User talk:Xpander/Archive 2

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Xpander. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Your submission at Articles for creation: North Rhine-Westphalian Academy of Sciences, Humanities and the Arts (January 17)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by DoubleGrazing was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
reliable
secondary
strictly independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Primary sources do not establish notability per WP:ORG.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:North Rhine-Westphalian Academy of Sciences, Humanities and the Arts and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:53, 17 January 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Xpander1! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:53, 17 January 2025 (UTC)

Hello

Hello, how are you? What should you pay more attention to when editing and creating an article for the English Wikipedia? We also hope that English Wikipedia will be the largest source of information in the world? Thank you. Happy editing! (VVWiki8 (talk) 12:29, 25 January 2025 (UTC))

Some advice I was given on a previous draft of GdiG

Just in case these help! (Also, look at WP:AUTHOR in addition to WP:PROF. People in the humanities often pass by the former more easily than the latter.) Cheers –

I'm confused about what kind of additional sources are needed, however. It's a stub that only makes three claims. The first two are supported by citations, second of which is a scholarly Dictionary of Hegelian Thought (in which GdiG was deemed important enough to be given his own entry). The third claim is supported by the titles of his works, the list of which are taken from his CV, which is linked below and can easily be independently verified.

Sorry if the answers to this are obvious, btw. This is only the second article I created from scratch.

Regards, PatrickJWelsh (talk) 11:53 am, 18 September 2022, Sunday (2 years, 4 months, 9 days ago) (UTC−5)

The core question at AfC is "would it survive a deletion discussion?" and my current thinking is that it probably wouldn't. The key policy is WP:PROF and it is not clear that they meet it from the article and references. For example did they hold a named chair? Are they elected fellow of a learned society, etc.? Has their research made and impact? Here are a few things to help you get it over the line:

You would probably be able to find additional reviews of their works which is one way of showing impact.

Patrick (talk) 18:06, 25 January 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Patrick Welsh, Thanks for your suggestions. Is there a way to access the interview you provided? It seems to require some form of institutional access. Xpander (talk) 18:38, 25 January 2025 (UTC)

No, that's odd. I'd assumed it was for some kind of promotional alumni publication or something. You could try the Wayback Machine. Otherwise I'm not sure what to tell you. (Also, an interview with the subject by his lifelong institutional home is of rather limited use as a source for Wikipedia purposes.)

In all events, best wishes with the draft! There are a few places he's cited with attribution on the Hegel page, and it would be nice to have at least a stub to wikilink. Cheers, Patrick (talk) 18:53, 25 January 2025 (UTC)

January 2025

Your edit to Klaus Hartmann (philosopher) has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for information on how to contribute your work appropriately. For legal reasons, Wikipedia strictly cannot host copyrighted text or images from print media or digital platforms without an appropriate and verifiable license. Contributions infringing on copyright will be removed. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. The first paragraph of the Works section was copied verbatim from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hegel/, a site that declared that Authors contributing an entry or entries to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, except as provided herein, retain the copyright to their entry or entries. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 22:21, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

Italic links

Thanks for adding Hegel Bulletin to List of philosophy journals, but please don't complicate things unnecessarily as you did here. Just put the italics marking outside the link - I've fixed this one. PamD 17:41, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi @PamD, This must be an issue with the visual editor. I didn't check for the wikitext, as there was nothing wrong with the visual appearance of the article. But I get the gist, thanks for notifying. Xpander (talk) 06:55, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Arnold Vincent Miller (April 18)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Theroadislong was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Arnold Vincent Miller and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Theroadislong (talk) 08:13, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Theroadislong, The subject has at least three obituaries dedicated to them, as well as a review of their work, all in reliable sources, possibly meeting GNG as well. Their translations has had an immense impact on the literature. Xpander (talk) 09:48, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Xpander1! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Theroadislong (talk) 08:13, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

May 2025

Hi Xpander1! I noticed that you recently made an edit at Ebrahim Karimi (physicist) and marked it as "minor", but it may not have been. "Minor edit" has a specific definition on Wikipedia: it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Thank you. Kj cheetham (talk) 10:13, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

@Kj cheetham Thanks for the note. I try to avoid that but it sometimes happens by mistake. Best Xpander (talk) 10:15, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

Easily done. :-) Keep up the good work overall. -Kj cheetham (talk) 10:20, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi Xpander1. Thank you for your work on Société française de philosophie. Another editor, Noleander, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Wording could use some work. For example: "it has welcomed the greatest representatives .." The word "greatest" is not appropriate in an encyclopedia, because it is a judgment. The voice of the encyclopedia should be very neutral and objective.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Noleander}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Noleander (talk) 12:50, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Noleander, thanks for the reminder. I have addressed that specific line in the article. If you see other issues, please let me know. Best. Xpander (talk) 12:59, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi Xpander1. Thank you for your work on Atoosa Kasirzadeh. Another editor, Zzz plant, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Hi, I'm writing to elaborate on tagging the page with a notability question. H-index of 16 is too low for WP:NPROF C1, and I don't see any other things here like prestigious society membership, named chair, or chief editor for significant journal. I'm not finding WP:SIGCOV in independent sources either for a WP:GNG pass. Ultimately I suspect this may be WP:TOOSOON - the subject just became an assistant professor in 2024, so she is at the very beginning of her career. But if there is something I'm missing here then please go ahead and add to the article and/or reply here. Thank you,

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Zzz plant}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Zzz plant (talk) 02:55, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

Atoosa Kasirzadeh moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Atoosa Kasirzadeh. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability and she has made a good start, but it is too soon.. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit the draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Ldm1954 (talk) 22:37, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Atoosa Kasirzadeh has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Atoosa Kasirzadeh. Thanks! Ldm1954 (talk) 22:39, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

AFD

Hi there - please don't nominate your own articles for AFD when you're actually hoping for them to be kept. If another editor redirects something you've created, they're going by WP:BLAR, which is a bold action you're perfectly allowed to reverse if you disagree with it. Then the burden is on the editor who first redirected the page to take it to AFD. If they edit-war with you about it, that's its own problem (also not one solved by taking the article to AFD, and definitely not something Onel would have done in this case). -- asilvering (talk) 14:10, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Asilvering, Thanks for your diligent notes. Yes you are right, there was a few oversights on my part, and Onel is quite a well meaning user. I've already thanked them for their generous contributions, on their talk page. Best. Xpander (talk) 12:11, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

CS1 error on Kenneth R. Westphal

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Kenneth R. Westphal, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

A bare URL error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 14:14, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

Giacomo Rinaldi moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Giacomo Rinaldi. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit the draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Broc (talk) 14:08, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

Nomination of Peter J. Lewis for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Peter J. Lewis, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter J. Lewis until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:03, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

Claudio Calosi moved to draftspace for better proof of notability

Thanks for your contributions to Claudio Calosi. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability and he is an assistant professor, not as claimed a full professor, and notability is very unclear. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit the draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Ldm1954 (talk) 01:29, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Claudio Calosi has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Claudio Calosi. Thanks! Ldm1954 (talk) 01:31, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

June 2025

Before adding a category to an article, as you did to Herman Nohl, please make sure that the subject of the article really belongs in the category that you specified according to Wikipedia's categorization guidelines. The category being added must already exist, and must be supported by the article's verifiable content. Categories may be removed if they are deemed incorrect for the subject matter. Thanks for creating these pages. Just so you know, categorization works differently on every wikipedia. Here are the guides for the English language wikipedia. Please don't add non-defining categories like Men ^SMason_Garrison 00:30, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

CS1 error on Hegel Society of Great Britain

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Hegel Society of Great Britain, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

A bare URL error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 11:13, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

Foreign language in articles

Hi Xpander1, I noticed that on your recent article Manfred Baum whenever there was a foreign title (like his books) you made them cursive instead of using the {{lang}} template. This may look the same visually, but plays a vital role for wiki users using screen readers, only by using the language template can these screen readers read the article correctly and not make a mess out of it. I've gone ahead for now and fixed it in the article but please consider this when writing your next article. Kind regards and happy editing Squawk7700 (talk) 16:37, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

Btw here's the mos link if you're interested: MOS:OTHERLANG Squawk7700 (talk) 16:40, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	I noticed all the work you've been doing creating pages for Hegel scholars, great job! BuySomeApples (talk) 20:51, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

Michael Rosen

Just a note that your move of Michael Rosen -> Michael Rosen (author) has been reverted as an undiscussed move. Please use the WP:Requested moves process for moves which may be controversial. Natg 19 (talk) 18:21, 8 July 2025 (UTC)

Reply

Thanks for your message. I think you have misrepresented the CSD criteria in that a CSD nominator should notify the editor, but the whole point of CSD is that an admin can delete without further discussion. I'm amused that you post in article space text without any in line references at all, and then suggest that I should have done the referencing for you instead of deleting. You appear to be writing the article backwards. Find independent verifiable sources first and write text based on what they say. Don't write the text in the vague hope you can find references later.

I'll restore as draft, where, of course, it should have been in the first place. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:37, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

@Jimfbleak I just restored the article to the main space. As I said I didn't dispute the deletion, what you did was technically correct. Neither have I asked for adding sources, just indicated what the WP:N encourages, namely, notability is 'not a feature of an article' and a simple search which determines sources exist is recommended. Afterwards the article can be Drafted or tagged with Template:Sources exist, Template:No footnotes etc.

As for CSD, I just quoted the policy verbatim, you can see for yourself: Wikipedia:Speedy deletion. In other words how are users supposed to find out if their page got deleted? Through chance?

And as for vague hope, I wouldn't approach a subject in the first place, If I knew that it was not notable. In this case I betted too much on the de-wiki source, which the article was translated from (the source they provided is not available anymore). So in the end, there was no "vague hope" to begin with, just didn't have the time to add the sources. If you still think the topic is not notable, you can nominate the article for an AfD. Xpander (talk) 10:44, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Just out of idle curiosity, why all the references to reviews? His notability is largely due to his academic position rather than what people think of his work, especially the reviews are primary source journal articles. I've correct two characters, and I've removed the link to a sales page that serves no other real purpose in terms of content, and the doi, alas, gets there anyway Jimfbleak - talk to me? 11:02, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

@Jimfbleak The subject is primarily known through his works as per WP:AUTHOR C#1, in this case mostly reviews. As for the link you're describing, It's what most academics have access to as well as the Wikipedia Library, therefore it saves a lot of time, in locating the resource. I'm not sure if its removal is beneficial. Xpander (talk) 11:26, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Deutsche Gesellschaft für Philosophie moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Deutsche Gesellschaft für Philosophie. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit the draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:52, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

August 2025

Before adding a category to an article, as you did to Peter Fuss, please make sure that the subject of the article really belongs in the category that you specified according to Wikipedia's categorization guidelines. The category being added must already exist, and must be supported by the article's verifiable content. Categories may be removed if they are deemed incorrect for the subject matter. Thank you. ^SMason_Garrison 20:08, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

@Smasongarrison, Please do elaborate, which category and why? Xpander (talk) 20:32, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Sure! So the one I see the most of translated articles is Category:Men. On English wikipedia, it isn't one that is supposed to be used for individual people because it's not considered defining. If you look at the categories I changed [1], you can see that most of your tags weren't in the most specific categories. WP:CATDD has a quick list of tips, but WP:CATPEOPLE is also helpful to getting at the why we try to use the most specific category (with some exceptions, so check out WP:EGRS if you want to know more about exceptions). ^SMason_Garrison 20:42, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

@Smasongarrison, Those categories weren't added by me, they came from the de-wiki source, which I usually leave intact. If you see the page's history the only category by me, was added towards the end. In any case thanks for sorting those out. Xpander (talk) 20:53, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

When you created the page, they were added. You're responsible for the edits you make, even if they're populated by other tools. Please clean them up instead of leaving them intact. The norms for categories differ by wiki. ^SMason_Garrison 23:12, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. @Smasongarrison Xpander (talk) 18:17, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Zackmann08. Thank you for your recent contributions to Douglass North. When you were adding content to the page, you added duplicate arguments to a template which can cause issues with how the template is rendered. In the future, please use the preview button before you save your edit; this helps you find these errors as they will display in red at the top of the page. Thanks. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 15:04, 30 August 2025 (UTC)

@Zackmann08. Thanks for your note. However I think the particular duplicate argument you're referring to was not added by me, but rather the user @Aspects. Regards. Xpander (talk) 15:46, 30 August 2025 (UTC)

My bad! Thanks for the note. —Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 15:48, 30 August 2025 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi Xpander1. Thank you for your work on David Sherman (psychologist). Another editor, Klbrain, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thanks for creating a page for this researchers, who reaches WP:NACADEMIC through the coherent body of well-cited work. It is a single-source stub, so there is much more to build here: finding other reliable sources discussing his work and biographical details for example. Professional listing by societies can help; or published reviews covering the scope of his output. It would also be helpful to link this page from others.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Klbrain}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Klbrain (talk) 09:37, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

@Klbrain, I added a couple of more sources, the most important of them being the Google Scholar page. You can take another look. Xpander (talk) 09:56, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

There's no need to separately include the Google Scholar page because it's already present in the 'Authority Control' databases - have a look at the bottom of the page. It's there along with Scopus and ORCID. Regarding additional sources, they're fine, but also rather 'connected' to Sherman. What about the view of his critics? If he doesn't have critics, is actually just following the crowd ;) Klbrain (talk) 10:09, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

I see. Didn't know GS is included in auth control. Regarding the sources you're right, psychology isn't my cup of tea. I actually created the page as to disambiguate David Sherman in search results. Therefore not sure how those critiques would be found. @Klbrain Xpander (talk) 12:26, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Agricultural Palace

Hello Xpander1,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Agricultural Palace for deletion, because it's a redirect from an article title to a namespace that's not for articles.

If you don't want Agricultural Palace to be deleted, you can contest this deletion, but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

John B123 (talk) 20:52, 15 September 2025 (UTC)