Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5

Thank you for reviewing Draft:Rachel Cowan so quickly. If I remove the offending sentence "People who worked with her described her as a prophet, teacher, healer, and visionary who empowered individuals to effect change." would that satisfy your objection? Note that sentence was sourced and summarizes what others said. But I'm fine to remove it. What about the final sentence under section "Personal life and passing": "She passed away on August 31, 2018 leaving behind a legacy of compassionate leadership and spiritual innovation, inspiring others to carry on her work." Does that run afoul of NPOV? Nnev66 (talk) 14:55, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Nnev66:, yes I would say that also falls afoul of NPOV guidelines. A general rule when writing Wikipedia biographies is to keep positive or negative adjectives to a minimum, even when paraphrasing a source. Devonian Wombat (talk) 23:03, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the feedback. I removed the original sentence you mentioned (with word "prophet") and the one I noted in italics above. I added two more sentences at the "Personal life and passing" section. I don't see any other NPOV issues. Please take another look in case you see something else of concern. I'll then submit for review again. Nnev66 (talk) 01:09, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Checking back in to see if you have any other concerns about Draft:Rachel Cowan. I believe I've addressed NPOV issues. The article reads to me in formal tone so I'm not sure if the box on the page is standard verbiage or you felt there was an issue there. Would be good to have your concerns addressed before I re-submit. If I should be doing something different than I am in responding to your comments also please let me know as this is my first time going through this process. Nnev66 (talk) 21:13, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Hi and Hello Devonian Wombat. I have written a BLP. It's quite detailed. Anyways my request is that can you submit my draft for publication on wikipedia? If you can do that I would be extremely thankful to you.

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

Harris Zaindi (talk) 18:58, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol | May 2024 Articles Backlog Drive
On 1 May 2024, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each review will earn 1 point. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:14, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to other languages.

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process.

This is a reminder that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) ends on May 9, 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.

Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.

On behalf of the UCoC project team,

RamzyM (WMF) 23:18, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated 1880 Republican National Convention for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Hog Farm _Talk 18:02, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New pages patrol | September 2024 Backlog Drive
On 1 September 2024, a one-month backlog drive for new pages patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each article review will earn 1 point, and each redirect review will earn 0.2 points. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:09, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reviewing my draft which you recently declined. I cannot fathom why Quadrio is not considered notable when she has recieved several prominent awards, most recently a Kings honour. She is an expert in sexual abuse in Australia, poviding expert testimonies and called upon by the media for her expert opinions. Plus other reasons cited in the article. I have looked carefully at WP:PROF and the criteria there. I have not been able to find citations for all of her posts, some I have had to remove, records from the 70's are hard to obtain. Would you be so kind as to tag the places I need to cite? I have gone through the article more carefully and removed any language that might be considered peacock, but seriously I don't think this is accurate. I also think I have remained neutral, I have used quotes to represent the person, who is an outspoken advocate on womens rights and sexual abuse. I feel these quotes are suited to describing Quadrios work rather than anything I feel or think about her. Yes, as the author I have made a decision to include these quotes but that is based on the fact that this is who the person is, this is their career. I am just bewildered, and a tad frustrated, as to why I cannot get this article out of draft stage or what to do about it. Thanks Bcritical (talk) 02:35, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

January 2025 Backlog Drive | New pages patrol
On 1 January 2025, a one-month backlog drive for new pages patrol will begin in hopes of addressing the growing backlog. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Each article review will earn 1 point, while each redirect review will earn 0.2 points. Streak awards will be given out based on consistently hitting point thresholds for each week of the drive. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:52, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I just replied on my talk page to your comment on my Jack Mallers Draft. Would it be (more) appropriate if I would post it here? Please help me what kind of comments to place where. Thanks in advance to making me understand. And thanks for your review of my draft article too.

Let me copy paste what I wrote here too:

We have just seen an American president win, by largely ignoring main stream media and going big on social media and podcasts. Jack Mallers is all over the place on YouTube and on podcasts in dozens of long form interviews with all kinds of outlets. He is without any doubt one of the 10 leading voices on Bitcoin and America is supposed to become the Bitcoin & crypto capital of the world in the next years. Bitcoin has reached 100K just as Mallers predicted last fall. He is definitely one of the pioneers who gave El Salvador the privilege of becoming the first country on the planet with Bitcoin als legal tender. Nobody doubts that .... and yes in many main stream articles he is only cursory mentioned ... yet the doesn't make his historic contribution any smaller. Imagine history recounts with cursory mention the guy who made the knife with which Julius Caesar was killed. This guy might still warrant a Wikipedia article if we knew he was a leading voice on Roman knife making. I see that it is beyond my power to help open up YouTube to the podcasting world (which would certainly mee merited) so I understand I have to move within the rules set-up by the platform. In this case what I can do is finding references like this one: https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/jack-mallers-new-video-about-bitcoin-scarcity-right-money That's a reputable source with some written paragraphs about an interview with Mallers. To me it is almost ridiculous or even vandalism by editors when a person mentioned by New York Times, Washington Post, Forbes etc etc etc would not be adequately sourced. But I respect your view as a Wikipedia insider to learn from you and find my way around. So tell me: is the Nasdaq link what you are looking for? I'm sure I can find more. In the end you will have to admit that Mallers merits an article. Please help too keep Wikipedia timely and updated and don't "censor" pages that clearly need to be there. Actually I am surprised that Wikipedia fails here as a collaborative project since, why is nobody stepping in and helping me expand and polish the article? I hope you will! Hajosmit (talk) 11:26, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Hajosmit:, if you wish to change what Wikipedia considers reliable sources I would recommend a discussion at the idea pump noticeboard, though I will warn you I do not believe you will have much success at bringing about change. At the moment Wikipedia requires significant coverage in reliable secondary sources, which the sources you have cited do not provide as they are either primary sources affiliated with the subject or minor cryptocurrency websites with no apparent editorial standards. Devonian Wombat (talk) 11:46, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

But how about the New York Times references etc. Normally that would be the "golden" standard for wikipedia right? There is wapo, forbes, business week etc etc. What's not to like? Hajosmit (talk) 11:47, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have added the Nasdaq.com reference and made a remark about the fact that Jack Mallers hasn't written a single book yet. I would much appreciate if you would take a step back and see with objectivity that we might as well end the whole Wikipedia project if a person with this amount of intellectual and entrepreneurial impact, quoted by NYT, WaPo, Forbes, Nasdaq, Business Week, Bloomberg, CNBC etc does not merit a Wikipedia article, then who would? I do not know whether you or Wikipedia is biased against Bitcoin, but a trillion dollar asset class, with a whole news ecosystem of its own, simply needs good coverage. This is what I am dedicating myself to for the next years, hoping to learn a lot from guys like you on the way. So feedback about any kind of edits that you propose are super welcome. Yet "vandalism" by rejecting must-have articles in my judgement is a step too far. I'm literally trying to help the Wikipedia project ahead. Please assist me in my journey. Hajosmit (talk) 07:12, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Jack Mallers:, the main issue I think you're encountering is that being quoted by a news organisation is not considered secondary coverage, since the only info it gives is directly provided by the subject. The same thing goes for the press releases in Business Wire. The coverage of Mallers in reputable organisations such as the New York Times don't provide significant coverage because they are extremely short, being passing mentions. In order to be significant coverage, usually at least a couple paragraphs is needed. Devonian Wombat (talk) 08:19, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Devonian Wombat, are you sure that that book passes WP:NBOOK? Only sources mention in the book also include the authors comments, so they are not passing WP:BOOKCRIT right? ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 06:11, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Bunnypranav:, I thought when going over the sources that while it was quite borderline, the sources cited were mostly original content and didn't largely rely on an interview or promotion with the author. However if you think the article is non-notable I won't object to it being nominated for deletion; I'm not overly familiar with BOOKCRIT or how it's generally interpreted so I'll leave it to your judgement. Devonian Wombat (talk) 08:14, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, I've seen the sources and it seems notable enough. ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 09:23, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @Devonian Wombat, as requested on the page Draft:Jonathan Frantz, I removed the bullet points and redid that section, keeping the encyclopedic tone. All citations have been adjusted accordingly as well. Thank you for your suggestions. If there's nothing else to change, could you please approve? Again, thank you for the help! Editora89119 (talk) 14:24, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your reasons for rejection were that its "sourced exclusively to the NASA website and a random SpaceX fan page", and then claimed that "neither of which are reliable secondary sources". You also labeled them as "vast amounts of primary sources", which is also incorrect.

NASASpaceflight is a WP:RS. Don't take my word for it, check the Talk:SpaceX Starship page, which states "NASASpaceFlight.com, generally reliable" and the related FAQ "The few that are reliable are NASASpaceFlight.com and big news outlets in this case." Even if NASASpaceflight was associated with NASA (which it isn't), it would remain a secondary source, not a primary.

Then there's ArsTechnica, which is certainly not a "SpaceX fan page".

Next Big Future... I didn't add that, and have no idea why it was added at all. I've since replaced it with an actual source: the FCC. I'm fairly confident that the FCC is a reliable source.

Already, this is enough to pass the requirements for notability. And there are still two more (independant) sources.

The first source is "Mobile Internet Research Center". I'm not sure how reliable the source is, but it both coroborates the next source and doesn't seem to have any errors.

The second source is arguably a fan site, but is generally quite reliable: the RingWatchers. The only part of the article that is cited by them is the claim of 54 Starlinks being the max payload of F9.

The consensus to delete the article was regarding a version with substantially less information and sources. Due to the expansion, many of the arguments for deletion during that discussion are no longer applicable. But if this was your sole grounds for rejection, it'd at least make some sense. But with the above in mind, your reason for rejection is rather confusing. Redacted II (talk) 03:28, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

the draft Woffio (talk) 00:12, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect at Drop-Seq has been deleted as {{db-afc-move}}. Since you marked the draft as under review, I assume that you requested the deletion of the blocking redirect; so you can go ahead and accept it. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:29, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I've updated this page now and hope it's correct and can finally be approved? Jakob Hallgren already has a swedish wikipedia page that is "live".Jakob Hallgren - Wikipedia

Thanks! Roxanabovia (talk) 11:58, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of a group of Wikipedians to better understand their experiences! We are also looking to interview some survey respondents in more detail, and you will be eligible to receive a thank-you gift for the completion of an interview. The outcomes of this research will shape future work designed to improve on-wiki experiences.

We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this survey, which shouldn’t take more than 2-3 minutes. You may view its privacy statement here. Please contact me if you have any questions or concerns. Kind regards, Sam Walton (talk) 16:34, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Phenomenon 10 (talk · contribs)
  • David Kahn (martial artist) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
  • Draft:David Kahn (martial artist) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello! Kindly indicate which exact sentences in the article seem like advertisement.

Every statement in the article, like "His teaching emphasizes morality, integrity, and the historical context that gave rise to Krav Maga." or " . . . also pursues civic advocacy" is accompanied by a citation and/or further specific and factual details like, "emphasizing relationship development between police forces and community members, as well as non-lethal self-defense tactics training for police officers."

Thank you.

Phenomenon 10 (talk) 14:59, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Phenomenon 10:, the bit of the draft that is most like advertisement is the massive list of news organisations that have supposedly covered Kahn in the 'Career' section. If there is nothing in these articles that can be added to the article beyond 'Kahn was covered in this newspaper' they should not be in the article. Additionally, Kahn's cryptocurrency venture is sourced exclusively to primary sources, and given WP:DUEWEIGHT concerns it should not be mentioned in the article unless a reliable secondary source has covered it. Also many of Kahn's supposed achievements such as the 'pursues civic advocacy' line are examples of peacock language, I would recommend making your description of Kahn's work as academic and 'dry' as possible; as this is an encyclopaedia and that is the tone generally wanted. There are enough sources here to demonstrate notability, so if these tone and promotion concerns are fixed I can say with confidence the draft will be accepted. Devonian Wombat (talk) 21:31, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Phenomenon 10 (talk) 13:13, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

May 2025 Backlog Drive | New pages patrol
On 1 May 2025, a one-month backlog drive for New Pages Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each review will earn 1 point. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:25, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Christopher Bram (talk · contribs)
  • Draper Shreeve (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
  • Draft:Draper Shreeve (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Dear Devonian Wombat: Before I edit my rejected draft of the Draper Shreeve bio, I have a couple of questions. I assume I should just remove any information or quotes I cannot support with footnotes that can be verified online. Is that correct? I have access to a couple of newspaper clips but don't know how to make them accessible for the Wikipedia editors.

Thanks for your help.

CB

Christopher Bram (talk) 15:07, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Christopher Bram: What newspaper are these clippings from? With any luck they will be digitised somewhere like Newspapers.com or in another archive somewhere; even if they can't be accessed there should be a link somewhere online. While sources do not necessarily have to be available online; some proof of their existence via database would be good. Devonian Wombat (talk) 21:17, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Devonian Wombat,

Can you help me?

User "Lekkha Moun" left a comment on my draft article stating the following:

Comment: Doesn't meet WP:SPORTCRIT. Subject is often not mentioned in sources, but rather Krav Mags as a whole. Lekkha Moun(talk) 09:59, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

This comment is entirely not factual. Every reference provided in the article mentions David Kahn by name.

I would like Wikipedia management to remove the comment. What can be done?

Thank you. Phenomenon 10 (talk) 14:14, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Devonian Wombat. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Lee Yi-Jin, 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) 22:07, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Devonian Wombat. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Lee Yi-Jin".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:07, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, You denied publishing of the page I created on Jakob Hallgren. I immediately updated it based on your comments but since then, nothing has happened and no one else has reviewed the page. Can you please review it again as I am really hoping to have it live as soon a possible. Thank you. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Jakob_Hallgren&action=history 2001:2042:3005:D200:DD94:27B:E35B:13FB (talk) 09:26, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2001:2042:3005:D200:DD94:27B:E35B:13FB, the reason why no-one has reviewed your draft is that it has not yet been submitted for review. After a draft is declined it is removed from the review queue so improvements can be made. If you wish for it to be placed back in you can simply submit it again. Hope this helped! Devonian Wombat (talk) 21:16, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

September 2025 Backlog Drive | New pages patrol
On 1 September 2025, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each review will earn 1 point. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:31, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, There is an ongoing Articles for Deletion (AfD) discussion regarding the article Tariq Masood. I have worked extensively on improving the page: removing unreliable references, integrating peer-reviewed and mainstream sources, and rewriting content into a neutral, encyclopedic tone. These changes were made in response to earlier criticism, and I have tried to address the concerns raised in previous discussions. I kindly invite you to participate and share your views at the AfD. My request is only that the article be evaluated fairly on the basis of sources and notability, rather than on a simple headcount. Thank you for considering. Khaatir (talk) 02:40, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Khaatir:, I have no knowledge of this subject, but I should inform you that per WP:CANVASS going to other editors talk pages to try and bring them into a deletion discussion on your side is a violation of Wikipedia's rules. I understand that having an article deleted sucks (I have had quite a few of mine deleted!) but the way to deal that is by providing significant coverage in reliable sources in the deletion discussion, or if all else fails writing on some other topic. I note that the article Jamia Tur Rasheed, where Masood studied, is quite short and poorly formatted; adding some improvements and more information to that might be a good idea. Devonian Wombat (talk) 02:48, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Devonian Wombat Thanks, I didn't know about this policy. Khaatir (talk) 02:51, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have partially reverted some of your edits on the article on Monash University. The edit summary provided is: there is a long-standing precedent that Wikipedia articles about universities should include neutral sections covering rankings, admissions, tuition/financial aid, libraries and notable academics (see WP:UNIGUIDE, Pomona College (FA) and every GA-Class article about a university). While many sections need improvement, there are better ways to indicate this than outright blanking.

I'm actually astonished that these removals were even considered but I'm happy to discuss this further if needed. I'm aware that the article isn't perfect, and hope to re-write it completely some time next year, but blanking means that any editor who wants to improve it would have to start over and not know what to write. Some of my favourite FA, GA and near-GA class articles about universities include King's College London, University of Edinburgh, Durham University, Pomona College, University of Santo Tomas and University College London. I would suggest familiarising with them before considering blanket deletions such as these in the future. Jace Aotearoa AU (talk) 09:54, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Jace Aotearoa AU:, that's perfectly understandable, my reasons for blanking those sections was mostly that they were promotional to the extent that I believed WP:TNT applied as the article was better off without them than with them in their current state. If you disagree I have no objections to them being restored, I was simply removing them per BOLD etc. Devonian Wombat (talk) 04:44, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Thizab85 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Socrate ERP (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Reformulation: I’ve been trying to publish a page on Wikipedia, but each attempt gets declined. I created three articles, one for Socrate ERP an ERP that has been available for decades on the mena region, one for AIMS SAL a software company since 1987, and another for AIMS International its sister company since 2023, yet the submissions keep failing. I’m not sure what needs to be improved to make them compliant with Wikipedia’s guidelines.

If you want, I can also help you adjust the text to better meet Wikipedia’s notability and sourcing requirements.

Thizab85 (talk) 07:45, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Thizab85:, the main issue with your draft is a lack of secondary sources covering your topic. The only things you've cited are primary sources, as they're either from the company themselves or from organisations they are a member of, such as the American-Lebanese Chamber of Commerce. These do not contribute to notability as they are not independent of the subject; I would suggest trying to find some newspaper coverage of the company or something similar if you wish to see the article accepted. Devonian Wombat (talk) 11:16, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Devonian,

Thank for very much for responding.

I have written three articles about a software company based in Lebanon that develops enterprise solutions. Its main product is an ERP system called Socrate. The company has been operating for more than 35 years, since 1987, and numerous articles attest to its long-standing presence, as shown in the attachments. The product itself is also referenced in many publications, although I’m not entirely sure which of these sources would be considered independent according to your criteria.

I am eager to share the information about the company and the product in a non commercial way as many other software companies do on Wikipedia such as SAP for example, as I believe that when people search for AIMS SAL or Socrate, there should be comprehensive information available on Wikipedia that accurately reflects the company, the work, and the products they offer while it is strictly for information and have no business or commercial purpouse.

Please let me know what additional information you require so that we can present a strong and well-supported business case for your evaluation.

I am writing about the product of a well established company that you can find records on different sources:

https://www.yelleb.com/company/351323/AIMS_SAL

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7q1ZAoRgK8U

https://www.yelleb.com/companies/SOCRATE_ERP

chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://investinlebanon.gov.lb/Content/uploads/SideBlock/180727111651427~IT%20Directory%20%202018.pdf

chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/http://data.infopro.com.lb/file/ITDirectory2015.pdf

https://lb.kompass.com/a/software-audit-management/5760038/r/mount-lebanon/lb_lbjl/ Thizab85 (talk) 08:16, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, and thanks for your work cleaning up articles. However, I'm really not sure that removing pipes is a good move. There are (deep sigh) quite a few editors who enjoy adding pipes when they discover links to redirects... I'll let that piece of news sink in a bit... I suggest that the best practice is neither to add pipes (redirects are fine) nor to remove them (if it ain't broke, don't fix it, and in any case it encourages the pipe-gnomes). The last thing we want is an endless loop of well-intentioned addition and removal, I'm sure you'd agree. All the best, and season's greetings. Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:26, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Chiswick Chap:, oh dear, my apologies for that. It was my understanding that removing pipes in favour of pure redirects was considered best practice! Cheers for letting me know otherwise :) Season's greetings! Devonian Wombat (talk) 11:34, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January–February 2026 Backlog Drive | New pages patrol
New Pages Patrol is hosting a one-time, two-month experimental backlog drive aimed at reducing the backlog. This will be a combo drive: both articles and redirects will earn points. The drive will run from 1 January to 28 February 2026. The drive is divided into two phases. Participants may take part in either phase or across both phases, depending on availability. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled during the drive. Two-month drive-exclusive barnstars will be awarded to eligible participants. Each article review earns 1 point, while each redirect review earns 0.2 points. Streak awards will be granted based on consistently meeting weekly point thresholds. Barnstars will also be awarded for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Interested in participating? Sign up here.
You are receiving this message because you are a New Pages Patrol reviewer. To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself from here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:21, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

May 2026 Backlog Drive | New pages patrol
On 1 May 2026, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each review will earn 1 point. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:23, 29 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Devonian Wombat, I noticed you're an active AFC reviewer with knowledge of Australian topics and I was hoping you might be willing to take a look at Draft:Future Associate when you get a chance. It's an Australian VFX studio based in Sydney (Marrickville), founded in 2018, with credits on productions including Monkey Man, The Equalizer 3, Elvis, and the HBO series Watchmen. The draft was declined in March for sourcing and has since been updated with references including independent editorial coverage from VFX Voice and Deadline. It's been pending for about 2 months. No pressure at all — just thought given your familiarity with Australian topics you might be better placed than a general reviewer to assess it. Thanks for all your work on the backlog. Lindsayjadams (talk) 04:38, 14 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Lindsayjadams:, I note that the Draft has since been declined by another reviewer. While I hope you're able to find sources and get the article accepted, it's important to emphasise that directly requesting reviews from a reviewer is frowned upon, and that performing a review on request is generally not something reviewers are supposed to do. Nevertheless, good luck with the draft! I understand that the long backlogs followed by a decline can be very disheartening, but the alternative would be the article being flagged and deleted at WP:AFD. Devonian Wombat (talk) 06:55, 14 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reviewing my article Draft: Si-Ware Systems. Your comment noted that there are concerns about the lack of secondary sources. I agree the there are some primary ones, but i thought they were a minority. Your feedback suggests otherwise. Would you please specify which ones don't count as secondary source and why ? AhmedKorayemSaid (talk) 08:05, 14 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@AhmedKorayemSaid:, the problem with the draft is not that there are no secondary sources, but rather that the ones that are there do not meet the requirements outlined in the WP:CORPDEPTH policy (yes, I am aware all the different policies are confusing, but bear with me!). For example, this article that you've cited by EE Times does not meet CORPDEPTH as it as an announcement of a product launch, which are explicitly described in the relevant policy as not contributing to notability. There are also a number of cited sources that are of dubious reliability; EE Times as a whole is a trade publication owned by a computer company, and Zawya, despite formerly being owned by Reuters, does not appear to have a publicly listed editorial team and seems to mostly publish press releases. Hope this was helpful! Devonian Wombat (talk) 11:18, 14 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:37, 14 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reviewing my page on Rivos Inc! The comment is that Github does not count as a notable source. I understand that Github is not notable, those links are just for some interesting snippets I found while researching. The other articles I linked were there for notability; talking about the history and analysis of the company. Do I need to add more information about notable partnerships, awards, and contributions to the industry? They have done a lot of open source contributions to various important software projects, but I guess open source contributions do not have merit on Wikipedia? ZystricV (talk) 00:18, 15 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

• @ZystricV: In order to demonstrate notability, an article on a company must pass WP:CORPDEPTH. This guideline explicitly states that articles on funding rounds, acquisitions and product launches do not showcase that a company is notable. Devonian Wombat (talk) 01:45, 15 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Devonian Wombat, thank you for reviewing the draft Enenche https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Enenche

I understand the sourcing concerns. The name is an indigenous Idoma name from a minority ethnic group in Nigeria, so most available references are local cultural sources rather than major publications. I used the best local sources I could find My major concern is that I have taken it upon myself to document minority Idoma names, as the Idoma are a minority ethnic group in Central Nigeria, so as to improve their representation on Wikipedia and also contribute more through my edits.

Please, could you guide me on the best way to improve the article so it can better meet Wikipedia standards?

Thank you. Adini Anna (talk) 7:37, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

@Adini Anna:, as there do not appear to be multiple individuals with Wikipedia pages that have the name Enenche, you will need to showcase that the topic meets WP:GNG. In order to contribute towards this guideline, sources need to be reliable, which generally means they have quite strict editorial standards. If you cannot find any such sources on the name Enenche specifically, I would recommend expanding articles such as Idoma language that are very short at the moment; you can use Google Scholar and/or books to find good sources that may not show up in a regular search engine. For example, using Google Scholar I found this article on Idoma proverbial names that could easily be used to expand an existing article. Devonian Wombat (talk) 12:30, 15 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Devonian,

Thank you for reviewing my page on Mahmoud Abuwarda Plaestinian guitarist and composer.

I have completely rewritten the draft to strictly follow WP:NPOV. All promotional language, adjectives, and personal commentary have been removed. The text now only states verifiable facts neutrally supported by independent reliable sources. Would you please check it out if it's good or not now.

Best whishes, Mahmoudabuwarda90 (talk) 09:28, 15 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Mahmoudabuwarda90:, while reviewers are not supposed to provide reviews on request, I can advise you that one of the reasons why you may be having so much trouble getting timely reviews is that your draft is bloated with so many citations, almost all of which do not contribute to notability, it's extremely difficult for reviewers to analyse it. I would recommend cutting the article down to be based on 5-6 of your best sources, that way it's much easier to review. Devonian Wombat (talk) 12:37, 15 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for your valuable advice on Draft:Mahmoud_Abuwarda. Your tip about "citation bloat" was incredibly helpful.

I followed your advice exactly: I completely rewrote the text to be 100% neutral (WP:NPOV) and pruned the draft down to a concise stub supported by only my 5 strongest, independent sources.

I have just resubmitted it. I know you cannot provide reviews on request, so I am absolutely not asking you to look at it—I simply wanted to thank you for pointing me in the right direction!

Best regards, ~2026-29360-12 (talk) 14:15, 15 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot for your support. Just edited the draft. Mahmoudabuwarda90 (talk) 15:11, 16 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Devonian Wombat, thank you for reviewing the article Architects NRT, and I apologise if the project listing read as too promotional. Encouraged by my discussion with E mln e, I have attempted to flesh out the Representative works section mostly based on projects included in the curated Finnisharchitecture.fi database. I hope the section now reads more encyclopedic and balanced. Best regards Bepop1989 (talk) 20:46, 15 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, Devonian Wombat and thank you for your review of Draft:Canopy Roads of Leon County, Florida. I have reedited the article to use encyclopedic tone and removed superfluous passages. Your comments stated: This draft is not written from a neutral point of view, but I can't identify any promotional language, personal commentary or informal language. Would you be so kind as to identify a couple of examples in the article?
You also commented: Wikipedia is not a place for original research or personal opinions. I cite sources throughout the article. Please point out text that contains either of those.
Again, thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia and assistance in this article. DMarkFL (talk) 14:08, 18 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@DMarkFL:, that decline message is used both for promotional language as well as for language that is simply too casual or 'unencyclopedic' so to say. Hope this helped clear up any confusion! Devonian Wombat (talk) 22:20, 18 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine, how about identifying anything that you objected to in the article. DMarkFL (talk) 23:12, 18 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@DMarkFL: For one, the entire 'Tree inventory' section appears to be written as an advice guide on how to maintain the canopy roads themselves, which was a violation of WP:NOTGUIDE and also WP:UNDUEWEIGHT, as no secondary sources are cited to support the information. The same goes for the 'Legal' section, which for some inexplicable has a preamble naming the exact municipal code responsible for the relevant bylaws and then goes into extraneous detail, sourced entirely to primary sources, about said bylaws, which is a similar violation of NOTGUIDE and UNDUEWEIGHT. The 'management' section is much the same. Similar problems arise with the namedrop of the Canopy Road Cafe in the 'Canopy Roads' section, which seemed to be overly promotional given that it was once again cited only to the county website. Lastly, the lead of the article says that the canopy roads are noted for their 'historical significance and beauty' but provides no attribution for this claim, and it is not cited in the main body of the article. Devonian Wombat (talk) 23:22, 18 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. That is exactly what I was looking for. I had already addressed the issues you identified. My source for the lede says "noted for historic and scenic significance" which I phrased as 'historical significance and beauty'. Is that inaccurate? DMarkFL (talk) 00:28, 19 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for taking the time to review Draft:2025 California Surrogacy Controversy and provide feedback. The initial draft had a number of references that discussed the controversy well after the initial breaking news. In the process of improving the entry, I have further added a few more recent references and made a stronger connection. I also added a new section on impact and significance. I resubmitted it for another round of review and believe it aligns with the criteria for inclusion for events. Thank you for your contribution to Wikipedia! Metagrow (talk) 16:32, 18 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Metagrow:, one thing you may want to keep in mind is that per WP:RSP, the New York Post is considered an unreliable source. I would recommend finding other sources for the content currently sourced to it. Devonian Wombat (talk) 22:16, 18 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RSP is a helpful resource. Upon reviewing the article again, I incorrectly marked the media source of one notable reference as from the New York Post but in fact it is from The New Yorker. I have got that fixed, in addition to removing the other New York Post reference. Metagrow (talk) 23:23, 18 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

		The Articles for Creation Barnstar
		You're really active in the AfC WikiProject; you deserve to be recognized! Welovecontributors! [talk] 01:27, 21 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Devonian, you've declined my draft about OFF February and cannot see why it would be considered irrelevant or advertising. If you could point out to specific elements, I would be grateful. This is an non-commercial initiative backed by many organisations, including medical societies and major cultural institutions, that is present in 54 countries in the world, with millions of participants. Similar movements such as Dry January or Movember have their own Wikipedia pages. Many thanks in advance. Manuel Vicens Sans (talk) 11:58, 21 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Manuel Vicens Sans:, the draft was declined as it is entirely promotional in content. Per WP:NPOV, Wikipedia articles must be written in an objective manner that does promote the subject of their article. As an example, the 'International support' section is nothing more than a bare list with no attempt at analysis or explanation. There are also numerous examples of WP:PEACOCK language such as 'whose purpose is to mobilise humanity' and 'regaining control over their time and attention', quotes which appear to come directly from the organisation itself and which are not neutral descriptors of its goals. Devonian Wombat (talk) 12:12, 21 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I wanted to let you know that I have substantially updated the references for Draft:Mystery Jersey King following your decline on 18 May 2026.

The draft now includes coverage from:

* BBC News - national broadcaster
* ITV News - national broadcaster
* The Sun - national newspaper
* Daily Express - national newspaper
* National World, BusinessCloud, Insider Media, TheBusinessDesk, Derby Telegraph, Derbyshire Times, Lincolnshire World and the UK Intellectual Property Office blog

I believe the draft now meets Wikipedia's notability criteria for organisations. I would be grateful if you could take another look when time permits. Thank you. FootballMadOlivia (talk) 14:08, 22 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Devonian Wombat, what exactly is your problem with the draft? A) It's a direct translation from the existing German article. B) The filmmaker is very accomplished and well-received. C) What do you expect besides a brief biographical outline and some notes on notable films from a filmmakers article? It literally gives the absolute average and very common overview of film biographies you'll find in the EN-WP. I've seen many and they're not any different from this article. It is a very acclaimed filmmaker, though. What you read as advertisement or promotion are actual achievements. Your decline is pretty offensive and does not give any clue to what could be improved. Would you rather have less mention of the awards in the text and more about productional facts / content of the films? Her recent long feature was nominated for 3 awards at the Berlin International Film Festival. Grizma (talk) 12:38, 26 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Thank you for reviewing my draft for C-Therm Technologies.

I understand that my first draft of the article may have not seemed like the organization was sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. I have edited the article accordingly - could you please review the article again?

Your assistance would be greatly appreciated. Hotandcold4444 (talk) 12:45, 26 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Hotandcold4444:, while the draft has been declined again by another reviewer, I note that several of the sources appear to be about Nancy Mathis or products the company released rather than the company as a whole, and many more appear to be press releases, largely by Opportunities New Brunswick. Devonian Wombat (talk) 22:45, 26 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Devonian Wombat,

Thank you for your feedback on my draft for Didier Dietschi.

English is not my native language, so I used an AI tool to assist with translation, which I now realize gave it an unencyclopedic, textbook-like tone.

I wanted to let you know that I am currently gathering independent secondary sources (such as independent dental literature reviews citing his work) to satisfy WP:PROF, and I will be completely rewriting the text to fix the tone and format.

I will update the draft as soon as I have finished revising it. Thank you for your patience and guidance! CristinaG22 (talk) 13:07, 29 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]