Wikipedia:Requests for feedback/2011 April 2
I feel like I have reliable sources, but I still have the box on top of the page saying that it needs to be reviewed. I am not sure how to go about this, other than with you guys.
Forest City Derby Girls (talk) 02:44, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
- A good idea is to use inline citations to display your references, and to perhaps try and prove the article's notability a little more by adding reliable sources. Chevymontecarlo 18:40, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
oni (talk) 12:47, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
- I think you might want to work on adding more reliable sources in order to prove the article's notability, and perhaps more information for a reader new to the subject. Other than that, though, I think the article is decent, or at least fairly informative. Chevymontecarlo 18:34, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
As urban agriculture is getting broader, specific subsets are emerging (i.e. community gardens, vertical gardening, entrepreneurial agriculture in downtowns, etc.) Public produce is an emerging subset of the broader category of urban agriculture.
Smogman (talk) 14:57, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
- You might want to consider adding sections to your article, in order to make it more easy to read and navigate, but other than that I don't really see any major problems. Nice job! Chevymontecarlo 18:38, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
Charles W. McCall (1878-1948) was a San Francisco Bay Area architect who designed over 250 residential, commercial and public buildings, of which four are listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Based in Oakland, McCall contributed personal touches to the prominent styles of his day including Colonial Revival, Craftsman, Prairie, Art Deco and Modern. He was recognized as a significant architect by the principal professional journals of his time. Tycoon Robert Dollar was a patron.
I just created a first draft of an article. The principal assistance I need at this time is how to superscript the footnotes that I created in the text and how to have the footnotes appear vertically rather than running into each other horizontally.
Thank you very much for your counsel.
Will King
Prjmneswe (talk) 20:33, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
- At this point, the easiest way for you to adjust your references to comply with the Wikipedia system will be to use "List-defined references". You can see more about the various alternatives to do references at Wikipedia:Citing sources. However, I set it up on the page and did the first one for you. Note that there are a lot of fussy details to this, so do one at a time until you get comfortable with the typographical details involved. If you get error messages, that's to be expected. Just go back and look for the tiny mistake that caused it.
- One issue with your references as they stand is that they are "bare" -- no bibliographical details about the citation. Your article would be much better documented (and the references would end up looking better), if you used the templates (e.g. "cite web") at Wikipedia:Citation templates. It's a fair amount of work to do this, however, so just get the references working first. Thanks for the article. Tkotc (talk) 18:28, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
Thutho28 (talk) 20:55, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
What is the next step to make it a wiki article?
Sanaravena (talk) 21:06, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
I am a current outreach student at the Rural Studio working on the 20K House Project. I noticed that "20K House" was referenced multiple times on the Rural Studio wikipedia page, as it is an ongoing research project. I figured it deserved it's own wikipedia page/entry for people to gain more information on the subject if they wanted it.
Bocaj1644 (talk) 21:24, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
Am trying to review this article as seems to be invalid sources can you assist in edits. 199.19.186.9 (talk) 21:45, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
199.19.186.9 (talk) 21:45, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
Looking for a review! Romkeh (talk) 22:47, 2 April 2011 (UTC)