Mgp28

Draft:Jan Poolman (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Thanks for reviewing the draft page on Jan Poolman. I have added several references where you asked for references. I hope it is fine now.

best regards, wikicluck44 Wikicluck44 (talk) 17:03, 6 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi Wikicluck44, Thank you for reaching out. I think it's best to wait for a fresh reviewer for a resubmission so that its chance of acceptance is not dependent on one person's say-so. Submitted articles are not reviewed in any set order, but sooner or later someone will come along and review it. Best of luck with the article, Mgp28 (talk) 13:08, 7 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi Mgp28, thanks for your answer! and I will wait for a new reviewer. Best regards, Wikicluck44 Wikicluck44 (talk) 05:56, 10 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Pichpich (talk) 16:32, 9 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

--Lajmmoore (talk 19:58, 25 July 2024 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

That's very kind, thank you. Mgp28 (talk) 18:01, 6 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

--Rosiestep (talk) 19:00, 26 August 2024 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

Hi Mgp28, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the new page reviewer user right to your account. This means you now have access to the page curation tools and can start patrolling pages from the new pages feed. If you asked for this at requests for permissions, please check back there to see if your access is time-limited or if there are other comments.

This is a good time to re-acquaint yourself with the guidance at Wikipedia:New pages patrol. Before you get started, please take the time to:

• Add Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers to your watchlist to follow NPP-related discussions
• If you use Twinkle, configure it to log your CSDs and PRODs
• If you can read any languages other than English, add yourself to the list of reviewers with language proficiencies

You can find a list of other useful links and tools for patrollers at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Resources. If you are ever unsure what to do, ask your fellow patrollers or just leave the page for someone else to review – you're not alone! _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:29, 28 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

That's great, thank you. Mgp28 (talk) 22:15, 28 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Philippe Pétain and Talk:Kamala Harris on "Politics, government, and law" request for comments, and at Wikipedia talk:Please do not bite the newcomers on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 12:45, 29 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hello! I would like to thank you for your review of my first Wikipedia page. Your attention on notability and suggestion to add citations that refer to the document after its approval was very useful. I have now foregrounded the section on "Global Recognition, Citation and Implementation" and added references 19-80 to show how the document has been widely received by the international community. As well, I enhanced the text on the projects that build off of this document to show how they are making a difference. I think this is a real improvement. Thank you!

I also have an important question. In going through all of the citations of the doc it has become clear that the strict reference is with an accent ("Méndez" not "Mendez"). This creates a problem because the title of the draft is without an accent -- this does not appear to be something I can edit. I read that when the page moves this can be changed. Is that correct? Legitimacy Matters (talk) 13:10, 30 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for reaching out. You've clearly put a lot of work into this draft since I last read it. I tend not to review articles for a second time -- if an article is going to be reviewed twice I think it is better for it to get a second opinion, rather than my opinion twice -- but I wish you every luck with it.

You are right: to change the title of the page it needs to be moved. You have made enough edits that you should have the appropriate rights to make a move yourself. See Help:How to move a page for instructions on how to do this.

But in this case there's probably no need to move it. When an article is accepted, it is moved to the main space of Wikipedia. One of the reviewer's tasks at that point will be to make sure that the it has the right name. (If you're unhappy with the name the reviewer gives it, there will still be options to get it renamed later.)

A final recommendation if you really do want to move the article, is to check the Wikipedia:Article titles policy. For instance, I think your title could be shorter. Either "Principles on Effective Interviewing for Investigations and Information Gathering" or "Méndez Principles" would seem appropriate -- you will know better than me which is the more commonly used name.

I hope this helps. Please let me know if anything is unclear. Mgp28 (talk) 14:03, 30 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hello again! Thank you very much for your thoughtful feedback and for acknowledging the revisions I’ve made to the draft. I very much appreciate your time and guidance.

After reviewing the relevant literature and considering existing Wikipedia entries, I believe the title "Méndez Principles on Effective Interviewing" best captures the essence of the document while remaining clear and concise.

Given the significant updates I’ve made, I would greatly appreciate your consideration for a second review. Your initial insights were instrumental in guiding these improvements, and a follow-up review could help ensure the article meets all necessary standards before it is moved to the main space. This could also help avoid potential delays, as the first review took four months and the indications are that this could take another 3-4 months.

Additionally, if the article passes your second review, you would have the opportunity to oversee the renaming as it is officially moved. This would ensure that the title accurately reflects the content and is consistent with the manner it which similar document’s are presented within Wikipedia.

If a second review isn’t feasible, I would be grateful for any further advice on how to strengthen the draft. Your continued guidance would be invaluable.

Thank you once again for your support and understanding! Legitimacy Matters (talk) 18:06, 1 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Kathy Hochul on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 02:30, 4 September 2024 (UTC)Reply