Help desk
< August 22	<< Jul \| August \| Sep >>	August 24 >

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.

August 23

James Earle Shivers

James Earle Shivers born March 3,1962 He is the son of Mountain Green Shivers "Mount" and Betty Grace Chappell. He is from Griffin Georgia. He has two brothers Michael Scott Shivers and Stanley Mount Shivers.He has served five Governor's of the State of Georgia, George Busbee, Joe Frank Harris, Zell Miller , Roy Barnes and Sonny Perdue. He now serves United States Congressman Austin Scott of the eighth district of Georgia. He is Deputy Director of Congressman Scott's Warner Robins, Georgia office.

Mr. Shivers has always had a love for politics, yet he never held a public office. His family has very close ties to the Talmadge and Maddox family, Herman Talmadge who once was the Governor of Georgia and a United States Senator of Georgia, along with Former Governor Lester Maddox that also served as Lt. Governor of Georgia after serving as Governor of Georgia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.110.199.181 (talk) 00:04, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not able to resubmit post review and changes

Hi,

I am in the process of submitting my first article. It was declined a couple of times, I made changes and resubmitted each time. The article was declined again yesterday. I modified the article based on the reviewer's comment, but I am now unable to submit for review. I don't see any option for resubmission, although I have been able to save my changes.

Can someone please help me submit the article? Thanks.

The link to the article is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Samarthanam_Trust_for_the_Disabled

Thanks Arundhativenkatesh (talk) 06:13, 23 August 2012 (UTC)ArundhatiVenkatesh[reply]

Fixed The article has been resubmitted. --Nouniquenames (talk) 06:40, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Samarthanam Trust for the Disabled

Hi,

I'd had trouble re-submitting my article for review, and had posted a question here. The article has now been submitted for review. (thanks!) But, there is now a warning that says:

"Warning: This submission is not timestamped and so will be permanently at the back of the queue. Please replace this template with {{AFC submission|||ts=20120823074753|u=Arundhativenkatesh|ns=4}}."

How can this be fixed? Thanks in advance

The link to the article is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Samarthanam_Trust_for_the_Disabled

Arundhativenkatesh (talk) 07:49, 23 August 2012 (UTC)Arundhativenkatesh[reply]

It seems fine now, looks like its been fixed! Sionk (talk) 09:18, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Front-end Magazine

Front-end Magazine is an online magazine for professional front-end developers & designers, with a focus on useful techniques, best practices and valuable resources.
It was started on 1st August 2012, by Prabhu Natarajan. It is regularly posts the articles about techniques & resources.

Website: URL — Preceding unsigned comment added by Snprabhu2004 (talk • contribs) 09:27, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Declined No sources, Lack of information, non notable etc. In the article I used the No sources reason. John F. Lewis (talk) 12:15, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Chandrika Balan

Dear Sir/Madam

You have stated that my article has been placed in Start class. I have provided all information you needed. You have shown "Citation" needed for one information to which I have the scanned copy to prove the statement. How I send it to you.

best regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Panank (talk • contribs) 14:36, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You can upload images which are available under a free license to the Wikimedia Commons via their Upload Wizard. Non-free images which are to be used under the doctrine of fair use can be uploaded to Wikipedia itself via Special:Upload. I'm no expert on copyright and don't know whether either method is appropriate for scans of newspaper articles or the like. In any case, the reference should be to the newspaper article itself, not just to a scanned and uploaded image, even if that article itself is not available online. A scan may be provided for our readers' convenience, but it cannot be used instead of the true source. The {{cite news}} template is available to easily format references to news pieces. Huon (talk) 16:41, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/NextWindow

Greetings--I have read the notes explaining that the article was rejected due to the advertising/promotional nature of content. I have re-read this and there is no marketing language within this--everything is neutral, factual and referenced. I have also included links to several outside pages, not just the company resources. I tried to write this in similar style to the page of parent co. SMART Technologies. Can you offer advice on how to change this so that it could be accepted? Thanks in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NextWindow (talk • contribs) 15:06, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

While the content may be factual and is partly referenced, the sources largely are not reliable by Wikipedia's standards. The first two are the company's own website, a primary source (so are most of the external links included in the draft itself). The third is a press release which doesn't have the reputation for fact-checking and accuracy necessary to be considered reliable. The fifth doesn't even mention NextWindow. The sixth is a blog, again lacking editorial oversight. The other three are better sources, though the last one doesn't really cover NextWindow, and I have doubts all three combined provide coverage significant enough to meed our notability criteria; see in particular WP:CORP.

Also, much of the article is not referenced at all - in fact, only a small part of the "Company Overview and Key Milestones" section cites any sources at all. We don't have sources for the founding date (and one reliable source mentioning a founding date disagrees with the draft), for the offices and manufacturing plants, for the US patents they supposedly hold and for how they acquired patents older than the company itself, or for the technical details of their products.

The draft is promotional because it happily uses vacuous but good-sounding descriptions such as "leading" (about SMART Technologies, sourced to a certainly non-neutral press release) or "major" (about the desktop computer manufacturers that use NextWindow products; the manufacturers themselves could be sourced to the VentureBeat article, but that source doesn't describe them as "major").

The article also engages in synthesis by taking sources about two large customers and using these examples to generalize about NextWindow's "large customers in many industries" - neither source says so, and the list of industries ("including education, hospitality, dining, casinos, tourism, sporting goods, museums, high-tech and shipping") is entirely unsourced.

If this is to be turned into a viable article, the unsourced and poorly sourced content would have to be removed, the reliable sources, in particular the VentureBeat article, should be used for all they're worth (for example we don't mention the number of employees given in that article), and we should aim for a drier tone that doesn't sound like something straight out of NextWindow's PR department (for example "history" instead of "Key Milestones"). But even then the most basic problem, notability, remains. To solve that issue, we need more truly reliable sources, such as news reports (and not just press releases), that cover the company in some detail - a paragraph devoted to the company is the bare minimum, the more the better.

As an aside, you might want to have a look at our username policy. Your user name seems to "unambiguously consist of a name of a company, group, institution or product" and therefore is considered promotional and not permissible on Wikipedia per WP:CORPNAME. Since you haven't made that many edits yet, it might be easiest to abandon this account and to create a new one with an acceptable user name. Huon (talk) 16:41, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of User:DOMICH/sandbox

If my submitted article for Edwin Pope was embedded in my sandbox (unintentionally). They will be able to understand what I'm trying to do correct? DOMICH (talk) 17:23, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure they will. If you want to make sure, I could move it to WT:Articles for creation/Edwin Pope, but I don't think that will be necessary.

By the way, the article at times deviates from the sources. For example, it says Pope won four National Headliners Club awards, but the Georgia Trend mentions only three. Conversely, the article says he won three Eclipse awards, but his Miami Herald bio says he won four. That should be fixed by providing better sources and by editing the article to bring it in line with what the sources provided actually say about Pope. Huon (talk) 19:13, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'll go back and recheck all the sources so that they match up. This my first new page creation so I was looking to get a fairly decent sourced version approved, and then get help from some more seasoned contributors once it's up. Thanks for your reply! DOMICH (talk) 19:42, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]