User talk:Kraftlos/Archive 3

Kraftlos -- On one hand, Mentoring Tenmei was a failure because we didn't develop plausible strategies for averting the problem which has developed here at Talk:List of tributaries of Imperial China#Cite does not verify asserted "facts".

• In 2009, I foresaw a set of prospective issues recurring ad nauseam; and I sought help here. The counter-intuitive result was ArbCom punishment in order to molify the indignant, extravagant complaints of Caspian blue and Teeninvestor.
• In 2010, Mentorship did not address the questions with which I began nor did the investment of time encompass averting recidivism. Regrettably, my writing and weekly status reports for mentors remained opaque. I didn't manage to ask for help in a way that made responding easy or possible.

On the other hand, Mentoring Tenmei was a success because both Caspian blue and Teeninvestor appear to have withdrawn from Wikipedia, and I'm still here to address the kinds of questions their edits and strategies inspired. In their absence, WP:Verifiability/WP:Use English/WP:Burden will continue to be conflated with content issues; but my comments and questions are less likely to be misconstrued as personal attacks.

Kraftlos -- Now that the formal mentorship period has ended, are you willing to help me develop a strategy for dealing with problems I expect to recur. These do not appear to be conventional in your editing experience. This may be unique to East Asian topics and contributors; and if so, your perspective is all the more valuable.

I predict that problems like the one here will persist and increase in the foreseeable future -- not because this is a self-fulfilling prophesy -- but because of developments in East Asia and because of the nature of our collaborative context. This category includes the stale problems I discovered with Caspian blue at Talk:Joseon Tongsinsa/Archive 1 and also similar to what I encountered with Teeninvestor at Talk:Tang Dynasty in Inner Asia/Archive 1.

I do not invite your intervention in any specific dispute thread. Rather, I'm looking for your help in forward-looking analysis and planning. The response I'm looking for is binary: "yes" or "no"?

If you're no longer interested in this kind of open-ended activity, please accept my sincere thanks for the help you've already offered. --Tenmei (talk) 19:47, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Hi! I saw you were involved with a previous nomination for deletion of List of suicides in fiction, and felt you should be informed of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of suicides in fiction (3rd nomination). Thanks!--Yaksar (let's chat) 17:33, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi. If you are still acting as Tenmei's mentor you might want to look at Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Tenmei. Taemyr (talk) 08:27, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

I've been away from Wikipedia for a while. Been spending my online time doing other things. I think marathoning page clean-ups, AfD, and RfC was what did it. Anyway, expect to see more from me this month; and if I find something interesting to do, I'll probably keep at it. If you watch my talkpage, go ahead and say hi! I ask only out of a vain curiosity. :P --Kraftlos (Talk | Contrib) 04:40, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

I want to thank you again for your mentoring.

I appreciated your efforts; and my participation the project was affected by your investments of time and thought. --Tenmei (talk) 15:41, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Roger Davies commented about here about "recognizing the very considerable efforts that went into mentorship" ....

In my opinion, each of us did everything we were asked to do. Those who volunteered to be mentors deserve repeated thanks and acknowlegement, nothing less. --Tenmei (talk) 03:15, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

One added note: Roger Davies now assesses mentorship in terms of whatever he means by the phrase "subsequent failure".

Shall I allow this phrase to pass unchallenged. No mentors failed, nor was mentorship a failure.

Whatever Roger Davies meant is only another example of moving the goalposts. Yes, ArbCom failed us all again.... And yes, if someone will explain it to me, I can try to understand how and why I failed again -- but not you. Please believe that you did all that anyone could have hoped for or expected. --Tenmei (talk) 03:47, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi Tenmei. As you may or may not have noticed, I've become a lot less active the past few months and haven't been able to keep up on this discussion. I'm not sure what you mean by "moving the goalposts" because it appears the goals have remained the same. The reason I think they're saying mentorship failed is not because we mentors failed in our duty, but that the mentoring process failed to bring about the desired result, that is a change in your communication style and the way you work with others on the site. I think you are a well-meaning editor that would like to contribute; but you seem to spend a lot of this mentorship time worrying about Arbcom and telling us about everything they're doing instead of making edits.

Arbcom is the final authority on Wikipedia and I don't get the impression that they're being unfair. I think they're trying to keep the peace on Wikipedia while giving you a chance to make changes. Please take what they have to say seriously - and if I were you, I would keep away from those articles that started this mess in the first place. It's better to contribute in areas where your work will be appreciated and wont cause problems.

I wish you well, and I hope they let you keep editing. If they choose the 1-year site ban, I would highly recommend putting in some work at Simple English Wikipedia, that site needs help (and of course your native-language Wikipedia). --Kraftlos (Talk | Contrib) 10:42, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Articles for Creation urgently needs your help! Articles for Creation is desperately short of reviewers! We are looking for urgent help, from experienced editors, in reviewing submissions in the pending submissions queue. Currently the are 4336 submissions waiting to be reviewed. Do you have what it takes? Are you familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines? Do you know what Wikipedia is and is not? Do you have a working knowledge of the Manual of Style, particularly article naming conventions? Are you autoconfirmed? Can you review submissions based on their individual merits? If the answer to these questions is yes, then please read the reviewing instructions and donate a little of your time to helping tackle the backlog.

FYI, we have a greate AFC helper script (located at User:Timotheus Canens/afchelper4.js). It helps you in reviewing submissions, e.g: it informs the submitter, it creates talk pages (when submitting), update /recent (when submitting), etc. Simply include it in your skin.js and hit review at the top (similar to twinkle). Regards, mabdul 12:48, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

HI there - thanks for your additional comments on how to rework the profile. I've made changes, which hopefully will make it more neutral in tone.Fbell74 (talk) 01:12, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi Kraftlos, Thx for your time in reviewing my article. i understand your concern about Hedgehog not being notable enough, but as a Beijing resident of 5 years i can assure you that the band has always been an important key anchor in the city's independent music scene. Unfortunately, I'm unable to read Chinese, so can't refer to those sources to back up my claim.

I was very surprised when i realized a year ago that there is no page for Hedgehog, but there are pages for Chinese bands who are less significant and much less popular. Would it be useful to cite City Weekend articles where 1) Hedgehog is the first listed of 2011's best bands, or 2) Hedgehog is the 2nd listed of Beijing's best bands past and present?

http://www.cityweekend.com.cn/beijing/articles/blogs-beijing/the-beat/the-year-in-rock-hottest-bands-of-2011/

http://www.cityweekend.com.cn/beijing/articles/blogs-beijing/the-beat/local-rock-101-beijing-bands-you-should-already-know-about/

Thanks for your time, i appreciate it. I'm still getting to know the ins and outs of Wikipedia.

William (citrusconcept) Citrusconcept (talk) 08:49, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi Citrustconcept. The main problem here isn't that there are no sources in English, it's just that Wikipedia articles are built on reliably independent coverage from third-party sources. That cityweekend can probably count as one reliable source, but the coverage in those two articles is pretty short. It would be better if you could find longer newspaper-style articles that are specifically about the band either from a newspaper or reliable online publication. You might also want to look at WP:BAND and WP:RS if you haven't already. Feel free to message me here if you have more questions! --Kraftlos (Talk | Contrib) 08:01, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Hello Kraftlos,

Thank you for reviewing the recent article I submitted. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/David_R._Fett As the article has not been accepted, I would like to ask you a few questions to see whether I can improve it for re-submission.

1. Regarding the "reliable" citing sources: If we cite the bullet-pointed research papers in Fett’s “Publications” section, would this be adherent to citing “independent” and “reliable” sources? Fett’s research has been published in accredited science and medical journals and abstracts for most of them can be found online.
2. If there are any other advice you can provide on creating "reliable" and "independent" sources I would appreciate it very much.
3. I noticed that the original "Reference List" I submitted was reduced almost half. Does that mean that the ones that have been deleted are not to be submitted again?

Thank you for your time and looking forward to hearing from you.

--Jae825 (talk) 00:46, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Hello Jae825, The references I removed were all links to other Wikipedia articles - which should be placed as WikiLinks in the main text of the article, but cannot be used as a reference for content to your article. Wikipedia articles are considered tertiary sources, that is a source complied from other sources, sources like scholarly journals and newspaper articles are secondary sources and things written by the subject would be a primary source. Wikipedia articles generally should only use reliable secondary and primary sources to fill in the gaps. In the case of establishing notability you should only be using secondary or independent sources that write specifically about the source. Wikipedia articles cannot be used as sources.

Papers written by the subject are worth mentioning, but they would be considered primary sources. What you need are reliable sources talking about Fett that aren't connected to him - I recall there being an MIT allumni news source, but you'll need a couple more sources. Anyway, I hope this advice made sense, please ask me if you need clarification. --Kraftlos (Talk | Contrib) 04:33, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

You may have noticed over the past few days that the MOTD that you link to on your user page has simply displayed a red link. This is due to the fact that not enough people are reviewing pending MOTDs here. Please help us keep the MOTD template alive and simply go and review a few of the MOTDs in the list. That way we can have a real MOTD in the future rather than re-using (This space for rent). Any help would be appreciated! –pjoef (talk • contribs) 11:15, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi Kraftlos,

It's been a while but thought I ask you some more questions.

I have all the links/sources that show his published works but I am having a bit of a hard time finding "secondary sources" that relate to Dr. Fett's background and/or his practice as a doctor, even though his accomplishments are pretty impressive. I did find a several website that mention his name as a donor/alumni, which I indicated below. But i anticipate that it won't be enough? But I did find a few sources on the novel "White Sleeper" he wrote - an interview, review, etc. I decided to send you the links of these secondary sources to make sure that they can be considered as reliable independent sources, before I resubmit the article. Please let me know what you think. Thank you in advance!!

Google Books

Giving Donors/MIT

Conversation with David R Fett on his book "White Sleeper" | Book Pleasures

"White Sleeper" Book Spotlight | Book Marketing Buzz

--Jae825 (talk) 07:25, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Hello Kraftlos,

Thank you for reviewing the recent article I submitted. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/David_R._Fett As the article has not been accepted, I would like to ask you a few questions to see whether I can improve it for re-submission.

1. Regarding the "reliable" citing sources: If we cite the bullet-pointed research papers in Fett’s “Publications” section, would this be adherent to citing “independent” and “reliable” sources? Fett’s research has been published in accredited science and medical journals and abstracts for most of them can be found online.

2. If there are any other advice you can provide on creating "reliable" and "independent" sources I would appreciate it very much.

3. I noticed that the original "Reference List" I submitted was reduced almost half. Does that mean that the ones that have been deleted are not to be submitted again?

Thank you for your time and looking forward to hearing from you. --Jae825 (talk) 00:46, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Hello Jae825, The references I removed were all links to other Wikipedia articles - which should be placed as WikiLinks in the main text of the article, but cannot be used as a reference for content to your article. Wikipedia articles are considered tertiary sources, that is a source complied from other sources, sources like scholarly journals and newspaper articles are secondary sources and things written by the subject would be a primary source. Wikipedia articles generally should only use reliable secondary and primary sources to fill in the gaps. In the case of establishing notability you should only be using secondary or independent sources that write specifically about the source. Wikipedia articles cannot be used as sources.

Papers written by the subject are worth mentioning, but they would be considered primary sources. What you need are reliable sources talking about Fett that aren't connected to him - I recall there being an MIT allumni news source, but you'll need a couple more sources. Anyway, I hope this advice made sense, please ask me if you need clarification. --Kraftlos (Talk | Contrib) 04:33, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Articles for Creation is desperately short of reviewers! We are looking for urgent help, from experienced editors, in reviewing submissions in the pending submissions queue. Currently there are 4336 submissions waiting to be reviewed and many help requests at our Help Desk. Do you have what it takes? Are you familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines? Do you know what Wikipedia is and is not? Do you have a working knowledge of the Manual of Style, particularly article naming conventions? Can you review submissions based on their individual merits? If the answer to these questions is yes, then please read the reviewing instructions and donate a little of your time to helping tackle the backlog. You might wish to add {{AFC status}} or {{AfC Defcon}} to your userpage, which will alert you to the number of open submissions. PS: we have a great AFC helper script at WP:AFCH! News Good article nominee 04 Aug 2012 – Parental brain (talk · edit · hist) was GA nominated by Carina1205 (t · c); see discussion AFCH script improvements 1.16 to 1.17 Batman still works!

Sent on behalf of WikiProject Articles for creation. If you do not wish to receive anymore messages from this WikiProject, please remove your username from this page.
Happy reviewing! TheSpecialUser ^TSU

• Delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 09:01, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject Articles for creation Backlog Elimination Drive

WikiProject AFC is holding a one month long Backlog Elimination Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running from October 22, 2012 – November 21, 2012.

Awards will be given out for all reviewers participating in the drive in the form of barnstars at the end of the drive.
There is a backlog of over 1000 articles, so start reviewing articles! Visit the drive's page and help out!

EdwardsBot (talk) 00:11, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

I just spent an couple hours on here. Haven't done that in a long time. Am I back? Maybe. If only to chip away at that AfC backlog. --Kraftlos (Talk | Contrib) 12:38, 21 November 2012 (UTC)