User talk:DoubleGrazing/Archive 22

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Perusall Draft

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

Hi, I would like to revise and resubmit this Perusall article for consideration. I read your rejection of the draft, and I have some questions. Are 5 independent, scholarly sources too few? If so, what # will work? I included articles published in the Journal of Educators Online; College Teaching; Frontiers in Education; Qwerty: Open and Interdisciplinary Journal of Technology, Culture and Education; and the Journal of Political Science Education. They have no connection to Harvard or Perusall. Is the problem that you want me to exclude sources connected to Harvard? That seems unnecessary, since there are already so many great sources cited here, but I can do that. There are dozens of peer-reviewed articles on Perusall, so I'm not sure why it matters if there's a mixture of types of sources here--websites, scholarly journal articles, and statements of the PhD professors who made the thing. Especially the latter seems relevant, because these statements can be cited without creating bias. You cite Edison in an article about the lightbulb, right? Yes, of course, you cite the inventor's words on his invention. They are relevant--especially when balanced with many other sources (as I've done). Plenty of articles cite in this manner. In addition to the sources listed above, I cited other sources--some from universities and some from PhDs--none of whom are related to Harvard or Perusall (not in any way that I can discover). My stub shouldn't be considered perfected, true, but please compare it to the Hypothes.is article [[1]], and I think you'll find it nearly as successful as that article already. Josh a brewer (talk) 15:49, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
Hi @Josh a brewer: thanks for your message.
I would like to first clarify something. My role as an AfC reviewer isn't to stop you publishing an article (even if it may sometimes feel like that!); my role is to stop you publishing an article that isn't ready to be published, or shouldn't be published at all. For example if the subject is hopelessly non-notable (which I'm not saying is the case here; quite the opposite) but the article is published nevertheless, it won't last 'in the wild' more than minutes, hours at the most, before it gets deleted, and that's in nobody's interests. So my job is to help you develop the article up to a point where it has better than 50:50 chance of surviving a deletion request or discussion. In other words, we're working towards the same objective here.
Second point of clarification: I didn't reject this draft, which would mean you couldn't resubmit it, I only declined it, which means you very much can resubmit, after you've addressed the reasons for declining, in this case the sourcing. As I already said in my comment, I actually think this is probably notable, we just need to make sure the sources fully establish that, so in that sense we're almost there.
As for your other comments/questions, five sources is certainly adequate, as long as they are of sufficient quality to establish notability, meaning they are reliable and fully independent of the subject, preferably secondary, and they provide significant coverage (not just passing mentions etc.) of the subject. Academic papers/journals may or may not be secondary, as explained at WP:SECONDARY.
And no, you don't need to exclude or remove Harvard-related or other close sources from the draft, you just cannot rely on them to establish notability, because they are not fully independent of the subject.
With all that out of the way, please review the WP:GNG guideline, and if you can find sources that meet every aspect of that, please add them, or if you think your draft already includes sources which achieve the same then please highlight the three strongest so I can take another look. Thanks, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:03, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
@DoubleGrazing: Thank you for spending the time to review and reply to the Perusall draft. I have reviewed the standards for notability and secondary research, and I believe the draft of the Perusall article passes those standards. There's a sufficient amount of reliable, secondary, and independent sources to confirm Perusall's notability and its appropriateness for inclusion in Wikipedia. In short, it merits inclusion. The verifiable and sourced statements in the article have been treated with equal weight. As stated above, this draft includes information from Journal of Educators Online; College Teaching; Frontiers in Education; Qwerty: Open and Interdisciplinary Journal of Technology, Culture and Education; and the Journal of Political Science Education. These are reliable, secondary, and independent journal articles written by researchers who are not connected to Harvard or Perusall in any discernable way. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Perusall
Josh a brewer (talk) 18:17, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
@Josh a brewer: okay, that being the case, you should resubmit this draft, so a reviewer can assess it. Best, --DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:27, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

Draft: Mario Brero

Hello,

Thank you for your comment and the time you spent reviewing the sources for this page.

In response to your question about the top 3 sources, I would answer that:

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2023/04/03/the-dirty-secrets-of-a-smear-campaign https://www.nouvelobs.com/rue89/rue89-police-justice/20140517.RUE3887/carrure-de-montagne-et-souplesse-de-felin-le-curieux-detective-d-areva.html (in French) https://www.letemps.ch/suisse/un-espion-suisse-juge-paris (in French). The second choice would have been this great investigation by Mediapart, but the article is only available for a subscription. https://www.mediapart.fr/journal/france/010323/une-fuite-de-donnees-revele-l-ingerence-des-emirats-en-france

I hope it helps. Thank you. Camuvin (talk) 13:11, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Okay thanks @Camuvin; I'll post those in the draft for whoever reviews this. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:18, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Women in Red May 2023

Women in Red May 2023, Vol 9, Iss 5, Nos 251, 252, 267, 268, 269, 270


Online events:

See also:

Tip of the month:

  • Use the Google translate app and camera on your phone to translate text from an article or book

Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 18:27, 27 April 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Trying to be a Wikipedian

Hello DoubleGrazing and thank you for reviewing my humble submission on the Huguenots of Meaux. I am sorry for my clumsy start with insufficient citations. I am an ancient mariner in my 94th year and my grasp of computer technology is basic research so I hope my new submission is better. I have been researching Huguenots for another project and, when visiting the Meaux sites, I was surprised that little or no mention of Mangin or LeClerc was apparent yet they started the first Reformed church in France inspired by Jean Calvin. and endured the ultimate penalty. Such history and sacrifice must be preserved. I am just putting the finishing touches to my revised submission following your advice and will submit shortly. Whilst I have not been able to grasp a lot of the complexities of citations I have tried to give you access to that information in the way I was best able. I hope it is acceptable but, if not, I have done my best. I hope it arrives. I have had difficulty saving my updated edits each day even though I believe I followed the instructions and then publish but they do not appear always next day so I copy each day and then paste to Wikipedia as I will now do. I shall wait with patience for your response in the fullness of time. Thank you again and warm regards Patrick (Hobbs) Rowbarton (talk) 07:05, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:The Fourteen of Meaux
Hello @Rowbarton: thanks for your message. I will take a look at your draft, to see if I can help you along. It can be tricky getting to grips with all the features and techniques here at Wikipedia, I've been at this for many years and feel like I'm only just starting to learn the proverbial ropes! Best Regards, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:14, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
Thank you. It is such a relief to be in touch after so many hours/weeks of research and frustration and to know I am not losing my marbles!! My problem is this. I have just, this minute, opened as always to my last 'in progress' edit page shown (but which is never the one I saved last!) on site. I then deleted this and pasted from my word pad my revised and latest submission which is my best shot so far. I then 'Published' to save but there is no 'RE-SUBMIT" button I can see on that page so I select the 'go back' arrow and am told I may lose my edits if I do. And I do - since next time around the original unedited text is still there preventing me sending my revised one to you!! I'm sure it's my fault but I don't think of myself as a thicko' and with your kind support I am sure I will get my effort to you for appraisal eventually and I can stop sobbing and my wife will stop beating me for my tantrums!! Thanks again DoubleGrazing. Patrick (Rowbarton) "The Fourteen of Meaux". Rowbarton (talk) 01:35, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

Request to Recover my draft article

Sir Please my draft article was not there. it is my first draft article I will remove copy violations. Ardo27 (talk) 12:33, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

@Ardo27: if you mean Draft:Government First Grade College, Carstreet, then no, it isn't there, because it was deleted as a copyright violation. You need to write in your own words.
And I couldn't recover it for you even if I wanted to, as I'm not an administrator. You can ask the deleting administrator if they would give it back to you, but don't get your hopes up, as copyvios are not normally restored. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:10, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Superior College, Dera Ghazi Khan

Indeed, wouldn't it be such less of a waste of time if we didn't have to start an AfD to get the creator to get it? One day! Star Mississippi 22:29, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

Salla National Park

hei rakas DoubleGrazing، Paljon kiitoksia työstäsi tämän artikkelin. parissa.Kunnioituksella.Patricia Mannerheim (talk) 11:53, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

Perusall Draft

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

Hi, I would like to revise and resubmit this Perusall article for consideration. I read your rejection of the draft, and I have some questions. Are 5 independent, scholarly sources too few? If so, what # will work? I included articles published in the Journal of Educators Online; College Teaching; Frontiers in Education; Qwerty: Open and Interdisciplinary Journal of Technology, Culture and Education; and the Journal of Political Science Education. They have no connection to Harvard or Perusall. Is the problem that you want me to exclude sources connected to Harvard? That seems unnecessary, since there are already so many great sources cited here, but I can do that. There are dozens of peer-reviewed articles on Perusall, so I'm not sure why it matters if there's a mixture of types of sources here--websites, scholarly journal articles, and statements of the PhD professors who made the thing. Especially the latter seems relevant, because these statements can be cited without creating bias. You cite Edison in an article about the lightbulb, right? Yes, of course, you cite the inventor's words on his invention. They are relevant--especially when balanced with many other sources (as I've done). Plenty of articles cite in this manner. In addition to the sources listed above, I cited other sources--some from universities and some from PhDs--none of whom are related to Harvard or Perusall (not in any way that I can discover). My stub shouldn't be considered perfected, true, but please compare it to the Hypothes.is article [[2]], and I think you'll find it nearly as successful as that article already. Josh a brewer (talk) 15:49, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
Hi @Josh a brewer: thanks for your message.
I would like to first clarify something. My role as an AfC reviewer isn't to stop you publishing an article (even if it may sometimes feel like that!); my role is to stop you publishing an article that isn't ready to be published, or shouldn't be published at all. For example if the subject is hopelessly non-notable (which I'm not saying is the case here; quite the opposite) but the article is published nevertheless, it won't last 'in the wild' more than minutes, hours at the most, before it gets deleted, and that's in nobody's interests. So my job is to help you develop the article up to a point where it has better than 50:50 chance of surviving a deletion request or discussion. In other words, we're working towards the same objective here.
Second point of clarification: I didn't reject this draft, which would mean you couldn't resubmit it, I only declined it, which means you very much can resubmit, after you've addressed the reasons for declining, in this case the sourcing. As I already said in my comment, I actually think this is probably notable, we just need to make sure the sources fully establish that, so in that sense we're almost there.
As for your other comments/questions, five sources is certainly adequate, as long as they are of sufficient quality to establish notability, meaning they are reliable and fully independent of the subject, preferably secondary, and they provide significant coverage (not just passing mentions etc.) of the subject. Academic papers/journals may or may not be secondary, as explained at WP:SECONDARY.
And no, you don't need to exclude or remove Harvard-related or other close sources from the draft, you just cannot rely on them to establish notability, because they are not fully independent of the subject.
With all that out of the way, please review the WP:GNG guideline, and if you can find sources that meet every aspect of that, please add them, or if you think your draft already includes sources which achieve the same then please highlight the three strongest so I can take another look. Thanks, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:03, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Ayala Hasson

Hi! Can you review this article? דפישולץ (talk) 09:34, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

@דפישולץ why? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:36, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
It could take months before someone reviews it. This is my first work and it was frustrating to learn it did not become an article. That is why I have approached; I saw your name on the list of reviewers and thought you might be willing to help me. דפישולץ (talk) 09:42, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
Everyone else I turned to ignored me. I'm grateful that you have replied. If you're not willing to do it, then it's okay. Thank you for your time. דפישולץ (talk) 09:47, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
It's because there is a long list of drafts awaiting reviews, and you're sort of asking to jump the queue. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:49, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
@דפישולץ: it wouldn't be fair to other editors whose drafts are awaiting review.
It doesn't have to take long, it could be someone reviews it today, even. (Obviously I'm not saying they will, but it's not impossible.) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:48, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
It sounds fair and makes sense. I thought there was nothing wrong with taking active action to make things run faster. I guess others are just not as eager as I am to have their first article accepted. I read about Wikipedia:Did you know?. I hoped to submit it, but I guess I have to wait. I'm grateful for your reply and firm moral stand; if you change your mind later, I'll be grateful. Have a nice day. דפישולץ (talk) 09:54, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
@דפישולץ: no worries; "nothing ventured, nothing gained", etc. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:01, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for all the AfC work

Just popping by to thank you for the work you do around AfC, and especially the AfC help desk. It's appreciated. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:53, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, from me, too. Your responses are thoughtful, concise, helpful, and polite. Thank you for the work you do, and I can't imagine how all of you folks at AfC do it. Chamblis (talk) 13:42, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Question from SurinameCentral (20:54, 8 May 2023)

Hi , i have a problem with the Wikipedia ENG page of Suriname. Suriname has disputed areas with both Guyana and French Guiana, but other users keep reverting the incomplete map of Suriname. i remade another map using the same method that wikipedia uses, where the disputed areas are marked in a lighter green color, but i cannot update it on the map as a new version. i need your help to clear this injustice on the maps of Suriname. The disputed areas should be marked as such on BOTH countries maps, NOT only shown on Guyana and Left out completely on maps of Suriname. this is unfair. Look ath the Ortho Map on the page of India, it shows the disputed areas in a lighter color, so why is Suriname treated with other rules? --SurinameCentral (talk) 20:54, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

nurreal number system

The nurreal number system is my creation that I made. Leo Bhandari (talk) 05:48, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Right well i am the inventor of the nurreal number system. Leo Bhandari (talk) 06:03, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Regarding notability of my article

hello, Thanks a lot for taking time for reviewing my article. I think I have added enough citations or references in my article but it is still telling as not notable. Can you please inform which part of the article needs more citations? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Bombay_Chamber_of_Commerce_and_Industry Thanks and regards Sandipan1997 (talk) 11:03, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

@Sandipan1997: it doesn't need more citations, it needs sources that meet the WP:GNG standard and can therefore establish notability; you need to read and understand that GNG guideline.
The sources currently cited are primary, or routine business reporting. The last source (the book) mentions the Chamber several times, but always only in passing. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:12, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion

How to solve Speedy deletion.Pls tell me. Nattaw211198 (talk) 09:27, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

Deleted draft source code

Hi, is it possible to get my deleted draft source code so I can make edit for the part where it violated copyright?

Draft:Will Lyle Juliemuzic (talk) 15:36, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

@Juliemuzic: I can't return it, I'm not an administrator. You can ask the deleting admin, but as a general rule copyright violations are not returned. In any case, IIRC it was almost entirely a copyvio, so there really wasn't anything to rescue. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:41, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

Draft: Atlantic Shark Institute

Hi there DoubleGrazing,

Thank you for reviewing the page that I am editing and trying to get approved (Atlantic Shark Institute).

I added more references (that focus primarily on the subject) and also added more information pertaining to notability (for example the Institute recently broke two state records for license plate sales, over 4000 in a week!)

I am new to wikipedia and still learning, happy to hear any recommendations from you as I work to get this article published.

Kind regards, -Tomas K. Tomaskoeck (talk) 02:12, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Tomaskoeck: since you mention the record for licence plates, it's perhaps worth reiterating that interesting as facts like that may be, they don't have anything to do with 'notability' in the Wikipedia context. Notability is often misunderstood as 'importance' or 'fame' or being the 'biggest X' or 'the first Y' or something like that. Whereas notability is simply a question of sources: if the subject has received significant coverage in secondary sources (newspapers, TV and radio programmes, books, etc.) that are reliable and independent of the subject, then it is notable; otherwise not. And if cannot be shown to be notable by citing multiple such sources, then it isn't possible to have an article on the subject included in Wikipedia.
Another, related point is this: when writing an article, you shouldn't write what you know about the subject, and then try to find sources that support what you've written. (I'm not suggesting that is what you've done; this is just hypothetical scenario.) You should instead read what reliable sources have said about it, and summarise (in your own words) that, citing each source as you go. HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:44, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
Hi DoubleGrazing,
Thank you for getting back to me so quickly. Having your guidance makes me feel less overwhelmed so I greatly appreciate it.
I am pasting some sources (I made sure they are features and not passing mentions) of the Atlantic Shark Institute. Let me know if these look good. There are many others but I did not want to become repetitive.
  1. MARKEY, HUGH. "Great white shark tagged inside Harbor of Refuge for first time". RICentral.com. Retrieved 2023-01-19.
  2. Community Focus: Jon Dodd of the Atlantic Shark Institute". WRPI. News 12. June 8, 2022.
  3. Nagle, Kate. "Catching Mako Sharks Will Now Be Prohibited -- RI's Atlantic Shark Institute Praises Move". GoLocalProv. Retrieved 2022-11-21.
  4. Staff, Carlos R. Muñoz Globe; July 8, Updated; 2021; Comments, 7:09 a m Share on Facebook Share on TwitterView. "Second great white shark tagged in Rhode Island waters could provide key climate-change data - The Boston Globe". BostonGlobe.com. Retrieved 2023-05-14
  5. VIDEO NOW: Atlantic Shark Institute announces eight Great White sharks tagged, retrieved 2023-02-07
  6. Atlantic Shark Institute's charity license plate 'shatters' record". ABC6. 2023-05-01. Retrieved 2023-05-05.
Have a great weekend and I wish you well!
-Tomas Tomaskoeck (talk) 16:42, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

Draft: County of Achalm

Hey DoubleGrazing,

Thanks for previously reviewing my page about the County of Achalm.

I have taken your notes and help into consideration and have found new, reliable sources that discuss the medieval county of Achalm.

I was wondering if you could help me out and overlook the page before I submit it.

Please get back to me with your thoughts and comments on the page.

Best Regards, MomGamer. Momgamer09 (talk) 16:22, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

Article Maskeliade

Hey DoubleGrazing, Thanks for previously reviewing my page about the Draft:Anton Maskeliade.

I was wondering if you could help me answering my questions. The article is translation from the Russian Wiki — https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9C%D0%B0%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B5%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%B0%D0%B4%D0%B5,_%D0%90%D0%BD%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%BD

And we have there over 20 sources, which I transfer to translation also.

Is it correct way to support the article with reliable sources?

Thank you!

Best Regards, Musatkina Musatkina (talk) 08:34, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Musatkina: you can use the sources cited in the ru.wiki article, as long as they meet the relevant standards of reliability etc. Note, however, that in what comes to notability, each language version of Wikipedia has different rules, and what is adequate in one version may not be so in another; the en.wiki requirements tend to be more onerous than in other language versions.
Incidentally, when you say "we have", who is the "we" you refer to? And what is your relationship to the article subject? Thanks, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:59, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Bárbara Sánchez-Kane

Thank you. The draft that you directed was different from the article in two ways. First, the article title had diacritics, and there was already a redirect in article space from the title without diacritics to the title with diacritics. Second, the draft that you declined and then redirected was ugly and looked like a resume. If there weren't already an article, the draft would have had to be tagged as needing reformatting. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:06, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Antrim Coast half marathon

Hey DoubleGrazing, Thanks you for reviewing my page! We have resubmitted based on your feedback. If you could review the page again it would be much appreciated. Wurkhouse (talk) 14:32, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Blake_Boyd_(Actor)

Hello DoubleGrazing, asking about this page Blake Boyd an American Film actor. Mercy kiai (talk) 08:56, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

@Mercy kiai: yes... what is your question? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:00, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
I saw you moved the draft from mainspace, is there anything I need to do more to the page ? Mercy kiai (talk) 09:16, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
@Mercy kiai: the article has no sources, which is completely unacceptable for any article, but especially so for an article on a living person (see WP:BLP), as we need to be able to verify the information. And as there are no sources, there is also no evidence of notability, which is a key requirement for inclusion in Wikipedia. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:19, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
I have added sources as advised DoubleGrazing. Mercy kiai (talk) 10:19, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
@Mercy kiai: okay; please don't move it to the main article space yourself, though, send it to AfC for review. Now that this has been draftified once, it will have to be deleted if it is found to be not suitable for publication. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:29, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
I have finished sourcing it and moved it immediately Mercy kiai (talk) 10:32, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
@Mercy kiai: why are you in such a hurry to publish this? What is your relationship with the subject? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:44, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
Still no good sourcing in the article. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:51, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
I've moved this back to draft after removing everything that doesn't have a shred of reliable sourcing. Mercy kiai, please do not move this back to main space until it has been reviewed by someone who understands our sourcing and notability policies. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:59, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
Just a heads up, DG, I blocked Mercy Kiai, Kr. Amritanshu, and Faithlyne for sock/meat and UPE and opened an SPI here. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:15, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
@ScottishFinnishRadish: oh good, thanks for that. I had a feeling there might be something dodgy here, but couldn't immediately find any evidence so moved on. Cheers, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:19, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

War Museum Askifou

Hi , I am doing this cause of work of my university . I am gonna take a grade at this work , could you check it once again?

When it gets public my teacher gonna give the grade , thanks a lot !!!

User:MuseologyLabIU/sandbox MuseologyLabIU (talk) 18:07, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi @MuseologyLabIU: you have to resubmit the draft for it to be reviewed again, but I can tell you already that it will not be accepted as most of the content is unreferenced and the sources are not enough to demonstrate that the subject is notable.
Also, I have previously posted a message on your talk page asking for details of your relationship with the subject of this draft. You have not yet responded to that message; please do so now. Thank you. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:52, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Draft: May al-Ibrashy

Hello, thanks for reviewing the Draft:May al-Ibrashy. I'd like to discuss the points you made declining the submission.

On reliable sources, eight out of the 11 references are secondary sources: popular English news outlets in Egypt: Ahram Online, Daily News Egypt, and Egyptian Streets. A further two are websites of organisations that awarded prizes, and one is a primary reference to employment. I fail to see how this adds up to non reliable sources.

On the question of notability, I believe al-Ibrashy (as any other person) should be assessed on her local or regional significance, rather than on a global level. There is a wikipedia page on architects from Egypt that can give some context. Overall, a consideration of context as to the amount of material required to argue notability for Egyptian and Arab persons should be made, as architects (and many other professions) do not garner the same attention from media and the public as peers in the West.

I would appreciate it if you reviewed your assessment in light of this.

Ypedia1 (talk) 19:53, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 56

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 56, March – April 2023

  • New partner:
    • Perlego
  • Library access tips and tricks
  • Spotlight: EveryBookItsReader

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:04, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

Improve article

Hi please how can I improve my article that was declined Bina ofLagos (talk) 09:55, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Women in Red - June 2023

Women in Red June 2023, Vol 9, Iss 6, Nos 251, 252, 271, 272, 273


Online events:

See also:

Tip of the month:

  • Looking for new red links? Keep an eye out for interesting and notable friends, family, or associates of your last article subject, and re-examine group photos for other women who may still need an article.

Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 09:15, 28 May 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:DoubleGrazing/Archive_22&oldid=1159246401"