Hello, these are the only references available, from the business itself so I am not sure how they are unreliable, every bit of information i have provided is backed up in the references, from the company and its parent. What do you need me to do? Thank you Dh545 (talk) 13:38, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Dh545. I am afraid in that case the Gym does not merit a Wikipedia article at this time. Only organisations that have had significant coverage in multiple published independent secondary sources are considered "notable" enough for an article on Wikipedia. Qcne (talk) 14:03, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've seen hundreds of businesses small enough have there own page, there is businesses local to me that are alot less notable than this gym, which is ran all over australia, even in the list of health clubs wikipedia there is heaps of less notable gyms. I have provided credible references all from the gym itself? I can also provide references to news outlets that have covered but there is no need as the references i've provided a contain all of the info i've written. Dh545 (talk) 15:17, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Dh545. Unfortunately Wikipedia has millions of articles and tens of thousands of them are poor quality - as we're all volunteers no one has gotten around to deleting them or improving them. If you link me some I can take appropriate action?
As per my above message, we need independent sources - so even though the gym itself is a reliable source, it is not independent of the gym for hopefully obvious reasons.
So, if you can find three sources that each are:
- independent of each other.
- independent of the gym (not interviews with the CEO or regurgitated press releases).
- from reliable places (not random blogs or social media).
Then I will take another look. Qcne (talk) 15:21, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Asking for fresh eyes is always good[edit]

I usually choose a different venue, WT:AFC where there is less chance of folk piling on and you still get a decent answer. I have commented on the thread there in a manner which I hope all parties will find helpful. This has the potential to become heated, which never usually works out well for the COI editor. The discussion touches upon WP:ACADEME which you may be familiar with 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 22:01, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, that's an essay I have not seen before. Thanks Tim, really useful. Qcne (talk) 08:39, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It may be worth considering sharing the essay with the editor who has criticised you. While they are not the direct target audience there may be mutual benefit.
I started it off, and am proud of the way others developed it, which is precisely as it should be. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 16:12, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 16 May 2024[edit]

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:58, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft: Invenio Origin[edit]

Hello, post your comment/rejection, I made changes to the draft and resubmitted the same day - it has so far not had any further notes with regards to being approved/rejected. Hence this message. I understand the workload is heavy, but thought I will reach out and check anyway.

Based on your comment, I was able to find citations other than Times of India for all but one of the mentions on my draft - a TV series that they have produced (MasterChef India - Telugu). The wiki page of the TV series itself also lists Invenio Origin as one of the production companies, however, I was not able to pin down which source the page mentions that the mention found approval there - however, I also did notice that the wiki page of this series has quite a few citations from Times of India for other points that have been mentioned.

The only article that explicitly mentions Invenio Origin as one of the producers of the show is on Times of India. There are a couple others that makes a generalised mention and I'm not sure how those websites rank at Wikipedia in terms of credibility, hence I refrained from citing them.

Would you suggest I remove the mention of this TV series for this particular language, or is one mention of TOI out of 13 overall citations acceptable?

Thanks a bunch! SouthBlrBoy (talk) 13:01, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @SouthBlrBoy. Had a look at the sources and the majority are brief mentions so don't provide WP:SIGCOV of the company.
It might be easier if you show me three sources that all meet the following criteria:
  1. From reliable newspapers/magazines (not random blogs or IMDb)
  2. Are independent of the company (not press releases or pure interviews with the CEO)
  3. Provide significant coverage (not fleeting mentions)
  4. Gives some kind of analysis, commentary, discussion, comparison, etc. Something other than just "This company exists."
The ottplay.com source is okay: it is mostly derived from an interview with the CEO but does provide some independent commentary. A couple more sources like that would work.
Getting these sources first would allow us to establish the notability of the company.
Hope that helps! Qcne (talk) 14:17, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just trying to make sure I know which problem I have to solve - You're saying you'd like to see more sources that meet your mentioned criteria for Invenio Origin overall, or for the specific citation issue I mentioned above? If I am understanding you correctly, you mean Invenio Origin isn't notable yet unless I can cite at least three sources that agree with your mentioned criteria? SouthBlrBoy (talk) 16:55, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The latter, yeah. We need to see significant coverage of the company which is independent of what the CEO says. Two or three sources like that should do it. Qcne (talk) 17:06, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

About your review of this draft[edit]

Hey Qcne! I wanted to check in on whether you intend to continue this review as it's been a week since you marked it as in review. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 23:23, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TechnoSquirrel69 Ack, I don't even remember clicking that. Must have been a mistake on my end! Please unmark it for me. Qcne (talk) 23:26, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No problem; done. For future reference, you can find the button to mark or unmark a draft as in review by opening AFCH and clicking the double chevrons («) on the right. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 23:30, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Qcne&oldid=1224347917"