This is an archive of past discussions about User:Chzz. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Seems Chip123456 has learned nothing and post-block expiry is back at WP:ANI. As the person who started the last ANI notice I thought I would let you know. --Bob Re-born (talk) 23:17, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
hi, i added references as suggested. also a picture. but it needs a disambiguation page, i think to distinguish my henry van dyke (b. 1928) from the other henry van dyke. i added a note to the other henry van dyke page but it's not in the right place. it should be up by the title name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fieldinski (talk • contribs) 18:15, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for reviewing my article submission, Mathew D. McCubbins. Many of the modifications I made were at the recommendation of the previous reviewer which I may have not effectively executed in totality. Can you please advise me how to best improve the article to meet Wikipedia's guidelines as there are still cautionary banners at the top. For example, it notes that the individual may not meet notability standards. This individual is one of the mosy preeminent living American political scientists (particularly in relation to other American political scientists currently on Wiki), so how do I establish this other than the secondary sources referenced and have the banner removed? Thank you for any assistance you might be able to provide as I am still learning in this process.
Andrea.colleen.francis (talk) 14:29, 7 January 2012 (UTC)andrea.colleen.francis
Baron Middleton reference
Hi there
Could I create another entry for a particular member of this family?
Or do I have to add her to the existing Baron Middleton family entry?
I have just completed a new article as above. Would you please review it, or forward to someone else for review. Not sure how the process works. I have already moved the article to its own mainspace. Thanks CatherineCathlec (talk) 22:22, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi, many thanks for checking over the new article for Laurence Dale. I have now added some inline references and would be grateful if you could spare some time to review it again. Many thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fdarts (talk • contribs) 14:17, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Eyeco logo.gif
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Eyeco logo.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Whacking with a wet trout or trouting is a common practice on Wikipedia when experienced editors slip up and make a silly mistake. It, along with sentencing to the village stocks, is used to resolve one-off instances of seemingly silly behavior amongst normally constructive community members, as opposed to long term patterns of disruptive edits, which earn warnings and blocks.
Example
Whack!
The above is a WikiTrout (Oncorhynchus macrowikipediensis), used to make subtle adjustments to the clue levels of experienced Wikipedians.
To whack a user with a wet trout, simply place {{trout}} on their talk page.
Hope you read that, but finally I found out why we are getting many submissions and filter hits (#167) with not transcluding the submit template correctly! (see Template:Afc preload/draft). That was a really bad edit! why did you substituted the userspacedraft template? mabdul15:12, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
6 inline references have now been added to my submission for Laurence Dale. I really cannot understand why the wikipedia editors are being so awkward about my article. I would like to point out that this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rúni_Brattaberg ... has no inline references at all, whilst this page : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Audi only has 2. Someone else has questioned the 'notability' of Laurence Dale. I believe this artist to be just as notable as Ian Bostridge, Robert Tear, Philip Langridge, he was a very important performing artist in his genereation and is now an innovative opera director and currently artistic director of a central european music festival.
I would appreciate your further comments ... or preferably acceptance of this article.
Fdarts, if you look up at the top of this page you'll see that Chzz is on an indefinite break, and he hasn't been active on Wikipedia yet this year. I can't really help you with your proposed Laurence Dale article, but for some suggestions:
Of your inline references, I think (yes, it's just my opinion) that there is one in particular which is a "reliable source for Wikipedia" and just might demonstrate the subject's notability: this is the link to Debrett's. This source was identified as acceptable for Wikipedia in this discussion of reliable sources for the article on Fidelis Morgan, so I don't see why your link to Debrett's shouldn't both be a reliable source and demonstrate your subject's notability.
All of your other inline references look to me to be verging on spam - don't be offended, it can be a difficult thing to avoid, and anyway someone else might disagree with me. The main thing is, really you want to prioritise finding references to your subject in printed books, newspaper articles or magazine articles, at least mentioning him in the way you need - though, if you can find them online, that's perfectly acceptable - that is, if he just happens to be mentioned in an article as artistic director of a festival, for example, then that's a good reference for saying so in Wikipedia. But making reference to a music store, for example, verges on making an advertisement for the music store. I hope that makes sense for you.
Bearing in mind what I say above about Debrett's, and especially if you can find alternative references as I've suggested above, why not take up the suggestions headed "If you have any questions…" and "When ready to resubmit…", in the pink "Review completed" box at the top of your proposed article? (at the time of writing, that is)
I'm sorry Chzz isn't around at the moment but you won't be the only one who's missing him! Bear in mind, anyone who contributes to Wikipedia is a "Wikipedia editor", including you: no-one's intentionally being awkward (as far as I know), they'll just be doing their best to see that anything added to Wikipedia reaches a minimum standard, which we all have to work towards. Also bear in mind that I'm not speaking on Chzz's behalf, and he might not agree with what I've said! I hope that's all of some help to you. Nortonius (talk) 17:47, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
Mail
Dear Chzz, I just resubmitted my request for an update to the "Muhammad Ali" section again as you suggested. I hope the change can be made. I believe I've now done everything you've asked. Thank you very much for your assistance. Please do let me know if there is anything else that would need to be done.
Hello, Chzz. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Update: new user warning test results available
Hi WP:UWTEST member, we wanted to share a quick update on the status of the project. Here's the skinny:
We're happy to say we have a new round of testing results available! Since there are tests on several Wikipedias, we're collecting all results at the project page on Meta. We've also now got some help from Wikimedia Foundation data analyst Ryan Faulkner, and should have more test results in the coming weeks.
Last but not least, check out the four tests currently running at the documentation page.
i have document by visakha museum which is run by indian government as a reference.
my user name is altaf shaik. you can communicate with me in that user name — Preceding unsigned comment added by Altaf shaik (talk • contribs) 12:41, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
I was told my submission had no inline references, what does this mean and how do I fix it. Also how do I make my submission better so that it will be accepted?4.225.90.119 (talk) 07:40, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the response last month on the two pages I created about TV writer/producers. The credits come from IMDB. What else do I need to do for verifiability? I've seen other TV writer/producer pages and want to make mine like theirs. Thank you.
Julie Hurwitz (talk) 23:05, 25 January 2012 (UTC)Julie
A request for comments has been opened on administrator User:Fæ. You are being notified due to your prior participation in ANI, RfA, or RfC discussions regarding this user. Thank you, MadmanBot (talk) 19:45, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
inserting references
When I try to insert a reference using the dropdown box, the <ref...> is placed at the top of the page instead of at the cursor location. Can you help me with this? Serena SerenaLaVine (talk) 00:00, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
I suggest you ask on the help desk. Please tell them which browser you are using (internet explorer, firefox, safari) and if the problem is the same whether logged in or logged out. Best of luck. Chzz ► 12:51, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
All the stuff which fell on t'floor,
Snout of gilt, and one black rat
Which drowned on falling in the vat,
Butcher's thumb untimely chop'd
And down into the mincer drop'd,
Piglet's hide and youngling's pizzle
In the sausage spit and sizzle.
Pizzle, fizzle, spit and sizzle
Barbie, if it doesn't drizzle!"
I made these on MF's page a little while ago, and thought you'd like to share in the enchantment, given your penchant for the product ;P Pesky (talk …stalk!) 10:25, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
Sounds great; it's good to use everything but the squeak. But yes...like most things on Wikipedia, they'd definitely need more sourcessauces. Thanks! Chzz ► 12:22, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Photos
Hi,
Thanks for your helpful reference recommendations and links to useful pages [i.e. Cheatsheet].
Next, we would like to add photos, but want to wait,
so as not to lose our place in line for the approval process.
How many photos would you recommend?
Which link best describes how to add photos?
I'm worried by your saying "we" - and by your user name, because company / group names are not permitted. As described there, you should almost certainly stop using the name "Ccjjpro" and get a new user name.
You would not "lose your place" - you can freely edit the draft at any time; it will not affect the time it takes for review. And if you change your username, you can still edit it. It's at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Craig Curtis.
There is no specific limit on number of pictures, but of course they should not be excessive, and should add real value to encyclopaedic understanding. Any number of pictures could be stored on Commons, and linked to from the article.
The important thing about pictures is, they should be appropriately licenced for anyone to use them.
SerenaLaVine--Article on Amateur Classical Musicians Association
The proposed articla on the Amateur Classical Musicians Association has been updated with proper references. Please see the updated article in User:SerenaLaVine/sandbox.
will check Trash files: should have thought of that myself. I'm afraid, though, that I changed my designated mailbox, but never responded to the "verify" email. If true, though, wouldn't the old email address still be in place? I'll check, and get back to you.
Much of the tone makes the article appear to be "original research" - ie opinion, not facts-with-references.
For example, The main difference between Sekhem and other energies is that Sekhem has a very strong connection to many of the Gods and Goddesses of Egypt. - according to who? It is also used as a suffix to many names of people in a position of power in ancient Egypt. - according to who? (where can this be verified?)
Because the original Seichim was taught without a manual, the classes all followed the oral tradition of teaching. - reference? Consequently, each teacher taught in their own way. - reference?
In "origins", the wording makes it sound as though it is the opinion of Wikipedia. For example, He was able to learn more about the vibrating energy he felt in his hands and began to share this energy with others. - he might indeed think or believe that, but I doubt very much that it is actual hard-fact.
Hello Chzz, I am the author of the article entitled "Council for Higher Education in Newark". I am a novice at this so bear with me. I understand my article has been accepted, which is great, but the article is still identified as having a "close paraphrasing" issue. Will paraphrasing box disappear at some point or does it mean that I need to do more re-writing? Thanks Wrrsimone (talk) 22:01, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
I was hoping you could give me a little more detail about why my article was not approved. What sorts of things would show the importance of the subject / encyclopedic worthiness? Is there something more specific I should include, like a paragraph dedicated to arguing its importance? Or should I include more links showing its large media coverage? I'm just wary of being declined for seeming biased about the subject if I argue to strongly for its importance.
Several independent reliable sources - such as, some newspaper articles which are substantially about the organization. Not blogs, not listings of events, not PR. It may also help to read the business FAQ. Chzz ► 22:27, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi Chzz - I am not sure why Dave McGillivray's bio was declined. He is an author and the race director for the Boston Marathon since 1980s - and he made history when he ran across the US in 1978. He has been profiled in the Boston Globe, the Boston Herald, and countless other bpulications if you Google him, which I cited a few. Can you explain why the bio we submitted was turned down? I followed the guideliness so any advice would be good.
Thanks so much.
BARwolfe - Beryl Wolfe, owner of Wolfe News Wire and Wolfe PR (I have worked with Dave McGillivray and Olympic Gold Medalist Joan Benoit Samuelson on the TD Bank Beach to Beacon 10K since the year 2000.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Barwolfe (talk • contribs) 22:08, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Beryl Wolfe
Hi again - I took out the Wiki references - someone had told me to cross link him so you see he is mentioned on the Boston Marathon page but I took that ot now - there are tons more articles about him out there since he ran across the US - twice - and has organized so many road races - I can add probably 25 more articles about him, if you want. But hopefully the wiki ones are gone now and that will help? thanks so much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Barwolfe (talk • contribs) 22:33, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
It needs direct, inline references so that we can see where the facts can be checked. For example, it says, In 1978, McGillivray ran across the U.S. from Medford, Oregon to his hometown of Medford, Mass., covering a total distance of 3,452 miles and ending to a standing ovation - where could I make sure that is correct?
As it says, "This suggestion doesn't sufficiently explain the importance or significance of the subject. See the speedy deletion criteria A7 and/or guidelines on music-related topics. Please provide more information on why this musical artist or musical recording is worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. Thank you." - and it refers to Wikipedia:Notability (music).
Listings at "lastfm" and "allmusic" and similar are not appropriate to show that 'notability'. Nor is iTunes, where it is sold. The others don't seem to be reliable sources, and/or son't show "significant coverage". It would require, for example, several newspaper/magazine articles that are about the band. See also WP:VRS, WP:IRS. Chzz ► 23:05, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Not a problem. I'm still learning. I guess selling 50,000 downloaded songs isn't worthy. Neilsen Soundscan is not reliable source nor the fact every band Skyla Talon has been in..not to mention the man himself is recognized & consider worthy musician. But to suggest to delete that which is already alive and breathing and recognized is confusing. So if I get that Spin Magazine review would that make this a worthy enough for you to judge it? How many is sufficient for you? Which by there are thousand of artist who only have myspace pages.
How did they get included. One can guess
Thank you but I had three other volunteers from the chat help. I asked in this was good enough.
If you wont help me Chzz I'll go back to the HELP chat & find someone not so judgmental to not let their baise opinion what music is or not. Fanoflife27 (talk) 23:37, 1 February 2012 (UTC)23:26, 1 February 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fanoflife27 (talk • contribs)
No; my main concern was the referencing. The neutrality is a side-issue, really. As I said, "=Please remove anything that cannot be verified in reliable sources. All the facts should be referenced - and in particular, when it's about living people.".
For example, it says, The band consists of Patrick McGowan (Guitars & Vocals), Dan McGowan (Guitars & Vocals), Becky Osenenko (Keyboards), Charles Batdorf (Bass), and Joe Rizzolo (Drums). - are those names published in a reliable source? Are they well-known? See WP:NPF / WP:BLPNAME.
It says, They are known for writing songs of an epic nature - according to who?
I posted this on the AFC discussion page, but since most of my concerns are from your accepts, I'll put it here.
A bit of a concern here. If you accept a submission, at least make sure that it complies with the WP:MOS and doesn't have some common errors. Many of these fixes are trivial- I've fixed quite a few.
Bold the title the first time it appears in text.
Correct the headline hierarchy. (2 equal signs, then 3, etc.)
I know. However, over the past few hours, I have personally reduced the AFC backlog from around 650 to around 150; thus, I did not have the time to do all the editing I'd like. I'd like to add categories, to assess the article, to format and add details to references, and many other things; however, if I had been doing so, I would have been unable to clear the backlog. Fixing poor formatting is easy enough, and usually does happen as natural editing - so to be honest, I'd rather work through the huge backlog that is clogging up the system, and not worry too much about formatting. But sure, thanks for letting me know; I do know all the formatting stuff; I've worked on lots of GA/FA articles too. Chzz ► 00:40, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
Good evening, this article is written in a neutral point of view, providing the facts as they are to this community. Please provide suggestions so I may improve this listing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crazyartsyguy (talk • contribs) 01:49, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
It is not neutral; for example, safe, vital, and attractive mixed-use environment that celebrates the diversity of art, well-known businesses.
Please check the over-use of the word "several"; see also WP:TONE.
It says it is a focal point for art activities of all types - according to who? Ditto for This growing region is known for socializing, entertaining, dining, shopping, arts, crafts and safe, vital, and attractive.
I'm new to wikipedia but couldn't believe there was no article about Bob Mirams. Now that I've tried to start one, I can see why - there is very little information available about him online.
Not sure what else I can do to have this article accepted - I can add some of his art (with his signature)
Unfortunately, it's a case of showing "significant coverage" (WP:VRS) - which may not be possible in this case. We'd need to see several published articles that are about this person, otherwise a live article would be liable for deletion. Chzz ► 02:05, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
The following summary accompanied the rejection of the article on The Amateur Classical Musicians Association:
Your article does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of published material. If you still feel that this subject is appropriate for Wikipedia, please rewrite your proposed article in the form of an encyclopedia entry, and make sure to avoid certain terms meant to show off the subject.
I don't see any specific areas of the submission highlighted; however, I have some idea of what you mean. For example, in the Mission portion, the following sentence appears:
With this aim firmly in mind, ACMA recognizes the talent and dedication of its members, and is committed to helping each one discover the joy of public performance
Would this be considered more a statement of opinion or evaluation rather than fact?
That type of thing, yes. For example, at the moment, it begins by saying ACMA "provides opportunities for nonprofessional (but dedicated) classical musicians to play solo and ensemble works in front of an appreciative audience - a) the phrase 'provides opportunities' sounds like a marketing brochure, not an encyclopaedia, b) who says they are dedicated (that's opinion, not fact) and c) the audience are appreciative according to who?
Instead, it should simply state facts, in an encyclopaedia manner - something like, "ACMA is a non-profit music organization based in New York."
Instead of ...performing in an intimate yet formal concert-like setting, just put "performing concerts" or something. And remove things like, ACMA emphasizes the need for meaningful, inspired performances that are mutually satisfying for audience and performer alike - because, again, that sounds like an advert.
dude, sorry you don't read chinese but that doesn't mean this is a non-notable person. i'm filling in an empty link in an article that already existed. so for you to not accept the submission is actually pretty stupid. some info is better than none. it was a link that already existed. stop being a dumb ass and get a life. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rockpapersilver (talk • contribs) 02:38, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
You're more likely to succeed if you do not insult people who are trying to help you.
I've recreated the page with more detail and notes about some of the concerns I'm sure will be brought up at some point. Let me know what you think. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrDerperson (talk • contribs) 03:07, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi. I'm not sure which version of the page you meant, because it looks like you blanked it, and then it was restored to an older version? (see history).
But... in order to be considered notable, it'd need some coverage outside of the University of Washington - such as, newspapers. Hope that helps; resubmit it any time. Chzz ► 04:01, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
Hello,
I have resubmitted it, and have added more content. If you approve it, can I kindly ask you to add a photo of the cover to the infobox?
Thanks in advance!
Dokidash (talk) 04:27, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi there, I was wondering if you wouldn't mind helping me with two classes here in the US (the time difference may actually work out for the best), given the experience you have as an editor. I am the current campus ambassador for Michael Mandiberg's Interactive Technology and Pedagogy class at CUNY Graduate center and Evan Hill-Ries' Copyright Commerce and Culture assignment at NYU. Would you be interested in serving as an online ambassador?
Could you please help me, it is the first article I write here and I thought I was doing an okay job, this wikipedia writing stuff it's really complicated.
If you will like to help and make any edits, I really, really will appreciate it.
We all have to assess references, and the basic question is, "do I trust the information?". For the above, I'd say,
Probably
No; Wikipedia is not a reliable source
I doubt it. Does it have "editorial control" and a "reputation for fact-checking and accuracy"?
As above
The link does not work. But given the name of it, I doubt it
Good sources include published, respected newspapers/magazines, books, and major news-websites. Small/independent websites are not usually acceptable.
However, if you want to check if a specific link can be considered reliable or not, please ask on WP:RSN.
I am not convinced that the film is notable. If there were, for example, 3 newspaper articles that were about the film, I'd say yes. When we're struggling to find references, and having to use non-authoritative websites, it indicates that something may not meet the notability guideline and thus, if made live, might be deleted - in such cases, I don't like to 'accept' an AFC, because I don't want it to simply be deleted later.
However, if you are able to find better sources - at any time - you can always resubmit the page (as explained at the top of it). Best, Chzz ► 13:52, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
this is my first wiki article so i would appreciate any help you can give. if u could tell me just what statements need reference to, would be appreciated. I have allready attached the proper case law reference details, although i supect these proceedings are legally suppressed (family court). Also, the first paragraph is confirmed already in wiki article of "without prejudice" - can i use that as a reference? If the last paragraph is an issue still can I resubmit with out it? and failing that can this case be at least submitted as a stub? Thanks, K.S. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kiwisheriff (talk • contribs) 06:02, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
All articles must show "significant coverage in independent, reliable sources". Currently, it does not have any. Court proceedings might be acceptable, but be careful because it might be considered a primary source. Unless the case has been reported in publications such as newspapers, magazines, books or news-websites, then it would not meet the notability requirements. In other words - have other people already written about it? -Wikipedia, as an encyclopaedia, only has articles on things that are already reported elsewhere.
Re. "without prejudice" - no, sorry; Wikipedia itself is not a reliable source, and cannot be used as a reference.
Re. 'stub' - all articles must have references to show why the subject is notable, no matter how long/short they are, otherwise they're likely to be deleted.
Hello - thank you for the comments on the submission. Please forgive me also - I am not a regular submittor of materials. Some advice please: Renal devervation is predicted by some thought leaders in the cardiovascular medicine world to be possibley the single fastest growing surgical procedure in medicine in the coming decade - more prevalent that heart bypass or even drug eluding stents. Considering the many billions spent by healthcare each year on hypertension drugs, the emergence of this simple procedure to lower blood pressure could mean a great deal to both patients and the healthcare system - savings in the $billions each year and growing with the aging of society. Would it be helpful to cite some of these things at the outset of the article. Thanks for the advice 98.189.10.100 (talk) 00:49, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
I'm sure it has the potential to become significant, but at the moment I don't believe the article shows "significant coverage" - that's the issue. Wikipedia, as an encyclopaedia, does not provide innovative information; we only publish articles about things that others have already written about (reasonably extensively) - we don't permit original research or any kind of speculation. If/when there are several articles that are specifically about "Renal denervation" then we could accommodate an article about it. Chzz ► 01:04, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks chzz - this is good news - thewre have been dozens of artiocles published - including both peerr-reviewed and non-peer reviewed pieces. I will include those citations and resubmit the article. Thank you very much.98.189.10.100 (talk) 16:34, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi,
Tony is well known in Venezuela.
He contributes to the people of Venezuela.
We plan to extend the article about him/
Please approve the article.
Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.166.44.200 (talk) 06:11, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but as explained, articles cannot be accepted if they do not meet the basic notability requirements. It does not matter how well-known a person is; their notability must be demonstrated, through references to publications such as newspapers. The references do not have to be in English. But the information must be verifiable. Chzz ► 13:57, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
We are a record label and thoroughly explain our history and releases, in greater detail than many other record label pages on Wikipedia.
While we may be a fairly new company, we have provided plenty of references from credited sources such as Billboard & Mashable that explain our work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.187.204.229 (talk) 07:09, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
Other existing articles are not relevent, when considering a new one. There are many articles on Wikipedia which are "bad" - they need fixing, or deleting. That does not excuse other new articles not meeting the requirements.
"CoolBusinessIdeas.com" sounds like it's a promotional site - self-published? I'm not sure about "Hudson Times" - that one is probably OK. "All access" looks like a press release? "Strong Arm Steady" is just a listing, and not an independent reference; and the "billboard.biz" article doesn't actually seem to be about Element 9. So, I didn't consider it met the general notability requirements, sorry; I wouldn't want to 'accept' it just to have it deleted. I suggest you try to add more independent reliable sources, if possible, and resubmit it. Maybe another editor will have different views.
I'm concerned at your use of "we" - Wikipedia accounts are for individuals, not companies. Please take the time to read the business FAQ.
1) Coolbusinessideas.com - no clue who runs the site. You'll see the info there refers to an article that was originally posted in The Post, the student newspaper of Ohio University. For some reason, when The Post rebuilt their website a few years ago, some of the archives were not updated, therefore an electronic link was not possible. I still have a hardcopy of the article: http://www.e9hh.com/e9_article.jpg.
2) "Hudson Times" is actually Hudson Hub Times. A small town paper, but still a verifiable source: http://www.hudsonhubtimes.com/.
3) The Billboard article is specifically about an Element 9 album release & focuses on a newsworthy decision made by Element 9 principles. The article is just as much about the label as it is any subject in the article.
It's a bit insulting that you've insinuated there is "promotion" contained in this entry. Every statement is backed by verifiable references & there is no conjecture used. I feel sufficient evidence has been presented to justify approval of this article. Please reconsider. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Element9hiphop (talk • contribs) 21:01, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi there Element. Just in case no one else has told you, I'd advise you to change your username voluntarily before you are forced too. You can see instruction at WP:CHU, and usernames that seem promotional (or are just business names, like yours) are prohibited. Regardless, I agree with Chzz that your topic does not quite meet the WP:GNG. First, there's a common misconception that all sources need to be online. I agree that coolbusinessideas doesn't seem like a reliable source, so skip that and use the newspaper article directly. A useful template for that is {{cite newspaper}}. Husdon Times seems, well, decent, but billboard.biz is not. For a source to be useful, it needs to discuss the subject in depth, and I definitely don't see that with just a brief mention of the company. NoleloverTalk·Contribs21:19, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
Our event is well known in Indian academic circles and our chief purpose of creating a wikipage is to provide crystal clear information about the event to anyone who is yet unknown to it. Please specify what all changes are needed to be made explicitly since a delay can prove detrimental to our event.I have also posted the necessary refernce for confirmation.
. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GOURA29 (talk • contribs) 07:50, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
Please see WP:VRS. It would need to be based on facts from sources such as newspaper articles / magazines / news-websites. For help with formatting the references, see WP:REFB.
Hi, just a quick question, you had a good look at Grammarly, right? I'm asking because I have some concerns about previous incarnations of that article, and the users who created them with regards to socking and paid editing. This current editor looks unrelated to me, but I'm a bit suspicious that he too may have had a motivation to promote the product. Thanks, Amalthea09:36, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
To be honest, no, I didn't have a particularly good look. There was a backlog of 650 'article for creation' pages, which I reviewed yesterday. I considered it was unlikely to be deleted in the immediate future. If there's any problems with neutrality, of course it can be edited, like anything else. And if the user/s are here to promote, then that can be dealt with appropriately too. But as far as AFC goes, all we can do is think, "does it meet the basic requirements?" - it seemed to, so I accepted it. Feel absolutely free to 'tag' it, to speak to the user, to edit it, or even to list it for deletion (if you think necessary) - of course. Best, Chzz ► 14:18, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi there. The intentions for my submission to Wikipedia is to make other designers aware of my concept and build and improve upon this concept. So awareness of this concept to the many designers out there is my intention and goal. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mehdidehghani (talk • contribs) 10:40, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi Chzz,
Thanks for reviewing the page created by me.
I would like to understand what process i should follow? as i have used the Article wizard only while creating it.
So can you please guide me how i should go about creating a Page of "Manjul Bhardwaj" as feel it should be available to all the people about him and his activities and a mission.
The reason why I created this article is because there are TONS of Uruguayans living abroad, especially in the United States. Many of them are also living in Europe, but since I don't know any other languages besides Spanish and English, with English being the most widely spoken language in the world, I thought the article had to exist in that language; that's why I made the effort of translating it so they can share it with their companions.
"Karibe con K" actually did achieve gold status in some of their records, but there is little-to-non information online since it's so badly organized that there are barely any web links to certify that. I am deeply sorry for being unable to fix that at the moment.
I wish this article does get published, since I'm sure it will be highly resourceful for all Uruguayans abroad.
I want to take this opportunity to thank you for taking your time in revising the article and replying to me.
Unfortunately, if there is little-to-no information available, then we can't add it to Wikipedia - we only publish information that has already been published elsewhere. Chzz ► 17:11, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi Chzz - I think the reason that Bernadette Davis is important/signficant is that she co-wrote one of the most popular sitcoms of the 90s. She worked with Andrew Davies on a number of tv shows as well as this one and he is definitely significant and important. All of the shows she has authored were previously on Wikipedia in their own right, so if they are important/significant, surely the writer of the programs is! Yours 212.95.227.74 (talk) 12:51, 2 February 2012 (UTC)PaukiPKK
The question is not what you or I consider to be important or significant, but whether there is "significant coverage in reliable sources' - see WP:VRS. It'd require published reliable sources with significant information about that person - because notability is not inherited. Chzz ► 17:21, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
I wonder. What is needed for it to be important enough?
I have already explained that Oh My! is a band that meet several of the criterias for music pages and the band is of relevance, got a fanbase worldwide that will enjoy this and alot of more information coming.
The instructions is: "A musician or ensemble (note that this includes a band, singer, rapper, orchestra, DJ, musical theatre group, etc.) may be notable if it meets at least one of the following criteria"
1. Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable and are independent from the musician or ensemble itself. -- I have even refered one.
2. Has had a single or album on any country's national music chart. -- The Four last singles has been on Swedish national music charts.
10. Has performed music for a work of media that is notable, e.g. a theme for a network television show, performance in a television show or notable film, inclusion on a notable compilation album, etc. (But if this is the only claim, it is probably more appropriate to have a mention in the main article and redirect to that article. Read WP:BLP1E and WP:BIO1E for further clarifications) --- Information is on homepage, but I can post the link to MTV.com and the tv-series Ninas Mal.
11. Has been placed in rotation nationally by any major radio or music television network. -- Clearly stated in the texts. Should I refer swedish national radio for this?
I find it hard to find the straight line between overposting links (and thereby get the feeling of marketing) and underposting links so you feel unhappy about the result.
The most important of those is #1 - the 'general notability guideline' - which refers to WP:N - which also says,
"In order to meet Wikipedia's standards for verifiability and notability, the article in question must actually document that the criterion is true. It is not enough to make vague claims in the article or assert a band's importance on a talk page or AfD page – the article itself must document notability."
In other words, you need to give references to independent, reliable sources.
When I reviewed it, it had three references - but two of them were primary sources.
You've now added another, which is ourstage.com - the problem is, that's a listing entry, not 'significant coverage'.
Can you find any articles in newspaper/magazine or a reputable website (with 'editorial control' and a 'reputation for fact-checking')?
Also, it would help a lot if you added inline references, to show where the facts can be checked. For example, it says they come "from Sundsvall, Sweden" and "was formed in 2008" - where can those specific facts be checked? There should be a reference directly after each fact. For help on how to do that, please see WP:REFB. I'll also add help on your own talk page. Chzz ► 19:00, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
As I said, it has problems with neutrality. For example,
"the Standing Committee and the Central Executive, the two most powerful decision making bodies of the Jamaica Labour Party" - who says that they are the most powerful? The reference is to their own website. That's a primary source, and should not be used for non-neutral claims.
"Jamaica Speaks, a very popular radio weekday morning news and commentary program" - who says it is very popular?
"Delano was widely credited for his lead role" - credited by who?
"Other accomplishments include he going to the People’s Republic of China on two special visits" - why are these 'accomplishments'? Why are the visits special?
"a leading member of Jamaica’s delegation" - where can we verify that he is a leading member?
"Delano has been involved in a number of controversial issues that have attracted significant media attention" - how many is 'a number'? How significant was the attention? Who says it was significant?
The over all problem is, that it depends too much on "g2kjamaica.org" - which of course is not an independent reference.
Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable, published secondary sources and, to a lesser extent, on tertiary sources. Secondary or tertiary sources are needed to establish the topic's notability and to avoid novel interpretations of primary sources, though primary sources are permitted if used carefully. Material based purely on primary sources should be avoided. All interpretive claims, analyses, or synthetic claims about primary sources must be referenced to a secondary source (from WP:PRIMARY, with my added bold).
Greetings Chzz ...
As you are aware, this is my first Wikipedia submission and have a lot to learn about the proper procedure.
I have entered four links to support the requirement for evidence and hope that this meets the regulations.
Thanks for your support.
Cheers - Daybydaiboy
Daybydaiboy (talk) 14:06, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
Please see WP:VRS - I don't think it shows significant coverage in independent reliable sources.
May I know the reason why the proposed article '2009 IPL Players Auction' got rejected? We have pages like 2010 IPL Player Auction, 2011 IPL Players Auction and also 2012 IPL Players Auction. I created the article 2009 IPL Players Auction to complete the series of articles on the stated topic.
The only references are to "espncricinfo.com". Apart from that single website, who else has written about the event? What makes it notable? See WP:VRS.
Thank you for your suggestions. The article Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Safway_Services,_LLC was written to provide correct information and relevant content on the company. Our objective is not for promotion or advertising, but to help those who may be looking for info on the company. I can attempt to rewrite, however I'm not sure how I would go about doing that, since that was not the intention. Any additional insights would be helpful. If you could list out some specific changes that I can make to get the approved that would be helpful. Thank you for your assistance. Theweldingguy (talk) 15:29, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
It's clearly not written from a neutral point-of-view. It begins,
Safway Services, LLC, headquartered in Waukesha, Wis., has been a leader in scaffolding and innovative access solutions since 1936.[2] With an extensive in-house engineering department, award-winning safety excellence [3], a powerful project management system and a new insulation facility, Safway delivers exceptional services and premier products throughout North America via a network of more than 85 branches. Offering sales, rental, assembly, disassembly, training, labor and project management, Safway’s experience and expertise is used throughout the commercial construction, bridge, industrial (offshore, petrochemical and power) and special events markets.
Who says they're a leader? The reference (Hoovers) is clearly not a neutral source. Who says it is powerful/exceptional/premier? Who says they have experience and expertise?
It is highly promotional, it isn't encyclopaedic, and thus if accepted, it'd be likely to be deleted as spam. Please refer to the business FAQ; it's hard to be neutral when you have a conflict of interest, so really the best advice is, to write about something else. If the company is indeed notable, someone else will write about it. Sorry. Chzz ► 19:29, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi Chzz, thank you for reviewing the proposed article, my first submittal on Wikipedia. Based on studying the guidelines for assessing the importance of topics generally and films in particular, the worthiness of this film is its quality (original and award-winning) contribution to the body of work on Dr. Martin Luther King and the Civil Rights Movement. I have added the following paragraph to the draft:
"Although numerous films have been made on Dr. Martin Luther King and the Civil Rights Movement, "The Witness" looks at King's work from the intimate perspective of a friend and one of the last surviving eyewitnesses (Rev. Kyles). The film contributes both original personal interviews and geographical perspective. Shot on-location in Memphis at several historic sites, its focus is less national than local, providing a more in-depth account of Dr. King's efforts to improve physical safety and financial conditions of the sanitation workers in the city where he ultimately met his untimely death."
Another indicator of importance is that the film won multiple awards in its category (Documentary Short), and was nominated for an Academy award for "Best Documentary Short". It was of sufficient note to be aired on HBO (February 18, 2009) and was shown at numerous film festivals (domestic and international), winning multiple awards in its category. (I have added an independent citation for the Oscar nomination and a review in the Los Angeles Times.)
Taking these factors together and benchmarking against comparable encyclopedic articles on short documentaries (some of which did not go beyond film festival awards and an Oscar nomination), one could reasonably deem this film of adequate importance for inclusion in Wikipedia.
Some parts have references, but a lot of things don't. For example, "Directed by filmmaker Adam Pertofsky and produced by Margaret Hyde" - where can I check that? "an intimate portrayal" and "a compelling introduction" - according to who? That's not neutral.
2008 Palm Springs International ShortFest, it won the Audience "Favorite" Award for "Best Documentary" along with the Jury award for Best Documentary - citation required.
2009 Nashville Film Festival it received "Best Documentary Short" - citation required.
2008 Cinema St. Louis Film Festival in the category of "Best Documentary Short"." - citation required.
Thanks very much for reviewing the Shelly Colvin page for me Chzz. Just a quick question re: reliable resources. Is it ok to cite her official web page ? I will remove the twitter references and other self published items.
It's OK to use a reference to a primary source (such as her webpage) with two important conditions -
a) It may only be used for totally neutral, simple facts, and not for any kind of claim. For example, "Chzzco is based in London <ref>Chzzco website</ref>" is OK. "Chzzco has a turnover of $9M<ref>Chzzco website</ref>" is not OK.
CSSWE is just as significant as RAX or KySat-1 or any other CubeSat mission. I believe every artificial satellite deserves its own encyclopedia page - each one is a testament to science and what mankind can do. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dtgerhardt (talk • contribs) 18:26, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for reviewing our recent page creation submission. I see that the Emmett Kelly (musician) page was not accepted for submission. Based on the criteria for submission, here's why he is deserving of an article:
1) He has been part of the personnel and/or composer of well over 20 critically acclaimed albums (lists and example reviews below):
3) He has releases on important indie labels such as Drag City, Domino, Polyvinyl, and Narnack (all of which are represented in Wikipedia).
4) He has toured extensively both in the United States and Europe
5) His albums and performances have been featured in prominent publications such as BBC, The Village Voice, Pitchfork, The Chicago Reader, The Onion, and The New York Times (a couple examples below see also the albums section above):
Allmusic, discogs, blogs, and similar websites are not reliable sources. Nor is Wikipedia - so links to other articles are irrelevent. All that matters is, it must show "significant coverage in independent reliable sources" - such as newspapers, books, magazines, news-websites, and so on. WP:VRS. Notability is not inherited, and the existence of other articles does not help. Best, Chzz ► 19:47, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
Great, understood... so this artist has been covered in a variety of local and national independent reliable sources including: Pitchfork, New York Times, BBC, The Village Voice, The Chicago Reader, Dusted Magazine, the onion etc.
He also has released several albums on important independent labels such as Drag City, Narnack, Domino etc. and collaborated extensively with internationally renown artists.
Absolutely. If in doubt, always err on the side of too many sources, rather then not enough. If the bank has been covered buy the NYT, the BBC, Chicago Reader, etc, then he's probably notable. Add those sources and we'll go from there. NoleloverTalk·Contribs00:31, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
Re: Review of Submission for International Dialogue Education Associates, Inc.
Hello,
I appreciate your time and feedback for the submitted article. Can you please provide some guidance or direction as to what should be pared down, and what level of detail to avoid? It is very appreciated.
It's very difficult to write when you have a conflict of interest, so it is not recommended. However, if you choose to do so...
Stick to facts that other people - independent of the organization - have written. Respected publications with editorial control and a reputation for fact-checking. Add inline references, to show where the facts can be checked - see WP:REFB.
Do not present things as 'fact' when they are, really, opinion - e.g. "Internals are more successful in school, in work, gather more information, exhibit more initiative" etc.
As this is an encyclopaedia, we only report on things that other people - independently - have already published information about. So do not write about things like "Dr. Laborde began by handing out a stack of brightly colored papers" unless it's supported by a published reference such as a newspaper.
Thank you for taking the time to review my article submission. My reason for including Paul Heroux as an encyclopedia article is that he is running as a Congressional candidate in the 4th District in Massachusetts. Joseph P Kennedy III is also running as a candidate and he has a page that was recently created as a result of running in this race. They are both candidates and both equally deserving of a page on Wikipedia, one no more or less than the other.
Concerning Mr Heroux's background, I included the following links and I would also refer you to the signed letters of recommendation on company letterhead found on his website.
Hi. When you leave messages, please remember to "sign" your name, by putting ~~~~ (four tilde signs) at the end. This will add your name, and the date and time. You can also do this by clicking the 'sign' button, pictured to the right.
Thanks for adding those references. I have one remaining concern, which is: has anyone written anything about this person outside of his candidacy? We have a policy to not have articles about people known for just one thing, and I'm concerned about WP:POLITICIAN.
Forgive me if I've missed something; I have not checked through all the refs in detail - as you can see on this page, I've been somewhat busy with questions about other articles-for-creation.
Please let me know what, apart from reports on candidacy, makes the person notable. The 'letters of recommendation' don't help; we're looking for "significant coverage in independent reliable sources". Chzz ► 19:58, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
CHEN again
Hello Chzz, This is the author of the article entitles "Council for Higher Education in Newark,(CHEN)". I hate to bother you but I discovered that there are two versions the article, the older one of which is entitled "Council for Higher Education in Newark" - which is to say it lacks the characters:, (CHEN). This older version is still flagged as having the "close paraphrasing" issues. But more importantly, it seems to me the older article should be deleted entirely. I seem to recall reading somewhere that this is not to be done lightly. So I'm wondering if you have any suggestions.
Ah, OK. We had (1) "Council for Higher Education in Newark" and (2) "Council for Higher Education in Newark, (CHEN)". Although (2) was 'better', (1) was actually the correct title. So, I copied (2) over (1), putting the attribution details in the edit summary, and changed (2) to be a redirect to (1).
