Wikipedia:Requests for feedback/2010 November 7

< 2010 November 6

2010 November 7

2010 November 8 >

Back to main feedback page

Index of all pages

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

Please give us feedback on this page, we'd like to get it approved.... =0) -Karl

68.2.40.149 (talk) 00:43, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but this article has major problems. It is a sycophantic PR piece, full of peacock terms, fluffy, unreferenced assertions and unencyclopaedic minutiae about this person's life and career. It fails WP:NPOV, contains absolutely no references to this individual in any independent reliable source, and its only links are to her own or associated websites, most of which appear to be soliciting donations. The links to the books also direct you straight to purchasing opportunities - please be aware that Wikipedia is not a forum for marketing things. She may possibly pass the notability threshold by virtue of her activities, but you need to cite significant coverage of her in multiple independent sources in order to demonstrate this - newspaper or magazine articles about her would be a good start. As a helper at RFF I don't like to nominate articles for deletion unless they are copyright violations or personal attacks, but this article is in danger of being swiftly deleted by someone unless it is cleaned up quickly, either as unambiguous promotion or because it lacks reliable independent sources (see WP:N and WP:BLP). I will move it into your usespace for you to work on if you wish, but it does not belong in the mainspace at present. Incidentally, you say "please give us feedback ... we'd like to get it approved." Who is "we?". If you represent the subject of this article or her organisation, you should not be creating it - see WP:COI. Ka renjc 22:27, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I see that all the maintenance tags I applied to the article after reviewing it have been removed by one of its major contributors without an edit summary; I assume the offer of userfication has been declined. Ka renjc 09:07, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/This_Is_Home_%28Switchfoot_song%29

RafaelMatosIndy500 (talk) 02:28, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:Koogel moogel/webtrees

This is a new article, any feedback appreciated. Thanks

Koogel moogel (talk) 04:31, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This article will probably be deleted fairly quickly if it is moved to the main encyclopaedia, I'm afraid. This software is brand new and there are no citations to independent reliable sources to show why it is notable. Wikipedia is not a place to promote new things; it only covers subjects that are already independently notable. Without references to demonstrate this, the subject is unsuitable for a Wikipedia article at present. Ka renjc 22:34, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ajoy Ghatak

First article, comments welcome.

Amitabhghatak (talk) 08:15, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

He seems to pass WP:N and the article is brief but pretty well done. Your references are not formatted correctly - I have fixed one to get you started, but see Wikipedia:Citing sources for more help. The link to the Flipkart site isn't suitable as it's commercial, and it's throwing the formatting of the section header as it stands, so it needs removing. The language is basically fine, but you should remove the references to "Professor" Ghatak - Wikipedia does not use such titles in the text, see WP:MOS. Just one thing - your username suggests you may be related to the subject of the article. If so, you need to read WP:COI. Ka renjc 23:05, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

CorneliaFlodeluna (talk) 10:25, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This article has been deleted twice previously. --Falcadore (talk) 10:54, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted again. I do not trust anything coming from this sockpuppeteer. Prolog (talk) 12:43, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not attempt to create multiple articles with no changes if they have been deleted already, as it is clear the article is not suitable for Wikipedia just from the fact it's been rejected twice. Chevy monte carlo 07:14, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

PUT TITLE HERE within Pangu Totems in North America e.g. User:Example/Lipsum or Cats or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Example/Lipsum

on the link park there is a weired arrow how do I get rid of it. I am just new user and trying to learn more. i like u to take a look and comment on my article. Thank u

Hendonsolonge (talk) 20:13, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You don't seem to be linking to an article, and there are no created articles in your edit history. Try using the Article wizard if you want to create one. Ka renjc 22:40, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Epistades/Enter_your_new_article_name_here

Hello! Trying to create a page for screenwriter Daniel C. Mitchell and just need to figure out the basics - such as the difference between "References" and "External Links". Also how to link the film and TV titles to their existing pages on wikipedia. Thanks!

Epistades (talk) 20:22, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

References are web links or printed sources that are used to verify a statement in an article. See WP:Reliable references. External links, on the other hand, are related links which aren't really suitable to be used as a reference but they're related to the article's subject and so should be included - see WP:External links. I've provided some comments on your article below. Chevy monte carlo 07:12, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_C._Mitchell

Please help me with formatting references and stuff!

Epistades (talk) 20:59, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent job! I think you've formatted the references just fine - you've used footnotes which is great. However, I do think the first paragraph might need some references. Other than that though, I think the article is great. Chevy monte carlo 07:10, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:ThatGirl42/Meg_Stivison

ThatGirl42 (talk) 03:49, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You need to use footnotes to display your references correctly, and also I think you need to consider expanding the article, if possible, so it's at least long enough for it to be classified as a stub. Chevy monte carlo 07:07, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]