User talk:Absurdum4242

I disagree with your reasons for declining the article. Currently, it already has three academic sources: Thomas Mocharitsh's diploma thesis on Ruthenian military terminology, Evan Samborowski's paper on Galician military units, and Alexei Lithavorik's Russian language research on Austro-Hungarian units on the Eastern Front. I can't find many in-depth sources online, even in German, but my plan was to add more to the article when they became available

Despite my disappointment that the draft wasn't approved, I do want to share my appreciation. I really do like how you provided a critique that is long and specific enough to where I can be constructive and steps to where I can improve. Not many have done so and therefore I wanted to thank you for it. m( _ _ )m TansoShoshen (talk) 14:20, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

No problem, I’m one of the editors who really do like seeing new articles approved, so I’m always rooting for people to get through the process. One thing I will say, while there doesn’t seem to be sufficient sources for the studio, you might have a better chance creating a page for the Ongezellig cartoon itself. Keep at it 👍 Absurdum4242 (talk) 15:35, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

The issue with that is that Ongezellig has had so many attempts to make an article about it and I still don't personally think it has enough media coverage to justify having an article. The thing about Studio Massa's works is that they are popular and media talk about the culture around them, but not necessarily about the works or the studio itself.

Even for that section about Ongezellig, there's big differences between how English-language and Dutch-language sources when they do talk about the show (ex. English sources call it a series with 6 episodes, Dutch sources call it an animation with 6 parts).

Due to the above, is it strange to attempt to have a "Reception of Ongezellig" page or along those lines? TansoShoshen (talk) 03:44, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

See, if it is in fact the case that they talk about the works, but not about the studio, it strongly suggests that the studio itself is NOT notable enough for an article. Especially if, as you say, you don’t think that one of their most popular and influential shows also does not have enough notability to sustain an article… and yes, haveing a “reception of X” article without an “X” article would be very strange. “Reception of X” is always a sub-section for “Article X”. Absurdum4242 (talk) 04:40, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

I just found 2 new sources for Ongezellig, I went ahead and tried to make a draft around the topic. Could you please give me some pointers as to what to improve? TansoShoshen (talk) 05:12, 7 September 2026 (UTC)

Hi Absurdum4242, thanks for the feedback on Draft:BC Unclaimed Property Society. I went through the draft again and rewrote each section to address the concerns from the previous review. Just wanted to let you know the changes have been made. Thanks! Davidlebrun90 (talk) 17:23, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

I have a scanned/digitised copy of the first source which is a printed book from 1989. But I guess copyright is still Karnataka Lalithakala Academy. Would it be okay if I upload it to archive.org and link it? I uploaded it to archive.org https://archive.org/details/y.-nagaraju-a-biography-1989 The official english translation starts from page 34 of the scanned book. Subbu (talk) 15:04, 30 September 2026 (UTC)