User talk:Bobby Cohn

Archives and other talk page banners.

Archives: Index 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 2 sections are present. This user talk page often deals with similar or reoccurring topics. Generic titles of messages may be reformatted for clarity, such as renaming the section title to a link of the topic page. This user is a regular and doesn't mind if you template him. Though he will appreciate if you expand on your reasoning should your concern not be immediately apparent.

I wanted to get some more information from you on what type of sources you're looking for. The information presented in my article came mostly from newspaper clippings and high school yearbooks (most of which state the year they joined the conference or show standings to that effect). I compare what I wrote to the Parkland Conference page, and there are only two citations listed. It also has a comparative lack of narrative to what I presented, could that be the problem? Please advise. Moserjames79 (talk) 20:59, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Moserjames79, you're actually in a really good spot if everything is sourced from newspapers and yearbooks as you say (this would directly address my WP:OR concerns if you aren't publishing original research yourself but merely summarising the things you've found from researching old sources). To remedy the issue, in the article following the narrative that you've written (that I'm assuming to be a summary of the sources) or statements of fact, simply cite those newspaper articles or books as you have with the online sources.

We have details about this in WP:OFFLINE, but please be as specific as possible when citing things, including name of publication/journal/newspaper, authors, date, etc. The yearbook one is interesting, but the same advice applies, give title, chapter/page, etc, as much as possible. Let me know if you need more guidance on this, my recomendation to new editors is to always follow the WP:INTREF3 guideline as it follows an easy popup style box that you can fill, and it will format it properly, but this will require that you not use the VisualEditor, something that can be changed in your preferences.

Regarding the other article, it is best not to rely on previously published material to be the standard of the work on the project, in essence: WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. If you do want to follow along or use a guide, other editors have written 2009 Big Ten Conference football season, which is listed as a Good article, or 2012–13 Michigan Wolverines men's basketball team, which is listed as a Featured article. But a Good article or a Featured article can be quite the challenge and is not what is asked of you when submitting a draft for review. However, the example article you've described above is tagged for WP:Notability and WP:Verifiability, the same issues I'm trying to address with your draft. If subjects can't be proven notable, the remedy is deletion and if the material isn't cited, it's possible other editors may challenge and remove it, see WP:PROVEIT.

Thanks for coming to ask, I'm always happy to help. My goal probably aligns with your goal, I want to see your draft published; I also want to make sure it's done right. If you have any other questions, please feel free to ask! Kindly, Bobby Cohn (talk) 23:17, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Moserjames79, just to give you an update on the status of your draft review, I've asked for some advice on the reliable sources noticeboard, see the section § The use of yearbooks as a source for an external but related organization as I mentioned that I am unfamiliar with this specific issue. Hopefully this will provide us with an answer and/or more specific guidance moving forward. There's nothing more for you to do in this moment, I thought I would simply keep you apprised of the latest as it relates to the draft. All the best, Bobby Cohn (talk) 17:11, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for following up on this, hopefully we get some clarification out of this so I can better prepare the other conference histories I have in the queue. Moserjames79 (talk) 18:57, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Bobby Cohn. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Natural Health News".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:21, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Bobby Cohn,

I realize you didn't write this draft, another editor took a redirect you created from moving an article and built an article on top of it. But, according to Twinkle, you are the draft creator, hence this message. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:23, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Liz, no worries. I'm pretty active at AFC and AFC/R as well as closing RMs, so I get these from time to time. I understand that it's just the mediawiki software keeping track of who first published the page; the notifications don't bother me. Most times if it isn't relevant to me, I'll just the revert the message here to keep down on clutter.

Thanks for keeping a sharp eye out though! All the best, Bobby Cohn (talk) 14:09, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Courtesy link: Draft:Desh Pal S. Verma

Hi Bobby,

thank you for leaving the comments on how to edit and correct the Biography for Dr.Verma. I am however struggling to fix the edits or know which edits to properly fix. Is there a way you can highlight all what needs to be edited so I can make my corrections? I am trying to have his biography published for him before he passes. For the External links are the links broken or how do i properly inlay them to fit your wiki formatting requirements? This is my first wikipedia page creation for Dr. Verma and I am trying my best! Any help of advice would be greatly appreciated! Vermadesh (talk) 21:19, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Vermadesh, I've removed the inline links, there is more detail in the linked project page explaining why they are not appropriate. I have also tagged the material that would need to be verified before the article is published, lest it be challenged and removed. There is also extensive listing of the subject's publications, typically it is best to only list the top 4 or 5 by impact or citation metrics. There are other websites whose role it is to host these lists, Wikipedia is not one of them. I've also dome some copy editing removing the promotional wording in the draft, I imaging another reviewer will examine this as well. Let me know if you have any other questions. Thanks, Bobby Cohn (talk) 21:07, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Bobby can you please review the verma biography one more time and make any more comments or adjustments that you see fit. I have tried to make the proper edits as you have requested! I appreciate your patience and willingness to help Thanks again! Vermadesh (talk) 16:50, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is not my practice to do reviews upon request; I may have a look at it if I have some time, but I can't make any promises. At a quick cursory glance, I don't spot any glaring issues. Bobby Cohn (talk) 18:51, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Any particular reason it was closed as not moved? It seemed to be no consensus (4 in favor/4 against), and without a summary it’s hard to tell where the consensus against a move is coming from. 74.101.118.218 (talk) 21:50, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're making the mistake of counting votes, but even if we were to do that, half of those that "voted" support caged or prefaced their support as weak or as conditional to the name retiring. Bobby Cohn (talk) 12:52, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But yes, to further answer your question, it looked to me like people were making PTOPIC arguments that weren't gaining a ton of traction, coupled with caveated CRYSTALBALL speculation and sourcing was generally sparse, especially when asked for. As with any consensus decision, should new facts arise (and I would encourage a new RM to present them, of course), now or in the future, it would not preclude a new RM. But in the current argument, I generally read consensus to be against the move in the current state. Bobby Cohn (talk) 15:48, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the recommendation to merge my article with another one. It has been really helpful and I am grateful you gave me the recommendation. I have currently merged the my article with the one you recommended. Infoadder95 (talk) 16:30, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Glad it worked out for you, Infoadder95. The project is better off for your contributions!

Kindly, Bobby Cohn (talk) 23:37, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sir, I'm very new to wikipedia & the person in that article is my Great-Grandfather. Kindly help me out & guide me so that my page gets accepted & published in the open space. HalderRemer88 (talk) 20:36, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @HalderRemer88: between my declination and your resubmission, all you did was change one citation and a piped link. I would caution you against spamming the resubmit button before actually addressing the concerns raised by reviewers, I would note you did something similar between the previous review and my own. Reviewers tend to find this disruptive and will not aid in having your article published.

I've added maintenance tags to the first two sections that I saw that didn't contain a single reference. I would also note the information in the infobox is most likely written because of your WP:COI and not based on any sources that I was able to find in the text. It looks to me, because you are writting about your grandfather, that you're writting the article WP:BACKWARD. Instead, only write about things that can be demonstrated by reliable sources, cite to those sources inline in the text as you have variously done throughout the article, and cut the rest.

It is also best that your declare your conflict of interest on your user page.

All the best, Bobby Cohn (talk) 20:48, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]