Wikipedia:Requests for feedback/2010 July 27

< 2010 July 26

2010 July 27

2010 July 28 >

Back to main feedback page

Index of all pages

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Brouillette.ryan/mikolim

Miko is a photographer that regularly appears in articles that I encounter. Is my draft objective, or the rantings of a fanboy

~~Brouillette.ryan (talk) 01:30, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It does seem a little promotional.. with phrases using words such as "Honed", "Immersed" and "Youthful dynamic". But the more important thing is that it definately needs REFERENCES. Especially because it's a BLP, it's very important to always source BLP's as they are held to a higher standard of WP:V. -- œ ^™ 19:36, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:Katyaqua/Aquabatics

All help gratefully recieved to help make this article live. Thanks

~~Katyaqua (talk) 10:10, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, you did not give us a link to your article, but from checking your contribution history I can safely assume you meant User:Katyaqua/Aquabatics which I've linked for you, for the benefit of reviewers.

So, before you got it userfied, it looks like it was deleted as being blatant advertising. To fix that you must be sure to conform with the Neutral Point of View policy. I suggest you tone down the promotional fluff, such as "stunning" and "wonderful". Also you could add a bit more information on the subject such as notable places/areas where the technology is used. -- œ ^™ 19:55, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christensen_Failure_Criterion

I thank you for your feedback about the article.

~~Sungkha777 (talk) 10:40, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly? I have absolutely no idea what this article is about. It would be a huge improvement if the lead paragraph could fully explain, ideally in layman's terms, what the subject is, is part of, and/or relates to. It would also help if you could add more wikilinks to the various technical jargon so readers can read about these terms. -- œ ^™ 20:54, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Too technical for most readers. Also not sure as to why this concept possesses notability. Shearonink (talk) 14:21, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:Speedcasthongkong/SpeedCast

~~Speedcasthongkong (talk) 10:57, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, judging by your chosen username I suspect you may have a conflict of interest, I encourage you to read over the WP:COI page and heed its advisement. The subject and the article itself seems fine, however there are formatting issues, specifically with the wikilinks and section headings. I've properly formatted the section headings for you and formatted a couple of the links as an example so you can do the rest. I highly suggest you thoroughly read and understand the Editing FAQ which briefly explains some basics of article editing. Also, don't forget to add relevant categories once you move it out of userspace. -- œ ^™ 21:09, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Since 'SpeedCast' is a wholly-owned subsidiary of AsiaSat, it makes more sense to me that this draft-article would be placed within the parent-company's article when/if published onto Wikipedia. -- Shearonink (talk) 14:28, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Brahmadesam(Villupuram) & Brahmadesam_(disambiguation)

Hi Wikipedians,
Please review my article & provide your valuable feedback. Looking forward to create more such article particularly article about villages. There is some problem with the 'disambiguation tag placed at the top of the page.

For Brahmadesam Village, i have created disambiguation page. But i dont know how to make the Disambiguation Tag to read as For other uses, see Brahmadesam_(disambiguation). Please help me to fix this broken link.

~~Raj 6644(தமிழன்) 11:07, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good - nothing more I can suggest except, of course, writing more. The other uses notice is fixed now, it reads "For other uses, see Brahmadesam_(disambiguation)" - for future reference, those are called HatNotes - for that type you can use this format {{Other uses| NAME OF OTHER ARTICLE OR DISAMBIGUATION }}. Anyways, good job and happy editing! ~ QwerpQwertus · Contact Me · 00:29, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeschooling_and_Alternative_Education_in_India

Please review the article and guide me accordingly

~~Indiahomeschool (talk) 12:20, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew Housser

I have edited a number of articles, but this is the first one I have ever created from scratch. Please let me know of ways I can improve it or if it is good as is. This is article is about the CEO of a company I see frequently talk about debt issues as an expert. In today's economy I thought it would be good to put him on Wikipedia. I saw that his business partner was already in Wikipedia so I used his article as sort of a template. Please be gentle as this is my first article!

~~Elementrider77 (talk) 14:04, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good job, but I'd make sure that all of it is neutral, the tone of the article should be disinterested and factual and you should add a few more good citations where the "Citation Needed" notices are from big newspapers, websites, news, ect. |:-) ~ QwerpQwertus · Contact Me · 01:02, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parental_Rights_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

You will find that the sources are solid and good, but this content simply has not been reviewed. Could someone please review this article so the new article tag can be removed? Thank you.

~~12.20.128.3 (talk) 14:34, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:Mgreason/Sandbox 6

I created an article on Franklin Webster Smith which grew larger each time I did more research. A main section, United States Navy vs. Franklin W. Smith is particularly lengthy. My question is this: should I create a new article on this topic and summarize it for the biographical article?

~~Mgreason (talk) 14:57, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion, you don't need to, but if you want to split it or if you want to write more on that particular topic, I might consider it. ~ QwerpQwertus · Contact Me · 01:15, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kugler Hospital About a Great Missionary Hospital established in Guntur in 1887

The article is about a Great Missionary Hospital established in Guntur in 1887 and since it is my first article I would welcome feedback on how to make it better and useful. ~~Prakash69 (talk) 15:20, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A couple of points:

Try and find some references, and use inline citations to display them correctly. Articles with no references are likely to just get deleted.
Break the article up into sections, like this:

==History==

Add some names to the external links, like this:

==External links==
*[http://www.articlename.com/article/267|Example article name goes here!]

Hope it's helpful. Chevy monte carlo 06:27, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Axblt58/SBC

The article about Schlumberger Business Consulting was deleted some time ago, and any reference to this business unit has recently been deleted from the Schlumberger page. I feel this is a strong business unit inside of Schlumberger, that deserves a stand-alone article, as it is in a specific business, and is a relevant force in oil and gas management consulting today (being cited by Forbes and other specialized magazines, and also Les Echos, one of France's top business newspapers). I appreciate every comment that can improve on my work! Thanks in advance.

~~Axblt58 (talk) 15:26, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nice article. I don't see any immediate problems with the article. Chevy monte carlo 06:24, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Scott Hull (mastering engineer)

I wonder if someone could take a look at my article Scott Hull (mastering engineer) , and, if it's OK, remove the "new unreviewed article" tag.

~~Wikibench (talk) 16:02, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You should generally avoid words such as "acclaimed". Take a look at Wikipedia:Manual of Style (words to watch). You might also find Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons helpful. Yaris678 (talk) 21:48, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Yaris678. I removed "acclaimed" from the article. Any other issues I should note? Wikibench (talk) 14:04, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The rest all looks pretty good to me. I will remove the "new unreviewed article" tag. I would say there are two next steps.

Get the interest of a WikiProject. WikiProjects group together people interested in a similar topic. They will help you develop the article further. Perhaps if you ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Music, they will be able to tell you which of the daughter projects will be most interested. I don't think there is a "WikiProject Mastering Engineers"... But there are ones relating to different genres and so on.
Put the article in some categories. See what is appropriate in Wikipedia:WikiProject Music/Categories.

Yaris678 (talk) 14:42, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again Yaris678. I added some categories, and will check with WikiProject. Best Wikibench (talk) 17:46, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:Ssjvash228/Jaffer Ali (Entrepreneur)

This is my first article...I was in the process of writing one on the mainspace, and it was deleted before I was finished with it. So I finished it up on the userspace. Let me know if it's ready for the big move! Thanks! ~~Ssjvash228 (talk) 16:12, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have moved the article to an appropriate title and made some obvious changes to the first sentence. Beyond that, I am afraid the article is still very dodgy. Parts of it read like adverts for Vidsense and these are, surprise, surprise, referenced to the Vidsense website. Yaris678 (talk) 22:13, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It sounds like just an advertisement for the guy. Try and find some names to the references, like this:

Example sentence <ref>[http://www.examplearticle.com/article/267|Example article name]</ref>.

There's still a long way to go, though. Consider also adding some more details to the infobox, if you can. Thanks. Chevy monte carlo 06:23, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks guys! I have updated the page with better references, a few language things to make it sound less advertise-y, and more stuff in the infobox. I also added some categories. Ssjvash228 (talk) 19:37, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Still reads like an advert. In most cases it isn't the phraseolgy, its the content. A lot of it seems to be bigging up Jaffer and Vidsense. Yaris678 (talk) 23:56, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not quite sure how else to put some of the phrases you may be thinking of...for example, "Vidsense is the largest online video network that delivers safe, scalable reach for big-brand advertisers " is an assertion made by the company and backed up with a couple 3rd party articles. In the earlier draft of the article, it was marked for deletion because Ali wasnt shown to be notable enough. I'm trying to say why this guy is worthy of a wikipedia page. If i get rid of the stuff about vidsense, I feel the same problem would happen again. Any advice on the approach I should take then? Thanks! Ssjvash228 (talk) 16:10, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The statement you refer to is cited to a press release by Vidsense (it is on the Market Wire website - a website that exists to host press releases). That is not an independent source. If there are independent sources, I suggest you use them. Yaris678 (talk) 12:05, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I also suggest that you read Wikipedia:Notability. The important thing in determining the notability of a topic is the amount coverage in independent sources. Things like being the first this or the largest that don't necessarily help. Yaris678 (talk) 15:54, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Colleenmurrin/AM_Conservation_Group,_Inc.

This is the first time I have posted a Wikipedia article, so any feedback or edits to formatting is greatly appreciated! THank you for your time, it is a short informational article about a company called AM Conservation Group and their new products that are invented by the company president. I also do not know how to create the company info box on the right hand side that I have seen on other pages about companies, or how to post photos, so help with that is very welcome!

Thank you.

~~Colleenmurrin (talk) 16:31, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The link you've provided doesn't lead anywhere. Can you fix the link please? I can't find the article you want reviewed. Chevy monte carlo 06:20, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There's something wrong with the URL provided in the Subject line above. Tried to fix it but couldn't figure out what was wrong. Just go to -->> User:Colleenmurrin/AM Conservation Group, Inc. .

Shearonink (talk) 17:36, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jnyanydts/3B_Scientific

I created an article on the company 3B Scientific. They manufacture anatomy related products and physics equipment. Your feedback is appreciated. Thank you!

~~Jnyanydts (talk) 17:31, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Consider replacing the bold text with proper sections, like this:

==History==

Also, timelines are not really ideal for Wikipedia articles. Try and replace this with a paragraph or two. Thanks. Chevy monte carlo 06:15, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spokane_Civic_Theatre

An informative article on the historic Spokane Civic Theatre. I would like some basic feedback as I am crafting this article - what can I add, what shouldn't I have added? Are there any blatant formatting errors? Nitpicking is fine too. All help is appreciated.

~~Zara (talk) 19:47, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I see in the references, one has been displayed correctly using an inline citation (basically the <ref> </ref> tags) but two haven't. Try and put the other two references into the article at the place where the link helps to prove whatever is stated in the article, like this:

Example sentence <ref>[http://www.examplearticlewebsite.com/article/236|Example article name]</ref>.

Hope this is helpful. Also, try and add a name to the references, like in the example above. Thanks. If you have any more questions, please send me a message. Chevy monte carlo 06:18, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]