Wikipedia:Requests for feedback/2010 June 9

< 2010 June 8

2010 June 9

2010 June 10 >

Back to main feedback page

Index of all pages

Little_Arabia_-_Anaheim

Please review. I'm new to this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Omarmasry (talk • contribs) 03:59, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's an excellent little article you have there. Plenty of references and links. You've even managed to include categories in there as well. It's great. One other tip I have with writing posts on talk pages and forums on Wikipedia like this one - please sign your posts with the four tildes (~~~~). This places a userstamp next to your post detailing when and who is posting. If you don't have a key that can type tildes on your keyboard, you can click the four tildes in the bar below the 'Save page' button at the bottom of the edit window to automatically insert the four tildes into your post. Thanks and I hope you understand. If you have any more questions please ask. Chevy monte carlo 04:47, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Request for feedback

Hi everyone, I would like someone to please review the content I've added to Wikipedia; User:Kushla Smith. Thanks in anticipation. Kushla Smith (talk) 06:58, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A few thoughts and opinions on the article:

You don't need a title in the article. When the article is eventually moved to the mainspace it will be given the correct name.
Please add more links to the article. I recommend starting with adding links to place names first. You can add a link to another article on Wikipedia by putting [[ ]] around it - for example [[Loughborough]] would create a link to the Loughborough article. Links help the reader out - they can click on the link of a term or place they've not heard about and go to the other article to find out more.
Please try and move the references into the article rather than in a separate section. For more information on how to do this, please visit WP:CITE, in particular the 'How to present citations' section.

I will fix the external links at the bottom for you, but if you have any more questions please feel free to either ask here or at the Help desk. Thanks! Chevy monte carlo - alt 12:02, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for the feedback, I really appreciate it! I've made some changes. It is ok now? Thanks Kushla Smith (talk) 23:55, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I have made a few improvements to the article, but I agree with the template tag at the top - in places the article sounds like an advertisement. I think in the 'Development' section is where the problems are. Phrases like 'over 40,000 retail outlets' and 'quickly, at the best market value possible' should be rewritten or removed if you can, to try and make the article sound more neutral. For more information on this, please see WP:NPOV. Thanks and I hope you understand. One last thing - maybe try adding more links - I'd say that you should maybe start with the place names first. Chevy monte carlo 05:21, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

1. I moved this from your userpage to User:Kushla Smith/Signmanager, which is what we call a "sandbox".

2. There is a long history of spammy "articles" about this company being created and deleted as obvious advertisements.

3. No discourtesy intended, but do you have any connection with this company (see WP:COI). --Orange Mike | Talk 14:43, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I do have a connection with the company. But more importantly I feel this business has an important message in that they started small, creating a new industry and way of doing things, and they have developed into a larger business. And I feel they are noteworthy because they continue to be recoginised with acheivement awards. Kushla Smith (talk) 00:22, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please review my article!

Hi can you please give me your feedback on this page that I've created. I am new to wikipedia, and would apprciate your help! Here's the link to my article - [1] Thanks a ton! Newway123 (talk) 08:00, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Some notes:

The article is a compilation of promotional materials and news reports, starting with the choice of section headings. Phrases were lifted, in their entirety, from copyrighted sites. A whole paragraph spoken by the CEO and reproduced by an industry website is copied without quotations and without attribution. This is a serious policy breach and may lead to immediate deletion of content. Even if you are writing for the company you cannot use their press releases until the copyright owner publishes them under a free license (see more at Wikipedia:Copyrights and Wikipedia:Plagiarism).
Wikipedia policy clearly says: Articles about companies and products are written in an objective and unbiased style. That is, advertizing is prohibited and phrases like "The company is a leader in India" are usually frowned upon, and need very serious, independent references to stay. Place yorselves in the shoes of a complete stranger - if they need to describe corporate structure, would they call company units Centres of Excellence? And will they dedicate so much space to corporate structure, at all? Look at the featured article BAE Systems for an example of the balance between structure and the rest of article.
And yet, the article misses on certain important points:
- History - just how old is it? Who founded it, and how it was brought from the start to present day? Ideally, there must be some human "hook" - an insight into the stories of the people who shaped the company (i.e. an article on Ford Motor Co. must discuss the role of Henry Ford). But in case of a relatively new company this may be impossible to back up with reliable independent sources.
- Basic financials - how large is it? How much revenue it generates?
Articles should present factual information in free-flowing text, not bulleted lists. Again, take a look at the featured articles.
Always check internal links! A link to BSE in the first line of the article leads to a disambiguation page. East of Borschov (talk) 08:45, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:Tatyana_Popova/ShareCAD

User:Tatyana_Popova/ShareCAD This article is about a new web-service which lets one view several formats of drawings over the web free of charge, and if needed share the drawings with other users. That would be great to receive an evaluation of the article. Thanks everybody. Tatyana Popova (talk) 09:46, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think the article's references need a bit of work. Most of the references in the article seem to be the service's official site. Please try and find references from reliable sources which are independent of the article's subject. Also other Wikipedia articles cannot be used as sources, so please remove these. Please also try and work on the article's tone - at the moment it sounds like an advertisement. Things in the article like the system requirements and the service's official site need to be either removed or changed. Hope this helps! Chevy monte carlo - alt 11:52, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your opinion Chevymontecarlo and for your time with this! I will mind your comments and try to improve the article. Tatyana Popova —Preceding undated comment added 14:28, 12 June 2010 (UTC).[reply]

User:Sami70/International Organization for Peace, Care and Relief

Hi , I'd love feedback on The International Organization for Peace, Care and Relief page that I just created and wish to move it to the article space, Please help me with anything that must be changed or improved. Thanks in advance ... --Sami70 (talk) 09:58, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please try and add a few references for the 'Objectives' section of the article. Also although the photos and infobox are great I think the 'Objectives' section needs to be made more neutral-sounding, as at the moment it sounds a bit like an advertisement. Chevy monte carlo - alt 11:46, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not too bad. You've got the referencing covered, but it might require some re-structuring and a clean-up. -Reconsider ! 12:58, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

School of Business, Trinity College, Dublin

Dear Wikipedia people I have created an entry for the School of Business, Trinity College Dublin. The School is in the process of planning a new building. I have an image of the architectural plan of the proposed building, but every time I have uploaded to the site, it has been taken down. I have permission of course to use the image, and I have asked others with experience with Wikipedia what to do, but to no avail Any help is greatly appeciated --Norah Campbell 09 June 2010-83.71.13.113 (talk) 11:19, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The reason why the image has been repeatedly taken down is probably because it is either considered spam or is not useful to Wikipedia. The article on the School of Business has probably got tone problems- it's likely to sound like an advertisement. If you have any more questions, please ask at the Help desk, where the users there have a much greater knowledge of Wikipedia's policies and the like. Thanks. Chevy monte carlo - alt 11:40, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Greater China Transport Logistics

Greater China Transport Logistics I've changed the primary source to the other reference already. Is that alright now? Thanks.

YokieL (talk) 11:32, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's a good article but I think you should try adding more links to it, and try and rename the reference links to something more descriptive. Chevy monte carlo - alt 11:34, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'll try improving on that. YokieL (talk) 11:48, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, feel free to ask here if you have any more questions/thoughts regarding editing and improving articles. Chevy monte carlo - alt 11:55, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Could I know when will the template of the new unreviewed article be removed? YokieL (talk) 12:17, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you're happy with my feedback, I can remove it for you. Do you want me to do that? Chevy monte carlo 15:23, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, thanks so much.You're so helpful. YokieL (talk) 17:05, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yabba67/Bernd Fix

User:Yabba67/Bernd Fix

June 9th, 2010 Yabba67 (talk) 15:59, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nice article. You have plenty of references, categories and the infobox is good as well. I don't think there's anything wrong with the article, except maybe separate the article out into sections a bit more. Chevy monte carlo 05:30, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Brandon Trust

Hi

Can someone please review the 'Brandon Trust' page so we can remove the tag at the top? Many thanks. Bex martin —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bex martin (talk • contribs) 16:01, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You should work to establish notability in the lede. As a threshold matter, for inclusion on wikipedia the article's topic must be notable within the meaning of WP:N. Secondly, you should work to provide more references/citations for the claims in the article. I made a few edits to improve the format of the sources, but there is still work to be done. I haven't given it a full review, but this is what I picked up from a first pass. -Thibbs (talk) 20:01, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:Yabba67/Bernd Fix

Article related to person mentioned in Antivirus article section "History".

June 9th, 2010 Yabba67 (talk) 16:13, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have replied to your first request further up the page :) Chevy monte carlo 05:33, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

World Class IT

World Class IT: Why Businesses Succeed When IT Triumphs

Hello,

This article is about a book that: 1) crystallizes and quantifies the important relationship between a business' information technology department and overall corporate strategy. 2) introduces five principles that are used to align IT with business strategy.

The themes outlined in this book have influenced current business theory by outlining an important business trend with metrics and measures.

I would really appreciate any feedback on this article!

Thanks!

Fortind89 (talk) 16:53, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Hello Fortind89,

In general I think this looks good. There was another review of the book that you may want to add (<http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/345924/Book_Review_IT_Leadership_Boiled_Down_to_5_Elements> ). The more references you include, the more credible the article. Also, you may want to relate the article to more topics in the "see also". One minor point, the publisher, Jossey-Bass, is a division of Wiley-Press, which you may want to add.

JohnJacobson2 (talk) 18:44, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think the 'five principles of world class IT' sounds a bit like a magazine article - I think that you should maybe replace the section with a brief sentence or paragraph summarising what's in the section already. Chevy monte carlo 05:35, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting review of Bop It article

Hi I'm a long-time editor here so I usually have a pretty good sense of what is right or wrong with articles that are in development, however I am running into big problems at the article on Bop It. I've been editing at that article since April of 2008 and during this time I have spent the majority of my editing efforts trying to deal with another highly bipolar editor who sometimes adds useful information and at other times adds huge amounts of what I consider to be useless information. This same editor has also spent an enormous amount of time vandalizing the article as well as several other articles and he is currently banned. This hasn't stopped him, however, as he is editing from behind a dynamic IP address. So consequently I am endlessly engaged in trying to turn the eternal stream of edits he makes into something useful for Wikipedia. It's a wearisome process and by now I have had direct engagement with practically every line in the article. Since 2008 the article has ballooned and expanded from 5,230 bytes (when I first began editing it) to 23,972 bytes and there is no indication that an end is in sight. Whenever I think the article is now fully complete this other banned editor adds more trivia. I try my best to cut out the most trivial stuff but despite my best efforts the article has become bloated and cumbersome and thus difficult to navigate.
About a year ago exactly, in June of 2009 another user made a number of BOLD edits in which she mercilessly slashed out huge sections of the article that she thought was useless. While I am in general more of an inclusion-minded editor and while I generally decry the wholescale slashing of verifiable information, I feel that her edits did improve the article considerably. This other editor (the one who cut out material) has departed from the article now and I was hoping to call upon my fellow editors here at RfF to help provide an external objective viewpoint on the article as it stands. I have a vague impression that it is too big but my close familiarity with it has rendered me considerably more useless at cutting material then I normally would be. Even if your opinion is simply that it is fine, any help would be much appreciated. Thanks in advance, -Thibbs (talk) 19:30, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure how much help this is, but it seems to be pretty good, though some of it does go somewhat off-topic. You may possibly consider forming any of the off-topic parts (that would be notable enough to do so) into their own articles or maybe adding it to the company article or making an article on the company's products. If not I'd just shrink it somewhat and leave it, it is useful info if you stick to the main points of the off-topic stuff. ~ QwerpQwertus ·_Talk_·(Talkback Me)· 03:47, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK great. This sets me more at ease. Thanks for the feedback. -Thibbs (talk) 05:04, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

PS - If anyone else wants to take a look at it that would be great too. The more eyes on it the better I feel it will become. Cheers, -Thibbs (talk) 05:04, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well currently the article has been rated as "start class". If you look at the grading scheme at WP:VG/A you can get an idea of what to improve.-Reconsider ! 07:51, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I'd actually started there. I was going to ask for peer review at WP:VG to try to bump it up a class but the problem is that the class structure they use seems to presuppose that the article isn't detailed enough and that to improve it an editor shoudl add more information. Meanwhile I believe this article may actually suffer from being too detailed. Anyway I'll use the class structure as guidelines if I'm considering cutting anything. Thanks for your help. -Thibbs (talk) 23:20, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yefim Shubentsov

I want to add an article for Yefim Shubentsov, currently in my user space, and would appreciate feedback. Thank you! I have done lots of editing but never article creation.

Splash90 (talk) 20:10, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is a good place for getting feedback on user-space drafts, but I can't seem to find it (even in your user-space). Could you provide a link or the exact title? ~ QwerpQwertus ·_Talk_·(Talkback Me)· 22:48, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Link User:Splash90/Yefim Shubentsov -Reconsider ! 03:47, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would reccommend adding more references which prove the notability or importance to an encyclopedia, expanding it, and adding reliable sources, and an infobox an picture always can help. Good job though! If you can possibly improve some of these things and you'd like help putting it up live, feel free to contact me. ~ QwerpQwertus ·_Talk_·(Talkback Me)· 03:53, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(To reconsider) Thanks! Why couldn't I find that? ~ QwerpQwertus ·_Talk_·(Talkback Me)· 03:53, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - I added an info box and more news articles from reliable sources (newspapers etc). I don't have a photo of him and the only one I found online is probably copyrighted and looks to be really outdated. I also don't know what more to write about him that's not 'advertising' sounding. Splash90 (talk) 19:24, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

iheartradio

Hello-- I would like to submit my article for review! Here is the draft: user:sparkynekka/iheartradio

Looking forward to hearing back from you.

Thank you so much!

sparkynekka 21:43, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

It's pretty good, but you will need to add more references which will prove it's importance or notability to an encyclopedia in addition to possibly making it a little less like an instruction manual - it should be purely about the subject in most cases. Good job though! ~ QwerpQwertus ·_Talk_·(Talkback Me)· 03:40, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:NOTGUIDE. -Reconsider ! 03:48, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also, YouTube and Twitter are not valid references for Wikipedia, as per the rules at WP:CITE. Please either remove or replace them. Thanks. Chevy monte carlo 05:24, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Check out WP:Cite to see how to format your references.SPhilbrick T 15:17, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]