User Talk: Zippybonzo

Server-side rendered snapshot of this editor's Wikipedia talk page discussions.

{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis
|archiveprefix=User talk:Zippybonzo/Archive
|format= %%i
|age=120
|maxarchsize=150000
|numberstart=1
|archivebox=yes
|box-advert=No
}}

__FORCETOC__

Draft:Carol Griffiths ↗

Hi. Thank you for reviewing my draft. Based on your feedback, I have improved the tone of the draft to sound less like a resume. I have removed what seemed less important details and combined together education and career section. This is the only section that I have used her CV in. Other than that I have used published book reviews in the works section and papers who have cited her work in the research section. Can you please review again when you have time? HRShami (talk) 09:56, 9 July 2026 (UTC)

Hi,
Thank you again for reviewing and accepting my AfC submission of Argentina–Egypt controversy at the 2026 FIFA World Cup.

I noticed that shortly after the article was accepted and moved to the main namespace, it was redirected to another article that is currently under an AfD discussion. Since you reviewed Argentina–Egypt controversy at the 2026 FIFA World Cup and considered it suitable for publication, I wanted to ask for your opinion.
Do you think Argentina–Egypt controversy at the 2026 FIFA World Cup could still merit a standalone article based on the available sourcing, or do you think the redirect is the more appropriate outcome?
I'm not asking you to take any particular position in the discussion. I'm simply looking for guidance from an experienced AfC reviewer so I can better understand the situation.
Thank you very much for your time. Rayhan Ahmed Tamim (talk) 16:09, 9 July 2026 (UTC)

:@Rayhan Ahmed Tamim — I'm not sure whether necessarily it merits a standalone article so much as being part of Egypt at the FIFA World Cup ↗ and Argentina at the FIFA World Cup ↗; and I also didn't particularly think the title declaring it a "controversy" was necessarily the greatest title for the article, however the actual content within it would be fine merged into those articles Zippybonzo | talk | contribs ↗ (they/them) 17:26, 9 July 2026 (UTC)

Draft:Ripley Valley State Secondary College ↗

Hi Zippybonzo, thank you for the clear feedback on my draft. I completely understand your point regarding the promotional tone, particularly with how the house system looked like a marketing brochure.

I have done a thorough edit to strip out the "sports day" elements (colours, mascots, etc.) and completely removed the awards section to align the draft strictly with WP:NPOV and WP:NOTBROCHURE. I believe it now ready for another review, if you have the time.

However, I would appreciate your guidance on one specific point: the naming of these houses (Blaine, Flinders, Goolman, Perry) is actually a shared institutional framework across both this college and the neighbouring Ripley Valley State School (an article I plan to work on next). The names are tied directly to the peaks of the Flinders Peak Group, which hold deep historical and cultural significance to local Aboriginal heritage and the geographic identity of the entire Ripley Valley precinct.

How would you recommend integrating this connection to local landmarks and Indigenous culture in a neutral, encyclopedic way that respects local heritage without crossing into promotional territory? I want to make sure the article is culturally accurate but strictly adheres to Wikipedia's standards. Thank you! MilkyWhiteGirl (talk) 16:36, 9 July 2026 (UTC)

:I'll take a look at the draft again later, however I don't think the naming of the houses is necessarily a notable topic to include in the article to avoid bloating it Zippybonzo | talk | contribs ↗ (they/them) 17:27, 9 July 2026 (UTC)
::I'm still quite new to this, but looking through the Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools/Article advice ↗, I noticed it says house systems are relevant if they serve a pastoral function rather than just an add-on for sports days. In the Queensland education system, the house structure is systemically utilised as the core framework for daily roll call, student welfare, vertical mentoring, and behavioural case management.
::Live pages for nearby schools—such as Ipswich Girls' Grammar School ↗, Woodcrest State College ↗, and The Springfield Anglican College ↗—already include their house systems exactly this way, or similar to how I posted before, and I can count at least a dozen more local school articles doing the same. Do these existing pages all exhibit bloat and promotional material because of this (and need to be removed?), or is a single factual sentence simply standard institutional data for Australian school articles? MilkyWhiteGirl (talk) 01:58, 10 July 2026 (UTC)