User talk:Hurricane Wind and Fire

If I have declined your draft, I will not review it again if you request. However, I am willing to look over your draft and provide feedback. Additionally, please provide a link to the draft you are talking about.

After every twenty posts, ten are archived. Each archive will have thirty posts.

• Archive 1 (January 2025 - October 2025)
• Archive 2 (November 2025 - January 2026)
• Archive 3 (January 2026 - present)

Hello Hurricane Wind and Fire, I see we have similar interests about the great and destructive powers of Mother Nature. Was it fate or is WIki just that wonderful that it was able to connect you to this entry?

Thank you for reviewing the AquaBlock Draft. Draft:AquaBlock - Wikipedia

I have read your input, understand the direction and have made edits and reposted.

The only existing "postings" are of the Patent and Trademarks. This is validity that the item exists in this world and therefore can hopefully be further explained and understood with help of world's best and largest Encyclopedia.

This humanitarian aid element is fairly fresh to the world; it needs the help of WIki to be better understood; this is the effort and focus here..

I hope you are as compassionate about helping and improving the efforts and lives affected by the devastation of Hurricanes Winds and Fire.

*I along with my family, church and friends volunteer and provide aid and help those in need. This item does it better, but it is not well understood.

Thank you the help and mentoring.

Edward Edward Seichei (talk) 18:36, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Edward Seichei I am passionate about helping people impacted by natural disasters and commends to what you and your community are doing. I can verify this is real, but the notability requirements for Wikipedia require more than just existing.

The general notability guideline states we need significant coverage into multiple (at least three) reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject. In my eyes, the best way to find a source that establishes notability is a reputable news source with several lengthy paragraphs talking about why the subject is important. These sources are independent of the subject as long as they do not include interviews with the subject or the people behind it.

If you are trying to get the item more well-known or understood, Wikipedia isn't the greatest place for that. While creating an article can bring more attention to AquaBlock, the best way is probably to create your own website/webpage or create an advocacy organization in your area. I don't know much about creating websites, but I'm sure there is a website or someone in your area that can help you with that.

Please ask if you have more questions or need clarification. Cheers! 🌀Hurricane Wind and Fire (talk) (contribs)🔥 01:25, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I just wanted to let you know that I made the suggested changes at Draft:Quill.org. I axed the product list and did a hard pass on promotional language. I'm curious what you think. Kjm9211 (talk) 20:29, 10 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Kjm9211 The draft reads less promotional. I'm going to leave the draft for another reviewer in case they find any issues, but good job! This is likely to be accepted. 🌀Hurricane Wind and Fire (talk) (contribs)🔥 22:27, 10 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello HW&F, I made a citation edit yesterday, but I'm not sure if it was accepted. Here is the link it came from: https://tobybeaversrealtor.com/salesperson-why-the-old-legal-term-still-lives. Can you tell if Wikipedia picked it up? I received an email: "Thanks for editing! Try suggested edits to develop new skills and learn about best practices." Editing has become really difficult to comprehend since the good old days...Thanks for your help! Best Toby --TobyBeaversRealtor (talk) 18:02, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@TobyBeaversRealtor I don't think the email means anything, it just seems to be something sent by the Wikimedia foundation or another Wikipedia editor.

You made an edit request, but it was reverted in this edit because it was considered self-promotion. I think the main problem was that it was not written like an encyclopedic article in a neutral point of view. It looks like the website you used a source is your own website (please tell me if I'm wrong) and if you would like it added to Wikipedia, you may want to rewrite it so it would fit into the article, real estate. It read different than the rest of the draft, make sure it flows nicely along with the rest of the information in the article.

Ask if you need clarification or have more questions. 🌀Hurricane Wind and Fire (talk) (contribs)🔥 04:42, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks 🌀Hurricane Wind and Fire, I actually wrote it first for Wiki then posted it on my blog as a post. I'll try and rewrite it now. TobyBeaversRealtor (talk) 16:02, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I rewote the article but cannot figure out where to add it now:

"Before the 1967 formalization of the Multiple Listing Service (MLS), real estate practitioners functioned primarily as transactional intermediaries for the transfer of real property, with a scope of work largely limited to ministerial tasks and seller-centric documentation. While the modern professional landscape has shifted toward a robust fiduciary model, wherein licensees provide complex advisory services for both buyers and sellers, statutory language has remained largely stagnant. Consequently, the 'salesperson' designation persists as a legal vestige in various state codes to delineate a subordinate licensee from a broker, who maintains ultimate supervisory liability and regulatory accountability (Jennings, 2022; National Association of Realtors, 2024)."

Academic Citations

Primary Legal Source: Jennings, M. M. (2022). Real Estate Law (12th ed.). Cengage Learning. (This is the "gold standard" textbook for the intersection of real estate and law).

Industry Governance: National Association of Realtors. (2024). The Code of Ethics and Standards of Practice.

Historical Reference: Miller, N. G., & Geltner, D. M. (2005). Real Estate Principles for the New Economy. (Useful if you want to cite the specific economic shift caused by the MLS).

State Statutory Reference (APA 7th Edition):

Virginia Real Estate License Act, Va. Code Ann. § 54.1-2100 et seq. (2024). https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title54.1/chapter21/

Legal Theory Reference:

American Law Institute. (2006). Restatement of the Law (Third), Agency. St. Paul, MN: American Law Institute Publishers.

Key Academic Refinements Made:

"Ministerial Tasks" vs. "Helping": In academic writing, "helping" is too informal. "Ministerial" refers to acts performed under the authority of a superior without the exercise of individual judgment—perfect for describing early real estate roles.

"Statutory Nomenclature": This replaces "the term... is still used." It sounds more authoritative and focuses on the law (statutes) and the naming conventions (nomenclature).

"Fiduciary Model": This introduces the legal concept of trust and agency, which explains why the role has changed more deeply than "providing a service" does. TobyBeaversRealtor (talk) 17:00, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@TobyBeaversRealtor You cannot add the information because the real estate article is semi-protected, meaning that you need to be autoconfirmed to edit the article. Simply put, your account must be at least four days old and you need to have made at least ten edits. Otherwise, you can submit an edit request (similar to what you did the other day) and an autoconfirmed user will add the information the article and if they do not, they will explain why. 🌀Hurricane Wind and Fire (talk) (contribs)🔥 22:35, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I know you don't really edit articles about wildfires outside of the United States. However, you do edit many articles about wildfires. I have come up with an idea to expand on wildfires in Canada by proposing Wikipedia:WikiProject Canadian wildfire. If you are interested, you can place your name under the 'Interested' section. CostalCal (talk) 06:59, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@CostalCal This is a good idea, we should expand on Canadian wildfires. I will add my name. I feel it could go either way but mostly depends on how many people are interested: we could create this as a task force of WikiProject Wildfire and create a United States task force.

Before creating a WikiProject or task force, you should take your idea to the WikiProject Wildfire talk page and/or the WikiProject Weather talk page. For a WikiProject, you would need to get at least 10 people interested and write a proposal at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council, following the steps at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals. 🌀Hurricane Wind and Fire (talk) (contribs)🔥 14:27, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I already have 3 people interested. And, talked on the WikiProject Wildfire talk page and the WikiProject Weather talk page. It shouldn't be that difficult getting this running. CostalCal (talk) 16:33, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Changed to Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Guide/Task forces. CostalCal (talk) 17:08, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Sorry if you wanted a full-on WikiProject and I ruined it for you. 🌀Hurricane Wind and Fire (talk) (contribs)🔥 17:33, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello --Samyokello (talk) 11:31, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Samyokello Hello! Doh you have any questions related to editing Wikipedia I can help with? 🌀Hurricane Wind and Fire (talk) (contribs)🔥 13:38, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sould invisible comments used for requests to other editors?, e.g. "could someone make this wall of text shorter?" --JimmyCetacea (talk) 09:04, 26 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@JimmyCetacea I assume you are talking about hidden text? Look at the page I linked. The best way to draw attention to improving an article is raising a discussion on the article's talk page. For Siege of Soissons, you would start a new topic at Talk:Siege of Soissons with the issue that should be solved. 🌀Hurricane Wind and Fire (talk) (contribs)🔥 14:47, 26 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Kinda late, but thx! JimmyCetacea (talk) 06:57, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Hurricane Wind and Fire! I’m a new editor, and I’m looking for some honest advice on a draft I’ve been working on: Draft:Martins Vincent Otse Initiative.

I've had it declined a few times for WP:NCORP and have also been cautioned about using tools to help with my formatting. I’ve recently overhauled the page to move away from 'routine' news and focus more on the organisation's unique transparency model and the public debates it has sparked.

Could you please look through the entire page and advise me on what I should change or add next?

What is the #1 thing you would change before I hit resubmit?

I’m really trying to learn the ropes and would appreciate your expert eyes on the whole project. Thanks so much --Andyashua (talk) 10:31, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Andyashua just finished looking at the page and all the sources. It looks like it should meet WP:NCORP, there's WP:SIGCOV in multiple reliable secondary sources.

One thing you need to change, first: in the lead, the source does not support Based in Abuja, the organisation is noted for its "open-ledger" philanthropic model and its focus on public education reform and community infrastructure in West Africa. You don't need to add sources to the lead (it is a brief summary of the article), but if you do, ensure the information they are cited to is verified by the sources cited. 🌀Hurricane Wind and Fire (talk) (contribs)🔥 15:39, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Hurricane Wind and Fire! Thank you so much for the review and for confirming the [[WP:NCORP]] and [[WP:SIGCOV]] status that is a huge relief!

I have taken your advice and simplified the lead. I removed the specific claims about the 'open-ledger' model and 'West Africa' from the opening paragraph since the initial source didn't cover those details. I've ensured those specific points (and their citations) are now properly detailed in the [[WP:NCORP]]'Operations and transparency'[[WP:NCORP]] and [[WP:NCORP]]'Projects' sections of the body instead.

I have just applied those updates to the draft to ensure the lead is a neutral summary and that all claims are properly verified in the body. I really appreciate you helping me navigate the 'lead summary' rules! Andyashua (talk) 20:44, 2 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I am trying to make a article for UFL in 2027 even though it is only 2026, I see that Hurricane Wind and Fire said the 4 references were unsuitable. I agree with that statement but just note that there will be many more references in the time to come. Thank You ~2026-10263-07 (talk) 13:25, 1 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm letting you know that the four references can be used, but they do not establish notability. You don't need to remove the sources. 🌀Hurricane Wind and Fire (talk) (contribs)🔥 14:47, 1 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Hurricane Wind and Fire, 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 20:25, 1 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

did I cite my edit well --Kpopstan1708 (talk) 22:33, 1 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Kpopstan1708 It appears the information is verified by the source. However, are you sure "Early life" is the correct section to put that information in? 🌀Hurricane Wind and Fire (talk) (contribs)🔥 22:57, 1 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

where would be a better place to put the info and the citation --Kpopstan1708 (talk) 23:12, 1 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Kpopstan1708 It may be a better idea to put the info in the career section, along with the information about her appearance in Eleven. 🌀Hurricane Wind and Fire (talk) (contribs)🔥 01:03, 2 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

good point Kpopstan1708 (talk) 01:14, 2 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

ill be like following the release of their first single Eleven dadadada...... Kpopstan1708 (talk) 01:14, 2 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

my Liz content got taken down by another admin and I'm currently and calmly trying to dispute it and I'm curious what I did wrong considering I cited sources, provided factual info, confirmed her 100% Korean ethnicity, and provided a prominent circumstance of her career. --Kpopstan1708 (talk) 14:39, 2 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Kpopstan1708 It looks like the editor who reverted your edits beliefs you used artificial intelligence, but note we shouldn't put external links to social media like YouTube in the middle of an article. If it is something created by her or something that could be useful to readers, raise a discussion at Talk:Liz (South Korean singer) discussion whether or not the link is necessary. 🌀Hurricane Wind and Fire (talk) (contribs)🔥 22:54, 2 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

i just figured it would be okay since she was actually a part of filming since it is under her music groups page but would be edits possibly be added back If I remove the YouTube link and add more sources Kpopstan1708 (talk) 05:51, 3 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Kpopstan1708 It would be best to consult the editor who reverted your edits, they can give you the most specific feedback. 🌀Hurricane Wind and Fire (talk) (contribs)🔥 14:38, 3 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I did consult the editor who reverted my edits multiple times and they just told me that my addition appeared to be written by AI, which is false, and that Wikipedia does not tolerate "original research" and claimed that it was fancruft which is false because the addition I made was significant throughout the k-pop community and not just IVE fans. Kpopstan1708 (talk) 20:16, 3 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

They also said that next time I should read reliable sources and not use a large language model even though it was all my own words Kpopstan1708 (talk) 20:17, 3 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

They also removed the thread from their talk page Paper9oll was the username, I think. Kpopstan1708 (talk) 20:18, 3 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You may want to raise the issue at Talk:Liz (South Korean singer) where multiple other people may have an input. 🌀Hurricane Wind and Fire (talk) (contribs)🔥 01:41, 4 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

how do I make a wiki page? --Jayyyce (talk) 04:35, 3 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Jayyyce See WP:YFA. The best way to start out is with the Wikipedia:Article wizard. 🌀Hurricane Wind and Fire (talk) (contribs)🔥 14:39, 3 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]