Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by SisRob (talk | contribs) at 10:24, 26 March 2015. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Main pageTalk pageSubmissions
Category, Sorting, Feed		ShowcaseParticipants
Apply, By subject		Reviewing instructions
Help deskBacklog
drives
Shortcuts
Welcome to the Articles for Creation help desk

  • This page is only for questions about article submissions—are you in the right place?
  • Do not provide your email address or other contact details. Answers will be provided on this page.
  • Watch out for scammers! If someone contacts you saying that they can get your draft published for payment, they are trying to scam you. Report such attempts here.
Ask a new question
Please check back often for answers.
Skip to today's questions · Skip to the bottom · Archived discussions


March 19

02:43:10, 19 March 2015 review of submission by QUSRAAFCAF


I need to get my draft to main page for review and publishing see

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:QUSRAAFCAF#Brief_History It is user draft section and comes up on a web search for "Queensland University Squadron"


QUSRAAFCAF (talk) 02:43, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@QUSRAAFCAF: I have submitted the draft for review on your behalf, and it can now be found at Draft:Queensland University Active Citizens Air Force Squadron. Please also see the note I left on your talk page about your username. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 15:15, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 14:56:45, 19 March 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Nancy Goovaerts


Hi! My name is Nancy Goovaerts. I am the Corporate Communications Manager of the UNIVEG Group. I have submitted a self written article about the UNIVEG Group. But unfortunately, it has not been accepted because it included - so called- copyrighted information, which is not permitted on Wikipedia. This entire draft was written using my own words and structure. Can you please provide feedback so this article gets approved?

Nancy Goovaerts (talk) 14:56, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Nancy Goovaerts: The page was deleted by ThaddeusB both because it was "Unambiguous advertising or promotion" and because it was "Partially a copyright violation". I can't see the deleted draft, but the copyright violation was likely text that appeared either to be identical to or closely paraphrased from corporate literature.
The reviewer also felt that your submission appeared to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. You should also review the guide for editing with a conflict of interest. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 15:09, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 17:53:42, 19 March 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Frankmalcolmkembery


I recently submitted to articles for creation but the reviewer declined to accept it at this time due to it not being adequately supported by reliable sources. Please can you explain in more detail what reliable sources is supposed to be and why my article did not have reliable sources. Yours sincerely Frank Malcolm Kembery frankmalcolmkembery 17:53, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

@Frankmalcolmkembery: Because your article is the biography of a living person, every statement of fact in the article needs to be backed up by an in-line citation to a reliable source that verifies that the information is correct (see WP:RS for definitions of what counts as a reliable source). However, even if you make these changes, I'm not sure that Frank Malcolm Kembery meets the standards of WP:MUSICBIO. Please read over WP:MUSICBIO and make sure your article qualifies before resubmitting. Thanks. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 19:51, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

18:04:11, 19 March 2015 review of submission by Group IFC

My page was refused as the references were not strong enough. The awards that the organisation has won are totally independent - would these not work as references? Any help on how to get better references would be greatly appreciated. Group IFC (talk) 18:04, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Group IFC: Please see WP:CORP for what qualifies an organization as notable. You need to cite significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article. A listing on an award page is not considered significant coverage.
Also, please read the notice I left on your talk page about your username. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 19:56, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

18:10:21, 19 March 2015 review of submission by Magnet321


Magnet321 (talk) 18:10, 19 March 2015 (UTC) This is all wikigobble. Try again! Your wiki code is indecipherable. This is deliberate mechanism to discourage contributors. Magnet321----[reply]

18:14:32, 19 March 2015 review of submission by Dstonewpi


I need the headling of the article to read: Howard D. Morgan, not World Press Institute. Dstonewpi (talk) 18:14, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Dstonewpi:  Done --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 19:44, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I moved your draft to Draft:Howard D. Morgan, but I had to decline it because it appeared to be a copyright violation. Please see the message on your talk page. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 19:58, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

20:09:35, 19 March 2015 review of submission by Dstonewpi

The story was rejected because it took material from the World Press Institute web site. Howard Morgan is a member of the board of the WPI. He authorized the biography that we submitted. I am a staff member at the World Press Institute. So I don't see any copyright problem. Please advise. Dstonewpi (talk) 20:09, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The page the text was copied from, http://worldpressinstitute.org/bios/howard_morgan.htm, clearly says "Copyright © 2015 World Press Institute" at the bottom. Wikipedia cannot accept material copied from elsewhere, unless it explicitly exists under a compatible licence and is written in an acceptable tone—this includes material that you own the copyright to. In order to use that text on Wikipedia you would need to follow the instructions at WP:Donating copyrighted materials to release it under a compatible license. However, most information on organizations' websites is designed to be promotional, and therefore isn't written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. You're much better off rewriting the information from a neutral point of view, making sure that the text refers to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 21:33, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

22:32:15, 19 March 2015 review of submission by Chersky


Chersky (talk) 22:32, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry to trouble you but I should be very grateful for clarification of the problem with references mentioned as the reason for the rejection of my article in its present form, especially as this was not something mentioned by the previous reviewer. Is the problem that the references have not been entered correctly (many of them being bibliographical references to the subject's published work and appearing as such)or that there are insufficient references in the final section(or both!). It would be a great help if you could give me one or two examples of specific incorrect or inadequate citations and point me in the right direction.

With thanks

Prof Alex Chersky

Chersky (talk) 22:32, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There are a number of problems. The one that @Onel5969: mentions at the top of the Draft is that for articles about living people, "Contentious material, whether negative, positive, or neutral" must have an inline citation; and, for all articles, "Any statement that you believe is likely to be challenged" must have an inline citation. I'm not too sure that many parts of your Draft would be caught by this, but certainly things like "he bought out for one pound from its majority shareholders and operators after they had proved fraudulent" is a strong claim to have completely unreferenced.
Second (and perhaps related) is promotional wording. I am guessing it's true that Early Greek Warfare was revolutionary, but if Wikipedia is to use such a strong word then it needs to cite an independent reliable source that says so. Likewise we don't need to say that Ted Wright is "distinguished". "brilliant pioneering work" is a little too emphatic to stand uncited. Then later "a revolutionary all-on-film total immersion course", teaching "the best English speaking and pronunciation skills".
Third is a rather pointy tone. "Regrettably the teaching unions still call the shots, and the country’s educational attainments and social mobility languish low in international rankings". This is more an opinion than a statement of facts about Greenhalgh's life. "...not waste time teaching phonetic alphabets that, unlike the notation of music, will never be used". This is a point of view and should not be stated in Wikipedia's voice in this context. It would be acceptable, of course, to say "Greenhalgh took this approach because he believed that phonetic alphabets, ..." et cetera.
As a general note, rather more inline citations, especially to sources independent of Greenhalgh and his publishers, would be helpful. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 11:37, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 22:54:25, 19 March 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Steve23546


my article was declinedand im not sure why and i dont understand there help to improve it

Steve23546 (talk) 22:54, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your Draft Draft:Nick Merico needs more and better references. Take a look at Nick's co-star Paola Andino to see the quantity and quality of references that might be needed to establish Nick's notability in Wikipedia terms. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 11:00, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

March 20

00:24:21, 20 March 2015 review of submission by Bcornwell32


Bcornwell32 (talk) 00:24, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have an article I am trying to reference at: http://www.christianitydaily.com/articles/2245/20150219/criminal-minds-season-10-episode-16-spoilers-major-cast-member.htm

But when I add it, then click on the references it goes to the home page of the reference and not the specific article. How can I link this article correctly?

thanks,

brittany

@Bcornwell32:  Fixed: You seem to be putting // at the end of your URLs. If you remove them, the links will go to the correct place. I have taken care of the links in your draft, just make sure that you don't have any extra //s at the end for future links that you add. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 00:40, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

thank you so much! i had one more question if you don't mind. in my article i explain that i co-founded a group called 'polo buddies' and then i describe what the group is. would it help to add a reference to the website www.polobuddies.com after that explanation. Or would that not be helpful. thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bcornwell32 (talk • contribs) 20:46, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

04:55:33, 20 March 2015 review of submission by FoxyFlute


FoxyFlute (talk) 04:55, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

My article was given conditional acceptance and marked as "Start-Class", with the recommendation to add further categories. I have now added all the relevant categories, as recommended. Will my article now be changed from "Start Class" to a regular article? FoxyFlute (talk) 04:55, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@FoxyFlute: I have reassessed Johann Baptist Wendling as C class and removed the maintenance tag. If you're confident that a tag is redundant, be bold and remove it. WikiProject Classical Music may be able to give more advice. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 07:29, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

14:39:56, 20 March 2015 review of submission by Dcw2003

I need help tagging the references to the text, beginning with the date of Abe's victory winning the Panamanian Heavyweight championship to reference the New York's Time Article in the references list. There are also problems with the text not being thoroughly "encylopedic," although I know everything I have listed is factual. I cannot list every page in which I have used Abe's autobiography for information, as there are 30 editions of Abe's autobiography, and most have different paging, although I could attempt to put a chapter as a reference I would prefer not to if I can get around it.

The information in the piece is in many cases drawn from other Wiki articles. I would greatly appreciate someone reviewing my piece without deleting too much information, although I'm open to quite a few deletions if necessary.


Dcw2003 (talk) 14:39, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dcw2003 - Happy to help. On citations themselves, where to insert, etc., see WP:CITE. On how to format those citations, you can take a look at WP:CIT. The latter will also has a link when you want to use the same reference many times. To use a reference, you need a page number. I would select one of the versions of the autobiography, and stick with that. You can "ping" me here, (use the @Dcw2003: template), or you can message me on my talk page if you need further help. Onel5969 (talk) 15:03, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

17:20:02, 20 March 2015 review of submission by Willygg


I am not clear what exactly notability requires. Mike Jones was an eminent 20th century muralist and trade union artist.. I have referenced all that and provided background on his life, with significant facts hyperlinked. I have included footnote references. Could you give me specific examples from the submission of what needs to change. Many thanks. Willygg (talk) 17:20, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have asked for help at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Socialism#Mike Jones (artist). You may find Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners useful in further improving the Draft. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 13:32, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

19:10:11, 20 March 2015 review of submission by ArtVigilante2

Hi, My article wasn't approved, but it is comparable to the following pages:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ellen_Eagle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Maidman https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_T._Scott https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Kassan

My article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:ArtVigilante/sandbox

What can I do to improve my article. Should I list exhibitions like Richard T. Scott? I like the simplicity of Ellen Eagle's page. Please advise.

ArtVigilante2 (talk) 19:10, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I responded to this editor on my talk page. Onel5969 (talk) 14:19, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 19:21:38, 20 March 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by NottsInfo



NottsInfo (talk) 19:21, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

20:09:28, 20 March 2015 review of submission by Madegray


Madegray (talk) 20:09, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am trying to create a wikipedia page to point to and distinguish Gordon Gray, the publisher from the other Gordon Gray's that are on wikipedia. I'm not sure how I would go about proving his date of birth and birthplace. All other information is public and verifiable. What needs to be done to have the page approved?

Hi Madegray - There are two issues with your article. First, there is only a single reference, and while that establishes Gray as the founder of Mafia, it is a mere mention of him. There are two types of references, those which verify facts (like your reference), and those which establish notability. Your reference would help establish the notability of Porter (who the article is about), but not Gray. We need to see coverage like this about Gray, to establish notability, and they need to come from independent sources. Second, once you have the notability references, you need to make sure that each assertion you make which might prove contentious, has an inline citation. You can learn more about references at either referencing for beginners or citing sources. Further, you can learn how to format your citations at citation templates. Assertions like changing the name of the company would definitely need a reference. Finally, while not a problem, you should remove the sentence about his net worth. We don't report unknowns. Onel5969 (talk) 14:33, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

March 21

05:00:55, 21 March 2015 review of submission by Arunharry2015


Arunharry2015 (talk) 05:00, 21 March 2015 (UTC) Hi[reply]

Have been trying to create this article on my late grand father Dr V Hariharan who was a freedom fighter, physician and social worker of repute during the first half of the 20th Century. Unfortunately, there is not much on him on the net barring a few references here and there as what i know of him, he was a true Gandhian who never believed in showcasing his work or claiming credit for what he did. This is just my small attempt to give a little due for what all he has done. The narrative is based on information i have gathered from living sources (people) who knew him, of which the dates, people and events mentioned I have been able to corroborate with actual events in history. Therefor, it is requested that the article be approved.

Personal recollections are not sufficiently reliable to verify encyclopedia facts. However, please be aware that sources do not need to be "on the net" in order to be reliable. Old newspapers or out of print books can be reliable sources and can be cited with date, title, page number, author and publisher and so on. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 13:15, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

05:19:37, 21 March 2015 review of draft by Мамуля007


I have found a lot of articles on the person I am writing about in different magazines and newspapers (for example in "The Oregonian"). I can order these articles and print them out, but can not provide a link to list them in References box. The links I could find so far seem not to be as notable. Could you please help me with the research of links for reliable sources or give me any suggestions? Мамуля007 (talk) 05:19, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Мамуля007 - You cite the sources that you have, it does not matter if there is no web link. To cite a newspaper or magazine article you need to include the following in the reference: newspaper/magazine title, date, article title, author's name (if there is one, if the article is from an agency then name the agency instead of the author), page number. That is enough information for someone to find the article in a library or archive collection. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 10:51, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

05:41:03, 21 March 2015 review of submission by Bonmee

I need help with an article that was declined due to notability. A first reviewer, Mr. Guye, stated "excellent draft here" (so I thought my article was in good shape), but had me include more verifiable sources before I resubmitted. However, my resubmission was then declined due to lack of notability in my article. I have reviewed the criteria for notability for "musicians and ensembles," and it states that my article "must meet at least one of the following criteria," while I have shown that the subject of my article meets more than one: "1. Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent from the musician or ensemble itself." I have provided several verifiable sources that I believe meet that #1 criteria. Also, "4. Has received non-trivial coverage in independent reliable sources of an international concert tour, or a national concert tour in at least one sovereign country." References 10 and 11 in my article show that the subject has received coverage in independent reliable sources on tour with the artist Moby. In addition, "10. Has performed music for a work of media that is notable, e.g., ...performance in a television show." References 6 and 7 in my submitted article show that Julie Mintz has performed on both "The Tonight Show with Jay Leno" and "Conan." And finally, criteria "5. Has released two or more albums on a major record label or on one of the more important indie labels." Julie Mintz has released 1 album on a notable indie label (see reference 12 and 13) that is responsible for major indie releases including Bat for Lashes and Warpaint. I understand if this final criteria is not permissible, as the subject of my article has not released two albums on this label. I feel like my article is being judged overly critically for notability. Can you please advise me how I should proceed and if there is a possibility of having my article re-reviewed? Or simply what I should do next? Thank so much! Bonmee (talk) 05:41, 21 March 2015 (UTC) Bonmee (talk) 05:41, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bonmee - To get another review all you need to do is click the blue "Resubmit" button in the pink review box - but don't do it yet! While the references you now have do imho establish Mintz's notability there are some rather wide gaps in the referencing - the Early life and Early career sections in particular are not yet adequately referenced - only one statement in each of these sections are actually properly sourced. It is particularly important that her family background information, where claims about her relatives and her ethnicity and religion are stated, must be properly referenced. If you can't find a source for those claims rather remove them. The WP:EGRS rules are necessarily strict to protect the privacy and dignity of living people mentioned in articles. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 11:10, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 11:16:58, 21 March 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Trankieuvan


I don't really know how to edit my draft to meet the requirements of wikipedia, especially "encyclopedia article". I have already deleted some "peacock" words and this draft I have from ASEAN Secretariat - Culture & Information Division.

Could you please help me to edit the article? Thank you very much!

Trankieuvan (talk) 11:16, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Copying material provided by the organisation itself is not a sensible starting point for an article. Until you can collect and cite multiple independent reliable sources that describe the organisation in detail, Wikipedia cannot have an article about the organisation. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 13:13, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 20:44:09, 21 March 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Mike-eastman


I have sent an article in about the London band Katch 22, it is a true report of events as they happened. I have tried to add photographs to corroborate the article but as I edit to make it similar to the layout of other 60's bands pages, the page does not load the same as it I make. Can someone edit it for me in the right format. I can send any further pictures as they are needed. Mike-eastman (talk) 20:44, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Mike-eastman (talk) 20:44, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There are several problems here. First is that Wikipedia does not have, nor want, separate articles on all bands that ever existed. Katch 22 might not meet Wikipedia's notability requirements. There is more information about this at Wikipedia:BAND.
Second is that articles are not assembled as a collection of images and videos, which is the sort of layout you seem to be trying to achieve. Wikipedia does not have good facilities to support such a layout, and the result, as you can see, is a mess. It's a lot easier to keep it as simple as possible... write in prose paragraphs, with simple layout as explained in Wikipedia:CHEATSHEET, and using basic references as explained in Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners.
Third is that collections of images and videos are not the sort of references that are needed to prove notability.
Fourth is that uploading large quantities of things like scans of adverts from magazines, is likely to run into problems with copyright... most such material is likely to get deleted if you don't demonstrate that the material is freely licensed. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 13:06, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Fifth is that you should also read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 13:07, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

22:59:09, 21 March 2015 review of submission by Bcornwell32


Bcornwell32 (talk) 22:59, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]


In the article I'm creating i explain that David co-founded a group called 'polo buddies' and then i describe what the group is. would it help to add a reference to the website www.polobuddies.com after that explanation. Or would that not be helpful. thanks!

@Bcornwell32: While there is nothing technically wrong with using the group's official page to verify basic facts, that citation would not help to show the notability of David or Polo Buddies, and a third-pary independent source would be greatly preferred. Also, if there is a specific page on the Polo Buddies website that verifies that David is the co-founder and the description, it would be better to link to that then just the home page.--Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 17:03, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

March 22

08:37:15, 22 March 2015 review of submission by DimaGIT

Draft:Abdulla Al Gurg , I am requesting help to understand why my Draft has been deleted and why I don't have a chance to work on it and whether is it ok to create a new draft with the same title and get it reviewed. Thanks

DimaGIT (talk) 08:37, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Go to Draft:Abdulla Al Gurg and follow the instructions to have the draft 'refunded' Fiddle Faddle 13:24, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

17:05:56, 22 March 2015 review of submission by MedResearchSF


Hi, My article was reviewed by Looie496 - clearly a very knowledgeable person in the field of neuroscience. His/her review claims that 'Legitimate sources are repeatedly misused as references for statements that they do not support.' but does not give any indication of what specifically he/she views as being misused. I've asked Looie496 through his/her talk page for some specifics so that I can correct them, but have not heard back. My first request was on March 5th. My second response was just today - so I know there hasn't been any chance to respond to my second request.

I've gone into some of the forums to get clarification and some other reviewers were dismayed by the lack of specificity as well.

I've had several neuroscientists review my article (some of them are also the authors of some of the cited works) and they aren't clear what the reviewer objected to.

I don't mind making edits - I want this to be the best article possible. I just need to know specifically what needs to be addressed. Could you please advise me on how to proceed?

Thanks, MedResearchSF (talk) 17:05, 22 March 2015 (UTC)MedResearchSF[reply]

MedResearchSF (talk) 17:05, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Have you asked the reviewer? It is like to be the fastest route.
I have not looked at the draft, not my area of expertise, but, if the references are by the folk inside the topic there is a potential issue unless the material is peer reviewed. Fiddle Faddle 17:10, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I have asked WikiProject Medicine to assist with this issue. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:23, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]


the article cites 27 references...none are reviews that fall within a 5 year range, (see Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources_(medicine) --Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 10:34, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • It is my opinion that this article diverges significantly from what Wikipedia usually covers in the health space. Here are some ideas:
  • Consider visiting Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine's talk page to talk this through point by point. If you are willing, then developing this piecewise through iterations of comments and response would be the easiest way forward even though it may take multiple cycles of review.
  • Make sure that the article meets Wikipedia's notability requirements first. It is not obvious that this article meets that minimal criteria for inclusion. In short - identify 2-3 reliable sources which feature "Bioelectronic_Medicine" as their subject.
  • All content in the article should come from reliable sources which are cited. Prepare to delete everything in the article which is not backed by a reference, and think about what is left.
Thanks for coming to Wikipedia. You are most welcome to continue this discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine. Blue Rasberry (talk) 13:39, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

March 23

Request on 08:28:25, 23 March 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by DestroyMyJeep


Hi there, I have updated my page with the assistance of a user on the live-help section, to bring it into line with your requirements. I have been waiting about 15 days for someone to come along and give it the final approval, but no one has come along. Can you please let me know if I need to do something to notify the reviewers that this is ready for final review? Please advise,

Ashton Wood. DestroyMyJeep

DestroyMyJeep (talk) 08:28, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you mean Draft:Destroy My Jeep it was deleted as unambiguous advertising on 11 March 2015 by MelanieN, who will be able to discuss this with you. Fiddle Faddle 13:11, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

10:54:52, 23 March 2015 review of submission by Magnet321


Magnet321 (talk) 10:54, 23 March 2015 (UTC) Dear Help Desk, Reviewing your ability to reject articles you do not like and then make redress system inpenetrable. To whit receive negATIVE FEEDBACK ON MARCH !ST . CORRECTED SO I THOUGHT BY MARCH 5TH AND RESUBMITTED. NOW i find it impossible to reconnect with CraigyDavi to get further data or a response to my resubmission. Please instruct me as to what I must now do, in plain text please I cannot cope with more Wikispeak. It is dehumanising. of your writers and your volunteer Unpaid editors. It also allows them to escape ownership of their decisions.Psychologically if not administratively Now simply where must I go to find further feedback on my resubmission. Incidentally your search engine can find no reference to CraigyDavi. Would the real Craig Davison Stand up please? Magnet321----[reply]

The best way to get help is to be rude. What you must do now is be pleasant, link to the draft you would like help with and ask nicely. I think you will find that no-one is much interested until that happens. There are no paid staff here, so please change you attitude. Fiddle Faddle 12:06, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

11:30:21, 23 March 2015 review of submission by Maybelline Ooi


Maybelline Ooi (talk) 11:30, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Editor,

I am have been trying to publish an article on Queen Silvia Nursing Award in Wikipedia but it had been rejected on 3 occasions due to the content, references and notability issues. I had since made the necessary edits, could I have some feedback on them so I can work towards creating a useful article for the audience.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Queen_Silvia_Nursing_Award

Thank you so much.

Maybelline Ooi (talk) 11:30, 23 March 2015 (UTC)Maybel[reply]

If I could read Swedish I would be able to assess the draft's sources. I wonder, is there a Wikiproject regarding Sweden where you could ask for help? Fiddle Faddle 11:50, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@User:Timtrent - I'm sure if you ask at WP:WikiProject Sweden someone would be willing to Verify the sources. (There is a WikiProject for almost every country) Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:22, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

11:49:31, 23 March 2015 review of submission by Axemangraphics


Hello I have recently received a second rejection for my submission to Wiki on St. Mary's Catholic Church, Williamstown page. Reasons given were that info had not been cited, however almost every single sentence has been cited! can someone please be a little more specific? Which phrase is preventing this from getting posted?

Axemangraphics (talk) 11:49, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Axemangraphics (talk) 11:49, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I believe, because Wikipedia is a gazetteer, this would qualify for inclusion. My opinion differs form that of the other reviewers. I'll take a brief look. Fiddle Faddle 11:53, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The point about WP being a gazetteer is relevant only to named natural features and human settlements (hamlet, village, town, city, district and so on) not individual buildings. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:26, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Saw this after I accepted it. I'm reasonably content either way. Fiddle Faddle 13:16, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

12:41:42, 23 March 2015 review of submission by Redtango88


Hi there,

My proposed page entry for business pitches has been rejected as it apparently read more like an essay than an encyclopedia. I've made some changes and was wondering if I could get it critiqued? I was wondering how my page differs from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elevator_pitch, in terms of compliance with Wikipedia rules?

Thanks in advance for your time. Redtango88 (talk) 12:41, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you resubmit Draft:Business pitch for review. I have a feeling that it is more like a dictionary definition than an article Fiddle Faddle 13:19, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Redtango88 - I've made a few minor changes to improve the layout, I also added a "See also" link to a related concept; sales presentation, although that article needs quite a bit of work to get it up to standard. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 13:38, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

14:36:10, 23 March 2015 review of draft by Brehman90

@Brehman90: Draft:Islamic_Relief_Academy does not yet exist. Would you like the draft at User:Brehman90/sandbox moved there? --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 16:58, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

15:21:25, 23 March 2015 review of submission by Slipvoid

I submitted my first Wikipedia article but received a message indicating the article was rejected because the submission was not adequately supported by reliable sources. This confuses me because I took the proper steps to include 9 very credible sources (scientific publications and online magazine articles). A user responded saying "Anything you can't source should be removed - even if "you know it's true". All of the information on the page is unbiased and true, I do not understand how every fact can be sourced. For example, how does one verify where they were born, worked, or studied as a major? Do I need to publish scans of work records, birth certificate, diplomas? Some of this information cannot be found online or in a book. Please advise. Thank you. Slipvoid (talk) 15:21, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

When I push a draft bio back for more work on referencing I flag it thus "For a living person we have a high standard of referencing. Every substantive fact you assert, especially one that is susceptible to potential challenge, requires a citation with a reference that is about them, and is independent of them, and is in WP:RS." You will see that there is wriggle room here, in the area to do with being susceptible to challenge.
I have not looked at your draft, but suggest you use 'my' rationale in the prior paragraph to inspect your referencing. If you believe that it meets that then it is good to be resubmitted. Do note that mine is but one opinion. Fiddle Faddle 16:38, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, birth certificates etc. No. Please do not supply these. There are very restricted circumstances in which they are valid, and usually only for historical figures. Fiddle Faddle 16:40, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

19:24:56, 23 March 2015 review of submission by MITAeroAstro


Hi. I am new to the wonderful world of Wikipedia page creation, and, alas and alack, my first foray into page creation was denied...because the individual was not sufficiently notable. I would love some help since said insufficiently notable person is my boss, Jaime Peraire, Department Head of Aeronautics and Astronautics at Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Truly, Jaime is as (if not more) accomplished as many who have Wiki pages, so I'm a tad confused why he doesn't make the proverbial grade.

Thanks in advance.

Joyce

MITAeroAstro (talk) 19:24, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@MITAeroAstro: I believe that the reviewer was incorrect when they stated that Jaime Peraire wasn't notable. Per WP:PROF, the fact that he holds a named professorship at a major institution does makes him notable enough for a Wikipedia article.
However, your article still doesn't meet the minimum standard for inline citations required for a biography of a living person. Every statement of fact needs to be baked up with a citation to a reliable source using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 20:01, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Please also see the note I left on your talk page regarding your username. Thanks. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 20:01, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

22:48:18, 23 March 2015 review of draft by Arise again, Arisedrew!


I'm creating an article that was deleted over a year ago because it lacked sources for notability warranting its place as an article. I reread that article in the history; it was quite poorly done and focused on in-universe information. If I create this article appropriately, with sources indicating its notability in the real-word (like an item that has been reviewed), can that warrant it becoming an article once more (even though it was already deleted in the past)? --Arise again, Arisedrew! (talk) 22:48, 23 March 2015 (UTC) Arise again, Arisedrew! (talk) 22:48, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

yes Fiddle Faddle 08:36, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

March 24

10:19:38, 24 March 2015 review of submission by Silentarif


Silentarif (talk) 10:19, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

PLEASE ADVISE WHICH REFERENCES ARE REQUIRED TO CREATE THE ARTICLE?

Please confirm that you have visited your draft and read the review comments. Once you have confirmed this please ask for more information, specifying what you do not understand. Please do not use all capitals. Fiddle Faddle 11:23, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I confirm that I have visited the draft and read the review comments. I have added some references for my article but the article is not accepted so i am unable to understand which type of references you required. Please be noted that I have added almost 7500 songs of Asha Bhosle songs in my article and my wish is that people must know about her songs details. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Silentarif (talk • contribs) 11:39, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

10:26:34, 24 March 2015 review of submission by Dhmellor


Having revised my first draft of the article Leeds Lieder, to include references to reliable independent sources, The Times and the Austrian Cultural Forum, I'm puzzled that it has been rejected again. I'd appreciate your advice as to what should be done in order to ensure that the article is accepted. Those two sources are certainly independent and reliable - do you simply want more than two? Dhmellor Dhmellor (talk) 10:26, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Dhmellor: The article from The Times is a good start, however we generally need more that one example of significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article to show notability. The Austrian Cultural Forum appears to be more of a directory entry than significant coverage, and it refers to the line-up being chosen by "our Artistic Director", implying that it's not an independent source. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 18:20, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that - it's helpful. I'll put a couple more references in and re-submit. Dhmellor (talk) 10:13, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

10:49:50, 24 March 2015 review of submission by 2.125.172.90


We recently had our article declined on regulatory data management, saying it reads too much like an essay. We don't quite understand as we've tried very hard to do it in a similar style to other articles in this space. It's not an essay, it's information about what regulatory data management is all about and why it is important at the moment, since it is becoming a hot topic in the city. Banks need to understand what to look for in a tool in order to help them comply with the regulation - then they need to go and find the right tools for their particular needs. Even if we write this again it will be saying the same stuff so we aren't sure what to do. But yet this is what users out there need to know - I thought that was what Wiki was for. Please can you clarify why this is more of an essay style than something like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governance,_risk_management,_and_compliance, for example? Thanks

2.125.172.90 (talk) 10:49, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you delete everything below the Context section it could probably be an acceptable article. Wikipedia is absolutely not at all interested in the "why" or the "should be" aspects of any topic. We have articles about things that happened thousands of years ago so being a current "hot topic in the city" is also of no relevance. We never tell readers what to think or do about a topic - in fact we never even refer to the reader. Your draft currently consists mostly of unsourced opinions and arguments about what needs to be done and why - all completely irrelevant. Give us only the what, when, where and who. That other article has a rather prominent tag at the top pointing out it's problems, so using it as an example of an acceptable article is a rather bad idea. The English Wikipedia has almost 5 million articles - more than a few of them rate somewhere between barely adequate and utter rubbish. Hope this helps. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:06, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

13:15:29, 24 March 2015 review of submission by Crimsontidealabama

It seems my entry was rejected over the citations. Only one citation was from a self-published source. The others were from third party sources. Please help me understand what may be wrong with these sources. Thanks.

Crimsontidealabama (talk) 13:15, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Crimsontidealabama: The reason that the article was rejected is that large sections of it (such as the first 8 paragraphs of the background section) don't have any in-line citations. To quote the decline message left by the reviewer: "Every substantive fact you assert, especially one that is susceptible to potential challenge, requires a citation".
Also, please see the message I left on your talk page. Thanks. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 18:00, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

13:44:13, 24 March 2015 review of submission by Datablue12

The article submitted was flagged for copywriting. The article/biography written is for Peter Aiken. The information sited was provided to Virginia Commonwealth University for his bio there by us (Data Blueprint). Peter is the Founder of Data Blueprint and a Professor at VCU. The information provided is our written biography for him. Please help me understand how we can get a biography posted for Dr. Aiken. Thank you.

Datablue12 (talk) 13:44, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Datablue12: Wikipedia cannot accept material copied from elsewhere, unless it explicitly exists under a compatible licence and is written in an acceptable tone—this includes material that you own the copyright to. You should attribute the content of a draft to outside sources, using citations, but copying and pasting or closely paraphrasing sources is not acceptable. The entire draft should be written using your own words and structure.
If you wish to license the text that your company wrote under a compatible license, you can follow the instructions at WP:Donating copyrighted material. However, official biographies are usually written to promote the subject, and therefore are not written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. You are much better off re-rewring the information from a neutral point of view, avoiding peacock terms that are designed to promote or show-off the subject, or waiting for someone who does not have a conflict of interest to write an article about this person. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 18:08, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 17:30:24, 24 March 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by FrankAbalistreri


Hi I submitted an article and it was rejected for Copyright issue. The problem is I am the person that wrote the content on the other site... How do I deal with this? Thanks!!

FrankAbalistreri (talk) 17:30, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@FrankAbalistreri: If you wish to license the text that you wrote under a compatible license, you can follow the instructions at WP:Donating copyrighted material. However, text written for company websites is usually designed to promote the subject, and therefore is not written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. You are much better off re-rewring the information from a neutral point of view, avoiding peacock terms that are designed to promote or show-off the subject, or waiting for someone who does not have a conflict of interest to write an article about the subject. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 18:11, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

18:34:40, 24 March 2015 review of submission by Tfennes

i do not understand why my entry is not notable; the reference given is a genuine scientific publication. To be precise, I am the author and the article cited is part of my thesis.

Tfennes (talk) 18:34, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am afraid you have just given the precise definition of WP:OR, something we do not allow. You may find reading WP:ACADEME useful to help you gain an understanding of Wikipedia vs Academe. If you are here to publicise your own research, that, too, is not allowed. If the topic is inherently notable it will have been peer reviewed, published in a peer reviewed publication, and/or have multiple people commenting upon it it recognised publications. Fiddle Faddle 18:45, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
What if this user were to use the very sources he cited in his thesis, instead, as the citations for the article? This looks like a legitimate and encylcopedia-worthy entry. --Arise again, Arisedrew! (talk) 23:10, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Arise again, Arisedrew!: It depends upon the quality of the sources and their peer reviewed status. At present the Tfennes is protected from WP:COI issues, but needs to understand that, the moment the draft is accepted, great care is required with editing a topic in which they have ultimate involvement. Fiddle Faddle 23:52, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

23:38:19, 24 March 2015 review of submission by Vivre101


Vivre101 (talk) 23:38, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I would like to keep this page going until I have more time to edit as requested. I have changed the date formats on the numerous references. Can you tell me if it is safe for awhile now as a Start Class article or in imminent danger of being deleted? Thanks, Pat

Your Paula Bourne article? It's already in the mainspace and doesn't seem to be up for deletion at all. --Arise again, Arisedrew! (talk) 23:41, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

March 25

Request on 07:29:28, 25 March 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Jefferyseow


Re: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Satwant_Singh_Dhaliwal

Rejection cites This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. I cannot see where the article has been written in the informal style and am still waiting for someone to point out the problem passage(s). Rejection cites Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. I have cited published works, to wit, The Star (a national daily English-language newspaper), Asia Samachar (an independent news portal for Sikhs in Southeast Asia and the surrounding countries like Hong Kong, Australia and New Zealand), The Straits Times (a national daily English-language newspaper), published UNESCO meeting proceedings, publications of the Pacific Science Association and the Malaysian Historical Society and an awards list from the office of the Prime Minister of Malaysia. Blanks were filled in from his unpublished resume and bio in order to make the writing more cogent. I'd like to know which of these is deemed unreliable or non-independent.

Rejection cited Please make sure to avoid peacock terms, that are designed to promote or show-off the subject. I did not use any peacock terms. But I did cite things that notable people said about him in an article. Is citing what someone said in an article not allowed? If citing is allowed, then please someone point out where I have used peacock terms.

Thank you. jefferyseow (talk) 07:29, 25 March 2015 (UTC) jefferyseow (talk) 07:29, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have left you a comment in the draft itself, and notified you that it is there. I hope you find it of assistance. Fiddle Faddle 21:50, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

21:18:36, 25 March 2015 review of submission by Gmcvoy


Would like to change the title to "Sustainability Rating for Transportation andItalic text Other Infrastructure"

Can't seem to find the source of the "reference not included" diagnostic.

Would ultimatly like this article linked to the other wickpedia articles cited.

Meanwhile, a bit confounded by the bibliography -- footnotes seem in order, so perhaps that's sufficient.

Thank you.


Gmcvoy (talk) 21:18, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

02:36:37, 26 March 2015 review of submission by Diazmr.90


There was a wikipedia page for "Rafael Yañez". Was the page removed by Wikipedia for a specific reason, or was it vandalized? The page had previously been vandalized and cleared before being the action was undone and the page returned the normal. Now the page redirects, and the content is gone. Is it somewhere?

Diazmr.90 (talk) 02:36, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I took a look; User:Tiller54 deleted it and created a redirect as "puffery nonsense" [1]. I'm somewhat surprised - it's clear the article had multiple issues, but he didn't propose the merge, redirection, or deletion before doing it (not that I would know if such is policy or not - I'm quite new, myself). --DawnDusk (talk) 02:55, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

10:24:29, 26 March 2015 review of submission by SisRob


SisRob (talk) 10:24, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=653588693"