Help desk
< April 23	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	April 25 >

Welcome to the WikiProject Articles for creation Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.

April 24

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/No. 614 Volunteer Gliding Squadron

For some reason the feed back keeps coming back that my article is blank which it is not? I don't know what is causing this ?

Cheers Fergus — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fergus614 (talk • contribs) 01:50, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article had been blanked recently. I have undone that, and it is currently in the queue. Nolelover ^Talk^·^Contribs 03:25, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Declined article

This is for the article Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Data Scientist

I based the Data Scientist entry I've been writing on the Database Administrator entry. I followed the format for the DA entry, the tone and style, and yet for some reason the entry reviewer wrote:

"This submission reads like a bullet point list for a job candidate. It is not consistent with the style and content appropriate for an encyclopedia entry. The topic is very important, and large in scope. Perhaps a smaller subset would be better to do first? Either that or significantly expand this entry, as it is not adequately informative as is."

The article reads like that because that is what the Data Scientist entry is. This is not a Data Science entry, it is specifically about what the job of Data Scientist means. I am not sure what is wrong with that? The Database Administrator entry is exactly the same thing.

So, I then deleted most of the bullet points for technical skills, general skills and education/certification (though they were used in the DA entry I spoke of above) and edited the entry down to make it a smaller subset, with the goal that later more would be added and then I got these comments from the reviewer:

"This submission reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Submissions should summarise information in secondary, reliable sources and not contain opinions or original research. Please write about the topic from a neutral point of view in an encyclopedic manner."

The submission I've written I honestly believe does summarize information in secondary, reliable sources (the sources I've used are such), and does not contain opinions.

Before I spend anymore time working on this, it would be really helpful to get clearer comments. Why is this entry not a "neutral point of view"? Why is this entry not written in "encyclopedic manner"?

Thank you for all of your help and comments, I hope to make this process smoother for everyone with the next update to the article. CRScribes (talk) 03:06, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

For your first concern, see why the existence of badly written articles does not justify creation of similar ones. For the neutral point of view concerns, there are several problematic points:

peacock terms: "conceive innovative ways", "actionable intelligence that can be used to move the company forward successfully", "create innovative data products that help leverage big data", "develop innovative metrics"
The article is for the most part not written in prose, which is generally considered more encyclopedic. In particular see WP:NOTDIR; the article seems like a business directory entry simply describing the profession in a bulleted list. See software engineer for a good example article. A412 (Talk • C) 22:48, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why my page creation is not published?

Hi, can any editors/admins tell me the reasons why this article I created some months back is not published. BTW I just improved the article and references. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Journal_of_North_East_India_Studies — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gangpi (talk • contribs) 13:38, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In order for the article to be published, it first must be submitted. Do so by adding {{subst:submit}} to the top of the page- it will then be put in the queue for review. A412 (Talk • C) 22:51, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

1910 Welling Train Wreck

Wikipedia article on 1910 Train Crash in Wellington Avalanche.

Do you have a live person passenger list that was on this train.

I have alwasy been told my Grandparents Belle and John Henry Donner were on this train and survived.

Grandpa said they burned any and sll wood they could find until help came. They portionsd our food from the dining rom so every one could have a little to eat until they were rescured. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.18.166.202 (talk) 14:52, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This page is for questions about the Articles for creation process. Please consider asking this question at the Wikipedia:Reference desk. They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what the Help Desk is for). Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. You could always try searching Wikipedia for an article related to the topic you want to know more about. I hope this helps. Nolelover ^Talk^·^Contribs 17:01, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/US National Steel

Considering that my article submission for US National Steel has been declined, due to a current article for US Steel and/or National Steel...how can I have information for US National Steel linked to these currently existing articles when using the search option? Thanks in advance. 50.128.137.134 (talk) 16:40, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, the submission actually duplicated National Steel Corporation. US Steel is just the company that bought them out. At present, the real articles are linked and a redirect from the AfC is not necessary (AfC's are rarely linked at all anywhere). Nolelover ^Talk^·^Contribs 17:03, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Esperanto Monuments

I was trying to flag the foreign language article for translation. The directions on how to do that are confusing but I thought it had something to do with creating an English version and then flagging it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mnatureson (talk • contribs) 17:20, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I know, you have to tag the Dutch version for translation here, unless you want to translate it yourself (please add sources if you do :) ). If you don't want to translate it, you can add it to the requested articles list. Nolelover ^Talk^·^Contribs 22:30, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Question on rejection over citation.

I am having a problem getting a new entry accepted. The entry is for the writer, DOROTHY MARIE DONNELLY. When I first submitted it, I got a rejection based on a need for a citation for one sentence--at least I think it's for only one. I just decided to delete the sentence that had been boxed and to make paragraph changes at the same time. After I (1) typed in the changes, I (2) hit the save page box. That is all. Many days later, I find that the changes have not shown up and the same citation objection remains.

Today, I tried again, only to find that now several new boxes have appeared. I'm stymied. Obviously, I am doing something wrong, but Ph.D. and over forty years of university teaching have not prepared me to deal with the intricacies of editing for Wikipedia. Can you help?

I might add that the sentence for which a citation was requested concerned a bit of personal kowledge about Dorothy Donnelly's writing habits that all her sons (still living) know about.

Thank you.

Jerry612 (talk) 18:46, 24 April 2012 (UTC)Jerry612[reply]

All articles must be verifiable- thus they need to have reliable sources which are independent of the subject. See the tutorial on referencing for more information. A412 (Talk • C) 22:36, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Question

I would like to know the most common charcterists inherited from parents. 75.88.36.89 (talk) 19:19, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This page is for questions about the Articles for creation process. Please consider asking this question at the Wikipedia:Reference desk. They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what the Help Desk is for). Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. You could always try searching Wikipedia for an article related to the topic you want to know more about. I hope this helps. Nolelover ^Talk^·^Contribs 19:37, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sources for Publicity Shy profession

Hi. I'm working on a page now (my working draft is at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Victoria_Blyth_Hill) and I can see even with a 10 page cv that it will be hard to come up with the standard citations for this notable person, one of the top paper conservators in the US, "ask anyone" ; ) . The problem is that this profession is notoriously publicity-shy. I have citations for articles she wrote but nothing much outside of her professional journal (of the American Institute for Conservation) for citations; are presentations at professional meetings helpful? This is a notable person---A Fellow --honorary-- of the American Institute for Conservation, and also honored as top Conservator Emeritus at the L A County Museum of Art when she retired. Thanks for help. Marilyn Nix (talk) 23:41, 24 April 2012 (UTC)Marilyn[reply]

PS OK I brushed up on the references and verifiability and see that her scientific articles in the (peer-reviewed) professional journal are important. Thanks for any comment, otherwise, I think I may have caught up! Will keep at it on the research and references Marilyn Nix (talk) 05:53, 25 April 2012 (UTC)marilyn[reply]

Well, you definitely need more then just citations about things she's written, so I don't see how presentations she's given will really help you. One of the common problems we have on Wikipedia is explaining to people that just because someone has written lots doesn't make them notable; they need to have been written about. Now, I'm not familiar with this field of the organizations involved but I do encourage you to look at WP:ACADEMIC#Criteria. These are the notability criteria for academic persons, and she might just squeeze into one or two (if being a Fellow at the AIC is as good as it sounds). Does this help at all? Nolelover ^Talk^·^Contribs 22:37, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sherbourne Common

Page submission declined since being categorized as "Noindexed pages"

It is not true that the article has not been indexed!

I made a mistake posting a peace of the article in a wrong field so now, it is impossible for me to delete or edit that part /chapter. The rest of the article is indexed, and contains the same chapter. The non-editable chapter posted in a wrong field should be removed.

Best regards. 99.240.30.181 (talk) 23:57, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry, the NOINDEX tag is purely for maintenance. It means that your submission won't show up in external searches (like Google) until it's been moved to mainspace. Nothing to worry about :) Nolelover ^Talk^·^Contribs 22:41, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]