• Kcornell123 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Natalie Popovich (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I see multiple pages that list IMDB as a source but was told to remove IMDB from the source list. Do I cite IMDB or not? Kcornell123 (talk) 01:23, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Kcornell123, Thanks for reaching out, no IMDB is not considered a WP:RS reliable source since it's user generated content and there is no proof the submitted content on the site is vetted. IMDB can be used as an external link for an article on an actor, for example. See WP:CITINGIMDB for more. JC7V (talk) 01:31, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• DFTSchools (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Daughters of Mary Immaculate and Colloborators (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi I have created the name of the Article as 'Daughters of Mary Immaculate and Colloborators'. But it should be 'Daughters of Mary Immaculate (DMI Sisters)'. How can I change?

DFTSchools (talk) 07:40, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No need to move page and if so, not to the suggested title. You have a lack of references and a bunch of inline links which is no good. Legacypac (talk) 11:57, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Akhilmohan3365 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Midhun musiqz (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Akhilmohan3365 (talk) 08:15, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tagged G11. Total nn spam. Legacypac (talk) 11:39, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Basper82 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:David Andrew Bovino (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

We've updated the writing the references to highlight notable factors in this article and subject. We've removed promotional reference links and added information about cases that were of public notoriety over just promotional material for the lawyer highlighted.

Basper82 (talk) 09:16, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WP:MILL lawyer. Correctly rejected. Legacypac (talk) 11:41, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Ushindi4578 (talk · contribs)
  • User:Ushindi4578/sandbox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Ushindi4578 (talk) 11:34, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Declined Legacypac (talk) 11:37, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Requested user be blocked. They are spamming the same garbage all over the place. Legacypac (talk) 11:55, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Blocked. Spamming in edit summaries! — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:07, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• 94.179.172.250 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:IKMF International Krav Maga Federation (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Something else. This draft is awaiting review and awaitig response. Please re-consider status of AfC resubmission by editor Alex4ff. Thanks!

94.179.172.250 (talk) 11:50, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 94.179.172.25 The article has been reviewed and it was declined. Please note that is already a Krav Maga article in EN Wikipedia. International Krav Maga Federation article should sorely write about the Federation itself and not blurred to inclusion of other wider topics which have been covered in Krav Maga page. Secondly, the content written is more like an essay and promotional piece than encyclopedic style or writing. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 07:32, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Simeonsoden (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Virginia Bodman (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi, I submitted a draft article that has been declined, however the account that made decision has since been blocked for being a sockpuppet (I'm assuming that's bad). Please let me know if I should make the suggested changes or if i could resubmit it and have a more 'reputable' user approve. Please advise on the best course of action Many thanks. Here's the draft in question: https://en.wikipedia.orghttps://demo.azizisearch.com/lite/wikipedia/page/Draft:Virginia_Bodman

Simeonsoden (talk) 13:46, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Simeonsoden Greetings to you. You could follow the suggestion and read the links as per the in the pink panel in the draft. Please note Wikipedia can NOT be the source - see WP:CIRCULAR. Utube is not a reliable source. We are after multiple independent, reliable sources which the sources talk about the subject in length and in depth and not merely passing mentioned. Please note sources such as from major newspaper and reputable journals would be suitable as long as they are not interview pieces. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 14:15, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]