User talk:CFA

Wikipedia ads	file info – show another – #69

Click here to start a discussion with me.

Welcome to my talk page! Please remember to be civil. My watchlist is large and sometimes hard to manage. Please ping me with the {{ping|CFA}} template if you're trying to get my attention on a page that isn't this one. If you can't find a previous discussion, it was probably archived. Feel free to create a new section or rescue the old one from the archives. I will happily review articles or drafts upon request. Not everyone does this, so please don't go around spamming other reviewers. If you have come here to ask for help because I declined your AfC submission, please leave a message with a clear format, like "Draft:Your draft's name", or click the "reviewer's talk page" link on the decline notice on your talk page, and it will do so for you. I will not re-review your article unless I've said otherwise. I'm happy to help answer any questions you have, but you'll have to wait for another reviewer to keep things fair for everyone.

Other talk page banners

CFA is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries. This user is a regular and doesn't mind if you template him. This user is aware of the designation of the following topics as contentious topics: post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people pseudoscience and fringe science India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them governmental regulation of firearm ownership; the social, historical and political context of such regulation; and the people and organizations associated with these issues COVID-19, broadly construed climate change complementary and alternative medicine articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles abortion the Arab–Israeli conflict He should not be given alerts for those areas.

Thanks for reviewing the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Dav1d. I was wondering if you can help identify which references are good and which ones are problematic, so that I can improve the draft. Previous reviewer indicated that Youtube and medium reference were unreliable so I removed those. Please let me know what I can improve in order to make this draft acceptable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trudluc (talk • contribs) 13:32, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Trudluc: Hi, a lot of your article is cited directly to unreliable sources, like blogs. For example, this is a blog, and so is this, this, this, this, this, etc. GitLab and Vimeo are also unreliable. Please also review the general notability guidelines to make sure the topic is notable enough for a Wikipedia article. Generally, a good number to look for is 3 independent, reliable, sources that are entirely about the subject. Let me know if you have any other questions. Happy editing! C F A 💬 15:32, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear CFA

A page I wrote was declined and I would like to explain. In my opinion, prof. lee is a [WP:ACADEMIC]] 's criteria from number 5 to 8. This is because he has been a professor at one of Korea's top universities for more than 30 years, editor-in-chief of a prestigious international journal, and president of Daegu Gyeongbuk Institute of Science and Technology in South Korea. Hyoshin cho (talk) 05:06, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Hyoshin cho: Hi, your best shot at notability is probably WP:NACADEMIC criteria #8 as the editor of a journal in their subject area. None of the other criteria apply based on what is written in the article. You could try resubmitting, but please address the tone issues which is partially why your draft has already been declined several times. The article reads like a promotional resumé at the moment. Also, how do you know of Lee Kunwoo? You uploaded a picture of him on Commons under "your own work" which means you have met him to take the picture. Your draft will not be accepted until you appropriately disclose your conflict of interest or paid editing. Please respond to me stating how you know him. Thank you. C F A 💬 14:25, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your kind response. Actually, I did ask live help for help, and I did edit it, but I'll try to fix the parts that feel like a promotional resume. I'll try to change the tone so that it's based on objective facts. Mr. Lee is the president of the university where I work. As for the photo, I uploaded the photo from our company's homepage, and of course, it was taken by a professional photographer from our public relations team. He is already an authorized person on the Korean Wikipedia homepage, but the American version seems to be a bit difficult. If there is anything wrong or misleading, I think it should be corrected. Thank you for your reply, even though you are busy. Hyoshin cho (talk) 23:51, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Hyoshin cho: Thank you for letting me know. First, you should make sure to appropriately disclose your conflict of interest, and in this case it may actually be a financial conflict of interest with different instructions. As to uploading the photo, if you did not take it, you do not own the copyright to it. And I can see on the university's website that it says "COPYRIGHT 2024 DGIST. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.", which means using it on Wikipedia is violating copyright. You will have to find a suitably-licensed alternative or request that the photographer donate the image to Wikipedia. C F A 💬 02:19, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi CFA, I'm Neuromancer2022. I'm writing 'cause you've reviewed the page "Draft:Cignaroli Academy and Brenzoni School of Painting and Sculpture" and unfortunately it seems that it's lacking sources. It's my first english page so would you please help me a bit and clarify what I should do now? Sources that I have our all ancient books hundred years old... I wrote the references in Bibliography and notes. Thank you so much Neuromancer2022 (talk) 12:37, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Neuromancer2022: Hi, yes, books are fine. The quality of your references is not the issue. A lot of the article completely lacks citations, though. For example, the "Activity in the 20th century" section, which is 8 paragraphs long, doesn't have a single citation. It is not clear to reviewers where that information came from if you do not attach citations to the claims. Feel free to resubmit once you have resolved this. Let me know if you have any other questions. Happy editing! C F A 💬 15:25, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations on ranking among the top three most active pending changes reviewers in the last 30 days. Excellent work!

– DreamRimmer (talk) 16:28, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

	The Special Barnstar
	Thank you so much for you improvements to Lady Randolph Churchill! Heart (talk) 14:07, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You or I couldn't have accepted that draft even if we wanted to accept it. Both of those titles have been salted in article space. If the proponents are serious about wanting an article about their person, they should attempt a community discussion. So they have a community discussion at MFD. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:57, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Copy editing is about making a small fix to the way an article is written, such as spelling, grammar, or the clarity of the text. Copy edits help articles to be more professional and trustworthy. Reaching Mercury from Earthh poses significant technical challenges. --O.omaya7 (talk) 09:59, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, you rejected my Vahika draft and I wanted to ask why as you stated no reason. The lead states with good sources that the current Bahlika wiki, which you said the draft be merged into, was totally different to the Vahika region draft I wrote about with totally different histories and being in totally different areas.(one in Punjab the other in Northern Afghanistan) hence why it shouldn’t have been rejected.

Thanks. Maniacdude (talk) 10:13, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Maniacdude: I declined your draft, which means you are still able to resubmit it. Vahika redirects to Bahlikas and appears to be talking about the same region. I guess it is not? You are clearly much more knowledgeable on the subject than me, so I will take your word for it. I will let another reviewer take a look.

Unrelated: Why are you working on this draft with two accounts? You submitted it with one and left me this message with another. C F A 💬 15:37, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

thanks.

This is my alt account, I forgot the password for my main Zenithxxx account so I can’t log into it on my mobile. Maniacdude (talk) 15:41, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Let me know if you have any other questions. Happy editing, C F A 💬 15:49, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Calder's Flamingo in Chicago Hello, CFA. The article for improvement of the week is: List of public art in Chicago Please be bold and help improve it! Previous selections: Cape (geography) • Ambush Get involved with the AFI project: Nominate an article • Review nominations Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:05, 29 July 2024 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject AFI • Opt-out instructions[reply]

Hey CFA, I was hoping to get some feedback based on your comment on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Café Hagen. Do you mind if I ask some questions to help me better understand how WP:AUD, WP:SIGCOV and WP:INDEPENDENT are applied? Thankyou. Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 03:36, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Rollinginhisgrave: Well, for starters, all the sources I listed are independent. There is no reason to believe any of them have any connection with the subject or have received any payment for publishing their articles. They all, save maybe The Stranger, meet WP:SIGCOV because they are all wholly about the subject. Some go especially in-depth; for example, The Seattle Times article is more than 900 words. It also meets WP:AUD because The Seattle Times is the largest newspaper in Washington, and thus qualifies as a regional outlet (e.g., the biggest daily newspaper in any US state). Happy editing, C F A 💬 04:02, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think my comment concerning dailycoffeenews possibly failing WP:INDEPENDENT has any merit? Beyond what I've already said, I've just noticed the piece is filed under "marketing".

Is there any way for articles about restaurants in major cities to fail WP:AUD, since all the papers covering it will be regional outlets in some capacity?

Similarly, wouldn't the consideration of audience for Seattle Times be who it is stated the article is written for ("covers the food scene in the neighborhoods around Seattle") rather than the whole of Washington?

Greatly appreciate the clarification. This is my first time putting something up for AfD and it went terribly. Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 04:13, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Rollinginhisgrave: Yeah, you probably are right about Daily Coffee News. It looks like they do some type of advertising so I wouldn't be surprised if that was a promotional piece. We can count that as non-independent. WP:AUD is more of a "safety net" to catch otherwise-non-notable businesses that have only been covered in a few run-of-the-mill stories in small, local newspapers, like most local businesses have. This is a different case. These stories are not run-of-the-mill. They go in-depth about the café. The Seattle Times isn't a "small" newspaper by any means, either — it's the largest in the state. If it hadn't been covered in The Seattle Times, there might've been a better argument for it failing WP:AUD, since the other newspapers were mostly small, local ones. At the end of the day, in cases like this, voters will generally err on the site of keeping. People generally don't like deleting articles because of "technicalities" when there is little reason to.

I used to avoid AfD like the plague up until a few months ago because of how confusing it was. Once I started participating, my first few didn't go so well either. I suggest going to today's AfD log and voting in a few that have had no votes yet, so you have to do most of the research/analysis yourself. That's how I learned. C F A 💬 14:56, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think it sounds like what I have been considering SIGCOV is excessive, which I picked up from this convo. It's kind of hard for me to comprehend there's like 400 Wiki articles worth of notability to be written from just this one Seattle Times author's output from the last few years; I can't tell if that's liberating or demoralizing.

Thanks for the tip on voting on recent discussions. Bit worried I'd be misapplying policies given today's mess. Might just stick to article creation for a while and hope I absorb through osmosis. But I'm really grateful for your help here. Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 15:26, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is a new update for Abstract Wikipedia and Wikifunctions. Please, come and read it!

In this issue, we discuss our upcoming Wikifunctions events at Wikimania 2024, and we take a look at the latest software developments.

Want to catch up with the previous updates? Check our archive!

Enjoy the reading! -- User:Sannita (WMF) (talk) 14:13, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery 23:08, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello CFA, why do you keep reverting my constructive edits. I am not block evading. MalachiPro (talk) 02:03, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there, thanks for taking the time to review Draft: Oli Dugmore. Would it be possible for you to reconsider your conclusion here? I see there is a lengthy interview (i.e. significant coverage) with the subject by Cherwell (newspaper), an independent publication, which given the verbatim nature of the reportage, this is likely to be reliable. There's also an interview of him from journalism.co.uk. Dugmore is all over the internet, has appeared many times on TV, and runs PoliticsJOE, with over 300 million YouTube viewings. Chumpih ^t 06:34 + 45, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

@Chumpih: Hi, interviews generally don't count towards notability. This is especially true in this case where the articles are essentially just transcripts of the interview. There is no secondary, journalistic content here; they're just primary sources. Journalism.co.uk is a PR/advertising publisher for journalists so I doubt it's independent anyways. The rest of your sources are either unreliable (e.g. YouTube), non-independent (e.g. press releases), or only offer trivial mentions of the subject. A good number to look for is 3 independent, reliable sources that offer in-depth coverage about the subject. Happy editing, C F A 💬 14:25, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Just wanted to let you know that I resubmitted the page about the NJ Food Council--I added a paid disclosure, dramatically cut the length of the article, and did my best to remove all material that could be construed as self-promotional. Thanks! JMGroove (talk) 18:16, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@JMGroove: Thank you. You'd be surprised with how many editors ignore the paid editing message and keep resubmitting without acknowledgement. I won't review it again (per policy), but another reviewer should. Happy editing, C F A 💬 18:48, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much! JMGroove (talk) 19:39, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello CFA, thanks a lot for reviewing the draft article. I will do my best to revise the wording into a more encyclopedic format and remove any potential peacock expressions.

But with the requirements on the references, I have difficulties to understand the feedback. From my point of view, only following references are not meeting the necessary requirements:

3) Correns, Claus (1990). Meinen Freunden zum Abschied. Tōkyō: Nansosha. ISBN 978-4-8165-0042-8.

4) "Introduction - Correns Corporation". Introduction - Correns Corporation (in Japanese). Retrieved 2024-03-28

7) Boerner, Lisa (2014). "50 years DB Schenker in Japan The journey has just begun" (PDF). www.dbschenker.com (in English / Japanese). Schenker-Seino Co., Ltd. p. 34. Retrieved 31 May 2024.

However, they are cited at the text sections a,b,c and d. And all those sections were also covered with the other references, too. Even having some references which are not from an objective source can be ok under certain circumstances. Example, as reference of companies turnover figures. Also the information of the industries where the company is involved is most likely known by the company itself better than from other sources. So I believe that the reference to the website of that company is acceptable, unless there is contradicting information available.

Thus, kindly be asked to point out which reference else is of your concern, if any. My motivation is, so far, to keep the above 3 references within the article, for reason of completeness. Therefore I have added the additional sources to back up the topic with independent sources, too. Looking forward to your reply.

Merged account (talk) 08:33, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Merged account: Hi, on Wikipedia, companies must meet the notability guidelines for organizations in order to be eligible for an article. That is:

A company, corporation, organization, group, product, or service is presumed notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject.

We're looking for reliable, independent news articles, books, etc. that go in-depth about the company. Right now, none of your sources show that the company meets these guidelines. A good number to look for is 3 independent, reliable sources that offer in-depth coverage. Let me know if you have any other questions. Happy editing, C F A 💬 15:04, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your guidance and prompt reply! Merged account (talk) 01:25, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I created a article from Maloi a girl group from BINI and it was separately article from independent activites. Would you mind to take a look at my article for that?

Thank you very much. --Royiswariii (talk) 12:18, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Royiswariii: The first thing I noticed was that Maloi (singer) is cited to a few unreliable sources. YouTube and Facebook are user-generated content and they should not be used as citations, especially in a biography of a living person. Consider finding some reliable, secondary coverage instead.

As to whether the subject is notable on their own: I'm not sure. Musicians that are part of a group do not inherit notability from their group. They have to meet the notability guidelines for musicians individually. A lot of sources about her fall into two categories: Sources primarily focusing on the group and tabloid journalism. Sources that primarily focus on the group do not offer significant coverage of Maloi herself, and thus don't count towards notability. A lot of articles that are specifically about her (e.g. this preview.ph article) seem to be primarily tabloids that likely aren't reliable. I would recommend looking for more in-depth, reliable sources to help show individual notability. Let me know if you have any other questions. Happy editing, C F A 💬 15:26, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I’ve made the changes on the EDHEC Business School article and they were reverted. Could you please have another look at it? It wasn’t vandalism, I cleaned up the unsourced content and the bits where it sounded like an advertisement, and I added few sources. Many thanks! 80.214.102.181 (talk) 19:04, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see. Both versions had promotional material, so it looked like you were deliberately adding it. I've restored your version and cleaned up most of the remaining promotion. Happy editing, C F A 💬 19:10, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there,

I would like you to search for information on that topic. I have done four days of research and found that most of the information in the section about the Zaza language is incorrect. I corrected it, but a user named “historyofiran” reversed all my changes. I corrected it again, but you reversed it this time. I hope you can address this issue so that Wikipedia can be a better source for people trying to learn about culture. Many are trying to separate Kurdish people and add propaganda to the Wikipedia page about Kurdish people. Hope you understand. Raykoosi0 (talk) 00:28, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy ping: HistoryofIran. C F A 💬 00:50, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Raykoosi0: Removing half the article and drastically switching the POV is going to require some type of consensus. C F A 💬 00:52, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do some research, and you will find out that it's mostly wrong!?https://www.reddit.com/r/kurdistan/s/TD6FqSq2b4 Raykoosi0 (talk) 00:57, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In Wikipedia we follow WP:RS, not Reddit. Please see [2]. HistoryofIran (talk) 01:07, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

i didn’t say to follow Reddit. I just sent it to you so you could read it and try to fix it. Don’t you work on Iranian topics? If you don't, I will, with a better source and more accuracy. But this time, don't reverse it! Raykoosi0 (talk) 01:20, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, you clearly have not been listening all this time. You will reach WP:CONSENSUS Talk:Zaza language before you remove sourced info again or get reported to WP:ANI (sorry for the notification spam CFA, last comment here). HistoryofIran (talk) 01:26, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It seems you don’t understand! I’m saying fix it, and you’re saying no. I’m saying I will, and you’re saying I will be banned from editing! Goodbye, man. I think you have spent a lot of time on Wikipedia. 👋🏻 Raykoosi0 (talk) 01:34, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! You made comment, and i do not agree with you. Please, can you look at the sources? I added this comment 3 times -Sources 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 , 11 are public articles, not interviews made about the individual and his work. Those are not some crazy paid puff, but different articles. So instead of creating a page about this individual as and artist,I should make 5 pages about his songs which are widely recognized and on global charts? He also produced a piece of art that was widely recognized. I believe the fact he wrote songs for Madonna, Janet Jackson, Selena Gomez, Chris Brown also speaks for the notability. thank you. J2009j (talk) 06:19, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@J2009j: Hi, and welcome to Wikipedia. I'm not sure why you're asking me. Your draft was declined 4 times by other reviewers since I last saw it. I have nothing to do with the other reviewers' decisions. When I reviewed it, you were citing Wikipedia and Last.fm (both extremely unreliable sources) in a biography of a living person, which was enough for me to decline it solely because of that. In terms of notability, WP:NMUSICIAN criteria #2 does not apply because he was one of many producers on a Madonna song. He must meet the general notability guidelines instead, which requires significant, in-depth coverage in multiple independent, reliable sources. Here is my assessment of the sources you listed:

• https://www.thenocturnaltimes.com/afsheen-ft-nisha-scared-of-losing-you-is-emotional-anthemic/ (2): I have never seen this source before and it isn't listed anywhere on Wikipedia. It may or may not be reliable. I don't think it's independent, though, because they do marketing & sponsorships and there is no listed author on the post. It wouldn't be significant coverage anyways because it is about his album, not him himself. N
• https://thefestivalvoice.com/be-happy-with-happy-tunes-from-afsheen/ (3): Unreliable right off the bat. It is a blog. N
• https://www.nextplateauent.com/profile.php?id=24 (5): Not independent. It is a record label. N
• https://edmidentity.com/2020/10/25/edmid-fall-frequencies-2020-afsheen/ (6) Looks independent and probably reliable, but it is more about an album he released than about him himself. ?
• https://www.thenocturnaltimes.com/afsheen-passionfruit-drake-melodic-cover-tayler-buono/ (7) Same as #1. About his new release. N
• https://edmnations.com/afsheen-rebecca-ferguson-collaborate-on-uncrazy/ (11) Another blog about one of his releases. N

So, yes, you may be better off writing an article about one of his albums if you can't find any in-depth coverage about him. C F A 💬 14:47, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For the criteria 2#- it is not only the song of Madonna, but song of multiple people. - Janet Jackson, Selena Gomez, Chris Brown and other. There are sources in Korean for example. I do not speak Korean. I added this - His song "Four Seasons" recorded by South Korean singer Taeyeon, claimed the number one spot on the Billboard K-Pop Hot 100 for two consecutive weeks and reached number 6 on the Billboard World Digital Songs chart.^[1].

criteria 11 also applies here- Has been placed in rotation nationally by a major radio or music television network.

criteria 10- performed at main places - such as Hollywood bowl, Tomorrowland and other main festivals as dj. J2009j (talk) 15:30, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@J2009j: Sure, but criteria #2 in this context applies to Madonna, Janet Jackson, Selena Gomez, Chris Brown, Taeyeon, etc., not Afsheen. Afsheen was a producer, not the musician, and thus is subject to different notability guidelines. Criteria 11 may apply if any of his songs have been placed in rotation by a major radio network, but not if any of the songs he produced did. Criteria 10 is referring to songs that have been, for example, used as soundtracks in notable movies, not where they have been performed. C F A 💬 15:38, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, so in case these works are those he produced- should we apply the category producer then or maybe songwriter? For producer that would produced a significant piece of work- which would be song. I did not add songs of "Janet Jackson, Selena Gomez, Chris Brown" and others in the article specifically. I added k-pop, Lindsay Stirling from recent. J2009j (talk) 15:44, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@J2009j: I think your best bet is looking for more in-depth sources about him so you can show he meets the general notability guidelines, instead of trying to prove he meets WP:NMUSICIAN. There is clearly coverage about his albums, and he did produce for notable artists, so maybe try finding a few more independent, reliable sources, then resubmit. C F A 💬 15:50, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.I know, but many people who work behind the scenes do not care about publicity so in some cases there are very few sources. I had the same case for another page I made, he even had an Emmy and still no publicity. I added sources I could find. Can you take a look since you already are familiar with the article? I also found some charts- look at his credits. Those are well-known names - https://norwegiancharts.com/showperson.asp?name=AFSHeeN But no publicity, weirdly. I added what I could find on Google. J2009j (talk) 16:14, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it's looking better. I'd say you have a fairly high chance of getting it accepted, considering the fair amount of spread-out coverage. This Latin Grammy nomination, more interestingly, because it's in his name, may actually satisfy WP:NMUSICIAN #8. I've left a comment for future reviewers. C F A 💬 16:48, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! J2009j (talk) 17:29, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, CFA! After your rejection of my draft I've added sources on the last part as you suggested me. Would you please take a look at it? Thank you very much Neuromancer2022 (talk) 08:55, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Neuromancer2022: Thank you for taking the time to improve it. It's looking much better. There are still a few paragraphs that don't have inline citations attached to them. Generally, you should aim for every paragraph to have at least one inline citation so readers are able to verify the information. I would suggest working on that, and then another reviewer should check it out. Happy editing, C F A 💬 15:00, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You recently reviewed the article Academic Capitalism and made a comment I don't understand at all. When you say "The term does appear to be used, so a separate article may be warranted" what exactly are you referring to? Additionally, you are citing the reason for the decline due to what I think you are trying to say is the 'tone' of the article, and opinions in the narrative...can you please point out 'opinions' because I don't see it. The article is written as an academic term, thus it does read like a journal as many academic terminology articles on this platform currently read. Not to mention that as many times as this article has been reviewed, no one has ever said that about the narrative. This makes me wonder exactly where you're coming from. Thank you for your explanation. Geraldine Aino (talk) 11:32, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Geraldine Aino: Hi, I was referring to the notability of the subject. Since the term appears to be the subject of multiple reliable, secondary sources, it most likely meets the general notability guidelines (i.e., it's not an unused neologism). That was a note to future reviewers. Now, I'm not sure if it warrants its own article or if it should be merged into a parent article (like Capatalism), but that is an editorial decision that can be made later. Right now, your article reads like an essay. Wikipedia articles, like all tertiary sources, are supposed to summarize what secondary sources say about the subject. See this paragraph for example:

Academic capitalist expands revenue sources for higher education during times when state budgets are tight. The authors also note the trend of increasing professionalism in administrative support for new economy activities. Unfortunately, these same new layers of administration contribute to the rising costs of higher education, in some cases negating the revenues from academic capitalism.

It appears to be synthesis based on your own reading of a source (words like "unfortunately" do not belong in neutral Wikipedia articles). There is no citation attached to that claim either. I'm not sure what you're referring to by saying "as many times as this article has been reviewed" because, as far as I can tell, it was only reviewed once before. Let me know if you have any other questions. Happy editing, C F A 💬 15:20, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the quick response. I understand what you were trying to say now that you have explained it👍 However, I would like to reiterate my opinion that the article does not read like an essay, but in fact reads like most other terminology-based articles on Wikipedia which are academic in nature. None of the narrative is of my own opinion whatsoever. The section you referred to is objective. The article has been reviewed several times, all with different reasons for decline. Although I am not the original author, I am certainly no stranger to getting articles approved, and this one seems one of the better efforts. At this time it's not worth my time anymore to argue about it's notability and will abandon the attempt. Geraldine Aino (talk) 17:22, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello CFA,

I am attempting to upload some photos (spacecraft, satellites, rocket launches). I was a aerospace engineer and have a nice collection of these archives. When I try the system thinks its not my work and denies me. All the photos I took personally with a film camera (1980's and 90's). Is there any assistance you could possibly offer?

Thank you in advance CFA! Nist2024 (talk) 14:29, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Nist2024: Hi, and welcome to Wikipedia! Are you trying to upload them on Commons with the File Upload Wizard? I'm not very familiar with Commons so I probably can't help you if you're getting an error there. I suggest asking at the Teahouse or the Help Desk where other editors are able to way in. If you're having trouble on Commons, asking at the Commons Help Desk will probably give you the answers you need. Happy editing, C F A 💬 15:27, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you CFA! I will try that. Nist2024 (talk) 16:19, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I just wanted to ask you what telltale signs made you determine that user Raayaan9911 was using ChatGPT in responding to me. I certainly felt like I was talking to a brick wall because the responses were so off-the-wall and irrelevant to what I had said, but my initial inclination was to chalk that up to any or all of (a) someone for whom English may not be a first language, (b) someone who may have been using templated responses, (c) someone with "special needs" (I won't take that comment any further than that), or (d) someone who just plain wants to troll. I have some suspicions that Raayaan9911 might be a sockpuppet of (1) a user I reported earlier this summer who was then banned and (2) the user (now banned as a sockpuppet) who made the edit that prompted my edit summary about which Raayaan9911 was purporting to complain, but the usual investigative tools aren't turning anything up so far. As you will have seen from my comments, I found it puzzling and annoying that someone who's been a registered user for two weeks would adopt such a high-handed approach, but if it's a use of generative artificial intelligence that would explain a lot. Long way of saying, I'm interested in knowing what you looked for to identify such a use. Thanks! 1995hoo (talk) 16:04, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@1995hoo: I find it pretty easy to recognize at this point. Stuff like It's important to maintain a respectful and professional tone in all contributions to ensure a positive and collaborative editing environment and If you have any questions or need further assistance, please do not hesitate to reach out. We value your contributions and are here to support you in maintaining a positive and respectful editing environment. are classic ChatGPT responses. It just isn't natural. I imagine English isn't their first language judging by their responses (Ahh Okay i Type Myself) and otherwise poor grammar in articles. I only found this user because their grammar in articles was so poor that it was flagged as "potentially unconstructive" on Recent Changes. Now, there's not necessairly anything wrong with that in itself, but ChatGPT is certainly not helping. C F A 💬 16:19, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Most of what I know about ChatGPT comes from the stories in the legal press here in the USA about attorneys who have landed in hot water when they tried to use ChatGPT for legal research and it fabricated case citations (obviously a huge problem that will not get a happy response from a court). But I agree, the "We value your contributions" language was exceptionally strange for a single user to employ, especially a new user who is pretty obviously not an administrator. Incidentally, I would never have found this user but for a message the user left on my talk page complaining that I used "offensive language" in an edit summary, apparently referring to my use of a grawlix. Hopefully I won't have any further interactions with that user! Thanks for the information on ChatGPT. 1995hoo (talk) 16:25, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's also worth noting that GPTZero (an AI detector) returned "100% AI" for both of their responses, now that I've checked. It's pretty much guaranteed at this point. C F A 💬 16:34, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. All the more reason to delete the comment that started all this from my talk page, then. I very much appreciate your assistance! 1995hoo (talk) 16:42, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]