Click here to leave a new message, LINK to any article you want me to look at And sign your posts using ~~~~. I may not bother with posts where articles are not linked and posts are not signed. I may just delete them and ignore them and you. I do not review drafts on request, nor, normally, do I review a draft more than once, so please do not ask If you want me to do something for you, make it easy for me, please. |
This is the home account for Fiddle Faddle, which is both my nickname and my alternate account. When you begin a new message section here, I will respond to it here. When I leave message on your Talk page, I will watch your page for your response. This maintains discussion threads and continuity. See Help:Talk page#How to keep a two-way conversation readable. If you want to use {{Talkback}} or {{ping}} to alert me about messages elsewhere, please feel free to do so. |
It is 10:49 AM where this user lives. If it's the middle of the night or during the working day they may well not be online. For accurate time please | the page
I do not remove personal attacks directed at me from this page. If you spot any, please do not remove them, even if vile, as they speak more against the attacker than against me. |
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 |
This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
In the event that what you seek is not here then it is archived (0.9 probability). While you are welcome to potter through the archives the meaning of life is not there.
Hello Timtrent I Carefully Added Sources This Time Please Review It And It's My First Time Editing In Wikipedia. Imperial Enjoyer (talk) 11:40, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Imperial Enjoyer Thank you for taking the time to do that. We get better and better as time passes. The issue I noted was that individual facts (rather than swathes of text) are the elements which need references. As long as you are certain that you have done that to the best of your ability then I see no issue, and have no need to revisit the drafts/articles.
- My objective, as ever, is to create a smooth path for drafts to become articles, and to create a decent learning experience for new editors. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 11:51, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
Your opinion
It may be valid, but let us allow them their say. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 16:55, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for the tip
Cltr (talk) 15:07, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
William Knighton author is not the same person as Sir William K
I an trying to create a new page for the author William Knighton - as my draft says, he should not be confused with Sir William Knighton, the physician who became private secretary of King George IV and was created a baronet, who was a cousin of his father according to Debrett's. RCS sharpshooter (talk) 16:01, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- @RCS sharpshooter thank you for that information. I will revoke my review. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 16:02, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
Thank you
Richard Swetenham — Preceding unsigned comment added by RCS sharpshooter (talk • contribs) 16:05, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
Cynthia F. Moss
This is about Cynthia F. Moss entry comments: the entry is student work. Please note that those same students had an editor reject an entry about another AAAS Fellow on the basis of them "feeling" that AAAS not being very selective in their awards of that title (Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science), so they did an "overkill" on trying to prove notability. Thank you for pinging, I will clean up the references Minuette Macon (talk) 18:38, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Minuette Macon I saw it was a student work, but it appears to have been abandoned, yet of sufficient quality to be accepted. I think the students did well enough here.
- Please link me to the other article? No promises. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 19:29, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- Draft:Alison Barth "The person has been an elected member of a scholarly society or association, but I do not see enough evidence to suggest that AAAS is highly selective or prestigious enough to pass this guideline."
- I will go through again to see if I can get more notable sources on Barth, but generally AAAS distinction is sufficient to pass the professor test as it's an incredibly prestigious title (not Oscars, for sure, but science vs art, etc). I am the instructor for this course-after the class ends, the students rarely, if ever, check on submissions. I get to them whenever I can, but that's not very often unfortunately. Thanks so much for your help with this Minuette Macon (talk) 19:58, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
Accepted @Minuette Macon all it has to do is to have a >50% chance of surviving an immediate deletion process. The reviewer appears to be new to the task, and is still bedding in
- Any others that you believe to be worth looking at? 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 20:20, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you, this totally made my day! I agree about the other ones, even when female profs are professionally notable, for example Sarah Kucenas, there just aren't sufficient notable sources, but that's a whole other can of worms. If you have the time, please check Draft:Elva Diaz It was rejected, but I'd love a 2nd opinion on whether I should redo the whole entry. NIH New Innovator award recipients are also generally notable in Wiki terms, but I am not an editor Minuette Macon (talk) 21:21, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Minuette Macon I'm on the brink with Diaz, and too tired to check now. It's past 10:30pm here. I'm busy tomorrow. If you can find one additional thing for me to hang my hat on between now and Sunday (and tell me so) it will be an easy acceptance.
- Kudos to the students, too, who tried to fold wikipedia notability for the ones who do not yet have it. I don't think we need to open the worm can about female vs male profs and coverage in reliable source. It's true in any field of work, from top to bottom. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 21:35, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you, this totally made my day! I agree about the other ones, even when female profs are professionally notable, for example Sarah Kucenas, there just aren't sufficient notable sources, but that's a whole other can of worms. If you have the time, please check Draft:Elva Diaz It was rejected, but I'd love a 2nd opinion on whether I should redo the whole entry. NIH New Innovator award recipients are also generally notable in Wiki terms, but I am not an editor Minuette Macon (talk) 21:21, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
I think this might be headed to AfD if it gets moved again. As best I can tell, there's nothing notable about this particular event, coverage about it even in the sources linked in the article only demonstrate passing mentions. I would be curious about your thoughts, but I was ready to hit send on Twinkle before I got the edit conflict error message. Cheers, Bobby Cohn (talk) 21:56, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Bobby Cohn I am sure you are right. It just seemed worth giving the creating editor a further chance to think. I send disputed draftifications to AfD regularly; I'm sure you do too. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 22:24, 31 August 2024 (UTC)